Corporate Social Responsibility: Mehr als nur PR

2014 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bettina Lis ◽  
Christian Neßler

Der Beitrag soll auf die wachsende ökonomische Relevanz von Corporate Social Responsibility auf dem Finanzmarkt Bezug nehmen . Nachhaltigkeits-Investments stellen hierbei einen noch kleinen, aber stetig wachsenden Bereich des Kapitalmarktes dar. Sustainable and Resposnsible Investments (SRI) verfolgen eine Investitionsstrategie, die sowohl den ökonomischen als auch gesellschaftlichen Anlageerfolg fokussiert. The paper reviews the development of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and sustainable and responisble investment (SRI). SRI is a growing segment of international capital markets. SRI describes an investment strategy which seeks to maximize both financial return and social good. Keywords: sustainable investments, responsible investments, nachhaltige kapitalanlagen, csr

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Miller Gaither ◽  
Lucinda Austin ◽  
MaryClaire Schulz

This article seeks to delineate the relationship between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and social change and asks the important question of whether and how corporations may serve as agents of social change. Dimensions of the business–society relationship are explored to further distinguish CSR from other types of corporate social initiatives and critically examine what types of corporate social initiatives can effectively and ethically serve as vehicles for social change. Based on this exploration, the article advances a descriptive model of business–society relationships and their capacity for creating and promoting social change. A case evaluation of Coca-Cola’s ‘3Ws’ social initiatives – related to well-being, water, and women’s empowerment – is then used to highlight and contextualize the model.


Author(s):  
Andrew C. Stuart ◽  
Jean C. Bedard ◽  
Cynthia E. Clark

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) assurance rates continue to lag behind corporate reporting of CSR activity (Blasco and King 2017), suggesting managers question whether the benefits of purchasing assurance outweigh the costs. This article summarizes a recent study by Stuart, Bedard, and Clark (2020) investigating the value of CSR assurance when a company experiences a negative event by examining how prior disclosure of management’s CSR intentions, and the decision to purchase independent assurance, influence investors’ judgments. Findings suggest investors react more favorably to management’s intention to engage in activities that increase expected future financial returns when economic times are good. In contrast, in difficult times investor preference shifts to management’s intent for activities done solely for social good as a signal of ethical culture. However, this preference disappears when disclosures are assured. Findings suggest the decision to purchase CSR assurance plays an important role in signaling management’s ethical culture.


Organization ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 416-432 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carl Cederström ◽  
Michael Marinetto

This article explores the ‘liberal communist’, a conceptual and satirical figure originally elaborated in the work of Slavoj Žižek (2008). The liberal communist claims (1) that there is no opposition between capitalism and the social good; (2) that all problems are of a practical nature, and hence best solved by corporate engagement and (3) that hierarchies, authority and centralized bureaucracies should be replaced by dynamic structures, a nomadic lifestyle and a flexible spirit. This analysis of the liberal communist has at least two implications for research on CSR. First, it examines the ideological role of CSR by moving beyond a propaganda view, instead offering an ideological reading that focuses on the ways in which CSR seeks to obliterate any existing contradictions between ‘philanthropic actions’ on the one hand and ‘profit-seeking business activities’ on the other hand. Second, it demonstrates how critique is not necessarily what corporations seek to avoid, but something that they actively engage in.


2008 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 314-336 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bert Spector

Both business executives and management scholars have, in recent years, focused a great deal of attention on the theme of corporate social responsibility (CSR). Calls for business leaders to expend resources on behalf of “social good” tend to downplay, if not ignore, what is fundamentally an ideological question: just what is a “good” society and who defines “goodness”? The ideological underpinnings of social responsibility and its relationship to the “good” society can be explored through an historical perspective. The roots of the CSR movement trace back to the early years of the Cold War. Led by Donald K David, Dean of the Harvard Business School and supported by other academics and executives given voice on the pages of the Harvard Business Review, advocates urged expanded business social responsibility as a means of aligning business interests with the defense of free-market capitalism against what was depicted as the clear-and-present danger of Soviet Communism. Today's enthusiastic calls for business to “do well by doing good” could benefit from a similar critical analysis not just of the goals of CSR but also the ideological assumptions, often unacknowledged, that underlie those goals.


Author(s):  
Abagail McWilliams

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a legitimate responsibility to society, based on the principle that corporations should share some of the benefit that accrues from the control of vast resources. CSR goes beyond the legal, ethical, and financial obligations that create profits. In the research literature, corporate social responsibility is defined in a variety of ways, depending on the aspect of CSR being examined. An inclusive definition is that social responsibility requires the firm to take into account the interests of all stakeholders, where stakeholders are defined as everyone who affects or is affected by the firm’s decisions and actions. A firm-focused definition holds that social responsibility includes actions that further a social goal, beyond what is required by ethics, law, and profitability. A political economy–oriented definition posits that firms have a responsibility to correct market failures such as negative externalities and government failures such as limits to jurisdiction that result in worker rights violations. When implemented, altruistic CSR implies that firms provide a social good unrelated to the firms’ business that does not benefit the bottom line. Strategic CSR implies that firms are simultaneously profitable and socially responsible. To achieve this, CSR must be a core value of the firm and must be integrated into processes and products. When employed strategically, CSR can be an element of a differentiation strategy, leading to premium prices, enhanced brand and firm reputation, and supportive community relations. Corporate environmental responsibility often takes the form of overcompliance with regulation, improving the environment more than is required. A primary benefit of this is to stave off further regulation. To capture the benefits of being socially responsible, the firm must make stakeholders aware of its record. This has led to triple bottom line reporting—that is, reporting about firm performance in terms of profits, people, and the planet. Social enterprises go a step further and make social responsibility the primary goal of the organization.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 205630512110174
Author(s):  
Elisha Lim

This article examines Facebook’s role in the treatment of marginalized identity as currency. Recent examples of solidarity statements and corporate social responsibility rhetoric treat disenfranchised racial and gender identities as value-added competitive market quantities to boost brands. This trend also incentivizes marginalized actors to capitalize on their own disenfranchisement in pursuit of visibility and career advancement. The resulting identity politicking replaces communal care, grassroots social ties, solidarity, and interdependence with isolating market competition. This article diverges from scholars who trouble the differential value of identity—by troubling the valuation of identity itself. Facebook normalizes identity as private property in what I call a transition from identity politics to “personal identity economics.” I coin this concept and break it down into the following four factors: (1) The optimization of difference beginning in the 1970s, (2) Facebook’s algorithmic invasion of market logic into intimate aspects of life starting in the mid 2000s, (3) Ads Manager’s economization of identity into legible economic units, and (4) neoliberal corporate social responsibility rhetoric of “social good” as a profitable asset.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document