Corporate_Social_Responsibilities

Theories and ideas about Corporate Social Responsibility Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is becoming more and more important nowadays. It is the obligations of companies to behave ethically and to bring about growth of economic, while develop the quality of life of the labor force and their families, as well as the community and society at large. CSR is a complex principle and an effective way to understand clearly about it is to have a look at these two articles: Brad Howarth, C.2005, “Character building; Sales & Marketing”, Sydney Morning Herald, June 23, ProQuest ANZ Newsstand and Katie Lahey, C.2001, “Good business is about stakeholders, not just shareholders”, Sydney Morning Herald, May 18, ProQuest ANZ Newsstand. CSR and Points of view in two articles CSR is an evolving term without a recognized set of specific criteria and as such it does not have a standard definition (Waddell et al, 2007, p.174). CSR is about striking a balance between economic, environment and social obligations, while at the same time addressing stakeholder or shareholder expectations (Waddell et al, 2007, p.174). CSR is mentioned clearly in the first article “Character building; Sales & Marketing” by Brad Howarth: “Companies are worried about what people think, so developing a corporate reputation is now a full-time job”. Although Howarth does not give a definition of CSR in his article, he emphasies the importance of it in recent time. He uses many examples to show that an organization’s reputation is extremely necessary for its development. Clare Hart, chief executive officer of business information service Factiva considers building a corporate reputation strategy is going to be part of the planning process. Meanwhile, Laurel Grossman, chief executive of RepuTex, assumes that a poor reputation can erode financial performance and share price and make it harder to attract and retain good staff. Tim William, Westpac’s senior manager for corporate social responsibility and sustainability defines CSR as “In abstract terms, it is about managing and maximizing intangible value. In more practical terms, it is about ensuring the business does right thing in all dealings with its stakeholders” (Brad Howarth, 2005). Visy’s corporate communications manager, Tony Gray says his company started doing the things that have come to be known as corporate social responsibility because they felt these things made good business sense. All examples indicate that CSR is a tool to affirm an organization’s position in customers’ thought and in the market. In the second article, “Good business is about stakeholders, not just shareholders” by Katie Lahey, chief executive of the State Chamber of Commerce, it is said that the growing consumer backlash becoming more evident. It is time for business of all sizes to embrace the principles of corporate social responsibility. This means adopting strategies and policies that meet or exceed the public’s ethical, legal, commercial and social expectations. This one also emphasies that CSR is an important business issue which needs to be taken seriously. “There are real financial gains to be had by companies which embrace this concept. Those who don’t risk losing market share to their competitors” (Katie Lahey, 2001). Katie uses some examples to reveal that CSR can bring financial benefit to companies that do the right thing for the community and environment. Respect for organization’s CSR will bring benefit to staff, customers, partners and community. These are influence parts to existence and development of all entrepreneurs. When organizations fulfill their CSR well, they will be supported faithfully and enthusiastically by staff, customers and other partners. This is the most fundamental element of all succeed. For example, on almost websites of famous and big companies all over the world, we can see they emphasize their CSR rather than introducing their products and services. One of the most important aspects of CSR is the attitude of leaders to staff in the company. Due to a research of Fast Company magazine in 2001, 26 percent of American staff announce that they concern to their company’s success. 55 percent of staff equate their own benefit with their bosses’. Only 19 percent do not like their companies. The majority of organizations waste 2/3 working time of their staff because of their inappropriate behavior to their staff. In Katie’s article, this problem is also mentioned. The Clemenger Report of 1998 titled How Stekeholders are changing the Rules, Australia indicated 81 percent of respondents thought companies were putting profits ahead of people. Only 13 percent felt businesses were achieving a balance between profit and social responsibility. This research showed the most important factor characterizing a “good” company was how it looked after its employees. This was followed by financial returns and profitability (17 percent each), customer relations (6 percent) and the level of community responsibility (6 percent) (Katie Lahey, 2001). CSR can increase organization value of tradename and prestige significantly. Prestige improves revenue, attracts partners, investors and labours. Multinational groups such as The Body Shop (English group manufactures skin and hair care products) and IKEA (Swedish furniture group) are standard patterns. They are both famous not only of their quality products but also social and environment responsibility organizations. Both articles had connection arguments holding up the views from Contemporary management (Waddell et al, 2007). Therefore, CSR is generally known as the way an organization achieves a balance between its business processes to produce an overall positive impact on society. CSR is a manager’s duty or obligation to make decisions that promote the welfare and wellbeing of stakeholders and society as a whole (Waddell et al, 2007, P.174). Katie Lahey (2001) shows prominence of CSR as being socially and environmentally responsible can markedly affect a consumer’s decisions. And Brad Howarth acknowledges CSR as a full-time job and it can build organization’s reputation. Advantages and limitations Howarth’s (2005) article gave good examples about the importance of CSR for organization in present time; however, it was only in theory. The article did not describe any specific figures to show the differences between a company before and after it had taken CSR. It would have been practical and beneficial if it had included numbers. Katie’s (2001) article had a good connection between CSR and its relationship with profit of a company, its staff, customers and our community. It also gave some references to prove the implementation of CSR. Inspite of that, it should have had some specifics and provided some examples from employers or founders. References 1. Waddell, Devine, Jones, George, 2007, Contempory Management, McGraw Hill Australia Pty Limited, North Ryde, NSW 2113, Australia. 2. Brad Howarth, C.2005, “Character building; Sales & Marketing”, Sydney Morning Herald, June 23, ProQuest ANZ Newsstand. 3. Katie Lahey, C.2001, “Good business is about stakeholders, not just shareholders”, Sydney Morning Herald, May 18, ProQuest ANZ Newsstand.