2. Definitions and Relationships
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is the
process by which businesses negotiate their role in
society
In the business world, ethics is the study of
morally appropriate behaviors and decisions,
examining what "should be done”
Although the two are linked in most firms, CSR
activities are no guarantee of ethical behavior
3. Recent Evidence of CSR Interest
An Internet search turns up 15,000 plus
response to “corporate citizenship”
Journals increasingly “rate” businesses (and
NGOs) on socially responsive criteria:
Best place to work
Most admired
Best (and worst) corporate reputation
4. Reasons for CSR Activities
CSR activities are important to and even
expected by the public
And they are easily monitored worldwide
CSR activities help organizations hire and
retain the people they want
CSR activities contribute to business
performance
5. Corporate Social Responsibility Continuum
Do more than
required; e.g. Integrate social
engage in objectives and
philanthropic business goals
Fight social giving
responsibility
initiatives
Maximize firm’s Balance profits
profits to the and social
exclusion of all objectives
else
Do what it
takes to Lead the
make a Comply;
industry
profit; skirt do what
Articulate and other
the law; fly is legally
social value businesses
below required
objectives with best
social radar practices
6. CSR are Grounded by Opposing Objectives
(Maximize Profits to Balance Profits with Social
Responsibility) and so Activities Range Widely
Do what it takes to make a profit; skirt the law; fly below
social radar
Fight CSR initiatives
Comply with legal requirements
Do more than legally required, e.g., philanthropy
Articulate social (CSR) objectives
Integrate social objectives and business goals
Lead the industry on social objectives
7. Businesses CSR Activities
Philanthropy
give money or time or in kind to charity
Integrative philanthropy—select beneficiaries aligned
with company interests
Philanthropy will not enhance corporate reputation
if a company
fails to live up to its philanthropic image or
if consumers perceive philanthropy to be manipulative
8. Integrate CSR Globally
Incorporate values to make it part of an
articulated belief system
Act worldwide on those values
Cause-related marketing
Cause-based cross sector partnerships
Engage with stakeholders
Primary stakeholders
Secondary stakeholders
9. Business Ethics Development
The cultural context influences
organizational ethics
Top managers also influence ethics
The combined influence of culture and top
management influence organizational ethics
and ethical behaviors
10. The Evolving Context for Ethics
From domestic where ethics are shared
To international where ethics are not shared
when companies:
Make assumptions that ethics are the same
Ethical absolutism—they adapt to us
Ethical relativism—we adapt to them
To global which requires an integrative
approach to ethics
11. Emergence of a Global
Business Ethic
Growing sense that responsibility for righting
social wrongs belongs to all organizations
Growing business need for integrative
mechanisms such as ethics
Ethics reduce operating uncertainties
Voluntary guidelines avoid government impositions
Ethical conduct is needed in an increasingly
interdependent world—everyone in the same
game
Companies wish to avoid problems and/or be good
12. Ways Companies Integrate Ethics
Top management commitment in word and
deed
Company codes of ethics
Supply chain codes
Develop, monitor, enforce ethical behavior
Seek external assistance
13. External Assistance with Ethics
Industry or professional codes
Certification programs, e.g., ISO 9000
Adopt/follow global codes
Caux Round Table Principles
14. Reasons for Businesses to Engage in
Development of a Global Code of
Business Ethics
Create the same opportunity for all businesses if
there are common rules
Level the playing field
They are needed in an interconnected world
They reduce operating uncertainties
If businesses don’t collaborate, they may not like
what others develop
15. Four Challenges to a Global Ethic
Global rules emerge from negotiations and will
reflect values of the strong
Global rules may be viewed as an end rather than
a beginning
Rules can depress innovation and creativity
Rules are static but globalization is dynamic
Editor's Notes
Companies can engage in CSR activities even while they are acting in unethical ways. For example, Enron was a champion of community involvement, but used off-balance-sheet partnerships to bilk investors and eventually ruin the company. Similarly Parmalat helped many Parma people and gave $2 million to restore the sixteenth- century Correggio frescoes at Parma Cathedral. But he diverted hundreds of millions from publicly held Parmalat to family owned companies like soccer team Parma AC and Parmatour . Companies can say one thing a nd do another .
Bullet 1 from Fleming, John E. (2004). Corporate citizenship revisited. AOM Newsletter , 35(1): 4. A 2002 U . S . poll conducted by the Wall Street Journal/NBC showed public esteem for business leaders dropped following reports that companies like Enron, Andersen, and others. Fifty seven percent of respondents said corporate standards and values dropped in the past 20 years compared with 38% who said they were the same. This compares to 1998 when respondents’ reports were 53 – 42%. They proportionately said government should regulate business, and that has occurred, for example Sarbanes-Oxley. From: Harwood, John. (2002, Apr il 11). Public’s esteem for business falls in wake of Enron scandal. WSJ , D5. Corporate scandals in Japan (former Mitsubishi Motors exec utive arrested on suspicion of professional negligence re: defective truck parts); Citibank turfed from Japan for irregularities. Corporate scandals also in Europe: ABB and Barnevik pay; hold kickbacks to suppliers; also make this a worldwide phenomenon .
On the left side of the continuum we see that the objective is to maximize firm’s (or individual) gains to the exclusion of all else (an example is Tyco whose CEO and CFO faced trail for larceny—converting $600 m of company assets to their own use); on the right is objective to balance social (CSR) and profit objectives .
Th ese may be activities you’ll see in your firms . Integrative philanthropy— Avon Products Inc. “ T he company for women" donates funds to breast cancer research. In Seattle, FareStart partners with Consolidated Restaurants; Pharma companies align with Operation Smile, AIDs donations .
Incorporate values in belief statements: McDonald's: “ We believe that being a good corporate citizen means treating people with fairness and integrity, sharing our success with the communities in which we do business, and being a leader on issues that affect customers ” (McDonald's Corporation, 1992). Act on values: Starbucks put resources into integrating values . Primary stakeholders are internal to the company such as owners, employees, labor unions, customers and suppliers (Clarkson, 1995). Secondary stakeholders operate external to the firm; they could be nongovernmental organizations, social activists, community groups, and governmental organizations . REI definition of social responsibility: “ Achieving commercial success in ways that honor ethical values and respect people, communities, and the natural environment ” includes ethics, community investments, corporate governance, environmental health and safety practices, sustainability, sourcing practices. Matt Hyde, Sr VP of Merchandizing and Logistics at REI said the only way we can be CSR is if we pursue commercial success — it ’ s a given that you have to make money (Nov ember 1, 2004) .
If national practice is bribery, then most companies in that nation will use bribery . If a top manager is unethical, then he/she sets a lead that others follow . When managers behave unethically, employees can be demoralized, lose faith in the organization, and even leave their jobs. Others might follow-the-leader themselves and engage in unethical behaviors. High demands for performance and profitability led Enron employees first to cut ethical corners and finally to break laws as well. According to one Enron controller, the logic was as follows: "If your boss was [fudging] and you have never worked anywhere else, you just assume that everybody fudges earnings. Once you get there and you realized how it was, do you stand up and lose your job? It was scary. It was easy to get into 'Well, everybody else is doing it, so maybe it isn't so bad.'"
Most firms are developed within a nation, borrowing their ethical practices from them . When they go international, they face new ethical challenges . NIKE Inc. was "founded on a handshake" with implicit belief that "business with all of our partners [would be] based on trust, teamwork, honesty and mutual respect. We expect all of our business partners to operate on the same principles." Nike discovered that their overseas subcontractors were not treating workers with respect, and this suggests that Nike's view of these principles and what they meant did not result in desired subcontractor behavior.
C reate a cohesive ethical program that meets multiple and sometimes conflicting demands.
F undamental honesty and adherence to the law . P roduct safety and quality, workplace health and safety precautions C onflicts of interest E mployment practices F air practices in selling and marketing products or services F inancial reporting S upplier relationships P ricing, billing, and contracting T rading in securities and/or use of insider information P ayments to obtain business A cquiring and using information about others S ecurity and political activities E nvironmental protection I ntellectual property or use of proprietary information (Business Roundtable, 1988).
Accountants have a professional code of ethics that companies rely on .
a. M aintaining or creating the opportunity for business activities . b. A ll firms should be operating according to the same principles; this produces the "level playing field" upon which many organizational leaders prefer to play . c. E thical codes are needed and are possible in a world that is interdependent on many other dimensions of business activities . d. T hey reduce operating uncertainties and, e. G rowing public interest in a global code of ethics suggests that if businesses don't develop such codes, they will be developed by other bodies that may be unfavorable to business interests.
G lobal rules are likely to emerge from a negotiation process ; they are unlikely to reflect values and habits consistent for all cultures. To the extent that these rules are developed by firms from the Westernized countries, they may not incorporate concerns for much of the world. Second, global ethics may be viewed as an end point rather than a beginning point for developing global ethics. Organizations may hide behind global codes, claiming that the absence of rules means that all behaviors are acceptable as conditions change. Organizations may/will find loopholes then use the rules in defense . A global code of ethics also may serve to depress innovation, since some will hesitate to act in the absence of clear guidelines. However, a static set of guidelines is unlikely to keep pace with globalization.
