Abstract
There has been continued debate on the corporate social responsibility (CSR) since 1950s. Over time, the concept has undergone transformation in its periphery of operations. The classical view relating to the role of CSR was first based on philanthropic perspective after which the shift was directed to the way corporations relate with the community (Talaei and Nejati 2009).
The pioneers of role of CRS in the society in early years (Shinn 2002) helped encourage the management to have incentives on how to raise both ethics and justice in the community through economization ethics.
The research paper critically analyses on the emerging needs for corporations to have strong commitment to corporate responsibility and why companies need to be community oriented. Further considerations are based on programs undertaken by the federal to ensure that policies of corporate social responsibilities are made meaningful to the society (D’Amato, Henderson, and Florence, 2009).
Introduction
Shinn (2002) in his paper, towards incorporating the corporate responsibilities in an organization, uses relational theory. It has the originality of linkage between the firm and the environment in which the firm operates. This forms the main objectivity of incorporating CSR in the corporations. Incorporation of the CSR within the firm requires the management of such organizations to be able to integrate business and the society (Porter and Mark 2006). Business and corporations need the support of each other. Reflectively, all organization that incorporates social responsibilities shall be able to deal with potential problems facing them.
Organization of CSR in firms and needs of the society calls for extensions from the intervention to the strong leadership. Moreover, adjustments within firms make good reports in the relationships between society and organization. The success of strategies undertaken by some of the companies has relied on their operating managements. Through this strategy, they assist in identifying and prioritizing the social responsibilities in relation to the society and how the organization shall benefit in long-run.
On the contrary, fewer companies have created unification in their philanthropist behaviors and efforts in managing of the CSR. On a lesser degree, they seek to incorporate the social dimensions among their main values (D’Amato et al. 2009).
The way strategies are being adopted towards the CSR requires a different strategy on how to approach them together with the philanthropic nature of the organizations than the one being used today. Companies must be able to move away from a more fragmented and defensive attitude to a more integrating and affirmative strategy. The focus should be to ensure that the systems move away from images that require emphasis to those that are substantive.
Some of the measures that have been incorporated in the organizations and measuring of the stakeholders’ involvement and their satisfactions fail to have a positive impact to the society. This means that there is need to measure potential impact likely to be created by such integrations. Strategy as a way of making appropriate choices and the successes made in the CSR bears no difference.
It encompasses the art of considering which type of the choice on the social point of view will have greater impact and that with minimal impact (Porter et al. 2006). While CSR that are more responsive depend on good corporations and addresses, every possible negative impact resulting from such undertakings incorporates selective social ethics. Each and every organization is called upon to address increased number of issues that the company does and the way it directly or indirectly affects the immediate environment.
The purpose for the incorporation of CSR in organizations should be based on the moral purpose of such organizations to the community and the society. Through provisions of jobs, investing in the capital, buying and selling of products, Shinn (2002) alongside carrying out businesses in a daily basis, all these undertakings taken by the organizations have a profound positive impact to the society.
The most possible essence thing that the firm can do for the society and the entire community is through making a positive contribution. Perception on the role of the CSR instead of the consideration on the; possible damage to cause and control or as a public relation promotion will call for a dramatic transformation and thinking in companies.
The most convincing and assurance from the strategy implementation of the CSR by companies is that they will become more competitive and profitable. Most of the corporations have failed to take up the problems in the world. While some continue to face challenges due to insufficiency resources that can enable them to deal with such challenges. Every company can take up a step particularly in identifying specific problems within the society that is based equipped to resolve such problems.
Addressing social based concerns through creation of shared responsibilities will result into sustenance. This will eliminate on the dependence upon incentives of government and private organizations. A well managed organization through application of its resources, knowledge and utilization of management skills towards problems facing the society the stake it has, it can have a greater positive impact on the society than merely depending on the philanthropic agencies.
Foundations on the role played by the federal and the federals in promoting the adoption of CSRs among the nations shall be based on the government conference held in Vienna Australia. The Australian ministry of Agriculture is normally charged with the obligation of ensuring that all the government stakeholders are represented.
Through providing the venue, the stakeholders meet to deliberate on the measures to be taken by the companies to ensure adoption of CSR. Steurer (2010) Paul Hohnen in his opening presentation notes the role played by the government in changing the behaviors other than acting as a regulator.
Through illustrations, he identifies the positive contributions of the government to businesses- creation of an environment that enables CSR adoption, raise awareness and stimulation of both public and private sectors through participating in debates, promotion of CSR initiatives through endorsements or invitations of businesses and support to the entire society, formalizing and recognizing other CSR initiatives, funding research works by professions alongside facilitating of networks in CSR perspectives, engaging both private and public partnering and lastly building CSR capacities in business environments.
Through answering the question related to why there should be government participation and interests, the paper on European commission ([EU], 2010) states that CSR is a better concept in which various companies helps in integrating all matters related to environment, health, workforce and discrimination of people in their operations and interactions with stakeholders who are the customers, suppliers, shareholders. All these are to take place on a voluntary basis (EU 2010).
Consequently, there has been assumed participation by many of the European bodies and other government agencies. All the participating bodies assist in reshaping and promotion of the CSR. More recently, the effects arising from the responsibility has seemed to be more linked to political activities.
This has eventually resulted into creation of a distinct policy field. As shown in the EU (2010) report, various initiatives undertaken by the governments in promoting CRS in the society lies in: them having traits and principles of governance and voluntarism, policy instruments are normally of a soft-law in nature and finally, they all tend to share objectivity of fostering sustainable developments in relation to traditional hard laws.
This last section of the paper is devoted to consider some of the practical steps that should be considered by the government agencies in developing a sound policy framework for CSR. This approach however is different from the business firms as described in the first section of the paper. Designing of such a framework does not entirely rely on one approach.
But the national framework is determined by various factors such as political and economic, local understanding and definition of corporate responsibilities and the types of interventions to be met. Instead of just relying on the already formulated model, the public sector should according to each state adopt relevant instruments that will ensure they build Porter et al. (2006), supervise, implement and improve on the society and stakeholders.
EU (2010) the six main frameworks to use on adopting CSR are: making a first understanding of the CSR and its relevant scope, the second entails making of the definition of such CSRs, third, all the relevant CSRs should be fitted within the government structure, fourth, definitions should be made on the public CSR and the rationality of the policy, fifth, government should make efforts towards identifying all possible policies that require interventions and the last part is the monitoring to assess the impacts created by such corporate social responsibilities.
References
D’Amato, A., Henderson, S., & Florence, S. (2009). Corporate social Responsibility and Sustainable Business: guide to leadership, Task and Functions. Web.
Porter, M., & Mark, K. (2006). Strategy and Society: The Link between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility. Web.
Shinn, S. (2002). A small but growing number of business schools focus on the issue of corporate social responsibility. Web.
Steurer, R. (2010). The Role of Governments in Corporate Social Responsibility: Characterizing Public Policies on CSR in Europe. Web.
Talaei, G., & Nejati, M. (2009). Corporate Social responsibility in Auto industry: An Iranian perspective. Web.
United Nations Global Compact. (2010). The Role of Governments in Promoting Corporate Responsibility and Private Sector Engagement in Development. Web.