Corporate Social Responsibility refers to all the efforts made by an organization to satisfy the interests of the society and its stakeholders. An organization goes beyond the expectations of regulatory bodies to promote the social welfare of its stakeholders and the surrounding community.
Corporate Social Responsibility is not a profit making venture but a way of giving back to the society by guarding stakeholders’ interests. The benefits of Corporate Social Responsibility should trickle down to all the members in the community without any kind of discrimination. Corporate Social Responsibility should begin from within the organization where the welfare of employees is taken care of.
Organizations are always under scrutiny by the, government public and other stakeholders with failure to participate in activities that enhance the welfare of its customers, employees and the community at large dents its leading serious consequences. This essay will compare and contrast different Corporate Social Responsibility models used by organizations.
The financial power exhibited by organizations means that the national economy of any country depends on their general input (Mallin, 2009). The surplus money that organizations have at their disposal should be used on funding environmental conservation and social welfare programs.
The Social Corporate Responsibility concept is understood differently by different organizations. The Corporate Social Responsibility programs and initiatives are implemented using different models that depend on a company’s philosophy on Corporate Social Responsibility (Mallin, 2009). There is always a contention on how far organizations should go when trying to meet societal goals.
Many Corporate Social Responsibility models used by organizations are normally integrated with the overall business model of the organization. Organizations are expected to comply with legal and ethical standards when carrying out corporate and social responsibilities.
The pyramid of Social Corporate Responsibility is a graphic model that defines Corporate Social Responsibility in four parts. This broad definition has some similarities and differences with other Corporate Social Responsibility definitions (Mallin, 2009). The four facets of the Corporate Social Responsibility pyramid define and explain Social Corporate Responsibility from different perspectives.
The Corporate Social Responsibilities are very wide and this calls for a clear understanding of the four perspectives. The economic facet that represents all the economic responsibilities of an organization forms the base of the pyramid (Mallin, 2009). Organizations have shareholders that invest in them with an aim of getting returns from their investment.
The economic facet ensures that shareholders do not lose their investments. Companies have the responsibility of ensuring that investors receive rightful dividends and investment returns on time. It is the responsibility of a company to come up with ways of making profits for investors to enjoy the benefits of their investment.
The economic facet brings a new dimension to the definition of Corporate Social Responsibility because other definitions do not actually highlight the investors’ welfare (Bacher, 2007). A profitable company ensures continuous supply of important goods and services as well as the creation of employments opportunities for the unemployed.
It is the responsibility of an organization to come up with the right strategies and systems in order to improve its revenues for the benefit of shareholders (Bacher, 2007). The second facet of the Corporate Social Responsibility pyramid is the legal facet. Organizations have the responsibility of obeying all the regulations that govern its operations.
The company has to adhere to all the laws and regulations governing environmental conservation, employee protection, consumer protection and contractual agreements.
The legal facet of the pyramid only focuses on the laid down regulations but does not mention the extra effort put in place by organizations beyond the normal legal requirements (Bacher, 2007). Organizations come up with extra initiatives to help the community which supersede the minimal legal requirements.
It is important for organizations to adhere to all regulations because failure to do so puts the company at the risk of being shut down and in the process harming investors and employees (Bacher, 2007). The third facet of the Corporate Social Responsibility pyramid is the ethical facet.
All the activities of an organization should be just and fair without causing any harm to employees, consumers and the environment. It is the responsibility of an organization to observe the law and demonstrate ethical leadership for the benefit of all stakeholders (Bacher, 2007).
Examples of an organization’s ethical responsibilities include waste management, genuine advertisements and how the employees are treated within the organization. It is also ethical for an organization to provide good working conditions for its employees.
The ethical facet emphasizes the fact that Corporate Social Responsibility should begin from within the organization as it spreads to the community (Bacher, 2007). The fourth and final facet of the Corporate Social Responsibility is the philanthropic facet.
This is the facet that is highlighted in almost all models of Corporate Social Responsibility. According to the philanthropic facet, it is the responsibility of organizations to commit its financial and human resources towards improving the quality of life in the community (Anderson, 1989).
Some of the programs that organizations support under the philanthropic facet include health programs, educational programs, civic programs and volunteer programs (Anderson, 1989).
The four facets of Social Corporate Responsibility have critical tensions among themselves (Anderson, 1989). There is a strong relationship between the economic facet and the philanthropic facet because the financial position of an organization determines whether it will participate in philanthropic programs or not.
Philanthropic initiatives require finances and it becomes difficult for an organization that is struggling financially to sponsor philanthropic initiatives.
The economic and legal facets are dependent on each other since it is difficult for an organization to operate and make profits without having complied with all the laws and regulations (Anderson, 1989). All the components of the Corporate Social Responsibility pyramid are very important in the general running of an organization.
The corporate Social Responsibility pyramid forms the basis on which different models are built upon. The similarities between the various Corporate Social Responsibility models are many compared to differences (Bacher, 2007). The objectives of Corporate Social Responsibility are very similar regardless of the model adopted by an organization.
It is important to conduct a feasibility study before choosing the type of Corporate Social Responsibility model to use in a particular community. The two most common models are the constituency and the sustainability model (Bacher, 2007). The constituency model classifies an organization into different groups that have similar interests.
The company management should work hard to ensure the interests of each group are satisfied. Some of the constituencies under the constituency model include shareholders, employees, consumers, creditors and the outside community (Bacher, 2007). This model can lead to conflicts if an organization satisfies the interests of one group and fails to consider other groups.
The interests of shareholders and non-shareholders should be considered in a company’s Corporate Social Responsibility strategies (Bacher, 2007). A company that focuses on making a lot of profits without giving its employees fair remunerations is bound to have conflicts.
The idea of splitting an organization into constituencies is what makes this model to be very unique compared to other models (Schwartz, 2011). The Sustainability model takes a different approach by advocating for economic sustainability for the successful implementation of Corporate Social Responsibility initiatives.
According to the sustainability model, an organization should have long-term strategies to ensure it maintains profitability on a long-term basis (Schwartz, 2011). An organization’s future depends on the economic sustainability of the organization. The well-being of stakeholders is key to an organization’s sustainability.
In conclusion, Corporate Social Responsibility initiatives are aimed at ensuring the interests of all stakeholders are satisfied. Corporate Social Responsibility is a way through which an organization can give back to the society.
The Corporate Social Responsibility pyramid consists of four fundamental components that are necessary for a company to be fully operational (Schwartz, 2011). Corporate social Responsibility models may have different approaches but the goals and objectives are almost similar.
The sustainability and constituency models are the two major models that organizations use when implementing Corporate Social Responsibility initiatives.
The Corporate Social Responsibility pyramid broadens the definition of Corporate Social Responsibility definition to include the economic, legal, ethical and philanthropic components. Corporate Social Responsibility Definitions have many similarities compared to differences because the goals and objectives are almost similar regardless of the model or approach a particular organization adopts.
References
Anderson, J., (1989). Corporate Social Responsibility: Guidelines for top management. New York, NY: ABC-CLIO.
Bacher, C., (2007). Corporate Social Responsibility. New York, NY: GRIN Verlag.
Mallin, C. (2009). Corporate Social Responsibility: A case study approach. New York, NY: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Schwartz, M., (2011). Corporate Social Responsibility: An ethical approach. New York, NY: Broadview Press.