Modern corporations take an active part in the social and political life of citizens and the states. Since many corporate organizations are “obliged” by their communities to perform corporate social responsibility activities as mandatory actions to help the community they operate in, some of the organizations negatively interpret it as being another way of bringing profit for their investors and stockholders. It became possible since CSR became not voluntarily when an organization devotes some part of the profit for the improvement of the environment or assisting the consumers, but “investing” money into CSR to receive even more profit at the end. Today, many corporations hinder the fight against global crime by being involved in illegal practices and activities.
Globalization hurts social corruption opening new methods and ways for illegal actions. Much of this simply has to do with the demographic changes reflected in a growing number of poor who strain the capacity of traditional sources of support. This assumption, however, tends to be based on anecdotes, subjective observations, and biased surveys, rather than empirical data. More scientifically derived information is difficult to obtain because there are no previous studies conducted on the level of care by which to compare.
Government goals and strategies are unquestionably tempered by a lack of fiscal resources, but they are also strongly influenced by the belief that any solutions to the problems of the poor population must be approached in the context of cultures. Enforcing CSR is not only morally questionable but can also lead to its manipulation for the realization of the corporate objectives (Kotler and Lee 2004).
The assistance for the community in solving its problems is good for its own sake, but not because such actions play an important role in enforcing organizations’ profit objectives. For instance, Wal-Mart is accused of gender and sex discrimination while Gap is accused of using child labor in India. Of equal importance, however, is educating the stakeholder to understand what is going on in the industry and what the industry is trying to do. The stakeholder also has a social responsibility to be aware of and understand the socioeconomic process. The giant corporation, Nike is also involved in one of the scandals because of kid’s labor used in its factories in Asia.
These examples show that global transnational corporations do not help international organizations to fight crime, but become a source of crime themselves. Ideally, every company most certainly must obey all social responsibility-oriented laws and requirements (Monks and Minow 2003).
The case of Texaco (which cut off the retirement benefits for African-American employees) shows that many international companies violate social responsibility principles and try to achieve financial gain only. Of equal importance, though, is educating society to understand what is going on in the industry and what the industry is trying to do. Texaco has a social responsibility to be aware of and understand the pollution process. The relationship of business with the community has had a long and changing role and involves many areas.
In sum, pursuing financial gains, corporations hinder the fight against global crime being involved in illegal practices. Global actors should apply CSR strategies more responsibly and strategically while managing a variety of risks common in developing countries. Such risks can involve a lack of skilled labor resources, social unrest, ineffective regulations, faulty tax structures, and generally poor living and health conditions. Participation in CSR activities and following regulations and laws of the countries they operate in can make global corporations act in a more socially accountable manner.
References
Kotler, Ph., Lee, N. (2004). Corporate Social Responsibility: Doing the Most Good for Your Company and Your Cause. Wiley.
Monks, R. A. G., Minow, N. (2003). Corporate Governance. Wiley; 3 edition.