Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Corporate Social Responsibility and Multi-Stakeholder Governance: Pluralism, Feminist Perspectives and Women’s NGOs

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Leadership, Gender, and Organization

Part of the book series: Issues in Business Ethics ((IBET,volume 63))

Abstract

The corporate social responsibility (CSR) literature has increasingly explored relationships between civil society and social movements, including non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and corporations, as well as the role of NGOs in multi-stakeholder governance processes. This paper addresses the challenge of including a plurality of civil society voices and perspectives in business–NGO relations, and in CSR as a process of governance. The paper contributes to CSR scholarship by bringing insights from feminist literature to bear on CSR as a process of governance, and engaging with leaders of women’s NGOs, a group of actors rarely included in CSR research. The issues raised inform contributions to the CSR literature relating to the role of women’s NGOs with regard to the gender equality practices and impacts of corporations, and with respect to defining the meaning and practice of CSR. The paper frames marginalized NGOs as important actors which can contribute to pluralism, inclusion and legitimacy in CSR as a process of governance. It identifies several key barriers to the participation of women’s NGOs in CSR, and concludes by making suggestions for future research, as well as practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Acker, J. (2006). Inequality regimes: Gender, class, and race in organizations. Gender and Society, 20, 441–464.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, S. B. (2010). Governing the global corporation: A critical perspective. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20, 265–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, S. B. (2011). Voices of the Governed: Towards a theory of the translocal. Organization, 18, 323–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrientos, S., Dolan, C., & Tallontire, A. (2003). A gendered value chain approach to codes of conduct in African horticulture. World Development, 31, 1511–1526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bebbington, J., Brown, J., Frame, B., & Thomson, I. (2007). Theorizing engagement: The potential of a critical dialogic approach. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 20, 356–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharjya, M., Birchall, J., Caro, P., Kelleher, D., & Sahasranaman, V. (2013). Why gender matters in activism: Feminism and social justice movements. Gender and Development, 21(2), 277–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boström, M., & Hallström, K. (2010). NGO power in global social and environmental standard setting. Global Environmental Politics, 10(4), 36–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P. (1982). Leçon sur la Leçon. Paris: Editions de Minuit.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite, J., & Drahos, P. (2000). Global business regulation. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, T., Jackson, G., & Matten, D. (2012). Corporate Social Responsibility and institutional theory: New perspectives on private governance. Socio-economic Review, 10, 3–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, L. D., Khagram, S., Moore, M. H., & Frumkin, P. (2000). Globalization, NGOs and multisectoral relations. In J. S. Nye & J. D. Donahue (Eds.), Governance in a globalizing world. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burchell, J., & Cook, J. (2013). CSR, co-optation and resistance: The emergence of new agonistic relations between business and civil society. Journal of Business Ethics, 115, 741–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, G. (2011). The uneven geography of participation at the global level: Ethiopian women activists at the global periphery. Globalizations, 8(2), 163–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calas, M. B., & Smircich, L. (1997). Feminist inquiries into business ethics. In A. Larson & E. Freeman (Eds.), Women’s studies and business ethics towards a new conversation (pp. 50–79). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charlesworth, H., & Chinkin, C. (2000). The boundaries of international law. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory. A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, G. (2002). Gender, power and post-structuralism in corporate citizenship. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 5(Spring), 17–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corley, K., & Gioia, D. (2004). Identity ambiguity and change in the wake of a corporate spin-off. Administrative Science Quarterly, 49, 173–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Council of Europe. (1998). Gender mainstreaming: Conceptual framework, methodology and presentation of good practice. Council of Europe. EG-s-Ms (98) 2 Feb.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coupland, C. (2005). Corporate social responsibility as argument on the web. Journal of Business Ethics, 16, 355–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crane, A., McWilliams, A., Matten, D., Moon, J., & Siegel, D. (Eds.). (2008). The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Bakker, F. G. A., & Den Hond, F. (2008). Introducing the politics of stakeholder influence: A review essay. Business and Society, 47, 8–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Bakker, F., Den Hond, F., King, B., & Weber, K. (2013). Social movements, civil society and corporations: Taking stock and looking ahead. Organization Studies, 34, 573–593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DenHond, F. (2010).Reviewessay: Reflections on relationships between NGOs and corporations. Business and Society, 49, 173–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Den Hond, F., & De Bakker, F. G. A. (2007). Ideologically motivated activism: How activist groups influence corporate social change activities. Academy of Management Review, 32, 901–924.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derry, R. (1997). Feminism: How does it play in the corporate theatre? In A. L. Larson & R. E. Freeman (Eds.), Women’s studies and business ethics towards a new conversation. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doh, J., & Guay, T. (2004). Globalization and corporate social responsibility: How non-governmental organizations influence labor and environmental codes of conduct. Management International Review, 44, 7–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doh, J., & Guay, T. (2006). Corporate social responsibility, public policy, and NGO activism in Europe and the United States: An institutional-stakeholder perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 43, 47–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doh, J., & Teegen, H. (2002). Nongovernmental organizations as institutional actors in international business: Theory and implication. International Business Review, 11, 665–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, N. (2013). Fortunes of feminism: From state-managed capitalism to neoliberal crisis. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gherardi, S. (1995). Gender, symbolism and organizational cultures. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, D. U., & Rasche, A. (2007). Discourse ethics and social accountability—The ethics of SA 8000. Business Ethics Quarterly, 17, 187–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gioia, D., Corley, K., & Hamilton, A. (2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B. (1992). Basics of grounded theory research. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies of qualitative research. London: Wiedenfeld and Nicholson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gond, J. P., Kang, N., & Moon, J. (2011). The government of self-regulation: On the comparative dynamics of corporate social responsibility. Economy and Society, 40(4), 640–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gond, J. P., & Moon, J. (2012). Corporate social responsibility in retrospect and prospect: Exploring the life-cycle of an essentially contested concept. In J. P. Gond & J. Moon (Eds.), Corporate social responsibility: A reader. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grosser, K. (2009). CSR and Gender Equality: Women as stakeholders and the EU sustainability Strategy. Business Ethics: A European Review, 18, 290–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grosser, K. (2011). Corporate social responsibility, gender equality and organizational change: A feminist perspective. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, University of Nottingham, Nottingham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grosser, K., Adams, C., & Moon, J. (2008). Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace: A study of corporate disclosure. Research Report. London: Association of Chartered and Certified Accountants.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grosser, K., & Moon, J. (2005a). Gender mainstreaming and corporate social responsibility: Reporting workplace issues. Journal of Business Ethics, 62, 327–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grosser, K., & Moon, J. (2005b). The role of corporate social responsibility in gender mainstreaming. International Feminist Journal of Politics, 7, 532–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grosser, K., & Moon, J. (2008). Developments in company reporting on workplace gender equality?: A corporate social responsibility perspective. Accounting Forum, 32, 179–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guerard, S., Bode, C., & Gustafsson, R. (2013). Turning point mechanisms in a dualistic process model of institutional emergence: The case of the diesel particulate filter in Germany. Organization Studies, 34, 781–822.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1974). Theory and practice. London: Heinemann Educational Books Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1998). The inclusion of the other: Studies in political theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hale, A., & Opondo, M. (2005). Humanising the cut flower chain: Confronting the realities of flower production for workers in Kenya. Antipode, 37, 301–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, A. (1999). Institutional evolution and change: Environmentalism and the US chemical industry. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 351–371.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Husted, B. (2003). Governance choices for corporate social responsibility: To contribute, collaborate or internalize? Long Range Planning, 16, 481–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karam, C., & Jamali, D. (2013). Gendering CSR in the Arab Middle East: An institutional perspective. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(1), 31–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilgour, M. A. (2007). The UN Global Compact and substantive equality for Women: Revealing a ‘well hidden’ mandate. Third World Quarterly, 28, 751–773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy, D. L., & Kaplan, R. (2008). Corporate social responsibility and theories of global governance: Strategic contestation in global issue arenas. In A. Crane, A. Mcwilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, & D. Siegel (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, K. (2008). Grounded theory. In R. Thorpe & R. Holt (Eds.), The Sage dictionary of qualitative management research. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maddison, S., & Partridge, E. (2007). How well does Australian democracy serve Australian women? In The democratic audit of Australia. School of Social Sciences, The Australian National University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maiguashca, B. (2011). Looking beyond the spectacle: Social movement theory, feminist anti-globalization activism and the praxis of principled pragmatism. Globalizations, 8(4), 535–549.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, J. (2007). The gendering of leadership in corporate social responsibility. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 20, 165–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J. (1993). Inequality, distributive justice, and organizational illegitimacy. In K. Murnighan (Ed.), Social psychology in organizations: Advances in theory and research (pp. 296–321). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • McBarnet, D., Voiculescu, A., & Campbell, T. (2007). The new accountability. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyerson, D. E., & Kolb, D. M. (2000). Moving out of the ‘Armchair’: Developing a framework to bridge the gap between feminist theory and practice. Organization, 7, 553–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyerson, D. E., & Scully, M. A. (1995). Tempered radicalism and the politics of ambivalence and change. Organization Science, 6(5), 585–600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohanty, C. T. (2002). “Under Western Eyes” revisited: Feminist solidarity through anticapitalist struggles. Signs, 28 (2 (Winter)), 499–535.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molyneux, M. (1998). Analysing women’s movements. Development and Change, 29, 219–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moon, J., Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2011). Corporations and citizenship in new institutions of global governance. In C. Crouch & C. MacLean (Eds.), The responsible corporation in a global economy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nanz, P., & Steffek, J. (2004). Global governance, participation and the public sphere. Government and Opposition, 39, 314–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newell, P. (2005). Citizenship, accountability and community: The limits of the CSR agenda. International Affairs, 81, 541–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Brien, R., Goetz, A. M., Scholte, J. A., & Williams, M. (2000). Contesting global governance. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • O’Dwyer, B., Unerman, J., & Bradley, J. (2005). Perceptions on the emergence and future development of corporate social disclosure in Ireland. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 18, 14–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palazzo, G., & Scherer, A. (2006). Corporate legitimacy as deliberation: A communicative framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 66, 71–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson, R. (2007). Beyond women workers: Gendering CSR. Third World Quarterly, 28, 731–749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollack, A., & Hafner-Burton, E. (2000). Mainstreaming gender in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy, 7(3), 432–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Prieto-Carron, M. (2008). Women workers, industrialization, global supply chains and corporate codes of conduct. Journal of Business Ethics, 83, 5–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rasche, A., De Bakker, F., & Moon, J. (2013). Complete and partial organizing for corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 115(4), 651–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. (2007). Toward a political conception of corporate responsibility: Business and society seen from a Habermasian perspective. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1096–1120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, A., & Palazzo, G. (2008). Globalization and corporate social responsibility. In A. Crane, A. Mcwilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, & D. Siegel (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, A., & Palazzo, G. (2011). The new political role of business in a globalized world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy. Journal of Management Studies, 48(4), 899–931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slager, R., Gond, J. P., & Moon, J. (2012). Standardization as institutional work: The regulatory power of a responsible investment standard. Organization Science, 33(5–6), 763–790.

    Google Scholar 

  • Squires, J. (2005). Is mainstreaming transformative? Theorizing mainstreaming in the context of diversity and deliberation. Social Politics, 12, 366–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swedish Women’s Lobby. (2013). http://sverigeskvinnolobby.se/wpcontent/uploads/2013/08/Flyer-CSW-2-2.pdf.

  • Vogel, D. (2008). Private global business regulation. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 261–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walby, S. (2005). Gender mainstreaming: Productive tensions in theory and practice. Social Politics, 12(3), 321–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Windsor, D. (2001). The future of corporate social responsibility. International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 9, 225–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Women’s Resource Centre. (2013). The impact of public spending cuts on women’s voluntary and community organisations in London. London: Women’s Resource Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yancey-Martin, P. (2006). Practicing gender at work: Further thoughts on reflexivity. Gender, Work and Organization, 13(3), 254–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. RMIT University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

    Kate Grosser

Authors
  1. Kate Grosser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kate Grosser .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Nottingham Trent University, Nottingham, UK

    Mollie Painter

  2. Chicago, IL, USA

    Patricia H. Werhane

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Grosser, K. (2023). Corporate Social Responsibility and Multi-Stakeholder Governance: Pluralism, Feminist Perspectives and Women’s NGOs. In: Painter, M., Werhane, P.H. (eds) Leadership, Gender, and Organization. Issues in Business Ethics, vol 63. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-24445-2_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation