Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 89, Issue 4, pp 613–627

Theorising Corporate Social Responsibility as an Essentially Contested Concept: Is a Definition Necessary?

Article

Abstract

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has become indispensable in modern business discourse; yet identifying and defining what CSR means is open to contest. Although such contestation is not uncommon with concepts found in the social sciences, for CSR it presents some difficulty for theoretical and empirical analysis, especially with regards to verifying that diverse application of the concept is consistent or concomitant. On the other hand, it seems unfeasible that the diversity of issues addressed under the CSR umbrella would yield to a singular universal definition. Gallie, an eminent philosophical scholar, proposed the essentially contested concepts (ECC) theory in 1956 to address concepts that by their very nature engender perpetual disputes. He pointed out that there are certain concepts which by their very nature are inevitably contested and prescribed seven criteria for evaluating such concepts. This article examines these criteria to discover if CSR is an essentially contested concept and in that case, to construe if such a change in perception will resolve the definitional crisis. The analysis suggests that CSR is an ECC and this explains the potential for several conceptions of CSR, however, it does not totally obviate the need for a definition of its core or common reference point, if only to ensure that the contestants are dealing with an identical subject matter.

Keywords

Corporate social responsibility essentially contested concepts business society definition 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abrams, F. W.: (1951), ‹Management’s responsibilities in a complex world’, Harvard Business Review 29(3), 29–34.Google Scholar
  2. Alversson, M. and H. Wilmott: (1992), ‹Critical Theory and Management Studies: An introduction’, in M. Alversson and H. Wilmott (eds.), Critical Management Studies (London, Sage), pp. 1–20.Google Scholar
  3. Amaeshi, K. M. and B. Adi: (2007), ‹Reconstructing the corporate social responsibility construct in Utlish’, Business Ethics. European Review (Chichester, England) 16, 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Andriof, J. and M. McIntosh: (2001) Perspectives on Corporate Citizenship (Greenleaf Publishing, Sheffield, UK).Google Scholar
  5. Banerjee, S. B.: (2003), ‹The practice of Stakeholder Colonialism: National interest and colonial discourses in the management of indigenous stakeholders’, in A. Prasad (ed.), Postcolonial theory and Organizational analysis (Palgrave, New York), pp. 255–279.Google Scholar
  6. Banerjee, S. B.: (2007) Corporate social responsibility : the good, the bad and the ugly (Edward Elgar, Cheltenham).Google Scholar
  7. Bendell, J.: (2004) Barricades and Boardrooms: A contemporary history of the Corporate Accountability Movement (UNRISD, Geneva).Google Scholar
  8. Berle, A. A., Jr.: (1931), ‹Corporate Powers as powers in trust’, Harvard Law Review 44 , 1049–1079. doi:10.2307/1331341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bowen, H. R.: (1953) Social Responsibilities of the Businessman (Harper & Row, New York).Google Scholar
  10. Campbell, T.: (2007), ‹The normative grounding of corporate social responsibility: a human rights approach’, in D. J. McBarnet., A. Voiculescu and T. Campbell (Eds.), The new corporate accountability : corporate social responsibility and the law (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).Google Scholar
  11. Carroll, A. B.: (1979), ‹A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance’, Academy of Management Review, 4, 497–505. doi:10.2307/257850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Carroll, A. B.: (1998), ‹The four faces of corporate citizenship’, Business and Society Review, 100, 1–7. doi:10.1111/0045-3609.00008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Carroll, A. B.: (1999), ‹Corporate social responsibility - evolution of a definitional construct’, Business & Society, 38, 268–295. doi:10.1177/000765039903800303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Carroll, A. B.: (2008), ‹A History of Corporate Social Responsibility: Concepts and Practices’, in A. Crane, et al. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility (Oxford University Press, New York), pp. 19–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Collier, D., Hidalgo, F. D. and Maciuceanu, A.O: (2006),’Essentially contested concepts: Debates and applications’, Journal of Political Ideologies, 11, 211–246. doi:10.1080/13569310600923782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Connolly, W. E.: (1974) The Terms of Political Discourse (Heath, Lexington).Google Scholar
  17. Crane, A. et al. (eds.): 2008, The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility (Oxford University Press, New York).Google Scholar
  18. Dahlsrud, A.: (2008), ‹How CSR is Defined’, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 15, 1–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Davis, K.: (1960), ‹Can Business afford to ignore Corporate Social Responsibility?’, California Management Review, 2, 70–76.Google Scholar
  20. Davis, K.: (1967), ‹Understanding the Social Responsibility Puzzle’, Business Horizons, 10(4), 45–51. doi:10.1016/0007-6813(67)90007-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Davis, K.: (1973), ‹The case for and against the assumption of social responsibilities’, Academy of Management Review, 16, 312–322. doi:10.2307/255331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dodd, E. M.: (1932), ‹For Whom are Corporate Managers Trustees?’, Harvard Law Review, 45, 1145–1163. doi:10.2307/1331697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Donaldson.T.: (1983), ‹Constructing a social contract for business,’ in T. Donaldson and P. Werhane (eds.), Ethical Issues in Business (Prentice Hall Inc, Englewood Cliffs, NJ), pp. 153–166.Google Scholar
  24. Donaldson, T. and Dunfee, T. W: (1994), ‹Towards a unified conception of business ethics: Integrative social contracts theory’, Academy of Management Review, 19, 252–284. doi:10.2307/258705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Donaldson, T. and Dunfee, T. W: (1999) Ties that Bind: A Social Contracts approach to Business (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).Google Scholar
  26. Donaldson, T. and Preston, L. E.: (1995), ‹The stakeholder theory of the corporation: concepts, evidence and implications’, Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91. doi:10.2307/258887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Donham, W. B.: (1927),’ The social significance of business’, Harvard Business Review, 5(4), 406–419.Google Scholar
  28. Donham, W. B.: (1929), ‹Business Ethics - A general survey’, Harvard Business Review, 7(4), 385–394.Google Scholar
  29. Evans, W. M. and Freeman, R. E: (1988), ‹A stakeholder theory of the modern corporation: Kantian Capitalism’, in T. Beauchamp and N. Bowie (Eds.), Ethical Theory and Business (Prentice- Hall Inc, Englewood Cliffs, NJ), pp. 75–93.Google Scholar
  30. Frederick, W. C.: (2006) Corporation, be good!: the story of corporate social responsibility (Dog Ear Publishing, Indianapolis, IN).Google Scholar
  31. Freeden, M.: (1996) Ideologies and Political Theory (Claredon Press, Oxford).Google Scholar
  32. Freeman, R.E.: (1984) Strategic Management: A stakeholder approach (Pitman, Boston).Google Scholar
  33. Freeman, R. E.: (2002), ‹A stakeholder theory of the modern corporation’, in L. P. Hartman (ed.), Perspectives in Business (McGraw-Hill, Boston), pp. 171–181.Google Scholar
  34. Freeman, R. E. and Evans, W.M: (1990), ‹Corporate Governance: A stakeholder interpretation’, The Journal of Behavioral Economics, 19(4), 337–359. doi:10.1016/0090-5720(90)90022-Y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Friedman, M.: 1970, ‹The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Its Increase Its Profits’, New York Times Magazine, September 13th, pp. 32, 33, 122, 126.Google Scholar
  36. Frynas, J. G.: (2005), ‹The false developmental promise of corporate social responsibility: evidence of multinational oil companies’, International Affairs, 81, 581–598. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2346.2005.00470.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Galbraith, J. K.: (1978) The New Industrial State (3rd ed.) (Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston).Google Scholar
  38. Gallie, W. B.: 1956, ‹Essentially Contested Concepts’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 56, 167–198 reprinted in M. Black (ed.): 1962, The Importance of Language (Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ), pp. 121–146 (pages cited in the paper refer to the reprint edition).Google Scholar
  39. Garrett, T. M.: (1966) Business Ethics (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
  40. Garriga, E. M. and Mele, D. (2004), ‹Corporate Social Responsibility Theories: Mapping the Territory’, Journal of Business Ethics, 53 , 51–71. doi:10.1023/B:BUSI.0000039399.90587.34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Gellner, E.: (1967), ‹The concept of a story’, Ratio, 9(1), 49–66.Google Scholar
  42. Gray, J. N. (1977), ‹On the Contestability of social and political concepts’, Political Theory, 5, 331–348.Google Scholar
  43. Hemingway, C. A.: (2002) An exploratory analysis of corporate social responsibility : definitions, motives and values (University of Hull Business School, Hull).Google Scholar
  44. Hess, D and Dunfee T W: (2007), ‹The Kasky-Nike threat to corporate social reporting: Implementing a standard of optimal truthful disclosure as a solution’, Business Ethics Quarterly, 17(1), 5–32.Google Scholar
  45. Hoff, D.: (2006), ‹South African Cellular Wars in Nigeria’, International Journal of Emerging Markets 1(1), 84–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Hopkins, M.: (2003) The planetary bargain: corporate social responsibility matters (Earthscan, London).Google Scholar
  47. Jensen, M. C.: (2002), ‹Value Maximisation, Stakeholder Theory and the Corporate Objective Function’, Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(2), 235–256. doi:10.2307/3857812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Kolk, A., Van Tulder, R. and Welters, C: (1999), ‹International codes of conduct and corporate social responsibility: Can transnational corporations regulate themselves?’, Transnational Corporations, 8(1), 143–180.Google Scholar
  49. Lantos, G. P.: (2001),’The Boundaries of Strategic CSR’, Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18, 595–630. doi:10.1108/07363760110410281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Leipziger, D.: (2003) The Corporate Responsibility Code book (Greenleaf Publishing, Sheffield, UK).Google Scholar
  51. Levitt, T.: (1958), ‹The Dangers of Social Responsibility’, Harvard Business Review, 36 , 41–50.Google Scholar
  52. Lukes, S.: (1974) Power: A Radical View (London, Macmillan).Google Scholar
  53. Lukes, S.: 2005, Power: A Radical View (2nd ed.) (Palgrave Macmillan).Google Scholar
  54. Margolis, J. D. and Walsh, J. P: (2003), ‹Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 268–305. doi:10.2307/3556659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Matten, D. and Crane, A. (2005), ‹Corporate Citizenship: Toward an extended conceptualisation’, Academy of Management Review, 30, 166–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Matten, D., Crane, A. and Chapple, W: (2003), ‹Behind the mask: Revealing the true face of corporate citizenship’, Journal of Business Ethics, 45, 109–120. doi:10.1023/A:1024128730308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Matten, D. and Moon, J: (2004) “Implicit” and “explicit” CSR : a conceptual framework for understanding CSR in Europe (International Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility, Nottingham).Google Scholar
  58. McBarnet, D. et al. (eds): 2007, The New Corporate Accountability: Corporate Social Responsibility and the Law (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge)Google Scholar
  59. Mcintosh, M.: (2002) Living corporate citizenship (FT/Prentice Hall).Google Scholar
  60. McIntyre, A.: (1973),’ The Essential Contestability of Some Social Concepts’, Ethics, 84(1), 1–9. doi:10.1086/291897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Mcmahon, T. F. (1986),’ Models of the relationship of firm to society’, Journal of Business Ethics, 5, 181–191. doi:10.1007/BF00383624.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Mcwilliams, A. and Siegel, D. (2001), ‹Corporate Social Responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective’, Academy of Management Review, 26(1), 117–127. doi:10.2307/259398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. McWilliams A, Siegel d. and P Wright. (2006),’ Corporate Social Responsibility: Strategic implications’, Journal of Management Studies, 43, 1–18. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00580.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Ogden, S and Watson, R. (1999),’ Corporate Performance and Stakeholder Management: Balancing Shareholder and customer interests in the UK privatised water industry’, Academy of Management Journal, 42(5), 526–538. doi:10.2307/256974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Omiyi, B. (Managing Director, Shell Petroleum Development Corporation Nigeria): 2007, Corporate Social Responsibility and the Oil and Gas Industry. Paper Presented at the UN Global Compact Nigerian Network International Conference on CSR 6–7 March 2007. www.nesgroup.org. Assessed April 2007.
  66. Palazzo, G. S. and Scherer, A. G: (2006),’ Corporate Legitimacy as Deliberation: A communicative Framework’, Journal of Business Ethics, 66, 71–88. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9044-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Palazzo, G. S. and Scherer, A. G: (2007),’ Towards a political conception of corporate responsibility: Business and Society Seen from a Habermasian Perspective’, Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1096–1120.Google Scholar
  68. Palazzo, G. S. and Scherer, A. G: (2008),’ Globalisation and Corporate Social Responsibility’, in A. Crane.et al. (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility (Oxford University Press, New York), pp. 413–431.Google Scholar
  69. Phillips, R. A.: (1997),’ Stakeholder theory and a principle of fairness’, Business Ethics Quarterly, 7(1), 51–66. doi:10.2307/3857232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Porter, M.E and Kramer, M.R: (2002),’ The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy’, Harvard Business Review, 80(12), 56–69.Google Scholar
  71. Post, J. E., Preston, L. E. and Sachs, S: (2002) Redefining the corporation: stakeholder management and organisational wealth (Stanford University Press, Stanford).Google Scholar
  72. Prahalad C. K and Hammond A: (2002),’ Serving the World’s poor profitably’, Harvard Business Review, 80(9), 48–58 .Google Scholar
  73. Preston, L. E and Post, J. E: (1975) Private Management and Public Policy (N.J. Prentice- Hall Inc, Englewood Cliffs).Google Scholar
  74. Preston, L. E and Post, J. E: (1981), ‹Private Management and Public Policy’, California Management Review, 23(3), 56–63.Google Scholar
  75. Rawls, J : (1972) A Theory of Justice (Claredon Press, Oxford).Google Scholar
  76. Shamir, R.: (2005), ‹Corporate social responsibility: a case of hegemony and counter-Hegemony’, in D. S. Santos (ed.), Law and Globalisation from below- Towards a cosmopolitan legality (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge), pp. 92–117.Google Scholar
  77. Spence, L. J.: (2007),’ Corporate social responsibility and small business in a European policy context’, Business and Society Review, 112(4), 533–552. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8594.2007.00308.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Spector B.: (2006),’The Harvard Business Review goes to War’, Management and Organizational History 1(3), 273–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Spector, B. (2008),’ Business Responsibilities in a Divided World: The Cold War Roots of the Corporate Social Responsibility Movement’, Enterprise and Society, 9(2), 314–336. doi:10.1093/es/khn023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Stanfield, J. R and Carroll, M. C: (2002), ‹Governance and the Legitimacy of Corporate Power: A path of convergence for heterodox economics?’, Journal of Economic Issues 38(2), 363–370.Google Scholar
  81. Swanton, C.: (1985),’ On the ‹essential contestedness’ of political concepts’, Ethics, 95(4), 811–827. doi:10.1086/292685.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Tullberg, J.: (2004),’ Illusions of Corporate Power: Revisiting the relative powers of corporations and governments’, Journal of Business Ethics, 52(4), 325–323. doi:10.1007/s10551-004-1530-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Van Marrewijk, M.: (2003),’ Concepts and Definitions of CSR and Corporate Sustainability: Between Agency and Communion’, Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2–3), 95–105. doi:10.1023/A:1023331212247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Votaw, D.: (1972),’ Genius Becomes Rare: A Comment on the Doctrine of Social Responsibility Pt 1’, California Management Review, 15(2), 25–31.Google Scholar
  85. Waddock, S.: (2001),’ The multiple bottom lines of corporate citizenship: social investing, reputation and responsibility audits’, Business and Society Review, 105, 323–345. doi:10.1111/0045-3609.00085.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Waldron, J.: (2002),’ Is the rule of Law an Essentially Contested Concept (In Florida)?’, Law and Philosophy, 21 , 137–164.Google Scholar
  87. Watrick, S. L. and Cochran, P. L: (1985),’ The evolution of the corporate social performance model’, Academy of Management Review, 10(4), 758–769. doi:10.2307/258044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Werther, W. B. and Chandler, D: (2006) Strategic corporate social responsibility: stakeholders in a global environment (London, Sage).Google Scholar
  89. Whitehouse, L. A : (2003),’ Corporate social responsibility, corporate citizenship and the global compact: A new approach to regulating corporate social power’, Global. Social Policy, 3, 299–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Whitehouse, L.A.: (2005), ‹CSR as regulation: The Argument from democracy, in O’brien, J. (Ed.), Governing the Corporation (Wiley & Sons Ltd., England), pp. 141–162.Google Scholar
  91. Windsor, D.: (2006),’ Corporate Social Responsibility – three key approaches’, Journal of Management Studies, 43, 93–114. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00584.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Wolf, M.: 2001, Sleepwalking with the Enemy 16th May (Financial Times)Google Scholar
  93. Wood, D. J.: (1991),’ Corporate Social Performance Revisited’, Academy of Management Review, 16, 691–718. doi:10.2307/258977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Wood, D. J and Logsdon, J. M: (2001), ‹Theorising business citizenship’, in J. Anriof and M. Mcintosh (eds.), Perspectives on Corporate Citizenship (Greenleaf Publishing, Sheffield, UK), pp. 83–103.Google Scholar
  95. Zerk, J. A.: (2006) Multinationals and corporate social responsibility: limitations and opportunities in international law (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Aberystwyth UniversityAberystwythU.K.

Personalised recommendations