Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Modelling CSR: How Managers Understand the Responsibilities of Business Towards Society

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to develop a model of how managers perceive the responsibilities of business towards society. The article is based on the survey responses of more than 1,000 managers in eight large international firms. It is concluded that the managerial perceptions of societal responsibilities differ in some respects from the mainstream models found in the corporate social responsibility (CSR) and business ethics literature. The article is an output of RESPONSE: an EU- and corporate-funded research project on managerial perceptions of CSR.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Andriof, J., & McIntosh, M.2001. “Introduction”, in J. Andriof, M. McIntosh, & (eds.), Perspectives on Corporate Citizenship (Greenleaf Publishing Ltd., Sheffield, UK), pp. 14-24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baines, T., Lightfoot, H., Williams, G.M., & Greenough, R. (2006). State-of-the-art in lean design engineering: a literature review on white collar lean. Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 220(9), 1539–1547.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blowfield, M., & Googins, B.K. 2006. “Step Up: A Call for Business Leadership in Society. 2006”, A Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship Monograph (Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship, Chestnut Hill, MA).

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A.B. (1991). The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward a Moral Managemetn of Organizational Stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48. doi:10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-G.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. 2006, Constructing Grounded Theory (Sage Publications Ltd, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlsrud, A.: 2008, ‹How Corporate Social Responsibility is Defined: an Analysis of 37 Definitions’, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 15(1), 1–13.

  • Elkington, J. 1998, Cannibals with forks (New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island, Canada).

    Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, M.J. 2008, Making Sustainability Work (Greenleaf Publishing Limited, Sheffield).

    Google Scholar 

  • Fernández, E., Junquera, B., & Ordiz, M. (2006). Managers’ Profile in Environmental Strategy: A Review of the Literature. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 13(5), 261–274. doi:10.1002/csr.109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Figge, F., Hahn, T., Schaltegger, S., & Wagner, M. (2002). The Sustainability Balanced Scorecard – Linking Sustainability Management to Business Strategy. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(5), 269–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Franco-Santos, M., & Bourne, M. (2005). An examination of the literature relating to issues affecting how companies manage through measures. Production Planning and Control, 16(2), 114–124. doi:10.1080/09537280512331333020.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R.E. 1984, Strategic management: a stakeholder approach (Pitman, Boston, Massachusetts).

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R.E. (1994). The Politics of Stakeholder Theory: Some Future Directions. Business Ethics Quarterly, 4(4), 409–421. doi:10.2307/3857340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R.E., & McVea, J. 2001. “A Stakeholder Approach to Strategic Management”, in M. A. Hitt, R. E. Freeman, & J. S. Harrison (Eds.), The Blackwell Handbook of Strategic Management, (Blackwell Publishers Ltd. Oxford, UK), pp. 189-207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R.E., & Velamuri, S.R. 2006. “A New Approach to CSR: Company Stakeholder Responsibility”, in M. Morsing & A. Kakabadse (eds.), Corporate Social Responsibility: From Aspiration to Application (Palgrave MacMillan Houndsmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire), pp. 9-23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E., Wicks, A. C., & Parmar, B.: 2004, “Stakeholder Theory and “The Corporate Objective Revisited”, Organization Science 15(3), 364-369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gao, S.S., & Zhang, J.J. (2006). Stakeholder engagement, social auditing and corporate sustainability. Business Process Management Journal, 12(6), 722–740. doi:10.1108/14637150610710891.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardjono, T.W., & van Marrewijk, M. (2001). The Social Dimensions of Business Excellence. Corporate Environmental Strategy, 8(3), 223–233. doi:10.1016/S1066-7938(01)00125-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, J., & Boyle, E. (2006). Falling into capability learning traps: The role of the firm’s predominant managerial mental models. Management Decision, 44(1), 31–43. doi:10.1108/00251740610641445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, J.S., & Freeman, R.E. (1999). Stakeholders, Social Responsibility, and Performance: Empirical Evidence and Theoretical Perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 42(5), 479–485. doi:10.2307/256971.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, R.C., & Levenhagen, M. (1995). Metaphors and Mental Models: Sensemaking and Sensegiving in Innovative and Entrepreneurial Activities. Journal of Management, 21(6), 1057–1074. doi:10.1177/014920639502100603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, S. (1976). Executive Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility. Business Horizons, 19(3), 34–40. doi:10.1016/0007-6813(76)90049-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins, H. (2006). Small Business Champions for Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(3), 241–256. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9182-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewins, A., & Silver, C. 2007. Using Software in Qualitative Research (Sage Publications Ltd, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Marrewijk, M. v. (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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marrewijk, M. v., Wuisman, I., de Cleyn, W., Timmers, J., Panapanaan, V., & Linnanen, L. (2004). A Phase-wise Development Approach to Business Excellence: Towards an Innovative, Stakeholder-oriented Assessment Tool for Organizational Excellence and CSR. Journal of Business Ethics, 55(2), 83–98. doi:10.1007/s10551-004-2154-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matten, D., & Crane, A. (2005). Corporate Citizenship: Toward an Extended Theoretical Conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 166–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • McAlister, D.T., Ferrell, O.C., & Ferrell, L. 2003, Business and Society: A strategic Approach to Corporate Citizenship (Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston).

    Google Scholar 

  • Meehan, J., Meehan, K., & Richards, A. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: the 3C-SR model. International Journal of Social Economics, 33(5/6), 386–398. doi:10.1108/03068290610660661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mintzberg, H. (1983). The Case for Corporate Social Responsibility. The Journal of Business Strategy, 4(2), 3–15. doi:10.1108/eb039015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen, E.R. (2006). Making Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Operable: How Companies Translate Stakeholder Dialogue into Practice. Business and Society Review, 111(2), 137–163. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8594.2006.00265.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. (2005). Changing Mental Models: HR’s most Important Task. Human Resource Management, 44(2), 123–128. doi:10.1002/hrm.20053.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poksinska, B., Dahlgaard, J.J., & Eklund, J. (2003). Implementing ISO 14000 in Sweden: Motives, benefits and comparisons with ISO 9000. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 20(5), 585–606. doi:10.1108/02656710310476543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quazi, A.M. (2003). Identifying the determinants of corporate managers’ perceived social obligations. Management Decision, 41(9), 822–831. doi:10.1108/00251740310488999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quazi, A.M., & O’Brien, D. (2000). An Empirical Test of a Cross-national Model of Corporate Social Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 25, 33–51. doi:10.1023/A:1006305111122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • RESPONSE: 2007a, ‹Understanding and Responding to Societal Demands on Corporate Responsibility. Report Published in Relation to the Final Conference of the RESPONSE Project at INSEAD, Fontainebleau’, http://www.insead.edu/v1/ibis/events/response/information/documents/ResponseReport.pdf. Accessed 29 Nov 2007.

  • RESPONSE: 2007b, ‹Understanding Corporate Responsibility: An Executive Briefing. Results and Insights from project “RESPONSE”. Report Published in Relation to the Final Conference of the RESPONSE Project at INSEAD, Fontainebleau’, http://www.insead.edu/v1/ibis/events/response/information/documents/ResponseReport.pdf. Accessed 29 Nov 2007.

  • Rouse, P., & Putterill, M. (2003). An integral framework for performance measurement. Management Decision, 41(8), 791–805. doi:10.1108/00251740310496305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senge, P.M. (1992). Mental Models. Planning Review, 20(2), 4–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, S.P. 2003, Setting Global Standards: Guidelines for Creating Codes of Conduct in Multinational Corporations (John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hobroken, New Jersey).

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, N.C. (2003). Corporate Social Responsibility: Whether or How? California Management Review, 45(4), 52–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, D., & Niehoff, B.P. 2001. “Business Citizenship Outside and Inside Organisations”, in J. Andriof & M. McIntosh (eds.), Perspectives on Corporate Citizenship (Greenleaf Publishing Limited Sheffield), pp. 104-116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, A.S., & Simerly, R.L. (1994). The Chief Executive Officer and Corporate Social Performance: An Interdisciplinary Examination. Journal of Business Ethics, 13(12), 959–968. doi:10.1007/BF00881665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNIDO. 2002, Corporate Social Responsibility: Implications for Small and Medium Enterprises in Developing Countries (United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO), Vienna).

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Woerd, F., & van den Brink, T. (2004). Feasibility of a Responsive Business Scorecard – a Pilot Study. Journal of Business Ethics, 55(2), 173–186. doi:10.1007/s10551-004-1900-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vitell, S. J. and A. Singhapakdi: 1991, `Factors Influencing the Perceived Importance of Stakeholder Groups in Situations Involving Ethical Issues', Business and Professional Ethics Journal 10(3), 53–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S.A., Bodwell, C., & Graves, S.B. (2002). Responsibility: The new business imperative. Academy of Management Executive, 16(2), 132–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warhurst, A. (2005). Future roles of business in society: the expanding boundaries of corporate responsibility and a compelling case for partnership. Futures, 37(2-3), 151–168. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2004.03.033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, G.R., Treviño, L.K., & Cochran, P.L. (1999). Corporate Ethics Programs as Control Systems: Influences of Executive Commitment and Environmental Factors. Academy of Management Journal, 42(1), 41–57. doi:10.2307/256873.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WEF 2003, Responding to the Leadership Challenge: Findings of a CEO Survey on Global Corporate Citizenship (World Economic Forum (WEF), Geneva).

    Google Scholar 

  • Werre, M. (2003). Implementing Corporate Responsibility – The Chiquita Case. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2-3), 247–260. doi:10.1023/A:1023316303587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wicks, A.C., Gilbert, D.R., & Freeman, R.E. (1994). A Feminist Reinterpretation of the Stakeholder Concept. Business Ethics Quarterly, 4(4), 475–497. doi:10.2307/3857345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D.J. (1991). Social Issues in Management: Theory and Research in Corporate Social Performance. Journal of Management, 17(2), 383–406. doi:10.1177/014920639101700206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CBS Center for Corporate Social Responsibility (CBSCSR), Copenhagen Business School, Porcelænshaven 18B, 2000, Frederiksberg, Denmark

    Esben Rahbek Pedersen

Authors
  1. Esben Rahbek Pedersen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Esben Rahbek Pedersen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pedersen, E.R. Modelling CSR: How Managers Understand the Responsibilities of Business Towards Society. J Bus Ethics 91, 155–166 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0078-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0078-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation