Abstract
The purpose of this work is to give several reasons why we should give up the idea of corporate social responsibility. Freeman and Liedtka draw on their extensive experience in helping managers think about these ideas, as well as their reading of the management literature on this and other subjects. The authors have to confess that after years of trying to make sense of this idea they have come full circle to agree with Milton Friedman that the concept of corporate social responsibility is a dangerous idea. However, Freeman and Liedtka have slightly different reasons for their conclusions.
Originally published in: Business Horizons, 34(4), 92–98 © Elsevier, 1991
Reprint by Springer, DOI 10.1016/0007-6813(91)90012-K
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
This section is based on Freeman (1991). For a complete discussion of the history of the concept of corporate social responsibility, see Frederick (1987) and Preston (1988). Our understanding of the history of these ideas is due to Professors Frederick and Preston, as well as James Post and Ed Epstein.
- 2.
We take this point to be a large part of the substance of Tom Peters’ call for chaos in organizations as well as the current movement toward employee empowerment, “flat organizations,” and the decentralization of command and control organizations.
- 3.
Notable among these exceptions are Cavanagh (1976) and Scott and Hart (1990). More commonly, management thinkers are often heard to decry the Japanese success in business with explanations of the homogeneous nature of Japanese society and the reliance on communal versus individual values. If our management thinkers are to be believed, Japanese business is closely connected with the underlying cultural values, but American business is not—a strange theory indeed.
References
Barthes, Roland. 1975. The Pleasure of the Text. Trans. Richard Miller. New York: Hill and Wang.
Bellah, Robert, et al. 1985. Habits of the Heart. New York: Harper & Row.
Cavanagh, Gerald. 1976. American Business Values in Transition. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Frederick, William C. 1987. Corporate Social Responsibility and Business Ethics. In Business and Society, ed. S. Prakash Sethi and Cecilia M. Falbe, 142–161. Lexington: Lexington Books.
Freeman, R. Edward. 1991. A Note on Ethics and Business. UVA-E-071, The Darden School, University of Virginia.
Friedman, Milton. 1962. Capitalism and Freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Friedman, Milton. 1970. The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Its Profits. New York Times Magazine, September 13, 122–126.
Hardin, Garrett. 1968. The Tragedy of the Commons. Science, December 13, 1243–1248.
Preston, Lee E. 1988. Social Issues and Public Policy in Business and Management: Retrospect and Prospect. College Park, Md.: University of Maryland.
Scott, William, and David Hart. 1990. Organizational Values in America. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.
Selden, Arthur. 1990. Capitalism. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Freeman, R.E., Liedtka, J.M. (2023). Corporate Social Responsibility: A Critical Approach. In: Dmytriyev, S.D., Freeman, R.E. (eds) R. Edward Freeman’s Selected Works on Stakeholder Theory and Business Ethics. Issues in Business Ethics(), vol 53. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04564-6_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04564-6_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-04563-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-04564-6
eBook Packages: Religion and PhilosophyPhilosophy and Religion (R0)