Towards a Theory and Model of Corporate Social Responsibility and Implications for Management and Leadership Practices

Chapter
Part of the Issues in Business Ethics book series (IBET, volume 37)

Abstract

The deconstructive and complexity-inspired reading given of CSR in  Chap. 5 is developed into a theory and model of CSR in this chapter. To this end, a critical investigation of the three components of CSR is presented, namely corporate identity, the nature of the relations between corporations and society (including stakeholders), and the nature of corporate responsibility. The model of CSR that is derived from this investigation depicts the different domains of CSR (namely, the environmental, social, legal, and economic domains) as embedded in one another, and differentially related to one another. It is argued that these domains are interlinked in complex ways with the corporation, which makes it impossible to conclusively define corporate responsibilities. These complexities also frustrate our attempts at managing our CSR obligations, as our current analytic tools are inadequate in dealing with these complexities. A number of management tools that can help in this regard are therefore also introduced, as is a discussion on the leadership approach and responsibilities that support the theory and model of CSR developed here.

Keywords

Corporate Social Responsibility Business Ethic Corporate Responsibility Inattentional Blindness Business Responsibility 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Albert, S., B.E. Ashforth, and J.E. Dutton. 2000. Organizational identity and identification: Chartering new waters and building new bridges. Academy of Management Review 25(1): 13–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen, P. 2001. A complex systems approach to learning, adaptive networks. International Journal of Innovation Management 5(2): 149–180.Google Scholar
  3. Badiou, A. 2009. Pocket pantheon, trans. D. Macey. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  4. Brown, M.E., and L.K. Trevino. 2. Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly 17: 595–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Burtless, G. 2009. The financial crisis and the rule of law. The Brookings Institute. Available online at: http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2009/0414_financial_crisis_burtless.aspx
  6. Carroll, A.B. 1991. The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, July-August 1991: 39–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cilliers, P. 2001. Boundaries, hierarchies & networks in complex systems. International Journal of Innovation Management 5(2): 135–147.Google Scholar
  8. Cilliers, P. 2. On the importance of a certain slowness. Emergence: Complexity and Organization 8(3): 105–112.Google Scholar
  9. Cilliers, P. 2008. Complexity theory as a general framework for sustainability science. In Exploring sustainability science: A Southern African perspective, ed. M. Burns and A. Weaver, 38–57. Stellenbosch: African Sun Media.Google Scholar
  10. Cilliers, P. 2010. Difference, identity, and complexity. Philosophy Today, Spring 2010: 55–65.Google Scholar
  11. Colander, D., M. Goldberg, A. Haas, K. Juselius, A. Kirman, T. Lux, and B. Sloth. 2009. The financial crisis and the systemic failure of the economic profession. Critical Review 21(2–3): 249–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Collier, J., and R. Esteban. 1999. Governance in the participative organisation: Freedom, creativity and ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 21: 173–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Collier, J., and R. Esteban. 2000. Systemic leadership: Ethical and effective. The Leadership and Organization Development Journal 21(4): 207–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Crane, A., and D. Matten. 2004a. Business ethics: A European perspective. Managing corporate citizenship and sustainability in the age of globalisation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Crane, A., and D. Matten. 2004b. Questioning the domain of the business ethics curriculum. Journal of Business Ethics 54: 357–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Crane, A., and Matten, D. 2008. Ethics and the financial crisis. Crane and Matten Blog, Thursday, 18 Sept 2008. Available online at: http://craneandmatten.blogspot.com/2008/09/ethics-and-financial-crisis.html
  17. Crane, A. and Matten, D. 2010. Top 10 corporate responsibility stories of 2010. Crane and Matten Blog, Monday, 13 Dec 2010. Available online at: http://craneandmatten.blogspot.com/2010/12/top-10-corporate-responsibility-stories.html
  18. Derrida, J. 1988. Afterword. In Limited Inc, ed. G. Graff and trans. S. Weber, 111–160. Evanston: Northern Western University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Derrida, J. 1995. “Eating well,” or the calculation of the subject. In Points… Interviews, 1974–1994, ed. E. Weber and trans. P. Kamuf, 255–287. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Derrida, J. 1997. The Villanova roundtable. A conversation with Jacques Derrida. In Deconstruction in a nutshell: A conversation with Jacques Derrida, ed. J.D. Caputo, 1–30. New York: Fordham University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Derrida, J. 1999. Hospitality, justice and responsibility: A dialogue with Jacques Derrida. In Questioning ethics: Contemporary debates in philosophy, ed. R. Kearney and M. Dooley, 65–83. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  22. Derrida, J. 2002. Negotiations. In Negotiations: Interventions and interviews, 1971–2001, ed. and trans. E. Rottenberg, 11–40. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Donaldson, T., and L.E. Preston. 1995. The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review 20(1): 65–91.Google Scholar
  24. Erskine, T. 2003. Can institutions have responsibility? Collective moral agency and international relations. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  25. Floridi, L. 1999. Information ethics: On the philosophical foundation of computer ethics. Ethics and Information Technology 1(1): 37–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Freeman, R.E. 2008. Managing for stakeholders. In Ethical issues in business: A philosophical approach, ed. T. Donaldson and P.H. Werhane, 39–53. Upper Saddle River: Pearson.Google Scholar
  27. Freeman, R.E., and R.A. Philips. 2002. Stakeholder theory: A libertarian defense. Business Ethics Quarterly 12: 331–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. French, P.A. 1979. Collective and corporate responsibility. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  29. French, P.A. 1984. The corporation as a moral person. American Philosophical Quarterly 16: 207–215.Google Scholar
  30. Friedman, M. 1962. Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  31. Friedman, A.A. 2004. Beyond mediocrity: Transformational leadership within a transactional framework. International Journal of Leadership in Education 7(3): 203–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gioia, D.A., M. Schultz, and K.G. Corley. 2000. Organizational identity, image, and adaptive instability. Academy of Management Review 25(1): 63–81.Google Scholar
  33. Grebe, E. and Woermann, M. 2011. Institutions of integrity and the integrity of institutions: Integrity and ethics in the politics of developmental leadership. Research Paper. Developmental Leadership Program. March 2011: 26–37.Google Scholar
  34. Gronn, P. 2003. The new work of educational leaders: Changing leadership practices in an era of school reform. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.Google Scholar
  35. Hattingh, J.P. 2. The state of the art in environmental ethics as a practical enterprise: A view from the Johannesburg documents. In Environmental ethics and international policy, ed. H.A.M.J. ten Have, 191–216. Paris: UNESCO Publication.Google Scholar
  36. Homann, K. 2007. Globalisation from a business ethics point of view. In Globalisation and business ethics, ed. K. Homan, P. Koslowski, and C. Luetge, 3–10. Hampshire/Burlington: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
  37. Hosking, D.M. 2007. Not leaders, not followers: A post-modern discourse of leadership processes. In Follower-centered perspectives on leadership: A tribute to the memory of James R. Meindl, ed. B. Shamir, R. Pillai, M. Blighand, and M. Uhl-Bien, 243–264. Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
  38. Keeley, M. 1981. Organizations as non-persons. Journal of Value Inquiry 15: 149–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Keeley, M. 1988. A social-contract theory of organizations. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame.Google Scholar
  40. Ladd, J. 1970. Morality and the ideal of rationality in formal organizations. The Monist 54(4): 488–516.Google Scholar
  41. Lissack, M.R., and H. Letiche. 2002. Complexity, emergence, resilience, and coherence: Gaining perspectives on organizations and their study. Emergence 4(3): 72–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mauboussin, M.J. 2011. Embracing complexity. Harvard Business Review, September 2011: 89–92.Google Scholar
  43. Midgley, G. 2003. Science as systemic intervention: Some implications of systems thinking and complexity for the philosophy of science. Systemic Practice and Action Research 16(2): 77–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mitchell, R.K., B.R. Agle, and D.J. Wood. 1997. Towards a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defending the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review 22(4): 853–886.Google Scholar
  45. Morgenson, G., and J. Rosner. 2011. Reckless endangerment: How outsized ambition, greed, and corruption led to economic Armageddon. New York: Times Books.Google Scholar
  46. Morin, E. 1999. Seven complex lessons in education for the future, trans. N. Poller. Paris: UNESCO Publication. Google Scholar
  47. Morin, E. 2007. Restricted complexity, general complexity, trans. C. Gershenson. In Worldviews, science and us: Philosophy and complexity, ed. C. Gershenson, D. Aerts, and B. Edmonds, 5–29. Singapore: World Scientific.Google Scholar
  48. Morin, E. 2008. On complexity, trans. S.M. Kelly. Cresskill: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  49. Painter-Morland, M. 2. Redefining accountability as relational responsiveness. Journal of Business Ethics 66: 89–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Painter-Morland, M. 2008. Business ethics as practice: Ethics as the everyday business of business. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Petit, P. 2007. Responsibility incorporated. Ethics 117: 171–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Polonsky, M., and C. Jevons. 2. Understanding issue complexity when building a socially responsible brand. European Business Review 18(5): 340–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Richardson, K.A., and M.R. Lissack. 2001. On the status of boundaries, both national and organizational: A complex systems perspective. Emergence 3(4): 32–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Salancik, G.R., and J. Pfeffer. 1974. The base and use of power in organizational decision-making: The case of universities. Administrative Science Quarterly 19: 453–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sargut, G., and R.G. McGarth. 2011. Learning to live with complexity. Harvard Business Review, September 2011: 69–76.Google Scholar
  56. Schein, E. 1985. Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  57. Schwartz, M.S., and A.B.. Carroll. 2003. Corporate social responsibility: A three-domain approach. Business Ethics Quarterly 13(4): 503–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sims, R.R., and J. Brinkmann. 2003. Enron ethics (or: Culture matters more than codes). Journal of Business Ethics 45: 243–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Siponen, M. 2004. A pragmatic evaluation of the theory of information ethics. Ethics and Information Technology 6(4): 279–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Smith, A. 1776. An inquiry into the nature and cause of the wealth of nations. London: W. Strahan and T. Cadel.Google Scholar
  61. Trevino, L.K., and M.E. Brown. 2004. Managing to be ethical: Debunking five business ethics myths. The Academy of Management Executive 18(2): 69–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Trevino, L.K., and K.A. Nelson. 2004. Managing business ethics: Straight talk about how to do it right, 3rd ed. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  63. Uhl-Bien, M. 2. Relational leadership theory: Exploring the social processes of leadership and organizing. The Leadership Quarterly 17: 654–676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Uhl-Bien, M., R. Marion, and B. McKelvey. 2007. Complexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. The Leadership Quarterly 18: 298–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Velasquez, M.G. 1983. Why corporations are not morally responsible for anything they do. Business and Professional Ethics Journal 2(3): 1–18.Google Scholar
  66. Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  67. Wenger, E. 2000. Communities of practice and social learning. Organizations 7(2): 225–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Werhane, P.H. 1980. Formal organizations, economic freedom and moral agency. Journal of Value Inquiry 14: 43–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Woermann, M. 2010. Corporate identity, responsibility and the ethics of complexity. In Complexity, difference and identity, ed. P. Cilliers and R. Preiser, 167–192. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Woermann, M. 2011. In corporations we trust? A critique of contractarian-based corporate social responsibility models. African Journal of Business Ethics 5(1): 26–37.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht. 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Philosophy and Centre for Applied EthicsStellenbosch UniversityMatielandSouth Africa

Personalised recommendations