Corporate Social Responsibility: Evolution of a Definitional Construct
There is a formidable history related to the evolution of the idea and definition of company social responsibility (CSR). during this article, the author traces the evolution of the CSR construct starting within the Nineteen Fifties, that marks the trendy era of CSR. Definitions dilated throughout the Sixties and proliferated throughout the Nineteen Seventies. within the Eighties, there have been fewer new definitions, a lot of inquiry, and different themes began to mature. These different themes enclosed company social performance (CSP), neutral theory, and business ethics theory. within the Nineteen Nineties, CSR continues to function a core construct however yields to or is reworked into different thematic frameworks. [1]
Corporate Social Responsibility: a Theory of the Firm Perspective
We define a provide and demand model of company social responsibility (CSR). supported this framework, we have a tendency to theorise that a firm’s level of CSR can rely upon its size, level of diversification, analysis and development, advertising, government sales, client financial gain, market conditions, and stage within the business life cycle. From these hypotheses, we have a tendency to conclude that there’s associate degree “ideal” level of CSR, that managers will confirm via analytic thinking, which there’s a neutral relationship between CSR and money performance. [2]
Corporate Social Responsibility Theories: Mapping the Territory
The Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) field presents not solely a landscape of theories however conjointly a proliferation of approaches, that square measure controversial , complicated and unclear. this text tries to clarify the case, “mapping the territory” by classifying the most CSR theories and connected approaches in four groups: (1) instrumental theories, during which the corporation is seen as solely associate degree instrument for wealth creation, and its social activities square measure solely a method to attain economic results; (2) political theories, that concern themselves with the ability of firms in society and a accountable use of this power within the political arena; (3) integrative theories, during which the corporation is concentrated on the satisfaction of social demands; and (4) moral theories, supported moral responsibilities of firms to society. [3]
Fictitious consumer responsibility? Quantifying social desirability bias in corporate social responsibility surveys
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) surveys repeatedly indicate important shopper interest in product and services of companies that follow virtuous business practices. nonetheless the existence of a causative relationship between company responsibility and its money performance may be a oppose space, and clear proof that CSR would produce a competitive advantage is missing. As moral evaluations are deeply embedded in responsibility, this discrepancy casts doubt on the genuineness of the integrity customers categorical in surveys. A social desirability (SD) bias resulting in fictitious responsibility—be it associate degree intentional plan to seem moral or an unconscious tendency to exaggerate ethical behaviour—is so plausible and it threatens the responsibleness of analysis within the field. [4]
Corporate Social Responsibility and Investment Decisions in Listed Manufacturing Firms in Nigeria
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is AN inexorably essential issue for economic agents all over throughout the globe, because of frequently developing attention to all or any the aspects of firm’s activities and their relationships with stakeholders. Likewise in rising economies like African nation, the number of corporations that participate in intentional company social responsibility (CSR) reports (e.g. supportability reports, natural reports, ecological and social reports or company social duty reports) is increasing. the aim of this paper is to analyze the impact of company Social Responsibility on investment selections in listed producing corporations in African nation. [5]
Reference
[1] Carroll, A.B., 1999. Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business & society, 38(3), (Web Link)
[2] McWilliams, A. and Siegel, D., 2001. Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Academy of management review, 26(1), (Web Link)
[3] Garriga, E. and Melé, D., 2004. Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of business ethics, 53(1-2), (Web Link)
[4] Fictitious consumer responsibility? Quantifying social desirability bias in corporate social responsibility surveys
Henri Kuokkanen
Palgrave Communications volume3, Article number: 16106 (2017) (Web Link)
[5] Wisdom, O., Lawrence, I., John Akindele, O. and Muideen, I. (2018) “Corporate Social Responsibility and Investment Decisions in Listed Manufacturing Firms in Nigeria”, Journal of Economics, Management and Trade, 21(4), (Web Link)
