Can We Rely On Corporate Social
Can we rely on corporate social responsibility as a solution to poor corporate practices?
The phrase Corporate Social Responsibility was coined in 1953 with the publication of Bowen's 'Social Responsibility of Businessmen', which posed the question 'what responsibilities to society can business people be reasonably expected to assume? (Bowen, 1953) At the most basic level, CSR is about a business taking responsibility for the economic, social, ethical and environmental impact of its activities (Harrison, 2010). Corporate Social Responsibility is the continuing commitment by business to behave ethically and contribute to economic development while improving the quality of life of the workforce and their families as well as of the local community and society at large.
Many organisations criticise CSR because they don't see business delivering on its promises. However, the problem isn't simply that companies aren't practicing CSR very well, it's that the corporate structure is not capable of social responsibility. Corporations aren't just greedy, the only concern they can have is to concentrate wealth in the hands of their shareholders (Bakan, 2004). Through CSR companies trumpet their 'values', but a company can only have one value: its share-price. Economist Milton Friedman says that because a company is the property of its shareholders, CSR can only be insincere (Bakan, 2004). In other words, companies can only make a decision which favours the wider social good if the outcome is also the most profitable one.
CSR is an effective strategy for: bolstering a company's public image; avoiding regulation; gaining legitimacy and access to markets and decision makers; and shifting the ground towards privatisation of public functions. CSR enables business to propose ineffective, voluntary, market-based solutions to social and environmental crises under guise of being responsible. This deflects blame for problems caused by corporate operations away from the company, and
The phrase Corporate Social Responsibility was coined in 1953 with the publication of Bowen's 'Social Responsibility of Businessmen', which posed the question 'what responsibilities to society can business people be reasonably expected to assume? (Bowen, 1953) At the most basic level, CSR is about a business taking responsibility for the economic, social, ethical and environmental impact of its activities (Harrison, 2010). Corporate Social Responsibility is the continuing commitment by business to behave ethically and contribute to economic development while improving the quality of life of the workforce and their families as well as of the local community and society at large.
Many organisations criticise CSR because they don't see business delivering on its promises. However, the problem isn't simply that companies aren't practicing CSR very well, it's that the corporate structure is not capable of social responsibility. Corporations aren't just greedy, the only concern they can have is to concentrate wealth in the hands of their shareholders (Bakan, 2004). Through CSR companies trumpet their 'values', but a company can only have one value: its share-price. Economist Milton Friedman says that because a company is the property of its shareholders, CSR can only be insincere (Bakan, 2004). In other words, companies can only make a decision which favours the wider social good if the outcome is also the most profitable one.
CSR is an effective strategy for: bolstering a company's public image; avoiding regulation; gaining legitimacy and access to markets and decision makers; and shifting the ground towards privatisation of public functions. CSR enables business to propose ineffective, voluntary, market-based solutions to social and environmental crises under guise of being responsible. This deflects blame for problems caused by corporate operations away from the company, and