The purpose of this article is to provide a general summary of the key value propositions evident in the research on the business case for corporate social responsibility (CSR), described as four general ‘types’ of the business case, or four modes of value creation. It then presents a critique of these approaches (including identifying some problems inherent in the construct of CSR itself) and offers some principles for constructing a ‘better’ business case. Its intent is not to conduct a thorough review of studies analyzing the relationship between CSR and financial performance, as that has been well done elsewhere. Rather it seeks to unearth assumptions underlying dominant approaches in an effort to build a more robust business case for CSR that can move beyond existing limitations.

An important aim of critical management education is to stand in critique of mainstream educative practice, while engaging in ideas of new possibility and proposals for alternative action. Opportunities for critique can be opened by identifying paradox or the appearance of contradiction in the imperatives underpinning conventional approaches to management and management education. One such contradiction is the "sustainability paradox": our dominant approaches to wealth creation degrades both the ecological systems and the social relationships upon which their very survival depends. In this article, we offer, from within a critical management education frame, an alternative vision of management education as a progressive educative practice: one that embraces our embeddedness in the natural world and our social relation to one another. We conclude with ideas for redirecting the contextual, organizational, curricular, and pedagogical dimensions of management education toward such a vision.

No abstract

This article explores the implicit and explicit conceptions of the relationship between business, society, and nature that are evident in the management literature. The authors derive three conceptions, termed the disparate, intertwined, and embedded views, and consider how they relate to the economic, social, and environmental challenges of our time. It is argued that an embedded view is best able to help us address these challenges, as it infers a holarchical (or holistically hierarchical) perspective of the business— society—nature interface: the notion that the business, societal, and biospheric systems are not only interrelated but that they are most realistically (and therefore most usefully) viewed as nested systems. The embedded view highlights systemic limits and the dependency of society and economy on nature, and it thus provides a logical value ordering to these domains. The authors conclude by discussing the research implications of an embedded view.

No abstract