International business organizations are regularly addressed on their corporate social responsibility (CSR). As illustrated in this paper, it is not yet clear exactly what CSR means to organizations and how to deal with it. In this paper, the authors explore how a sensemaking approach helps to understand the business challenges of CSR within an organizational context. The theories of Karl Weick are applied to the experiences of CSR in Royal Dutch Shell. The authors argue that the key to CSR in international business organizations is to engage stakeholders and start a process of joint sensemaking. Three main competencies are crucial in this: the competency to engage stakeholders through listening and understanding; the creation of an organizational language so that CSR makes sense to members of the organization; and recognizing the momentum of taking action.

Purpose -This case study paper has the purpose of showing that both processes of hardwiring and soft wiring together is essential for embedding corporate responsibility across a global organisation to achieve lasting change.Design/methodology/approach -The approach taken in this paper is first to describe the experiences in the Shell Group in terms of tools and approaches. In Shell, governance and business processes are being aligned, ''hardwired'', while communications, leadership development programmes and competency frameworks reach the ''hearts and minds'' of Shell people -''soft wiring''. Informal networks tap into the enthusiasm of people, developing intrinsic motivation. These experiences of Shell are then compared with the sense making model of Cramer et al. Findings -The findings show a high level of alignment.Practical implications -The practical implication of this finding is that hardwiring and softwiring processes appear to be a vital combination for changing the way business do things.Originality/value -The value of this paper lies in making the business efforts of embedding corporate responsibility into business practice more effective by focussing on hardwiring and softwiring at the same time.

firms as political actors, global governance, stakeholder collaboration, conflict zones, corporate accountability, political responsibility, NGO legitimacy, consumer responsibility, hard and soft law, human rights,

Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to argue that corporate social responsibilities of international business can be defined in terms of human rights responsibilities. Design/methodology/approach -The approach taken is to draw from international law to examine whether these responsibilities can be defined in a precise way. Findings -The paper finds that human rights responsibilities of business needs further refining.Research limitations/implications -Research needs to be conducted from a law perspective on defining concepts such as ''complicity'', ''spheres of influence'' or ''respecting'' human rights. Practical implications -This paper calls upon international business and their stakeholders to use and pro-actively manage their human rights responsibilities and further refine the existing managerial human rights tools. Originality/value -In exploring the human rights responsibilities of business, this paper contributes to an important crossroads of international law and management.

No abstract