No abstract

The corporate responsibility (CR) discussion has so far been rather fragmented as academics tackle it from their own areas of expertise, which guarantees in-depth analyses, but leaves room for broader syntheses. This research is a synthetic, interdisciplinary exercise: it integrates philosophical, psychological and managerial perspectives of corporate responsibility into a more holistic CR-model for the benefit of academics, companies and their interest groups. CR usually comprises three areas: environmental, social and economic responsibilities. In all these areas there should be a match between corporate values, discourses and actions. The aim of this multidisciplinary research is to build a CR-model by integrating (1) utilitarian/egoistic, duty/rights/justice and virtue ethical corporate values with (2) increased consciousness of psychological defences in corporate discourses, in order to achieve (3) responsible environmental, social and economic corporate actions. The resulting CR-model can be tested in companies and executed through corporate strategic and operational management.

Firms are encouraged to manage their corporate responsibility and identity in accordance with the popular stakeholder theory. Managers are, however, confronted with the complexity of the praxis and related ethical dilemmas, as the expectations of their external stakeholders may be myriad, ambiguous and self‐contradictory, or even non‐existent in the global and dynamic business contexts. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to (a) review and critically discuss the stakeholder approach in striving for a responsible identity and (b) introduce an alternative approach that can address its inadequacies and shortcomings. The study outlines an alternative theorem, the awareness approach to responsible identity. In the conclusions, the article proposes how firms can adopt a responsible identity that leads to a desired image and reputation, and maps out further research opportunities. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

Is corporate sustainability absolute or relative? Should companies adopt an evolutionary (step-by-step) or a revolutionary (one-leap) approach to sustainable development -or is there a third way? These questions are hot potatoes, which burn the answerer's mouth because of strong opposing views. Yet the potatoes must be eaten now. There is no time to wait for them to cool because by then it may be too late to act. After munching these hot potatoes, an alternative (fi ve-leap) approach to corporate sustainability is outlined. A portfolio matrix measuring the integration of environmental, sociocultural and economic responsibilities along a fi ve-leap scale is drafted. This cube can be adapted to measure any company's level of responsibility with the aim of achieving sustainability on a fast track.

Many large companies seem to fulfil the psychiatric criteria for psychopaths in their corporate responsibility (CR) practices. Are they really incurable psychopaths, or is it possible that they could be counselled into accepting their responsibilities?CR studies have so far paid little attention to the variations in the CR emphases between different companies. This article, based on a conference paper (Ketola, 2005b), presents a CR emphasis model, pinpointing eight different approaches to corporate responsibility. Some companies do not voluntarily take any responsibilities.Companies acting like psychopaths need a Prince of Virtues to kiss awake their inner Sleeping Beauty from its 100-year irresponsibility sleep. All companies could take advantage of virtue ethics, which present the values shared by all humans, and hence exemplify the natural law (lex naturae). Counselling top managers and key individuals on their personal and professional values enables all personnel to integrate virtues into the company's CR practices.