Corporate social irresponsibility: review and conceptual boundaries

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to carry out a review of the academic literature about corporate social irresponsibility (CSIR) highlighting aspects that help us to define socially irresponsible behaviour and its relationship with socially responsible behaviour. Design/methodology/approach Through a Boolean search of studies related to terms of irresponsibility undertaken from 1956 to October 2016, the authors develop a review of the literature focussing on the main perspectives used for defining the term of CSIR. Findings The paper provides a framework of three main dimensions for understanding the differences in the literature that defines CSIR: who defines irresponsible behaviour, an impartial observer or a specific group of stakeholders, whether it is a firm strategy or a punctual action and which is the relationship between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and CSIR, continuity vs orthogonal relationship. Originality/value The paper provides and extensive and original review of a key construct, CSIR, and develops some insights about its antecedents and consequences. The authors try to provide light to the contradictory situation where a growing interest in CSR and the increase in voluntary commitments adopted by company leaders incorporating CSR into their strategies are, paradoxically, increasingly associated with CSIR.

When Boards Matter: The Case of Corporate Social Irresponsibility

“…First propagated in the 1960s, CSiR is defined as a sequence of activities undertaken by firms that cause harm to stakeholders and society, intentionally or accidentally (Campbell, ; Minor and Morgan, ; Riera and Iborra, ; Scherer and Palazzo, ). In terms of conceptualization, some scholars argue that CSR and CSiR are related and exist along a continuum.…”

“…CSR) and ‘avoiding bad’ (i.e. CSiR) are considered as distinct behaviours (Arora and Dharwadkar, ; Riera and Iborra, ). The bulk of the CSR literature either bundles positive and negative CSR behaviours together, giving rise to mixed research findings (Jain and Jamali, ; Kang, Germann and Grewal, ; Walls, Berrone and Phan, ), or focuses only on positive CSR.…”

Methodical dilemmas in research on small enterprise social irresponsibility

“…Social irresponsibility of an enterprise is a quite rarely considered concept both in the national and foreign subject literature. Although its presence in the scientific discourse dates back to the 1970s, which is more than 40 years, the greatest impulse for deeper discussion falls on the present times [Riera, Iborra 2017].…”

Does involvement in corporate social irresponsibility affect the linguistic features of corporate social responsibility reports?

“…Prior research on the relationship between the adoption of CSR policies and involvement in CSIR also suggests that companies may engage in and communicate about their CSR activities in order to offset past irresponsible conduct (e.g., Heal, 2005;Kotchen & Moon, 2012) or may adopt CSR policies in order to stake a strong claim to legitimacy that would mitigate any potentially negative reactions in the case of future CSIR (e.g., Flammer, 2013;Godfrey, Craig, & Hansen, 2009). 1 However, research on this topic has been scant (Riera & Iborra, 2017), and very little attention has been given to analysing how firms' involvement in CSIR may affect their CSR communication, especially with regard to CSR reports.…”