Corporate Social Responsibility: A Three-Domain Approach

Abstract

Abstract:Extrapolating from Carroll’s four domains of corporate social responsibility (1979) and Pyramid of CSR (1991), an alternative approach to conceptualizing corporate social responsibility (CSR) is proposed. A three-domain approach is presented in which the three core domains of economic, legal, and ethical responsibilities are depicted in a Venn model framework. The Venn framework yields seven CSR categories resulting from the overlap of the three core domains. Corporate examples are suggested and classified according to the new model, followed by a discussion of limitations and teaching and research implications.

Complexity Theory for a New Managerial Paradigm: A Research Framework

“…Organizations operate in a social context in which they need to deal with governments and communities (Schwartz & Carroll, 2003). The other actors in the context expect that organizations will act in socially responsible way that involves the ecosystem.…”

Ecological Systems Theory Approach to Corporate Social Responsibility: Contextual Perspectives From Meeting Planners

“…For example, the manufacture of products or delivery of service should be supported by processes that embody CSR, coupled with additional support services and guidance attributed to CSR. Thus, according to Schwartz and Carroll (2003) service differentiation can be achieved through exploitation of the appeal of CSR attributes to key segments of the market. In support Wan-Jan (2006) comments upon those who take CSR as a business strategy do so under the assumption that compliance will achieve sustainable profitability; equally serving the central norm of shareholder return while maintaining business and generating employment development of CSR in recent years has further segregated practitioners' commitment towards CSR initiatives.…”

“…Yet this allegiance to Friedman's share holder approach and corporate responsibility ignores microsocietal questions such as the impacts that businesses can have on communities through the way they operate. Schwartz and Carroll (2003) are of the opinion that CSR theory should relate to resource allocation of an organization, and view investment towards CSR as a mechanism for product differentiation. For example, the manufacture of products or delivery of service should be supported by processes that embody CSR, coupled with additional support services and guidance attributed to CSR.…”

Signaling Product Quality Information in Supply Chains via Corporate Social Responsibility Choices

“…Corporate social responsibility (CSR) consists of economic, legal, and ethical responsibilities, as well as voluntary or philanthropic responsibilities, which are guided by an organization's discretion, as opposed to legal or more explicit requirements [1][2][3]. Under the current global business environment, CSR is now a determining factor of success that firms cannot ignore [4].…”

“…Traditionally, CSR activities are thought of as firms' responses to the requirement of sustainability pillared by the so-called "triple bottom line": firms must reconcile environmental, social equity, and economic demands for their stakeholders [1,3]. However, Baron's [7] strategic CSR view argues that firms conduct socially and environmentally responsible activities as a strategic instrument for the purpose of profitability maximization via influencing stakeholders' expectations on working conditions, environment protections, poverty alleviation, human health, and so on.…”