Page 1

International Journal of Contemporary Applied Sciences Vol. 2, No. 12, December 2015
(ISSN: 2308-1365)

Business Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility and importance of

implementation of CSR at corporations
Dilah Ertop
PHD Student, Department of Business Administration,
Yeditepe University, Istanbul, Turkey
Abstract
In this article general concepts of business ethics and corporate social responsibility are
defined. Due to the reason of gaining power against competitors and avoiding external and
internal risks , CSR gets high importance among corporations. While some corporations do
these CSR activities for just corporation image, some of them give real importance and tries
to make it systematically. Ethics and corporate social responsibility are concepts that depend
upon each other. The Ethical Conduct theories and CSR theories are explained in this article.
Stakeholders are groups which are shareowners, employees, customers, lenders and society.
Corporations need the support of the stakeholders and cannot survive without support of
them. Successful implementation of CSR gives advantages to corporations and due to this
reason socially responsible conduct is tried to implement at multinational corporations.
Besides the external advantages, CSR is required to be implemented by Human Resource
Departments to spread the concept internally among employees and employers. Employees
who are confident that they are working at an ethical and socially responsible company tends
to be more motivated and efficient at the work. For the job satisfaction, ethics programs can
be implemented at corporations.
Keywords: Values, Ethics, Business Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility

Page 2
International Journal of Contemporary Applied Sciences Vol. 2, No. 12, December 2015
(ISSN: 2308-1365)
www.ijcas.net
38
1. Introduction
Business ethics: the why
1. Values are defined as the core set of beliefs and principles deemed to be
desirable of individuals (Andrews, 1987: Mason, 1992). Values are derived from
ones membership in a culture. With attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors, values
combine to form a continuous spiral of community culture (Adler, 1999).

2. Ethics are defined as the conception of what is right and fair conduct or behavior
(Caroll, 1991; Freeman and Gilbert, 1988). Ethics is a system of value principles or
practices and a definition of right and wrong (Raiborn and Payne, 1990). Velasquez
(1999) defined ethics as being concerned with judgements involved in moral decisions:
normative judgements which state or imply that something is good or bad, or right or
wrong. Thus, these statements of ethics or value judgements attempt to ascribe value to
actions, so the actor can determine whether or not should engage in the action. More
specifically with regard to business, De George (1999) defined business ethics as the
interaction of ethics and business. De George also distinguished between objective and
subjective morality. Objective morality is the broader, societally held moral law. This is
most easily equated with promulgated law. Subjective morality, on the other hand, is
ones own belief as to the rightness or wrongness of an action.

3. Business ethics is a form of applied ethics (Broni, 2010) that examines ethical
principles and moral or ethical problems that arise in a business environment
(Solomon, 1991). It applies to all aspects of business conduct and is relevant to the
conduct of individuals and business organizations as a whole (Bernard, 1972;
Donaldson, 1982: 36).
A fundamental truth is that business cannot exist without society and that society
cannot go forward without business. Thus, business must acknowledge societys
existence and societys growing demand for more ethically responsible business
practice. Businesses will in fact engage in ethical business practices for one of two
reasons, one ethical in nature and one more Machiavellian. The ethical motivation
guiding business is related to a desire to do the right thing, without external pressure or
governmental constraint. The more Machiavellian approach that businesses espouse
in their use of ethics has its roots in a desire to convince the stakeholder that the firm is
doing the right thing. The firms end here is either to avoid legal consequences of its
actions or to convince the stakeholders that the firm does have their best interests at
heart and seeks to serve their interests rather than their own.

4. General Business Ethics

If the companys main purpose is to maximize the returns to its shareholders
(Heath,
2006), then it should be seen as unethical for a company to consider the interests and
rights of anyone else (Marcoux, 2003).
Corporate social responsibility or CSR works a s an umbrella term under which the
ethical rights and duties existing between companies and society is debated
(Donaldson - Dunfee , 1994).

Page 3
International Journal of Contemporary Applied Sciences Vol. 2, No. 12, December 2015
(ISSN: 2308-1365)
www.ijcas.net
39
4.1. Ethics of finance
Fundamentally finance is a social science discipline (Dobson, 1997). The discipline
shares its border with behavioral science, sociology (Cetina Preda, 2005). Ethics of
finance is narrowly reduced to the mathematical function of shareholder wealth
maximization.
Such simplifying assumptions are necessary in the field of finance for the construction
of mathematically robust models (Dobson, 1997).
Such a mathematical chimera, it is observed, lets the experts in the field of finance into
the vice of greed justification. However, the signaling theory and agency theory within
the domain of finance reveal clearly the normative undesirability of wealthmaximization
(Dobson, 1997). Ethics seen from the stakeholder perspective is the privilege of the
immediate and remote stakeholders as much as it is the obligation of
the firms towards them.
4.2.Ethics of Human Resource Management
The ethics of human resource management (HRM) covers ethical issues arising around
the employer-employee relationship (Sennett, 1998), such as the rights and duties
owed between employer and employee (Dessler, 2000; Pinnington, 2003, Walsh,
2007).
4.3. Ethics of Sales and Marketing
Marketing, which goes beyond the mere provision of information about a product,
may seek to manipulate our values and behavior (Barry, 2000). Marketing ethics
overlaps strongly with media ethics, because marketing makes heavy use of media
(Atwood, 1998).
4.4. Ethics of Production
This area of business ethics deals with the duties of a company to ensure that products
and production processes do not cause harm (Philips, 2008).
4.5.Ethics of Intellectual Property, knowledge and skills
Knowledge and skills are valuable but not easily ownable as objects. Attempts to
assert ownership and ethical disputes over ownership arise.
4.6. Ethics and Technology
The computer and the World Wide Web are two of the most significant inventions of
the twentieth century. There are many ethical issues that arise from this technology
(Turing, 1950).
4.7. International Business Ethics
Theoretical issues such as cultural relativity of ethical values receive more emphasis in
this field (Braverman, 1999; Watrick, 1998).
4.8. Ethics of Economic Systems
This vaguely defined area, perhaps not part of but only related to business ethics (Lee,
2005), is where business ethicist venture into the fields of political economy and
political philosophy, focusing on the rights and wrongs of various systems for the
distribution of economic benefits.

Page 4
4.9. Law and Business Ethics
Milton Friedman is the pioneer of the view. He held that corporations have the
obligation to make a profit within the framework of the legal system. (Machan, 2007).

Five legitimate ethics bases have been identified within the standards approach
(McKenna, 1999; Shaw, 1996):

4.9.1. Eternal law:

This ethics base presumes that there is a common set of moral standards
which offer a set of general rules, will apparently differ for many people.
4.9.2 Utilitarianism:
The utilitarian principle means that managers should act in ways to create
the greatest benefits for the largest number of people; the focus is on the outcome, not
on the
intent, of management behavior.
4.9.3 Universalism:
This ethics base finds the ethics of a decision depending on the motives or intentions of
the decision-maker, which can be related to the contractual arrangements and
obligations of the decision-maker.
4.9.4. Distributive justice:
According to this idea, managers should act to ensure a more equitable
distribution of benefits.
4.9.5 Personal liberty:
This view is based on the primacy of the single value of liberty. Managerial
decisions should not violate the individual right to be free of coercion.
5. The ten principles of the UN Global Compact
5.1. Human Rights
Principle 1: Businesses should support and respect the protection of internationally
proclaimed human rights.
Principle 2: make sure that they are not complicit in human rights abuses.
5.2. Labour Standards
Principle 3: Businesses should uphold the freedom of association and the effective
recognition of the right to collective bargaining;
Principle 4: the elimination of all forms of forced and compulsory labour;
Principle 5: the effective abolition of child labour; and
Principle 6: the elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation.
5.3. Environment
Principle 7: Businesses should support a precautionary approach to environmental
changes;
Principle 8: undertake initiatives to promote greater environmental responsibility; and
Principle 9: encourage the development and diffusion of environmentally friendly
technologies.
5.4. Anti-Corruption
Principle 10: Businesses should work against corruption in all its forms, including
extortion and bribery.

Page 5
6. Strategic Frameworks for Managing Ethics
Businesses tend to realize that they must participate in society in an ethically symbiotic
way. The ethical motivation guiding business is related to a desire to do the right thing,
without external pressure or governmental constraint. Businesses often chose this
approach without being forced into doing so. DeGeorge (1999) a noted business
ethicist, contends that people believe businesses are amoral, when in fact they
generally embrace the values of ethics in doing business. He cites several factors that
serve to legitimize his position; one such factor is society, which expects moral behavior
of its business when it cries out against immoral labor practices or environmental
policies. Businesses themselves are taking proactive approaches to ethics.

Reasons to engage in ethical practices

Author
Reason for ethical decision
Friedman (1962) Stockholders are the firm's only responsibility
DeGeorge (1999) Society expects moral behavior
Machiavelli Avoid legal consequences Convince stakeholders that firm serves their
interests
Nash (1995) Curry consumer favor
Paine (1994) Legal compliance Integrity - does not exploit potential loopholes in law
Paine Ethical Framework
Strategy
Type
Reason for Strategy
Actions Within Strategy
Legal
Compliance
Strategy
Adherence to the letter of the law. Desire to avoid public outrage, loss of public trust and
a tarnished image.
1) Follow the letter of the law

Page 6
Integrity strategy
Adherence to the spirit of the law. Desire to avoid exploitation of loopholes within the
law
1) Communicate values &commitments 2) Personally committed management
 3) Integrationof values into strategic decision-making 4) Structure supports &
reinforces principles 5) Managers trained to use values & commitments

7. The Ethical Conduct Theories

7.1. Deontology
Deontology tries to define universal duties that serve as moral guides to decision
making. Immanuel Kant and John Rawls are academics that discussed those
guidelines. In deontology the moral duty embodies the concept of good. The outcome of
following that moral duty- whether being good or bad- is not important. One of the major
problems of deontology is its lack of guidance for prioritizing the duties. Another
problem is the disregard for the consequence of keeping a moral duty (Bohlman,
Herbert M. and Dundas, Mary J.1999, p.31).
7.2.Utilitarianism
Contrary to deontology utilitarianism establishes ethical standards based on the
consequences of an action. Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill believed that
decisions should be made on the basis of utility or usefulness. The utilitarianism states
that good is the greatest happiness for the greatest number. The problem on the other
hand with this approach is that prediction of success, failure or utility of certain
behaviors is impossible. It could also cause the problem that individual well-being can
be sacrificed for the social benefit. One individual may suffer more as a result of
behavior that brings society greater happiness (Bohlman, Herbert M. and Dundas, Mary
J. 1999, p.31).

8.Ethics and Global Markets

The company is a system that is open to environment, governed by persons who live in
specific contexts and are the bearers, in their performance of the function of corporate
governance, of the aspirations, culture and morality that characterize them. The ethics
find in companies contains the same elements as the ethics in the socio-economic
context in which they operate. The aspirations and ethical levels of companies operating
in certain countries differ substantially from those of companies operating in other
areas, where the defense of the environment, social welfare, human rights, cooperation,
assistance, etc. are expected and offered to a lesser degree, or are not requested or
protected at all. New globalized, networked economy, based on the coordinated
management of knowledge, sets evolutionary trends in motion that raise the level of
ethicality, but simultaneously generates a braking effect on the ethical contents of
corporate behavior.

Page 7
9.Evolutionary Trends
9.1.Transparency
The first need that must be referred to briefly is that of transparency, which is tending-
albeit slowly and with some opposition- to become an essential condition of access to
and permanence on the markets. Information is an important part of democratic life,
because it allows us not only to make conscious choices, but also to prevent or stop
every type of possible abuse by some parties over others.
9.2.Quality
The second need regards quality, in the broadest sense of the term. It is a
complex issue, which extends well beyond the need to produce and supply a product
that meets defined standards and the customers specific expectations in relation to the
price paid. Quality directly affects the manufacturing logics of the entire chain, at all
stages of value creation, according to the philosophy of Total Quality Management.
9.3.Cooperation
The issue of cooperation is certainly the most suggestive and important to
assess the ethical aspects of a companys operations. When the logics of pure
exchange leave space for those of systematic collaboration between parties, the ethical
contents of the contract relationship are overcome in favor of the unpredictable ethical
potential that stems from dialogue, shared projects, risks and related responsibilities,
and the production and exchange of ideas and knowledge.
9.4.Protection of the Environment
The need to protect the environment focuses attention on the role played by
society in defining companies operating and strategic choices: growing concern about
pollution levels has forced companies to adopt more through, precise policies, often
innovative and complex, to protect the natural environment.
10. The Braking Effects

10.1. Economic and legislative asymmetries on the global market

The pressure of global competition, combined with the fact that in certain
countries it is possible to implement production combinations investing fewer resources
or with higher degrees of freedom, forces companies to locate a large part of their
activities in these countries, so that they can produce and operate with a competitive
advantage. We can observe that companies that operate in areas with profound social
differences tend to be what we could call multi-ethical companies, because they tend
to differentiate their levels of ethicality, at least in part, aligning them to those of the
socio-economic contexts in which they operate, in many of which ethics are of marginal
importance.
10.2.The Group Structure
The need to take advantage of asymmetries between the different areas of the
global marketplace forces manufacturing concerns to structure themselves as groups.
They use the group structure to evade and avoid both the codes of practice put in place
to protect various interests and the ethical aspects that they embrace.
10.3. The Role of Finance
Finance dominates the economy: the power of institutional investors exceeds
worldwide GDP which allows them to take control of any large multinational corporation.

Page 8
11.The MNCS Global Ethics and Social Responsibility
Ethical and socially responsible conduct of a multinational corporation (MNC) is an
important concern in strategic management. Ethical conduct, usually beyond the legal
conduct, can be an important requirement for MNCs in most countries. An MNCs social
and cultural environments, as they change from time to time, should have a bearing on
the MNCs ethical and socially responsible conduct. An MNCs social and cultural
environments comprise at three tiers: global, regional and host country. Thus, an MNC
must take into account the stakeholders at the three tiers as it formulates core ethical
and socially responsible goals and strategies at the levels of MNC headquarters, region
and host country. Ethical and socially responsible conduct is culture bond. Even so, the
globalization process increasingly brings countries closer on essential issues; and that
tends to make core values for many ethical issues similar.
12. Research on small business and ethics
Chrisman and Fry (1982) compared small and large organizations, finding that
the smaller businesses seemed to better understand the issues of corporate social
responsibility rather than large companies. Brown and King (1982) identified the
different internal and external factors that would cause disparity in the ethical behavior
of small and large businesses. Smith and Oakley assessed the ethical values of small
business owners. Their findings indicated that the ethical values of small business
owners in non-urban areas were higher than in urban areas.
13. Integrating Business and Society
Successful corporations need a healthy society. Education, health care, and equal
opportunity are essential to a productive workforce. Safe products and working
conditions not only attract customers but lower the internal cost of accidents. Efficient
utilization of land, water, energy, and other natural resources makes business more
productive. Good government, the rule of law, and property rights are essential for
efficiency and innovation. Strong regulatory standards protect both consumers and
competitive companies from exploitation. Ultimately, a healthy society creates
expanding demand for business, as more human needs are met and aspirations grow.
Any business that pursues its ends at the expense of the society in which it operates will
find its success to be illusory and ultimately temporary. The mutual dependence of
corporations and society implies that both business decisions and social policies must
follow the principle of shared value. That is, choices must benefit both sides. If
either a business or a society pursues policies that benefit its interests at the expense of
the other, it will find itself on a dangerous path. A temporary gain to one will undermine
the long-term prosperity of both. The interdependence between a company and society
takes two forms. These are inside- outside linkages.
Virtually every activity in a companys value chain touches on the communities in which
the firm operates, creating either positive or negative social consequences. Not only
does corporate activity affect society, but external social conditions also influence
corporations, for better and for worse.

Page 9
Competitive context garners far less attention than value chain impacts but can have
far greater strategic importance for both companies and societies. Ensuring the
health of the competitive context benefits both the company and community.
Competitive context can be divided into four broad areas: first, the quantity and
quality of available business inputs-human resources, second, the rules and
incentives that govern competition-such as policies that protect intellectual property,
ensure transparency, safeguard against corruption, and encourage investment; third,
the size and sophistication of local demand, influenced by such things as standards
for product quality and safety, consumer rights, and fairness in government purchasing;
fourth, the local availability of supporting industries, such as service providers and
machinery producers. Any and all of these aspects of context can be opportunities
for CSR initiatives. Social issues affecting a company fall into three categories,
which distinguish between the many worthy causes and the narrower set of social
issues that are both important and strategic for the business. Generic social
issues may be important to society but are neither significantly affected by the
companys operations nor influence the companys long-term competitiveness. Value
chain social impacts are those that are significantly affected by the companys
activities in the ordinary course of business. Social dimensions of competitive
context are factors in the external environment that significantly affect the underlying
drivers of competitiveness in those places where the company operates.
Prioritizing Social Issues
Generic Social Issues
Value Chain Social Impacts
Social Dimensions of
Competitive Context
Social issues that are not significantly affected by a companys operations nor materially
affect its long- term competitiveness. Social issues that are significantly affected by a
companys activities in the ordinary course of business. Social issues in the external
environment that significantly affect the underlying drivers of a companys
competitiveness in the locations where it operates.
14.The Stakeholder Concept
The term stakeholder was first used in 1963 with the intention of generalizing the notion
of stockholders as the only group to whom management needs to be responsive
(Slinger, 2000). More recently Freeman has admitted that the word stakeholder is an
obvious literary device meant to call into question the emphasis on stockholders
(Freeman, 1999). The concept was defined as those groups without whose support the
organization would cease to exist and originally included shareowners, employees,
customers, lenders and society (Freeman, 1984). The stakeholder concept has grown in
prominence over recent years due to increased coverage in media, public interest and
concern about corporate governance, and its adoption by third-way politics (Metcalfe,
1998). The appeal of stakeholder theory for management theorists is both empirical and
normative (Cragg, 2002). Empirically, stakeholder theory rests on an observation or
what we might call a fact (Cragg, 2002). Organizations have stakeholders that have the
potential to influence them both positively and negatively.

Page 10
15. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)is definedas categoriesor levels
of economic, legal, ethical and discretionary activities of a business entity as
adapted to the values and expectations of society(Andrews, 1987; Carroll, 1979; Sethi,
1975). Archie Carroll (1979) has developed a framework for integrating all dimensions
of social responsibility into the firms corporate culture and decision making processes.
The level of responsibility can be measured against the social issue involved, as well as
the firms social responsiveness to these issues. These responsibilities are economic,
legal, ethical and discretionary.
The economic responsibilities of the firm are to produce goods and services to be
sold at a
profit. Obedience to societal laws and regulations, while executing economic
responsibilities is the firms legal responsibilities. The firms ethical
responsibilities are to meet societys expectations for conscientious and proper
behavior. The firms discretionary responsibilities encompass the duty to carry out
acts of a voluntary nature designed to provide for the betterment of society, such as
philanthropic contributions or provisions of certain employee benefits.
The second dimension of Carrolls model is represented by the firms the Philosophy
of Social Responsiveness. There are four types of social responsiveness
philosophies. First, the reaction philosophies require the firm to address social issues
as a result of the application of external forces, such as legal, regulatory or social
pressures. Defense philosophies address social issues to escape being forced into it
by the external forces. The third philosophy of responsiveness is the accommodation
philosophy: these firms address social issues because they exist. The
proaction philosophy is one that attempts to be proactive with society: it attempts to
anticipate important social issues before they are generally recognized as being
important and to develop strategies for addressing these issues.
The third dimension of this model is the dimensions of the social issues themselves. A
review of stakeholders and issues in society yields a list of issues identified by Carroll:
consumerism, environmentalism, discrimination issues, issues involving product
safety and occupational safety, and shareholder issues. Social issues are as
dynamic as is society and the list should be considered illustrative only, not complete.
These concepts of values, ethics / morality and CSR are not mutually exclusive; rather,
they are interrelated and somewhat interdependent. Values influence the extent of a
corporations perceived social responsibility and are influenced by societal activities and
norms or standards. One component of corporate social responsibility is an
organizations ethical responsibility, which is also influenced by the values of
society (Carroll, 1979). Conversely, ethical or unethical activities of an organization
can influence the values held by members of society.

Page 11
Organizational social performance model
Dimension 1 -
Philosophy of Social Responsiveness Dimension
2
-
Social Responsibility Categories Dimension 3 Social Issues Involved
Proaction
Discretionary responsibilities Consumerism Accommodation Ethical responsibilities
Environment Defense Legal responsibilities Discrimination Reaction Economic
responsibilities Product safety Occupational safety
Shareholders Adapted from A.B. Carroll (1979), A Three-Dimensional Conceptual
Model of Corporate Performance, Academy of Management Review 4, 503.
Corporate social responsibility, business ethics, and values: An historical
perspective Authors Corporate social responsibility Ethical/Moral considerations
Values/Other Barnard (1938)
Analyze economic, legal, moral,social and physical aspects of environment Morals are
active results of accumulated influences on persons evident in actions Responsibility:
power of private code of morals to control individual conduct Simon (1945)
Organizations must be responsible to community values Ethical propositions assert
''oughts'', rather than facts Firm survival involves adapting objectives to values of
customers Drucker (1945) Management must consider impact of every business policy
upon society Morality must be principle of action exhibited through tangible behavior
First responsibility to society is to make a profit Selznick (1957) Enduring enterprise will
contribute to maintenance of community stability Definition of mission includes wider
moral objectives Leadership requires defense of critical values

Page 12
Andrews (1971- Revision)
Firm should have explicit strategy for support of community institutions Defining firm
only in financial terms leads to subordination of ethical concerns Ethical behavior is
product of values Freeman (1984)
Business must satisfy multiple
Stakeholders Concern for ethics necessary but not sufficient to decide ''what we stand
for'' Enterprise strategy: what do we stand for?

Corporate social responsibility incorporates two elements

1) Sufficient focus by the enterprise on its contribution to the welfare of society in the
longer term
2) The relationship with its stakeholders and society at large
The first part of the definition emphasizes the companys contribution to the welfare of
society. This element is closely related to the values and objective of society and benefit
society stressed in the definition of Mosley et al. and Kok et al. Following Elkington
(1997) , the Social Economic Council stresses that the companys
contribution to the welfare of society does not consist only of economic value
creation, but concerns value creation in three spheres, referred to as the Triple-P
bottom line. Profit: The economic dimension. This dimension refers to the creation of
value through the production of goods and services and through the creation of
employment and sources of income. People: The social dimension. This includes a
variety of aspects concerning the impact of company operations on human beings
inside and outside the organization, such as sound labour relations and health and
safety. Planet: The ecological dimension. This dimension relates to the effects of
company operations on the natural environment. The second element in the definition
emphasizes the relationship with stakeholders and society at large.
According to the so-called stakeholder approach, enterprises are not accountable
only to their shareholders, but should also balance a multiplicity of interests of
stakeholders that can affect or are affected by their operations (Freeman
1984). Good stakeholder relations also require that the firm respond to legitimate
questions and concerns, that it opens up its way of doing business and that it engages
in continuous dialogue with several interested parties. This requires that the company
apply certain procedural standards that contribute to the transparency of the company.
A company is responsible to the society that it belongs to and which it operates.
Page 13
International Journal of Contemporary Applied Sciences Vol. 2, No. 12, December 2015
(ISSN: 2308-1365)
www.ijcas.net
49
a) The global integration of corporate systems, public authorities, services and
infrastructure, codes of practice and constraints aggravates the situations of inefficiency
and
insolvency, quality deficiencies and the many types of imbalance that can emerge in
every
manufacturing organization. The repercussions do not only effect the survival of the
individual organization, but extend to the outside world by destroying the equilibrium of
the
network, the system or the operating structure that the company belongs to.
b) In the case of entities that issue financial tools, this increases out of all proportion
the
involvement of financiers who link their economies directly to that of the company
financed,
in the presence of quite significant asymmetries of information, which markets seem
unable to
reduce or to keep to an acceptable level of risk.
c) The people running companies ought to have a strong, pregnant sense of the
responsibility
of managing the vital interests and savings of an ever-growing number of individuals,
who
have established a bond with the manufacturing organization, trusting in the
professional
skills and competence of its managers and the validity of its strategic plan.
There are at least three levels of corporate social responsibilities as defined by
Stahl and
Grigsby (1997). These positions are:
 Minimum legal compliance: Managers comply with the minimum social requirements
of
the law
Enlightened self- interest: Managers use social responsibility programs as a
strategic
weapon to communicate to the market that they are better than their competitors
Proactive change: Managers use its assets actively to improve society independent
of a
direct benefit to the firm; they are taking positions far beyond the requirements of the
law.
The three fundamental lines of CSR enquiry prevalent in the academic literature,
while
not mutually exclusive might be characterized as:
1) Stakeholder driven: CSR is viewed as a response to the specific demands of largely
external stakeholders such as governments, NGOs, and consumer lobby groups with
regard to
a firms operations, or with regard to generalized concerns.
2) Performance driven: emphasizes the link between external expectations and a
firms
concrete CSR actions, focusing on measuring the effectiveness of such actions
(Wood,1991)
as well as determining which activities might be best suited to deliver the requisite
performance.
3) Motivation driven: examines either the extrinsic reasons for a firms CSR
engagement
such as enhancing corporate reputation (Fombrun,2005), preempting legal sanction
(Parker,
2002), responding to NGO action (Spar & La Mure, 2003), managing risk (Fombrun,
Gardberg & Barnett, 2000; Husted, 2005), generating customer loyalty or intrinsic
rationales
building on philosophical concepts such as contract theory (Donaldson & Dunfee,
1994),
Aristotelian virtue ethics (Solomon, 1993) or Kantian duty ethics (Bowie, 1999) to
advance
particular notions of its obligations and responsibilities.
The US Committee for Economic Development, in 1971 described corporate social
responsibility as: related products, jobs and economic growth; related to social
expectations;
and related to activities aimed at improving the social environment of the firm. Sethis
1985
three level model included: social obligation; social responsibility; and social
responsiveness.

Page 14
International Journal of Contemporary Applied Sciences Vol. 2, No. 12, December 2015
(ISSN: 2308-1365)
www.ijcas.net
50 Evolving global business norms are moving CSR toward mainstream business
practice as non-governmental organizations such as the World Resources Institute
(WRI), AccountAbility, Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), International Standards
Organization (ISO 14000), and the United Nations all have initiatives targeted toward
improving the social involvement and performance of the worlds business community.
16. Creating a corporate social agenda
Categorizing and ranking social issues is just the means to an end, which is to
create an
explicit and affirmative corporate social agenda. A corporate social agenda looks
beyond
community expectations to opportunities to achieve social and economic benefits
simultaneously. It moves from mitigating harm to finding ways to reinforce corporate
strategy
by advancing social conditions. Such a social agenda must be responsive to
stakeholders, but
it can not stop there. A substantial portion of corporate resources and attention must
migrate
to truly strategic CSR.
16.1.Responsive CSRcomprises two elements: acting as a good corporate citizen,
attuned to
the evolving social concerns of stakeholders, and mitigating existing or anticipated
adverse
effects from business activities. The second part of responsive CSR-the mitigating the
harm
arising from a firms value chain activities-is essentially an operational challenge.
Because there are a myriad of possible value chain impacts for each business unit,
many
companies have adopted a checklist approach to CSR, using standardized sets of
social and
environmental risks. The Global Reporting Initiative is rapidly becoming a standard for
CSR
reporting.
16.2.Strategic CSR:For any company, strategy must go beyond best practices. It is
about
choosing a unique position- doing things differently from competitors in a way that
lowers
costs or better serves a particular set of customer needs.
These principles apply to a companys relationships to society as readily as to its
relationship
to its customers and rivals. Strategic CSR involves both inside-out and outside-in
dimensions
working in tandem. Strategic CSR also unlocks shared value by investing in social
aspects of
context that strengthen company competitiveness.
17. Corporate Social Responsibility Theories
CSR theories and related approaches in four groups: 1 ) instrumental theories, in
which the
corporation is seen as only an instrument for wealth creation, and its social
activities are
only a means to achieve economic results 2) political theories,
which concern themselves
with the power of corporations in society and a responsible use of this power in
the
political arena 3) integrative theories, in which the corporation is focused on the
satisfaction of social demands; and 4) ethical theories, based on ethical
responsibilities of
corporations to society. In practice, each CSR theory presents four dimensions
related to
profits, political performance, social demands and ethical values.

Page 15
Corporate social responsibilities and related approaches
Typeso ftheory Approaches Some key references Instrumental theories
Maximization of shareholder value Strategies for competitive advantages Friedman
(1970), Jensen (2000) Porter and Kramer (2002) Hart (1995) and Lizt (1996)
Prahalad and Hammond (2002) Hart and Christensen (2002) Prahalad (2003)
Political theories Cause-related marketing Corporate constitutionalism
Integrative Social Contract Theory
Corporate Citizenship
Varadrajan and Menon (1988) Murray and Montanari (1986) Davis (1960,1967)
Donaldson and Dunfee (1994,1999) Wood and Lodgson (2002) Andriof
and McIntosh (2001) Matten and Crane
Integrative theories Issues management Public responsibility Stakeholder
management Corporate social performance
Sethi (1975), Ackerman (1973),
Jones (1980), Vogel (1986),
Wartick and Mahon (1994)
Preston and Post (1975, 1981)
Mitchell et al. (1997), Agle and
Mitchell (1999), Rowley (1997)
Carroll (1979), Wartick and
Cochran(1985), Wood (1991b), Swanson (1995)
Ethical theories
Stakeholder normative theory
Universal rights Sustainable development The common good Freeman (1984,1994),
Evan and Freeman (1988), Donaldson and Preston (1995), Freeman and Philips
(2002), Philips et al. (2003) Alford and Naughton (2002), Mele (2002) Kaku (1997)
18. Six key elements for successful CSR
1)Good stakeholder management
2) Good corporate leadership
3) Greater priority for CSR at board level
4) Integration of CSR into corporate policy at all levels and in all divisions of business
5) Regulation at the national and international level understood and demonstrated
across all areas of business
6) Active involvement of, and good coordination between, government business, NGOs
and civil society.

Page 16

19. The Emergence of Corporate Social Responsibility

Many companies awoke to it only after being surprised by public responses to issues
they had not previously thought were part of their business responsibilities. Nike, for
example, faced an extensive consumer boycott after the New York Times and other
media outlets reported abusive labor practices at some of its Indonesian suppliers in the
early 1990s. Shell Oils decision to sink the Brent Spar, an obsolete oil rig, in the North
Sea led to Greenpeace protests in 1995 and to international headlines. Pharmaceutical
companies discovered that they were expected to respond to the AIDS pandemic in
Africa even though it was far removed from their primary product lines and markets.
Fast-food and packaged companies are now being held responsible for obesity and
poor nutrition. Pressures clearly demonstrate the extent to which external stakeholders
are seeking to hold companies accountable for social issues and highlight the
potentially large financial risks for any firm whose conduct is deemed unacceptable.
While businesses have awakened to these risks, they are much less clear on what to do
about them. In fact, the most common corporate response has been neither strategic
nor operational but cosmetic: public relations and media campaigns, the centerpieces of
which are often glossy CSR reports that showcase companies social and
environmental good deeds. The proliferation of CSR reports has been paralleled by
growth in CSR ratings and rankings.
20. Four Prevailing Justifications for CSR
Proponents of CSR have used four arguments to make their case: moral obligation,
sustainability, license to operate, and reputation. The moral appeal- arguing that
companies
have a duty to be good citizens and to do the right thing is prominent in the goal of
Business
for Social Responsibility. Sustainability emphasizes environmental and community
stewardship. An excellent definition was developed in the 1980s by Norwegian Prime
Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland and used by the World Business Council for
Sustainable
Development: Meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of
future
generations to meet their own needs. The notion of license to operate derives from
the fact
that every company needs tacit or explicit permission from governments, communities,
and
numerous other stakeholders to do business.
Finally, reputation is usedby many companies to justify CSR initiatives on the grounds
that
they will improve a companys image, strengthen its brand, enliven morale, and even
raise the
value of its stock.
21. Managers Personal Values as Drivers of Corporate Social Responsibility
Corporate social responsibility refers to managements obligation to set policies, make
decisions and follow courses of action beyond the requirements of the law that are
desirable
in terms of the values and objectives of society. (Mosley et al. , 1996, p.141).
Corporate social responsibility may be viewed as a process in which managers take
responsibility for identifying and accommodating the interests of those affected by the
organizations actions. (Maclagan , 1998, p.147).

Page 17
International Journal of Contemporary Applied Sciences Vol. 2, No. 12, December 2015
(ISSN: 2308-1365)
www.ijcas.net
53
It could be argued that the motivation for engaging in CSR is always driven by some
kind of
self-interest (Moon, 2001), regardless of whether the activity is strategically driven for
commercial purposes alone, or whether it is also partly driven by what appears.
As Robinson observes it is always difficult to tell whether behaving ethically towards
external
stakeholders is prompted by altruism or self-preservation. The strategic theory of the
firm
perspective, incorporating corporate image management and the need to facilitate the
integration of a global workforce, would seem to represent business self-interest and
can be
contrasted with the possibility of an altruistic impulse among business leaders or
managers.
The theory of the firm argument is that the concern of management is to maximize
shareholder value. From this viewpoint, CSR is a response to the competitive
environment
and the demands on managers from various stakeholder groups (Menon and Menon,
1997;
McWilliams and Siegel, 2001). Similarly, Gray et al. identify the inclusion of
stakeholders
in corporate affairs and CSR reporting as mechanisms by which the organizations
satisfy
pressures on them to demonstrate satisfactory CSR performance (Gray et al., 1995,
p.65).
Thus, CSR disclosure and reporting can be viewed in terms of corporate image
management,
a strategic marketing activity.
Corporations adopt CSR to cover up the impact of corporate misdemeanor. Sceptics
have
accused companies of taking a public ethical stance in order to project a good image,
regardless of their unpublicized unethical practices (Caulkin, 2002) .
Agle and Caldwell (1999) state that there are common threads in all definitions of
values.
They quote Schwartz and Bilsky (1987): Values are concepts or beliefs about desirable
end
states or behaviors that transcend specific situations, guide selection or evaluation of
behavior
or events and are ordered by relative importance (Cited in Agle and Caldwell, 1999, p.
359).
Individual managers organizational decisions are driven by a variety of personal values
and
interests, in addition to the official corporate objectives.
Managers personal values have been widely investigated both in general and in
specific
contexts and corporate social performance.
Psychological egoism is, in essence, the view that all our actions can be traced back to
self
interest; for example feeling good by doing good.
The most obvious example of altruistic values in CSR can be seen in corporate
philanthropy.
The notion of Ren in Chinese religion is translated as : Human-heartedness, or loving
benevolence toward other humans; a pivotal ethical notion in Confucianism (Smart,
1989, p.
106). Therefore, religious beliefs can be viewed as a motivator of philanthropy or CSR,
although it could also be argued that the religious motive is in itself driven by reasons of
self-
interest. Researcher differentiates moral values from other categories of values: notably
social
values; political values; religious / spiritual values and sentimental values. Any of these
categories of values could be equally considered as drivers of CSR.
There can be distinguished three types of corporate culture with respect to
organizational
attitudes to stakeholders and the creation of value:
Level 1: a compliance culture, where the organizational unit is not especially engaged
with its
stakeholders but where basic societal norms are respected and thus the organization
seeks to
avoid the unacceptable destruction of value

Page 18
International Journal of Contemporary Applied Sciences Vol. 2, No. 12, December 2015
(ISSN: 2308-1365)
www.ijcas.net
54
Level 2: a relationship management culture, where the organization recognizes the
instrumental value of good relations with immediate stakeholders, e.g. customers,
workers,
communities and business partners, and seeks to provide what value is appropriate in
each
case, within the limits of what is possible and usually after the demands of investors are
satisfied.
Level 3:
a sustainable organization culture where the organization recognizes the
interdependencies and synergies between the firm, its stakeholders and society and
seeks to
maximize the creation of value simultaneously in economic, social and ecological terms.
22. Corporate Social Responsibility: The Key Role of Human Resource
Management
An organization can exhibit a better image in the minds of people by presenting itself as
an
excellent employer which cares for its people and involves them in the ambit of social
responsibility. This involvement of employees indicates the strategic importance of HRM
in
the CSR initiatives of an organization. Human Resource policies, forming the framework
for
the culture in the business management, create awareness towards the need to achieve
the
business goals in the best possible and ethical manner (Agrawal, 2007).
With the help of HR functions, the socially responsible values can be inculcated and
sustained
in the organizational culture through the following ways:
a) The HR department should take the responsibility to develop a formal policy on
sustainable
practices involving employees.
b) The orientation programme of newly recruited candidates should be designed in a
manner
that corporate philosophy about CSR gets highlighted. The commitment of top
management
towards CSR is very important which should be expressed in tangible terms to reinforce
the
right kind of behavior in the organization.
c) The designing of performance management system should be done in such a
manner that it
measures the socially responsible initiatives taken by employees. This becomes
important as
the internalization of CSR in an organizational culture requires that appropriate
behaviors get
appraised, appreciated as well as rewarded.
d) The training facilities may also be made available to instill the CSR culture among
employees. This becomes necessary to make employees learn and practice CSR
activities.
e) Empowerment of managers by giving them decision-making authority shall help in
executing social responsibility at local level.
f) Code of ethics of an organization can stimulate social responsibility to a great extent
reinforcing amongst its employees.
g) Responsible Human Resource Management practices on equal opportunities,
diversity
management, whistle blowing, redundancy, human rights, harassment shall give
credibility to
the CSR initiatives of the organization.
h) The separation of employees during mergers, acquisitions, downsizing etc. should be
strategically aligned with the business strategy as well as Corporate Social
Responsibility.
Retraining, retention, redeployment of people can be worked out with aggressive
communication, information campaigns and outplacement services in place to assist the
transition of people from the organization.
Page 19
International Journal of Contemporary Applied Sciences Vol. 2, No. 12, December 2015
(ISSN: 2308-1365)
www.ijcas.net
55
) Social Reports or Sustainability Reports should be prepared to underline the
organizations
commitment to social or sustainable practices.
i) The Human Resource department should effectively measure and evaluate CSR
activities.
The value added by CSR in the form of direct results, such as, economic savings and
indirect
results like increase in employee satisfaction, less employee turnover, measured by
staff
attitude surveys, shall indicate contribution to improved business performance.
23. Ethics Programs, Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility and Job
Satisfaction
CSR involves the economic, legal, ethical and discretionary expectations that
society
has of organizations at a given point in time (Carroll, 1979, p. 500). Programs that
fulfill
these basic expectations are developed to honor economic and social agreements
between the
organization and the general public, as well as to position the organization as a positive
value-
driven (or morally-based) entity in society (e.g., Swanson,1995; Wartick and Cochran,
1985;
Wood, 1991).
CSR efforts focus on establishing legitimacy (Wood, 1991) and fit between societys
expectations of the business community and the ethics of business (Zenisek, 1979,
p.362) to
ultimately enhance the organization. In other words, social responsibility creates a
symbiotic
relationship based on give and take between stakeholders and companies (Tuzzolino
and
Armandi, 1981).
While external societal obligations drive CSR activity (Zenisek, 1979), internal
considerations
(or organizational characteristics) should shape a companys response to these
obligations.
For example, past work suggests that an organizations culture, values, and policies can
prompt various actions required to satisfy stakeholders (e.g., Swanson, 1995, 1999).
This is
most likely accomplished by the presence of value systems and behaviors that create
broad
interest in ethics (e.g., Swanson, 1995; Wood, 1991; Zenisek, 1979) which enhances
support
for CSR as a natural extension of this approach.
CSR efforts influence stakeholders generalized reactions to the
organization.Outside
the company, it is widely recognized that CSR can increase investor interest,
customer
purchases of products offered, and positive relationships with the
government (e.g.,
Keim, 1978; McWilliams and Siegel, 2001; Trevino and Nelson, 2004; Tuzzolino and
Armandi, 1981). Inside the company, attention to CSR should enhance employees
responses to the work environment. According to McWilliams and Siegel (2001, p.
122),
Employees are another source of stakeholder demand for CSR. By satisfying
employees
expectations about CSR, as well as business ethics in general, companies should
expect
improved job attitudes, increased productivity, and reduced turnover(e.g., Trevino and
Nelson, 2004; Tuzzolino and Armandi, 1981).
If individuals believe that their organization prescribes ethical principles, then the
standards
increasing attention to business ethics should prompt greater awareness of company
involvement in socially responsible activities.
Job satisfaction is associated with many important organizational variables and is
usually a
central consideration in business research that investigates employee-based
phenomena
(Spector, 1997).
Ethics programs are associated with greater perceived CSR activity in a company, and
that
ethics programs and CSR activity are associated with more satisfied employees.

Page 20
Ethics programs Presence of ethics codes Communication of ethics codes Perceived
CSR Job Satisfaction Presence of ethics training Hours of ethics training
24. Ethics Programs and CSR Organizational ethics is a companys adoption of
desired ethical standards and business practices. Some companies promote an ethical
culture / climate by establishing positive values that influence organizational members
ethical beliefs and actions (e.g., Ferrell and Greshem, 1985; Hunt and Vitell, 1986; Hunt
et al., 1989; Trevino, 1986; Trevino and Nelson, 2004).Other companies advance
organizational ethics with codes that present ethical values and behavioral requirements
(e.g., Adams et al., 2001; Farrell and Farrell, 1998, Valentine and Barnett, 2002, 2003).
Still other companies develop specialized training to give employees guidance about
ethics (e.g., Chen et al., 1997; Loe and Weeks, 2000; Sims, 1991;
Valentine and Fleischman, 2004). Regardless of the programs utilized, the overall
motivation is to improve employees execution of work from an ethical standpoint. A
natural extension of organizational ethics is a companys involvement in CSR, which
involves answering the requirements of stakeholders, with particular focus on societal
issues and challenges (Carroll,
1979; Joyner and Payne, 2002; Turban and Greening, 1996; Wartick and Cochran,
1985). Ethics programs not only enhance a companys ethical culture , but also its
attention to CSR. Indeed, Zenisek (1979, p. 366) claimed that a companys response to
the general publics interests was based on a business ethic comprised of
organizational behaviors and the managerial attitudes as to what constitutes legitimate
demands.
25. The Link Between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social
Responsibility Governments, activists,and the media have become adept at holding
companies to account for the social consequences of their activities. Corporate social
responsibility has emerged as an inescapable priority for business leaders in every
country. Many companies have already done much to improve the social and
environmental consequences of their activities, yet these efforts have not been nearly
as productive as they could be-for two reasons. First, they pit business against society,
when clearly the two are independent. Second , they pressure companies to think of
corporate social responsibility in generic ways instead of in the way most appropriate to
each firms strategy. The fact is, the prevailing approaches to CSR are so fragmented
and so disconnected from business and strategy as to obscure many of the greatest
opportunities for companies to benefit society. If, instead, corporations were to analyze
their prospects for social responsibility using the same frameworks that guide their core
business choices, they would discover that CSR can be much more than a cost, or a
charitable deed-it can be a source of opportunity, innovation, and competitive
advantage.

Page 21
When looked at strategically, corporate social responsibility can become a source of
tremendous social progress, as the business applies its considerable resources,
expertise, and
insights to activities that benefit society.
It is stated that CSR practice gives advantages to businesses
 Provides with the societys favour and lowers the risks of business operations
Forms the image of the corporation and improves its reputation
Stimulates the organizations innovation and creative work
Helps to find easier ways to attract external sources of sponsorship
Broadens markets and makes situations for sales increase
Helps to attract positively motivated employees, enhances the value of human capital
Stimulates the organizations culture
Lowers expenditures, stimulates production and income increase, enhances the
efficiency and work
26. CSR Auditing System
The following items were highlighted by the research as crucial points to be considered
in
developing a CSR auditing system:
The inclusion of all significant stakeholder groups in the auditing process
Diversity in individual perceptions of CSR
The problem of negative screening
The shortcomings of the tick-box approach to auditing CSR
The requirement that the measurement of CSR should be both quantitative and
qualitative
in nature
27. Corporate Social Reporting
Corporate social reporting has been defined as having the following roles (Parker, L.
1986):
Assessing the social impact of corporate activities
Measuring effectiveness of corporate social programmes
Reporting upon a corporations discharging of its social responsibilities
External and internal information systems allowing comprehensive assessment of all
corporate resources and impacts
28. Business in the Community (BITC) has identified five key areas for measuring
impact, and three levels at which this can be measured, recognizing that companies
will be at
different stages in embedding reporting into their business.
28.1.Marketplace
Advertising complaints
Customer satisfaction levels
Social impact of core products / offer
28.2Environment
Overall energy consumption
Use of recycled material

Page 22
International Journal of Contemporary Applied Sciences Vol. 2, No. 12, December 2015
(ISSN: 2308-1365)
www.ijcas.net
58
28.3. Workplace
Diversity profile
Staff turnover
Staff satisfaction measure
28.4. Community
Cash value of company support
Project progress measures
Impact evaluations of community programme
28.5. Human Rights
Grievance procedures
Proportion of suppliers measured for compliance on human rights
Conclusions
The ethics is the natural perception of human being knowing what is right and what is
wrong.
The ethics starts knowing the borders of your rights and giving not harm to any others
rights.
Business ethics should not be based on Machiavellian approach which means to avoid
legal
punishments and just considering for corporate image and to convince stakeholders that
the
corporation is doing the right thing.
The rivalry in the business world causes most of times contradictions in the
implementation
of business ethics. But with right policies these contradictions can be eliminated and an
ethical system can be structured.
The implementation of CSR at corporations gets more importance day by day.
The corporations who apply CSR policies in a right way have a lot of advantages. Some
of
these advantages are a)consumers want to buy products , b) employees want to work,
c)
government gives prestige, d) suppliers want to cooperate, e) media supports, f) lobby
groups
support, g) labor unions cooperate.
Besides external implementation of CSR , internal implementation such as HR ethical
policies, ethical training and company culture and work style based on business ethics
are
very important.
Human is the basic value of corporations. Without human, there can be no corporation.
The corporations who ignore human factor and only focuses on corporate image and
profit
can not survive. In the long time, that kind of corporations fail.
Employees should have the feeling of value for their corporations. If you are an ethical
person
but if your company forces you to do unethical conducts , this is the indicator of
degeneration.
In the implementation of CSR policies correctly, Human Resource departments stand at
the
most critical point at the corporate structure.
HR departments should stand at an independent place. What HR department should do
is ?
-Ethical conduct manual should be prepared .

Page 23
-Internal and external ethical conducts should be separated and defined in detail.
-Employers and employees have to be trained about ethical conduct periodically.
-Corporate Social Reporting have to be declared in web portals , media , etc.
-Besides corporate venture, individual ventures about CSR should be supported and
rewarded.
-Periodically CSR activities and ethics training should be measured.
-Employees should know all their rights and must know where to apply in any conflict
which
threats their individual right.
-The ethical conduct should be base in the relations with all stakeholders. To do this
audit
system for all departments should be developed measuring stakeholder relations of all
departments.
-Ethics culture should be spread from individual to corporate culture.
While CSR is most commonly explained in terms of the strategic commercial interest of
the
organization this is not always the case. Where individual managers can exercise
influence,
they may initiate or change specific projects in order to address their personal moral
concerns.
Thus, evidence that individual managers do champion social responsibility, as opposed
to
simply acting as agents of corporate policy, may inspire or remind employees that they
can
make difference in an organization without a formally adopted CSR culture. Individual
discretion is the route through which personal values impact on CSR policies, permitting
individuals to use their judgement.
Perceived CSR plays a mediating role in the relationship between ethics programs and
job
satisfaction. Management should consider invigorating the ethical focus and culture of
the
organization with ethics codes, training, and CSR activity, which might prompt more
positive
beliefs about the firm, as well as the immediate work context and culture. Ethics
programs
should target individual ethical reasoning rather than simply promote more generalized
ethical
values that generate little efficacy with employees. An organization may wish to
communicate its commitment to CSR by expanding its ethics codes and training to
include
elements of social responsibility. Enhancing a positive CSR might better influence the
attitudes and perceptions of both internal and external constituents.
References
Valentine, Sean and Fleischman, Gary. : 2007, Ethic Programs, Perceived Corporate
Social
Responsibility and Job Satisfaction
Joyner, E. Brenda. , Payne, Dinah. , Raiborn A. Cecily.: 2002, Building Values,
Business
Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility Into The Developing Organization
Hemingway, A. Christine and Maclagan, W. Patrick.: 2004, Managers Personal Values
as
Drivers of Corporate Social Responsibility
Joyner, E. Brenda and Payne, Dinah. : 2002, Evolution and Implementation: A Study of
Values, Business Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility
Cavalieri, Enrico .:2007, Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility
Page 24
International Journal of Contemporary Applied Sciences Vol. 2, No. 12, December 2015
(ISSN: 2308-1365)
www.ijcas.net
60
Morimoto, Risako. , Ash, John. , Hope, Chris. :2005, Corporate Social Responsibility
Audit:
From Theory to Practice
Tracey, Paul. , Phillips, Nelson. , Haugh, Helen. : 2005, Beyond Philanthropy:
Community
Enterprise as a Basis for Corporate Citizenship
Matten, Dirk. , Crane, Andrew. , Chapple, Wendy. : 2003, Behind the Mask: Revealing
the
True Face of Corporate Citizenship
Barnea, Amir and Rubin, Amir. : 2010, Corporate Social Responsibility as a Conflict
Between Shareholders
Whitehouse, Lisa. : 2006, Corporate Social Responsibility: Views from the Frontline
Zwetsloot, M. J. I. Gerard. : 2003, From Management Systems to Corporate Social
Responsibility
Godfrey, C. Paul and Hatch, W. Nile. : 2007, Researching Corporate Social
Responsibility:
An Agenda for the 21
st Century

Kok, Peter. , Wiele, van der Ton., McKenna, Richard, Brown, Alan. : 2001, A Corporate
Social Responsibility a Quality Management Framework
Garriaga,Elisabet. , Mele, Domenec. : 2004, Corporate Social Responsibility Theories :
Mapping the Territory
Tumay, Meltem.: 2009, Why Corporate Social Responsibility: A New Concept In The
21st
Century
Sharma, Suparn. (PHD) and Sharma, Joity. (PHD) : 2009, Corporate Social
Responsibility:
The Key Role of Human Resource Management
Damanpour, Faramarz. : 2006, The MNCS Global Ethics and Social Responsibility: A
Strategic Diversity Management Imperative, Journal of Diversity Management Volume
1,
Number 2
Wheeler, David. , Colbert, Barry and Freeman, R. Edward. : 2003, Focusing on Value:
Reconciling Corporate Social Responsibility, Sustainability and a Stakeholder Approach
in a
Network World, Journal of General Management Vol.28 No.3
Basu, Kunal and Palazzo, Guido. : 2008, Corporate Social Responsibility: A Process
model
of Sensemaking, Academy of Management Review 33(1):122-136
Porter, E. Michael and Kramer, R. Mark. : 2006, Strategy & Society, Harvard Business
Review
Velentzas, John and Broni, Georgia. : 2010, Ethical Dimensions in the conduct of
business:
business ethics, corporate social responsibility and the law. The ethics in business as a
sense
of business ethics, International Conference on Applied Economics
Greenwood, Michelle and Cieri, de Helen.: 2005, Stakeholder Theory and the Ethics of
Human Resource Management, Monash University, Working Paper 47/05

Page 25
International Journal of Contemporary Applied Sciences Vol. 2, No. 12, December 2015
(ISSN: 2308-1365)
www.ijcas.net
61
Ven van de, B. and Graafland, J. J.: 2006, Strategic and moral motivation for corporate
social
responsibility Tilburg University, Netherlands
Juscius, Vytautas and Snieska, Vytautas. : 2008, Influence of Corporate Social
Responsibility on Competitive Abilities of Corporations, ISSN 1392-2785 Engineering
Economics. No 3 (58)
Collins, Dennis. : Business Ethics How to design and manage ethical organizations