Delphi Methodology to Determine the Criteria Recognized Corporate Social Responsibility - Essay Example

While these studies attempt to move beyond the philosophical, speculative, and prescriptive tendency characterizing most of the literature in CSR, no studies have examined CSR criteria from the corporate executive’s perspective.

For an increasing number of global and multinational corporations, corporate social responsibility (CSR) has become an important aspect of conducting business (Aquilera et al, 2005; Hummels, 2004; Mackey et al, 2005; Peloza, 2005). Despite the continuing debate about its meaning and despite the ongoing criticism of CSR as being enacted purely for self-interest(Porter, 2003), businesses are increasingly adopting CSR practices (Mackey et al, 2005; Peloza,2005). Some theorists speculate that the recent surge in interest is due to corporations seeking to increase market competitiveness (Mackey, 2005; McWilliams & Seigel, 2001). On the other hand, some theorists recommend that firms adopt CSR because doing so can mitigate risk and can actually improve profitability (Godfrey, 2004). Other theorists advise corporations to engage in “profit-maximizing ethics” (Windsor, 2001).

In a 2004 review of CSR for the Journal of Corporate Citizenship, Hummels noted that whether it is an American, a European, or Asian corporation surveyed, all agreed that CSR is how necessary for the continuity of the firm. Because of the impetus to compete profitably, and because firms desire to ease the negative effects of recent corporate scandals, such as ENRON and WorldCom, leaders are trying to understand how to satisfy both shareholders and stakeholders.

Background of the Study
Corporate Social Responsibility is not a new concept; in fact, it has a relatively long history. The North American culture has seen several waves of interest in CSR over the past 50 years. In each wave of interest, there appears to have been a continuation of both the interest in its value (to society and to business) and in CSR’s inherent problems (Hummels, 2004). Over the years, organizational observers have noted the problems with CSR and describe them as conceptual vagueness, lack of understanding about which operational mechanisms to use, cost-benefit, and the lack of an agreed-upon moral foundation (Frederick, 1986, 1994; Hummels, 2004; Porter, 2003).

There are several debates raging currently concerning corporate social responsibility. One concerns the issue of, what is referred to as, the “one-size-fits-all” problem. Several writers have stated that it is impractical to assume that one definition and one set of CSR operating principles could satisfy all needs across industries, nations, cultures, and organizations (Banerjee, 2001; Gobbels 2002). Another fundamental debate concerns business priorities; from this perspective, we have the debate about the fundamental purpose of business and to whom any corporation should serve the highest allegiance: the shareholder or the various stakeholders (van Marrewijk, 2003).
In the past five years, there has been an intriguing appearance of actual research conducted concerning CSR in use.