Week 4 response papers - Essay Example

Week 4 Response Papers Response to post Businessmen men agree with Carroll’s (1999) ment because they are highly aware of the negative impacts that their activities pose on the environment and which are not covered by their profit-and-loss statements. A realisation of this responsibility has led a wide adoption of the concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and virtually all organisations currently produce annual CSR reports. This is also reflected on their environmental cautious products and production processes.

However, the concept has used as a way of attaining a competitive advantage in a society that is becoming environmentally cautious. The disadvantage with such an approach is that businesses relax their CSR actions when they are not economically rewarding. This means that organisations no longer derive their motivation for CSR mainly from their negative environmental effects and need to protect the environment, but the need to have a good image and make profit.The avoidance of CSR may not be detrimental to the organisation but its effect cannot be ignored in a society where customers are becoming more cautious about environmental issues.

Over the recent years, CSR has afforded organisations some social power and ignoring this because of economic or other reasons is bound lead to a gradual reduction of social power. Davis’s statement therefore holds some truth. As mentioned, businesses know the effects of their actions on the environment. In this case, they have an obligation to focus on environmental change whether voters and politicians are not pushing agendas that focus on environmental change. In opposition to Hussein’s (1999) statement that adopting such a position can be harmful to the organisation, CSR has turned into one of the biggest source of competitive advantage for businesses.

Multinationals have also tapped into it as a risk management model. In addition, many governments respond positively to such actions by recognising and rewarding organisations which undertake good CSR activities in efforts to protect the environment. This has increased awareness of such organisations, their products and consequently, they have experienced a positive return on their sales (Bhattacharya et al, 2011). Customer/voter purchases are now influenced by CSR to the benefit of organisations that have good CSR reputations.

ReferencesBhattacharya, C. Sen, S. and Korschun, D. (2011). Leveraging Corporate Social Responsibility: The Stakeholder Route to Business and Societal Value. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press, Carroll, A. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business and Society, 38(3), 268‐295.Hussain, S. (1999). “The Ethics of ‘Going Green: The Corporate Social Responsibility Debate. Business Strategy and the Environment, 8(4), 203-210. Response to student 2 post Since the 1950s, many organisations have formulated their own CSR policies.

However, if the decision to become responsible was totally left at their disposal, many would choose not to because CSR activities are involving both in time and financial wise. This points to the importance of external motivations like presidential politics in making organisation take responsibility for their actions more than just those covered by their profit-and-loss statements. However, it is not worth to argue that all recent happenings that impact on the profits of organisation or general economy like genocides or terrorist attacks is one of the main reasons for becoming socially responsible.

Things like accountability requirements, information access, environmental awareness and environmental hazards like oil spills are at least effective in eliciting social responsibility. Corporate image has a direct impact on the social power of an organization and CSR is one of the powerful ways of improving this image (Eisingerich and Ghardwaj, 2011). It is therefore rational and proofable to agree with Davis’s statement that that avoidance of social responsibility leads to the gradual erosion of social power.

Hussain’s (1999) statement does not reflect the true picture of the current society and their take on environmental issues and this is evidenced on the role played by environmental issues in American presidential politics. It also ignores the fact that voters are able to take and support educated decisions relating to their environment, and are more aware of environmentally supportive technologies and products. In addition, environmental protection cannot be exclusively driven by agendas but the willingness of citizens and politicians to take a personal responsibility for the environment then support the responses of others.

References Eisingerich, A. and Ghardwaj, G. (2011). Corporate Social Responsibility: Does Social Responsibility Help Protect a Companys Reputation?. MIT Sloan Management Review, 52 (March): 18–18. Hussain, S. S. (1999). “The Ethics of ‘Going Green: The Corporate Social Responsibility Debate. Business Strategy and the Environment, 8(4):203-210