Corporate Rresponsibility Strategies - Essay Example

For an estimate of three decades now, the corporate social responsibility (CSR) doctrine received the same attention as to the traditionally used philosophy in corporate decision making (Walton, 1982). In fact, the meaning and importance of corporate responsibilities for consumers in different countries may also differ. This is a clear picture suggesting that it has already existed perhaps in the entire world today keeping everyone informed about its existence at some point. According to Maigan and Ferrell (2003), they found out in their study that US, France and Germany have substantial differences on how they give meaning and importance for corporate responsibilities. This is to suggest the fact that the way corporate social responsibility is viewed from one country to another may be subjective considering the chance that it might differ in its meaning and importance from one country to another. It is therefore important to consider that in a particular country, understanding how it viewed and defined corporate social responsibility is a special task to be undertaken. This is to ensure that the values defined underlying corporate social responsibility is taken into consideration beforehand. Thus, this would minimize complexity and confusion in the interpretation of whatever information needed to be analyzed regarding corporate social responsibility issue. In addition, various strategies regarding corporate social responsibility have now existed and have gone through evolution. There are five strategy dimensions needed in corporate social responsibility program according to Burke and Logsdon (1996). They particularly focused on centrality, specificity, proactivity, voluntarism and visibility. According to them, these five can be identifiable as the five strategies as dimensions to help assess the value every firm has created for CSR programmes. This result can bring significant understanding on how a certain firm or even a country values CSR in general. In particular, the giving of value to CSR may have a strong link to the meaning and importance given to it. Doane (2005) explained that corporate social responsibility has become special tool used by businesses and governments in solving social and environmental problems. Doane tried to present the way corporate social responsibility has become engaged and become part of the market and pointed out that it is subjected to changes of the market that cannot be predicted. Doane therefore believed that the corporate social responsibility’s reported act of intentional reporting to improve performance is a myth. Furthermore, she included the following myths: corporate behavior is changed by the codes and management systems and business sustainability is obtained when consumers go for change since this will trigger the business community to exactly do its share on the process. Therefore Doane concluded that in order to obtain future sustainability, the transformation required in the market needs to be ensured that the corporate world can really benefit from all its actions. This means that the concept of CSR has become entirely profit oriented in a sense knowing the situation that the corporate world must ensure essential benefits it can take. Another study presented almost the same result as to like Doane’s. Oppewal et al. (2006) investigated the effect of retailer and centre actions in demonstrating corporate social responsibility. Their investigation was done by simply allowing consumers to evaluate town shopping centers. According to Oppewal et al., donations to charities, support for schools or cultural or sports events and demonstrations of concern for the natural environment have positive impact on the ability of retail stores to attract customers making it a potential basis of their competitive advantage. The results of the study of Oppewal et al. simply show that shopping destination performance can be improved provided that the centre’s corporate social responsibility and its indicators are to be included. However, they found out that corporate social responsibility’s attributes and their effects are smaller than non-corporate social responsibility attributes and their effects. Their study suggested that even there was only smaller difference detected, it would still further imply that there is still a significant effect that can be considered at some point. From the study of Du et al. (2007), they found out that the positive beliefs of consumers on CSR were strongly linked to greater possibility of purchase, loyalty and advocacy behaviors. The most important finding they have was to have known that CSR initiatives are not all created equal. Du et al. simply indicated that those brands that are on CSR with alignment on the core business strategy are most likely to obtain the real benefits of CSR from the point of view of customers. Gupta and Pirsch (2008) found out that the 460 consumers they studied have indicated that CSR influences their store image. According Gupta and Pirsch, CSR becomes effective at influencing store image when retailers have created a positive performance perception to its customers. They added that consumers are more open, satisfied and loyal to stores initiating CSR programs. Olsen et al. (2006) believed that corporate social responsibility is becoming quite commonly used strategy in influencing consumers and creating a difference about a product. They found out that even the CSR is low fit or high fit initiative it is, or even profit or non- profit motivated, they both have the same impact. Consumers according to them consider the timing involved in aspects related to their beliefs, attitudes and intentions. In fact, there are considerable evidences to support that corporate social responsibility can influence consumers and eventually the activities of supermarket. What seems clearer is that more studies have been focused on studying consumer behavior and in particular the psycho-social impact of retailing to consumers. Considering that it is important to consider consumers’ attitudes, beliefs and intentions on the products, it is important to take into account that these aspects eventually are strongly related to consumers’ loyalty, satisfaction and future intention of purchase. Thus, it is in this area that important attention needs to be taken into consideration in line with the activities of corporate social responsibility in influencing activities in the market. Shown on the following graphs is the result of market research showing how much shoppers are influenced by various aspects of corporate social responsibility. Graph 1. Bar graph showing factors in food and drink purchases, by rank, December 2007 Graph 2. Line graph showing factors in food and drink purchases, by rank, December 2007 References Burke, L. and Logsdon, J. M. (1996) ‘How corporate social responsibility pays off’. Long Range Planning, Vol. 29 (4): 495 – 502. Doane, D. (2005) ‘Beyond corporate social responsibility: minnows, mammoths and markets’. Futures, Vol. 37 (2-3): 215-229. Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B. and Sen, S. (2007) ‘Reaping relational rewards from corporate social responsibility: The role of competitive positioning’. International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 24 (3): 224-241. ] Gupta, S. and Pirsch, (2008) ‘The influence of a retailer’s corporate social responsibility program on re-conceptualizing store image’. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 15 (6): 516-526. Maignan, I. and Ferrell, M. O. (2003) ‘Nature of corporate responsibilities: Perspectives from American, French and German consumers’. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 56 (1): 55-67. Olsen, K. L. B., Cudmore, A. and Hill, R. P. ‘The impact of perceived corporate social responsibility on consumer behavior’. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 59 (1): 46-53. Oppewal, H., Alexander, A. and Sullivan, P. (2006) ‘Consumer perceptions of corporate social responsibility in town shopping centres and their influence on shopping evaluations’. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 13 (4): 261-274. Walton, C. C. (1982) ‘Corporate social responsibility’. Journal of Economics and Business, Vol. 34 (2): 173-187. Read More