Corporate Social Responsibility in Modern Organizations - Coursework Example

Corporate Social Responsibility in the Modern Organizations Student’s Name: Instructor’s Name: Course Code: Date of Submission: Introduction Any of the organizations in the modern business have embraced the concept of corporate social responsibility. This is because organizations are expected to ensure that they behave responsibly so that its activities can be accepted in the society and avoid conflicts with the stakeholders. However, the corporate social responsibility has some drawbacks (Jan et al 2012). These arguments against the corporate social responsibility have to slow reactions by some organizations as they consider it as an expense. In this effect, this essay will discuss the concepts of corporate social responsibility. What is corporate social responsibility? Cooperate social responsibility include all the activities which are undertaken by the management of an organization to ensure corporate citizenship. Corporate social responsibility has been applied by many organizations in the modern business as a way of being social responsible. The aim of the corporate social responsibility is to make decisions that can follow the reactions of the society and doing things which are desirable and acceptable by the society (Jan et al 2012). Corporate social responsibility is associated with making strategic decisions that focus on the issues affecting the society and the ways in which the relationship between the society and the organization can be fulfilled. In this way, corporate social responsibility is concerned with institutional practices and not the individual decision making among the managers. The main elements of the corporate social responsibility include economic, legal, ethical and philanthropic. However, in the recent years the four elements of the corporate social responsibility have been criticized since they do not touch on all the activities of corporate social responsibility. Definitions of social responsibility Organizations define social responsibility differently but they almost refer to the same thing. The first definition is that social responsibility is the commitment and efforts which are done by the management of an organization that helps to contribute to the profits and revenue of an organization (Adam & Valerie 2010). Other organizations define social responsibility as the social activities which are undertaken by an organization to meet the social needs of the society with the aim of creating good relationship between the management and the stakeholders like the society and the employees. Moreover, social responsibility can be defined as the activities that are undertaken by an organization to contribute to living standards of the society by doing what is right at the right time and avoiding what is wrong. In this effect, social responsibility can be defined as the development and implementation of policies that contribute to the social welfare of the society in which an organization operates in. Role of management in delivering on an organization’s corporate social responsibility The management of an organization plays an important role in delivering the corporate social responsibility. The first role of the management is to ensure that the employees and the management understand the role of implementing the corporate social responsibility policy through effective leadership. This is one way in which the management will gain commitment from the employees while implementing the corporate social responsibility policy (Adam & Valerie 2010). This means that the leadership should integrate the corporate social responsibility activities with the mission of the organization and the employees will help to implement the corporate social responsibility policy. Therefore the management helps to integrate the business objectives with the objectives of the employees hence contributing to effective implementation of the corporate social responsibility policies. The other important role of management in delivering the corporate social responsibility program is supporting the business sustainability. The management will use different management tools to assess the stage of the organization regarding the advancing sustainability in order to make appropriate choices for the organization (Patrick & Bodo 2012). This is because the life cycle of the organization has to be considered when developing the corporate social responsibility program so as to develop the social responsibility policy which can be accommodated by the resources of the organisation. This is because the corporate social responsibility consumes resources and if the organizational life cycle is not assessed effectively, the organisation will select the corporate social responsibility policy which cannot be sustained by the organisation. In this regard, the management plays an important role in delivering sustainable corporate social responsibility policy. In addition, the management plays the role of influencing the sustainability of the workforce that contributes to effective implementation of the corporate social responsibility policy. The HRM package for the employees influences their satisfaction and ability to be retained in the organisation. In order to motivate the employees to offer their best skills to implement the CSR policy, they should be compensated well so that they can be motivated (Patrick & Bodo 2012). This helps to improve the performance of the employees in terms of corporate social responsibility. The end result is that the goals and objectives of corporate social responsibility will be achieved and will be sustained by the employees. The management also plays the role of engaging the different stakeholders regarding the best CSR policy that can be implemented. This is the most important part of implementing the corporate social responsibility policy since it helps to improve communication among the different stakeholders. For instance, the management has the role of engaging the investors in decision making regarding the CSR so that they can be part of the decisions and strategies developed (Duane 2012). The end result is that there will be no resistance to implementing the corporate social responsibility policy instead the stakeholders will contribute to delivering the corporate social responsibility effectively. Management therefore plays the role of improving communication and engaging the stakeholders in decision making to gain their commitment. Furthermore, the management of the organisation mobilizes the resources that will be used to implement the corporate social responsibility policy. All the departments should be included when making the CSR decisions so that the policy selected will be sustainable and avoid selecting the CSR policy which cannot be sustained at the long run (Duane 2012). For instance, the finance manager should guide the management to operate within the budget and where necessary and forecast on the likely impact by implementing the CSR policy. Therefore management plays the role of mobilizing resources to implement the CSR policy. Ways an organisation can take up their corporate social responsibility An organisation can take up corporate social responsibility activities in various ways. The first way is through engaging in environmental programs. These are the programs that help to protect the environmental from exploitation. For instance, an organisation can engage in ensuring that the society increases the use of renewable sources of energy so that they can reduce the emission of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere (Lars et al 2014). As a result, the company will be able to improve its reputation since it will be considered as one of the organization that contributes to societal values. The other way an organisation can take up the corporate social responsibility is contributing to the cultural environment. This means that the management of the organisation should be able to support the arts of and science in the society as well as sports. This is one way in which the organisation will take up the corporate social responsibility (Lars et al 2014). This can be done by sponsoring the cultural activities and the society will be able to preserve the cultural environment. The end result is that the organisation will develop positive relationship with the society hence improving its reputation. In addition, an organisation can take the corporate social responsibility through humanitarian support. When there are harsh conditions, the organisation can take the responsibility of supporting the people suffering during the harsh conditions. For instance, when there are disasters like floods the organisation can provide humanitarian support like providing health support and economic support (Lars et al 2014). In this way, the organisation will have contributed to the society hence its activities will be supported by the stakeholders. This helps to create competitive advantage of the organization since it will be able to create market for its products to the society. The organisation can also take up the corporate social responsibility through sponsorships provided to the needy people in the society. For instance, the management should provide education scholarships to needy students in the society as a way of helping to improve the living standards of the people in the society. Besides improving the living standards of the people in the society, through sponsorships the organization will be able to improve its competitive advantage since it will market its products to the target audience (Archie & Kareem 2010). Sponsorships can also be done by sponsoring various sporting events hence contributing to building good reputation of the organisation. Arguments for and against organizations being socially responsible The first argument for corporate social responsibility is that it helps to develop long term viability of the organisation. This is because through corporate social responsibility, the organisation is able to develop strategies that can help to create good relationship with the stakeholders. For instance, through corporate social responsibility it is possible to improve the relationship with the customers and this will influence the buying behavior of the customers (Archie & Kareem 2010). This will improve the competitive advantage of the organisation. In addition, the argument for corporate social responsibility is that it helps to take proactive measures instead of reactive. This is the strategy that helps to improve the working relationship between the organisation and the stakeholders. Through corporate social responsibility, the organisation is able to take measures to create positive perception among the stakeholders instead of taking reactive measures and this contributes to improved organizational performance (Kathleen & Ralph 2014). Furthermore, there is a big relationship between corporate social responsibility and marketing. One of the aims of CSR is to increase the profits of the organisation. Through CSR, it is possible for the organization to market the products because the customers can be aware of the organization and its products. This creates good reputation of the organisation hence the organisation will perform better in the organisation and this argument has been supported by many scholars (Kathleen & Ralph 2014). Therefore CSR contributes to marketing function. It is also argued that CSR helps to improve communication between the stakeholders and the management of the organisation. The activities for taking the corporate social responsibility aim at improving the brand among the eyes of the customers. Moreover, through social responsibility activities, the stakeholders will be able to interact with the management of the organisation and this helps to provide feedback to the management (De Schutter 2008). This helps to improve the strategies which are employed to meet the needs of the customers leading to competitive advantage. However, there is also the argument against the corporate social responsibility. The first argument against is that an organisation aims to maximize the profits. The social responsibility activities consume financial resources and this means that the profitability of the organisation will decline. Instead, this argument states that an organisation should not be concerned with the social responsibility activities if it wants to achieve the best results in terms of profitability (Kathleen & Ralph 2014). This is according to economic theory argument developed by Friedman which states that an organisation should aim to maximize the profits. The other argument against the social responsibility is that the organisation is not equipped to do the social responsibility activities. This is because the managers have expertise in managing the organisation and its finances and other resources but they do not have expert knowledge in social responsibility activities (De Schutter 2008). This can affect the management of the organisation and may not achieve the primary goals and objectives and this will affect the competitiveness of the organisation hence social responsibility is not a must for modern organizations. Conclusion Corporate social responsibility comprises of all the activities which are developed and implemented by an organisation to improve its reputation in the society. Management plays important roles in delivering the CSR activities. The first role of management is to mobilize resources, motivate the employees and engage stakeholders and also developing sustainable CSR programs. CSR activities which an organization can take include cultural environment preservation, engaging in communal activities and sponsorships. The argument for social responsibility includes improved communication, marketing of products and services and improving reputation of the organisation. However, the argument against include lack of CSR expertise and it reduces the organizational profits. References Adam, L & Valerie, S 2010, Corporate Social Responsibility, International journal of management reviews, Vol. 12, No.1. pp. 8-19. Archie, B. C & Kareem, M. S 2010, The Business Case for Corporate Social Responsibility: A Review of Concepts, Research and Practice, International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 12, No.1, pp. 85-105. De Schutter, O 2008, Corporate social responsibility, European style. European Law Journal, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 203–236. Duane, W 2012, Corporate social responsibility and irresponsibility: A positive theory approach, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 66, No. 10, pp. 1937–1944. Jan, K., Oliver, S., Martin, R., Xuyi ,W & Malte, B 2012, Competition-motivated corporate social responsibility, journal business research, Vol. 66, No. 10, pp. 1954-1963. Kathleen, W & Ralph, W 2014, The double bottom line: Profit and social benefit, Business Horizons, Vol. 57, No. 1, pp. 11—20. Lars, I., Tim, K & Michael, H 2014, Corporate social responsibility: Why bother?, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 43, No. 5, pp. 64—72. Patrick, E & Bodo, B 2012, Corporate social responsibility and corporate social irresponsibility, Journal of business research, Vol. 66, No. 10, pp. 1807-1813. Read More