Trend and prospect of corporate social responsibility
Keywords:
Corporate Social Responsibility; Sustainability; Stakeholders; Management; Company.Abstract
In recent years it was intensified by companies the action of incorporating their strategic and operational concepts related to Corporate Social Responsibility, Sustainability and Stakeholder Theory. The confluence and interaction of the concepts of these three constructs both in doctrine and in the actions of companies generated in these very different answers, speaking on strategies, policies and shares representing idiosyncratic interpretations of each concept, showing a unique relationship between them situation that hinders the proper classification of each entrepreneur performance.As a first objective, this bibliographic research analyzes the historical evolution of the three named concepts, examining their origins and initial ideas and their mutual interaction and interrelation. The second objective, we sought to develop an instrument that would allow a more accurate characterization of entrepreneurs socio-environmental actions on firmer foundations that denominations that companies allocated to these actions.Based on the investigation, and adapted for this scheme Galbreath (2006), it was possible to obtain a tool to differentiate entrepreneurs socio-environmental actions based on the theory on which design their policies and actions fundamentals. Also, this instrument facilitates the ordering of the doctrinal contributions in these issues. Finally, a prospective hypothesis of the three concepts developed in research is proposed.References
Ackoff, R. L. (1994). Planificación de la empresa del futuro. México D F: Limusa.
Ackoff, R. L. (2000). Recreación de las corporaciones. México D F: Oxford University Press.
Argandoña, A. (2007). Responsabilidad social de la empresa: ¿qué modelo económico? ¿qué modelo de empresa? Documentación social, N° 146, 11-24.
Baumann, D. (2016). Corporate social responsibility in a globalizing world. Business Ethics Quarterly, 26(1), 137-141.
Bowen, H. R. (1953). Social responsibilities of the businessman. New York: Harper & Brothers.
Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. The Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497-505.
Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: evolution of a definitional construct. Business & Society, 38(3), 268-295.Le
Committee for Economic Development. (1971). Social responsibilities of business corporations. New York: autor.
Cortina, A. (1994/2000). Ética de la empresa. Madrid: Editorial Trotta SA.
Cortina, A. (2003). Construir confianza: ética de la empresa en la sociedad de la información y las comunicaciones. Madrid: Editorial Trotta SA.
Davis, K. (1960). Can business afford to ignore social responsibilities? California Management Review, 2(3), 70-76.
Davis, K. y Blomstrom, R. L. (1966). Business and its environment. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Dempsey, J. (2015). Moral responsibility, shared values, and corporate culture. Business Ethics Quarterly, 25(3), 319-340.
Donaldson, T. y Dunfee, T. W. (1999). Ties that bind: a social contracts approach to business ethics. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Recuperado el 8 de diciembre de 2012 de: http://books.google.com.ar/books?id=c71Ti8RuT10C&pg=PA175&hl=es&source=gbs_toc_r&cad=4#v=onepage&q&f=false
Elkington, J. (1994). Towards the sustainable corporation: win-win-win business strategies for sustainable development. California Management Review, 36(2), 90-100.
Fassin, Y. (2009). The stakeholder model refined. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(1), 113-135.
Flammer, C. (2015). Does Corporate Social Responsibility Lead to Superior Financial Performance? A Regression Discontinuity Approach. Management Science, 61(11), 2549-2568.
Freeman, R. E. (2004). The stakeholder approach revisited. Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts-und Unternehmensethik, 5(3), 228-241.
Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine, September 13, 122-126.
Friedman, A., y Miles, S. (2006). Stakeholders: theory and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Frynas, J. G. y Stephens, S. (2015). Political Corporate Social Responsibility: Reviewing Theories and Setting New Agendas. International Journal of Management Reviews, 17(4), 483–509.
Galbreath, J. (2006). Corporate social responsibility strategy: strategic options, global considerations. Corporate Governance, 6(2), 175-187.
Gallie, W. B. (1956). Essentially contested concepts. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Vol. 56, p. 167-198.
Green, B. (2010). El universo elegante. Barcelona: Litográfica Roses, SA.
International Organization for Standardization. (2010). Norma ISO 26000:2010. Buenos Aires: IRAM.
Jensen, M. C. (2002). Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Business Ethics Quarterly, Vol. 12 (2), 235-256.
Kekes, J. (1977). Essentially contested concepts: a reconsideration. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 10(2), 71-89.
La Santa Biblia, (1960), Mateo, 7:15-20, Buenos Aires, Sociedades Bíblicas en América Latina.
Lund-Thomsen, P., Lindgreen, A. y Vanhamme, J. (2016). Industrial Clusters and Corporate Social Responsibility in Developing Countries: What We Know, What We do not Know, and What We Need to Know. Journal of Business Ethics, 133(1), 9-24.
Meadows, D. H., Meadows D. L., Randers, J. y Behrems, W. W. (1972). The limits to growth. New York: Universe Book.
Miles, S. (2012). Stakeholder: essentially contested or just confused? Journal of Business Ethics, 108(3), 285-298.
Mitchell, R., Agle, B., & Wood, D. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853-886.
ONU. (1987). Informe de la Comisión Mundial sobre el Medio Ambiente y el Desarrollo "Nuestro futuro común". Recuperado el 3 de enero de 2013 de http://es.scribd.com/doc/105305734/ONU-Informe-Brundtland-Ago-1987-Informe-de-la-Comision-Mundial-sobre-Medio-Ambiente-y-Desarrollo.
ONU. (1992). Declaración de Rio. Recuperado el 3 de enero de 2013 de http://www.un.org/geninfo/bp/enviro.html
Phillips, R., Freeman, E., y Wicks, A. C. (2003). What stakeholder theory is not. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(4), 479-502.
Porter, M. y Kramer, M. (2002). The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy. Harvard Business Review, 80(12), 56-69.
Porter, M. y Kramer, M. (2006). Strategy & society: the link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78-92.
Porter, M. y Kramer, M. (2011). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 89(1/2), 62-77.
RAE. (2015). Diccionario de la Lengua Española. (23° ed.). Real Academia Española, versión electrónica recuperada el 05 de enero de 2016 del sitio: http://dle.rae.es/?id=ZSZtERx, http://dle.rae.es/?id=SkENGmm
Rodríguez Fernández, J. M. (2007). Responsabilidad social corporativa y análisis económico: práctica frente a teoría. Ekonomiaz N° 65, 2° cuatrimestre, 12-49.
Rodríguez Fernández, J. M. (2008). Modelo stakeholder y responsabilidad social: el gobierno corporativo global. M@n@gement, 11, 81-111.
Sternberg, E. (1997). The defects of stakeholder theory. Corporate Governance: an International Review, 5(1), 3-10.
Votaw, D. (1972). Genius Becomesr Rare: A Comment on the Doctrine of Social Responsibility Pt. I. California Management Review, 15(2), 25-31.
World Business Council for Sustainable Development. (2010). Visión 2050. Recuperado el 25 de marzo de 2011 de http://www.wbcsd.org/vision2050.aspx
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2016 Jorge Roberto Volpentesta
The works published in this magazine are under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 Argentina license.
Important: The author is the owner of the rights to exploit the contents of the article of his authorship.
You are free to:
Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format.
Adapt — remix, transform and build from the material.
The licensor cannot revoke these liberties as long as you follow the terms of the license.
Under the following terms:
Attribution - You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if any changes have been made. You may do so in any reasonable way, but not in a way that suggests that you or your use is endorsed by the licensor.
Non-Commercial - You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
There are no additional restrictions - You cannot apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others to make any use permitted by the license.
