Corporate and Social Responsibility

Corporate Social Responsibility is an important term that few know of. This term stands for everything that’s moral, from using less harmful chemicals in their products to protecting the rights of the workers and the society we live in. However, some companies do not live by this word. This, coupled with the massive amount of consumers buying their products, can cause a multitude of problems not only for the company workers, but to the world itself. As such, companies should become more aware of their effects on the world around them and change their moral responsibilities to treat their workers more humanely, protect the lives of the people in their towns, cities and countries and save the environment from further destruction and pollution.

It is overwhelming how corporations have embedded a social responsibility in their mission statements and company objectives. This leaves us with one assertion that is that corporations do have some level of obligation towards society’s morality; however, the corporation itself is not a moral agent (Klaus M. Leisinger). The discussion that follows is about corporations being moral agents or otherwise; however I will reach a conclusion that corporations do have an obligation that extends beyond obeying the law; evens so this obligation have been derived from the corporations quest for profit making. Corporation’s obligation

In (Cohen, 2008), the author quotes (Drucker, 1946) in noting that “Every organization must assume full responsibility for its impact on its employees, the environment, customers, and whomever and whatever it touches”. According to (Cohen, 2008; Drucker, 1946), that is the very definition of social responsibility. There are many ambiguities surrounding the concept of social responsibility; everything from definition to terminology, even what actions constitute responsible behavior is unsettled (Vogel, 2005). For purposes of this paper we will use the term corporate social responsibility (CSR).

Because corporations are established to profit and shareholders invest money with expectations of a greater return, managers cannot be given a directive to be “socially responsible” without providing specific criteria of checks and balances to which needs to adhere. Therefore, it is imperative to the success of a corporation for managers to not act solely but rather to act within the policies of the shareholders.

or so many years our society has been thinking of forming new creative and innovative businesses, which would be more environmental and customer friendly. Nowadays a large number of different companies follow the social, ethical, as well as moral consequences when it comes to their decision making. One of the relatively new concepts involving economic and social concerns is Corporate Social Responsibility. Many of us apply this approach not only at work, but also in everyday life without even recognizing.

There are conflicting expectations of the nature of a company’s responsibilities to society. However, those companies that undertake what may be termed ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’ must decide; what are the actual social responsibilities of these companies? I will present a possible paradigm. Also, I will look at the benefit to the business that employs proper management as compared the business with poor management. This research paper describes my view of corporate social responsibility and compares the social responsibilities of Delta Air Lines and Spirit

The ethical issues presented in this case are the different views that each individual has on how the idea of corporate social responsibility (CSR). This dispute is between Mr. Milton Friedman, John Mackey, and T.J. Rodgers; all of which has a different outlook on CSR. The definition of CSR refers to the responsibilities that business has to the society in which it operates and to those actions that a business can be held accountable. Most philosophers have come up with three different types of responsibilities that corporations can be held accountable for. The first and most important of the three is a corporation’s duty to not cause harm. If a corporation can

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is a very controversial topic. A question that has been debated for the past few decades is; is it corporately viable to introduce social responsibility as a proposed addition to the work ethic of business organisations. As well as, if adopting the framework of corporate social responsibility would yield positive improvements for those organisations.

“Corporate Social Responsibility is the continuing commitment by business to behave ethically and contribute to economic development while improving the quality of life of the workforce and their families as well as of the local community and society at large.” (Baker, Mallen (June 8,

The expectation that businesses behave responsibly and positively contribute to society all while pursuing their economic goals is one that holds firm through all generations. Stakeholders, both market and nonmarket, expect businesses to be socially responsible. Many companies have responded to this by including this growing expectation as part of their overall business operations. There are companies in existence today whose sole purpose is to socially benefit society alongside businesses who simply combine social benefits with their economic goals as their company mission. These changes in societal expectations and thus company purpose we’ve seen in the business community over time often blurs the line of what it means to be socially

Issue 1: I do believe that corporations have a responsibility to society as a whole, not only to maximize their own profits and benefit the economy but also to respect the community that they reside in. They achieve this by not only providing employment, but also upholding an image. It is up to

Company Q is a small local grocery store chain who has made poor decisions when it comes to social responsibility. Company Q’s business is suffering because the owners’ do not know the heart of running a business, Social responsibility. When opening a business it is not all about the money. Sure it is nice to think about growth and reaping the benefits of a bigger bank account, but the first thing that is important in business is the consumers. Who is buying what you are selling? What will make consumers buy more, comeback, or tell friends? Businesses flourish around consumers. So if it is money you are after, then consumers are who you need and want. So in business in order for Company Q to get what they want and need, they will need to give the consumer what they want and need, social responsibility. Give back, it has always been said “It is better to give than to receive.” After careful review of Company Q's business actions, this company lacks social responsibility in many areas.

For my current event, I choose an article based upon the management topic of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). The article I choose was “A Purpose Beyond Profit”, written by Tony Schwartz, for the New York Times in 2014. As the title implies, it looks at businesses practices adopted by corporations that have surpassed just obeying regulatory laws to actually encompassing many sustainability programs to help society, even if means lowering their profits. In a meticulous analysis of the article, “A Purpose Beyond Profit”, I will summarize the main points of the author, show the important factors that support the main idea(s), reveal any holes in the main ideas, and its supporting arguments; further more I will provide counter-arguments to the basis of the article, and will discuss management theories that are applied in businesses today.

Corporate social responsibility has been one the key business buzz words of the 21st century. Consumers' discontent with the corporation has forced it to try and rectify its negative image by associating its name with good deeds. Social responsibility has become one of the corporation's most pressing issues, each company striving to outdo the next with its philanthropic image. People feel that the corporation has done great harm to both the environment and to society and that with all of its wealth and power, it should be leading the fight to save the Earth, to combat poverty and illness and etc. "Corporations are now expected to deliver the good, not just the goods; to pursue

Crane, A. and Matten, D. (2010) ‘Corporate social responsibility’, (3rd edition) Business Ethics. Oxford: Oxford university press, pp.51-60