What does csr really stand for? An analysis of corporate definitions of CSR in Poland

• Autorzy: Maria Roszkowska-Menkes

Warianty tytułu

Co naprawdę oznacza Społeczna odpowiedzialność biznesu? Analiza definicji CSR najbardziej Odpowiedzialnych firm w Polsce

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is perceived as the building block for modern literature focused on the primary purpose of a firm and its role in society. CSR, however, can be still described as knowledge in a continuing stage of emergence with neither a dominant paradigm nor universal definitions, assumptions, nor methods. The lack of consensus in the literature is accompanied by the increasing ambiguity of understanding and implementation of CSR among companies. The goal of this paper is to explore how CSR is defined in the literature and contrast these findings with definitions used by the most responsible companies in Poland. The study is also aimed to identify challenges for future research in this field. In doing so, I conduct a content analysis of CSR definitions published on corporate websites and in documents of companies included in the "2015 Ranking of Responsible Companies." The study enabled to identify three themes that illustrate current understanding of the concept among the most responsible companies in Poland: (1) integration with core business strategy; (2) stakeholder relationships management; (3) sustainability(original abstract)

Społeczna odpowiedzialność biznesu (corporate social responsibility - CSR) uznawana jest za podstawową koncepcję wyjaśniającą rolę przedsiębiorstwa w społeczeństwie. Wciąż jest to jednak obszar badań bez dominującego paradygmatu - charakteryzuje się brakiem wspólnego podejścia teoretycznego, uniwersalnych założeń czy metod. Brakowi konsensusu w literaturze towarzyszy wieloznaczność pojęcia CSR wśród przedsiębiorstw. Celem niniejszego artykułu jest zbadanie jak CSR jest definiowany w literaturze oraz zestawienie osiągniętych wyników z definicjami najbardziej społecznie odpowiedzialnych firm w Polsce. Badanie ma pozwolić również na identyfikację kierunków przyszłych studiów w tym obszarze. By osiągnąć tak postawione cele badawcze przeprowadzona została analiza definicji CSR opublikowanych na stronach i w dokumentach korporacyjnych firm uwzględnionych w "IX Rankingu odpowiedzialnych firm 2015". Badanie pozwoliło na identyfikację trzech tematów ilustrujących współczesne rozumienie koncepcji CSR wśród analizowanych firm: (1) integracja ze strategią biznesową; (2) zarządzanie relacjami z interesariuszami; (3) zrównoważony rozwój(abstrakt oryginalny)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Enterprise sustainable development; Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR); Stakeholders

PL

Rozwój zrównoważony przedsiębiorstwa; Społeczna odpowiedzialność biznesu; Interesariusze

• Czasopismo: Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu
• Rocznik: 2016
• Numer: nr 423 Social Responsibility of Organizations. CSR 1.0, CSR 2.0 and what's next?
• Strony: 94--106

Twórcy

autor

Maria Roszkowska-Menkes

• Warsaw School of Economics, Poland

Bibliografia

• Andriof J., McIntosh M. (eds.), Perspectives on Corporate Citizenship, Greenleaf Publishing, Sheffield 2001.
• Baron D.P., Private politics, corporate social responsibility, and integrated strategy, Journal of Economic Management Strategy 2001, vol. 10(1), pp. 7-45.
• Bowen H., Social Responsibilities of the Businessman, Harper & Row, New York 1953.
• Carroll A.B., Evolution of a definitional construct, Business and Society 1999, vol 38(3), pp. 268-295.
• Carroll A.B., Three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance, The Academy of Management Review 1979, vol. 4(4), pp. 497-505.
• COM(2011) 681, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: A renewed EU strategy 2011-14 for Corporate Social Responsibility, Brussels, http://bit.ly/1yAbfQZ (date of access: 22.06.2014).
• Dahlsrud A., How corporate social responsibility is defined: An analysis of 37 definitions, Corporate Social Resposibility and Environmental Management 2008, 15, pp. 1-13.
• Doane D., The Myth of CSR, Stanford Social Innovation Review 2005, http://bit.ly/1GDeUOu (date of access: 27.06.2015).
• Du S., Bhattacharya C.B., Sen S., Corporate social responsibility and competitive advantage: Overcoming the trust barrier, Management Science 2011, vol. 57(9), pp. 1528-1545.
• Elkington J., Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business, New Society Publishers, 1997.
• Fleming P., Jones M.T., The End of Corporate Social Responsibility. Crisis and Critique, Sage Publications, 2013.
• Freeman R.E., McVea J., A Stakeholder Approach to Strategic Management, Working Paper, No. 1-2, 2001, Darden Graduate School of Business Administration, University of Virginia.
• Freeman R.E., Velamuri S.R., A new approach to CSR: Company stakeholder responsibility, SSRN
• Electronic Journal, 2008, http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1186223 (date of access: 07.07.2014).
• Friedman M., The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits, The New York Times Magazine, September 13, 1970.
• Garriga E., Melé D., Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory, Journal of Business Ethics 2004, vol. 53(1/2), pp. 51-71.
• Goebbels M., Reframing corporate social responsibility: The contemporary conception of a fuzzy notion, Journal of Business Ethics 2002, vol. 44, pp. 95-105.
• Greenwood M., Stakeholder engagement: Beyond the myth of corporate responsibility, Journal of Business Ethics 2007, vol. 74(4), pp. 315-327.
• Henderson D., Misguided Virtue: False Notions of Corporate Social Responsibility, New Zealand Business Roundtable, 2001.
• Horrigan B., Corporate Social Responsibility in the 21st Century: Debates, Models and Practices Across Government, Law and Business, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham 2010.
• Husted B.W., Allen D.B., Strategic corporate social responsibility and value creation among large firms. Lessons from the Spanish experience, Long Range Planning 2007, vol. 40(6), pp. 594-610.
• Husted B.W., de Salazar J., Taking Friedman seriously: Maximizing profits and social performance, Journal of Management Studies 2006, vol. 43(1), pp. 75-91.
• ISO 26000:2013. Guidence on social responsibility.
• Johnson H.A., Business in Contemporary Society: Framework and Issues, Wadsworth, Belmont 1971.
• Karnani A., CSR stuck in a logical trap, California Management Review 2011, vol. 53(2), pp. 105-111.
• Karnani A., Doing well by doing good: The grand illusion. California Management Review 2011, vol. 53(2), p. 69.
• Lantos G.P., The ethicality of altruistic corporate social responsibility, Journal of Consumer Marketing 2002, vol. 19(3), pp. 205-232.
• Laszlo C., The Sustainable Company: How to Create Lasting Value through Social and Environmental Performance, Island Press, Washington 2003.
• Lockett A., Moon J., Visser W., Corporate social responsibility in management research: Focus, nature, salience and sources of influence, Journal of Management Studies 2006, vol. 43(1), pp. 115-136.
• Van Marrewijk M., Concepts and definitions of CSR and corporate sustainability: Between agency and communion, Journal o f Business Ethics 2003, vol. 44(2/3), pp. 95-105.
• Matten D., Crane A., Corporate citizenship: Towards an extended theoretical conceptualization, The Academy of Management Review 2005, vol. 30(1), pp. 166-179.
• Matten D., Crane A., Chapple W., Behind the mask: Revealing the true face of corporate citizenship, Journal of Business Ethics 2003, vol. 45, pp. 109-120.
• McWilliams A., Siegel D., Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification?, Strategic Management Journal 2000, vol. 21(5), pp. 603-609.
• McWilliams A., Siegel D.S., Wright P.M., Corporate social responsibility: Strategic implications, Journal of Management Studies 2006, vol. 43(1), pp. 1-18.
• Mullerat R., International Corporate Social Responsibility: The Role of Corporations in the Economic Order of the 21st Century, Kluwer Law International, Alphen aan den Rijn 2010, pp. 443-452.
• Pedersen E.R., Making corporate social responsibility (CSR) operable: How companies translate stakeholder dialogue into practice, Business and Society Review 2006, vol. 111(2), pp. 137-163.
• Porter M.E., Kramer M.R., Creating shared value, Harvard Business Review, January-February 2011, pp. 1-17.
• Sen S., Bhattacharya C.B., Korschun D., The role of corporate social responsibility in strengthening multiple stakeholder relationships: a field experiment, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 2006, vol. 34(2), pp. 158-166.
• Sternberg E., The Stakeholder Concept: A Mistaken Doctrine, Foundation for Business Responsibilities, London 1999, http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=263144 (date of access: 27.06.2015).
• Surroca J., Tribo J.A., Waddock S., Corporate responsibility and financial performance: the role of intangible resources. Strategic Management Journal 2009, vol. 31(5), pp. 463-490.
• Vilanova M., Lozano J.M., Arenas D., Exploring the nature of the relationship between CSR and competitiveness, Journal of Business Ethics 2008, vol. 87(S1), pp. 57-69.
• Visser W., Future trends in CSR: The next 10 years, CSR International Inspiration Series, No. 11, 2012, http://bit.ly/10g1M2e (date of access: 15.10.2015).
• Visser W., Corporate Social Responsibility and the Individual. A Literature Review, Cambridge Programme for Sustainability Leadership Paper Series, No. 1, 2007.
• Visser W., The Age of Responsibility: CSR 2.0 and the New DNA of Business, Willey, London 2012.
• Waddock S.A., Bodwell C., Graves S.B., Responsibility: The New Business Imperative, The Academy of Management Executive 2002, vol. 16(2), pp. 132-148.
• Wartick S.L., Cochran P.L., The evolution of the corporate social performance model, The Academy of Management Review 1985, vol. 10(4), pp. 758-769.
• Wood D.J., Corporate social performance revisited, The Academy of Management Review 1991, 16(4), pp. 691-718.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.15611/pn.2016.423.07