PL EN


Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników
2016 | 15 | nr 2 | 123--150
Tytuł artykułu

Comparative Critical Review of Corporate Social Responsibility Business Management Models

Treść / Zawartość
Warianty tytułu
Porównawczy, krytyczny przegląd modeli zarządzania biznesem społecznie odpowiedzialnym
Języki publikacji
EN
Abstrakty
Tło badań. Dzisiejsza niespokojna rzeczywistość ekonomiczna, charakteryzująca się zakłóceniami rynku, kryzysami finansowymi i ekonomicznymi, oraz coraz częstsze skandale biznesowe kwestionują ważność bieżących modeli biznesowych, łącznie z tymi odnoszącymi się do pojęcia społecznej odpowiedzialności biznesu (CSR).
Cel badań. Celem artykułu jest porównawczy i krytyczny przegląd najpopularniejszych modeli biznesowych CSR i krytyka obecnej retoryki odnoszącej się do CSR. Stawiamy hipotezę, iż model biznesowy CSR powinien mieć ugruntowane podstawy instytucjonalne, których większości z nich brakuje.
Metodologia. Jako metodologię zastosowaliśmy badania krytyczne dotyczące zarządzania. Naszą analizę oparliśmy na gruntownym przeglądzie literatury. Po teorii etyczno-normatywnej Hopwooda (1994) i uznając podejście dotyczące akcjonariuszy, teorię legalności oraz teorię kontraktu społecznego jako podstawy naszej motywacji, dokonujemy krytycznego porównania 7 koncepcyjnych modeli biznesowych CSR. Te modele są opisane w kontekście teorii pozytywnej.
Kluczowe wnioski. Ogólny wniosek wskazuje na fakt, iż przeanalizowane modele biznesowe CSR nie uwzględniają czynników instytucjonalnych oraz realizmu pragmatycznego w działaniach biznesowych. Ponadto modele te są osadzone w nierealistycznych warunkach ekonomicznych. Mają one wiele wad i słabości, które obecnie pozostają wyzwaniem zarówno dla badań akademickich, jak i praktyki. (abstrakt oryginalny)
EN
Background. Today's turbulent economic reality characterised by market distortions, financial and economy crises and increasingly frequent business scandals question the validity of current business models, including also those concerning the notion of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).
Research aims. The aim of this article is the comparative critical review of the most common CSR business models and criticism of the current CSR rhetoric. We hypothesise that the CSR business model should have grounded institutional foundations that the majority of them lack.
Methodology. As a methodology in our research we use a critical management studies. We base our analysis on the profound literature review. Following the ethical-normative theory of Hopwood (Hopwood & Miller, 1994) and acknowledging stakeholders approach, legitimacy theory, and social contract theory as foundations of our motivation we critically compare 7 conceptual CSR business models. These business models are described based on the positive theory.
Key findings. The general conclusion indicates that the reviewed CSR business models do not consider institutional factors and pragmatic realism of business activities. Moreover, those models are embedded in unrealistic economic conditions. They have many shortcomings and weaknesses that as for now remain a challenge both for the academic research and practice. (original abstract)
Rocznik
Tom
15
Numer
Strony
123--150
Opis fizyczny
Twórcy
  • University of Social Sciences
  • University of Social Sciences
  • University of Social Sciences
Bibliografia
  • Afuah, A. & Tucci, C.L. (2001). Internet Business Models. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
  • Alt, R. & Zimmermann, H. (2001). Preface: Introduction to Special Section - Business Models. Electronic Markets REMA Elec. Markets, 11(1), 3-9.
  • Amit, R. & Zott, C. (2001). Value Creation in E-Business. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6/7), 484-493.
  • Applegate, L.M. (2001). Emerging e-business models. Harvard Business Review, 79(1), 79-87.
  • Aras, G. & Crowther, D. (2009). The Durable Corporation: Strategies for Sustainable Development. Farnham, England: Gower.
  • Ashforth, B.E. & Gibbs, B.W. (1990). The double-edge of organizational legitimation. Organization Science, 1(2), 177-194.
  • Ayuso, S., Ariño, M.A., García-Castro, R. & Rodriguez, M.A. (2007). Maximizing stakeholders' interests: An empirical analysis of the stakeholder approach to corporate governance. Working Paper, WP no 670, IESE Business School - University of Navarra, January.
  • Berger, I.E., Cunningham, P.H. & Drumwright, M.E. (2007). Mainstreaming Corporate Social Responsibility: Developing Markets for Virtue. California Management Review, 49(4), 132-157.
  • Betz, F. (2002). Strategic business models. Engineering Management Journal, 14(1), 21-24.
  • Bowen, H.R. (1953). Social Responsibility of the Businessman. New York: Harper and Brothers.
  • Bruntland, G. (1987). Our Common Future: The World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Campbell, T. (2007). The Normative Grounding of Corporate Social Responsibility: A Human Rights Approach. In: D.J. McBarnet, A. Voiculescu & T. Campbell, The new corporate accountability: Corporate social responsibility and the law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Campbell, D., Craven, B. & Shrives, P. (2003), Voluntary social reporting in three FTSE sectors: A comment on perception and legitimacy, Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, Vol. 16, No. 4, 558-581.
  • Carroll, A.D. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate social Performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497-505.
  • Carroll, A.D. (1991). The pyramid of social responsibility: toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4).
  • Carroll, A.B. (2004). Managing ethically with global stakeholders: A present and future challenge. Academy of Management Executive, 18(2), 114-120.
  • Chen, C.H. & Wongsurawat, W. (2011). Core constructs of corporate social responsibility: A path analysis. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration, 3(1), 47-61.
  • Chesbrough, H. & Rosenbaum, R.S. (2000). The Role of the Business Model in Capturing Value from Innovation (working paper). Boston: Harvard Business School.
  • Chesbrough, H. & Rosenbloom, R.S. (2002). The role of the business model in capturing value from innovation: Evidence from Xerox corporation's technology spin-off companies. Industrial & Corporate Change, 11(3), 529-555.
  • Clarkson, M.B E. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 92-117.
  • Claydon, J. (2011). A new direction for CSR: the shortcomings of previous CSR models and the rationale for a new model. Social Responsibility Journal, 7(3), 405-420.
  • Crane, A. & Matten, D. (2007). Business Ethics: Managing Corporate Citizenship and Sustainability in the Age of Globalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Cuganesan, S., Guthrie, J. & Ward, S. (2007). Legitimacy Theory: A Story of Reporting Social and Environmental Matters within the Australian Food and Beverage Industry. Presented to the 5th Asian Pacific Interdisciplinary Research in Accounting (APIRA) Conference, 8-10 July 2007, Auckland, New Zealand. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1360518 (access: 12.06.2016).
  • Cordeiro, J.J. & Towari, M. (2015). Firm characteristics, industry context, and investor reactions to environmental CSR: A stakeholder theory approach. Journal of Business Ethics, 130(4), 833-849.
  • Dahl, R. (1972). A prelude to corporate reform. Business and Society Review, 1, 17-23.
  • Donaldson, T. & Preston, L. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 21, 65-91.
  • Donath, R. (1999). Taming e-business models. ISBM business marketing web consortium 3(1). State College (PA): Institute for the Study of Business Markets, 1-24.
  • Dowling, J. & Pfeffer, J. (1975). Organizational legitimacy: Social values and organizational behavior. Pacific Sociological Review, 18(1), 122-136.
  • Driver, C. & Thompson, G. (2002). Corporate governance and democracy: The stakeholder debate revisited. Journal of Management and Governance, 6, 111-130.
  • Drucker, P. (1954). The Practice of Management. New York: Harper & Row Publishers.
  • Dubosson-Torbay, M., Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y. (2001). E-business model design, classification and measurements. Thunderbird International Business Review, 44(1), 5-23.
  • Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with Forks - Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. Stoney Creek, CT: New Society Publishers.
  • Elkington, J. (1999). Triple bottom-line reporting: Looking for balance. Australian CPA, 69(2), 18.
  • Elkington, J. (2004). Enter the Triple Bottom Line. In: A. Henriques & J. Richardson (eds.), The Triple Bottom Line: Does it All Add Up? Assessing the Sustainability of Business and CSR, 1-16. London: Earthscan Publications.
  • European Commission (2001). Green Paper - Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility. COM(2001) 36.
  • European Commission (2011). 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. COM(2011) 681.
  • Fijałkowska, J. (2014). Społeczna "nieodpowiedzialność" biznesu. In: Ł. Sułkowski & M. Zawadzki (red.), Krytyczny nurt zarządzania. Warszawa: Difin.
  • Fijałkowska, J. (2015). Raportowanie CSR a kwestie etyki i odpowiedzialności przedsiębiorstw. Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu, 2(396), 39-47.
  • Freeman, R.E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach. London: Pitman Publishing.
  • Freeman, R.E. (2002). Stakeholder theory of the modern corporation, in Donaldson, T. and Werhane, P. (eds), Ethical Issues in Business: A Philosophical Approach, 7th ed., Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
  • Freeman, R.E. (2008). Managing for stakeholders. In: T. Donaldson & P. Werhane (eds.), Ethical Issues in Business: A Philosophical Approach. 8th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  • Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase profits. The New York Times Magazine, September 13.
  • Gray, R. & Bebbington, J. (2000). Environmental accounting, managerialism and sustainability. Advances in Environmental Accounting and Management, 1, 1-44.
  • Gray, R. & Milne, M.J. (2004). Towards reporting on the triple bottom line: mirages, methods and myths. In: A. Henriques & J. Richardson (eds.), The Triple Bottom Line: Does it All Add Up? Assessing the Sustainability of Business and CSR. London: Earthscan Publications.
  • Gordijn, J., Akkermans, J. & Van Vliet, J. (2001). Designing and evaluating e-business models. IEEE Intellectual Systems, 16(4), 11-7.
  • Hamel, G. (2001). Leading the revolution. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
  • Hopwood, A.G. & Miller, P. (1994). Accounting as Social and Institutional Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Horowitz, A.S. (1996). The real value of VARS: resellers lead a movement to a new service and support. Marketing Computers, 16(4), 31-36.
  • Jabłoński, A. (2009). Model zrównoważonego biznesu a bezpieczeństwo biznesowe przedsiębiorstwa. Zeszyty Naukowe Wyższej Szkoły Humanitas. Zarządzanie, 2, 27-37.
  • Jabłoński, A. (2013). Modele zrównoważonego biznesu w budowie długoterminowej wartości przedsiębiorstw z uwzględnieniem ich społecznej odpowiedzialności. Warszawa: Difin.
  • Konczal, E.F. (1975). Models are for managers, not mathematicians. Journal of Systems Management, 26(1), 12-15.
  • Lewis, M. (2014). The New, New Thing. A Silicon Valley Story. W. W. Norton & Company, Atlanta.
  • Lichtenstein, B.M.B. & Brush, C.G. (2001). How do "resource bundles" develop and change in new ventures? A dynamic model and longitudinal exploration. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 25(3), 37-58.
  • Linder, J.C. & Cantrell, S. (2000). Changing Business Models: Surveying the Landscape. Accenture Institute for Strategic Change (working paper), May 24, 1-15.
  • London, T. & Hart, S. (2003). Reinventing strategies for emerging markets: Beyond the transnational model. Journal of International Business Studies, September.
  • Magretta, J. (2002). Why Business Models Matter? Harvard Business Review, May, 86-92. https://hbr.org/2002/05/why-business-models-matter (access: 15.05.2016).
  • Mahadevan, B. (2000). Business models for internet-based e-commerce: An anatomy. California Management Review, 42(4), 55-69.
  • Markides C. (1999). A dynamic view of strategy. Sloan Management Review, 40(3), 55-63.
  • Marquez, P., Reficco, E. & Berger, G. (2010). Socially Inclusive Business: Engaging the Poor Through Market Initiatives in Ibero-America. Cambridge, MA: David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies, Harvard University Press.
  • Mayo, M.C. & Brown, G.S. (1999). Building a competitive business model. Ivey Business Journal, 63(3), 18-23.
  • Michelini, L. & Fiorentino, D. (2012). New business models for creating shared value. Social Responsibility Journal, 8(4), 561-577.
  • Morris, M., Schindehutte, M. & Allen, J. (2005). The entrepreneur's business model: toward a unified perspective. Journal of Business Research, 58(6), 726-735.
  • Nalband, N.A. & Kelabi, S.A. (2014). Redesigning Carroll's CSR pyramid model. Journal of Advanced Management Science, 2(3), September.
  • Onyeka, O. (2015). Corporate social responsibility, juridification and globalisation: 'inventive interventionism' for a 'paradox'. International Journal of Law in Context, 11(3), 265-298.
  • Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y. (2010). Business Model Generation, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y. & Tucci, C.L. (2005). Clarifying business models: origins, present, and future of the concept. Communications of the AIS, 16(1), 1-25.
  • Owen, D., Swift, T., Humphrey, C. & Bowerman, M. (2000). The new social audits: Accountability, managerial capture or the agenda of social champions? The European Accounting Review, 9(1), 81-98.
  • Painter-Morland, M. (2006). Triple bottom-line reporting as social grammar: Integrating corporate social responsibility and corporate codes of conduct. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15(4), 352-364.
  • Petrovic, O., Kittl, C. & Teksten, R.D. (2001). Developing business models for e-business. Vienna: International Electronic Commerce Conference, 31.10.2001-4.11.2001.
  • Porter, M.E. (1985). Competitive advantage. New York: Free Press.
  • Porter, M.E. (1996). What is strategy. Harvard Business Review, 74(6), 61-78.
  • Porter, M.E. & Kramer, M.R. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78-92.
  • Prahalad, C.K. & Hammond, A. (2002). Serving the world's poor, profitably. Harvard Business Review, 80(9), 48-57.
  • Prahalad, C.K. & Hart, S. (2002). The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid. Strategy & Business, 26(1), 55-67.
  • Raczkowski, K. (2013). Gospodarka nieoficjalna w systemie zarządzania państwem. In: E. Gołębiowska & K. Raczkowski (eds.), Zarządzanie - nowe perspektywy. Przedsiębiorczość i Zarządzanie. Wydawnictwo Społecznej Akademii Nauk, XIV(8), 347-363.
  • Schneider, F. & Raczkowski, K. (2013). Size and development of the shadow economy and of tax evasion within Poland and of its neighbouring countries from 2003 to 2013: some new facts. In: K. Raczkowski & F. Schneider (eds.), The Economic Security of Business Transactions. Management in Business. Oxford: Chartridge Books Oxford, 3-31.
  • Sedikides, C., Herbst, K.C., Hardin, D.P. & Dardis, G.J. (2002). Accountability as a deterrent to self-enhancement: the search for mechanisms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 592-605.
  • Schumpeter, J. (1936). Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
  • Schwartz, M.S. & Carroll, A.B. (2003). Corporate social responsibility: A three domain approach. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(4), 503-530.
  • Sinclair, P. & Walton, J. (2003). Environmental Reporting within the forest and paper industry. Business Strategy and the Environment, 12, 326-337.
  • Slywotzky, A.J. (1996). Value Migration. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
  • Stewart, D.W. & Zhao, Q. (2000). Internet marketing, business models, and public policy. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 19(2), 287-296.
  • Stieb, J.A. (2009). Assessing Freeman's stakeholder theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(3), 401-414.
  • Sułkowski, Ł., Fijałkowska, J. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and intellectual capital interaction and voluntary disclosure. Studia Ekonomiczne. Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Katowicach, 150(150), 60-75.
  • Sułkowski, Ł. (2014). Paradygmat krytyczny organizacji i zarządzania. In: Ł. Sułkowski & M. Zawadzki (eds.), Krytyczny nurt zarządzania. Warszawa: Difin.
  • Timmers, P. (1998). Business models for electronic markets. Electron Commercial Europe, 8 (April), 1-6.
  • The Economist (2005). The World According to CSR: Good Corporate Citizens Believe That Capitalism Is Wicked But Redeemable. The Good Company: A Survey of Corporate Social Responsibility, January 22, 1-24.
  • Viscio, A.J. & Pasternack, B.A. (1996). Toward a new business model. Strategy and Business Global Commercial Consulting Firm, 2(1), 125-134.
  • Visser, W. (2005). Revisiting Carroll's CSR pyramid: An african perspective, in E. Rahbek & M. Huniche. Corporate Citizenship in a Development Perspective. http://www.waynevisser.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/article_africa_pyramid_wvisser.pdf.
  • Visser, W. (2008). CSR 2.0: The New Era of Corporate Sustainability and Responsibility. CSR Inspiration Series No. 1. Published online by CSR International. http://www.csrinternational.org (access: 20.04.2016).
  • Visser, W. (2010). CSR 2.0 the evolution and revolution of corporate social responsibility. In: M. Pohl & N. Tolhurst (eds.), Responsible Business: How to Manage a CSR Strategy Successfully. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Visser, W. (2012). The future of CSR: Towards transformative CSR, or CSR 2.0. Kaleidoscope Futures Paper Series, 1, 1-17.
  • Voelpel, S.C., Leibold, M. & Eden, B.T. (2004). The wheel of business model reinvention: How to reshape your business model to leapfrog competitors. Journal of Change Management, 4(3), 259-276.
  • Waddock, S.A. & Graves, S.B. (1997). Quality of management and quality of stakeholder relations: Are they synonymous? Business and Society, 36, 250-279.
  • Weill, P. & Vitale, M.R. (2001). Place to Space. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
  • Willard, P. (2005). The Next Sustainability Wave: Building Boardroom Buy-in (Conscientious Commerce). New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island, Canada.
  • [WBCSD] World Business Council for Sustainable Development and SNV Netherlands Development Organization (2008). Inclusive Business: Profitable Business for Successful Development. http://www.wbcsd.org/ (access: 12.04.2016 ).
  • Yunus, M. (2008). A World Without Poverty: Social Business and the Future of Capitalism. New York, NY: Public Affairs.
  • Yunus, M. (2010). Building Social Business. New York, NY: Public Affairs.
  • Zott, C. & Amit, R. (2007). Business model design and the performance of entrepreneurial firms. Organizati Science, 18, 181-199.
Typ dokumentu
Bibliografia
Identyfikator YADDA
bwmeta1.element.ekon-element-000171447228

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Musisz być zalogowany aby pisać komentarze.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.