Debate On Corporate Social Responsibility †MyAssignmenthelp.com

Question: Discuss about the Debate On Corporate Social Responsibility. Answer: The term corporate social responsibility may be defined as the duty that every organization has towards the welfare of the society. Every employers and managers should take into consideration about the long term interest of the company as well as the relationship shred by the company with the society. Often a new concept that has come into the recent modern method of doing business is considering the term of sustainability (Tai Chuang 2014). A socially responsible organization will outperform their rivals by concentrating more on the societys problems and thereby seeing them as opportunities for profit building and thereby helping the nation as well. In spite if a large number of benefits observed when an organization adopts corporate social responsibility, there are critics who speak against it positive aspects (Suliman et al. 2016). The following essay will mainly describe an argument for and against the topic which would be following by deriving the right conclusion form the disc ussion for benefit of the nation. Critics who like to oppose the topic state that business enterprises mainly have the reasonability to develop strategies for economic viability of the operations. They state that the responsibility of the government is to look after the interest of the activities going on in the society. They believe that not the organizations but the government should take the job of social responsibility in hands and realize the burden off the business enterprises. Such critics also suggest that the entire concept is a relative thing and therefore it is not suitable to spend time, finance and man power on the concept (Clapp and Rowlands 2014). The various questions that they arise to deter the main concept of the CSR are like what would be the proper measures of social responsibility and what would b the right extent of the business to engage itself in it. They also remain confuse about how much resources should be allocated for it, who would be set as the one with the main interest from this. Seve ral questions are often opened to subjective considerations which often make the task of implementing social corporate responsibility as the difficult task. Thirdly, when any type of social benefit program is incorporated, if initial cost exceeds the benefits the entire program, it might not be taken by the organizations even in short run. Often the mangers that are taken in the company by judging their aptitudes in management of teams, sales or services, may bring benefit to the productivity, of the organization and therefore they may be of great benefit to the organization (Salib et al. 2015). However, it might happen that such an expert manager may not handle social problems well. Often many unwilling countries take part in sub-optimal utilization of resources. By this statement it is meant that organizations who just engage themselves in corporate social responsibility without the real motive of doing well for the society usually allocate scarce resources for utilization of meet ing the social goals. This ultimately hampers the very purpose of the existence of the organization. The most negative factor aspect about the social corporate responsibility is that often high resources are required for implementing programs which are actually compensated by the organizations by increasing the prices of goods and their services (McWilliams 2014). Moreover they also try to meet the excess of the expenditure for the corporate social responsibility by decreasing the wage of the workers which results in job dissatisfaction, unrest in workplace and strong negative feelings of the workplace. It also leads to another big issues if the employers try to act ethically by keeping the price of the products same as before or by correctly paying the amounts of the salary to the workers. The main issue is all these affect the profits of the organization as a huge portion of the profit is spent on maintaining the programs for corporate social responsibility. A very good example can be provided here. In the year 2007, food retailer Woolworth could not see the face of profit. In the year, initially they had established a project called the Fresh Food Future program helping in enhancing the sustainability of the Australian agriculture. They helped to safeguard Australias; food security. They had to spend huge amount of money for this implementation. Of the A$9m (4.8m), which is spent in the five years to complete the fiscal year 2013, two thirds were invested into 180 farm for adoption of the innovative farming technologies. The others are spent for the investment in developing talent and leadership in agricultural so that the aging force can be circumvented (Hombert et al. 2014). Therefore it can be seen here that the organization could not manage the profit level it should have done as the maintenance of the goals of CSR lead to huge flow of resources (Cheng et al. 2014). Another Indian brand called the Oil and natural Gas corporation was to be supposed to pay 660crores for their CSR initiatives but failed to pay it. They paid 495 crores. They could not spend the allocated amount as most of their projects were in the transition phase. Therefore as the total amount could not be paid, their attempt to provide a full proof social development plan lacked completion and better outcomes. In order to support corporate social responsibility, several points can also be jotted down. Often worker force forms unions through unity and thereby demand for their protection of the rights form business and enterprises. In order to get support from the employees, organizations need to discharge responsibilities towards the employees. Nowadays, consumers are intelligent and they only buy products that they want to buy. They can never buys whichever product is offered to him but only takes them which he wants himself. Organizations that cannot satisfy them are closed. The sovereignty enjoyed by the consumers has made the organizations provide importance to social responsiveness (Korschun et al. 2014). Although this may lead to short term expenditure but in long term they bring in long run profitability properly fulfilling social obligations. Secondly, it is also seen that companies who care for the society become some of the powerful institutions of the society. Their acceptance by the society may become denied if they ignore any sort of social problems. Therefore very business organizations should assume social responsibility in the long run to avoid any sort of self destruction. When organizations have good managers, they can motivate the workers with increase in the level of educate and understanding of the business so that they can understand a good fact. The fact is that the organizations itself is the creations of the society and this will help the workers to e motivated for cause of social good. Such managers can rightly match up with the public expectations voluntarily setting an following standards or moral and social responsibility (Zentes et al. 2017). They can ensure that paying of taxes to the government, far wages to the workers, dividends to the shareholders and quality goods to the consumers and so on. Another reason which states the importance of CSR by organizations is to avoid any legal obligations. Government plays a direct part by influen cing through the organizations and advice them about what to do and what not to do. Different examples include central pollution board of a nation looks over the pollution done by organization, another laws look over the investor protection, others about the employees health or so. Non compliance with them may lead the organizations to heavy penalties. In order to avoid hem, organizations can take up activities to meet the social requirement and thereby can meet up the social concerns (Takkar et al. 2015). Moreover business are the creations of the society and therefore they also have a duty to protect their creator by proper flow of finances and allocation of resources in the best interests if the society. Growing professionalisms are contributing to social orientation of the business. Increasing of the professionalisms is making the managers develop knowledge about the formal management education and qualification. Such managers also get specialized in planning, organizing, leadin g and controlling through their knowledge. They also contribute to the code of ethics established by recognized body (Lins et al. 2017). This ethics of profession is helping managers to social value development which makes them concerned about society. Such managers in good business help in anticipating the developments and accordingly act in accordance with the currently conceived social responsibilities so that the future targets can be achieved. Many issues in the present society are created by business of today and therefore it becomes their duty to correct them. An organization which has gained huge name for their CSR is Sony Australia (Serves and Toamayo 2017). They have gone beyond their limits and have produced many important programs like a science venture for budding children, campaigned to raise awareness of the sustainable development goals, green 2020, diversity and inclusion that regarded values, developed projects for forest conservation in Sumatra. Therefore coming to the conclusion, it is evident that corporate social responsibility should be performed by every organization existing in the society as they have taken birth form the society and for the society. This would help the organization to compensate for the different harms they are doing to the environment starting form pollution to destruction of the greens and many others. Although many arguably produce negative points but the positive aspects have better outcomes for the society than the negative aspects. A share from the companys profit for overcoming the harms to nature and also protecting the likes and sovereignty of the customers, the social responsibility program will help in establishing a balance which will be enjoyed by both organizations and the consumers as a whole. References: Cheng, B., Ioannou, I. and Serafeim, G., 2014. Corporate social responsibility and access to finance.Strategic Management Journal,35(1), pp.1-23. Clapp, J. and Rowlands, I.H., 2014. Corporate social responsibility.The Essential Guide to Global Environmental Governance. Routledge: London, pp.42-44. Hombert, J., Thesmar, D., Tahoun, A., Piotroski, J.D., Zhang, T., Lim, J., Minton, B.A. and Weisbach, M.S., 2014. Using the firm-level corporate social responsibility (CSR) ratings of Kinder, Lydenberg, Domini, we find that firms score higher on CSR when they have Democratic rather than Republican founders, CEOs, and directors, and when they are headquartered in Democratic rather than Republican-leaning states. Democratic-leaning firms spend $20 million more on CSR than Republican-leaning firms ($80 million more...Journal of Financial Economics,111(1), pp.158-180. Korschun, D., Bhattacharya, C.B. and Swain, S.D., 2014. Corporate social responsibility, customer orientation, and the job performance of frontline employees.Journal of Marketing,78(3), pp.20-37. Lins, K.V., Servaes, H. and Tamayo, A., 2017. Social capital, trust, and firm performance: The value of corporate social responsibility during the financial crisis.The Journal of Finance. McWilliams, A., 2014.Economics of Corporate Social Responsibility. Edward Elgar Publishing. Salib, J., Sun, D., Wu, J., Wen, X. and Huang, C.C., 2015. Corporate Social Responsibility. Servaes, H. and Tamayo, A., 2013. The impact of corporate social responsibility on firm value: The role of customer awareness.Management Science,59(5), pp.1045-1061. Suliman, A.M., Al-Khatib, H.T. and Thomas, S.E., 2016. Corporate Social Responsibility.Corporate Social Performance: Reflecting on the Past and Investing in the Future, p.15. Tai, F.M. and Chuang, S.H., 2014. Corporate social responsibility.Ibusiness,6(03), p.117. Takkar, K., 2015. Corporate social responsibility.International Journal of Research in Economics and Social Sciences,5(8), pp.297-302. Zentes, J., Morschett, D. and Schramm-Klein, H., 2017. Corporate social responsibility. InStrategic Retail Management(pp. 207-226). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden.