I

Abstract

Implementation is a basic concept that discriminates between intentions, plans and norms on one side and actual reality and outcomes on the other side: implementation is the whole process that describes what happens between intentions and outcomes. The subtitle of the basic book on this subject is most telling: “How Great Expectations in Washington Are Dashed in Oakland [2]. Applying the concept of implementation to CSR implies that statements of intent have little meaning within the realm of CSR and CSR reporting. What matters is the implementation of actions and policies. On a theoretical plane, implementation is a practical way to talk about the difference between normative and positive behavior. For example, crimes occur in companies with a strict code of ethics. Implementation teaches us that we should not be scandalized because codes of ethics are in the normative sphere while we should be looking as close to reality as possible through measures of impact and outcome. Implementation is the value that best describes the degree of influence of the managerial paradigm in the agenda setting and general discourse in modern societies. Modern societies are studied and influenced through three large scale areas of investigation or paradigms: political science, law and the managerial paradigm, including at least economics, sociology and the specific managerial sciences such as marketing, and public relations. Looking at modern societies at large and how little implementation and outcomes are taken into account, it can be realized how the managerial paradigm is squeezed between politics and law. Finally, implementation can be part of a process framework for managing and reporting about CSR. Such a framework would include attention to the disclosure of organizational issues, to individual responsibilities within the organization (ethics) and the stewardship of unaware stakeholders (“unknown” stakeholders) [1].