Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Corporate Social Responsibility: A Theoretical Overview

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Corporate Social Responsibility and Discrimination

Part of the book series: CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance ((CSEG))

  • 2056 Accesses

Abstract

Discrimination at its core is a dilemma of legal and ethical nature in organizational practice. For organizations, discrimination certainly incurs questions of compliance with norms set by society. It touches also upon fundamental questions of the assumption and consciousness of responsibility beyond legal constraints within one’s scope of power. In the following, an introduction to the theoretical concept of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) will be provided in order to later connect CSR theory to the topical issue of gender discrimination.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Garriga and Melé (2004), p 52ff; Campbell (2007).

  2. 2.

    Beesley and Evans (1978), p 13.

  3. 3.

    Van Marrewijk (2003), p 102ff.

  4. 4.

    Boyd (1996), p 167ff; Dnes (2005), p 411.

  5. 5.

    Edelman and Suchman (1997), p 479ff.

  6. 6.

    A fear rooted in the ideological juxtaposition of the socialist and capitalist systems in the political context of these publications in the 1960s and 1970s. Friedman (1970), http://www.ethicsinbusiness.net/case-studies/the-social-responsibility-of-business-is-to-increase-its-profits/

  7. 7.

    Friedman (1970), http://www.ethicsinbusiness.net/case-studies/the-social-responsibility-of-business-is-to-increase-its-profits/

  8. 8.

    Donaldson (1982), p 1.

  9. 9.

    Livingston (1982), p 5ff.

  10. 10.

    Kaptein (2004), p 13ff.

  11. 11.

    Kaptein (2004), p 14.

  12. 12.

    Kaptein (2004), p 14.

  13. 13.

    Walton (1967), p 198; Snider (2003), p 183ff; Tencati et al. (2004), p 174.

  14. 14.

    Friedman (1970), http://www.ethicsinbusiness.net/case-studies/the-social-responsibility-of-business-is-to-increase-its-profits/

  15. 15.

    Friedman (1970), ibid.

  16. 16.

    Broadhurst (2000), p 95; Boyd (1996), p 168.

  17. 17.

    Broadhurst (2000), p 87.

  18. 18.

    Van Marrewijk (2003), p 101.

  19. 19.

    Crowther (2004), p 236ff.

  20. 20.

    Dahlsrud (2008), p 6ff.

  21. 21.

    Van Marrewijk (2003), p 101.

  22. 22.

    Tencati et al. (2004), p 176.

  23. 23.

    Bowen (2013), p 6.

  24. 24.

    Davis (1973), p 312ff.

  25. 25.

    Carroll (1999), p 279.

  26. 26.

    Carroll (1999), p 276.

  27. 27.

    Carroll (1999), p 271f.

  28. 28.

    Carroll (1999), p 279.

  29. 29.

    Sethi (1975), p 58ff.

  30. 30.

    Jones (1980), p 59f.

  31. 31.

    Davis (1973), p 313.

  32. 32.

    Carroll (1999), p 275.

  33. 33.

    Walton (1967), p 18.

  34. 34.

    Jones (1980), p 59f.

  35. 35.

    Carroll (1999), p 280.

  36. 36.

    Eilbert and Parket (1973), p 7.

  37. 37.

    Garriga and Melé (2004), p 66ff.

  38. 38.

    As quoted in 1971: “A large corporation these days not only may engage in social responsibility, it had damn well better try to do so.” Carroll (1999), p 277.

  39. 39.

    Fitch (1976), p. 38ff.

  40. 40.

    Epstein (1987), p 104.

  41. 41.

    Carroll (1999), p 273f.

  42. 42.

    Donaldson and Dunfee (1994), p 259f.

  43. 43.

    Logsdon and Yuthas (1997), p 1213.

  44. 44.

    Carroll (1999), p 274.

  45. 45.

    Carroll (1999), p 274.

  46. 46.

    Carroll (1999), p 275.

  47. 47.

    Drucker (1984).

  48. 48.

    Frederick (1960), p 60.

  49. 49.

    Walton (1967), p 18.

  50. 50.

    Carroll (1999), p 273f.

  51. 51.

    Carroll (1999), p 274.

  52. 52.

    Jones (1980), p 65.

  53. 53.

    Dahlsrud (2008), p 4ff; European Commission (2011b), http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sustainable-business/corporate-social-responsibility/index_en.htm

  54. 54.

    Carroll (1991), p 43.

  55. 55.

    Carroll (1979), p 500.

  56. 56.

    Carroll (1991), pp 40ff.

  57. 57.

    Carroll (1999), p 289.

  58. 58.

    Carroll (1991), p 42f.

  59. 59.

    Carroll (1999), p 284.

  60. 60.

    Carroll (1999), p 289.

  61. 61.

    Carroll (1999), p 284.

References

  • Donaldson T (1982) Corporations and morality. Prentice Hall College Div, Frederick, MD

    Google Scholar 

  • Walton CC (1967) Corporate social responsibilities. Murmann, Hamburg

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd D (1996) Ethics and corporate governance: the issues raised by the Cadbury report in the United Kingdom. J Bus Ethics 15(2):167–182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell JL (2007) Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Acad Manag Rev 32(3):946–967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll AB (1979) A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Acad Manag Rev 4(4):497–505

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll AB (1991) The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Bus Horiz 34(4):39–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll AB (1999) Corporate social responsibility: evolution of a definitional construct. Bus Soc 38(3):268–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalton DR, Cosier RA (1982) The four faces of social responsibility. Bus Horiz 25(3):19–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis K (1973) The case for and against business assumption of social responsibilities. Acad Manag J 16:312–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dobbin F, Jung J (2011) Corporate board gender diversity and stock performance: the competence gap or institutional investor bias? N C Law Rev 89(3):809–838

    Google Scholar 

  • Donnell SM, Hall J (1980) Men and women as managers: a significant case of no significant difference. Organ Dyn 8(4):60–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drucker PF (1984) The new meaning of corporate social responsibility. Calif Manag Rev 26(2):53–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards AL (1950) On “The use and misuse of the chi-square test”—the case of the 2 × 2 contingency table. Psychol Bull 47(4):341–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt KM (1989) Agency theory: an assessment and review. Acad Manag Rev 14(1):57–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Erhardt NL, Werbel JD, Shrader CB (2003) Board of director diversity and firm financial performance. Corp Govern 11(2):102–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foote D (2001) The question of ethical hypocrisy in human resource management in the U.K. and IRISH charity sectors. J Bus Ethics 34:25–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frederick WC (1960) The growing concern over business responsibility. Calif Manag Rev 2:54–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones TM (1980) Corporate social responsibility revisited, redefined. Calif Manag Rev 22(3):59–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaptein M, Avelino S (2005) Measuring corporate integrity: a survey-based approach. Corp Govern 5(1):45–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Logsdon JM, Yuthas K (1997) Corporate social performance, stakeholder orientation, and organizational moral development. J Bus Ethics 16(12–13):1213–1226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lorbiecki A, Jack G (2000) Critical turns in the evolution of diversity management. Br J Manag 11:17–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sethi SP (1975) Dimensions of corporate social performance: an analytic frame-work. Calif Manag Rev 17:58–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tencati A, Perrini F, Pogutz S (2004) New tools to foster corporate socially responsible behavior. J Bus Ethics 53:173–190

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Marrewijk M (2003) Concepts and definitions of CSR and corporate sustainability: between agency and communion. J Bus Ethics 44:95–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2011b) Enterprise and industry: corporate social responsibility (CSR), new European policy. http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sustainable-business/corporate-social-responsibility/index_en.htm

  • Friedman M (1970) The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine, 13 September, to be retrieved in a version commented by Craig P. Dunn at http://www.ethicsinbusiness.net/case-studies/the-social-responsibility-of-business-is-to-increase-its-profits/

  • Garriga E, Melé D (2004) Corporate social responsibility theories: mapping the territory. J Bus Ethics 53(1):51–711

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beesley ME, Evans T (1978) Corporate social responsibility: a reassessment. Croom Helm, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Snider J, Hill RP, Martin D (2003) Corporate social responsibility in the 21st century: a view from the world’s most successful firms. J Bus Ethics 48:175–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broadhurst AI (2000) Corporations and the ethics of social responsibility: an emerging regime of expansion and compliance. Bus Ethics: Eur Rev 9(2):86–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crowther D (2004) Perspectives on corporate social responsibility. Ashgate Publishing, England

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowen HR Social responsibilities of the businessman 2013 University of Iowa Faculty Connections (monograph)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria

    Christina Keinert-Kisin

Authors
  1. Christina Keinert-Kisin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Keinert-Kisin, C. (2016). Corporate Social Responsibility: A Theoretical Overview. In: Corporate Social Responsibility and Discrimination. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29158-1_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation