Advertisement

Corporate Social Responsibility: A Theoretical Overview

  • Christina Keinert-Kisin
Chapter
Part of the CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance book series (CSEG)

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.

Keywords

Corporate Social Responsibility Social Responsibility Sexual Harassment Corporate Social Responsibility Activity Corporate Responsibility 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Donaldson T (1982) Corporations and morality. Prentice Hall College Div, Frederick, MDGoogle Scholar
  2. Walton CC (1967) Corporate social responsibilities. Murmann, HamburgGoogle Scholar
  3. Boyd D (1996) Ethics and corporate governance: the issues raised by the Cadbury report in the United Kingdom. J Bus Ethics 15(2):167–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Campbell JL (2007) Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Acad Manag Rev 32(3):946–967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carroll AB (1979) A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Acad Manag Rev 4(4):497–505Google Scholar
  6. Carroll AB (1991) The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Bus Horiz 34(4):39–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carroll AB (1999) Corporate social responsibility: evolution of a definitional construct. Bus Soc 38(3):268–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dalton DR, Cosier RA (1982) The four faces of social responsibility. Bus Horiz 25(3):19–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Davis K (1973) The case for and against business assumption of social responsibilities. Acad Manag J 16:312–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 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):809–838Google Scholar
  11. Donnell SM, Hall J (1980) Men and women as managers: a significant case of no significant difference. Organ Dyn 8(4):60–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Drucker PF (1984) The new meaning of corporate social responsibility. Calif Manag Rev 26(2):53–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 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):341–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Eisenhardt KM (1989) Agency theory: an assessment and review. Acad Manag Rev 14(1):57–74Google Scholar
  15. Erhardt NL, Werbel JD, Shrader CB (2003) Board of director diversity and firm financial performance. Corp Govern 11(2):102–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Foote D (2001) The question of ethical hypocrisy in human resource management in the U.K. and IRISH charity sectors. J Bus Ethics 34:25–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Frederick WC (1960) The growing concern over business responsibility. Calif Manag Rev 2:54–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Jones TM (1980) Corporate social responsibility revisited, redefined. Calif Manag Rev 22(3):59–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kaptein M, Avelino S (2005) Measuring corporate integrity: a survey-based approach. Corp Govern 5(1):45–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Logsdon JM, Yuthas K (1997) Corporate social performance, stakeholder orientation, and organizational moral development. J Bus Ethics 16(12–13):1213–1226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lorbiecki A, Jack G (2000) Critical turns in the evolution of diversity management. Br J Manag 11:17–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sethi SP (1975) Dimensions of corporate social performance: an analytic frame-work. Calif Manag Rev 17:58–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Tencati A, Perrini F, Pogutz S (2004) New tools to foster corporate socially responsible behavior. J Bus Ethics 53:173–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Van Marrewijk M (2003) Concepts and definitions of CSR and corporate sustainability: between agency and communion. J Bus Ethics 44:95–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 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
  26. 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/
  27. Garriga E, Melé D (2004) Corporate social responsibility theories: mapping the territory. J Bus Ethics 53(1):51–711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Beesley ME, Evans T (1978) Corporate social responsibility: a reassessment. Croom Helm, LondonGoogle Scholar
  29. 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 48:175–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Broadhurst AI (2000) Corporations and the ethics of social responsibility: an emerging regime of expansion and compliance. Bus Ethics: Eur Rev 9(2):86–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Crowther D (2004) Perspectives on corporate social responsibility. Ashgate Publishing, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  32. Bowen HR Social responsibilities of the businessman 2013 University of Iowa Faculty Connections (monograph)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christina Keinert-Kisin
    • 1
  1. 1.University of ViennaViennaAustria

Personalised recommendations