Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Was Friedman Right? Moving Towards Strategic CSR Agenda

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Dynamics of Corporate Social Responsibility

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

  • 2959 Accesses

Abstract

The business of business is business. This statement describes what businesses do quite well, although in a very simplified fashion, which was Milton Friedman’s standpoint on the purpose of firm’s existence. Being a management scholar it is hard not to agree with it, even if you are not a radical liberal. For decades, however, corporate social responsibility (CSR), one of the oldest and most controversial concepts in management science, has been held in opposition to profit-making goals and shareholder wealth creation. Basing on a critical analysis of literature on CSR the goal of this paper is to add further insight into the debate on the strategic role of the concept in today’s companies.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
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.

    Articles that have term “corporate social responsibility ” in the title, keywords or abstract. The search was conducted on June 28, 2015.

  2. 2.

    More on ecomagination: http://invent.ge/1k9lUYT (Accessed June 28, 2015).

References

  • Andriof, J., & Waddock, S. (2002). Unfolding stakeholder engagement. In J. Andriof, S. Waddock, B. Husted, & S. Rahman (Eds.), Unfolding stakeholder thinking: Theory, responsibility and engagement (pp. 19–42). Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayuso, S., Rodríguez, M. A., García-Castro, R., & Ariño, M. A. (2011). Does stakeholder engagement promote sustainable innovation orientation? Industrial Management and Data Systems, 111(9), 1399–1417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, P. (2014). Plenary session: Growing society sustainably. In Sustainability Science Congress 2014. Copenhagen. Accessed June 30, 2015, from http://bit.ly/1Jus47G

  • Barnea, A., & Rubin, A. (2010). Corporate social responsibility as a conflict between shareholders. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(1), 71–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustainable competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17(2), 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, D. P. (2001). Private politics, corporate social responsibility, and integrated strategy. Journal of Economic Management Strategy, 10(1), 7–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borghesi, R., Houston, J. F., & Naranjo, A. (2014). Corporate socially responsible investments: CEO altruism, reputation, and shareholder interests. Journal of Corporate Finance, 26, 164–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouty, I. (2000). Interpersonal and interaction influences on informal resource exchanges between R&D researchers across organizational boundaries. The Academy of Management Journal, 4(1), 50–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, H. (1953). Social responsibilities of the businessman. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broomhill, R. (2007). Corporate social responsibility: Key issues and debates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, L., & Logsdon, J. M. (1996). How corporate social responsibility pays off. Long Range Planning, 29(4), 495–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1979). Three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. The Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1991). The Pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1998). The four faces of corporate citizenship. Business and Society Review, 100–101, 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1999). Evolution of a definitional construct. Business and Society, 38(3), 268–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi, C. J., & Lee, S. H. (1997). A knowledge-based view of cooperative inter-organizational relationships. In P. W. Beamish & J. P. Killing (Eds.), Cooperative strategies: European perspectives (pp. 195–219). San Francisco: New Lexington Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • COM. (2011). COM(2011) 681, 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, Brussels. Accessed June 22, 2014, from http://bit.ly/1yAbfQZ

  • Crane, A., Matten, D., McWilliams, A., Moon, J., & Siegel, D. S. (2008). The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlsrud, A. (2008). How corporate social responsibility is defined: An analysis of 37 definitions. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 15, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K. (1960). Can business afford to ignore social responsibilities? California Management Review, 2(3), 70–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doane, D. (2005). The Myth of CSR. Stanford Social Innovation Review. Accessed June 27, 2015, from http://bit.ly/1GDeUOu

  • Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. The Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2011). Corporate social responsibility and competitive advantage: Overcoming the trust barrier. Management Science, 57(9), 1528–1545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyer, J. H., & Singh, H. (1998). The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 660–679.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faust, C. (2006). What’s wrong with corporate social responsibility? (Corporate Watch Report 2006). Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, P., & Jones, M. T. (2013). The end of corporate social responsibility. Crisis and critique. London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. (1999). Divergent stakeholder theory. The Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 233–236.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. (2001). Stakeholder theory of the modern corporation. In L. P. Hartma (Ed.), Perspectives in business ethics (pp. 171–181). Boston: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. (2010). Strategic management—A stakeholder approach Kindle Edi. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E., & McVea, J. (2001). A stakeholder approach to strategic management (Working Paper, No. 1-2). Darden Graduate School of Business Administration, University of Virginia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E., & Reed, D. L. (1983). Stockholders and stakeholders: A new perspective on corporate governance. California Management Review, 25(3), 88–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E., & Velamuri, S. R. (2008). A new approach to CSR: Company stakeholder responsibility. SSRN Electronic Journal. Accessed July 7, 2014, from http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1186223

  • Freeman, R. E., Wicks, A. C., & Parmar, B. (2004). Stakeholder theory an “the corporate objective revisited”. Organisation Science, 15(3), 364–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garriga, E., & Melé, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1/2), 51–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graafland, J., & Mazereeuw-Van der Duijn Schouten, C. (2012). Motives for corporate social responsibility. De Economist, 160(4), 377–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grayson, D., & Hodges, A. (2004). Corporate social opportunity!: 7 Steps to make corporate social responsibility work for your business. Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, M. (2007). Stakeholder engagement: Beyond the myth of corporate responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 74(4), 315–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, J. (2005). Investing in corporate social responsibility. A guide to best practice, business panning & the UK’s leading companies. London: Kogan Page Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. L. (1995). A natural resource based view of the firm. The Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 986–1014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, D. (2001). Misguided virtue: False notions of corporate social responsibility. Wellington: New Zealand Business Roundtable.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hienerth, C., Keinz, P., & Lettl, C. (2011). Exploring the nature and implementation process of user-centric business models. Long Range Planning, 44(5–6), 344–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, S., & Smart, P. (2009). Exploring open innovation practice in firm-nonprofit engagements: A corporate social responsibility perspective. R&D Management, 39(4), 394–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horrigan, B. (2010). Corporate social responsibility in the 21st century: Debates, models and practices across government, law and business. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Howe, J. (2008). Crowdsourcing: Why the power of the crowd is driving the future of business. New York: Crown Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husted, B. W., & Allen, D. B. (2007). Strategic corporate social responsibility and value creation among large firms. Lessons from the Spanish experience. Long Range Planning, 40(6), 594–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Husted, B. W., & de Salazar, J. (2006). Taking Friedman seriously: Maximizing profits and social performance. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 75–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ISO. (2013). ISO 26000:2013. Guidance on social responsibility.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jamali, D., Safieddine, A. M., & Rabbath, M. (2008). Corporate governance and corporate social responsibility synergies and interrelationships. Corporate Governance: An International Review, 16(5), 443–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, H. A. (1971). Business in contemporary society: Framework and issues. Belmont: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kale, P., Singh, H., & Perlmutter, H. (2000). Learning and protection of proprietary assets in strategic alliances: Building relational capital. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 217–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanter, R. M. (1999). From spare change to real change: The social sector as beta site for business innovation. Harvard Business Review, 77(3).

    Google Scholar 

  • Karnani, A. (2011a). CSR stuck in a logical trap. California Management Review, 53(2), 105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karnani, A. (2011b). “Doing well by doing good”: The grand illusion. California Management Review, 53(2), 69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lantos, G. P. (2002). The ethicality of altruistic corporate social responsibility. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 19(3), 205–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laszlo, C. (2005). The sustainable company: How to create lasting value through social and environmental performance. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lettice, F., & Parekh, M. (2010). The social innovation process: Themes, challenges and implications for practice. International Journal of Technology Management, 51(1), 139–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Litz, R. A. (1996). A resource-based-view of the socially responsible firm: Stakeholder interdependence, ethical awareness, and issue responsiveness as strategic assets. Journal of Business Ethics, 15(12), 1355–1363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lockett, A., Moon, J., & Visser, W. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in management research: Focus, nature, salience and sources of influence. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 115–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, X., & Du, S. (2014, May). Exploring the relationship between corporate social responsibility and firm innovation. Marketing Letters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macgregor, S. P., & Fontrodona, J. (2008). Exploring the fit between CSR and innovation (Working Paper, WP-759). Centre of Business in the Society, IESE Business School, University of Navarra.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, J. D., & Walsh, J. P. (2003). Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 268–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matten, D., & Crane, A. (2005). Corporate citizenship: Towards an extended theoretical conceptualization. The Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 166–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matten, D., Crane, A., & Chapple, W. (2003). Behind the mask: Revealing the true face of corporate citizenship. Journal of Business Ethics, 45, 109–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2000). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance: Correlation or misspecification? Strategic Management Journal, 21(5), 603–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. S. (2011). Creating and capturing value: Strategic corporate social responsibility, resource-based theory, and sustainable competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 37(5), 1480–1495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, P. M. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: Strategic implications. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. The Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mullerat, R. (2010). International corporate social responsibility: The role of corporations in the economic order of the 21st century. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neville, B. A., & Bulent, M. (2006). Stakeholder multiplicity: Toward an understanding of the interactions between stakeholders. Journal of Business Ethics, 66, 377–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nidumolu, R., Prahalad, C. K., & Rangaswami, M. R. (2009). Why sustainability is now the key driver of innovation (pp. 56–64). September: Harvard Business Review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen, E. R. (2006). Making corporate social responsibility (CSR) operable: How companies translate stakeholder dialogue into practice. Business and Society Review, 111(2), 137–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrini, F., Pogutz, S., & Tencani, A. (2006). Developing corporate social responsibility: A European perspective. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2002). The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy. Harvard Business Review, 80, 56–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84, 78–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 89, 62–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K. (2006). Fortune at the bottom of the pyramid: Eradicating poverty through profits. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Wharton School Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renneboog, L., Ter Horst, J., & Zhang, C. (2008). Socially responsible investments: Institutional aspects, performance, and investor behavior. Journal of Banking and Finance, 32(9), 1723–1742.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roszkowska-Śliż, M., & Szumniak-Samolej, J. (2013). Społeczna odpowiedzialność biznesu w czasach hiperarchii i globalnej współpracy. In P. Płoszajski (Ed.), Społeczna odpowiedzialność biznesu w nowej gospodarce. Warszawa: Oficyna Wydawnicza SGH.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowley, T. J. (1997). Moving beyond dyadic ties: A network theory of stakeholder influences. The Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 887–910.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russo, M. V., & Fouts, P. A. (1997). A resource-based perspective on corporate environmental performance and profitability. The Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 534–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Korschun, D. (2006). The role of corporate social responsibility in strengthening multiple stakeholder relationships: A field experiment. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 158–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, E. (1999). The stakeholder concept: A mistaken doctrine. London: Foundation for Business Responsibilities. Available at: http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=263144

  • Sternberg, E. (2000). Just business (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stout, L. (2012). The shareholder value myth: How putting shareholders first harms investors, corporations and the public. San Fransisco: Berrett-Kohler Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Surroca, J., Tribo, J. A., & Waddock, S. (2009). Corporate responsibility and financial performance: The role of intangible resources. Strategic Management Journal, 31(5), 463–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital: The rise of net generation. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tapscott, D., & Ticoll, D. (2003). The naked corporation: How the age of transparency will revolutionize business. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tapscott, D., & Williams, A. D. (2006). Wikinomics: How mass collaboration changes everything: everything else. Penguin Group. Accessed June 24, 2014, from http://www.amazon.com/Wikinomics-Mass-Collaboration-Changes-Everything/dp/B00KEBXO8A/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1403646611&sr=8-7&keywords=wikinomics

  • Tidd, J., & Bessant, J. (2011). Zarządzanie innowacjami. Integracja zmian technologicznych, rynkowych i organizacyjnych. Warszawa: Wolters Kluwers Polska.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Marrewijk, M. (2003). Concepts and definitions of CSR and corporate sustainability: Between agency and communion. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2–3), 95–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Marrewijk, M., & Werre, M. (2003). Multiple levels of corporate sustainability. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2–3), 107–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vilanova, M., Lozano, J. M., & Arenas, D. (2008). Exploring the nature of the relationship between CSR and competitiveness. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(S1), 57–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Visser, W. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and the individual. A literature review. Cambridge Programme for Sustainability Leadership Paper Series, No. 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Visser, W. (2012). The age of responsibility: CSR 2.0 and the new DNA of business. London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Hippel, E. (2005). Democratizing innovation: Users take center stage. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. A., Bodwell, C., & Graves, S. B. (2002). Responsibility: The new business imperative. The Academy of Management Executive, 16(2), 132–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wartick, S. L., & Cochran, P. L. (1985). The evolution of the corporate social performance model. The Academy of Management Review, 10(4), 758–769.

    Google Scholar 

  • WCED. (1987). WCED A/RES/42/187. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. Accessed October 15, 2014, from http://bit.ly/1edhCnc

  • Wood, D. J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. The Academy of Management Review, 16(4), 691–718.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yunus, M. (2007). Creating a world without poverty: Social business and the future of capitalism. New York: Public Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Warsaw School of Economics, Warszawa, Poland

    Maria Roszkowska-Menkes

Authors
  1. Maria Roszkowska-Menkes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria Roszkowska-Menkes .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept of Management Theory, Warsaw School of Economics, Warsaw, Poland

    Maria Aluchna

  2. London Metropolitan University, London Guildhall Faculty Business & Law, London, United Kingdom

    Samuel O. Idowu

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Roszkowska-Menkes, M. (2017). Was Friedman Right? Moving Towards Strategic CSR Agenda. In: Aluchna, M., Idowu, S. (eds) The Dynamics of Corporate Social Responsibility. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39089-5_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation