Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Towards a Theory and Model of Corporate Social Responsibility and Implications for Management and Leadership Practices

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
On the (Im)Possibility of Business Ethics

Part of the book series: Issues in Business Ethics ((IBET,volume 37))

  • 1487 Accesses

Abstract

The deconstructive and complexity-inspired reading given of CSR in Chap. 5 is developed into a theory and model of CSR in this chapter. To this end, a critical investigation of the three components of CSR is presented, namely corporate identity, the nature of the relations between corporations and society (including stakeholders), and the nature of corporate responsibility. The model of CSR that is derived from this investigation depicts the different domains of CSR (namely, the environmental, social, legal, and economic domains) as embedded in one another, and differentially related to one another. It is argued that these domains are interlinked in complex ways with the corporation, which makes it impossible to conclusively define corporate responsibilities. These complexities also frustrate our attempts at managing our CSR obligations, as our current analytic tools are inadequate in dealing with these complexities. A number of management tools that can help in this regard are therefore also introduced, as is a discussion on the leadership approach and responsibilities that support the theory and model of CSR developed here.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Albert, S., B.E. Ashforth, and J.E. Dutton. 2000. Organizational identity and identification: Chartering new waters and building new bridges. Academy of Management Review 25(1): 13–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allen, P. 2001. A complex systems approach to learning, adaptive networks. International Journal of Innovation Management 5(2): 149–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Badiou, A. 2009. Pocket pantheon, trans. D. Macey. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, M.E., and L.K. Trevino. 2. Ethical leadership: A review and future directions. The Leadership Quarterly 17: 595–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burtless, G. 2009. The financial crisis and the rule of law. The Brookings Institute. Available online at: http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/2009/0414_financial_crisis_burtless.aspx

  • Carroll, A.B. 1991. The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, July-August 1991: 39–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cilliers, P. 2001. Boundaries, hierarchies & networks in complex systems. International Journal of Innovation Management 5(2): 135–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cilliers, P. 2. On the importance of a certain slowness. Emergence: Complexity and Organization 8(3): 105–112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cilliers, P. 2008. Complexity theory as a general framework for sustainability science. In Exploring sustainability science: A Southern African perspective, ed. M. Burns and A. Weaver, 38–57. Stellenbosch: African Sun Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cilliers, P. 2010. Difference, identity, and complexity. Philosophy Today, Spring 2010: 55–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colander, D., M. Goldberg, A. Haas, K. Juselius, A. Kirman, T. Lux, and B. Sloth. 2009. The financial crisis and the systemic failure of the economic profession. Critical Review 21(2–3): 249–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collier, J., and R. Esteban. 1999. Governance in the participative organisation: Freedom, creativity and ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 21: 173–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Collier, J., and R. Esteban. 2000. Systemic leadership: Ethical and effective. The Leadership and Organization Development Journal 21(4): 207–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crane, A., and D. Matten. 2004a. Business ethics: A European perspective. Managing corporate citizenship and sustainability in the age of globalisation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crane, A., and D. Matten. 2004b. Questioning the domain of the business ethics curriculum. Journal of Business Ethics 54: 357–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crane, A., and Matten, D. 2008. Ethics and the financial crisis. Crane and Matten Blog, Thursday, 18 Sept 2008. Available online at: http://craneandmatten.blogspot.com/2008/09/ethics-and-financial-crisis.html

  • Crane, A. and Matten, D. 2010. Top 10 corporate responsibility stories of 2010. Crane and Matten Blog, Monday, 13 Dec 2010. Available online at: http://craneandmatten.blogspot.com/2010/12/top-10-corporate-responsibility-stories.html

  • Derrida, J. 1988. Afterword. In Limited Inc, ed. G. Graff and trans. S. Weber, 111–160. Evanston: Northern Western University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derrida, J. 1995. “Eating well,” or the calculation of the subject. In Points… Interviews, 1974–1994, ed. E. Weber and trans. P. Kamuf, 255–287. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derrida, J. 1997. The Villanova roundtable. A conversation with Jacques Derrida. In Deconstruction in a nutshell: A conversation with Jacques Derrida, ed. J.D. Caputo, 1–30. New York: Fordham University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derrida, J. 1999. Hospitality, justice and responsibility: A dialogue with Jacques Derrida. In Questioning ethics: Contemporary debates in philosophy, ed. R. Kearney and M. Dooley, 65–83. London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derrida, J. 2002. Negotiations. In Negotiations: Interventions and interviews, 1971–2001, ed. and trans. E. Rottenberg, 11–40. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Erskine, T. 2003. Can institutions have responsibility? Collective moral agency and international relations. London: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Floridi, L. 1999. Information ethics: On the philosophical foundation of computer ethics. Ethics and Information Technology 1(1): 37–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R.E. 2008. Managing for stakeholders. In Ethical issues in business: A philosophical approach, ed. T. Donaldson and P.H. Werhane, 39–53. Upper Saddle River: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R.E., and R.A. Philips. 2002. Stakeholder theory: A libertarian defense. Business Ethics Quarterly 12: 331–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • French, P.A. 1979. Collective and corporate responsibility. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • French, P.A. 1984. The corporation as a moral person. American Philosophical Quarterly 16: 207–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. 1962. Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, A.A. 2004. Beyond mediocrity: Transformational leadership within a transactional framework. International Journal of Leadership in Education 7(3): 203–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gioia, D.A., M. Schultz, and K.G. Corley. 2000. Organizational identity, image, and adaptive instability. Academy of Management Review 25(1): 63–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grebe, E. and Woermann, M. 2011. Institutions of integrity and the integrity of institutions: Integrity and ethics in the politics of developmental leadership. Research Paper. Developmental Leadership Program. March 2011: 26–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gronn, P. 2003. The new work of educational leaders: Changing leadership practices in an era of school reform. London: Paul Chapman Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattingh, J.P. 2. The state of the art in environmental ethics as a practical enterprise: A view from the Johannesburg documents. In Environmental ethics and international policy, ed. H.A.M.J. ten Have, 191–216. Paris: UNESCO Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Homann, K. 2007. Globalisation from a business ethics point of view. In Globalisation and business ethics, ed. K. Homan, P. Koslowski, and C. Luetge, 3–10. Hampshire/Burlington: Ashgate Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hosking, D.M. 2007. Not leaders, not followers: A post-modern discourse of leadership processes. In Follower-centered perspectives on leadership: A tribute to the memory of James R. Meindl, ed. B. Shamir, R. Pillai, M. Blighand, and M. Uhl-Bien, 243–264. Greenwich: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keeley, M. 1981. Organizations as non-persons. Journal of Value Inquiry 15: 149–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keeley, M. 1988. A social-contract theory of organizations. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladd, J. 1970. Morality and the ideal of rationality in formal organizations. The Monist 54(4): 488–516.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lissack, M.R., and H. Letiche. 2002. Complexity, emergence, resilience, and coherence: Gaining perspectives on organizations and their study. Emergence 4(3): 72–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mauboussin, M.J. 2011. Embracing complexity. Harvard Business Review, September 2011: 89–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Midgley, G. 2003. Science as systemic intervention: Some implications of systems thinking and complexity for the philosophy of science. Systemic Practice and Action Research 16(2): 77–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgenson, G., and J. Rosner. 2011. Reckless endangerment: How outsized ambition, greed, and corruption led to economic Armageddon. New York: Times Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morin, E. 1999. Seven complex lessons in education for the future, trans. N. Poller. Paris: UNESCO Publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morin, E. 2007. Restricted complexity, general complexity, trans. C. Gershenson. In Worldviews, science and us: Philosophy and complexity, ed. C. Gershenson, D. Aerts, and B. Edmonds, 5–29. Singapore: World Scientific.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morin, E. 2008. On complexity, trans. S.M. Kelly. Cresskill: Hampton Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Painter-Morland, M. 2. Redefining accountability as relational responsiveness. Journal of Business Ethics 66: 89–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Painter-Morland, M. 2008. Business ethics as practice: Ethics as the everyday business of business. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Petit, P. 2007. Responsibility incorporated. Ethics 117: 171–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Polonsky, M., and C. Jevons. 2. Understanding issue complexity when building a socially responsible brand. European Business Review 18(5): 340–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, K.A., and M.R. Lissack. 2001. On the status of boundaries, both national and organizational: A complex systems perspective. Emergence 3(4): 32–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salancik, G.R., and J. Pfeffer. 1974. The base and use of power in organizational decision-making: The case of universities. Administrative Science Quarterly 19: 453–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sargut, G., and R.G. McGarth. 2011. Learning to live with complexity. Harvard Business Review, September 2011: 69–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schein, E. 1985. Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, M.S., and A.B.. Carroll. 2003. Corporate social responsibility: A three-domain approach. Business Ethics Quarterly 13(4): 503–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sims, R.R., and J. Brinkmann. 2003. Enron ethics (or: Culture matters more than codes). Journal of Business Ethics 45: 243–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siponen, M. 2004. A pragmatic evaluation of the theory of information ethics. Ethics and Information Technology 6(4): 279–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. 1776. An inquiry into the nature and cause of the wealth of nations. London: W. Strahan and T. Cadel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trevino, L.K., and M.E. Brown. 2004. Managing to be ethical: Debunking five business ethics myths. The Academy of Management Executive 18(2): 69–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trevino, L.K., and K.A. Nelson. 2004. Managing business ethics: Straight talk about how to do it right, 3rd ed. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uhl-Bien, M. 2. Relational leadership theory: Exploring the social processes of leadership and organizing. The Leadership Quarterly 17: 654–676.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uhl-Bien, M., R. Marion, and B. McKelvey. 2007. Complexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era. The Leadership Quarterly 18: 298–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Velasquez, M.G. 1983. Why corporations are not morally responsible for anything they do. Business and Professional Ethics Journal 2(3): 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. 2000. Communities of practice and social learning. Organizations 7(2): 225–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werhane, P.H. 1980. Formal organizations, economic freedom and moral agency. Journal of Value Inquiry 14: 43–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woermann, M. 2010. Corporate identity, responsibility and the ethics of complexity. In Complexity, difference and identity, ed. P. Cilliers and R. Preiser, 167–192. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Woermann, M. 2011. In corporations we trust? A critique of contractarian-based corporate social responsibility models. African Journal of Business Ethics 5(1): 26–37.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy and Centre for Applied Ethics, Stellenbosch University, Matieland, South Africa

    Minka Woermann

Authors
  1. Minka Woermann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Minka Woermann .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Woermann, M. (2013). Towards a Theory and Model of Corporate Social Responsibility and Implications for Management and Leadership Practices. In: On the (Im)Possibility of Business Ethics. Issues in Business Ethics, vol 37. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5131-6_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation