Corporate Social Responsibility in the C0-Operative Bank

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 154
  • Published : January 18, 2013
Open Document
Text Preview
Name: Aja Mariama Danso
Kaplan ID: C0357076
LJMU: 480466
Topic: Corporate Social Responsibility- The Evaluation of the Co-operative Bank’s CSR and Ethical
Stance

Contents

Page

1.Introduction ………………………………………………………………….. 2

2.Corporate Social Responsibility ……………………………………………... 2 2.1 Carroll’s CSR Models ……………………………………………………. 2
2.2 Modern CSR Argument ………………………………………………….. 3
2.3 Introduction of 3C-SR Model ……………………………………………. 3

3.The Co-operative bank and their Stakeholders ………………………………. 3

4.The Co-operative bank’s CSR and Ethical Finance Analysis ………………... 4
4.1 Sethi’s three-stage schema ……………………………………………….. 4
4.2 The 3C-SR Model ………………………………………………………... 5

5.Conclusion …………………………………………………………………… 6

6.References …………………………………………………………………..... 7

1. Introduction

This report aims to review the corporate social responsibility (CSR) models which managers should consider important when deciding their CSR stance. The report will also review the corporative bank and their stakeholders regarding CSR. The report will then go on to analyse and evaluate the corporative bank’s CSR and ethical position.

2. Corporate Social Responsibility

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) as a topic has received the attention of organisations and managers as a whole. The 1950s marked the start of the modern era of CSR for managers, where Howard R. Bowen (1953) defines social responsibilities in his publication as the businesses’ duty to make decision and follow principles that are acceptable to society. However, Milton Friedman (1970) argued that social responsibilities is for people not businesses, he claims that the only responsibility business managers should have is to use all their resources to maximise profit and increase shareholder’s wealth (Friedman, York Times Magazine, September 13, 1970, pp. 32-34).

2.1 Carroll’s CSR Models

In 1979, Carroll developed a social responsibility model with a hierarchy of four responsibilities, starting from economic, moving to legal, ethical and discretionary responsibilities (see fig. 1.1). This CSR model talks about responsibilities which are the main areas that managers should consider when taking a stance on CSR. The summarised views of Carroll’s hierarchy are businesses should strike to make profit as their main priority, and then complies with the rules and regulations of the law; also behave ethically and finally be good corporate citizen (Carroll, 1979, p.500). The hierarchical four responsibility model was later improved by Carroll in 1991 as “pyramid of corporate social responsibility” (see Fig. 1.2).

| |
| |
| |
| |

Discretionary
responsibilities

Ethical
responsibilities

Legal
responsibilities

Economic
responsibilities
Figure 1:1 Social Responsibility Categories (Carroll, 1979) [pic]
Figure 1.2 Pyramid of corporate social responsibility (Carroll 1991)

2.2 Modern CSR Arguments

As the definition of CSR developed and gain more attention over the years, more arguments over CSR began emerge. In reviewing CSR, both Goyder (2003) and Moore (2003) argued that firms claiming CSR in expectation of achieving greater profitability is unethical. Firms should take up CSR only if they can ensure positive impact on society and the environment. Even though Jones (2003) argued that managers must not use CSR as a business strategy but should see it as an ethical stance. However, he does not believe firms taking advantage of the opportunity to make profit is unethical. (Wan Saiful wan-Jan, 2006,...
tracking img