Corporate Social Responsible Definition

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 102
  • Published : October 5, 2010
Open Document
Text Preview

Corporate Social Responsibility: A definition
by Gail Thomas Graduate School of Business Curtin University of Technology Margaret Nowak Graduate School of Business Curtin University of Technology CRICOS Provider Code 00301J

© Graduate School of Business, Curtin University of Technology, GPO Box U1987, Perth, Western Australia, 6001. Telephone 61 8 9266 3366, Fax: 61 8 9266 3368 ISSN 1323-7853 ISBN 1 74067 514 2 December 2006 Information in this publication is correct at the time of printing and valid for 2005, but may be subject to change. In particular, the University reserves the right to change the content and/or method of assessment, to change or alter tuition fees of any unit of study, to withdraw any unit of study or program which it offers, to impose limitations on enrolments in any unit or program, and/or to vary arrangements for any program.

Working Paper Series 62

Corporate Social Responsibility: A definition I

by Gail Thomas Graduate School of Business Curtin University of Technology Margaret Nowak Graduate School of Business Curtin University of Technology

Working Paper Series No. 62 (Curtin University of Technology, Graduate School of Business)


Corporate Social Responsibility: A definition
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has variously been described as a ‘motherhood issue’ (Ryan 2002, p. 302) ‘the hot business issue of the noughties’ (Blyth 2005, p. 30) and ‘the talk of the town in corporate circles these days’ (Mees & Bonham 2004). There seems to be an infinite number of definitions of CSR, ranging from the simplistic to the complex, and a range of associated terms and ideas (some used interchangeably), including ‘corporate sustainability, corporate citizenship, corporate social investment, the triple bottom line, socially responsible investment, business sustainability and corporate governance’ (Prime Minister's Community Business Partnership). It has been suggested that ‘some…researchers…distort the definition of corporate social responsibility or performance so much that the concept becomes morally vacuous, conceptually meaningless, and utterly unrecognizable’(Orlitzky 2005); or CSR may be regarded as ‘the panacea which will solve the global poverty gap, social exclusion and environmental degradation’ (Van Marrewijk 2003).

Hopkins has commented that ‘without a common language we don’t really know that our dialogue with companies is being heard and interpreted in a consistent way’ (Hopkins 2003, p. 125). It is therefore important to explore the language of CSR if we are to understand and debate the concepts involved. This literature review

examines the evolution of CSR and seeks to identify some of the more common or prominent definitions that have evolved and the context within which they have been used. The review is not an exhaustive list of definitions but aims to synthesise the

main points in a way that may be useful to the broader discussion of CSR. While the review focuses on the literature of academe, it also explores the views of industry espoused in less formal means of communication.

Historical definitions of CSR
While the term CSR may appear to be relatively new to the corporate world, the literature reveals that the evolution of the concept itself has taken place over several decades. The fact that the terminology itself has changed over this time also

suggests that the meaning ascribed to concepts such as CSR will continue to evolve in tune with business, political and social developments. The impact of globalisation and mass communication also means that while definitions will reflect local


situations, they will also be strongly influenced by global trends and changes in international law.

1920s – 1950s
It has been suggested by Windsor that ‘business leaders have since the 1920s widely adhered to some conception of responsibility and responsiveness practices’ (Windsor 2001, p. 229). Others...
tracking img