Social Responsibility Journal
Emerald Article: Corporate irresponsibility and corporate social responsibility: competing realities Brian Jones, Ryan Bowd, Ralph Tench
To cite this document: Brian Jones, Ryan Bowd, Ralph Tench, (2009),"Corporate irresponsibility and corporate social responsibility: competing realities", Social Responsibility Journal, Vol. 5 Iss: 3 pp. 300 - 310 Permanent link to this document: http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17471110910977249 Downloaded on: 14-10-2012 References: This document contains references to 45 other documents Citations: This document has been cited by 3 other documents To copy this document: email@example.com
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by UNIVERSITY OF BRIGHTON For Authors: If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service. Information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com With over forty years' experience, Emerald Group Publishing is a leading independent publisher of global research with impact in business, society, public policy and education. In total, Emerald publishes over 275 journals and more than 130 book series, as well as an extensive range of online products and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 3 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. *Related content and download information correct at time of download.
Corporate irresponsibility and corporate social responsibility: competing realities Brian Jones, Ryan Bowd and Ralph Tench
Brian Jones is a Senior Lecturer, Ryan Bowd is a Senior Lecturer and Ralph Tench is Professor in Communications Education, all based at Leeds Business School, Leeds Metropolitan University, Leeds, UK.
Abstract Purpose – Building on the work of Carroll this article attempts to unravel, explore and explain corporate social responsibility (CSR) as a theoretical construct that has implications and consequences for corporate governance in particular, and more generally for the economy, business and society. It aims to extend Carroll’s work on deﬁnitional constructs by re-examining some of the theoretical frameworks that underpin, inform and guide CSR. Design/methodology/approach – Carroll identiﬁed different levels, or a pyramid, of CSR and these are outlined and the advantages and disadvantages of a pyramid, levels-based approach discussed. The main contributions of this article lies is in its exploration of corporate social irresponsibility (CSI) as a concept in contrast to CSR. Bowd, Jones and Tench’s CSI-CSR model is described, explained, analysed and used as a conceptual tool to make the theoretical move from a pyramid or level-based approach to a more dynamic framework of analysis. Findings – The proposition that CSI is better suited to a shareholder business model and CSR sits more comfortably with a stakeholder business model is examined. It is contested that people often wrongly equate CSR with irresponsible corporate actions. The CSI-CSR model establishes a theoretical framework around which grounded empirical research can be undertaken, applied and on which it can be reported. Research limitations/implications – This is a new area of research that addresses a gap in the literature and puts forward innovative theoretical models. Discussing the concept of irresponsibility makes for an interesting theoretical move. It questions the idea that corporations and business per se are always or necessarily socially responsible. Originality/value – In looking at and developing existing theoretical models, concepts and frameworks and exploring their merits, shortcomings and...
Citations: business takes account of its economic, social and environmental impacts in the way it operates – maximising the beneﬁts and minimising the downsides’’ (Crown copyright, 2004).
Carroll (1979, 1991) and Wood (1991) have contributed to building deﬁnitions of the different levels at which organisations respond to their corporate social responsibilities. These levels of responsibility are deﬁned as follows:
It is clear from the list above that Carroll’s (1991) pyramid has at its base starting point the economy and economic performance
Please join StudyMode to read the full document