Demonstrating a Commitment to Corporate Social Responsibility Not Simply Shared Value

Business and Professional Ethics Journal 33 (1):1-15 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Porter and Kramer are very clear that shared value is not corporate social responsibility. Not only do they criticize the four principles on which CSR rests: moral obligation, sustainability, license to operate, and reputation, as ineffective and vague, they maintain that the only reason for companies to engage in sustainability projects is to decrease costs and thus increase profits, not because they have a corporate responsibility to help protect the environment the people who dwell in it. Because social problems cause extra costs for companies and thus decrease profits, they say that companies should have strategies that might appear to be socially responsible, but are not because the intent is to improve profits. This paper will describe the current definitions and focus of CSR, explain shared value, and then propose ways that commitment to CSR can be made public by leaders and their businesses, such as using social license to operate, third-party assessors, and new business structures

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Corporate Responsibility and Freedom.Eric Palmer - 2007 - International Corporate Responsibility Series 3:25-33.
The Idea of Corporate Social Responsibility.Jacob Dahi Rendtorff - 2007 - The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 1:111-117.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-04-23

Downloads
29 (#536,973)

6 months
7 (#411,886)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references