Comparing and contrasting roles of corporations, government, and local communities in social responsibilities and competitiveness.

The corporation, government, and local communities play crucially important role in enhancing the social responsibility and competitiveness. All their activities are interrelated and create the holistic result in the society touching economic, environmental and social domain.

The corporation or business entity basic responsibility steams in delivering their product and service at their best, i.e. qualitative products at a competitive price. Treating their employee fairly and in a democratic manner and maintaining books of accounts transparently and paying taxes to the government, being not involved in any adultery and black marketing is also important. If the business entity does not come across this responsibility, it will decline the social welfare and wellbeing of the community and will decrease its competitiveness. Elizabeth Holmes, CEO of “Theranos” a Silicon Valley startup promised to revolutionized  blood testing, she stated the false statements to lure the investor and raised over $700 million and the company is now paying it badly, she is federally charged with lawsuits (BBC, 2018) and the company is liquidated

The government plays a regulatory, guardian and watchdog role. And its role should be pervasive through the country. The government brings various rule, regulation, laws, and policies for the capacity enhancement, i.e. industrial policy, tax laws, literacy police et cetera. It has to be equally sensitive and inclusive for all the citizen of the country. Should focus on raising awareness, improve transparency, foster social investment et cetera. The collected tax should be used in the transparent and uncorrupt manner and have to penalize if anyone goes acts the rule of law. European country Finland score global image for caring its citizen and expats, its education system is best ranked in the world and is the least corrupt country of the world. A careful and responsive government foster social justice, reduces social discrimination, reduces poverty and makes its citizen happy. Venezuela, the country with the largest oil reservoir, is economically down, the hyperinflation has crippled the life of people. Medicines, daily consumable goods are in shortage, 2.3 million people have left the country since 2004 (BBC, 2018). The lack of government foreign affairs policy and unfriendly relation with the global political and trade arena has brought extreme sanction. This has led to decrease the living condition of its people, had created social injustice, increased poverty and mortality rate has increased.

Most of the time, it is seen that the burden of the CSR and sustainability along with social responsibility is only seen in the corporation and government but for the successful flow of the CSR it has to be reciprocated by the community and its dwellers. The responsiveness from the community alerts the corporation and government to be accountable for their deeds. Individual Social Responsibility (ISR); an act of individual becoming responsible in his/her actions is also a fundamental of CSR. If the women empowerment has not been a case in this modern corporate society, “Metoo” had not been ignited. Most of the time, the company want to end up in CSR alone and does not want to be socially responsible (Thiel, 2016), the community should raise their voice. “PETA”, an American animal rights organization raised its voice against the inhumane treatment for animals, they strongly protested the China dog killing tradition. Group Against Smog and Pollution (GASP), is a non-profit citizen group in southwestern Pennsylvania working for the sustainable and healthy environment. It is a diligent watchdog, a lobbyist on many environmental issues.

Corporations, government, and local communities should be equally socially responsible as it brings the competitiveness and responsiveness. If a domain falls short then, this triangularity won't be harmonized.

Bibliography

BBC. (2018, August 22). How Venezuela's crisis developed and drove out millions of people. Retrieved from www.bbc.com: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-36319877

BBC. (2018, March 14). Theranos founder Elizabeth Holmes charged with $700m fraud. Retrieved from www.bbc.com: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-43406050

Thiel, M. (2016). The Social Domain in CSR and Sustainability: A Critical Study of Social Responsibility among Governments, Local Communities and Corporations. New York: Routledge.

Importance of personal trust in the success of CSR and sustainability.

The trusts make the customer believe the endeavors of the organization. It is the soft value which is hard to earn by the organization. It is an intangible asset. The trust comes with the legacy and enhances the brand image of the organization. Generally, in context of CSR people tend to trust the government entities more than the business corporation (Thiel, 2016). But often trust creates a biasness and if the biasness is positive, it favors and supports the CSR activities of the organization otherwise it dampens the organizational investment in CSR and sustainability. The trust could be seen a kind of the reciprocation done by the individual towards the organization financial and non-financial activities. The individual trust enhances the word of mouth marketing and referral for the organization.

The social networking behemoth Facebook was doing well, capitalizing in customer trust but the discloser of data breach where the personal information of its users was sold to the research firm, “Business Analytica” breaches the psychological contract its users had with it. These negatively influence the socio-economic domain of CSR and sustainability. Facebook stock price declined, and company lost billion dollars in just a week. The inability of the company to build up the trust with customers are making the company to lose the customers at the alarming rate. (Campanella, 2017).

But sometimes the company has to battle hard to come across and concertized its customer trust. The first trillion-dollar company of the world; Apple, once got into the battle of philosophy with the government of the USA. The company took the stand on the privacy of its customer information and revoked the government request to unlock the phone(the customer had criminal charges of mass shooting in San Bernardino, California). Though this is an exception and extreme cases, most of the time the companies’ investment to build the trust payoff. The public trust towards the cooperation has a significant positive impact in the CSR, it increases the corporate financial performance and corporate social performance (Boulouta, 2013). Similarly, as per the research conducted by social invest, the customers also want to engage in the CSR and 76% of the customer wants to donate for philanthropy, the company they trust (Social Investement, 2015).

Bibliography

Boulouta, I. (2013). The role of ‘public trust in corporations’ in CSR strategies which deliver value for both business and society. 4th Annual Conference in Political Economy.

Campanella, N. (2017, October 30). Customer Support in the Trust Economy: The Importance of CSR. Retrieved from www.getcrm.com: https://getcrm.com/blog/importance-of-csr/

Social Investement. (2015, June 12). CSR, what is the impact on consumers? Retrieved from www.blog.optimy.com: https://blog.optimy.com/csr-impact-consumers/

Thiel, M. (2016). The Social Domain in CSR and Sustainability: A Critical Study of Social Responsibility among Governments, Local Communities and Corporations. New York: Routledge.

Understanding the Dynamics of Leadership: A Case Study on Jeff Bezos and Jack Ma (Westcliff International Journal Of Applied Research, Volume 2,Number 1,Spring 2018)

 

 

Identify commonalities and differences in the CSR theories and methodologies.

If we retrospect and review the definitions, we will find that CSR theories and methodologies have become more boarder and with the passage of time they have incorporated more areas, intermediaries and have become responsive and sensitive. The major proposition of CSR is based on the pyramid as stated by the Carroll’ model, i.e. legal, ethical, economic and philanthropic. Similarly, the three pillar mode advocates economic, social and environmental. There is not exact, concise and standard definition about CSR and sustainability and with time scholar’s researches has brought changes in the concept of defining CSR.

The similarities that the theories to name i.e. Corporate Social Responsibility (Carroll,1979), The Triple Bottom(Freeman,1984) and Stakeholder Theory(Freeman,1984) shares are the fundament and rudimentary philosophy for their survival, i.e. they need profit.  The other remaining domains like complying legality, ethics, environments can be fulfilled only after its achievement of economic opulence. Than onwards these theories progress to legality, society, and environmentalism. The basis of the CSR steams in giving back to the society since the organization does for, with and along the society, all the theories steam from and with societal interaction. Rather it be an IT behemoth like Google or blue-chip Amazon there CSR dimensions starts from the economic dimension; profitability. Similarly, Bill Gates has pledged a significant portion of his earnings in philanthropy, he along with his wife has founded “Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation” to combat global poverty and illiteracy.

But these theories also have discrepancies, the earlier theory as of Carroll was more myopic for the organization. It covered the three pillars (economic, legal and ethical) but it was more concerned within organization periphery. But with the movement of consumerization, environmentalism and regulatory pressure, the theories have become more heterogeneous. The triple bottom theory goes beyond the organizational dimensions into the planet and people also. And the stakeholder theory emphasizes even greater domains. All the stakeholders, i.e. employee, consumer, competitors, government, national and international partners are acknowledged and rather focus on the stakeholder value maximization rather than the shareholder value maximization. These give company strategic competitive advantages, it enhances corporate performance et cetera. In the contemporary scenario, the focus is made more on the environmental and societal construct. As per (Thiel, 2016) the five distinctions of CSR are voluntariness, responsibility, creation of value, plural objective and respect for man and nature. Some scholars have echoed CSR as an organization being corporate citizen and depicting corporate social performance. Some focus on the philanthropy as the prime objective of CSR whereas some has highlighted legal compliance as the prime one.

Contemporary, the state of California is leaping way ahead when it comes about environmentalism. The state has made it a compulsion for the energy providers to divert their 50% of energy sales through renewable energy by 2030. These dimensions of CSR acted by the government or states if far more way head than the stereotype CSR theories and methodology. The state has come across the bureaucratic couch of just collecting taxes and become more competitive by being more responsible towards immigrants, environments, and employees.

Bibliography

Thiel, M. (2016). The Social Domain in CSR and Sustainability: A Critical Study of Social Responsibility among Governments, Local Communities and Corporations. New York: Routledge.

Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainability: A Review of Google LLC, Environmentalism, Responsible Employer, Lobbyist, Sustainability (Volume-I)

Introduction

“Google “a name that has become pervasive across the continuum and throughout the spectrum is a perfect apotheosis to uncover and dissect the way corporate social responsibility(CSR) is embedded into its strategic mission for sustainability. The hardly earned soft value from this intangibility has exemplified its brand from "corporation" to its "users." Has somebody asked you, “Are you a Googler?”, this proliferation of company name to daily consumer usages projects the declining proximity between the corporation and its customers or either way around – “An extension of the brand into consumer way of life.”

Google LLC. was founded in 1998 by Larry Page and Sergey Brin; it's an impetus and silicon of "Silicon Valley," a philanthropist, a corporate taxpayer and a socially and environmentally responsible business entity. For the third consecutive year, Google tops the list as the most socially responsible company (Strauss, 2016). The credit goes to google hyper-motivated employees. (Nasibov, 2015) has echoed, motivated employee is a boom to the company it makes them satisfied, a performer, productive and creates a conducive working environment.

Discussions

Google, a Responsible Employer

            Reconciling it with the Google, the company makes sure that its employees are well-fed, for that it has 25 different cafés and micro kitchens. The death of an employee, spouse, continues to get half of the salary for the next ten years. If your coding is stressful, you can get pampered from subsidized massage program inside your office. A personal passion is must, google instructs its employee to separate 20% of its working time to get involved in the projects they are passionate of, it has “Google shuttle” and “GFleet” which runs through biodiesel fuel, customize workstation to glamorize you and other many more perks and incentives which come along the most competitively and handsomely paid remuneration. Google, believes the company can’t thrive with the broken heart of its employees.

Google, a Responsible Environmentalist

Alphabet, a parent company of Google, posted $4.7 billion tax in 2016 (Christopher, 2017)  abiding itself as a civilized corporate entity. The company has equally emphasized in the environmentalism; it started preparing and publishing environmental report since 2015. As per Environmental Report, 2016 issued by Google, the company is unequivocally working to reduce its ecological footprints.  The Google data center consumes 50% less energy than a typical data center. Its Mountain View campus has 1.9MW solar panels which generate 3 million kWh clean energy; it has achieved Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification. From 2013 to 2015, the company giant has reduced water usages per employee by 30% at its Bays Area headquarters, and since 2007, the company is net carbon neutral.

Google, a lobbyist for social welfare  

Google is equally responsible towards the community and marginalized people. Google invested $ 28 million to construct 240 housing units in Allston (Godelnik, 2011). Google is the advocate of the free and fair internet, the company along with tech giants like Facebook appealed against Federal Communications Commission(FCC) for repealing the net neutrality rule set by Obama Administration (Moran, 2018). Google balloon project, “Project Loon” is working to provide the internet service to the corner of the worlds where optical fiber and wires are hard to reach, the success will make the internet available to 4 billion peoples who are still away from the connectivity. Except this, the company is working in self-driving cars, augmented realities, Google glass

Drivers for CSR

CSR is a win-win phenomenon. It is not the compulsion, its voluntary and discretionary but public awareness, consumerization has made it isomorphic imitation (Thiel, 2016). CSR gives competitive and comparative edge to the organization and helps to enhance company’s brand image. Being a responsible employer is not only a flow of mercy and miracles from employer to employee, but these activities also come with reciprocation. Employees at Google are highly innovative, the company’s 20:80 rule has propounded features like “Google Gmail," "Google News" and "Google Shuttle" whose pervasive reputation and market coverage cannot be denied. Its environmental concerns have helped to reduce the environmental footprints and have become a bench-marker whom other can follow in the industry. A business who uses Gmail can reduce the Green House Gas(GHG) emission of its email service by up to 98% compared running as email in the local server (Google, 2016).

The innovation like “Project Loon” not only facilitates the unserved and unattained civilization but also provides Google tremendous and gigantic new market of 4 billion population ultimately skyrocketing its advertisement income too. As per Mike Cassidy, project lead of "Project Loon," 10 % internet penetration will increase the GDP by 1.4%. The philosophy of environmentalism has embedded google into the “Green Business” this has not only reduced the cost of doing business but has also helped Google to divert those saved funds to more innovative and useful projects like Google Glass, Self-driving cars, Machine learnings, and Artificial Intelligences.  

CSR and Sustainability

Deloitte, a multinational professional service network which is also one of the big accounting organization of the globe defines sustainability as the responsibility for the impact the organization exerts on surroundings, environments, business, and social terms. It makes the organization aware and ad-hoc of economic reality, relationship with stakeholders and manages itself accordingly to be long-term and sustainable. CSR is not only about the philanthropy, but CSR also revolves in the circular loop where give and take places among the stakeholders, these long-run perspective makes it's sustainable.

A Norwegian sovereign wealth fund uses the current royalties from the natural resources for upcoming generations; this makes the countries approach sustainable (Bansal & DesJardine, 2015). In the same way, the Google’s CSR approach is also sustainable. The green investment made in renewal energies like solar and wind energies by Google has helped to minimize the cost by 50%, these saved funds are channelized into more reliable, renewal sources of energies. The investment made by Google on the employee development has motivated the employee, and these have enhanced the productivity of the overall company. Companies like Netflix, Apple, Google, and Dell are 40% more productive than the average company (Vozza, 2017)

Measuring the CSR

Measuring the impact of CSR can be carried on both quantitative as well as qualitative basis. But it could often be challenging as some dimensions of CSR are hard to quantify. But anyway, the measurement depends upon the objective of the company. It is mundane to link the training and development cost(independent variable) to the profit(dependent variable) of the company whereas it is hard to form empirical evidence for the impact of motivation(qualitative) on profit.

But in the context of Google, the CSR and its sustainability can be measured along numerous factors like, employee satisfaction, increasing market coverage(global), high acceptance from the market, new product introduction and innovation (Key Performance Indicators)and along with its ability to be the part of life, if there is a question like, i.e., Do you know what to eat around in Hollywood? You are going to get the answer; Please Google it. This acceptance and penetration of Google from primitive to super-technical use manifest the Google’s brand loyalty which is also earned by its CSR and sustainability.

                                                 Conclusion

Google is in the row to hit and be the third trillion-dollar US company who is rocking the S & P 500. Its calibration has not bloomed the Wall Street but equally the dwellers of Main Street are excited. This fame and gratification, the company has gained comes from its meticulous rendezvous in understanding and giving to society and trust it has built with its market. Google has abided itself to be a global corporate citizen, caring employer and by responding to community and environment and is one of the most praised and valued companies of this era.

Bibliography

Bansal, T., & DesJardine, M. (2015, January/February). Don’t Confuse Sustainability with CSR. Retrieved from iveybusinessjournal.com: https://iveybusinessjournal.com/dont-confuse-sustainability-with-csr/

Christopher, H. (2017, April 18). What America's Biggest Companies Pay In Taxes. Retrieved from www.forbes.com: https://www.forbes.com/sites/christopherhelman/2017/04/18/what-americas-biggest-companies-pay-in-taxes/#4e013fff2f51

Godelnik, R. (2011, October 7). Google Investing in Low-income Housing – Good Cause, Bad CSR? Retrieved from www.triplepundit.com: https://www.triplepundit.com/2011/10/google-investing-low-income-housing-good-bad-csr/

Google. (2016). Google Environmental Report. California: Google.

Moran, S. (2018, August 31). Investor’s Business Daily: Net Neutrality Advocates Unintentionally ‘Made the Case’ for Regulating Google, Facebook. Retrieved from www.breitbart.com: https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/08/31/investors-business-daily-net-neutrality-advocates-unintentionally-made-the-case-for-regulating-google-faceboo/

Nasibov, A. (2015, November 3). Impact of Employee Motivation on Performance (Productivity). Retrieved from www.linkedin.com: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/impact-employee-motivation-performance-productivity-anar-nesibov/

Strauss, K. (2016, September 15). 118,947 viewsSep 15, 2016, 10:00am. Retrieved from The Companies With The Best CSR Reputations In The World In 2016: https://www.forbes.com/sites/karstenstrauss/2016/09/15/the-companies-with-the-best-csr-reputations-in-the-world-in-2016/#46d99ec47506

Thiel, M. (2016). The Social Domain in CSR and Sustainability: A Critical Study of Social Responsibility among Governments, Local Communities, and Corporations. New York: Routledge.

Vozza, S. (2017, March 13). Why Employees At Apple And Google Are More Productive. Retrieved from www.fastcompany.com: https://www.fastcompany.com/3068771/how-employees-at-apple-and-google-are-more-productive

Importance of CSR and practitioners values and beliefs regarding CSR and sustainability

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is the process of giving back to the society. As per (Epstein, 2012) CSR provides room for innovation, cost-saving, brand differentiation, customer engagement, and employee engagement. “Levi Strauss and Co.” has focused on reducing the environmental footprints through revamping its manufacturing process, they have saved more than one billion liters of water. Similarly, in the USA alone 500 million disposable plastic straws are used every day which is literally damaging the environment, Starbucks is stopping the use of disposable plastic straws by 2020 (Caron, 2018). These kinds of activities not only economize the company also enhances the image and brand equity of the company.

Brundtland report on CSR and sustainability focuses on three pillars (environmental, economic and social) emphasizing environment over the economic and social pillar. Most of the time practitioners state sustainability in CSR as homogeneous but I personally feel its heterogeneity could not be denied as it is also impacted by social, cultural, political differences, for example, practitioners in the USA looks CSR and sustainability impliedly, Japanese views as an ethics and harmony, French as creating shared value, and Afghanistan emphasizes on relationship and serving others.

The view towards CSR fluctuates among the age group also, the young generation inclines for the environmentalism whereas the age group 30-45 appreciates shared value as the corporate drive initiatives. Higher level management thinks CSR and sustainability are two different things and can be implemented separately (Thiel, 2016). Actually, it is hard to implement CSR than well it is said, the social, political, economic factors impact the CSR and its philosophy and CSR concepts changes across the country, age groups, and genders. The young generation focuses on the environmentalism whereas the aged generation inclines for shared value. CSR should build up to the values and beliefs of local communities but should not be obliged to follow internationals.

Skeptics opinions that the company does not want to take the social responsibility and they just want to limit themselves with CSR. Advocates stress that the people, society and government should make the company responsible to follow CSR in long-term and in a sustainable way(the companies are just doing greenwashing)

CRS provides competitiveness thorough first mover advantage and improves the relationship with stakeholders. It can drive new norms and expectation for the businesses. Companies who ignore CSR will be laid back as it gets harder for them to get trust from its stakeholders. It should be dynamic as per the changing society. Corporate social responsibility is not only what companies do with their profit, but it’s about how they make it (Floyd, 2013)

In 2009, the bank of Finland performed a research on companies and their listing as a socially responsible company, the sample period was from 1990 to 2014, the company listed as socially responsible had 2% increase in the stock price but those excluded had the loss of 3% in the stock price.

The CSR definitely has positive impact in the company’s performance and also win-win to society, though it is not mandatory, incorporating it within the company’s strategy will provide competitive edge to the company and it should not be seen as the burden of company also, the society, community, and government should also equally reciprocate it.

The CSR should be sustainable and long-term focused, but CSR requires resources in terms of money, time and energy. So, to be sustainable, firstly it has to come across the first tier of Carroll pyramid, i.e. it has to be profitable. Once the company becomes profitable which is also an economic dimension of CSR, it can come across its obligation towards its employees and shareholders. It can abide legally by paying taxes and also can reinvest in the social capitals to build community skills. Google is investing in “Project Loon” through which it uses a hot air balloon to make internet available in the parts of the globe where the optical fibers are hard to reach.

Bibliography

Caron, C. (2018, June 9). Starbucks to Stop Using Disposable Plastic Straws by 2020. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/09/business/starbucks-plastic-straws.html

Epstein, J. (2012, February 21). Six Reasons Companies Should Embrace CSR. Retrieved from www.forbes.com: https://www.forbes.com/sites/csr/2012/02/21/six-reasons-companies-should-embrace-csr/#5de2d9e33495

Floyd, W. (2013, February 20). Is corporate social responsibility profitable for companies? Retrieved from www.devex.com: https://www.devex.com/news/is-corporate-social-responsibility-profitable-for-companies-80354

Thiel, M. (2016). The Social Domain in CSR and Sustainability: A Critical Study of Social Responsibility among Governments, Local Communities and Corporations. New York: Routledge.

Four gaps in social responsibility in the social domain and the impact which they have in government, business, and local communities.(CSR)

CSR provides competitive and comparative advantage to the company. It is a voluntary or discretionary act but incorporating it into the company strategy gives an added advantage. CSR creates “isomorphic pressure to institutions (Thiel, 2016). Furthermore, the burden of initiating and implementing CSR seem to be solely on the shoulder of businesses, government plays watchdog and regulatory role and communities often maintain their passivity to reciprocate back. These have created a gap while exhibiting social responsibility in the social domain which is listed below. 

Knowledge gap one: Socio-economics as social responsibility:

The socio-economic domains include the factors like consumer, employee and occupational health. The vigilance of the business/corporation lies within this periphery which should be wider than this and it's inadequate.

The lack of well-developed socio-economic domain often becomes liability for the government, business, and local communities. If the company is not paying the remuneration competitive as prevailing in the society, it will have a negative impact in the business as the employees will be de-motivated to work more and might lose their productivity. These will ultimately shrink the economy and government social protection cost may increase.

Knowledge gap two: Social well-being and social development:

The social well-being and development do not encompass the border dimension of sustainability, it only focuses on the sustainability of society, the focus on the social parameters alone creates the limitation to the advancement of the social domain of sustainability.

The focus on the social well-being and social development includes the enhancement of the standard of living, reduction of the poverty level, catering and uplifting the marginalized sector of the society. Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon pledge $2 billion for homeless people and constructing preschool for marginalized people. These act helps to create social-development in the community. Otherwise, the poverty will create social conflict and often increases social crime.

Knowledge gap three: Social responsibility of stakeholders:

For sustainability stakeholder’s participation is a must. The current sustainability science does not include and engage all the affected and responsible stakeholder groups. The stakeholder should also be proactive in the CSR and its sustainability.

Understanding stakeholder is of prime importance, the business of the company may erode if they are not able to acknowledge the stakeholder interest. Lots of Oil refinery in the US got close as they were not able to compensate well their stakeholders. They got strong opposition from the environmentalist. These created a new era of clean and renewal energy.

Unequal social responsibility among the corporation, local communities and government:

The societies role of CSR is not adequately covered by the social domain. And the role of government and business in CSR is deemed to be higher without any reciprocation from the communities.

The responsiveness should come from the individual as well as governmental level. The negative externalities of e-cigarette in high school students has compel the regulator to issue an ultimatum to the e-cigarette producer to handle the issue otherwise the government will ban it.

Bibliography

Thiel, M. (2016). The Social Domain in CSR and Sustainability: A Critical Study of Social Responsibility among Governments, Local Communities and Corporations. New York: Routledge.