Corporate Social Responsibility According to Employee Perception…
195
and respect for the rights and interests of stakeholders; discretionary (or philanthropic) responsibility: it comes from the expectation that the company will contribute
resources to the community by seeking to improve quality of life. Such actions would
be a response to social expectations and represent voluntary action to address social
issues.
In the 1980s, according to Carroll (1999), studies on scientific administration
began to explore topics related to the role of companies in society, which focus on
the issues already addressed by CSR. Drucker contributes by emphasizing that CSR
should be seen as a process and not just as a set of rules, moral standards, or even
performance and results, reinforcing the idea that businesses should align their social
responsibilities to their opportunities.
In the late 1990s, the contribution of Elkington (2001) was important in the discussion related to CSR and sustainability. This was outlined through the concept of
“triple bottom line”. The literature emphasized the need for management to consider
environmental issues able to cause complete degradation of ecosystems (such as use
of natural resources, climate change, greenhouse effect, etc.) as well as social issues
(such as income inequality, poverty, hunger, food shortages, epidemics) which could
deprecate consumer markets and the needed social environment for prosperity.
Currently, the academic community acknowledges the importance of Elkington’s
(2001) proposition regarding CSR, namely the inclusion of social, environmental
and economic impacts in the analysis of the company’s operations. The concept of
“triple bottom line” gained support both in academia (Bakker et al. 2005; Dahlsrud
2008; Alcañiz et al. 2010) and in business practices (European Commission 2001;
Brazilian Association of Technical Standards 2010).
Mohan (2003) suggests that the notions of stakeholder management, sustainability
and corporate citizenship would arise from the simple appreciation of certain aspects
with the same grounds as “concepts addressed within the concept of business social
responsibility” (Mohan, 2003, p. 288).
Carrol and Shabana (2010) conceptually define the basis of CSR, including
economic development and compliance to law at least for American authors; European references tend to consider actions that go beyond legislation (Matten and Moon
2008). This concept also includes governance and ethics in organizations, in addition
to voluntary action to address social issues.
Different arguments condemn or defend socially responsible practices. Tenório
(2015) states that there is a wide range of motivations that might lead a company
to adhere to CSR; they stem from company expectations in a post-industrial society
that, among other reasons, might go beyond profitability and job generation.
The European Commission’s Green Paper (2001) proposes a two-fold organization of CSR: one related to internal aspects, that is, organizational management
such as human resources, environmental issues, compliance, accountability and other
aspects related to personnel management, governance and SHE (Safety, Health and
Environmental Management); and another related to external aspects that deal with
social responsibility to external stakeholders, like investors, local communities, third
sector organizations, suppliers, business partners, clients, competitors, the press, and
others (European Commission 2001).
195
and respect for the rights and interests of stakeholders; discretionary (or philanthropic) responsibility: it comes from the expectation that the company will contribute
resources to the community by seeking to improve quality of life. Such actions would
be a response to social expectations and represent voluntary action to address social
issues.
In the 1980s, according to Carroll (1999), studies on scientific administration
began to explore topics related to the role of companies in society, which focus on
the issues already addressed by CSR. Drucker contributes by emphasizing that CSR
should be seen as a process and not just as a set of rules, moral standards, or even
performance and results, reinforcing the idea that businesses should align their social
responsibilities to their opportunities.
In the late 1990s, the contribution of Elkington (2001) was important in the discussion related to CSR and sustainability. This was outlined through the concept of
“triple bottom line”. The literature emphasized the need for management to consider
environmental issues able to cause complete degradation of ecosystems (such as use
of natural resources, climate change, greenhouse effect, etc.) as well as social issues
(such as income inequality, poverty, hunger, food shortages, epidemics) which could
deprecate consumer markets and the needed social environment for prosperity.
Currently, the academic community acknowledges the importance of Elkington’s
(2001) proposition regarding CSR, namely the inclusion of social, environmental
and economic impacts in the analysis of the company’s operations. The concept of
“triple bottom line” gained support both in academia (Bakker et al. 2005; Dahlsrud
2008; Alcañiz et al. 2010) and in business practices (European Commission 2001;
Brazilian Association of Technical Standards 2010).
Mohan (2003) suggests that the notions of stakeholder management, sustainability
and corporate citizenship would arise from the simple appreciation of certain aspects
with the same grounds as “concepts addressed within the concept of business social
responsibility” (Mohan, 2003, p. 288).
Carrol and Shabana (2010) conceptually define the basis of CSR, including
economic development and compliance to law at least for American authors; European references tend to consider actions that go beyond legislation (Matten and Moon
2008). This concept also includes governance and ethics in organizations, in addition
to voluntary action to address social issues.
Different arguments condemn or defend socially responsible practices. Tenório
(2015) states that there is a wide range of motivations that might lead a company
to adhere to CSR; they stem from company expectations in a post-industrial society
that, among other reasons, might go beyond profitability and job generation.
The European Commission’s Green Paper (2001) proposes a two-fold organization of CSR: one related to internal aspects, that is, organizational management
such as human resources, environmental issues, compliance, accountability and other
aspects related to personnel management, governance and SHE (Safety, Health and
Environmental Management); and another related to external aspects that deal with
social responsibility to external stakeholders, like investors, local communities, third
sector organizations, suppliers, business partners, clients, competitors, the press, and
others (European Commission 2001).