Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainable Development Management

Question: Discuss about the Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainable Development Management. Answer: Introduction In the present business environment, Corporate Social Responsibility has emerged as an important organizational function. The organizations, particularly large and multinational organizations have realized the importance of Corporate Social Responsibility and sustainable development.Kolk, (2015) suggest the dimensions either horizontal or vertical define organizations.Gawel (2014) suggest the non-linear dimensions are characterized by the instability by the inter-relationship that is formed. Dissipative structures (open systems) have high states of energy and exchanges with the environment at a various points of organizational complexity and react disproportionally to the change in the environment triggering changes and this acts as the basis of CSR policies of organizations. The objective of this paper is to discuss the literature review on the topic of CSR and theEcological Environment. As a part of this literature review, eight articles are discussed. Analysis Gawel (2014) performed an empirical study to analyze the areas that are covered under Corporate Social Responsibility. Author argued that CSR could have different meaning for different organizations. The balanced approach of CSR encompasses corporate social responsibility (CSR) as defined by Gawel (2014) as the ethical commitment to act in an economically and environmentally sustainable manner while taking into account the interest of all stakeholders (p.21). Although there may be times when the vision aligns but the method to reach the goal are fundamentally different. For these occasions, there is a greater opportunity and more justifications for leadership to involve stakeholders in developing strategies. ORiordan and Fairbrass (2014) describes CSR approach as the social nature of value creation is more explicitly acknowledged as it advocates focusing management attention on the best that can be created together rather than avoiding the worst (p. 123). In other words, corporations should avoid an Us vs. Them approach and consider the benefits of collaboration. Sharma Tomar (2013) discussed the nine dimensions of Corporate Social Responsibility for organizations. Sharma Tomar (2013) paralleled open systems to living systems open to the environment integrating inputs and releasing outputs back into the environment. The researcher described a method called the Offenes Sozio-Techno-Oekonomisches (OSTO) system or the open, socio-technical-economic system derived from open systems and comprising nine dimensions by which organizations can be analyzed in a variety of business situations (Sharma Tomar, 2013). The first dimension is the social system comprising the formal and informal relationships among all members of the organization and encompassing culture, values, and motivation practices. The second dimension is the technical system comprising the technical components, which transform the organizations inputs and outputs, and representing the relationship between employees and their tangible tools. The third dimension is the economic system which are metrics assessed in monetary terms. According to Sharma Tomar (2013) the three components of social, technical, and economic used to be an adequate methodology to assess an organization interest in CSR, ecology and sustainable development. However, the OSTO Model extends the analysis further into additional components. For example, the fourth dimension involving product-market-future analyzes the degree in which a product meets the need in the environment and ecology. The fifth dimension called the political control system represents key stakeholders and describes the balance of power among stakeholders. According to Sharma Tomar (2013) the sixth dimension is the environment which should be understood in the broadest sense and includes the social, political, and cultural context in which the organization lives, the technological and infrastructural circumstances in which an organization operates, and the ecological system of which it is a part (p.3). The seventh compone nt is the historical view of a system as some systems need to be observed over time for the systems effectiveness (Sharma Tomar, 2013). According to Sharma Tomar (2013) the eighth dimension is the future orientation, which relies on an organizations ability to understand environment feedback and to create outputs, which promote the longevity of the organization. The ninth dimension is the sub world system, which represents the destructive forces, which may undermine core processes in the open systems. Mansor and Tayib, (2013) agued that the complete benefits of CSR could be realized only when different organizations work together to create a balance in the society. Mansor and Tayib (2013) shares the in the open systems model organizations are interacting with political, academic, and social organizations.With this being so this can cause serious problems for unstable organizations being that the organization will have to consider the varying perspectives of each outside organization because they have now entered into working relationships were just more than one organization is at risk. Mansor and Tayib, (2013) depicts how these organizations must work together to focus on ecological environment and sustainable development. When the organization is unstable, at some point this will have to be addressed in which case could become part of the information that is shared.This could put the organization in a bad light and vulnerable to several various entities in efforts to find soluti ons to resolve problems.Organizations are constantly being influenced by their environment, both internally and externally, and need to employ open systems with feedback loops to address the interactions between different stakeholders that would ensure that the organization can achieve its mission of Corporate Social Responsibility. Taran Betts (2015) did an empirical study to analyze the real benefits of CSR policies. Taran Betts (2015) started their study with the hypothesis that CSR is just a fad and organization use CSR as a marketing gimmick. However, with the empirical research, authors determined that CSR is much more than the hygiene factors for organizations. Taran Betts (2015) surveyed the executives of 15 multinational organizations and concluded that high level of stakeholder commitment is required to ensure that CSR objectives could be reached. Authors highlighted that in organization, several outside parameters like social changes, political changes, competitors changes, natural disasters, stakeholders changes can influence the outcome of CSR and sustainability. The open system in term of exchanges with the environment has porous boundaries with all those parameters. The organization controllers need to pay attention while dealing to these environmental parameters. Also generally open system is adopted in organic structure with multiple organizations inside the organization. Making all the inside organizations award of these external parameters is one of the challenges in open system. Taran Betts (2015) argued that CSR policies could be difficult to implement due to varied need and expectations of stakeholders and it would be difficult to bring all the stakeholders together, especially when, profit making is the only objective of stakeholders in for-profit organizations. This is a particularly difficult issue for organizations in dealing with corporate social responsibility (CSR). Stakeholders have a particularly strong agenda in this area of for-profit organizations. CSR encompasses a wide array of an organizations social responsibilities including monetary donations, environmental impact, business practices, and more humane efforts (Taran Betts, 2015). The number of stakeholder opinions is countless and as you mentioned, it is imperative for organizations to put strate gies in place to better manage stakeholder influence. A few of the most feasible options are in identifying stakeholder agendas, pursuing relationships with those who share the most common interests, and disregarding stakeholders who bear no weight in the decision-making process. Kolk (2015) did a theoretical study to analyze the parameters or factors that distinguishes the approaches of organizations towards Corporate Social Responsibility. Authors used a secondary research methodology to determine the answer to the research questions, When CSR is an established function then why is that the different organizations have different approaches towards CSR? Authors analyze the literature and concluded that the approach towards CSR is government by number of internal factors. Organizations that are embedded deeply with bureaucratic and inflexible cultures would slow or delay the application of the CSR policies. Kolk (2015) suggest monetary goals would be easier to measure than the long-term effects of open systems. Kolk (2015) suggests monetary funding is a necessary element that employs attempts by organizations to modify the CSR policies and trends. Establishing formal relationships become paramount. Kolk (2015) suggest formal relationships can be formed to red uce uncertainty with the various forms of ownership. The internal environment of the organization could be the reason that different organizations have different reactions to the CSR and sustainability trends. Kim Kim (2014) argued that a latest trend in the application of Corporate Social Responsibility is the involvement of customers. Today, organizations have started to integrate with customer and society to implement the various aspects of CSR. It has been possible only when the conflict management strategies between different stakeholders. The latest trend suggests that the latest CSR influences are social, political, and economic to name a few. Over time the new CSR system began to render problems being that all of these various outside sources operate very differently which can create conflicts. For example, the government sector being of the mechanistic structure is governed by strict rules and regulations is now being mixed with private owned companies influence which may use a organic structure which is very free. In such a case, there may be conflicts of interest when an independent company renders help from both because they now have to conduct business in a manner that meets the needs of not just the organization, but all other outside influences as well that are involved. Widmark (2016) argued that as a part of implementation of CSR policies, it is important that the organizations must collect the feedback from employees and other stakeholders. There are many touted benefits to implementing a CSR system structure including an organization's ability to build coalitions within industries and increased responsiveness to environmental changes through feedback. Ironically, one of the main detriments to the implementation of a CSR systems approach includes feedback overload (Widmark, 2016). The establishment of CSR system requires managers to seek out feedback from many external constituents. By proactively seeking out information directly related to resources, managers utilizing an open systems approach promote a circle of information utilized to ensure the perpetual advancement of organizational initiatives. This cycle, which is circular and not linear, is continuous. However, the process can lead to information overload and dysfunction (Widmark, 2016). A ccording to Widmark (2016), feedback within an open system structure, if not properly managed, can overload managers with too much information hampering managers' abilities to process information beneficially. This information overload can lead to distrust between organizational members and external entities with which the organization should be attempting collaboration (Windmark, 2016). Conclusion The above paper discusses the literature review on the topic of Corporate Social Responsibility. The literature review identifies few common themes among the literature. One of the common themes is that the organizations can truly practice CSR only when it has the support of various internal and external stakeholders. It can be concluded that organizations may not be able to establish a strong CSR policy when the same CSR policy is not communicated to employees, customers or other stakeholders. The above literature review also discusses a common trend of increased involvement of customers and other external stakeholders towards CSR policies and strategies. In the current economic environment, a successful CSR policy is one that is targeted to society through customers. It can be said that customers has emerged as a key driving force or the bridge between organizations objective of CSR and society perception of organizations objective. This has been made possible with the increase use of Internet and social media campaigns. It is expected that the large and multinational organizations would continue to invest towards CSR policies. The new CSR trend also suggests that the small organizations have also picked up the direction of CSR and small organizations have also started to contribute towards society and environment in whatever way they can. References Gawel, A. (2014). Business collaboration with universities as an example of corporate social responsibility -- a review of case study collaboration methods. Poznan University of Economics Review, 14(1), 20-30. ORiordan, L., Fairbrass, J. (2014). Managing CSR stakeholder engagement: A new conceptual framework. Journal Of Business Ethics, 125(1), 121-145. doi:10.1007/s10551-013-1913-x Kim, M.S., Kim, D.T. and Kim, J.I., 2014. CSR for sustainable development: CSR beneficiary positioning and impression management motivation. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management,21(1), pp.14-27. Kolk, A., 2015. The social responsibility of international business: From ethics and the environment to CSR and sustainable development.Journal of World Business,51(1), p.2016. Mansor, M., Tayib, M. (2013). Integrated and Open Systems Model: An Innovative Approach to Tax Administration Performance Management. Innovation Journal, 18(3), 1-29. Sharma, S. and Tomar, A., 2013. Corporate Social Responsibility for Sustainable Development.Journal of Indian Research (ISSN: 2321-4155),1(4). Taran, Z., Betts, S. (2015). Corporate social responsibility and conflicting stakeholder interests: Using matching and advocacy approaches to align initiatives with issues. Journal of Legal, Ethical Regulatory Issues, 18(2), 55-61 Widmark, CatharinaC(2016).What do we think about them and what do they think about us? Social representations of interprofessional and interorganizational collaboration in the welfare sector.Journal of Interprofessional Care,30(1), 1356-1820.https://10.3109/13561820.2015.1055716