Instructions
The term “Corporate Social Responsibility” often generates contentious debate over the expected role of business in society. Some commentators (such as Nobel Prize winning Economist Milton Friedman) argue that the only “responsibility” for businesses and their managers/agents is to pursue their business activities to the fullest extent possible in the free market. Other social commentators and academics (such as management scholar Donna J. Wood) have gone to great lengths to illustrate how business activities have a great impact on stakeholders and social issues throughout society. The short handout from Milton Friedman “The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits” and the short handout on Donna J. Wood’s “Corporate Social Performance” model provide a nice overview of these differing perspectives. The section of the textbook on CSR and corporate citizenship (pages 30-70) provides a nice overview of relevant and practical arguments for and against Corporate Social Responsibility (pages 44-47) and an overview of Corporate Social Performance (pages 51-53).
While it is easy to take an “expose”/”National Enquirer” approach to the study and assessment of social issues in management topics, the most compelling and interesting analyses typically take frame an issue in an objective, two-sided manner. As such, the first assignment is designed to generate a systematic analysis of a two-sided problem by following the basic, fundamental three step process that is the “heart” of this course: (a) gather the relevant facts and tell a specific and compelling two-sided “story”; (b) use the concept s of “Corporate Social Responsibility” – business actors ought to pursue activities that are profitable within the bounds of law and ethical custom” from Milton Friedman and Donna J. Wood’s “Corporate Social Performance” – business actors ought to make a long-term commitment toward addressing an important social issue through a Principles->Processes-Outcomes Approach to make an objective evaluation of the firm’s approach toward this challenging issue; (c) offer a critique of the general advantages (pros) and disadvantages (cons) of using this model to approach important management challenges. As always, a good critique discusses, “Where will we see similar concerns in our future managerial roles?”
Please do the following for this assignment:
(1) Present Facts: Find and present a specific “real life” example of a situation, issue or case in which an organization or a decision-maker for an organization faced “competing pressures” with respect to a specific social issue or concern. Remember – the key is to take an issue or decision and frame it in a manner which has two compelling “sides.” Present the details of this example in a paragraph or two and make sure that this section ends with the presentation of your topic in the following format:
“How should (“could” if it is a past decision or issue) the decision-maker (identify him or her specifically) balance the competing pressures between side A (stated as specifically as possible) and side B (stated as specifically as possible)?”
(2) Apply Concept: In the following paragraph/section, apply the contrasting perspectives from Milton Friedman (make the case – what would be profitable within the bounds of law and ethical custom?) and Donna Wood (make the case – how could the manager/firm take a long-term approach toward the issues or situation through a Principles->Processes->Outcomes approach?) to evaluate the firm’s stance on this difficult issue. The analysis of these two distinct approaches to Social Responsibility and Social Performance should culminate in you taking a stand on whether the firm is doing an effective job at balancing the competing pressures in the management of this particular issue.
(3) Critique the Concept:
The most challenging part of every assignment is to step away from your example and your analysis at the end of the paper – to make some observations on the value and limitations of the concepts that we are studying. This is not the time to “second-guess” the individual in your example or to go off on some tangent about the issue you covered. Instead, think of this as your “final say” on the strengths and weaknesses of using Friedman and Wood when a manager must evaluate a firm’s stance on a difficult decision that has two (or more) legitimate sides (competing pressures).
Think about the following – when you consider Friedman’s approach and Wood’s approach, do either (or both) perspectives adequately provide a reliable means of addressing an issue which has two compelling sides? Does the model allow a manager to properly incorporate the most relevant details for evaluating the firm’s stance on the problem? Take a stand on these (or other) issues in your critique.
Keeping this point in mind, in the final section, make a final argument about whether or not Friedman’s approach and/or Wood’s approach are ultimately useful in successfully balancing competing pressures (taking your critique of the concept into consideration, where we will see similar concerns in our future managerial roles?)
Finally – list your source for the paper.
Solution
Introduction
Corporate social responsibility is a contemporary management tool that provides for business entities to engage with the communities in which they operate. Corporations participate in social contracts with different stakeholders to mitigate their business impacts on members of the public. However, various scholars in the past have developed contrasting ideologies relating to the corporate initiative management approach. Some assert that profit-making organizations should assume accountability for adverse impacts that their activities have on the natural environment and the people. Others believe that business entities should only focus on making profits, as the core of their existence. Such differences in perception exist in the real-life commercial management activities in the global economy, where some organizational heads are enthusiastic about giving back to society, and others focusing on wealth maximization. Differences in corporate social responsibility perception and interest from business heads are founded on an affinity to profitability and mitigating adverse impacts on society…………………………………To access the rest of the solution, please click on the solution for $5, please click on the purchase button.
