1
CHAPTER ONE
1.1 Historical Background
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is a balancing act in which corporates engage to
demonstrate their commitment to the society’s well-being. Corporates offer to support social
causes to develop visibility about their intentions. Sometimes, visibility goes to the extent of
marketing the business (Bagire, Kakooza, Nalweyiso and Tusiime, 2011). Society considers
business as an important agent to fulfil immediate needs which otherwise do not catch the
attention of governments. On the other hand, the responsibilities and relations between business
and society have also undergone major changes. Since the 1970s’ scholars have been reporting
that corporates have dual purposes—to be economically successful and socially responsible, and
that community involvement is one of the most important things they are expected to engage in
(Altman, 1999).
Social entrepreneurship has emerged as a global phenomenon to bridge the gap between
the demand for fulfilment of social and environmental needs, and the corresponding supply of
resources (Nicholls, 2006). Social entrepreneurship is considered as a response to failure of
market, state or/and both in meeting social needs (Nicholls, 2006; Yujuico, 2008). Social
entrepreneurs as individuals are the change agents (Dees, 1998; Dees, Emerson, & Economy,
2001; Elkington & Hartigan, 2008; Nicholls, 2006) because they aim at systematic solutions to
problems in the society and create social value (Nicholls, 2006). SE has been rapidly growing in
all the sectors: private, public and non-profit (Johnson, 2000).
Moreso, its constituent elements, strategic focus on social impact and an innovative
approach to achieve its mission, reflect the combination of social mission and entrepreneurial
creativity, and this combination makes social entrepreneurship distinct from other public, private
or civil sector activity (Nicholls, 2006). ‘By employing innovative business models, social
entrepeneurship are addressing country’s development needs, while maintaining sustainability
2
through viable revenue models’ (Asian Development Bank, 2012, p. 8). By associating with
social entrepreneurs, the companies can not only fulfil expectation of CSR but also can enhance
their corporate reputation (in the communities) and build brand. This is similar to the notion of
strategic CSR wherein companies ingrate their social goals with business goals, benefiting both
business and society (Porter & Kramer, 2006).
The Development of entrepreneurship is to encourage the economic growth and improve
people’s welfare. On the other hand, the utilization of natural resources which are not well
managed will influence the social, economic and environmental impact. Awareness of the limited
of natural resources requires efficiency and sustainable utilization (Rustiadi et al, 2009).
Externalities entrepreneurship with the surrounding communities typically is caused by boundary
issues, land conflicts, joint utilization of resources and social gap. To build a sustainable
harmonious relationship, companies are required to carry out social responsibility or corporate
social responsibility (CSR).
Practically, implementation of CSR does not run smoothly because of constraints from the
planning, implementation and monitoring. A research conducted by Darman (2012) at PT
Freeport discovered, the existence of obstacles to implementation of CSR due to cultural
differences, geographical conditions, security problems and the availability of human resources.
An integrated approach is required to ensure the success of CSR programs.
Governments in developing countries have now come to the realisation that no
development will be meaningful except when the rural communities are also carried along. This
realisation is borne out of the reality that rural dwellers constitute a significant component of their
population. Indeed, Onibokun (2007) in his policy paper revealed that the rural population
constitutes 70% – 80% of the entire population of most third world countries. Nigeria’s rural
dwellers constitute 53% of the country’s total population (World Bank 2015). The bulk of
3
Nigeria’s food and fibre supply come from the rural areas, whose production of cassava, palm
produce, etc. has long contributed significantly to the country’s gross domestic product (GDP).
However, poverty and infrastructural deficits are a common phenomenon in Nigeria’s
rural sector. Egwemi and Odo (2013) observe that Nigeria still falls far short of the economic and
social progress required to impact the well-being of the average Nigerian, given that over half of
Nigeria’s population live on less than 1 dollar a day. These obviously suggest the need for
attention to rural areas for sustainable development. Taking cognisance of the level of economic
activities in rural development, it becomes apparent that action must be taken to ensure
sustainable rural development.
Rural development is a strategy designed to improve the economic and social life of the
rural poor (Umembali & Akubuilo 2006). Deji (2005) sees rural development as a way of
restructuring the national economy to bring about improvement in the standard of living of people
in rural areas. But rural development cannot be achieved unless certain strategies are used.
Ebiriwa (2005) outlines some approaches to rural development as modernisation approach,
transformation approach and demonstration approach, while Nwobi (2007) adds agricultural
approach, internal combustion approach, basic resource approach, etc. to the list. Each of the
listed strategies has contributed in one way or another to the development of rural areas.
However, the inclusion of rural entrepreneurship as a strategy appears to be capable of
contributing much more.
The contribution of the entrepreneurship sector to community’s socio economic
development through Corporate Social Responsibility however have a number of researches such
as Mhina (2007); BOA (2008); Green (2010); Exim Bank (2010); as well as CRDB (2011)
present information in too a general way. They presented that firms, industries, banks and other
financial institutions are the state development partners that have been providing services to
citizens, especially in areas where the state has been unable to reach. Therefore the contribution
4
of the entrepreneurship sector to communities, social Economic development through firms,
industries etc is inadequately documented.
Traditionally, research showed tha Corporate Social Responsibility is widely understood
as philanthropy (“doing good with part of the profit”) and thus refers to charitable community
support projects in most cases (Piprek, 2007). Economic diversification has increased, with
particularly strong growth in service sub-sectors such as real estate, business services,
communication (in particular mobile phone services) and tourism (Mader, 2012).
Over the last few years in Nigeria, various companies have started applying the corporate
social responsibility, particularly foreign firms. Such firms include banking, telecommunications
and mining sectors, according to Piprek (2007). CSR definitely plays an important contribution in
promoting community development that is both ecologically friendly and socially conscious
(Piprek, 2007; Mader, 2012). However, such companies contribute much to community
development, such as charitable activities. It may be noted, however, that even with such efforts,
CSR in developing countries is not straightforward.
In addition, Corporations have an obligation to work towards meeting the needs of a wider
array of stakeholders, i.e. Corporate Social Responsibility, such as the employees, investors,
customers and the community in which the entrepreneurship activities are carried out. According
to EMC (2005), Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is not a new concept. Companies have
always, to some extent, tried to acknowledge the responsibility towards the community. Epps
(1996) and Berad (2011) argue that CSR has attracted worldwide attention and acquired a new
meaning in the global economy. Heightened interest in CSR in recent years has stemmed from
the advent of globalization and international trade, which have reflected in increased business
complexity and new demands for enhanced transparency and corporate citizenship. It embraces
the ‘triple bottom line’ and requires attention to be paid to economic, environmental and social
5
impacts. EMC (2005) argues that CSR is essentially about business’ contribution to sustainable
development and how best to maximize that contribution.
Studies by Williams (2005), Hopkins (2003) and Roche (2002) stipulate that it has been
increasingly argued that all organizations have an impact on society and the environment through
their operations, products and services and through their interaction with key stakeholders and
therefore CSR is important in all firms, large and small. The other literature by Epps (1996), in
addition, states that CSR is a means by which companies can frame their attitudes and strategies
towards, and relationships with, stakeholders, be they investors, employees or, as is salient here,
communities, within a popular and acceptable concept.
According to Moon and Vogel (2008), studies on CSR have shown that there has been
increasing public pressure from bodies (such as governmental organizations, non-governmental
organizations (NGOs), academics, trade unions and the media) for corporations to act in a
socially and environmentally responsible way. Such pressure has, to some extent had an impact
on CSR, as they have created a ‘legitimacy gap’, which provides a significant motivation for
companies to engage or attempt to engage in responsible business practices in order to acquire or
maintain legitimacy (Waddock, 2004).
Through CSR banks have been always focused on presenting safe, sound, sturdy, and
responsible service which contributes their mite to the socioeconomic progress of society as a
whole. The major impetus is given to sustainable projects in areas such as education, environment
and health and other socio-economic aspects should be concentrated on (Exim Bank, 2010). In
line with this Sweeney (2007) stipulates that banks perform CSR through their commitment of
business to contribute to sustainable socio- economic development, working with employees,
their families, the local community, and society at large to improve their quality of life, in ways
that are both good for business and good for development. This study is focused on the
6
examination of the contribution of entrepreneurship in the corporate Social Responsibility to rural
community socioeconomic development in Jalingo Local Government Area of Taraba State.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
Globalisation has made it expedient for MNCs to promote entrepreneurship to solve social
problems in the developing countries where they are domicile. This social responsibility is
necessary for long-term business interests and global competitiveness (Jenkins, 2007;
Haskins, 2009). The above assertion finds relevance in Nigeria, where entrepreneurial activity
has witnessed setbacks because of institutional corruption, weak commitment to development
plans and the domineering role of the public sector in the economy since independence
(Ukah, 2007; Raimi et al., 2014). The state of entrepreneurship in Nigeria is precarious: about
80% of the graduates from Nigerian universities annually cannot secure employment.
Furthermore, the country faces a rising unemployment rate, growing incidences of criminal
activities, armed robbery, religious insurgency and hostage taking/kidnapping in the country.
Research linked the poor performance of development policies in Nigeria to mere pursuit of
economic growth in statistical terms by policy makers, but failure to practically impact on the
lives of the people and the economy (IMF, 2004).
To revamp the Nigerian economy, and put it back on the path of sustainable development,
entrepreneurship through small business promotion was identified as a potential and a catalyst
for self-employment. In spite of the lofty role of entrepreneurship at formal and informal
levels in Nigeria, it became immersed in crisis caused by operational constraints. But, lack of
support aid as venture capital for entrepreneurship has been identified as a major operational
constraint hindering entrepreneurship in Nigeria.
At different periods, the government had responded to the needs of entrepreneurs and small
businesses through a number of entrepreneurship intervention programmes (EIPs), but these
initiatives witnessed massive failure. To bridge the constraints facing entrepreneurship
7
including finance, the scholars proposed the need for an enabling environment and
infrastructural enhancement through a private-sector- led investment.
Using CSR for entrepreneurship development could be a sustainable mechanism for economic
development, unemployment reduction, wealth creation and poverty reduction. But its
viability requires empirical and theoretical justification. In view of this, the overarching
problem that this research concentrated on is refocusing CSR as a ‘support aid’ for
entrepreneurship development in Nigeria. Could CSR be a potential support aid for
entrepreneurship development? What are the potentials of CSR as a support aid for
entrepreneurship development? While conventional CSR discourses have focused on
mainstream issues like labour relations, charities, and reputational building, few studies have
looked at the plausibility of refocusing CSR as a ‘support aid’ for entrepreneurship
development in developing Therefore, the focus of this study was to investigate the
contribution of entrepreneurship on the corporate social responsibilities in the rural areas.
1.3 Objective of the Study
The main objective of the study is to access the contribution of entrepreneurship on the corporate
social responsibilities in the rural areas while the specific objectives are:
i.
Examine the corporate social responsibilities role of entrepreneurship in rural areas in
Jalingo L.G.A, Taraba State.
ii.
Identify the challenges encountered by entrepreneurship organizations in rural areas in
Jalingo L.G.A, Taraba State
iii.
Suggest possible ways of tackling the challenges in rural areas in the study area
1.4 Hypothesis
1.5 Research Questions
The research will seek to answer the following research questions: -
8
i.
What are the corporate social responsibilities roles of entrepreneurship in Taraba
State?
ii.
What are the challenges confronting entrepreneurship organizations in rural areas in
Jalingo L.G.A, Taraba State?
iii.
What are the possible ways of solving these problems
1.6 Significance of the Study
This study is first significant in the sense that it will add to existing literatures on the contribution
of entrepreneurship in the corporate social responsibility in rural areas and serve as basic
framework for researchers, policy makers, academicians, entrepreneurs, NGOs and government
agencies in formulating policies that will enhance sustainable development in rural areas.
Secondly, the study will be beneficial to students of Business Administration Department,
lecturers and stakeholders who may intend to carry out further study on the contribution of
entrepreneurship on national development.
Thirdly, findings of this study will be beneficial to the people in the rural areas for the need for
them to embrace entrepreneurship skills and development which will in turn improve their
standard of living and reduce poverty.
Finally, the study will boost and encourage entrepreneurship development in our rural areas
which in turn will improve the standard of the living of the indigenes in the rural areas.
1.7 Scope and Limitation of the Study
This study will be carried out in Jalingo Local Government Area of Taraba State, Nigeria and will
concentrate on the contribution of entrepreneurship in the corporate social responsibility in the
rural areas. It is limited to time, insufficient fund, and bad communication network.
1.8 Organization of the Study
1.9 The Profile on the Study
9
1.10
Definition of Terms
Entrepreneurship: The etymological root of entrepreneurship is traced to a French derivative
verb “entreprende”, which simply means “to undertake” an endeavour (Kuratko and Hodgetts,
2004: 28).
Corporate Social Responsibility: Weihrich, Cannice and Koontz (2011:42) define Corporate
Social Responsibility as the serious consideration of the impact of the company’s action on
society. This was considered to be closely related to the term social responsiveness, a term
considered to be older to the business world.
Social Responsibility: Nnamdi, Chika and Nwaigw (2015) define social responsibility as the
duty of a privately owned enterprise to ensure that it does not adversely affect the life of the
community in which it operates. It also refers to the obligations of decision makers of corporate
organizations to take actions which project and improve the welfare of society as a whole along
with their own interests.
Rural Areas: This is the opposite of the people living in the urban areas. It comprises of
indigenes and citizens who mainly rely on agriculture for their survival. They are the local people
who have low standard of living. Gutterman, (2012: 1) defined it as a process to accommodate
environmental “risks and challenges”, which are realities intricately linked with production of
goods and rendering of services in “constantly changing markets”
10
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 Introduction
This chapter highlighted relevant literatures on the contribution of entrepreneurship on the
Corporate Social Responsibilities in the Rural Areas. It is sub-divided into headings such as
Conceptual Framework, Theoretical Framework, Empirical Framework and Summary of Related
Literatures.
2.2 Conceptual Framework
2.2.1 Concept of Entrepreneurship
The earliest definition of entrepreneurship sees it as an economic term which describes the
process of bearing the risk of buying at certain prices and selling at uncertain prices (Di-Masi 2000).
Later commentators, however, broadened this definition to include the concept of bringing together
the factors of production. But this definition according to Di-Masi (2008) led others to question
whether there was any unique entrepreneurial function or whether it was simply a form of
management. The concept of innovation was added to the definition of entrepreneurship by theorists
in the early part of this century. This innovation could be process innovation, market innovation,
product innovation, factor innovation, and even organisational innovation. Later definitions described
entrepreneurship as involving the creation of new enterprises and that the entrepreneur is the founder.
Entrepreneurships is the process of creating something different with value by devoting the
necessary time, and effort; assuming the accompanying financial, psychological and social risks; and
receiving the resulting rewards of monetary and personal satisfaction (Uwaoma and Ordu (2015)).
This definition however stressing four basic aspects of being an entrepreneur: 1) it involves a creation
process; the creation has to have value to the entrepreneur and value to the target audience. 2)
Entrepreneurs require the devotion of time and effort. It takes significant amount of time to create
something that will be of value both to the entrepreneur as well as the audience. 3) Assuming the
11
necessary risk; financial, psychological and social risks. 4) Reaping the rewards of being an
entrepreneur: independence, personal satisfaction as well as monetary reward for those profit
entrepreneurs (Hisrich and Peters, 2002 p10-11).
Furthermore, Timmons et al., (1989 cited in Uwaoma and Ordu (2015)) defined it in such a
striking way that: Entrepreneurship is the process of creating and building something of value from
practically nothing. That is, it is the process of creating or seizing an opportunity and pursuing it
regardless of the resources currently controlled. It involves the definition, creation and distribution of
values and benefits to individuals, groups, organizations and society. Entrepreneurship is very rarely
a get rich-quick proposition (not short term); rather it is one of building long term value and durable
cash flow streams (p.29). Entrepreneurship can also be seen as the process of doing things that are
not generally done in the ordinary course of business life or routine. In a nutshell, entrepreneurship
therefore refers to the ability and willingness to initiate and execute new business ideas which entail
some measure of risks or uncertainties.
A more objective analysis of entrepreneurship according to (Starcher, 2007) reveals that it can
best be characterized as a multi-faceted process which includes a vision, a high level of personal
commitment and drive, innovation, change, and the creation and building of something of significant
value over time. It also involves taking both personal as well as financial risks, building and
motivating a team of people, and mobilizing human, material, and financial resources.
One of these facets, innovation, deserves more explanation. In highly developed economies,
entrepreneurship often involves technological innovation - either applying existing and known
technology to new markets or the development of new technology. In contrast, in developing
economies there is little technological innovation involved. The innovation and opportunity for
changing the ways things are done tend to be broader in scope, and more often involve improvising
substitutes for non-available skills and materials, adapting production techniques and the way the
12
work is organized, and obtaining adequate management skills. In developing countries, introducing
elementary management practices can be a major source of innovation (Uwaoma and Ordu, 2015).
Inherent Risks involved in Entrepreneurship Engagement
It is important to emphasize that creating a new enterprise involves significant risk. In
studying a new venture, at least five major risks must be evaluated. These are:,
•
The product/market risk: Is it the right product or service at the right price for an identifiable
group of customers?
•
The managerial risk: Does the entrepreneur/team possess the required skills and experience?
•
The technical risk: Can the product be manufactured, or can the service be provided?
•
The competitive risk: What is the chance that the venture can achieve either product
differentiation or cost leadership and sustain it over time
•
Financial risk: Might the venture run out of money, and if so, can additional money be raised?
However, even after a positive evaluation of these risks, the failure rate is high - some
estimate that more than 50% of new ventures fail within five years (Durham, 2005).
It is obvious from aforementioned importance and nature of the risks involved that one of the
important tasks for an entrepreneur is to transfer some of the risk to others. It can be said that
successful entrepreneurs are extremely clever in getting others to share in their risk. In the process of
doing this, it becomes increasingly difficult to act in a socially responsible manner; and if the action
is not checked, it can cost the entrepreneur a lot.
13
The Process of Entrepreneurship
Fig1. Conceptualization of the Entrepreneurship development process)
From the above, the process of entrepreneurship can be divided into several distinct phases
beginning with the idea, or the seed of the venture. This is followed by some preliminary
consultations and fact gathering to determine the opportunity for success. Some consider this phase to
be an idea which has been well massaged. Then a more detailed definition and evaluation of the
feasibility of the venture is undertaken. The fourth phase is the start-up or launching of the new
enterprise, which can cover a period of 6 months or 2 years depending on the venture. The final
phase is the managing of the ongoing business enterprise.
With the tedious process it takes to successful engage in a thriving entrepreneurship, the
entrepreneurs tend to focus on investment recouping first, whilst acts of social responsibility take a
back seat, and if this is the case, as Jamnik (2011) puts it, the enterprise is heading for a “big survival
14
battle”. Again, this however, stresses the importance of making provision for corporate social
responsibility activities even before venturing into any business start - up. Although managers of
entrepreneurial activities are always faced with ethical management and social responsibility
challenges (Ordu and Okoroafor, 2014), these challenges are always surmountable especially if
socially responsibility is given priority and adequate attention.
Who are these Entrepreneurs?
A number of studies have been carried out to determine what characterizes successful
entrepreneurs. One conclusion of these studies is that successful entrepreneurs do not fit any single
profile. Some are young, others are retired. Some are creative geniuses; others are men or women of
action.But there are some common characteristics: They work hard; they are driven by an intense
personal commitment to the success of the venture. They are very achievement oriented. They are
able to live and cope with uncertainty and disappointments. They tend to be optimists. They seek
excellence and strive to win. They accept and learn from failures. They are pragmatic and action
oriented, not perfectionists. They value freedom to decide and to act and tend to be intolerant of
authority. And they believe strongly in themselves - they are self-confident (Hisrich and Peters,
2002).
Misconceptions about Entrepreneurs
Starcher (1997) gave a succinct description of the various myths associated with
entrepreneurs and these perhaps make them to be associated with a negative perception. This
negative image perhaps can only be changed through socially responsible actions. Of the lot, the
following seven myths about entrepreneurs are the most prevalent and these are summarized in the
table below:
15
Table1. Misconceptions about entrepreneurs and refutal statements
S/N Myth/ Misconceptions
Refutal statements
1
All entrepreneurs tend to be
Experience shows that the majority of founders or
alike
entrepreneurs defy generalities about their age,
experience, level of education and the like. Some
experts say that in some poor countries women are the
2
Entrepreneurs are driven by
most successful entrepreneurs.
What really drives most entrepreneurs is a deep
greed, power and lust for money personal need for achievement. They do not seem to
be galvanized by the sole prospect of profit. Research
has shown that high achievers work hard anyway
provided there is an opportunity to achieve something
worthwhile and of value. This is in line with the innate
3
Misconceptions that
characteristics of entrepreneurs.
On the contrary, the making of an entrepreneur occurs
Entrepreneurs are born to be
by
entrepreneurs
experience, and contacts over a period of years and
accumulating
relevant
skills,
know-how,
includes in particular self- development.
4
The wrong notion that the
Experience has shown that only one out of a hundred
most important thing for an
ideas results in a new business, and only five out
entrepreneur is to have a good
of ten new businesses survive more than five years.
idea
Experienced investors generally prefer a good
entrepreneur with a mediocre idea to a new or
inexperienced entrepreneur with a good idea.
5
Obtaining financing for a
For reasonable projects, supported by a competent
new venture is the most difficult entrepreneur, raising finances can be one of the least
step
difficult obstacles to overcome. This may be less true,
however, in many developing countries due to the
inadequacy of the banking system. Furthermore,
financing remains a major problem for women
entrepreneurs.
16
6
Entrepreneurs are reckless risk
Experience has shown that entrepreneurs go out of their
takers
way to avoid high-risk situations and they are very
clever in getting others to assume a lot of the risk.
7
Entrepreneurs sacrifice morals
Honesty and integrity are very important attributes
for profits
for entrepreneurs because they depend heavily on the
trust of their customers, suppliers, partners and
bankers. In fact, successful entrepreneurs are majorly
the ones who are ethical in their actions as well as
engage in corporate social responsibility to all of its
stakeholders.
In line with the dispelled seventh myth, it becomes imperative for entrepreurs to take the issue
of social responsibility very seriously so as to not only remain competitive, but for their utmost
survival and sustainability.
2.2.2 Concept of Social Responsible
The word social relates to human society (the New Lexicon Webster’s Dictionary of the
English Language). Social responsibility therefore refers to objective concern for the welfare of the
society. (Bala, Kpihi, and Yusuf, 2010). Social responsibility restrains business excesses for the
welfare of the society at large and the community in particular, wherein the business enterprise
operates. It restrains business organizations from undertaking destructive or harmful activities or
products, and encourages them to pursue activities that contribute to the enhancement of society’s
wellbeing. It is also called corporate social responsibility. Furthermore, the small business
encyclopedia defined socials responsibility as “Acting with concern and sensitivity, aware of the
impact of your actions on others, particularly the disadvantaged” (Small Business encyclopedia).
Therefore, for entrepreneur to successfully operate and remain in their business ventures they
have to act with concern and sensitivity to the needs of all the stakeholders of their businesses. This
17
ranges from employee to even the environment where they operate. In other words, acting
responsibly should be the watch word for entrepreneurs.
To whom is the Firm Socially Responsible?
A firm is socially responsible to itself, stakeholders, third parties and the environment.
Itself: It must make enough profits for its survival and growth.
Stakeholders:
•
Shareholders- They has rights to statements of accounts or financial statements, fair
dividends. A business firm should operate to maximize the wealth of its owners.
•
Employees: The business organization owes its workers a duty to provide good and safe
working conditions and environment, adequate compensation, good welfare facilities, guaranteed
salary payments, and opportunities for self-improvement. Good working conditions include safety in
the work place. Health and Safe Environment (HSE), as well as provision of firefighting equipment.
•
Government: Government is a participant, a facilitator and a regulator in industrial and
economic development. Business firms owe the responsibility to comply with government laws, rules
and regulations, support government programmers by paying taxes as at when due. Taxes include
import duties, excise duties, VAT, royalties, levies and rates.
•
Supplies/Creditors: To ensure prompt payment of supplies and creditors bills and facilities
respectively.
Third Parties
Society or Community: The firm should contribute to the good of the society or community
by supporting charitable or organizations, preventing pollution, maintaining good moral and ethical
codes and conducts, providing employment opportunities.
The Environment
Social responsibility connotes the response by the firm or enterprise, to the need(s) of the
environment in which they operate and have exploited, as evidence in pollution and environmental
18
degradation. The issue often discussed in entrepreneurial social responsibility affects everyone
(Nwachukwu, 2005). No Nigerian will be happy if he has to drink polluted water, breathe foul air,
use unsafe products, or be misled by un-trustful advertising.
Steps to Take to Ensure Social Responsibility Works for the Entrepreneurship
Durham (2005), highlighted several steps that an entrepreneur can take in order to deliver an
acceptable social responsibility activity. These steps are enumerated below:
•
Set goals. What do you want to achieve? What do you want your company to achieve? Do
you want to enter a new market? Introduce a new product? Enhance your business's image? In
answering these questions a clear cut goal would have been established.
•
Decide what cause you want to align yourself with. This may be your toughest decision,
considering all the option out there: children, the environment, senior citizens, homeless people,
people with disabilities--the list goes on. The entrepreneur might want to consider a cause that fits in
with its products or services. For example, a manufacturer of women's clothing could get involved in
funding breast cancer research. Another way to narrow the field is by considering not only causes
you feel strongly about, but also those that your customers consider significant.
•
Choose a nonprofit or other organization to partner with. Get to know the group, and make
sure it's sound, upstanding, geographically convenient and willing to cooperate with you in
developing a partnership.
•
Design a program, and propose it to the nonprofit group. Besides laying out what you plan to
accomplish, also include indicators that will measure the program's success in tangible terms.
•
Negotiate an agreement with the organization. Know what they want before you sit down, and
try to address their concerns upfront.
•
Involve employees. Unless you get employees involved from the beginning, they won't be
able to communicate the real caring involved in the campaign to customers.
19
•
Involve customers. Don't just do something good and tell your customers about it later. Get
customers involved, too. A sporting goods store could have customers bring in used equipment for a
children's shelter, then give them a 15 percent discount on new purchases. Make it easy for customer
to do good; then reward them for doing it. Doing this is acting responsibly – socially.
2.2.2 Concept of Corporate Social Responsible
CSR as a phenomenon and concept has attracted the attention of both practitioners and
academicians. Practice-oriented literature has viewed CSR as a strategic concept and used
terminology like strategic philanthropy and strategic CSR, and posited that not only should the cost
(of CSR) be off-set by the corporates but CSR should also provide them competitive advantage
(Ramachandran, 2011). CSR includes (a) corporate responsibility to consumers, employees and other
shareholders; (b) corporate responsibility to the environment; and (c) corporate responsibility to
community development (Besser, 1999).
The discourse on CSR has been shifting focus between business and society. We submit that
mapping CSR is complex and the issues which make it difficult are the multiple components (such as
legal, ethical, economic and discretionary), the variety of triggers (such as globalisation, human
rights, environment, labour and corruption), usage of competing terminologies (such as corporate
citizenship, corporate social performance, corporate sustainability and corporate accountability),
subject-specific needs in management studies (such as marketing, accounting, sociology, political
science and law), divergent interest groups (such as academia, researchers and managers), and
alignment between practice and theory (Okoye, 2009). Despite being a highly-contested concept
(Gallie, 1956 in Okoye, 2009), CSR is accepted as one of the key components of social intervention
among many business practices, whether voluntary or legislated.
The classical view of the profit-maximization behaviour of business has long been challenged
but not dismissed altogether. Accountability models and stakeholder and legitimacy theories propose
that corporates need to be sensitive to social and political issues that influence their operations
20
significantly (Deegan, 2002; Freeman, 1984; Meyer & Rowan, 1991; Mitchell & Agle, 1997;
Rowley, 1997; Ullmann, 1985; Valor, 2005). While the welfare of society is important, the
aspirations of enterprises cannot be neglected. The current discourse on CSR is dominated by this
‘middle path’ approach, establishing collaboration, and synergy and attempting to define the
balancing roles of business. Business managers are expected to acknowledge the legitimate claims of
other stakeholders (Pearce & Robinson, 2002) and strategy planning process must consider the
interests of all stakeholders, both economic and social (Jensen, 2001). This has led to the emergence
of two major concepts: sustainable development and stakeholders’ approach. The literature on
management brought discussions on stakeholders’ approach to explain CSR as a form of
‘commitment to operate in an economically and environmentally sustainable way while recognizing
the interest of multiple stakeholders and maximizing economic, social and environmental values
(Matten, Crane, & Chapple, 2003; Waddock & Post, 1990; Waddock, 2004; Wood, 1991).
The triple bottom line concept has generated explicit discussion on three types of
responsibility vis-à-vis performance results of business: financial (i.e., profit), environment (i.e.,
planet) and society (i.e., people) (Elkington, 1998; Marrewijk, 2003). Accordingly, corporate
performance should be measured not just by the traditional economic bottom line but also in terms of
social and environmental outcomes (Norman & Macdonald, 2003). CSR loses importance if
management’s prime concern is not with continuing the long-term health of the enterprise (Ingham,
2006). Hence, the discussion has moved further and the focus of CSR is now shifting from being
organizationally controlled to partnerships and interactions with more representational voices of
society (Kuhn & Deetz, 2008). This is a direct attempt to balance commitments of corporates to
groups and individuals in the operational environment.
The business for society view advocates that business should contribute to and support the
broader community and improve the quality of society (Albinger & Freeman, 2000; Carroll, 1991;
Sen & Bhattacharya, 2001; Snider, Hill, & Martin, 2003). It is argued that business enterprises exist
21
to serve the community and have a responsibility to contribute to society. Hence, corporates were
criticized for not paying enough attention to social and environmental impact of their business-related
activities (King & Lenox, 2001; Schaltegger & Synnestvedt, 2002). Therefore, communities are
becoming the focal point for decision making that affects corporates, and to stay in business and keep
its license to operate, a company has to consider the new role of communities in defining policy and
regulatory agendas.
2.2.3 Contribution of Entrepreneurship in Corporate Social Responsibility
Moreover, studies on CSR have shown that there has been increasing public pressure from
bodies (such as governmental organisations, non-government organizations (NGOs), academics,
trade unions and the media) for corporations to act in a socially and environmentally responsible way
(Moon and Vogel, 2008; O’Donovan, 2002; Unerman and O’Dwyer, 2007) as quoted by Lauwo
(2011). Such pressure has to some extent had an impact on CSR, as they have created a ‘legitimacy
gap’, which provide a significant motivation for companies to engage or attempt to engage in
responsible business practices in order to acquire or maintain legitimacy (Doh and Teegen, 2004;
Waddock, 2004). However, as indigenous communities living in the poorer regions of the world
(usually developing countries) continue to suffer severe social and environmental problems as a
result of corporate activity (Banerjee, 2007), then there a clear need for debate about the extent to
which pressure group intervention in developing countries (such as Tanzania) can have an impact on
improving CSR practices.
On the other hand, International organizations such as the UN Global Compact, International
Labour Organization (ILO) and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
(EOCD) have enacted various conventions and regulations with the aim of encouraging corporations
to be ethical, accountable and responsible. Also, an increasing number of laws and regulations have
been enacted at the national level (particularly in developed countries) in order to impose obligations
on companies to address ecological, employment, investment and gender issues and other social
22
problems caused by corporate activity (Buhr, 2008). One way in which major corporations have
responded to the increasing pressure to improve their social and environmental performance is by
adopting the practice of publishing CSR reports (Rabet, 2009; Vogel, 2005; Banerjee, 2007). As a
result of increasing CSR reporting, CSR has gained greater prominence in the contemporary global
economy.
However, Dillard, et al., (2004) argue that in a capitalist society, norms, standards and
institutionalized values (such as those relating to CSR), which are sometimes codified in laws and
regulations, are grounded in a neo-liberal ideology which facilitates wealth accumulation, private
property rights and free trade policies. It is questionable, however, whether such a view is relevant to
developing countries, such as Nigeria, where governments are often desperate to attract foreign
investment in order to deal with the various socioeconomic problems, in particular the endemic
poverty which exists in many such countries.
Within the context of contemporary globalization, poor developing countries are often
persuaded to deal with the problem of endemic poverty by seeking to attract foreign trade and
investment through de-regulation and liberalization policies. As a result, the regulatory frameworks
of such countries often prioritize to attract and mobilize foreign capital at the expense of protecting
citizens from the adverse consequences of corporate power and irresponsible business practices
including inadequate CSR reporting (Strange, 2006). When governments in developing countries
decide to adopt institutional arrangements and strategic capacities to improve the prospect of
retaining or attracting capital investment, this poses a challenge for governments with respect to
balancing the interests of private capital and the broader societal issues associated with promoting
social order (Korten, 2001).
In fact, the issue of promoting CSR practices in developing countries raises difficult
problems, as the promotion of such practices may have an adverse impact on foreign investment.
Thus, in the context of developing countries, it is necessary to understand the impact of CSR
23
practices on the historical, socio-cultural and regulatory structures and power. Since independence in
1961, there has been a strong local desire to encourage and maintain ethical business practices, public
accountability, transparency and good governance in Tanzania (Oxfam, 2008; Killian, 2006).
The involvement of private firms is a key element to foster rural development strategies.
Companies participating in integrated value chains are expected to act as a strategic partner providing
market opportunities for rural producers, as well as sharing technology, skills, and knowledge
necessary with them. The benefits for firms include continuous supply of their products;
strengthening of their supply chain; positive market recognition; access to specific market niches, and
improvement of their position to manage the risks involved in the process (Miguel, Stijn and Guido,
2015). Moreover, even companies whose value chains are not directly linked with rural communities
(i.e., financial services, mobile telecommunications, manufacturing, construction, chemicals, and
others) might have the opportunity to generate benefits through rural development. Through CSR and
stakeholder management strategies, firms could manage possible risks and contribute to the
improvement of the socio-economic conditions of rural communities nearby their manufacturing or
administrative sites. The win-win proposition expressed by Utting (2012) recognizes that through the
application of CSR strategies firms are able to receive different benefits like enhancement of
company’s competitive advantage, customer recognition, cost reduction by eco-efficiency and
recycling as well as an increase in the personnel’s morale and reduction of labor turnover.
However, there are significant obstacles that must be faced by firms during their race to
become better corporate citizens. For instance, companies undertaking costly initiatives could end up
risking their price-cost competitiveness. Other obstacles related to multi-institutional interactions
may result in bureaucracy and over-regulated processes representing resources and costs for
companies without generating meaningful societal benefits in return—principally during the early
stages of the process (Miguel, Stijn and Guido, 2015).
24
According to Nwachukwu (2005), the concept is that the entrepreneur produces or sells
products or services to the consumer. Hitherto, the generally popularized emphasis has been on
“caveat emptor” i.e. let the buyers beware, but what the Nigerians seem to be far saying at present is
“caveat venditor” i.e. Let the seller beware. The seller is to be held responsible for producing and
distributing safe products and services of all times. The entrepreneurs’ responsibility extends beyond
those who patronize him, to all the society as a whole. Thus, he is accountable for his performance to
the co- owners the distributors, the suppliers, the consumers and to the society in general.
Furthermore, the Nigeria entrepreneur, like entrepreneur the world over, is called upon to
respect our environment; he must recognize the aesthetic values and should help in their
preservations. Market stalls, workshops, and garages cannot be located everywhere in the city; town
or village with little regard for orderliness and decency. Noise pollution should be eliminated and all
wastes must be properly disposed of. The entrepreneur is expected to help the government solve
some of our societal problems by participating in both cash and kind, including, in health care
services, road maintenance, drainage sanitation activities, offering vocational training or work
experience, cultural activities, scholarships; Employment opportunities e.t.c. (Nwachukwu, 2005).
Thus, a socially responsible entrepreneur commits resources to the community town or village
in which he operates. He as a result benefits more as he is identified as a lover of the people. The
people in reciprocity love him, protect his interest and create a peaceful environment for his business
to flourish. This helps his business grow as more and more profits are made and ploughed back into
the enterprise.
Job Creation and Entrepreneurship
Entrepreneurship is an option for Nigerian graduates. The reality is that our youths graduate
in geometric progression but the available job opportunities is in arithmetic progression (Oluwashola,
Jimmy, Ayinde Diagbon, the Nation Newspaper August 22, 2015 pg 10).Lots of individuals are
laying complaints about youths wasting away, without proffering solutions to these predicaments.
25
Thank God for successful entrepreneurs like Tony Elumelu, who through its foundation (Tony
Elumelu Foundation, an NGO) is looking at training a lot of youths to be self-sufficient through their
focused entrepreneurial programs.
The government, and indeed other NGO’s, successful business men and politicians should
really look at entrepreneurship as a means of creating jobs for the teeming youth population. Not only
in the creation of jobs but also in the provision of enabling environment such as electricity, security
and availability of capital.
Resources (Capital)
Talking about provision of resources, such as capital, one recall that a scheme called you win
was established during the Jonathan’s administration, to provide capital for would be entrepreneurs.
This really worked, as lots of business ideas were birthed. Sustaining this “you win” project will
enhance assisting these youths to establish as entrepreneurs.
Agriculture
Agriculture is a sector with great potentials for entrepreneurship. Given the enabling
environment of capital, inputs and security, it can engage our army of unemployed youths, while
most graduates feel that agriculture is demeaning and degrading, they overlook the business part of
that industry, forgetting that agricultural products are commodities that never get out of fashion. It is
a daily need because it is required for the daily sustenance and living of humans.
Human Capacity Building
As part of corporate social responsibility, organizations should be made to invest in human
capacity building that engages the youth.
Unsafe Products
One of the criticisms made against Nigerian entrepreneurs is the introduction of unsafe
products into the markets. Serious bodily injuries have been sustained by consumers who have used
unsafe products, ranging from food, Cosmetics, drugs, bottled or canned goods, detergents, etc.
26
These products are sold in the markets as “imitations” of the original products, which have proven
quality and established trade names. There are laws in the country prohibiting the sale of unsafe
products. The Nigerian standards Organization is expected to enforce these laws. Nonetheless, the
unscrupulous entrepreneur still maneuvers to bring these products into the market. The influx of the
adulterated products into the market by the activities of some entrepreneurs is doing a great damage
to the image of made-in-Nigeria products. What the consumer demands is a product that is safe,
durable, honestly advertised and properly prized. A responsible entrepreneur acts to safeguard these
practices and act honestly to its various stakeholders knowing that his actions have a knock on effects
on others.
2.2.4 Role of Rural Entrepreneurship in Development
On the role of rural entrepreneurship in the development process, Naudes (2008) states that an
effective entrepreneurship venture fosters the production of wealth for a nation, creates jobs that
utilise human resources and also reduces economic waste. He maintained that the income level of the
average person and the standard of living of a society increase with every successful entrepreneurship
project; nonetheless, entrepreneurship originated out of trade by barter. Ejiofor (2009) points out that
entrepreneurship is the first step towards a self-reliant economy that can generate internal selfsustaining economic growth and development. In the same vein, Brain (2005) states that
entrepreneurs occupy a central position in a market economy, and there are never enough of them. A
society is adjudged prosperous only to the degree to which it rewards and encourages entrepreneurial
activity. Entrepreneurial activities are the critical determinants of the level of success, prosperity,
growth and opportunity in any country.
Entrepreneurship though desirable is usually fraught with difficulties and risks. Onyekwelu,
Uzor and Chiekezie (2008), citing Hisrich and Peters (2002), note that entrepreneurship is the process
of creating something different with values by devoting necessary time and effort, assuming the
accompanying financial, psychological and social risks and receiving resulting rewards of monetary
27
and personal satisfaction and independence. Nzelibe (1996) and Redmond (2008) see entrepreneurs
as action-oriented, highly motivated individuals who take risks to achieve goals.
Basically, entrepreneurs must possess distinctive qualities that will help them to excel. Gana
(2001) reveals that every entrepreneur possesses positive and negative qualities. He therefore advises
that the entrepreneur must effectively use his positive qualities like risk taking, decision making,
planning, self-confidence, creativity, uniqueness, futuristic, drive and energy to overcome the
negative qualities such as arrogance for business success. When entrepreneurs effectively combine
these qualities they are able to perform useful functions.
Rural entrepreneurship, conceptually speaking, is not much different from entrepreneurship.
Indeed, rural entrepreneurship could be seen as using the process and methods of entrepreneurship to
exploit untapped potential of rural areas, to bring about growth and development. Petrin (2004)
describes rural entrepreneurship as: a force that mobilises other resources to meet unmet market
demand, the ability to create and build something from practically nothing, the process of creating
value by pulling together a unique package of resources to exploit an opportunity.
Onyekwelu et al. (2008) highlight some pro-development entrepreneurial functions such as
identification of investment opportunities, formation and nurturing of enterprises, assembling and
coordinating of resources (human and material), invention, innovation, risk bearing, decision-making,
etc. These functions according to them are not left only for entrepreneurs in the urban areas but also
for the rural entrepreneurs. Rural entrepreneurs are individuals who find investment opportunities in
the rural areas.
The strategic role rural entrepreneurship could play in rural development appears to have
caught the attention of policymakers and development experts. Petrin (2004) notes that institutions
and individuals promoting rural development now see entrepreneurship as a strategic development
intervention that could accelerate the rural development process. In his words development agencies
see rural entrepreneurship as enormous employment potential, politicians see it as the key strategy to
28
prevent rural unrest, and farmers see it as an instrument for improving farm earnings while women
see it as an employment possibility near their homes which provide autonomy, independence and a
reduced need for social support. Clearly, entrepreneurship is seen as a vehicle for improving the
quality of life for individuals, families and communities as well as to sustain a healthy economy and
environment. He stresses that to accelerate economic development in rural areas, it is necessary to
increase the supply of entrepreneurs who will take risks and engage in the uncertainties of new
venture creation.
Sherief (2008) is equally emphatic about a possible role rural entrepreneurship could play in
rural development. He notes in particular that entrepreneurial orientation in rural areas is based on
stimulating local entrepreneurial talent and subsequent growth of indigenous companies, which in
turn would create jobs and add economic value to a region, and at the same time keep scarce
resources within the community. Indeed, this optimism is anchored on studies conducted by
Economic Commission for Latin America and Caribbean (ECLAC) and Food and Agricultural
Organisation (FAO) in the Latin American and Caribbean region which have shown that rural
enterprises can be an important modernising agent for small agriculture. Thus, government has
supported this process by creating incentives for agro-industry to invest in such regions.
Rural entrepreneurs are people who are prepared to stay in the rural areas and contribute to
the creation of local wealth (Petrin 1994). According to Perpar (2007), rural areas are isolated,
economically poor, depopulated and un-mechanised. Based on this, local entrepreneurial talents have
to be harnessed, and consequently, the growth of indigenous companies should be encouraged and
promoted. This will create jobs, add economic value to the region and, at the same time, retain the
scarce resources within the local area.
Of all available theories that could be used to unravel our subject matter under investigation,
the integrated rural development theory is perhaps the most potent. Integrated rural development
theory is a multidimensional strategy for improving the quality of life of the rural people. It is based
29
on the premise that the socioeconomic framework of the traditional rural system is obsolete;
therefore, integrated rural development strategies are designed to change this framework and promote
structural changes in society (Akhakpe, Fatile & Igbokwe-Ibeto 2012). The Directorate of Food,
Roads and Rural Infrastructure (DFRRI) of Babangida’s administration is a typical example of this
approach to rural development in Nigeria.
In spite of the clamour for the promotion of rural entrepreneurship as an effective rural
development channel, there is evidence that certain socioeconomic challenges could beset it, thereby
truncating the desired benefits that would be realised. A major challenge here could be linked to the
remoteness of the rural business environment which, according to Sherief, is symptomised by a lack
of local industrial and service milieu, meaning that there are fewer opportunities for firms to
subcontract out locally than in an urban centre. Again, and from the point of view of innovation
specifically, the low density of the business population results in a small number of potential
collaborating firms locally, as well as more sparsely distributed research and development,
educational institutions and business support providers compared with some other types of location.
In the Nigerian context, inadequate or dearth of infrastructural facilities have impacted
negatively on the business environment, including rural entrepreneurship.Okeke and Eme (2014) note
that poor access to infrastructure affects a large percentage of the population. Only about one in every
three households in rural areas has electricity and even when it is available, the supply of electricity
is often erratic. Agbola and Ukaegbu (2006) point to the devastating effect of poor infrastructural
facilities – erratic power supply, poor condition of road network and inadequate water supply – on
emerging businesses. Perhaps, one singular constraint that discourages entrepreneurship and business
growth in the rural sector is the security challenges posed by Boko Haram insurgency in the northeast and Niger Delta militancy in the south of Nigeria.
30
United Nations Development Project (UNDP), cited in Sherief (2008), has summarised the
problems faced by rural small- and medium-scale enterprises (SMEs) and suggested initiatives that
may be undertaken to solve these issues.
2.2.5 What an Entrepreneur could be missing if not acting in a Socially Responsible
Manner
Ehrlich, (2013) in his publications “why corporate social responsibility is important in 2015”
highlighted several reasons why organizations need to act in more responsibly in this millennium in
order to remain in business. In other words, if organizations are not socially responsible, they could
miss out on these benefits, and hence be digging their grave for slow but sure death! Some of the
reason includes the need to have a better public image, better media coverage, as well as foster a
positive work place environment amongst others (Erlich, 2013).
Therefore, both large and small companies have a lot to miss if the issue of social
responsibility is treated with laxity. Below are some of the areas they could miss out if CSR is
missing in their scheme of things:
For Big Corporations
Missing Out on Having a Better Public Image
A corporation’s public image is at the mercy of its social responsibility programs and how
aware consumers are of them (remember, this is the biggest obstacle – education and awareness)!
According to a study by Cone Communications, 9 out of 10 consumers would refrain from doing
business with a corporation if there is no corporate social responsibility plan.
For example, if a company is heavily involved in the practice of donating funds or goods to
local nonprofit organizations and schools, this increases the likelihood that a consumer will use their
product. Additionally, if a corporation takes great care to ensure the materials used in its products are
environmentally safe and the process is sustainable, this goes a long way in the eye of the
31
public.Remember, consumers feel good shopping at institutions that help the community. So acting
in more responsibly manner helps to Clean up your public image (and broadcast it to the world!)
Missing Out on Better and More Media Coverage for Publicity
“Going along with how the public sees your corporation, the amount of positive media
coverage a corporation receives is extremely important for business. It doesn’t matter how much your
company is doing to save the environment if nobody knows about it. As they say, it’s okay to toot
your own horn every once in a while. Make sure you’re forming relationships with local media
outlets so they’ll be more likely to cover the stories you offer them” (Ehrich, 2013). Therefore, how
much good a company can do in the local communities, or even beyond that, is corporate social
responsibility? And the better the benefits, the better the media coverage. On the other hand,
however, if a corporation participates in production or activities that bring upon negative community
impacts, the media will also pick this up (and unfortunately, bad news spreads quicker than good
news). Media visibility is only so useful in that it sheds a positive light the activities of one’s
organization.
Missing Out on the Fostering a Positive Workplace Environment
It is a general believe that employees like working for a company that has a good public
image and is constantly in the media for positive reasons. Happy employees almost always equal
positive output. So when there is no social responsibility in place in an organization, it becomes
increasingly difficult to foster a positive work environment relationship. There is even high employee
turnover in some instances. According may analysts, it’s clear that employees – particularly
Millennial – are equally concerned about the corporate company they keep. One study in the US for
example, reported that 72 percent of workers said they would choose a job at an eco-friendly
company over another company if given the choice.
32
For Small Nonprofits Organization
How corporations embrace corporate social responsibility in this day and age is also going to
be of great importance to the nonprofit world. Corporate responsibility actions such as giving
programs, which can include everything from matching gifts to volunteer grants; from team building
volunteer efforts to fundraising events are essential for the survival of NGOs.
These types of programs, which vastly increase the public good that corporations are doing,
are vital to nonprofit organizations because of the great monetary and volunteer implications. So if
nonprofits are not engaging in it, they will be missing as out as well. Specifically, they will be
missing out in the following areas:
Missing Out on the Opportunity for Greater Funding Through Employee Matching Gift
Programs
Corporations that offer matching gift programs are essentially doubling donations that its
employees are giving to eligible NGOs. For example, if an employee provides a N10, 000 donations
to anNGOs of their choice, his or her employer (if the company offers a matching gift program) will
write an additional N10, 000 checks, thereby increasing total funds brought in. It’s really that simple!
But if these socially responsibility actions are not in place, then the additional fund rising will
become an elusive task.
Furthermore, a recurring theme here seems to be the education factor of it. These are
phenomenal socially responsible programs that benefit both corporations and nonprofits, but if they
are underutilized because of a lack of awareness, then these programs do little good. As a nonprofit,
encourage corporations to promote these programs to employees – in fact, offer to help them!
It should also come as no surprise that matching gift programs increase employee engagement
for companies that offer these kinds of socially responsible programs, but they also help foster deeper
nonprofit-donor relationships (Erich, 2013).
33
Missing Out on the Greater Time Commitments through Employee Volunteer Grant Programs
For instance, in the developed countries such as US, Corporations that offer volunteer grants,
or even offer paid time off to volunteer at nonprofit organizations, are bringing in helping hands to
eligible nonprofit organizations. A corporation with this kind of program might offer (for example) a
$250 check to a nonprofit once an employee has volunteered at least 10 hours with the organization.
There are also pay-per-hour grants that many corporations offer, paying a certain dollar amount per
hour volunteered. This kind of socially responsible program is a win-win for both parties involved.
Employees of corporations are seen volunteering and donating their time to important causes in the
community, and nonprofits are receiving free time and volunteer work, which is essential the success
of so many nonprofits. These kinds of benefits are available to only organisations that act in more
socially responsible manner.
Missing Out on the Ease of Forging Corporate Partnerships
Yet another positive impact corporate social responsibility has on nonprofit organizations is
the possibility of corporate partnerships. These partnerships are vital to the work a corporation can do
in the local community, and important to a nonprofit that may not have the resources for major
marketing campaigns. Long-term corporate-nonprofit partnerships can benefit everyone.
For a corporation, a partnership with a local or national nonprofit organization improves the
company’s image in the public eye, as consumers can clearly see the positive impact a corporation is
having on their community. A key benefit is that it makes it easier for consumers to trust a company.
For a nonprofit organization, a partnership with a local or national corporation puts its name
on tons of marketing materials that otherwise could not have been afforded on tight budgets. A key
benefit is the partnership brings additional awareness to the nonprofit’s cause. These partnerships are
only possible if they see the corporate social responsibility of the organization as well as see how
their actions affects their stakeholders – only then is partnership in most cases, feasible.
34
2.3 Theoretical Framework
The social contract, stakeholder Theory and stewardship theory is adopted for this study.
2.3.1 Social Contract Theory
Gray et al., (1996) describe society as ‘a series of social contracts between members of the
society and society itself’. In the context of CSR, an alternative possibility is not that business might
act in a responsible manner because it is in its commercial interest, but because it is part of how
society implicitly expects business to operate.
In supporting this theory, Donaldson and Dunfee (1999) developed Integrated Social
Contracts Theory as guidance for managers to take decisions in an ethical milieu. They differentiate
between macro social contracts and micro social contracts. Thus a macro social contract in the
context of communities, for example, would be an expectation that business provides some support to
its local community and the specific form of involvement would be the micro social contract. Hence,
companies which adopt a view of social contracts would describe their involvement as part of
‘societal expectation’. This could explain the initial motivation; it might not explain the totality of
their involvement. One of the commercial benefits that were identified in the Australian study
(CCPA, 2000) was described as ‘license to operate’ – particularly for natural resource firms This
might be regarded as part of the commercial benefit of enhanced reputation, but also links for gaining
and maintaining legitimacy (Suchman, 2005). Therefore, this theory bases on the fact that business
companies are expected to undertake CSR activities as the means of gaining social license to operate
without which its operation and reputation would be flawed.
2.3.2 Stakeholder Theory
This theory insists on integrating groups with a stake in the firm into managerial decision
making (Rowley, 2007). These groups demand what they consider to be responsible corporate
practices. From this ground, some corporations are seeking corporate responses to social demands by
establishing dialogue with a wide spectrum of stakeholders. This is due to the fact that stakeholder
35
dialogue helps to address the question of responsiveness to the generally unclear signals received
from the environment. In addition, this dialogue ‘‘not only enhances a company’s sensitivity to its
environment but also increases the environments, understanding of the dilemmas facing the
organization’’ (Kaptein and Tulder, 2003).
Moreover, the fundamental responsibility of companies has for a long time been restricted to
the creation of economic value through maximizing profit; the stakeholder theory therefore, forces us
to look beyond this concept. Company directors can no longer be content to declare “We are making
money and we sub-contract to the State to regulate social injustices. To deal with all the outcasts that
our world produces” (Nash, 2000). The company, while being answerable to its “shareholders” also
has a wider “accountability” from shareholders to stakeholders because economic aspects cannot be
isolated from the rest (Freeman, 2004).
Thus the company is no longer accountable only to its shareholders but also to its
stakeholders, first of all the contractual stakeholders (employees, clients, suppliers), then the noncontractual stakeholders (local communities and communities in the broader sense, which are
affected directly or indirectly by its activity). This theory, therefore, concludes that business
companies should be accountable to their stakeholders including the community. This accountability
is constrained on using some of their profits for steering socio-economic development in the
communities in which they operate.
2.3.3 Stewardship Theory
This insists that, there have to be an inclusive level outcome of business decisions in ways
that goes beyond the loyal agent’s argument that, manager’s duty is essentially to serve the employer
loyally by contributing to profit maximization (Frynas, 2005).
This suggests that, stewardship of the corporation’s resources encompass a view of
stewardship of society’s resources to more broadly serve the society. This means that business is not
supposed to have steward responsibilities not just to shareholders, suppliers, distributors but also to
36
the local community in which the enterprise operates, the general public and the natural environment.
Therefore, when corporations make business decisions they should have both short and long term
effects on many sectors of society such as health, education, water and other sectors (Triker, 2009).
However, from these theories some common characteristics of CSR have been drawn as follows
2.4 Empirical Review
Corporate Social responsibility is predominantly considered as Western phenomena due to
strong institutions, standard, and appeal systems which are weak in developing countries of Asia
(Chaple and Moon, 2005). Such a weak system poses considerable challenge to firms practicing CSR
in developing countries like Nigeria. The literature on theory and practices on CSR in the developing
countries remain scant (Belal, 2001); which Nigeria is one of them.
Akinyomi (2013) studied Survey of corporate social responsibility practices in Nigerian
manufacturing sector. The study examined the practice of corporate social responsibility by
manufacturing companies in Nigeria. It employed survey research design to study 15 randomly
selected companies in the food and beverages sector. A total of 225 questionnaires were administered
to collect data. Data analysis revealed that CSR is a familiar concept in the sector as most of the
companies do engage in CSR activities regularly.
In Verma and Chauhan (2007) conducted research on Corporate Social Responsibility:
Impetus for rural development in India. Ten public and private companies were used to study their
CSR practices in the contest of rural development. The methodology of the study was relied on the
web based research, review of print literature. It was found that roads, pollution and power are the
major concern of corporate CSR activities as compared to least concern areas which is
communication and education. Contrary to it in a study by Dutta and Durgamohan (2009), it was
found that education takes the first place followed by health and social cause. Sazzard (2014) studied
on corporate social Responsibility: A tool for marketing and development of rural India. The
objective of the paper was to explore corporate social responsibility practices in the context of rural
37
development. The methodology was relied on web based research. It was discovered that CRS
actions have positive impact not only on development of rural India but also in their business.
Adeyemo (2013) investigated on An Evaluation of factors Influencing Corporate Social
Responsibility in Nigerian Manufacturing Companies. Multiple regressions were used to analyze the
data with the aid of SPSS version 20. The result identified factors that influenced CSR practices as
competition, employees demand, government policy, organizational culture, and customer demand
and recommended that organizations should see social performance as an enlightened self-interest
and should therefore handle it with a great concern Environics International (2001) conducted a 20
country survey and found that India is the last in the level of CSR demanded from companies in any
country. Similar survey was also conducted by the British Council (British Council et al., 2002)
reveals that a lack of provable link between CSR and firm performance often discourage companies
from engaging in CSR.
In a Study by Krishna (1992), it was observed that obstacle to CSR are found to be ad hoc
approach by the top management towards CSR, lack of consensus on priorities within the firm, and
problem related to measurement and evaluation of CSR activities were some of the obstacle
identified. Khan and Atkinson (1987) did a comparative study on managerial attitude to social
responsibility in India and Britain reveals that most of the Indian executives agreed CSR as relevant
to business and felt that business has responsibilities not only to shareholders and employees but also
to customers, suppliers, society and the state.
Uwaoma and Ordu (2015) conducted a study on Entrepreneurship and Social Responsibility:
The Nigerian Experience”. The paper provided insight into the social responsibility actions that
entrepreneurs have or have not been taking given the Nigerian context. In doing this, it adopts a
theoretical and conceptual approach. Firstly, it explains what entrepreneurship is – looking at various
definitions and refutes some of the myths which have grown up about entrepreneurs. Secondly, it
explains the concept of social responsibility as well as look at the reasons why entrepreneurs must act
38
in a socially responsible manner all through the entrepreneurship development process. Finally, it
critically evaluates and highlights some of the benefits entrepreneurship can miss out if it neglects
socially responsible actions and activities.
Richard, (2015) conducted a study on the Corporate Social Responsibility as a Tool for
Community Socio- Economic Development through Banking Sector in Tanzania: A Case of Crdb
Bank in Morogoro Municipality, Eastern Tanzania. The paper aimed at examining the contribution of
banking sector through Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in order to bring about community
socioeconomic development in Tanzania by taking Cooperative Rural Development Bank (CRDB
bank in Morogoro Tanzania as a case. The paper employed structured questionnaires, observations,
interviews and documentary reviews as the main tools for data collection. Data analysis was based on
descriptive statistics, frequency analysis and percentages. The results from the analysis show that
there are development projects that have been established and implemented by CRDB Bank,
including Education support projects, Health support projects, Entrepreneurship support projects,
Environmental conservation projects and Special group support projects. However, community
participation in the establishment and implementation of the development projects has been
inadequate. The challenges that limit the commitment of the Bank’s CSR were found to be rapid
population growth, climate change, inadequate loan management skills among clients and lack of
community awareness of its role in the established and implemented development projects. From the
results it was concluded that CRDB Bank had fulfilled its CSR but the community was not satisfied
because it has not been fully involved in initiating and implementing the projects. This paper strongly
recommends for the bank to extend its services to various sectors; embrace community participation
in all stages of development projects for sustainability; as well as ensuring training to the community
in order to create awareness on the role of the communities in the Bank’s CSR.
Lukman (2011) conducted a study on Entrepreneurship Development through Corporate
Social Responsibility – A Study of the Nigerian Telecommunication Industry. The research attempts
39
to fill the gap in this direction by examining the Entrepreneurship Development through Corporate
Social Responsibility – A Study of the Nigerian Telecommunication Industry. In specific terms, the
research seeks deeper understanding of CSR and Entrepreneurship with a view to refocusing both
constructs as support mechanisms for small enterprise development in Nigeria. Considering the
multidisciplinary nature of this research, an extensive review of literature was carried out which
provided deeper insights into the research problem. Arising from the review of literature, the human
capital theory and stakeholder theory provided the required theoretical grounding for the study. For
easy triangulation, the study adopted a mixed research methods (an amalgam of qualitative and
quantitative research methods). The target population for the study was the Nigerian
telecommunication industry, which comprised the 24 telecommunication companies and the 65
million proxy telephone users. Lagos state was preferred as the sample location. From the target
population, sample sizes of 9 telecommunication companies and 384 telephone users were selected
with justifications using purposive sampling and snowballing sampling respectively. The qualitative
aspect of research used interview instrument for data collection. The interview data from 9
interviewees were analysed using content and thematic analyses. The quantitative research on the
other hand used web-enabled questionnaire instrument for data collection. Out of the 384 telephone
users targeted, only 369 responses were analysed, using descriptive and inferential statistics (ChiSquare Test, Friedman Rank Test, Structural Equation Modelling and Multiple Linear Regression
Analysis). At end of the investigation, it was found that the stakeholders’ perception of CSR is
largely a philanthropic perspective; while the perception of entrepreneurship in the same industry is
the act of setting up businesses for self-employment and wealth creation. Furthermore, the dominant
CSR activity is sports and entertainments, while entrepreneurship development was poorly supported.
With regards to the potentials, the study found that CSR is a potential means for funding
entrepreneurship education; funding start-up venture capital for unemployed graduates/trainees;
funding business clusters and technology business incubation centres for small businesses; funding
40
purchase of equipment and tools for poor artisans, craftsmen and petty traders in disadvantaged host
communities; and also CSR could be an effective instrument for political risk mitigation in hostile
communities like Niger-Delta and Northern Nigeria. Finally, it was found that there is a relationship
between CSR and entrepreneurship in the Nigerian telecommunication industry, but the predictability
of CSR dimensions on entrepreneurship is weak. The study has therefore enriched the literature with
an enhanced understanding of CSR incorporating entrepreneurship, as opposed to viewing CSR in
terms of social, economic and environmental dimensions. The study concludes with a discussion of
the academic and practical implications of the findings as well as recommendations for further
research in this multidisciplinary field.
Entrepreneurial activity and new firm formation are unquestionably considered engines of
economic growth and innovation (Baumol, 1990; Murphy, Shleifer and Vishny, 1991). As such, they
are among the ultimate determinants of the large regional differences in economic performance. The
importance of new firm formation for growth has been recognized since Schumpeter (1934).
According to the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor Report (2000), about 70 percent of an area’s
economic performance is dependent upon how entrepreneurial the area’s economy is.
Entrepreneurial orientation in rural areas is based on stimulating local entrepreneurial talent
and subsequent growth of indigenous companies. This in turn would create jobs and add economic
value to a region, and at the same time it will keep scarce resources within the community. According
to Petrin (1992), to accelerate economic development in rural areas, it is necessary to build up the
critical mass of first generation entrepreneurs.
Studies conducted by Economic Commission for Latin America and Caribbean (ECLAC) and
Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) in the Latin American and Caribbean region have
indicated that rural enterprises can be an important modernizing agent for small agriculture.
Governments have supported this process by creating incentives for agro-industry to invest in such
regions. This has not only been in developing countries, but it has also been a clear policy of the
41
European Union (EU) which channels a large part of the total common budget to develop the
backward and poor regions of Europe (Raimi, 2015).
Lyson, (2005) echoes the prospects of small-enterprise framework as a possible rural
development strategy for economically disadvantaged communities and provides this description of
the nature of small-scale flexibly specialized firms: “First, these businesses would provide products
for local consumption that are not readily available in the mass market.. Second, small-scale
technically sophisticated enterprises would be able to fill the niche markets in the national economy
that are too small for mass producers. Third, small, craft-based, flexibly specialized enterprises can
alter production quickly to exploit changing market conditions.”
According to a study conducted in the United States it has been found that rural poverty has
become as intense as that found in the inner cities, and has stubbornly resisted a variety of attempts at
mitigation through economic development policies. The latest strategy for addressing this problem is
the encouragement of emerging “home-grown” enterprises in rural communities. The expectation is
that these new ventures-a) will provide jobs or at least self-employment; b) will remain in the areas
where they were spawned as they grow; c) and will export their goods and services outside the
community, attracting much-needed income. (Lyons, 2002)
Gavian et al., (2002), in a study on the importance of SME development in rural employment
in Egypt, have suggested that SMEs are traditionally thought of as well poised to respond to
increased demand by creating jobs. It is important to stress here that rural entrepreneurship in its
substance does not differ from entrepreneurship in urban areas. Entrepreneurship in rural areas is
finding a unique blend of resources, either inside or outside of agriculture. The economic goals of an
entrepreneur and the social goals of rural development are more strongly interlinked than in urban
areas. For this reason entrepreneurship in rural areas is usually community based, has strong
extended family linkages and a relatively large impact on a rural community.
42
2.5 The Major Lacuna in Contribution of Entrepreneurship on Corporate Social Responsibility
in Rural Areas
The literature on CSR has emerged from a variety of disciplines, such as sociology,
philosophy, accounting, management, finance, law and politics (Banerjee, 2007, 2008; Porter and
Kramer, 2006; Vogel, 2005; Jones, 2008). Within the accounting literature, CSR has been considered
as part of social accounting, which overlaps with social and environmental accounting (Adam, 2004
Beck, Campbell and Shrives, 2010; Gray, et al., 2001) as quoted by Lauwo (2011). Within the
accounting context, CSR is viewed as a potentially gentle mechanism which can be used to mobilize
meaningful organizational changes leading to less corrupt and unsustainable business practices.
Despite the increasing attention being given to CSR in the literature as a postulate for accountability
and for the promotion of ethical and responsible business practices, most studies have been primarily
Western-centric (Guthrie and Parker, 2000). Although, over the last decade or so there have been an
increasing number of studies focusing on CSR issues in developing countries (Belal, 2008;
Kuasirikun, 2005).
However, despite these studies, little explicit attention has been paid to the role played by
local laws and regulations and other institutional structures (such as NGO activism) on the
development of social accounting practices. Previous studies on social and environmental accounting
have instead tended to focus on the impact of global pressures such as that of international
organizations (Islam and Deegan, 2010). On the other hand, CSR is a social practice which tends to
be embedded in a particular economic, social cultural, historical and institutional structure (Midttun,
et al., 2006). For this reason, it was argued that it is inappropriate to apply conclusions reached from
studies in developed countries to what happens in developing countries, as the different sociopolitical, economic and regulatory environments of developed and developing countries shape CSR
practices differently. Jones (2009) has drawn attention to the significance of the national socio-
43
cultural environment and the level of national economic development as important variables
influencing our understanding of CSR.
CHAPTER THREE
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Research Design
The study adopted a Survey Research Method this research was carried out in Jalingo Local
Government area of Taraba State, Nigeria. The Local Government Area has two main seasons; the
dry season and rainy season. The rainy season is between April and October, while the dry season is
between November and March. It is within the guinea savanna ecological zone of Nigeria.
3.2 Area of the Study
The study was carried out in Jalingo Metropolis, the administrative headquarters of Taraba
State, Nigeria. Jalingo Local Government is located between the latitudes 8047' to 9001'N and
longitudes 11009' to 11030'E. It is bounded to the North by Lau Local Government Area, to the South
and West by Ardo-Kola Local Government Area. It covers a land area of bout 195km2. Jalingo Local
Government Area has a population of 139, 845 people according to the National Population
Commission (NPC), 2006) with a projected growth rate 3% (Shawulu et al., 2008).
Jalingo Local Government Area has tropical continental type of climate marked by wet and
dry seasons. The wet season usually begins from April and ends in October. The dry season starts in
November and ends in March. The dry season is characterized by the prevalence of the northeast
trade winds popularly known as the harmattan wind which is usually dry and dusty. The Local
Government has a mean annual rainfall of about 1200mm and annual temperature of about 290C,
relative humidity ranges between 60-70 per cent during the wet season to about 35-45 percent in the
dry season. Jalingo Local Government Area is located within northern guinea savannah zone
characterized by grasses interspersed with tall trees and shrubs. The predominant occupation of the
people is farming while other occupation includes: trading, craftwork, cow milk selling business by
44
majority of the Fulani nomads etc. Major crops grown are: maize, rice, groundnut, cowpea, yam,
cassava, sorghum and sugarcane.
3.3 Population of the Study
A purposive random sampling technique was used in this study. Five (5) wards were
purposively selected out of the ten (10) wards in the area. These wards were selected based on their
sizes and volume of entrepreneurship organizations available. Lastly, one hundred (100)
questionnaires were distributed to the respondents. Primary data that was used for the study was
collected by the use of questionnaire. The primary data was directly collected from the respondents
using the structured questionnaire. The questionnaires were administered personally, followed by
personal interview of respondents. The secondary data was collected from relevant published
materials such as journals, textbooks and internet.
3.4 Sample and Sampling Procedure
The Study was conducted in Jalingo Local Government Area which was stratified into wards:
Kona, Sintali ‘A’, Sintali ‘B’, Kachalla-sembe, Barade and Turaki ‘A’ ward in order to ensure
adequate coverage, and the table below shows the sampling procedure.
Table 1: Distribution of Questionnaire
Wards
No. of Questionnaire
No. of Questionnaire
Distributed
Returned
Kona
20
12
Sintali ‘A’
20
16
Sintali ‘B’
20
14
Barade
20
16
Turaki ‘A’
20
14
Total
100
72
Source: Field Survey, 2018.
45
46
3.5 Instrument for Data Collection
One instrument will be used to collect data for the study which is Contribution of
Entrepreneurship on Corporate Social Responsibility in Rural Areas Questionnaire (CECSRRAQ).
The questionnaire will be in two part A and B, Part A. Elicit information about the subject will be
require to between the following options from
Strongly Agreed
-
SA
[
]
Agreed
-
A
[
]
No Response
-
D
[
]
Disagreed
-
DA
[
]
Strongly Disagreed
-
SD
[
]
3.6 Method of Data Collection
The researcher visited the sampled wards within Jalingo Local Government to be used for the
study to administer the instrument. The "wait and take" technique will be adopted to collect the
completed questionnaire from the respondents in addition to the instructions written on the
questionnaire the subjects will be given verbal instruction where necessary.
3.7 Method of Data Analysis
Data will be analysis using simple percentage, mean and standard deviation. Simple
percentage method of analyzing data will be used to analyze data collected from the research work.
Simple percentage method includes mean, frequency count, number of respondents and percentage.
The formula is stated below:
No. of each frequency count
x 100
Total No. of Quest. Retrieved
The response obtained from the questionnaire distributed and collected can be used for data
generation for result and discussion in chapter four.
47
REFERENCES
Abreu, R., David, F., and Crowther, D. (2005) Corporate social responsibility in Portugal: empirical
evidence of corporate behaviour. Corporate Governance, 5(5), pp. 3-18.
Acs, Z., & Szerb, L. (2007) Entrepreneurship, economic growth and public policy. Small Business
Economics, 28 (2/3), pp. 109–122.
Adebakin, M. A. and Raimi, L. (2012) National Security Challenges and Sustainable Economic
Development: Evidence from Nigeria. Journal of Studies in Social Sciences, Vol. 1(1), pp. 130
Adegbemile, A.A. (2007). Developments in Telecommunications in Nigeria and its Impact on
National Development: Experiences from Around the World. Asian Journal of Information
Technology, 6: pp. 884-890.
Adeyemi, A. A. (2013) Development of Small and Medium Enterprises In Nigeria: A Paradigm
Shift. International Journal of Research In Commerce, IT & Management, Vol. 3(1), pp. 4045.
Agbola, M. & Ukaegbu, C., 2006, ‘Business environment and entrepreneurial activity in Nigeria:
Implications for industrial development’, Journal of Modern African Studies 44(1), 1–30.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022278X05001394
Aguilera, R. V.; Rupp, D. E.; Williams, C. A. and Ganapathi, J. (2007) Putting the S back in
corporate social Responsibility: a multilevel theory of Social change in organizations.
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 32(3), pp. 836–863.
Akande, O. O., and Ojukuku, R. M. (2008).The impact of entrepreneurial skills on small business
performance in Lagos - South-Western Nigeria. World Conference. Halifax, Nova Scotia:
International Council for Small Business.
Akhakpe, I., Fatile, O.J. & Igbokwe-Ibeto, C.J., 2012, ‘Local government and the challenges of
community and rural development in Nigeria: The way forward’, International Journal of
Asian Social Science 2(6), 803–819.
Akhuemonkhan, I. A., and Raimi, L., and Ogunjirin, O. D. (2015) Corporate Social Responsibility
and Entrepreneurship (CSRE): Antidotes to Poverty, Insecurity and Underdevelopment in
Nigeria. Social Responsibility Journal, Vol. 11 Iss: 1, pp.56 – 81.
Akhuemonkhan, I., Raimi, L., Ogunjirin, O. D. (2012) Corporate Social Responsibility and
Entrepreneurship (CSRE): Antidotes to Poverty, Insecurity and Underdevelopment in
Nigeria. Conference paper delivered at international conference on Poverty, Insecurity and
Development in Africa, Universiti de Lome, Republic of Togo, November 1-2
Alarape, A. A. (2007) Entrepreneurship programs, operational efficiency and growth of small
businesses. Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy,
Vol. 1(3), pp. 222-239.
Amaeshi, K., Osuji, O. K. and Doh, J. P. (2011) Corporate Social Responsibility as a Market
Governance Mechanism: Any implications for Corporate Governance in Emerging
48
Economies? Corporate Governance in Emerging Markets Conference, Seoul, 28th - 29th
May.
Bala, P.D; Akpihi, L, and Yusuf, I.A (Not dated).Entrepreneurship development in Nigeria:
Principles and Practice. Nigeria: Adey Digital Prints, pp 3-5
Benn, S. And Bolton, D. (2013), Corporate Social Responsibility, London, Sage Publications
Limited.Cadbury Nigeria Plc., Annual Report and Accounts for Year Ended 31st December,
2000.
Beyene, A. (2002) Enhancing the Competitiveness and Productivity of Small and Medium Scale
Enterprises (SMEs) in Africa: An Analysis of Differential Roles of National Governments
through Improved Support Services. Africa Development, Vol. 27(3), 130-156.
Bichta, C., 2003) Corporate Social Responsibility A role in Government Policy and
Regulation? The University, Centre for the study of Regulated Industries (CRI) of Bath
Brain,
T., 2005, The role of the entrepreneurship, viewed 19 June 2010,
http://www.entrepreneurship.com/startinga/business/startupbasics/article.78478.html
from
Brammer, S., Jackson, G. & Matten, D. (2012) Corporate social responsibility and institutional
theory: New perspectives on private governance. Socio-Economic Review, 10: 3–28.
Brønn, P. S. and Vrioni, A. B (2001) Corporate Social Responsibility and Cause Related Marketing:
an Overview. International Journal of Advertising, Vol. 20(2), pp. 207-222.
Carree, M.A., Van Stel, A.J., Thurik, A.R. And Wennekers, A.R.M. (2002), Economic
development and business ownership: an analysis using data of 23 OECD countries in the
period 1976-1996, Small Business Economics 19 (3): 271-290.
Chahoud, T., Emmerling, J., Kolb, D., Kubina, I., Repinski, G., Schlager, C. (2007). Corporate
social and environmental responsibility in India—Assessing the UN global compact’s role
Deji, O., 2005, ‘Membership of co-operative societies and adoption behaviour of women farmers:
Implication for rural development’. Journal of Social Science 10(2), 145–147.
Desaisa, M., 2009, Entrepreneurship in Iraq: Understanding the constraints, viewed 20 June 2010,
from http://www.wider.unu.edu/publications/newsletter/articles/en-GBlen
Di-Masi, P., 2000, ‘Defining entrepreneurship’, in Financing microenterprises: Theory and practice,
viewed 19 June 2016, from http://www.gdrc.org/icm/micro/define-micro.html
Di-Masi, P., 2008, ‘Defining entrepreneurship’,
http://www.gdrc.org/icm/micro/define-micro.html
viewed
13
June
2017,
from
Durham,L.(2005).Entrepreneurship and Ethics. A publication at the St. Thomas University, USA.
November, 15(http//.www.stthomas.edu/news/authors/bulletin) accessed on 9/09/2015.
Ebiriwa, O.M., 2005, Understanding development administration, Outright Publishers Ltd., Onitsha.
Egwemi V. & Odo, L.U., 2013, ‘Rural development and poverty eradication in Nigeria’, JORIND
11(1), 101–110.
49
Ehrlich, E. (2013). Why Corporate Social Responsibility is important in 2015. Corporate consulting
and learning centre publications. www.doublethedonation.com.Accessed on 8/09/2015.
Ejiofor, P., 1989, Foundations of business administration, Africana FEP Publishers Ltd., Onitsha.
Enemuo, A. U. (2012), Entrepreneurship Strategies, Onitsha, Abbot Books Limited.
Fauzi, H., Svensson, G., Rahman, A.A. (2010). ‘'Triple bottom line’ as ‘sustainable corporate
performance’: A proposition for the future. Sustainability, 2, 1345–1360
Gana, J.S., 2001, Entrepreneurship, Kaduna Tofegan Associates, Kaduna.
Giannetti, M., Simonov, A., (2003). Social Interactions and Entrepreneurial activity. Department of
Finance and SITE, Stockholm school of Economics, CEPR and ECGI, Stockholm, Sweden.
Guinness Nigeria Plc. (2008), Annual Report and Accounts for the Year Ended 31st December,
2008.
Hisrich, R. D., & Peters, M. P. (2002).Entrepreneurship (Fifth edition).International edition. New
York: McGraw Hill/Irwin Publishers. Pp 10 -11.
Hisrich, R.D. & Peters, M.P., 2002, Entrepreneurship, 5th edn., McGraw-Hill/Irwin, Sydney.
Hisrich, R.D. (1986). Entrepreneurship and Intrapreneurship and Venture Capital . Lexington,
MA: Lexignton books. Pp 90.
Ile, N. M. (2001), Management, A Functional Approach, Enugu, Ochumba Printing and Publishing
Company Limited.
Jamnik, A. (2011), The Challenges Of Business Ethics – Management And The Question. Tourism
and Hospitality Management, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 141-152.
Kayne, J.,(2000).Rural Entrepreneurship Initiative September. Kauffman Center for Entrepreneurial
Leadership, (pp 8).
Lee, H.S., & Phan, P., 2008, Initial thoughts on a model of rural entrepreneurship in developing
countries, 2nd edn., World Entrepreneurship Forum, Baltimore.
Majumdar, S., Saini, G.K. (2013). Perceptions of corporate social responsibility: A study of the
social segments in the Indian state of goa. South Asian Journal of Management, 20(1), 145–
156
Majumdar, S., Saini, G.K. (2016). CSR in India: Critical review and exploring entrepreneurial
opportunities. Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation in Emerging Economies, 2(1),
56–79
Manikandan, S (2014). Entrepreneur’s Social Responsibility (ESR): An Engine of Innovation for
creating new dimension to serve the society. Conference paper published by PG. & Research
Dept. of Commerce Guru Nanak College, Chennai, China.
Naudes, W., 2008, Entrepreneurship in economic development, viewed 13 June 2017, from
http://www.wider.Unu.edu/publications/working ers/research papers/2008GB/rp2008–2010
50
New York Committee for Economic Development (1971), Corporate Social Responsibility, New
York.
Nicholls, A. (2006). Introduction. In A., Nicholls, Social entrepreneurship: New models of
sustainable change (pp. 1–35). New York: Oxford University Press.
Nnamdi O. L. and Chika, L. and Nwaigw, B.S. (2015) Corporate Social Responsibility of
Businesses. European Journal of Business and Management ISSN 2222-1905. Vol.7, No.9.
Nwachukwu, C.C (2005). The Practice of entrepreneurship in Nigeria. Nigeria: Africana – first
publishers Ltd, Onitsha .pp 207-208.
Nwobi, T., 2007, Rural development, theories and strategies, Rex Charles and Patrick Ltd., Nimo,
Anambra State.
Nzelibe, C. G., Emejulu, G. A. And Onubogu, O. A. (1997), Contemporary Business Management,
Onitsha, Baset Printing and Publishing Limited.
Nzelibe, C., 1996, Entrepreneurship and management of small scale business, Optimal Publishers,
Enugu.
OECD,
2010,
Rural
entrepreneurship,
viewed
25
May
2010,
http://www.oecd.org/document/55/0,3343,en-217136/-38013663-38040311-11,0
from
Okeke, M.I. & Eme, O.I., 2014, ‘Challenges facing entrepreneurship in Nigeria’, Sinaporean
Journal of Business Economics, and Management Studies 3(5), 18–34.
https://doi.org/10.12816/0010956
Oluwashola, J., and Ayinde, D. (2015), publication at the Nation Newspaper August 22, 2015 pp 10.
Onibokun, A.G., 1987, ‘Rural development policy planning and implementation in Nigeria’, Journal
of the Nigeria 7(2), 20–34.
Onwuchekwa, C. I. (2000), Business Policy and Strategic Management, Onitsha, University
Publishing Coy. Oyedijo, A. (1995), Principles of Management, Ibadan, Paramount Books
Limited.
Onyekwelu, R., Uzor, N. & Chiekezie, N., 2008, Principles and practice of entrepreneurship, Rex
Charles and Patrick Ltd., Imo, Anambra State.
Ordu, P.A and Okoroafor, S. (2014). Sustaining Ethical Management Practice in contemporary
organization: Challenges and Mitigations in Nigeria. EBSU Journal of Contemporary
Management, Vol 2, No 1, pp 43-58.
Perpar, A., 2007, Characteristics of rural area in Slovenia, advantages, weakness, possibilities for
improvement of present situation from view point of sustainable rural development, viewed
2 June 2014, from http://www.agri.hr/jcea/issues/jcea8-2/Rdf/jcea82-14.pdf
Petrin, T., 1992, ‘Partnership and institution building as factors in rural development’, paper
presented at the Sixth Session of the FAO/ECA Working Party on Women and the
Agricultural Family in Rural Development, Innsbruck, Austria, 13–16 October.
Petrin, T., 1994, ‘Entrepreneurship as a an Economic Force in Rural Development’, key note paper
presented at the 7th FAO/REU International Rural Development Summer School,
51
Herrsching,
Germany,
8–14
September,
viewed
http://www.fao.org/docrep/w6882e/w6882eO2.htm
13
July
2017,
from
Popovich, M.G. & Buss, T.F., 1990, ‘101 ideas for stimulating rural entrepreneurship and new
business development’, Economic Development Review 8(4), 26–32.
Porter, M.E., Kramer, M.R. (2006 December). Strategy and society: The link between competitive
advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78–92
Post, J. E., Lawrence, A. T., and Weber, J. (1888), Business and Society, Corporate Social
Responsibility, Boston, McGraw Hills.
Raimi, L., Patel, A., Adelopo, I. (2014) Corporate Social Responsibility, Waqf System and Zakat
System as Faith-Based Model for Poverty Reduction. World Journal of Entrepreneurship,
Management and Sustainable Development, Vol. 10(3), pp. 228-242.
Raimi, L., Patel, A., Yekini, K. and Fadipe, A.O. (2014) Spatio-Temporal Audit of Nigeria’s
Industrial Policies and Entrepreneurship Development Interventions from 1946 to 2013.
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, Vol. 4(1), pp. 294-309.
Redmond, W.A., 2008, Entrepreneur Microsoft (R) Encarta (R) 2009 {DVD} Microsoft
Corporation.
Sarkar, J., Sarkar, S. (2015). Corporate social responsibility in India—An effort to bridge the
welfare gap (Working Paper No. WP-2015–023). Indira Gandhi Institute of Development
Research, Mumbai
Seven Up Bottling Company Plc. (2008), Annual Report and Accounts for Year
Ending 31st December,2008.United Bank for Africa Plc., Annual Report and Accounts for
Year ended 31st December, 2010. Weihrich, H., Cannice, M. V. And Koontz, H. (2011),
Management, New Delhi, Tata McGraw Hill.
Sherief, S., 2008, Entrepreneurship as an economic force in rural development, viewed 28 October
2015, from http://www.africaeconomicanalysis.org/articles/gen/rural_entrepreneurship.ht
Sofoluwe, A. O., Shokunbi, M. O., Raimi, L. and Ajewole, T. (2013) Entrepreneurship Education as
a Strategy for boosting Human Capital Development and Employability in Nigeria: Issues,
Prospects, Challenges and Solutions. Journal of Business Administration and Education
ISSN 2201-2958 Vol. 3(1), pp. 25-50.
Starcher, G. (1997). Ethics and Entrepreneurship, an Oxymoron? : A Transition to a Free Market
Economy in Eastern Europe. http://bahai-library.com/starcher_ethics_entrepreneurshipParis:
European Bahá'í Business Forum, 1997) accessed on 9/9/2015.
Sternberg, E. (2009) Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Governance. Economic Affairs,
Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc, Vol. 29(4), pp. 5-10.
Taman, S. (2011) The Concept Of Corporate Social Responsibility In Islamic Law. Indiana
International & Comparative Law Review, 481.
Tilling, M. V. (2004) Refinements to Legitimacy Theory in Social and Environmental Accounting.
Flinders University Commerce Research Paper Series No 04-6.
52
Timmons, J.A., Muzyka, D.F., Stevenson, H.H. and Bygrave, W.D. (1989).Opportunity
recognition: the core of entrepreneurship, in Churchill, N.C., Vesper, K.H. and Kirchoff,
B.A. (Eds), Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, Babson College, Wellesley, MA, pp.
409‐75.
Tounés, A., Chakroun, W. and Gribaa, F. (2011) A Spatio-Temporal Odyssey Around the Concepts
of Sustainable Development and Corporate Social Responsibility: Boundaries to Be
Determined? Journal of Modern Accounting and Auditing, October, 7(10), pp. 1158-1168.
Uadiale, O. M. and Fagbemi, T. O. (2012) Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial
Performance in Developing Economies: The Nigerian Experience. Journal of Economics and
Sustainable Development, Vol.3(4), pp.44-54.
Umebali, E. & Akuibilo, C.J.C., 2006, ‘Readings in cooperative economics and management’, in
E.E. Umebali (ed.), Rural resources farm business management and rural development,
Computer Edge Publishers, Lagos.
University of Port Harcourt Faculty of Management Sciences Publication (2011). Entrepreneurship
and Small Business Management: Theory and practice. pp 90-102.
Utting, P. (2003) Promoting Development through Corporate Social Responsibility - Does it Work?
Global Future, Third Quarter, 2003.
Uwaoma, I. and Ordu, P.A. (2015) Entrepreneurship and Social Responsibility: The Nigerian
Experience”. International Journal of Managerial Studies and Research (IJMSR) Volume 3,
Issue 10, PP 54-63 ISSN 2349-0330.
World Bank, 2015, World development indicators: Rural environment and land use. World Bank
Group, Washington, DC. Available from http://wdi.worldbank.org/table/3.1
53
APPENDIX I
Department of Business Administration
Faculty of Social & Mgt Sciences
Taraba State University,
P.M.B 1167 Jalingo
23rd April, 2018.
Dear Respondent,
Sir/Ma
QUESTIONNAIRE
I am a student of the above mentioned department currently undergoing a research work on
the topic: The Contribution of Entrepreneurship on the Corporate Social Responsibility in Rural
Areas. A case study of Jalingo L.G.A.
I am soliciting for your assistance to help me provide accurate information in Appendix II
Below.
All information retrieved will be treated confidentially and for the purpose of this research
work only.
Thank you,
Yours Sincerely
Angelo Baleri Grace
TSU/FSMS/BM/15/2018
54
APPENDIX II
Instructions: Please tick in the box provided or write where appropriate
Keys: SD: Strongly disagree, D: Disagree, SA: Strongly agree, A: Agree and NR: No response
QUESTIONNAIRE
Indicate the degree to which you agree or disagree with the following statements
about your company/organization
Statements
1. The company tolerates all religions, races and orientations
of its employees
2. The company provides its workers with regular training
3. The company provides paid maternity leave
4. The company provides paid family sickness and
bereavement leave to its employees
5. Employees are free to decide how much overtime they
want to do
6. My company prohibits child labour
7. My company views customer complaints as an opportunity
to improve service rather than as a problem that is taking
valuable time
8. When my company does not have the product/service it
is not my problem to suggest alternatives or options to the
customer
9. I sometimes lose my patience with customers whose
complaints I consider wrong.
SD
D
N
A
SA
55
10. Customer satisfaction is more important than finance and
human resource issues.
11.
The company is committed to fair trading practices
12. The company cannot be concerned with vulnerable
groups such as children because it is
13
company
always and clearly explains to the
not aThe
priority
customer
customer the way the product works
14.
The company sells only products that are clearly
labeled
15. Community issues like (bursaries, Sports & youth
organizations, disaster relief etc) are very important to my
company
16. My company gives first preference to local
employment
17. Workers are allowed to use company time for community
issues
18. The company responds promptly to customer complaints
19. (The concept of business social responsibility)
- that is the idea that businesses need to look beyond profit
motive and also contribute towards community causes such
as disaster
relief,
sponsorships,
as well
20.
Businesses
irrespective
of sizeetc.
indeed
haveas
a taking extra
care of its employees
and customers
is well
known
to me
responsibility
to contribute
to the above
named
social
causes
in 19.Business irrespective of size stands to benefit from
21.
contributing towards the above social causes
mentioned in 19
56
Indicate the degree to which you agree or disagree with the statement that a company that
engages in socially responsible activities mentioned in question 19 above are more likely to
derive the following benefits
D
SD
N
A
SA
22. Enhanced company image
23. Increased sales
24. Greater worker productivity
25. Keeps operating costs down
26.
level costs
of customer
due Increased
to lower (legal
and
27. Increased level of customer
loyalty
penalties)
loyalty
Indicate the degree to which you agree or disagree with regard to your company’s general
performance over the last three years
D
SD
N
A
SA
28. Employee attendance has
29. Sales has been growing
improved
30. Overall financial
performance
been of loyal
31. Increasinghas
number
improving
customers
32.
What type of business are you engaged in?
education
Primary
Second
Matric
ary
(grade
(grade
10 –
Female
Post matric
Post graduate
Other
Please state your highest educational level
(specify)
35.
……………
Please indicate your age in years
…..
Education
………
34.
No formal
Male
………..
Please indicate your gender
Transport
Retail
Mining
Hospitality-
restaurant
hotels
Health/
Medical
Commercial
farming
33.
57
36.
Indicate the number of years your business has been in
operation
37.
Indicate your First/home language
38.
Please think about your company’s sales over the past three to five years and
Over 50%
Increasing
41-50%
Increasing
31-40%
Increasing
21-30%
Increasing
11-20%
Increasing
1-10%
Increasing
change 0%
No
(1-20%)
Decreasing
indicate the average per year sales growth over the last three to five years.
39. Please think about your company’s gross profit level over the past three to five years
40.
Over 50%
Increasing
41-50%
Increasing
31-40%
Increasing
21-30%
Increasing
11-20%
Increasing
1-10%
Increasing
change 0%
No
(1-20%)
Decreasing
and indicate the average per year profit level over the last three to five years.
Besides the owner/manager how many people does your company
employ on full-time basis?
41.
Finally could you please use the table below to estimate in monetary terms the
10%
Over
10%
9%
8%
7%
6%
5%
4%
3%
2%
1%
1%
Less than
percentage of pre-tax profit that your company spends annually on social causes?