Global trends are encouraging companies to be more socially responsible.In recent
years, with the frequent occurrence of food safety accidents，it has seen an
argument between companies and corporate social responsibility (Chen, 2020).
Meanwhile, it isn’t just exist in food safety industry, it also exists in other industries,
such as oil industries and ITT(Sethi, 1975). The main argument is without performing
corporate social responsibility, why so many companies are still successful. This
social issue is due to the target of company operations, keeping maximization of
corporate interests. When a company is running, the first and the most important
thing is being responsible for making profits. It has been argued that companies
should not only be responsible for making profits, but also be responsible for the
environment, customers and their social responsibilities. (Sethi, 1975). However, this
essay will be demonstrate that although some companies are very successful in their
field, they still need to perform their corporate social responsibility due to maintain
a good public image.
Companies don’t need to engage in corporate social responsibility(CSR) because they
can earn profit without CSR. Thus they lack of CSR. The main reasons why some of
them lack of CSR are the pursuit for corporate profit, the difficulty to judge corporate
social responsibility for a company in some fields and the lack of social responsibility
conception. The first reason why some company lack of CSR is because of the
attention to economic development. While Sethi accepted that corporate social
responsibility is an elusive concept, but it can be measured and compared within a
structural framework and within the cultural context of each organization(Sethi,
1975), it also the case that why the trend of encouraging companies to be more
social responsibility. First, the main problem faced by enterprises is economic
development, so, as in many industries, they pay greater economic and social costs
for a period of time in exchange for faster economic growth and they may ignore the
importance of CSR. To illustrate, Leisinger use the global AIDS/HIV pandemic as the
background, he pointed out that some “Big Pharma” companies don’t live up to their
corporate social responsibility. Although corporate social responsibility is an
1
important social economic factor in the modern society. In Leisinger’s opinion, facing
and overcoming global poverty and improving health care conditions are the main
social responsibility for national governments and international governmental
institutions to provide aids to the patients in their countries or in development
countries. However, private companies do have corporate social responsibilities to
provide relevant help. As for why some “Big Pharma” companies don’t take the main
responsibility, the main reason is that it’s hard to judge corporate social
responsibility in pharmaceutical industry（Leisinger, 2005). These private companies
make their shareholders’ profit a priority.
However, although corporate social responsibility is an important social economic
factor in the modern society, some companies still lack of corporate social
responsibility conception. CSR, like ethic, some enterprises don’t have insufficient
sense of responsibility of enterprises themselves. They lack the concept of social
responsibility. In the process of operation, they ignore social responsibility only for
the pursuit of immediate interests, which brings invisible harm to the society, the
country and the environment (Chen, 2020). Overall, in terms of attention to
economic development and insufficient sense of responsibility of enterprises
themselves, in the corporate operation, some companies lack of CSR.
However, although companies can maintain profit without CSR, they still need to
engage in CSR because they need to maintain a good public image. A good company
public image sometimes can have a positive influence for corporate profit. Charity
behavior is one of the important forms for enterprises to actively undertake social
responsibility behaviors. With the increasingly intensified global economic
competition, enterprises at home and abroad have planned corporate social
responsibility behaviors into the overall strategy, in order to achieve a win-win
situation of economic and social interests. Enterprise philanthropy is from the heart
back to society, to fulfill social responsibility consciousness, voluntary abide by social
2
morality, good performance of the corporate social responsibility is conducive to
enterprises in market competition in a favorable position, but with the emergence of
hypocrisy, there is always a consumer of corporate philanthropy behavior suspected
of psychology, This suspicion leads consumers to attribute the motivation of
corporate CSR behavior to external enterprises. How enterprises should fulfill their
social responsibilities in order to gain consumers' recognition of philanthropic
behavior, eliminate consumers' prejudice against philanthropic behavior, and change
consumers' bad cognition of enterprises are of great significance to the long-term
development of enterprises.
While some companies may don’t want cost too much for corporate social
responsibility considering about shareholders profit. So some companies may try to
be corporate hypocrisy. That is to say some companies evade responsibility by
pretending to fulfill their social responsibilities. Erbschloe, M. (2020) claimed that the
process of shareholder activism has influenced the process of the company’s
corporate social responsibility. Erbschloe illustrates the evolution of corporate social
responsibility (CSR) is accompanied by the increase in the responsibilities of the
company. Erbschloe accepted that the forces behind the corporate is not only for
making profits, but also be for the environment, consumers and their social
responsibilities. How to make a balance between the enterprise’s economic profits
and social internets is a significant strategy for companies. And whether a company
living up corporate social responsibility raises concerns. Besides, a company’s prior
behavior on corporate social responsibility can influence the company’s stakeholders’
perceptions of corporate hypocrisy in the wake of a corporate social irresponsibility
event (Chen, 2020).And Chen(2020) uses different firms to analyze the reason of
corporate social irresponsibility. Therefore, it explains why markets and consumers
react differently when corporate social responsibility and corporate social
irresponsibility events occur in the same domain.
3
In conclusion, this essay has attempted to demonstrate that although companies can
meet with success without engaging in corporate social responsibility, they still need
to perform their corporate social responsibility. As an integral part of society,
enterprises should not only safeguard their own economic interests, but also fulfill an
important responsibility of corporate social responsibility. Corporate social
responsibility is about giving back to society, such as making charitable donations to
social causes. A socially responsible business recognizes its obligation to return a
portion of its profits to the society in which it operates in an appropriate way.
Although enterprises may not fully fulfill their CSR in consideration of their own
profits and shareholders' profits, in order to maintain a good corporate image,
enterprises need to plan their CSR behaviors into the overall strategy, in order to
achieve win-win economic and social benefits.
Chen, Z. et al. (2020) ‘Corporate Social (Ir)responsibility and Corporate Hypocrisy:
Warmth, Motive and the Protective Value of Corporate Social Responsibility’,
Business Ethics Quarterly, 30(4), pp. 486–524. doi: 10.1017/beq.2019.50.
Erbschloe, M. (2020) ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’, Research Starters: Business.
Available at:
https://search-ebscohost-com.ez.xjtlu.edu.cn/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ers&AN=8
9163622&site=eds-live&scope=site
Leisinger, K. M. (2005) ‘The Corporate Social Responsibility of the Pharmaceutical
Industry: Idealism without Illusion and Realism without Resignation’, Business Ethics
Quarterly, 15(4), pp. 577–594. doi: 10.5840/beq200515440.
Sethi, S. P. (1975) ‘Dimensions of Corporate Social Performance: An Analytical
Framework’,
California
Management
Review,
17(3),
pp.
58–64.
doi:
10.2307/41162149.
4