corporate social responsibility: really? · the problem companies adopt corporate social...
TRANSCRIPT
Corporate Social
Responsibility: Really?
White Paper by Micaela Kelly
1
Table of Contents
Executive Summary………………………………………………3
The Problem ……………………………………………………....4
CSR History ……………………………………………………….5
CSR Today …………………………………………………………9 CSR gap CSR as Public Relations
Example: Is Reebok really socially responsible?.…………… …10
The bottom line and Supply Chain Where do you draw the line?
Recommendations ……………………………………………….15
Supply Chain Solutions for Reebok Solutions for non-Reebok CSR issues
Conclusion………………………………………………………….18
Works cited………………………………………………………...19
2
Executive Summary
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is a policy that more and more companies are
implementing to not only enhance a more sustainable environment, but appear as if they are
contributing to this movement for their reputation as well. It is a vision for the world, based off a
global partnership for sustainable development, that should provide longterm value for
shareholders and stakeholders. CSR can strengthen human rights, labor rights, and labor 1
standards in the workplace by joining consumer power and socially responsible business
leadership. However, the problem is that many companies that seem to claim they are socially
responsible, and have CSR policies, don’t necessarily follow through. The issue here is that for
many industries, truly implementing CSR hurts their profits, and therefore claim to be CSR for
their brand image. To understand this, one has to look through the history of CSR, and how the
ideas have changed and built on one another over time. From there, we will look at where CSR is
today, specifically looking at reasons why a company would like to be seen as socially
responsible company. Consumers tend to be skeptical of CSR policies, as companies tend to use
them as a public relations tool. Although this is an problem across all industries, we will
specifically focus on Reebok, one of the biggest sport apparel and footwear producers, known for
their CSR policies and contribution to the movement. Despite Reebok’s reputation, they still may
not be what it portrays. Rather, the implementation of their CSR policies involve issues within
their supply chain. With that, I will offer recommendations on this issue, and potential ways to
successful manage a supply chain with corporate social responsibility, followed by general
solutions to the other issues involving the supply chain before going into the conclusion.
1Katsoulakos, P., Dr., M. Koutsodimou, A. Matraga, and L. Williams. "A Historic Perspective on the CSR Movement." A CSR Oriented Business Management Framework (2004). Web. <http://www.csrquest.net/uploadfiles/1D.pdf>.
3
The problem
Companies adopt Corporate Social Responsibility policies, and then do not follow
through with their claims. Specifically, looking at a company like Reebok, who is thought to be a
socially responsible company, there are certain problems within their supply chain that do not
line up with their Social Responsibility statements. According to CSR theorists, having a code of
conduct comes with many benefits, as “a positive effect of strategic CSR activities on
profitability could be realized through various competitive advantages”(514). More 2
specifically, having a strategic CSR statement can enhance a company’s brand and reputation,
form a closer connection with customers, highten employee morale and productivity, create
better risk management, and form better relationships within communities and governments.
However, a large issue with this is that a simple CSR statement or code of conduct can generate
a perception that a company is socially responsible, when in reality they are not. According to a
case study, Impacts of Corporate Code of Conduct on Labor Standards: A Case Study of
Reebok's Athletic Footwear Supplier Factory in China by Yu, “There are much less academic
research on social impact of laborrelated CSR policies or codes for example, their
effectiveness in combating sweatshop abuses and upholding labor standards” and that “codes of
conduct have potential in curbing the most immoral and inhumane violations of workers
rights”(514). Therefore, this brings many companies into question of whether their CSR 3
policies are executed. To understand social responsibility and what it means to companies, it is
important to go over the history, why they adopt CSR, and how it has changed over time.
2 Yu, Xiaomin. "Impacts of Corporate Code of Conduct on Labor Standards: A Case Study of Reebok's Athletic Footwear Supplier Factory in China." Journal of Business Ethics 81.3 (2008): 51329. Springer. Web. 3 Apr. 2016. <http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s1055100795212>. 3 Ibid
4
The History of Corporate Social Responsibility
Corporate Social Responsibility is not a new idea or concept for companies. According to
WBCSD, The World Business Council for Sustainable Development:
"Corporate Social Responsibility is the continuing commitment by business to contribute to economic development while improving the quality of life of the workforce and their
families as well as of the community and society at large." 4
Although this is one current definition, CSR means many different things to different
people, organizations, and stakeholders in a situation. Therefore, there is no particular universal
standard. However, simultaneously, corporate social responsibility has to have a similar meaning
to those who all claim to be socially responsible. Looking at this definition above, incorporating
“economic development while improving the quality of life” is an important aspect. A company,
unless it is a notfor profit company, has a purpose of making a profit, and therefore contributing
to economic development. A lot of the time, this becomes company's main goal, causing them to
leave ethics and values at the doorstep. Contributing to economic development, but also focusing
on the quality of life of the workforce is important, as it portrays them as “socially responsible”.
Over time, this definition has changed and evolved. The idea of Corporate Social
Responsibility, and the principle that a corporation has to tend to society beyond profit
maximization has historical roots. Going back to 1916, in the Journal of Political Economy, a
writer J. M. Clark stated “if men are responsible for the known results of their actions, business
responsibilities must include the known result of business dealings, whether these have been
recognized by law or not” Therefore this idea of being responsible for one’s actions, not only 5
4"WBCSD World Business Council for Sustainable Development." WBCSD World Business Council for Sustainable Development. Web. 10 May 2016. 5 Katsoulakos, P., Dr., M. Koutsodimou, A. Matraga, and L. Williams. "A Historic Perspective on the CSR Movement." A CSR Oriented Business Management Framework (2004). Web. <http://www.csrquest.net/uploadfiles/1D.pdf>.
5
individually, but as a corporation, is necessary even if it is not required by law, and is not new to
the business world. As we move forward to the 1950s, Howard Bowen, in Social Responsibilities
of Businessmen, defined corporate social responsibility as “the obligations of businessmen to
pursue these policies, to make these decisions, or to follow those lines of action which are
desirable in terms of the objectives and values of our society.” We see here a bit of a shift that 6
focuses on men’s “obligations” to take responsible business action, as it is in sync with society’s
wants and needs. Therefore, we see how CSR is viewed as a benefit to a company because it
gives their business value in the eyes of the consumers.
In 1960, Keith Davis’s definition, “the businessmen's decisions and actions taken for
reason at least partially beyond the firm's direct economic and technical interest(… )which need
to be commensurate with the company’s social power.” Similar to Bowen, David is highlighting 7
that a firm needs to take action beyond economic reason, in order to maintain social power.
Continuing into the 1970s, an author by the name of George Goyder wrote a book called “The
Responsible Company”, in which he highlighted the importance of social audit within a
company. Social audit “is a way of measuring, understanding, reporting and ultimately
improving an organization's social and ethical performance” which can “narrow gaps between
vision/goal and reality, between efficiency and effectiveness.” Therefore Goyder is illustrating 8
that social audit can be a management tool for companies to use as a platform in how they can
successfully perform as a company financially and ethically.
6 Bowen, Howard. Social Responsibilities of the Businessman. New York: Harper and Row, 1953. 7 Davis, Keith, “Can Business Afford to Ignore Social Responsibilities?” California Management Review, Spring 1960 8"4. Training Module on Social Audit." 4. Training Module on Social Audit. Web. 11 May 2016. <http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/ad346e/ad346e09.htm>.
6
Thus far, the idea of being a socially responsible company is something many companies
have adopted, and theorized about. Below is a chart (Figure 1) that highlights the evolution of
these different outlooks, beginning with Goyder.
Figure1
The next one in the chart is Sethi who developed a three tier model for classifying corporate
social performance in 1975. According to him a corporation has three responsibilities:
1) Social obligation → response to legal and market constraints
2) Social responsibility → address societal norms, values and expectations of performance
3) Social responsiveness → anticipate and adapt to
social needs 9
Based off of this model, in 1979, Archie B. Carroll
developed a three dimensional conceptual model of
corporate social performance (Figure 2).
9 Sethi, S.P. (1975). Dimensions of corporate social performance: An analytic framework, California management review 17.
7
In his pyramid to the right, he is highlighting the responsibilities of a company, with profit as the
foundation. Following economic responsibilities, a company needs to obey the law, then focus
on ethics, and lastly philanthropy. In his eyes, these are focuses a company has trouble
balancing, as they can create tension. Therefore, looking at them in this way provides an outlet
for companies to see what is most important, and built on top of that.
Looking at Carroll’s perspective, Igor Ansoff, author of “The Changing Shape of the
Strategic Problem”, believed there should be an “enterprise strategy” included in the functional
levels of a management. This means that in order to develop objectives that stakeholders will
support, a company needs to understand the concerns of their shareholders. This all relates to the
stakeholder theory, by R. Freeman, who stated that “managers needed to understand the concerns
of shareholders, employees, customers, suppliers, lenders and society, in order to develop
objectives that stakeholders would support. This support was necessary for long term success.” 10
With all of these point of views on CSR, it is clear there has been some change. It went from
caring about both profit and one’s community, to focusing on the needs of just the stakeholders,
in order to be successful.
Around the 1990s, the term CSR began to be picked up, rather than just the notion of
being a “responsible company”. It started to be picked up in boardrooms, companies started to
write sustainability reports, and the WBCSD started to create momentum for CSR principles and
practices. Since the 2000s, Corporate Social Responsibility has been seen as mainstreamed, 11
and an aspect that all companies have began to adapt since.
10 Freeman, E.R., 1984, Strategic management: A stakeholder approach, Pitman, Boston. 11Katsoulakos, P., Dr., M. Koutsodimou, A. Matraga, and L. Williams. "A Historic Perspective on the CSR Movement." A CSR Oriented Business Management Framework (2004). Web. <http://www.csrquest.net/uploadfiles/1D.pdf>.
8
CSR Today
"Corporate Social Responsibility is the continuing commitment by business to contribute to economic development while improving the quality of life of the workforce and their families
as well as of the community and society at large." 12
Going back to the quote from the beginning, it is clear this policy has changed over time.
Now, it it is almost expected that companies hold up to these values. However, due to this, it also
raises questions about whether companies are actually a socially responsible company or they
claim to be because they want to be seen as a socially responsible company since it is good for
their image. A dilemma companies face is their desire to maximize profit. As Milton Friedman
stated, “few trends could so thoroughly undermine the very foundations of our free society as the
acceptance by corporate officials of a social responsibility other than to make as much money for
their stockholders as possible” Therefore, he is stating that a company’s main purpose is to 13
make money for its shareholders. When social responsibility becomes a factor, it creates tension
between the two goals, and a business’s vision.
When looking at CSR today, in a recent study Nielsen asked corporate leaders and the
general public to reflect on corporate social responsibility. They found that two thirds of
executives feel as if companies have been more committed to CSR than they were three years
ago. However on the other end, only 39% of consumers agree. This shows there is a large gap
between business and consumer sides in looking at the levels of commitment to CSR.
12"WBCSD World Business Council for Sustainable Development." WBCSD World Business Council for Sustainable Development. Web. 10 May 2016. 13 Freeman, E.R., 1984, Strategic management: A stakeholder approach, Pitman, Boston.
9
Additionally, this shows that CSR can be seen as a trend or a way for companies to sell their
image.
CSR as Public Relations
According Corporate Watch, in a study over 80% of corporate CSR decision makers were
confident in the fact that practicing CSR will deliver branding and employee benefits. For
example, when a company donates to charity, they are specifically using their shareholders
investment. Therefore, in doing so, they are only doing this because they want to see an
improvement in their image by associating themselves with a cause, which can also be used a
vehicle for advertising. In other words, corporate social responsibility sells. It helps create
personal connections with consumers, in efforts to turn them into loyal consumers. In addition,
“since much of the business case for CSR depends on corporations being seen to be socially
responsible, CSR will continue to be a little more than PR for as long as it is easier and cheaper
to spin than to change” Therefore, companies are not doing it for the right reasons, and that is 14
the problem that needs to be changed.
Example: Reebok and CSR
When addressing this issue that CSR is used as tool to help a company’s image, a way to
further analyze this is looking at a real example. Reebok is a company that has been known for
the CSR policies, and with the much skepticism around the topic, it is debatable whether the
company is truly responsible, or if it is for show.
14"WHAT'S WRONG WITH CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY? : The Arguments against CSR."Corporate Watch. Web. 11 May 2016. <https://corporatewatch.org/content/whatswrongcorporatesocialresponsibilityargumentsagainstcsr>.
10
In the 1990s, there was a growth in antisweatshop campaigns and corporate governance
reform that lead to a movement for companies to establish corporate social responsibility (CSR)
or corporate codes of conduct. These written statements would define a company’s policies on
issues like labor, human rights, health and safety, forced labor, wages and hours, environmental
requirements from suppliers, and more. When it comes to clothing and footwear companies like
Reebok, Nike, or Adidas, they are more likely to have a code of conduct to address these
important standards, and explain the who, what, where and how, of the production of their
products to try and avoid certain exploitations from the media.
When Nike was under fire in the 90s with constant consumer boycotts, repeated media
investigations and international protests, Reebok’s name remained untouched. Reebok has
strategically positioned themselves as a socially responsible company, and has been extremely
successful in their humanrightfocused CSR strategy. Despite their success in strategically
marketing themselves as a socially responsible company, there has been the question if they
truly are.
Established in 1985, Reebok climbed its way to become the thirdlargest sportswear
brand in the world by 2004. Throughout this time, Reebok began their strategic CSR approach in
the late 1980s to promote themselves as a conscientious promoters and supporters of human
rights and labor rights. In 1988, Reebok put 10 million dollars to sponsor a world concert tour
called “Human Rights Now!” in honor of the 40th anniversary of the UN’s Universal Declaration
of Human Rights. Additionally, Reebok created a “Reebok Human Right Award”, honoring
young activists in their efforts to fight for human rights. By 2005, Reebok had given out 80
11
awards to activists from 36 countries. Therefore, it is evident that Reebok had began to
strategically position themselves as a socially conscious company, with motive to prove it.
In 1992, Reebok was criticized for violating worker’s basic rights. They responded with a
new “Human Rights Production Standards” that same year. According to the cover of the
document, “It provides specific direction to factory managers for incorporating basic human
rights principles into daily operations”. Furthermore, it states that Reebok adopted these new 15
standards “as a part of the company’s longstanding commitment to human rights”, essentially
placing a set of guidelines in the hands of
their factories. The guide has eight sections
that demonstrate practical application in a
factory that is shown in the table of contents
below. Therefore, for each of these sections, 16
Reebok has a whole chapter identifying the
standards their factories needs to uphold in
terms of human rights and labor rights. In
addition to their guidelines, Reebok also
created an American Center for International
Labor Solidarity (ACILS) to teach freedom
of association skills to workers in five
factories, as a way to address a main “spotlight” issue during the CSR movement against
15 Human Rights Production Standards. 1992. Human Rights Programs, Reebok International Ltd. 1895 J.W. Foster Blvd., Canton,MA.http://stoa.usp.br/dtb581/files/3335/18481/ReebokHR_Guide.pdf 16 Ibid
12
sweatshop labor abuses. Reebok’s statements, actions, and high presence in the CSR movement,
are not only a human rights focused strategy, yet also a marketing strategy. Between 1999 and
2004, Reebok’s revenue went from $11 million to $192 million. Therefore, it highlights how
Reebok’s social responsibility contributed to not only their brand’s image and consumer
perception, but transferred into financial success and growth as well. In essence, Reebok was
“doing better by doing good”(515). This then relates back to the issue of CSR as public 17
relations, and is also proof that with pushing CSR, a brand name is more relatable to consumers,
as they want to feel as if they are purchasing goods from a company that is doing good as well.
However, as it is also clear in Reebok’s case, they have put in real effort into the movement,
rather than just donating to a cause like in the example from Corporate Watch.
Reebok’s CSR: Supply Chain issue?
Although Reebok’s strategy proves to be successful in terms of their reputation and
profitability, whether their actions lead to real results, is unclear. In Yu’s study on Reebok’s code
of conduct and labor standards, he claims the factory in Taiwan has extremely long overtime
working, occupational and healthy problems, arbitrary punishments and abuses imposed by
management, difficulty in taking leave or resigning, and insufficient state protection and work
union representation. However, when looking at these claims, it is the factory that is not
implementing Reebok’s Human Rights Production Standards.
In 1997, Reebok hired a parttime local staff member to monitor the code implementation
at the factory who told the factory management to make improvements on working conditions,
shorten weekly working hours, pay fair wages and benefits according to Chinese law, and install
17 Human Rights Production Standards. 1992. Human Rights Programs, Reebok International Ltd. 1895 J.W. Foster Blvd., Canton,MA.http://stoa.usp.br/dtb581/files/3335/18481/ReebokHR_Guide.pdf
13
an employeeelected trade union to take part in Reebok’s “worker representation
initiatives”(519). Nonetheless, as this would mean more costs and less profit for the factory, 18
they were reluctant to make real improvements, claiming “Reebok’s current purchasing practices
had constrained its incentives and capability to achieve a full compliance of Reebok codes”(519).
This shows that Reebok did attempt to implement their CSR policies, but relating it back to 19
the problem of CSR, the bottom line gets in the way. However, here, it is the profit of the
outsourced manufacturer. Therefore, it becomes a supply chain issue for Reebok’s CSR
implementation.
Looking further into this, Reebok was unwilling to reform its purchasing policy or
sharing cost for improving labor standards with suppliers. Rather, Reebok followed a “legal
minimalist” approach, meaning the factories had to abide by Chinese law and regulation, which
relates back to Carroll’s CSR pyramid from the 1980s; Reebok is putting the law before ethical
responsibilities. Despite this, it can be seen in contradicting Freeman’s stakeholder theory since
it “delivered no real economic benefits to production workers”, and many of the labor related
codes were curbed, requiring them to “work harder, faster but were rewarded with meaner
payment… by [the factory’s] management as a solution to the dilemma between implementing
Reebok labor related codes and maintaining profitability”(523). Essentially, Reebok provided
detailed guidelines to their factories with the expected labor standards, yet through putting law
before their ethical responsibilities, they didn’t go the extra mile in following through. In
18 Yu, Xiaomin. "Impacts of Corporate Code of Conduct on Labor Standards: A Case Study of Reebok's Athletic Footwear Supplier Factory in China." Journal of Business Ethics 81.3 (2008): 51329. Springer. Web. 3 Apr. 2016. <http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s1055100795212>. 19 Yu, Xiaomin. "Impacts of Corporate Code of Conduct on Labor Standards: A Case Study of Reebok's Athletic Footwear Supplier Factory in China." Journal of Business Ethics 81.3 (2008): 51329. Springer. Web. 3 Apr. 2016. <http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s1055100795212>.
14
addition, the dilemma between the factory’s bottom line and social responsibility, ultimately
caused the CSR to fail due to the factory’s necessity to focus on profit in order to stay alive.
Where is the line drawn?
One could conclude Reebok as a socially responsible company since they are not the ones
who are curbing the standards, and it is rather their suppliers; Reebok’s intentions have never
strayed away from their humanrights efforts and implementations. However, as Reebok’s
suppliers, should Reebok be able to do something to change these issues in the Taiwanese
factory? It brings up whether Reebok is solely doing this for reputation purposes, fully aware of
the industry’s past and the near impossibility of implementing such labor regulations.
A company like Reebok, who has the resources to support these costs, should offer
potential solutions to reach their ‘intentions’ of CSR in their factories, rather than solely
outsource. A main reason why Reebok’s factory did not implement their labor standards was that
“Reebok had committed to neither sharing cost for code implementation with [the factory] nor
amending its sourcing policy to make improvement labor standards more financially
manageable” despite their growth and profitability over the past years(523) . Outsourcing their 20
labor CSR policy to the manufacturer, only added further costs in their dilemma between
improving labor standards and maintaining profitability. Therefore, in all of this, there seems to
be simple solutions, if Reebok is not solely doing this for PR.
Solutions for Reebok’s Issue
The key issue in reaching their full potential as a socially responsible company, is their
supply chain. Reebok outsourced their CSR policies in their supply chain, where they did not get
20 Yu, Xiaomin. "Impacts of Corporate Code of Conduct on Labor Standards: A Case Study of Reebok's Athletic Footwear Supplier Factory in China." Journal of Business Ethics 81.3 (2008): 51329. Springer. Web. 3 Apr. 2016. <http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s1055100795212>.
15
implemented due to the tension to generate profit. A solution to this issue within the supply
chain, is to simply take a new approach. Through outsourcing, and holding high expectations for
a small factory, is leads to instances like that the “suppliers are frequently forced to decrease
their own internal operation costs” that could potentially lead to “the relationship either becomes
weaker, adversarial, or ceases to exist altogether”(860) . Therefore, in Reebok’s position, their 21
implementation of CSR and labor guidelines with no financial help, caused their workers to work
harder for less pay, and in turn weakening that trust within the supply chain. In doing so, Reebok
is being hypocritical in their CSR outlook, as they are leaving a large gap in their supply chain
between them, their factories, and the implementation of their labor and human right policies.
Reebok’s overall vision to be a profitable, yet socially responsible company, is getting in the way
of the right tactics to achieve that goal.
To fix this issue, Reebok should take on a “sustainable collaboration method” meaning
their supply chain must have incentive alignment, communication, and trust to be successful . If 22
Reebok took on a more sustainable collaborative outlook to their supply chain management, their
CSR statement could be true to the core, and through every aspect of the company. Therefore,
this could be a solution to their problems within their supply chain and in their labor, as “the end
result of true collaboration occurs because the specific means that generate communication and
trust are choiceworthy despite the selfinterested eye toward the efficiency of the entire supply
chain”(862) . Switching to a sustainable collaboration method in their supply chain has the 23
potential to completely close the gap, and strengthen Reebok’s CSR policies to be more credible.
21 Drake, Matthew J., and John Teepen Schlachter. "A VirtueEthics Analysis of Supply Chain Collaboration." Journal of Business Ethics 82.4 (2008): 85264.Springer. Web. 15 Apr. 2016. <http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s1055100795978>. 22 Ibid 23 Ibid
16
Solution to nonReebok specific CSR issues
Going through Reebok’s case shows many reasons why CSR is difficult to maintain, and
also why consumers are skeptical. To refresh the problems of CSR addressed at the beginning,
the main one is whether companies use the policy for one’s image and profitability, instead of
truly making a difference and contributing to the CSR movement.
According to Nielsen, CSR has to be done right, and communicated well. More
specifically, consumers are more aware of CSR practices than they used to be. Now, they are
looking up a company’s commitment, and assessing the credibility in their statements. Due to
this, Nielsen explains that companies engaged with CSR policies much work even harder to
convince consumers of their authenticity. Therefore, companies should not overstate any
intentions or policies they claim to follow. On the other end, consumers want to see companies
acknowledge the challenge in “sustainably advancing the social good and that you have made a
meaningful, longterm investment in doing the right thing” . In addition, around half of those 24
surveyed saw company’s CSR efforts as selfserving. This is part of the problem. Companies
implement a CSR policy because no company wants to be seen as a socially irresponsible
company. A solution to this would be to take the time and choose one thing to focus on. It
doesn’t occur overnight, and therefore requires making changes to the company culture, and
getting buyins from different stakeholders. However another thing is that CSR is a product that
doesn’t have to be fully developed before sharing with customers, yet you have to make sure you
24Chris McAllister. "Uncommon Sense: Are Companies Truly Committed to Social Responsibility?" Nielson. 6 Jan. 2016. Web. 11 May 2016. <http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2016/uncommonsensearecompaniestrulycommittedtosocialresponsibility.html>
17
are committed longterm. This way, the industry, the consumers, and the shareholders are aware
you are making a social change a priority.
A solution to a company who is pretending to be socially responsible is to realize that
people are becoming more aware, and this is become more important to consumers. This does
not mean to hop on the bandwagon and attempt to give the people what they want, but to realize
it will be more harmful to get caught in the act. All in all, a solution is to make the decision to go
CSR and commit, or to stand true to the existing mission, with the attempt to make small impact
on the community here and there.
Conclusion
Corporate Social Responsibility has become an integral part of businesses, in hopes to
balance both their economic contribution and contribution as a more sustainable company.
However, as analyzed, a problem is many companies claim to be socially responsible, as a way
to attract consumers, stakeholders, or shareholders. Although Reebok was the only company
focused upon, there are companies far worse. Reebok makes an effort to implement the policies,
yet it was a problem within their supply chain. In comparison to Nike, who had a code of
conduct that claimed to follow all labor laws, and in turn is infamous for their use of sweatshops.
Therefore, there is the issue of businesses solely claiming to be responsible so the public thinks
that. When it comes to this, there is a clear solution, either commit and change the original
practices to become socially responsible, or don’t claim to be so. Otherwise, if it is a company
like Reebok, fix the issues, for example within the supply chain, that is preventing the CSR to be
fully implemented. Overall, a socially responsible company should have a vision for the world,
18
based off a global partnership for sustainable development, and provide longterm value for
shareholders and stakeholders.
Worked Cited
"4. Training Module on Social Audit." 4. Training Module on Social Audit. Web. 11 May 2016. <http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/ad346e/ad346e09.htm>.
Bowen, Howard. Social Responsibilities of the Businessman. New York: Harper and
Row, 1953.
Chris McAllister. "Uncommon Sense: Are Companies Truly Committed to Social Responsibility?" Nielson. 6 Jan. 2016. Web. 11 May 2016. <http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2016/uncommonsensearecompaniestrulycommittedtosocialresponsibility.html>
Davis, Keith, “Can Business Afford to Ignore Social Responsibilities?” California
Management Review, Spring 1960
Drake, Matthew J., and John Teepen Schlachter. "A VirtueEthics Analysis of Supply Chain Collaboration." Journal of Business Ethics 82.4 (2008): 85264.Springer. Web. 15 Apr. 2016. <http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s1055100795978>.
Freeman, E.R., 1984, Strategic management: A stakeholder approach, Pitman, Boston.
Human Rights Production Standards. 1992. Human Rights Programs, Reebok
International Ltd. 1895 J.W. Foster Blvd., Canton,MA.http://stoa.usp.br/dtb581/files/3335/18481/ReebokHR_Guide.pdf
Katsoulakos, P., Dr., M. Koutsodimou, A. Matraga, and L. Williams. "A Historic
Perspective on the CSR Movement." A CSR Oriented Business Management Framework (2004). Web. <http://www.csrquest.net/uploadfiles/1D.pdf>.
Sethi, S.P. (1975). Dimensions of corporate social performance: An analytic framework,
California management review 17.
19
"WBCSD World Business Council for Sustainable Development." WBCSD World Business Council for Sustainable Development. Web. 10 May 2016.
"WHAT'S WRONG WITH CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY? : The
Arguments against CSR."Corporate Watch. Web. 11 May 2016. <https://corporatewatch.org/content/whatswrongcorporatesocialresponsibilityargumentsagainstcsr>.
Yu, Xiaomin. "Impacts of Corporate Code of Conduct on Labor Standards: A Case Study
of Reebok's Athletic Footwear Supplier Factory in China." Journal of Business Ethics 81.3 (2008): 51329. Springer. Web. 3 Apr. 2016. <http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s1055100795212>.
Figure 1 and 2: Katsoulakos, P., Dr., M. Koutsodimou, A. Matraga, and L. Williams. "A
Historic Perspective on the CSR Movement." A CSR Oriented Business Management Framework (2004). Web. <http://www.csrquest.net/uploadfiles/1D.pdf>.
20