What is it about?
The business case literature has confused critical stakeholder responsiveness for corporate social responsibility. The hundreds of studies showing that it pays to be good (& hurts to be bad) have largely validated resource dependence, not necessarily shown that firms profit from helping solve social problems. The actual relationship is indirect and future empirical research needs to focus on this indirect relationship.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
Business and society scholars and practitioners have been happy to argue that market mechanisms are ample to regulate firm behavior -- to say that firms are good because it's in their financial interests to be good. But these conclusions may be based on an incorrect understanding of the mechanisms. Where it does not pay to be good, if society wants firms to do good things, we will need to reintroduce government regulation.
Perspectives
This is a "big picture" paper that seeks to reorient the business case literature and argue that government regulation should not be left out of how we approach social control of corporations.
Prof Michael L Barnett
Rutgers University Newark
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: The Business Case for Corporate Social Responsibility, Business & Society, July 2016, SAGE Publications,
DOI: 10.1177/0007650316660044.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
