Social Responsibility Of Business

Introduction

SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

The term social responsibility means different things to different people.

Generally, corporate social responsibility is the obligation to take action that

protects and improves the welfare of society as a whole as well as organizational

interests. According to the concept of corporate social responsibility, a manager

must strive to achieve both organizational and societal goals.

Current perspectives regarding the fundamentals of social responsibility of

businesses are listed and discussed through

(1) the Davis model of corporate social responsibility,

(2) areas of corporate social responsibility, and

(3) varying opinions on social responsibility.

A model of corporate social responsibility that was developed by Keith Davis

provides five propositions that describe why and how businesses should adhere to

the obligation to take action that protects and improves the welfare of society and

the organization:

Proposition 1: Social responsibility arises from social power.

Proposition 2: Business shall operate as an open system, with open receipt of

inputs from society and open disclosure of its operation to the public.

Proposition 3: The social costs and benefits of an activity, product, or service

shall be thoroughly calculated and considered in deciding whether to proceed

with it.

Proposition 4: Social costs related to each activity, product, or service shall be

passed on to the consumer.

Proposition 5: Business institutions, as citizens, have the responsibility to

become involved in certain social problems that are outside their normal areas

of operation.

The areas in which business can become involved to protect and improve the

welfare of society are numerous and diverse. Some of the most publicized of these

areas are urban affairs, consumer affairs, environmental affairs, and employment

practices. Although numerous businesses are involved in socially responsible

activities, much controversy persists about whether such involvement is necessary

or appropriate. There are several arguments for and against businesses performing

socially responsible activities.

The best-known argument supporting such activities by business is that because

business is a subset of and exerts a significant impact on society, it has the

responsibility to help improve society. Since society asks no more and no less of

any of its members, why should business be exempt from such responsibility?

Additionally, profitability and growth go hand in hand with responsible treatment

of employees. customers, and the community. However, studies have not indicated

any clear relationship between corporate social responsibility and profitability.

One of the better known arguments against such activities is advanced by the

distinguished economist Milton Friedman. Friedman argues that making business

managers simultaneously responsible to business owners for reaching profit

objectives and to society for enhancing societal welfare represents a conflict of

interest that has the potential to cause the demise of business.

According to Friedman, this demise almost certainly will occur if business

continually is forced to perform socially responsible behavior that is in direct

conflict with private organizational objectives. He also argues that to require

business managers to pursue socially responsible objectives may be unethical,

since it requires managers to spend money that really belongs to other individuals.

Regardless of which argument or combination of arguments particular managers

might support, they generally should make a concerted effort to perform all legally

required socially responsible activities, consider voluntarily performing socially

responsible activities beyond those legally required, and inform all relevant

individuals of the extent to which their organization will become involved in

performing social responsibility activities.

Federal law requires that businesses perform certain socially responsible activities.

In fact, several government agencies have been established and are maintained to

develop such business-related legislation and to make sure the laws are followed.

The Environmental Protection Agency does indeed have the authority to require

businesses to adhere to certain socially responsible environmental standards.

Adherence to legislated social responsibilities represents the minimum standard of

social responsibility performance that business leaders must achieve. Managers

must ask themselves, however, how far beyond the minimum they should attempt

to go difficult and complicated question that entails assessing the positive and

negative outcomes of performing socially responsible activities. Only those

activities that contribute to the business's success while contributing to the welfare

of society should be undertaken.

Social Responsiveness

Social responsiveness is the degree of effectiveness and efficiency an organization

displays in pursuing its social responsibilities. The greater the degree of

effectiveness and efficiency, the more socially responsive the organization is said

to be. The socially responsive organization that is both effective and efficient

meets its social responsibilities without wasting organizational resources in the

process. Determining exactly which social responsibilities an organization should

pursue and then deciding how to pursue them are perhaps the two most critical

decision-making aspects of maintaining a high level of social responsiveness

within an organization. That is, managers must decide whether their organization

should undertake the activities on its own or acquire the help of outsiders with

more expertise in the area.

In addition to decision making, various approaches to meeting social obligations

are another determinant of an organization's level of social responsiveness. A

desirable and socially responsive approach to meeting social obligations involves

the following:

Incorporating social goals into the annual planning process

Seeking comparative industry norms for social programs

Presenting reports to organization members, the board of directors, and

stockholders on progress in social responsibility

Experimenting with different approaches for measuring social performance

Attempting to measure the cost of social programs as well as the return on

social program investments

S. Prakash Sethi presents three management approaches to meeting social

obligations:

(1) the social obligation approach,

(2) the social responsibility approach, and

(3) the social responsiveness approach.

Each of Sethi's three approaches contains behavior that reflects a somewhat

different attitude with regard to businesses performing social responsible activities.

The social obligation approach, for example, considers business as having

primarily economic purposes and confines social responsibility activity mainly to

conformance to existing laws. The socially responsible approach sees business as

having both economic and societal goals. The social responsiveness approach

considers business as having both societal and economic goals as well as the

obligation to anticipate upcoming social problems and to work actively to prevent

their appearance.

Organizations characterized by attitudes and behaviors consistent with the social

responsiveness approach generally are more socially responsive than organizations

characterized by attitudes and behaviors consistent with either the social

responsibility approach or the social obligation approach. Also, organizations

characterized by the social responsibility approach generally achieve higher levels

of social responsiveness than organizations characterized by the social obligation

approach. As one moves from the social obligation approach to the social

responsiveness approach, management becomes more proactive. Proactive

managers will do what is prudent from a business viewpoint to reduce liabilities

whether an action is required by law or not.

Definition of Social Responsibility

Social responsibility is “an organization’s obligation to maximize its positive

impact and minimize its negative impact on the society”. In other words, it is “the

concept that businesses should be actively concerned with the welfare of the

society at large”. 

The concept of social responsibility is applicable to individuals and governments

as well as organizations. The social responsibility of an organization is referred to

as ‘corporate social responsibility’.

Social responsibility can be broadly divided into two parts: human responsibility

and environmental responsibility.

Human responsibility 

Refers to the responsibility of the organization towards the various parties

associated with it, which are known as ‘stakeholders’ in business parlance. These

parties include employees, shareholders, the government, customers, investors,

suppliers, competitors and the society at large. 

Environmental responsibility

 Refers to the organization’s responsibility towards environment protection. 

The concept of social responsibility holds that an organization should work in a

manner in which the interests of the stakeholders are protected or, at the very least,

they are not adversely affected. It holds that the organization should work in an

ethical manner and work in the best interests of the various parties associated with

it. The realm of social responsibility extends beyond the legal responsibilities of an

organization. It is voluntarily fulfilled by the organization. 

The concept of corporate social responsibility has been criticized by certain

experts, who believe that it is a cynical and selfish idea. They are of the opinion

that corporates undertake projects for social welfare only because of the increase in

reputation that they would get due to them. 

Arguments for Social Responsibility

The major arguments for the assumption of social responsibilities by business are:

1) Public expectations: Social expectations of business have increased

dramatically since the 1960s. Public opinion in support of business pursuing

social as well as economic goals is now well solidified.

2) Long run profits: Socially responsible businesses tend to have more and

secure long run profits. This is the normal result of the better community

relations and improved business image that responsible.

3) Ethical obligation: A business firm can and should have a conscience.

Business should be socially responsible because responsible actions are right

for their own sake.

4) Public image: Firms seek to enhance their public image to gain more

customers, better employees, access to money markets, and other benefits.

Since the public considers social goals to be important, business can create a

favorable public image by pursuing social goals.

5) Better environment: Involvement by business can solve difficult social

problems, thus creating a better quality of life and a more desirable

community in which to attract and hold skilled employees.

6) Discouragement of further government regulation: Government regulation

adds economic costs and restricts management’s decision flexibility by

becoming socially responsible, business can expect less government

regulation.

7) Balance of responsibility and power: Business has a large amount of power

in society. An equally large amount of responsibility is required to balance

it. When power is significantly greater than responsibility, the imbalance

encourages irresponsible behavior that works against the public good.

8) Stockholder interests: Social responsibility will improve the price of a

business’s stock in the long run. The stock market will view the socially

responsible company as less risky and open to public attack. Therefore, it

will award its stock a higher price earning ratio.

9) Possession of resources: Business has the financial resources, technical

experts, and managerial talent to provide support to public and charitable

projects that need assistance.

10) Superiority of prevention over cures: Social problems must be dealt with at

sometime. Business should act on them before they become serious and costly to

correct and take management’s energy away from accomplishing its goal of

production goods and services.

Arguments against Social Responsibility

1) Violation of profit maximization: This is the essence of the classical

viewpoint. Business is most socially responsible when it attends strictly to its

economic interests and leaves other activities to other institutions.

2) Dilution of purpose: The pursuit of social goals dilutes business’s primary

purpose: economic productivity. Society may suffer as both economic and social

goals are poorly accomplished.

3) Costs: Many socially responsible activities do not pay their own way. Someone

has to pay these costs. Business must absorb these costs or pass them on to

consumers in higher prices.

4) Too much power: Business is already one of the most powerful institutions in

our society. If it pursued social goals, it would have even more power. Society has

given business enough power.

5) Lack of skills: The outlook and abilities of business leaders are oriented

primarily toward economies. Business people are poorly qualified to cope with

social issues.

6) Lack of accountability: Political representatives pursue social goals and ar6e

held accountable for their actions. Such is not the case with business leaders. There

are no direct lines of social accountability from the business sector to the public.

7) Lack of broad public support: There is no broad mandate from society for

business to become involved in social issues. The public is divided on the issue. In

fact, it is a topic that usually generates a heated debate. Actions taken under such

divided support are likely to fail

Social Responsibility towards different parties

CSR operations have been brought in the practice of the leading and socially

responsible companies recently. Since the time it was not yet defined by the

marketing theory as so CSR has steadily presented in the complex work process of

Bulyard Shipbuilding Industry EAD. CSR presents responsibility to employees, the

environment and the interested parties, as well as participations in socially

significant projects and charity. 

The overall CSR activity pursues company goals related to the productivity, incl.

keeping and upgrading the employees’ and workers’ qualification, human

resources, incl. employees’ and workers’ motivation and setting up of teams,

improving working environment. 

Considerable part of the CSR operations of the enterprise is announced by

publishing financial statements, capital rationing information and random press-

releases and articles of different subjects. 

Social Responsibility of Management and Responsibilities of

managers

Social Responsibilities of Management

The term social responsibilities can be defined as the obligation of management

towards the society and others concerned.

Reason for Social Responsibilities: 

Business enterprises are creatures of society and should respond to the demands of

society. If the management does not react to changes in social demands, the society

will either force them to do so through laws or will not permit the enterprise to

survive. Therefore the longterm interests of business are best served when

management assume social responsibilities. The image of business organization

liked with the quality of its products and customer service and the extent to which

it fulfills the expectations of owners, employees, consumers, government and the

community at large. For longterm success it matters a great deal if the firm has a

favourable image in the public mind. Every business enterprise is a organ of

society and its activities have impact on the social scene. Therefore, it is important

for management to consider whether their policies and actions are likely to

promote the public good, advances the basic values of society, and constitute to its

stability, strength and harmony.

Increasing concern for the social responsibility of management, it is now

recognized that besides taking care of the financial interest of owners, managers of

business firms must also take into account the interest of various other groups such

as employees, consumers, the government and the community as a whole. These

interested groups are directly or indirectly affected by the pursuit of business

activities and they are the stake-holders of the business enterprise.

Responsibility towards owners:

 The primary responsibilities of management is to assure a fair and reasonable rate

of return on capital and fair return on investment can be determined on the basis of

difference in the risks of business in different fields of activity. With the growth of

business the shareholders can also expect appreciation in the value of their capital.

Responsibility towards employees:

 Management responsibility towards employees relate to the fair wages and

salaries, satisfactory work environment, labour management relations and

employee welfare. Fair wages should be fixed in the light of labor productivity, the

prevailing wage rates in the same or neighbouring areas and relative importance of

jobs. Managers salaries and allowances are expected to be linked with their

responsibility, initiative and skill. But the spread between minimum wages and

highest salaries should be reasonable. Employees are expected to build up and

maintain harmonious relationships between superior and subordinates. Another

aspect of responsibility towards employees is the provision of welfare amenities

like safety and security of working conditions, medical facilities, housing, canteen,

leave and retirement benefits.

Responsibility towards consumers:

 In a competitive market, serving consumers is supposed to be a prime concern of

management. But in reality perfect competition does not prevail in all product

markets. In the event of shortage of supply there is no automatic correction.

Besides consumers are often victims of unfair trade practices and unethical conduct

of business. Consumer interests are thus protected to some extent with laws and

pressure of organized consumer groups. Management should anticipate these

developments, satisfy consumer needs and protect consumer interests. Goods must

be of appropriate standard and quality and be available in adequate quantities at

reasonable prices. Management should avoid resorting to hoarding or creating

artificial scarcity as well as false and misleading advertisements.

Responsibility towards the Governments: 

As a part of their social responsibility, management must conduct business affair in

lawful manner, honestly pay all the taxes and dues, and should not corrupt public

officials for selfish ends. Business activities must also confirm to the economic and

social policies of the government.

Responsibility towards the community and society: 

The socially responsible role of management in relation to the community are

expected to be revealed by its policies with respect to the employment of

handicapped persons, and weaker sections of the community, environmental

protection, pollution control, setting up industries in backward areas, and providing

relief to the victims of natural calamities etc.

Social responsibility towards our employees

More than a thousand workers are directly employed or assigned by subcontractors

at Bulyard Shipbuilding Industry EAD. 

Despite the extremely volatile economic environment the enterprise always puts

efforts for assuring favourable working environment and building teams as well as

balancing between work and private life of the employees and encouraging higher

results. This is boosted by setting up, carrying out and attendance of diverse events

for different occasions.

Bulyard carries out career planning by means of courses, training, incl. indoor, for

the employees and workers, apprenticeship, probation for students and pupils of

vocational schools and universities (Varna Technical University, Naval Academy,

Varna, Nautical School, Varna) in order to let them get awareness of the facilities

and the process. The attendance of different specialized courses and indoor training

are arranged in case of necessity. 

Social responsibility towards the environment

The environmental protection related responsibilities are assigned to persons in

charge of this particularly. 

One of the related assignments is the collection of data on the quantitative impact

of the work process of the shipyard on the environment such as toxic gas and dust

emissions, consumption of power, water, consumables, recycling etc. We do

commit ourselves to strictly follow, be acquainted with and observe the

environment related legislation regulations.

Being socially responsible company, Bulyard takes account of the presence of

ecological risk when taking new projects and investments.

In relation to the environmental protection activity, by virtue of orders, all

employees, workers and subcontractors are obliged to keep their working stations

tidy and to keep the environment clean. The company is pursuing ways of

diminishing the toxic emissions, encouraging the efforts for saving renewable and

non-renewable sources. 

Serious factor influencing on the research process and determining the choice for

new suppliers and subcontractors is the environmental protection commitment. The

company expects from the subcontractors to follow the environmental protection

policy and power and water sources conservation. In addition to the existing

company practices, Bulyard undertakes financial support of different ecology

related causes, affecting not only the company territory but also the community as

a whole. 

Ethics and responsibility towards the interested parties

As a socially responsible company Bulyard’s stand determines the significance of

all interested parties, namely subcontractors, employees, clients, competitors, state

bodies, regulating the relevant activities (for instance Regional Inspectorates of

Environment and Water). The shipyard tolerates transparency and correct attitude

and expects back even amount of clarity, equity and loyalty. By means of the

bunch of measures in this aspect the shipyard strive to do their best to keep balance

between their interests and those of all the interested parties. From this point of

view the stand of the relevant audiences towards the corporate social responsibility

is important to us. This inevitably helps for building up mutual credit. If necessary

the CSR related issues are discussed on symposia, seminars, fairs, meetings

(including meetings of BULNAS with the participation of the members of the

association), at meetings with potential subcontractors and partners, in written

correspondence, circulars, company orders and reports. 

Participations in socially significant projects

The commitment to keep the environment clean incl. erection of a treatment plant,

replacement of water supply installation etc., support of a number of initiatives and

events important to the region and preservation of the employment, facilitate the

entire activity of Bulyard towards participations in socially significant and useful

projects. 

Charity

We sympathize with our employees’ lives and the society in general. We care

about their health by collecting funds and arrangement of campaigns to help

employees and workers of Bulyard in dire straights, collecting money for orphans

and homeless and neglected children, financial support to organizations and

institutions.

Barriers in enforcement of Social Responsibilities

Social responsibility has certain costs. It's not the natural thing to be responsible.

Greed and selfishness work against social responsibility. When greed and

selfishness become higher values, social responsibility goes out the window.

One of the problems with our culture is that we worship wealth. People who have a

lot of money are heroes to us and we strive to emulate them. We see wealth and

power as an indicator of merit and virtue. But people who are rich and want to be

richer, and corporate and industrial leaders whose jobs are to put the prosperity of

their companies at the top of their priorities, often trivialize social responsibility,

and this sets the tone for the whole culture.

The arguments against social responsibility are that it costs too much; it's a drag on

the economy, that it provides a negative incentive by cushioning failure, etc.

Evolution of social responsibility in India

The evolution of social responsibility in India refers to changes over time in

India of the cultural norms of corporations' engagement of corporate social

responsibility (CSR), with CSR referring to way that businesses are managed to

bring about an overall positive impact on the communities, cultures, societies and

environments in which they operate.[1] The fundamentals of CSR rest on the fact

that not only public policy but even corporates should be responsible enough to

address social issues. Thus companies should deal with the challenges and issues

looked after to a certain extent by the states.[2]

Among other countries India has one of the most richest traditions of CSR Much

has been done in recent years to make Indian Entrepreneurs aware of social

responsibility as an important segment of their business activity but CSR in India

has yet to receive widespread recognition. If this goal has to be realised then the

CSR approach of corporates has to be in line with their attitudes towards

mainstream business- companies setting clear objectives, undertaking potential

investments, measuring and reporting performance publicly.

The Four Phases of CSR Development in India

The history of SR in India has its four phases which run parallel to India's

historical development and has resulted in different approaches towards CSR.

However the phases are not static and the features of each phase may overlap other

phases.

The First Phase

In the first phase charity and philanthropy were the main drivers of CSR. Culture,

religion, family values and tradition and industrialization had an influential effect on

CSR. In the pre-industrialization period, which lasted till 1850, wealthy merchants

shared a part of their wealth with the wider society by way of setting up temples

for a religious cause Moreover, these merchants helped the society in getting over

phases of famine and epidemics by providing food from their godowns and money

and thus securing an integral position in the society. With the arrival of colonial

rule in India from 1850s onwards, the approach towards CSR changed. The

industrial families of the 19th century such as Tata, Godrej, Bajaj, Modi, Birla,

Singhania were strongly inclined towards economic as well as social

considerations. However it has been observed that their efforts towards social as

well as industrial development were not only driven by selfless and religious

motives but also influenced by caste groups and political objectives.

The Second Phase

In the second phase, during the independence movement, there was increased

stress on Indian Industrialists to demonstrate their dedication towards the progress

of the society. This was when Mahatma Gandhi introduced the notion of

"trusteeship", according to which the industry leaders had to manage their wealth

so as to benefit the common man. "I desire to end capitalism almost, if not quite, as

much as the most advanced socialist. But our methods differ. My theory of

trusteeship is no make-shift, certainly no camouflage. I am confident that it will

survive all other theories." This was Gandhi's words which highlights his argument

towards his concept of "trusteeship". Gandhi's influence put pressure on various

Industrialists to act towards building the nation and its socio-economic

development.[4] According to Gandhi, Indian companies were supposed to be the

"temples of modern India". Under his influence businesses established trusts for

schools and colleges and also helped in setting up training and scientific

institutions. The operations of the trusts were largely in line with Gandhi's reforms

which sought to abolish untouchability, encourage empowerment of women and

rural development.

The Third Phase

The third phase of SR (1960–80) had its relation to the element of "mixed

economy", emergence of Public Sector Undertakings(PSUs) and laws relating

labour and environmental standards. During this period the private sector was

forced to take a backseat. The public sector was seen as the prime mover of

development. Because of the stringent legal rules and regulations surrounding the

activities of the private sector, the period was described as an "era of command and

control". The policy of industrial licensing, high taxes and restrictions on the

private sector led to corporate malpractices. This led to enactment of legislation

regarding corporate governance, labour and environmental issues. PSUs were set

up by the state to ensure suitable distribution of resources (wealth, food etc.) to the

needy. However the public sector was effective only to a certain limited extent.

This led to shift of expectation from the public to the private sector and their active

involvement in the socio-economic development of the country became absolutely

necessary. In 1965 Indian academicians, politicians and businessmen set up a

national workshop on CSR aimed at reconciliation They emphasized upon

transparency, social accountability and regular stakeholder dialogues. In spite of

such attempts the CSR failed to catch steam.

The Fourth Phase

In the fourth phase (1980 until the present) Indian companies started abandoning

their traditional engagement with CSR and integrated it into a sustainable business

strategy. In 1990s the first initiation towards globalization and economic

liberalization were undertaken. Controls and licensing system were partly done

away with which gave a boost to the economy the signs of which are very evident

today. Increased growth momentum of the economy helped Indian companies

grow rapidly and this made them more willing and able to contribute towards

social cause. Globalization has transformed India into an important destination in

terms of production and manufacturing bases of TNCs are concerned. As Western

markets are becoming more and more concerned about and labour and

environmental standards in the developing countries, Indian companies who export

and produce goods for the developed world need to pay a close attention to

compliance with the international standards. 

Current State of CSR in India

As discussed above, CSR is not a new concept in India. Ever since their inception,

corporates like the Tata Group, the Aditya Birla Group, and Indian Oil

Corporation, to name a few, have been involved in serving the community.

Through donations and charity events, many other organizations have been doing

their part for the society. The basic objective of CSR in these days is to maximize

the company's overall impact on the society and stakeholders. CSR policies,

practices and programs are being comprehensively integrated by an increasing

number of companies throughout their business operations and processes. A

growing number of corporates feel that CSR is not just another form of indirect

expense but is important for protecting the goodwill and reputation, defending

attacks and increasing business competitiveness.

Companies have specialized CSR teams that formulate policies, strategies and

goals for their CSR programs and set aside budgets to fund them. These programs

are often determined by social philosophy which have clear objectives and are well

defined and are aligned with the mainstream business. The programs are put into

practice by the employees who are crucial to this process. CSR programs ranges

from community development to development in education, environment and

healthcare etc.

For example, a more comprehensive method of development is adopted by some

corporations such as Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Maruti Suzuki India

Limited, and Hindustan Unilever Limited. Provision of improved medical

and sanitation facilities, building schools and houses, and empowering the villagers

and in process making them more self-reliant by providing vocational training and

a knowledge of business operations are the facilities that these corporations focus

on.Many of the companies are helping other peoples by providing them good

standard of living.

On the other hand, the CSR programs of corporations like GlaxoSmithKline

Pharmaceuticals’ focus on the health aspect of the community. They set up health

camps in tribal villages which offer medical check-ups and treatment and

undertake health awareness programs. Some of the non-profit organizations which

carry out health and education programs in backward areas are to a certain extent

funded by such corporations.

Also Corporates increasingly join hands with Non-governmental

organizations (NGOs) and use their expertise in devising programs which address

wider social problems.

For example, a lot of work is being undertaken to rebuild the lives of the tsunami

affected victims. This is exclusively undertaken bySAP India in partnership

with Hope Foundation, an NGO that focuses mainly on bringing about

improvement in the lives of the poor and needy . The SAP Labs Center of HOPE in

Bangalore was started by this venture which looks after the food, clothing, shelter

and medical care of street children.

CSR has gone through many phases in India. The ability to make a significant

difference in the society and improve the overall quality of life has clearly been

proven by the corporates. Not one but all corporates should try and bring about a

change in the current social situation in India in order to have an effective and

lasting solution to the social woes . Partnerships between companies, NGOs and

the government should be facilitated so that a combination of their skills such as

expertise, strategic thinking, manpower and money to initiate extensive social

change will put the socio-economic development of India on a fast track.

Examples

The first company that comes to mind as a beacon of good corporate governance is

the Indian IT industry bellwether, Infosys. Indeed, Infosys is one of the companies

that has set benchmarks for other companies not only in India but all over the

world in the way corporate governance and social responsibility are handled and

projected to the outside world. The point here is that companies not only need to

walk the talk for CSR but also broadcast their achievements to the world at large.

Another company that has done an exceptional job of portraying itself as a good

corporate citizen is the TATA group in India and The Body Shop (formerly owned

by Anita Roddick) company in the United States.

While these two companies are at different ends of the spectrum as far as their

product lines and lines of business are concerned, the public perceives these

companies favourably mainly due to the visionary leaders that have led these

companies as well as the reputation that has been established through decades of

doing the right thing. Taken together with Infosys and companies like Sony

Ericsson, these corporations reap the benefits of being good corporate citizens in

terms of increased revenues and top of the mind brand recall by dint of being

model corporate citizens.

The key take away from this discussion is that companies do gain tangible and

intangible benefits by practising CSR and by projecting an image of good

governance and social responsibility to the external world. Of course, we have seen

how companies resort to “Green Washing” and spin to project something which

does not exist fully or partially. The point about these examples is that these

companies not only pursue socially and environmentally responsible strategies but

also make it a point to be on cordial terms with all the stakeholders (the suppliers,

governmental agencies, employees, consumers and society at large) which

translates into measurable and immeasurable benefits to these companies.

Finally, being a good corporate citizen brings its own benefits to the companies.

For instance, it is common to find leaders from these companies sitting on various

boards and advisory committees which speak volumes about the high esteem in

which they are held. This translates into instant recognition and a “halo” effect

which for all practical purposes is like the adulation that rock stars and sports

personalities receive from the people. The point here is that good corporate

behavior is rewarded at some point or the other and hence, companies must seek to

do well and do the right thing always. While not preaching, some of these

companies also help other companies in actualizing their visions for society and by

being transformational change agents as well as catalysts for CSR.

In conclusion, CSR as a business imperative must not be accepted grudgingly or

half heartedly. Instead, it must be practiced with full vigor and straight from the

heart passion and this certainly helps the companies in the long run. After all,

business is not all about the next quarter only.