SLP 4. Corporate Social Responsibility

Corporate social responsibility
Name:
Institution:
Introduction
Corporate social responsibility describes the mechanism used by corporations to run their business activities, as they direct their energies towards the establishment of a positive and preferred outcome for the society as a whole. It can also be regarded as the requirements by companies to make advance contributions that enhance society’s welfare.For the above to occur, corporations ethics must revolutionize to control the efforts towards building a desired society. For instance, a company can contribute to the construction of local roads or lighting the streets to promote safety and enhance transportation. Currently, the concept is viewed as giving back to the society while building the business. Surveys in the UK and USA, have confirmed that consumer are willing to associate with companies that show generosity by supporting programs that benefit the society (Ellen et al, 2006).
Corporations operate on local and government set ethics whose violation becomes a crime. Companies that violate those principles are socially irresponsible and in most cases they direct their effort towards wealth maximization. A socially responsible corporation conducts business by gearing their efforts towards making the societies and their environment a better living place. Companies are encouraged to do more than just what they are expected to do (Popa & Salanță, 2014). A manager should have the interest of the society at heart, for instance, investing in human capital.

The socially responsible corporation are expected to perceive the needs of a community and meet them. The firms that do not fulfill them are associated with environmental degradation and corruption scandals, rendering them socially irresponsible. Trying to compensate for the environmental damages, is not considered as a socially responsible act.
Corporate responsible and irresponsible managers have been compared, and both parties recognize they have a duty to the society, but the degree of acceptance varies. Apparently those irresponsible are more profit oriented as opposed to those who focus on promoting humanitarian welfare. The corporate social responsible have ethics that realize employees as a source to be valued (Popa & Salanță, 2014).While socially irresponsible corporations, consider employees as objects to be exploited. The responsible company in their guiding institution they have incorporated aspects of social responsibility but the other party have a theoretical view that does not account for the needs of the society.
Managers are at the core of this corporate social contribution, either negatively or positively. Manager are encouraged to handle business in ethical manners to ensure the corporation’s ethics are not violated whose repercussions are felt by the society. Training on standards should be promoted along with whistle-blowers to ensure the establishment of an ethical business culture. Manager violating the corporation values that affects the corporate social responsibility have to be identified and penalized. For the irresponsibility, this will ensure managers act in a modest manner with accountability to society expectations (Popa & Salanță, 2014).
In conclusion, the concept of corporate social responsibility and irresponsibly occurs side by side. Since at times even when it is at the manager’s best interest to promote the expectations of the society, unavoidable incidents happen which harm the society, and the corporation will try to correct it. In this context, the corrective measure is not considered as corporate social responsibility but rather classified as irresponsibility. Following business ethics to guide actions can help save the situation.
References
Ellen, P. S., Webb, D. J., & Mohr, L. A. (2006). Building corporate associations: Consumer attributions for corporate socially responsible programs. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 147-157.Popa, M., & Salanță, I. (2014). Corporate social responsibility versus corporate social irresponsibility. Management & Marketing, 9(2).