Running Header: DISCUSSION BOARD 2

Discussion Board two Jarrett Davis BUSI 560

DISCUSSION BOARD 2

In this paper, the terms corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate citizenship (CC) are compared and contrasted. Research is presented to highlight the commonalities and differences among the two concepts. Furthermore, the issue will be viewed from the Christian perspective. CSR and CC are concepts that some may choose to use interchangeably. Both terms emphasize serving society and stakeholders in a way that maximizes financial, social, and environmental performance (Lawrence & Weber, 2011). However, academic literature states that CC is the act of mobilizing social and environmental responsibility efforts on a global scale. In contrast, CSR methods are often implemented on a local or regional basis. CSR and CC methods echo each other in the belief that corporations are controlled by not only the stakeholders but by society (Valor, 2005). Since the 1990s, CC thinking was expected to replace the CSR concept in addressing social responsibility. The concept of CSR was viewed to be a relative concept due to varying social demands among stakeholder groups. Each company had to construct their own CSR plan in order to meet the needs of their local environment. Internally, CSR was a successful tool used to persuade management to be mindful of the social ramifications of their decisions. This success has been limited because CSR needs and efforts in the United States are not parallel to the CSR approach found in Europe (Sison, 2009). Following the CC method, corporations restructured their role and relationship with society on a national and global platform (Edward & Wilmott, 2008). CC advocates believe that the concept integrated CSR and stakeholder management framework within corporations (Valor, 2005). However, CC differed

DISCUSSION BOARD 2

from previous theology in that the corporation is viewed as an entity with a status much like a person. Critics noted that corporations were not real citizens, who hold rights and obligations under law (Sison, 2009). At most, a corporation can only be treated as a fictional legal person, yet corporate actions within society could be studied within the lens of citizenship (Sison, 2009, p. 241). The element of citizenship within the CC thought process is derived from political theory. Such theory sheds light on the social aspect of the firm as an institution and provides the entity with an identity. To date, CC has not become widely adopted among corporations (Lawrence & Weber, 2011). Some critics dislike the link CC creates between corporate activities and political theory. Christian theory states that we should not be self righteous, because the evil that exist within corporations exist within the hearts of us all (Fischer, 2011). The new popular term within corporations is political CSR. The more political democratized version of CSR could cause CC to be abandoned. Both CC and CSR theory are criticized as ambiguous theories, lacking proof of proposed benefits (Valor, 2005). Globalization has raised competition to an all time high; businesses must be pro active, flexible, and willing to change quickly (Fischer, 2011). One could argue that social responsibility theories are only as strong as the political leverage and reputation enhancement period they provide.

DISCUSSION BOARD 2

References Edward, P., & Willmott, H. (2008). Corporate Citizenship: Rise or Demise of a Myth? Academy Of Management Review, 33(3), 771-773. Fischer, K. (2011) Presentation: Globalization and Big Business Lawrence, A. T., & Weber, J. (2011). business and society: stakeholders, ethics, Public Policy (13th ed.) McGraw-Hill-Irwin. ISBN. 9780078137150. Sison, A. (2009). From CSR to Corporate Citizenship: Anglo-American and Continental European Perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics, 235-246. Valor, C. (2005). Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Citizenship: Towards Corporate Accountability. Business & Society Review, 191-212.