INHOUD
Meeting 2 2
Article 1: Carrol, 1999 2
Article 2: Dahlsrud, 2008 4
Seminar 1 The Domain of CSR 6
Meeting 3
Article 4: Sen, & Bhattacharya, 2001 7
Lecture 2: Slides based on Article 4 11
Article 10: Kim et al., 2010 14
Lecture 2: Slides based on Article 10 17
Lecture 2: Theoretical Framwork 18
Meeting 4
Article 3: Brown, & Dacin, 1997 20
Seminar 2: Slides based on Article 3 25
Article 13: Ellen et al., 2006 26
Seminar 2: Slides based on Article 13 30
Meeting 5
Article 6: Du et al., 2010 32
Lecture 3: Slides based on Article 6 35
Article 16: Du, & Vieira, 2012 37
Lecture 3: Slides based on Article 16 42
Meeting 6
Article 8: Schons et al., 2017 43
Seminar 3: Slides based on Article 8 45
Article 9: Turker, 2009 46
Seminar 3: Slides based on Article 9 49
Meeting 8
Article 11: Korschun, Bhattacharya, & Swain, 2014 50
Lecture 4: Slides based on Article 11 54
Article 14: Vlachos et al., 2009 56
Lecture 4: Slides based on Article 14 59
Meeting 9
Article 5: Du, Bhattacharya, & Sen, 2007 62
Seminar 5: Slides based on Article 5 65
Article 12: De Roeck et al., 2016 67
Seminar 5: Slides based on Article 12 70
Meeting 10
Article 7: Marin, Ruiz, & Rubio, 2009 72
Lecture 6: Slides based on Article 7 75
Article 15: Marin, Cuestas, & Román, 2016 78
Lecture 6: Slides based on Article 15 81
Meeting 12
Article 17: Lee & Kim, 2013 83
Article 18: Rim & Song, 2016 85
Meeting 13
Catch-up Lecture: Test Exam 88
1
,MEETING 2: ARTICLES 1 & 2, SEMINAR 1
Article 1. Corporate Social Responsibility – Evolution of a Definitional Construct
(Carroll, A. B, 1999)
The goal of the article is to trace the evolution of CSR as a main concept, or definitional construct, and come to
appreciate what it had meant in the past and still means today. The goal is to identify the major contributors to
the evolution of the CSR definition, rather than to review all that has been said by anyone on the subject.
The Modern Era of Social Responsibility Begins: the 1950s
In the early writing on CSR, it was referred to more often as social responsibility (SR) than as CSR. Perhaps,
this was because the age of the modern corporation’s prominence and dominance in the business sector had not
yet occurred or been noted.
Definition: “Businessmen were responsible for the consequences of their actions in a sphere somewhat wider
than that covered by their profit-and-loss statements” (Bowen, 1953).
CSR Literature Expands: the 1960s
The decade of the 1960s marked a significant growth in attempts to formalize or state what CSR means.
Davis argued that social responsibility is a nebulous idea but should be seen in a managerial context.
Furthermore, he asserted that some socially responsible business decisions can be justified by a long,
complicated process of reasoning as having a good chance of bringing long-run economic gain to the firm, thus
paying it back for its socially responsible outlook.
Definition: “Social responsibility implies a public posture toward society’s economic and human resources
and a willingness to see that those resources are used for broad social ends and not simply for the narrowly
circumscribed interests of private persons and firms” (Frederick, 1960).
Another major contributor to the definition of social responsibility during the 1960s was Joseph W McGuire.
His definition is somewhat more precise than previous ones in that he defined it as extending beyond economic
and legal obligations.
Walton (1976) elaborated to emphasize that the essential ingredient of the corporation’s social responsibilities
include a degree of voluntarism, as opposed to coercion, an indirect linkage of certain other voluntary
organizations to the corporation, and the acceptance that costs are involved for which it may not be possible to
gauge any direct measurable economic returns.
Definitions of CSR Proliferate: the 1970s
The four views of Johnson (1971):
1. CSR as conventional wisdom: in this view Johnson is hinting at the possibility of a stakeholder
approach as he references a “multiplicity of interests” and actually names several of these specific
interests (groups).
2. CSR as long-run profit maximization: in this view Johnson is saying businesses carry out social
programs to add profits to their organization.
3. CSR as utility maximization: in this view Johnson assumes that the prime motivation of the business
firm is that the enterprise seeks multiple goals rather than only maximum profits.
4. CSR as lexicographic utility theory: in this view Johnson suggests that strongly profit-motivated firms
may engage in socially responsible behavior.
2
,Although these views may appear contradictory at times, they are essentially complementary ways of viewing
the same reality.
The Committee for Economic Development (CED) articulated a three concentric circles definition of social
responsibility:
1. includes the clear-cut basic responsibilities for the efficient execution of the economic function—
products, jobs and economic growth.
2. encompasses responsibility to exercise this economic function with a sensitive awareness of changing
social values and priorities.
3. outlines new emerging and still amorphous responsibilities that business should assume to become
more broadly involved in actively improving the social environment.
Professor Wallich (1972) wrote that the exercise of CSR involves three basic elements:
1. the setting of objectives,
2. the decision whether to pursue given objectives,
3. and the financing of these objectives
Carroll himself (1979) proposed a four-part definition of CSR that was embedded in a conceptual model of
CSP. His basic argument was that for managers or firms to engage in CSP they needed to have:
1. a basic definition of CSR
“The social responsibility of business encompasses the economic, legal, ethical, and
discretionary expectations that society has of organizations at a given point in time”.
2. an understanding/enumeration of the issues of which a social responsibility existed (stakeholders)
3. a specification of the philosophy of responsiveness to the issues
The 1980s: Fewer Definitions, More Research, and Alternative Themes
The focus on developing new or refined definitions of CSR gave way to research on CSR and a splintering of
writing into alternative concepts and themes such as corporate social responsiveness, CSP, public policy,
business ethics, and stakeholder theory/management, in the 1980s.
The 1990s: CSR Further Yields to Alternative Themes
As a general statement, it should be observed that very few unique contributions to the definition of CSR
occurred in the 1990s. The CSR concept served as the base point, building block, or point-of-departure for
other related concepts and themes, many of which embraced CSR-thinking and were quite compatible with it.
CSP, stakeholder theory, business ethics theory, and corporate citizenship were the major themes that took
center stage in the 1990s.
Carroll himself (1991), revisited his CSR definition. The pyramid of CSR depicted the economic category
as the base (the foundation upon which all others rest), and then built upward through legal, ethical, and
philanthropic categories. He made it clear that business should not fulfil these in sequential fashion but
that each is to be fulfilled at all times.
Summary and Concluding Remarks
1950s: this decade ushered (inluiden) in what might be called the “modern era” with respect to
CSR definitions.
1960s: the literature on CSR developed considerably. Most of this definitional literature was
promulgated by academics.
1970s: definitions of CSR began to proliferate (vermenigvuldigen). The definitions became more
specific; also alternative emphases, such as corporate social responsiveness and CSP, became
commonplace.
3
, 1980s: fewer original definitions of CSR, more attempts to measure and conduct research on
CSR, and alternative thematic frameworks.
1990s: the CSR concept transitioned significantly to alternative themes such as stakeholder
theory, business ethics theory, CSP, and corporate citizenship.
Article 2. How Corporate Social Responsibility is Defined: An Analysis of 37
Definitions (Dahlsrud, 2008)
In this paper, CSR is viewed as a social construction and it is not possible to develop an unbiased
definition. However, it is possible to study the similarities and differences in between the available
definitions.
Current methodological approaches used to define CSR
1. Conducting academic literature reviews
2. Conducting interviews
3. Construct a definition through theoretical reasoning
Method
The method applied in this paper consists of three steps:
1. Gathering CSR definitions through literature review
37 definitions were found and analyzed
2. Developing and applying a coding scheme to obtain an overview of which definitions referred to
which dimensions
Five dimensions of CSR were identified (environmental, social, economic, stakeholder
and voluntariness). This is shown in Table 1.
3. The frequency counts from Google of all of the definitions referring to specific dimension were
added up to calculate the relative usage of each dimension
4
