Busm4687 assessment 1 _ Assessment task 1: Literature Review

RMIT Classification: Trusted

GLOBAL CORPORATE RESPONSIBILTY

ASSESSMENT 1: LITERATURE REVIEW

Name of the tutor: Mr. Thanapat Time: 11h30
Tutorial Day: Wednesday
Date of 24 July 2022

submission: (Excluding cover sheet, reference list, tables and
Checklist
 Number of words: 1100

figures)

DECLARATION AND STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

1. I hold a copy of this work which can be produced if the original is lost/damaged.
2. This work is my original work and no part of it has been copied from any other student’s
work or from any other source except where due acknowledgement is made.
3. No part of this work has been written for me by any other person except where such
collaboration has been authorised by the lecturer/teacher concerned.
4. I have not previously submitted this work for this or any other course/unit.
5. I give permission for this work to be reproduced, communicated, compared and archived
for the purpose of detecting plagiarism.
6. I give permission for a copy of my/our marked work to be retained by the school for
review and comparison, including review by external examiners.

I understand that:

7. Plagiarism is the presentation of the work, idea or creation of another person as though it is
my own. It is a form of cheating and is a very serious academic offence that may lead to
exclusion from the University. Plagiarised material can be drawn from, and presented in,

1

RMIT Classification: Trusted

written, graphic and visual form, including electronic data and oral presentations. Plagiarism
occurs when the origin of the material used is not appropriately cited.
8. Plagiarism includes the act of assisting or allowing another person to plagiarise or to copy
my work.

I. INTRODUCTION

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has become an important concept in the last few
decades, which refers to businesses’ responsibility toward society and the environment within
the scope of the legislation. This essay is going to discuss the CSR concepts, theories, and
how they perform in different contexts based on reviewing both authors’ viewpoints on 2
required texts. Firstly, this essay desires to summarize their core arguments and contributed
theories. Subsequently, this paper purports to clarify and explain the personal understanding
of both texts by clarifying their focal arguments with supporting evidence on similarities and
differences analysis of those articles. Finally, eventually interpreting which reasonable
arguments the writer most concurs.
II. MAIN SECTIONS

1. Article 1 summary (Rasche et al 2017)

This chapter pointed out many CSR concepts against the background of the changing roles
and responsibilities of corporations corresponding to significant social transformation and

trends in globalization. CSR changes in businesses are determined through many social
aspects. The paper provided an overview of how globalization has essentially influenced
CSR, which primarily increasingly struggles with governments to address social or
environmental problems, and to regulate the operations of multinational businesses since
sometimes those operations reach beyond single state boundaries. It outlined different
approaches to framing CSR in an accurate conceptual definition due to its ambiguity when
CSR will be performed differently for different groups of stakeholders to serve their all
interests. Thus, there exist many disagreements about what exactly CSR includes. CSR
perspectives were distinguished into five main conceptualizations clusters, including

2

RMIT Classification: Trusted

normative, integrative, instrumental, political, and emergent perspectives. It’s crucial to
understand that a lack of CSR doesn't guarantee corporate irresponsibility. There is no
evidence to suppose lack of explicit CSR strategies and practices, corporations may show
their irresponsible behaviors. The paper also discussed CSR overlap many other concepts
such as corporate sustainability, corporate citizenship, and business ethics but they are still
significantly distinguished. Many engage in CSR mostly due to the ‘business case’. Some
corporations are motivated to prepare CSR commitment and practices due to the belief in
positive impacts of CSR on their profits. However, adopting CSR is not directly relevant to
financial gains but CSR engagement can enhance the value driver such as revenue growth,
productivity improvements, and minimization, which straightforwardly drive the financial
benefits for companies. Another way, some firms including MNCs, SMEs, and family-owned
businesses likely engage in CSR as it is simply the right thing to need (moral case). Finally,
this chapter provided three conceptual frameworks to study CSR: strategy, communication,
and governance.

2. Article 2 summary (Rhodes 2021)

This article discusses when large organizations make progressive gestures in response to
social and environmental crises and the corresponding long-term impacts might have on
political systems. It pointed out a diversion that multinational corporations are becoming too
politically influential in society and argued that capitalism exists that seems to pose a threat to
social development sustainability. This article starts to show superficiality and irresponsibility
performances of the Australian government for clarifying their roles and responsibilities
against their every claim and operation towards society and the environment, which is against
the CSR theory. Most dangerously, many supported these behaviors. Many corporations
desire to meddle in politics, but in a different way when they publicly encourage
“progressive” political causes. Their behaviors are more environmentally and socially
responsible toward their business decisions, which are dedicated radically to all
“stakeholders”, now not just for shareholder primacy, and their self-interest. However, from a
negative angle, corporations actively show their gestures in support of progressive causes just

3

RMIT Classification: Trusted

for investment; they aim to attract progressive customers, limit public pressure, and occupy
public sentiments for marketing to advance their image and position. Rhodes (2021) argued
that corporations muscled to take over political power by lobbying the government to
influence policy, straightforwardly subsidizing political drives, and participating with citizens
on issues of public concern, but finally mainly for businesses’ self-interest. MNCs think they
have rights and responsibilities to outline the world's moral and political agendas and address
CSR problems because they judge the government is unable and unwilling to fulfill roles
without their leadership following Political perspective and likely to turn them into political
actors according to PCSR theory. Nevertheless, it is a paradox that corporate contributions
were tiny in CSR problem-solving inverse to what they promise.

3. Two articles comparison
a. Similarities

Both required articles mention CSR performances and behaviors of corporations in reaction
to environmental and social problems reactions in global circumstances. Article 1
acknowledges corporations' significant contribution (CSR approaches) to solving global
critically social and environmental problems, and Article 2 informs some businesses are
publicly supporting positive progressive political causes. More specifically, both articles
mention Political Perspectives in CSR research which implicated that multinational
corporations have freedoms to the democratic governance of business leading and participate
in self-regulation when the government is unable or unwilling to fulfill their gaps legally.
Both articles agree on the negative consequences of PCSR implementation of MNCs in
globalization that some states have withdrawn from many areas where they traditionally have
regulatory monopolies, bolsters the private corporations' political power, and weakens
government authority. Big politically influenced MNCs can easily stimulate public debate
and escape from government regulation to pursue economic profits. Two articles
acknowledge promoting CSR as an opportunity to promote operative elements to exploit
financial benefits, CSR is related indirectly to businesses’ profits.

b. Differences
4

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Rasch et al (Article 1) discuss more CSR concepts through many perspectives and provide
abundant relevant CSR theories for examination. The authors expand their CSR concept
study scope by overviewing CSR performances through many different perspectives,
including Normative, Integrative, Instrumental, Political, and Emergent perspectives. Article
1 reaches CSR definitions research which highlights CSR performs differently for different
stakeholders. CSR can be defined by many different approaches which mainly remark

integration of enterprises’ responsibilities towards society to satisfy all relevant stakeholders.
CSR changes over time corresponding to contemporary trends worldwide inducing many
state regulations to change to regulate international corporations properly.

Otherwise, the second article focuses on PCSR application from the Political perspective.
Rhode mostly discusses the methods by which many MNCs take political responsibility to
engage in environmental and social solving-problems and gain politically influenced power.
The flip side of MNCs’ performance starts to turn into positive progressive gestures in CSR
are increasing their public political influence, marketing, and negotiating power with the
government to facilitate their operations. Finally, there exists ineffectiveness of PCSR toward
society by the way they aim to exploit political power for their self-interests.

4. Arguments

Personally, the first most convincing argument derived from Article 1 (Rasche et al 2017), is
that defining exactly what is CSR in the global context is complicated due to the nature and
specific contexts of each CSR problem. CSR involves a wide variety of stakeholders; thus,
the business’s CSR has to carefully evaluate different stakeholders’ interests to perform
properly for different stakeholder groups (Freeman 1984). The stakeholder perspective of
CSR is more intricate due to the inconsistency of stakeholder levels. For instance,
Shareholders might decipher CSR regarding profit maximization. States might see CSR as
legislative compliance and guaranteeing safe goods and working conditions. For consumers,
CSR implies delivering high-quality products at competitive prices (Donaldson & Preston
1995). That makes CSR more intricate due to the inconsistency of stakeholder levels. Hence,
corporations need to flexibly apply CSR concepts to each issue and express appropriate

5

RMIT Classification: Trusted

responsibilities to satisfy stakeholders (Matten & Moon 2008). Moreover, CSR is intimately
involved in highly complex dynamic systems in environmental, social, philanthropic, and
financial sectors, thus, there will be different CSR defining ways in different areas (Sheehy
2015).

Secondly, the other argument I approve of is the critical analysis of contradictory
consequences of PCSR of big corporations (MNCs), mainly in second article. PCSR entails
the business’ responsibility to engage in self-regulation to fulfill government gaps legally.
These behaviors carried a positive but dark angel. In the globalization era, many MNCs
become excessively powerful actors across different nations, and challenge states to regulate
prompting inadequate regulatory forces of government on MNCs, accordingly, they could
escape from strict regulation or negotiate with states and induce them to consider their race.
Thus, it is permitted for MNCs to exploit political roles to achieve profitability while leaving
their liabilities regarding environment and social issues (Andreas & Guido 2011).

III. CONCLUSION

Overall, the two articles discuss business CSR performance for sustainable development of
environment and society from different perspectives; also place attention on Political
perspective (Article 2). By similar and different CSR concepts analysis, they empathize the
importance of all stakeholders evaluating in do CSR and ensure show responsibilities to serve
all stakeholder's interests. Besides, there is a warning of negative consequences of using
PCSR of some MNCs in the global context. Additionally, it is convincing for Rasche et al to
examine CSR concept from multidimensional views; define and approach CSR through many
aspects. Besides, Rhode argues in his study of the gaps of PCSR existing in globalization
towards acting sustainably towards society and the environment.

IV. REFERENCES
Andreas & Guido (2011) ‘The New Political Role of Business in a Globalized World: A
Review of a New Perspective on CSR and its Implications for the Firm, Governance, and

6

RMIT Classification: Trusted

Democracy’, Journal of Management Studies, accessed 23 July 2022.
/>Donaldson T and Preston L.E (1995) ’The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts,
Evidence, and Implications, The Academy of Management Review, 20(1):65-91, accessed 23
July 2022 />Freeman R.E (1984) ‘Strategic management: A stakeholder approach’, Boston: Pitman.
Matten D and Moon J (2008) ‘“Implicit" and "Explicit" CSR: A Conceptual Framework for a
Comparative Understanding of Corporate Social Responsibility’, The Academy of
Management Review, 33(2):404-424, accessed 19 July 2022 https://www-jstor-
org.ezproxy.lib.rmit.edu.au/stable/20159405?seq=2#metadata_info_tab_contents
Sheehy B (2015) ‘Defining CSR: Problems and Solutions’, Journal of Business Ethics,
131(3):625-648, accessed 24 July 2022 />24703631?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents

7