What CSR is not

Corporate social irresponsibility

Timothy S Clark, Kristen N. Grantham

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose - By exploring what Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is not, its opposite termed Corporate Social Irresponsibility (CSI), we raise understanding and focus awareness on the material differences and associated arguments for and against. Approach - Background, context, and theory introduce the concept of a continuum between CSI and CSR, which is illustrated in a progression of graphic figures. Findings - Focus on the affirmation of CSR has distracted attention and resources from a more addressable concern: identification and denunciation of antisocial business behavior. Focusing instead on the opposite, defined here as CSI, avoids much of the ambiguity of CSR and presents a clarifying continuum between the two. Originality - Using engaging logic, uncommon connections are made between such erstwhile polar-opposites as Friedman and Carroll to reveal broad agreement that CSI is destructive and can be universally opposed. Implications - While promotion of CSR remains contentious, a broader range of business and thought leaders can find common ground by focusing on the CSI side of the continuum and uniting against it. Practitioners, academicians, and activists alike can agree that social benefits are greater from focusing on reduction of CSI rather than on promotion of CSR. Copyrightr

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationCritical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability
PublisherEmerald Group Publishing Ltd.
Pages23-41
Number of pages19
Volume4
ISBN (Print)9781780529981
DOIs
StatePublished - 2012

Publication series

NameCritical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability
Volume4
ISSN (Print)20439059
ISSN (Electronic)20439067

Fingerprint

Corporate Social Responsibility
Logic
Resources
Progression
Social benefits

Keywords

  • Antisocial business behavior
  • Corporate social irresponsibility
  • Corporate social responsibility

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Business, Management and Accounting(all)

Cite this

Clark, T. S., & Grantham, K. N. (2012). What CSR is not: Corporate social irresponsibility. In Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability (Vol. 4, pp. 23-41). (Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability; Vol. 4). Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2043-9059(2012)0000004010

What CSR is not : Corporate social irresponsibility. / Clark, Timothy S; Grantham, Kristen N.

Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability. Vol. 4 Emerald Group Publishing Ltd., 2012. p. 23-41 (Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability; Vol. 4).

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Clark, TS & Grantham, KN 2012, What CSR is not: Corporate social irresponsibility. in Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability. vol. 4, Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability, vol. 4, Emerald Group Publishing Ltd., pp. 23-41. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2043-9059(2012)0000004010
Clark TS, Grantham KN. What CSR is not: Corporate social irresponsibility. In Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability. Vol. 4. Emerald Group Publishing Ltd. 2012. p. 23-41. (Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability). https://doi.org/10.1108/S2043-9059(2012)0000004010
Clark, Timothy S ; Grantham, Kristen N. / What CSR is not : Corporate social irresponsibility. Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability. Vol. 4 Emerald Group Publishing Ltd., 2012. pp. 23-41 (Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability).
@inbook{95402030708245e587b0c29ab04aa098,
title = "What CSR is not: Corporate social irresponsibility",
abstract = "Purpose - By exploring what Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is not, its opposite termed Corporate Social Irresponsibility (CSI), we raise understanding and focus awareness on the material differences and associated arguments for and against. Approach - Background, context, and theory introduce the concept of a continuum between CSI and CSR, which is illustrated in a progression of graphic figures. Findings - Focus on the affirmation of CSR has distracted attention and resources from a more addressable concern: identification and denunciation of antisocial business behavior. Focusing instead on the opposite, defined here as CSI, avoids much of the ambiguity of CSR and presents a clarifying continuum between the two. Originality - Using engaging logic, uncommon connections are made between such erstwhile polar-opposites as Friedman and Carroll to reveal broad agreement that CSI is destructive and can be universally opposed. Implications - While promotion of CSR remains contentious, a broader range of business and thought leaders can find common ground by focusing on the CSI side of the continuum and uniting against it. Practitioners, academicians, and activists alike can agree that social benefits are greater from focusing on reduction of CSI rather than on promotion of CSR. Copyrightr",
keywords = "Antisocial business behavior, Corporate social irresponsibility, Corporate social responsibility",
author = "Clark, {Timothy S} and Grantham, {Kristen N.}",
year = "2012",
doi = "10.1108/S2043-9059(2012)0000004010",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "9781780529981",
volume = "4",
series = "Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability",
publisher = "Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.",
pages = "23--41",
booktitle = "Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - What CSR is not

T2 - Corporate social irresponsibility

AU - Clark, Timothy S

AU - Grantham, Kristen N.

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - Purpose - By exploring what Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is not, its opposite termed Corporate Social Irresponsibility (CSI), we raise understanding and focus awareness on the material differences and associated arguments for and against. Approach - Background, context, and theory introduce the concept of a continuum between CSI and CSR, which is illustrated in a progression of graphic figures. Findings - Focus on the affirmation of CSR has distracted attention and resources from a more addressable concern: identification and denunciation of antisocial business behavior. Focusing instead on the opposite, defined here as CSI, avoids much of the ambiguity of CSR and presents a clarifying continuum between the two. Originality - Using engaging logic, uncommon connections are made between such erstwhile polar-opposites as Friedman and Carroll to reveal broad agreement that CSI is destructive and can be universally opposed. Implications - While promotion of CSR remains contentious, a broader range of business and thought leaders can find common ground by focusing on the CSI side of the continuum and uniting against it. Practitioners, academicians, and activists alike can agree that social benefits are greater from focusing on reduction of CSI rather than on promotion of CSR. Copyrightr

AB - Purpose - By exploring what Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is not, its opposite termed Corporate Social Irresponsibility (CSI), we raise understanding and focus awareness on the material differences and associated arguments for and against. Approach - Background, context, and theory introduce the concept of a continuum between CSI and CSR, which is illustrated in a progression of graphic figures. Findings - Focus on the affirmation of CSR has distracted attention and resources from a more addressable concern: identification and denunciation of antisocial business behavior. Focusing instead on the opposite, defined here as CSI, avoids much of the ambiguity of CSR and presents a clarifying continuum between the two. Originality - Using engaging logic, uncommon connections are made between such erstwhile polar-opposites as Friedman and Carroll to reveal broad agreement that CSI is destructive and can be universally opposed. Implications - While promotion of CSR remains contentious, a broader range of business and thought leaders can find common ground by focusing on the CSI side of the continuum and uniting against it. Practitioners, academicians, and activists alike can agree that social benefits are greater from focusing on reduction of CSI rather than on promotion of CSR. Copyrightr

KW - Antisocial business behavior

KW - Corporate social irresponsibility

KW - Corporate social responsibility

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84896379494&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84896379494&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1108/S2043-9059(2012)0000004010

DO - 10.1108/S2043-9059(2012)0000004010

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9781780529981

VL - 4

T3 - Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability

SP - 23

EP - 41

BT - Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability

PB - Emerald Group Publishing Ltd.

ER -