The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/1026-4116.htm

JEAS
38,2 The evolving path of CSR: toward
business and society relationship
Kuldeep Singh and Madhvendra Misra
Department of Management Studies, Indian Institute of Information Technology,
304 Allahabad, India
Received 23 April 2020
Revised 6 November 2020 Abstract
Accepted 18 January 2021 Purpose – This paper takes a critical look at the meaning of corporate social responsibility (CSR) based on the
available literature on the subject matter. As CSR is an evolving concept both in meaning and practice, this
study aims to highlight CSR actions of the world’s six largest organizations (Google, Twitter, Amazon, Apple,
ExxonMobil and Walmart). The purpose of choosing these organizations and their CSR adoption was to
examine the business-society relationship and the role of key stakeholders in establishing this association.
Design/methodology/approach – This study examined CSR through the case study approach and provides
valuable insights by showing that CSR is a connecting link between business and society. Specifically, the
authors took a crucial look at various contentious, often ambiguous definitions, theoretical framework, brief
historical development, issues and controversies surrounding it, the role of CSR in community development
and summing it up with the future direction and managerial implications.
Findings – This study observed that there are some developmental strategies taking place today which are
relevant to the issue at stake, such as: contributing to the world economy, corporations donating or engaging in
a wide range of philanthropic gestures now than ever and contributing to the beauty of the society by meeting
rising community expectations.
Originality/value – By analyzing the worlds’ 6 largest companies’ CSR initiatives, this study provides
valuable insights by showing that CSR is a connecting link between business and society and is based on win-
win collaborations between civil society, business, investors and government. These companies’ CSR
initiatives have been mostly unexplored in past studies.
Keywords Corporate social responsibility (CSR), Business-society, Community development
Paper type Conceptual paper

Introduction
Within the last few decades, there has been an urgent call by corporations, investors and
governments to invest hugely on corporate social responsibility (CSR), so as to assist in
curbing out the global crises in the society. Ojo (2009) and Quelch and Jocz (2009) mentioned
that the government alone lacks the sufficient capacity to attend to the insatiable needs of
society and the environment. Seifi and Crowther (2018) remarked that financial market
breakdowns, severe economic instabilities and food shortages, required urgent assistance
both in developing and developed nations. Thus, there is a need for corporations and
investors to join hands with the government in building a credible society.
Every corporate, especially in leading developed economies of the United States, Canada,
Australia and the United Kingdom, has a CSR policy and produces annual reports detailing
their activities and socially responsible actions (responsibility toward the members of the
society, employees and shareholders). Since the dawn of the 1990s till date, the EU has been at
the forefront of recognizing and appreciating CSR as a sustainable development strategy to

The authors acknowledge Dr. Vijayshri Tewari, Head of Department of Management Studies, IIIT-
Allahabad, for her valuable support in completing this article.
Journal of Economic and Availability of data and material: No data are associated with the paper.
Administrative Sciences Competing interests: there is no competing interest.
Vol. 38 No. 2, 2022
pp. 304-332 Funding: No funding received from any agency or organization for this research work.
© Emerald Publishing Limited Authors’ contributions: The corresponding author writes and develops the manuscript, while the
1026-4116
DOI 10.1108/JEAS-04-2020-0052 second author provided the idea and review before submission.
harness or boost the organization’s accountability to citizens and public institutions through The evolving
inclusive, sustainable and smart growth. path of CSR
Over the past two decades, CSR has changed the statuesque of doing business in the world
(Hou et al., 2016; Szczepankiewicz and Mu
cko, 2016). Basically, CSR describes three key terms
“corporate,” which covers the large area of business, “social,” describes the local community
and “responsibilities,” which harnesses both sides of their relationships. Thus, in its purest,
widest and commonest sense, CSR includes all the constituent elements and stakeholders in
an organization’s operations together with the society in which it operates (Carroll, 1979). 305
Businesses are encouraged to develop a credible, ethical behavior and contribute
meaningfully to economic prosperity, harnessing the quality of life of their workforce,
their dependents and/ or families, the local community where they operate and the large
society (Simionescu and Dumitrescu, 2016). In the US, CSR is described more as a
philanthropic model, whereby companies maximize profits after fulfilling their basic
obligation of paying taxes and then donate a certain percentage to worthy causes, ultimately
addressing a global challenge (Matten and Moon, 2008).
Over the years, a number of definitions have surfaced, oftentimes coming from business
analysts, economists, management experts, environmentalists, management experts, social
critics and lots more (Dahlsrud, 2008). Today, many reporting agencies, scholars, researchers
and reputable institutions have explored these concepts left, right and center, both
empirically and theoretically (Falkenberg and Brunsæl, 2011; Allen and Craig, 2016; Tilt,
2016; Capaldi, 2016; Abukari and Abdul-Hamid, 2018). Many of these definitions are
extremely limited by attempting to represent, scratch the surface or describe a section of the
contending issue at stake.

CSR definitions
In 2001, the EU defined CSR as a concept whereby companies decide voluntarily to contribute
to a better society and a cleaner environment (European Comminsion, 2001). However, this
definition was updated in 2011, barely ten years after, and the sole objective was to generate an
increase in CSR impact. It was thus updated to the responsibility of enterprises for their impacts
on society and to consider CSR as a formidable route to sustainable development. According to
this updated definition, it was expected that companies and businesses are operating in the EU
to demonstrate a huge commitment to CSR through responsible business, transparent,
accountable and dedicated business activity (European Commision, 2011). The implication in
principle is that companies are called to be socially responsible by integrating consumer,
ethical, environmental, social and human rights championship in their profit organizations.
Other notable definitions include, CSR is how companies manage the business processes
to produce an overall positive impact on society (Baker, 2004) and “the obligation of
businessmen to pursue those policies, to make those decisions or to follow those lines of action
which are desirable in terms of the objectives and values of our society (Bowen, 1953). These
definitions explain that organizations should engage in capacity building for sustainable
livelihood in the society. Bowen (1953) regarded by multiple researchers as the father of CSR,
stressed that large organizations ought to fulfill responsibility toward society in
consideration of the impact of their business operations. Many other definitions of CSR
drew huge inspiration from Bowen (1953) thought.
Moving forward and almost in the same affirmation, Drucker (1954) added: “Management
has to consider whether the action is likely to promote the public good, to advance the basic
beliefs of our society, to contribute to its stability, strength, and harmony”. This definition
provides motivation for businesses to consider the social-political environment in which the
organization operates.
The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) (2010) defines CSR as ’ the
responsibility of an organization for the impacts of its decisions and activities on society and
JEAS the environment, resulting in ethical behavior and transparency which contributes to
38,2 sustainable development, including the health and wellbeing of society; takes into account the
expectations of stakeholders; complies with current laws and is consistent with international
standards of behavior and is integrated throughout the organization and implemented in its
relations (Hemphill, 2013).
The definition provided by ISO (2010) considered as well-detailed and all-encompassing
and explains what companies and profit organizations can do to create a sustainable
306 development path for the society. As per Strategic Direction Journal report (2018), CSR is a
self-regulating business model that helps a company be socially accountable to itself, its
stakeholders and the public. By practicing CSR, also called ’corporate citizenship, companies
can be conscious of the kind of impact they are having on all aspects of the society, including
economic, social and environment.
The overall crux of all definitions is that “CSR is a broad concept which can take diverse
forms through scholarships, grants, philanthropy, boost morale, volunteer efforts and lots
more” also by engaging in CSR, companies take socially responsible actions that will uplift
the society, instead of having a negative influence on them.

Historical development of CSR

CSR has passed through decades and seen by many schools of thought as one of the most
widely accepted concepts in the corporate world (Bowd et al., 2006; Vitolla et al., 2017).
Formerly, CSR was regarded as a contradiction, a farce, joke and oxymoron (Karnani, 2011;
Cloud, 2007). Today, the story is different, CSR has gained a meteoric rise fueled by a couple of
consistent movements comprised of institutions, agents and mechanisms (Jahdi and Acikdilli,
2009). The growing impact of CSR can be said to have reached a crescendo or to a new level
with the dawning of globalization and there are strong argumentative analyses in different
quarters that both are causally connected.
The rise of CSR almost instantly coincided with the rise of classical social movements in
liberal democracies such as feminism, civil rights etc. (Ozkazanc-Pan, 2019; Michelson et al.,
2016). Despite the myriads of criticisms received, the influence of CSR continues to expand.
Several ground breaking studies have attempted to throw light on this concept. The first
effort to theorize the causal connection between society and corporations points to Howard
Bowen’s literary exposition “Social Responsibilities of the Businessman” (Bowen, 1953).
Bowen’s work does not imply that prior to these, industrialists, writers and researchers have
not been thinking on the dialectical composition between corporations and society. But
Bowen’s book took a bold step on the idea of businesses providing social responsibilities
model. Bowen’s thoughts presented in his book “Social Responsibilities of the Businessman”
were unanimously adopted by an interdenominational agency comprising of about 29
orthodoxy and protestant Church bodies. The initial plan of the book was to be ’an
investigation of economic life and its relation to spiritual and moral values (Bowen, 1953).
In 1950s, Bowen’s work turned out to be a historical statement on CSR, welcoming it as a
new concept that should be sustained. While researchers feasted on Bowen’s brainchild, there
were also heavy rejections and economic criticisms championed by Milton Friedman, who
argued bluntly that social responsibilities of businesses were to maximize profits for its
shareholders and described CSR as a “subversive doctrine” that frustrated the optional
foundation of free enterprise society (Friedman, 2009). Furthermore, Bowen’s publication
experienced further controversial analysis, especially the political and social legitimacy of his
CSR description. Preston (1975) and Elkins (1977) maintained that despite the criticisms,
minimal theoretical advancements were achieved beyond what Bowen had earlier stipulated.
The point of convergence over this intellectual, rational discussion over CSR was due to
their underlying descriptions about organizations, businesses, the economic behavior of most
corporate businesses, and CSR was radically different, and none of the sides were willing to
succumb to their earlier stands (Burchell and Cook, 2013). CSR is not about public relations or The evolving
rhetoric; what authenticates CSR is the action of the players- corporations and employees. path of CSR
Today, a number of studies have affirmed the effect of CSR on society and corporations (Bair
and Palpacuer, 2015; Tanimoto, 2009). Researchers have acknowledged corporations as
social actors and are now laying greater emphasis on the strategic and managerial issues on
CSR (Brown et al., 2010; Highhouse et al., 2009).
CSR is a global, multifaceted and dynamic concept, which has received a lot of contentious
remarks across continental borders (Husted and Allen, 2006; Logsdon and Wood, 2005). Some 307
schools of thought regarded it as purely and uniquely a western phenomenon; others feel that it
is a concept that is common with nations with reputable, active corporations, civil society
organizations and ebullient democratic institutions (Chapple and Moon, 2005; Chaudary et al.,
2016). Overall, CSR is important to shareholders, consumers and employees. The work of
Howard Bowen in the 1950s have inspired many businesses not only in the US, but around the
world to instill CSR programs in their business operations, by raising morale in their workplace
and creating a meaningful change to their community (Wiraeus and Creelman, 2019).
A corporation cannot be socially responsible unless it becomes accountable to itself in all
ramifications and its stakeholders (Farber et al., 2015). CSR is all about giving back to society,
a reliable strategy competent and smart companies use to build customer loyalty. A CSR
–Friendly Corporation sets remarkable standards to its competitors and industry. Many
small and medium-sized corporations in the world are creating various CSR programs, but
although some of their actions are not as well publicized as larger companies like Facebook,
Twitter, Microsoft, Virgin Atlantic, Amazon, World Bank, United Nations etc. (Manning et al.,
2017; Frick, 2016; Arzova, 2009).

Theories of CSR
CSR also known as corporate social opportunity, responsible business, corporate citizenship
and as a process whereby corporations consider the interest of the society by taking care of
certain responsibilities on the stakeholders, customers, shareholders, employees,
communities and the environment (Kanji and Chopra, 2010). The implication is that
corporations have to comply with stipulated legislative regulations and voluntarily take up
the initiative of improving the lives of their employees, their families, local community where
they operate and the society at large. To be considered an effective act, their CSR program
had to be ethically friendly. CSR can come in varied ways such as:
(1) Socially sensitive investment.
(2) Working in collaboration with local communities.
(3) Building awesome relationship with their workforce, clients and their families and
(4) Participating actively in activities that ensure environmental sustainability and
conservation.
Garriga and Mel
e (2004) classified CSR theories in four groups: (1) instrumental theories,
which state that organization is an instrument for wealth creation and that this is its primary
social responsibility, (2) political theories, which remarked the relationship between business
and society on the power and position to accept social duties or to participate in certain form
of social interaction and co-operation, (3) integrative theories, this looks that an organization
ought to integrate social demands, arguing that business depends on society for its existence
and growth and (4) ethical theories, that focused on the ethical requirement for the
relationship between business and society.
Secchi (2007) claimed that these classifications basically relates to “what” (what is the
theoretical background of CSR?) but fails to explain how they define relations between
JEAS business and society and where responsibility is allocated. Therefore, after making the
38,2 critical appraisal of Garriga and Mel
e (2004), Secchi (2007) analyzed CSR from a broader
multidisciplinary perspective (literature review, avoiding overlaps and to obtain a set of
variables that can be useful for enhancing further improvement in CSR theory and practice).
Secchi (2007) divide CSR theories in three homogeneous groups by examining strong
connections with business ethics, strategic management, political economy and sociology.
These theories are:
308
Relational theory
This theory buttresses the interaction between business and society. As per this theory the
business organization loses its central role and start being an interactive part of the economic
system where CSR deals with the economic values in the society. Further, this reflects the
volume of an organizations’ social proof for their social responsibilities. Among other things,
this theory states that the corporations should always find a way to continuously engage with
the stakeholders. In summary, relational theory is valued-based and greatly interdependent
between the society and corporation.

Managerial theory
This theory is measurable and organizational oriented; that’s the essential logic of this theory.
CSR here is approached internally. Thus, external matters are subject to organizational
decision making. Furthermore, managerial theories have been divided into three sub-theories
namely:
(1) Society responsibility for multinationals.
(2) Social accountability, auditing and reporting and
(3) Corporate social performance.
The managerial theory considers the social economic variables of the corporation and also
link business strategy to responsibility ideology. Corporations are controlled and regulated
as they fulfill the corporate objectives of their businesses and their responsible actions to their
relevant communities.

Utilitarian theories
In the utilitarian theory, the action of corporations is viewed as mechanical, also called profit
maximization by a school of economic analysts. Businesses are seen as a tool of wealth
creation, while their social activities are viewed as a means to achieve economic results.
Utilitarian theory is divided into two, the idea of functionalism and the social costs of the
corporation.
This theory suggests that businesses need to get involve in social co-operation and accept
social duties. The corporation is seen as an aspect of economic system, with an ultimate goal
of maximizing profit. The business is viewed as an investment which as a matter of fact is
profit oriented to the investors and stakeholders. Thus, CSR in this clime becomes an
opportunity to balance the industrial system with the society. There are few other theories
which are relevant for the adoption of CSR as per mentioned in Table 1.

The role of CSR in community development

The word “community” is simply defined as a group of interdependent people, who live in
close proximity, interacting on a regular basis and sharing common values (Hsu and Liao,
2014). These people strive continuously to fulfill their basic needs. This group of people is
S.No Theories Meaning References
The evolving
path of CSR
1 Signaling theory Signaling theory focuses on internal Zerbini (2017), Su et al. (2016),
stakeholders’ intention to share Yu et al. (2017)
information and receive signals from the
market and external stakeholders
2 Cognitive Organizational stakeholders use cognitive Hahn et al. (2014), Lee and Kim
categorization theory heuristics to categorizing the executives or (2017), Finch et al. (2015) 309
the firm as socially responsible
3 Organizational This theory suggests that organizational DeRoeck and Delobbe (2012),
identification theory stakeholders are inclined to develop strong Farooq et al. (2014), Lythreatis
identification with the organization when et al. (2019)
they identify their organization as being
distinctive and favorable and further
integrate it with their self-concept
4 Relationship This theory addresses the essence of the Dhanesh (2012), Lee et al. (2019),
management theory organization and public relationships Cheng (2020)
around common interests and shared goals
5 Theory of justice The theory of justice supports to fairness Caruana and Chatzidakis
and equity in decision making with the (2014), Blowfield and Dolan
social contract approach (2008), Toft (2015)
6 Engagement theory Engagement theory deals with the positive Opoku-Dakwa et al. (2018);
attitude held by the organizational Afsar et al. (2020), Bohn and
stakeholders toward the firm and its Walgenbach (2019)
values
7 Social identity theory Social identity theory suggests that an Brammer et al. (2007), Turker
organizational stakeholders’ self-concept (2009), Marin et al. (2009)
is strongly influenced by their membership
of different social groups
8 Social exchange Social exchange theory suggests that Slack et al. (2015), Kim et al.
theory organizational stakeholders give great (2014), Lee et al. (2018)
value to the perception of being cared and Table 1.
valued by their business firm and they Theories related to the
tend to perform accordingly adoption of CSR

respectful and committed to the ideals of each component of the society. Mainly, there are
community leaders in every community whose prime duty it is to ensure the success of their
community. These leaders are committed in ensuring that people take responsibility of their
actions, community welfare and achievements.
On the development side, community development means an initiative which is carried
out in the community in close partnership with external corporations (Vargas, 2000). It is
geared toward empowering people, members of the community by equipping them with the
right skill set they need to bring positive change to their communities.
The United Nations defines Community Development as a process where the conditions of
social and economic progress are created through participation within the community and
reliance on community initiatives (Dziro, 2014). From this UN approach, one can succinctly
observe that this definition epitomizes an organizational and economic process.
Research scholars mentioned that community developers must understand the power of
working with individuals based on mutual respect and social justice, as well as removing the
barriers that prevents people from participating actively in issues that affects them in the
community. It is observed that community developers establish and build bridges of
friendship and collaboration. They express the optimal values of mutuality, participation,
oneness, equity, equality, continuous learning, reciprocity and fairness.
JEAS Community work is another term that is closely related to this community development.
38,2 Community work embodies both an individualistic and collective experience. Sustainable
development is not only the prerogative of the government alone. It requires hugely the CSR
initiatives of business entities and stakeholders.
Community development in this context focuses on cultivating communal coherence, local
networks, mutual aid and social justice. The role of CSR toward community development is
multiple; it is important both to community members and corporations as well. Besides
310 serving as philanthropic gestures, CSR projects in communities are bringing
transformational change in communities. This has been made possible as a result of
collaboration of brands with development sectors especially non-profit organizations.
Within the last five decades, the western world has been hugely occupied with various
strands of CSR such as discretionary, ethical and legal. In some African countries, CSR staff
and departments began to emerge in corporations in recent years. These trained
professionals take pains in designing community oriented service projects, thereby
helping the government to fulfill certain broader social and economic goals.
Authentic community development is achievable when citizens engage in community
work through combined activities, strategies, programs and processes. CSR is in line with
UN’s “Global Impact “act which promote human right corporate sustainability. By virtue of
this initiative, CSR aims to combat corruption, builds markets, ensure social inclusion, safe-
guard environment through collaborations with United Nations, labor, civil society,
government and businesses.
The role of CSR in communities is to strengthen the link of participation, collaboration and
co-operation between community and corporations.

Development of conceptual model

In current scenario, business organizations either more or less capable of responding to social
issues, it is strategically sound to choose issues that are directly or indirectly affect the firm
performance, operations and organizational reputation. Hence, the ideal process of dealing
with CSR is strategical in nature that advocates a great emphasis upon the management of an
organization in order to make a connection with society. In this context, it is important that
business-society relationship took a new orientation of business thought that shift from
“social responsibility” to “social responsiveness”. Amidst these experiences, this study is
interested in identifying the current experiences that comes from the business and society
relationship.
For developing the conceptual model to link business with society specially through CSR,
many authors/researchers/experts such as Agarwal et al. (2015), Jiang and Wong (2016) and
Castillo (2015) made a remarkable contribution. A number of studies have made in support of
such models which also discussed in this study also (Pedersen, 2010; Meehan et al., 2006).
Based on findings retrieved from the literature, a hypothetical model is developed. This model
is derived from the CSR theories and is based on seminal works of researchers in the field of
CSR, that link business organizations with society (Maas and Reniers, 2014; Claydon, 2011)
(see Figure 1).
In this conceptual model, the first cluster “business” with its 5 related factors has been
adopted from Zeng et al. (2012), Garc
ıa-Zamora et al. (2013). In second cluster “CSR” is taken
with 4 kind of the social responsibilities from Jamali and Mirshak (2007). The third cluster
relates to the society and environment. This model provides understanding of linkages
between business and society. Further, stakeholders are common cluster that connects with
business, CSR and society. From these clusters, the evolving path of CSR toward business
and society relationship could be expressed. Further, if an organization does CSR in the mode
of discretionary, legal, ethical and economic responsibility, then it assists in forming a good
 The evolving
Business path of CSR

Customers
Ownership Firm Firm Reputation Governance
Performance Operations
Structure

Employees
311

Suppliers
CSR

Discretionary Ethical Legal Economic

Responsibility Responsibility Responsibility Responsibility

Investors
Regulators
Society and Environment

Community
Figure 1.
A hypothetical model
for showing CSR as a
link between business
and society

business atmosphere and getting an opportunity to engage with all stakeholders to obtain
their opinions.

Experts mining
The study has followed a rigorous expert mining process to assess the importance of
identified socially responsible approaches considered in the conceptual model. A team of 12
experts including, five senior executives from multinational organizations, three CSR
consultants, two academicians and two policy makers have been identified. As per earlier
studies in the CSR domain a five-point Likert scale have been majorly used by researchers in
the Indian context (Khan, 2008; Rohini and Mahadevappa, 2010). The reason for choosing this
scale may be depend on the sensitivities of respondent’s knowledge and experience to record
a more accurate evaluation. Therefore, a five-point Likert scale has been constructed where 5
indicates full agreement with the importance of approach, and 1 expresses full disagreement
with the importance of that socially responsible approach. The exert mining process have
been performed through expert opinion survey to validate/established identified variables in
social responsibility context. Based on expert opinions, we proposed to delete the variables
with the mean scores below 3.5; thus, no variable was eliminated from the list (See Table 2).
Prima facie the number of experts may be seen as low; however, the number of experts is
similar to previous studies using a same expert mining method (Kapse et al., 2018; Agrawal
et al., 2017). In this study, these identified socially responsible approaches have been analyzed
JEAS for the selected 6 organizations in the next parts (Google, Twitter, Amazon, Apple,
38,2 ExxonMobil and Walmart).

Method
The approach of this study is based on the multiple case study method, which is becoming
increasingly more popular in social science research. Multiple case studies have been
described as a main parameter for theory building and to provide a strong base for qualitative
312 research (Eisenhardt and Graebner, 2007). This study considered 6 companies to analyze
their CSR initiatives: Google, Twitter, Amazon, Apple, ExxonMobil and Walmart. The
research utilizes secondary data collected through companies’ annual reports, CSR and
sustainability reports, Social and environmental reports. The companies were chosen on the
basis of the following criteria: the four companies (Amazon, Apple, ExxonMobil and
Walmart) were selected on the basis of Forbes top ten companies, and two companies based
on social networking and technology (Twitter and Google) were selected. The reason for
choosing these two companies is the growing popularity and new ethical issues including risk
of deception, cyber-bullying and surveillance (Bauer, 2014). The CSR impact of these
companies was believed relatively high, as they are the big players in the industry. Along
with discussing CSR initiatives, this study further provides a discussion on the issues and
controversies related to CSR.

Brief descriptions of the great CSR initiatives

Google LLC
Google while growing, its business potential is deeply committed to social causes that
enhance people’s lives and community development (Fieseler and Fleck, 2013). Google’s
support for non-technology related events guarantees them an intangible asset – good will.
While Google’s support for digital training and related activities boost its earnings potential
as more people are daily learning about the web and a wide range of digital services such as
Google Finance, YouTube, Google search and lots more.
Google Search is very famous, and it is being used by majority of population of the
connected world (Breyer et al., 2011). Google engages in lots of community and CSR
initiatives, and this can be seen in their partnerships with non-profit organizations and their
$50 million budgetary allocations, that supports non-profits and economic opportunity for
everyone (source google.org). Basically, Google’s CSR is focused on these thematic areas:
Economic Opportunity, education, sustainability through arts and culture (see Figure 2),
crisis response, inclusion and their impact challenge. Also, Google employees are encouraged
to engage in social charitable causes by giving back to non-profit organizations they love.
Thus, Google’s main volunteering arm is “Google Serve” which is celebrated every June. It
is usually a week of collective volunteering service which includes building homes, cleaning

S.no Socially responsible approaches Expert mean score

1 Ownership structure has significant influence on firms’ CSR behavior 4.25

2 CSR is a step in the direction of effective corporate governance 4.17
3 CSR can enhance firms’ reputation 3.92
4 CSR can enhance films’ operations performance 3.83
5 Social Responsibility toward Employees 4.00
Table 2. 6 Social responsibility toward Suppliers 3.92
Expert mean score for 7 Social responsibility toward customers 3.75
identified socially 8 Social responsibility toward investors 3.92
responsible 9 Social responsibility toward community 3.75
approaches 10 Social responsibility toward environment 4.33
 The evolving
path of CSR

313

Figure 2.
Doodle for Google
(Sustainability through
arts and culture)

graffiti and helping non-profit organizations to optimize the use of technology in their
business operations. Till date, Google have matched over $21 million in employee donations
to more than 9,000 organizations around the world (source google.org). Google, one of the
largest corporations in the world is a perfect example of a business that is working to improve
the quality of lives. In addition to these CSR initiatives, Google has successfully implemented
“Google Green” in its ebullient environmental policy. Below, the socially responsible behavior
of Google is mentioned accordingly.
Social responsibility to employee. Google treats employees as the most critical assets for the
company, and the employees themselves also feel being part of the company. Google strives
to address the interests of its workforce through not only the working environment but also
compensation. In terms of working conditions, the company’s environment encourages social
interaction, sharing and healthy competition among workers. In terms of remuneration,
Google employees are some of the most competitively paid in the world.
Social responsibility to supplier. Google Inc. plays a significant role in suppliers, some of
which are small businesses. The company engages many suppliers, thereby promoting
productivity. The company also engages the suppliers in the formulation of its policies
through the code of conduct and ethic of suppliers. Finally, the company acknowledges the
diversity of its suppliers by treating them individually as opposed to a group.
Social responsibility to the investor. Just like other stakeholders of the company, Google
treats its investors with the utmost respect in terms of the provision of quality products. The
company strives to provide a wide range of products to keep the flow of the profits to its
investors. The company also conducts market research to ensure that they fine-tuned their
products to the consumer’s needs hence profitability. Google also keeps updating these
people on the progress of the activities of the company.
Social responsibility to the customer. Google Company lays much emphasis on its
customers as part of its CSR. The company invests in its marketing wing to reach a wide
range of customers. The customers of this company are also continuously provided with
high-quality products and services at affordable prices. Through market research, the
company has been able to learn the behavior of its clients and address their needs effectively.
Social responsibility to the community. Communities are the most vital part of the
stakeholders of any organization. As such, the community expects businesses around them to
give back to them in terms of grants, charity work and provision of employment to the
members. Google has done this through its organization wing, offering more than $100
JEAS million investments and grants. The company also employees people from across the globe in
38,2 addition to taking part in global public health and poverty reduction hence promoting their
living standards.
Social responsibility to the environment. A company has a responsibility to play a vital
role in environmental preservation and protection. Google takes part in climate change
programs in addition to taking part in environmental ethics and standards. The company has
invested in the reduction of the influence of its data sources on the environment through
314 efficient machines. Also, the company maximizes its production on renewable energy to
reduce the levels of environmental pollution.

Twitter (Social network company)

Twitter is investing greatly in volunteerism, civic engagement and data and contents
partnerships with non-profits and charities around the world (Busch and Shepherd, 2014).
This organization is committed to free expression, equality and safety. Twitter’s
philanthropic mission is to make the world a better place. Twitter invest in organizations
that tackle online safety issues including hateful conduct, gender-based harassments, abuse
and bullying.
Twitter takes pride in partnering with organizations that promote digital citizenship for
youth, media literacy, advance freedom of expression, Internet rights, civil liberty advocates,
equal opportunities in STEM – science, technology, engineering and mathematics, computer
programs for women and underprivileged minorities, humanitarian relief efforts, first
responders and much more.
Twitter CSR initiatives around the globe allow communities to learn, connect, network,
grow together and help cultivate equality, understanding and opportunities in the
communities (Adi, 2018). Twitter work with thousands of non-profits all over the world
with the best practices of developing an engaging and more effective presence on Twitter (see
Figure 3).
Twitter employees get involved in a global day of service #TwitterForGood day. They do
this by spending the day with various nonprofit organizations and helping them in their
service to the local communities. Here we discussed the socially responsible behavior of
Twitter accordingly.

Figure 3.
Twitter social intitiatve
page
@TwitterForGood
Social responsibility to employee. Twitter plays its’ CSR to its employees through the provision The evolving
of competitive remuneration. The working environment of these workers is also healthy and path of CSR
safe. The employees are also provided by other benefits based not only on work done but also
on the rate of innovation. The terms of service of the employees here are also flexible to boost
innovation among the employees
Social responsibility to supplier. Twitter values its’, suppliers, as significant providers of its
raw materials. The company engages with its suppliers regularly to keep them updated on
the changes that could be existing on the quality of products they provide. They also engage 315
these suppliers for a long time so that they can plan on their individual development.
Twitter’s supplier relationship manager acknowledges the diversity of its suppliers hence
have unique contracts suitable for each of them.
Social responsibility to the investor. The most important role that Twitter plays toward
investor is to carry out awareness update in a continual manner for its socially responsible
initiatives. It also remits reports on profits and losses for mitigation purposes. The company
also involves its clients in decision making in a bid to increase its profit margins for the
benefit of the investors. Finally, market research and advertisement are also practices that
have enabled the relationship between Twitter and its investors to be strong and healthy.
Social responsibility to the customer. Twitter’s most value profit determiners are
customers; hence, it reaches them through advertisements. The company also ensures that
the needs of its customers are met as it adjusts its products regularly to suit the desires of
these clients. Through the provision of special badges to the most active customers, the
company promotes healthy competition among the customers. There is also a customer
representative available round the clock to ensure the clients are comfortable with the
services provided by the company.
Social responsibility to the community. Twitter contributes to the wellbeing of members of
the community. The management supports community programs that enhance the same.
They also propose the strategies that need to be taken into account to address social
problems. The company supports health systems, gender equality and other social solutions.
The platform provided by the social network giant also promotes intercultural exchange
hence promoting peace globally.
Social responsibility to the environment. Although the offices of twitter emit a certain level
of rays into the environment, the company reduces its influence by acquiring modern
machines. Twitter also increases environmental awareness through its platforms. The other
most outstanding role that this company plays is on education on environmental
conservation. Twitter always focused on increasing environmental awareness and education.

Amazon Inc. (E-commerce company)

Amazon is deeply committed to a wide range of sustainability programs. Amazon has
improved its social responsibility in recent years in two great areas such as renewable energy
commitments and packaging improvements. Other CSR initiatives include waste reduction
and recycling, supporting nearly one million nonprofit organizations through “Amazon
Smile” program. Amazon smile give shoppers the opportunity to support their favorite
nonprofit when buying Amazon products.
Amazon is also committed to providing donations that runs in hundreds of thousands of
dollars as disaster relief. They have successfully donated ’for earthquake in Nepal, Typhoon
Haiyan relief in Philippines and Hurricane Sandy relief in the US. Here we discussed the
socially responsible behavior of Amazon accordingly (Amazon, 2015).
Social responsibility to employee. Amazon, as a global company, plays its CSR to its
employees who are drawn from all over the world. The company remunerates its employees
relatively well. Also, it engages in the training and professional development of the
JEAS employees. There are also sustainability initiatives and principles to ensure the employees
38,2 are safe from any threats. Amazon also provides other benefits that promote competition
among the employees within their corporate offices.
Social responsibility to supplier. As a renowned online store, Amazon engages with its
suppliers at different levels. The company has to ensure that the suppliers are engaged every
time of the changes in terms of service. The suppliers are also drawn from many parts of the
world, making it empower global suppliers of different products solve in its platform.
316 Another activity that makes Amazon outstanding is how it legally engages its suppliers for
the safety and sustainability of their businesses in the future.
Social responsibility to the investor. Amazon Inc. investors are the management of the
company. This, therefore, makes it quite hectic to determine its role to the investors. However,
the maximization of profits along with socially responsible initiatives becomes the most
critical aspect of its CSR. Amazon’s management, being able to interact at all times, strategies
together to promote the growth and performance of the company.
Social responsibility to the customer. Amazon Inc. serves a global consumer base hence has
a significant role to play in ensuring their wellbeing. The company strives to be at the service
of its clients by providing a self-service portal for remote access. Similarly, the currency used
in the purchase of its products is flexible based on the consumer’s location. The company
regularly gives its customers a discount of good to attract and maintain them. Bezos, the
company’s manager, also invests in market, conducts market research to ensure that it is fully
consumer-centric.
Social responsibility to the community. Amazon Inc. always strives to better the lives of
people around whom it operates. In this regard, the company has a significant focus on
building skills and educating the children and adults within its physical locations. The
homeless and those facing disaster are also helped by Amazon to lead healthy lives. Amazon
also struggles to support community programs aimed at making the life of humanity better
while securing its brightest future.
Social responsibility to the environment. The operations of Amazon are aimed at ensuring
environmental conservation. The company is doing away with most of its physical stores so
that its effects on the environment could reduce. Besides, the company takes part in
environmental preservation programs in the countries within which it operates. Amazon Inc.
has played its CRS in taking care of the environment.

Apple Inc.
Apple is very committed to CSR across their global supply chain. Apple treats employees
with dignity and respect, create safe working conditions and use environmentally responsible
processes. Apple cares about its customers and the safety of the planet. In Apple’s corporate
relationship, people come first. Apple gladly works with suppliers and ensure that high
ethical standards is maintained at all times from mining, logistics, retail stores to recycling
(Khan et al., 2015).
This organization always derive pleasure in raising the bar of excellence, creating
environmental protections, fair working hours and respectful workplaces free from
discrimination. Many scholars and analysts have repeatedly confirmed that Apple follows
local, regional, continental and intercontinental regulations. Since 2007 till date, over 17.3
million supplier employees have been trained on their fundamental rights (Apple, 2019).
Employees are trained to know their rights and to speak up whenever they feel those rights
have been violated or threatened.
Apple prohibits any kind of forced labor, and the supplier must adhere to this or risk
removal from Apple’s supply chain. Since 2008 till date, Apple has built amazing
opportunities for their buyers; they have successfully provided educational programs to
over 3.6 million supplier staff since 2008 till date (Apple, 2019). The essence of this program is The evolving
to equip those within their supply chain to gain relevant skills, advance their careers, whether path of CSR
it is earning a new degree or learning a new language.
Apple is committed to providing greener communities and factories. They do this by
deepening their partnerships with suppliers to safeguard the planet through adopting safer
chemicals, conserving water and energy, collaborative programs and eliminating waste.
Apple happily does all these as a way of boosting collective positive impact on the
planet Earth. 317
Apple has received countless global recognition for their various CSR initiatives,
especially on combating forced labor, creating a greener supply chain and driver safer
chemicals. In 2018, Apple was a recipient of Thomson Reuters Foundation “Stop Slavery
Award”, ranked first and awarded an Aþ rating out of 40 retailers by “Mind the Store” and
much more (Apple, 2019). Here we also discussed the socially responsible behavior of Apple
accordingly.
Social responsibility to employee. Apple is one of the globe’s brands with a workforce drawn
from across the globe. Apple has been outstanding in its operation due to the competitive
salary it pays its employees. Besides, employees also enjoy world-class health services. The
working environment is healthy and conducive for bot creativity and hard work.
Social responsibility to supplier. Apple plays a crucial role in maintaining its supply base.
The company continually engages many suppliers of raw materials for the manufacturing of
electronics so that they provide equality products. Besides, the company enlightens these
suppliers of the standards and usability of their contents supplied. Due to the quality of its
products, Apple purchases from the suppliers are paid competitively to supply them always.
The suppliers are also treated uniquely based on their divergent backgrounds.
Social responsibility to the investor. Apple Company encourages investors through the
maximization of profits. The company also engages in product promotion and brand
marketing to increase its sales. Apple Inc. has been producing goods with high quality hence
attracting more profits. The constant communication between the company’s management
and the investors also motivate them to increase the capital base to the company. Apple Inc.
has corporate responsibility toward its investors to provide them optimal returns on their
investments.
Social responsibility to the customer. Apple’s customers have a sense of pride across the
globe. This pride is attributed to the roles that the company plays to them. It provides the
highest quality products to attract and maintain the customer base for the company. Also,
the company conducts extensive market and competitor analysis, making them ahead of
the others in meeting the needs of their customers. The company also safeguards its
clients against danger and threats due to their continual upgrade in both hardware and
software.
Social responsibility to the community. Apple Inc. engages communities around the areas of
its operations through the provision of employment opportunities and helping the lowly in
society. It also supports community programs aimed at promoting social and economic
growth. The company also engages the community through education of the best ways to
care for and conserve their environment. It also provides technical guidance and to make sure
natural resources are protected and accessible.
Social responsibility to the environment. The company is sensitive about the protection and
conservation of the environment, hence upgrades its products to reduce their environmental
risks. Apple Inc. takes part in global environmental mitigation programs. Apple Inc. is
committed to protecting the environment, health and safety of its employees, customers and
the global communities where it operates. It reduces the number of physical stores to reduce
the environmental pollution caused by them.
JEAS ExxonMobil Corporation
38,2 ExxonMobil is committed to efforts regarding governance, social and environmental
performance. They do this by protecting people, the wellbeing of the communities and
environment where they operate (Diara et al., 2004).
Their diverse portfolio of projects requires them to operate both in sensitive and remote areas
including bio-diverse and deepwater locations. ExxonMobil is working around the world to be a
preferred supplier, employer, neighbor and business partner. They are doing this by maintaining
318 a corporate-wide goal of safeguarding the security and health of the public and employees,
courteously upholding respects for human rights and managing their social impacts
Good corporate governance speaks volumes and aids long-term growth. In its daily
operations, ExxonMobil is employing a wide range of processes and policies to promote
transparency and uphold high ethical integrity. Amazingly, ExxonMobil’s board of directors
is proving strategic insight to their sustainable CSR programs (Manteaw, 2008). Here we
discussed the socially responsible behavior of ExxonMobil accordingly.
Social responsibility to employee. ExxonMobil is one of the companies having employees
from across the globe. The company strives to play its CSR roles to the employees. It supports
a total of 71,000 to develop their professional skills. The company also provides its employees
with high-quality medical care as a way of making the environment of work conducive. The
remuneration of employees in the company is also competitive to world standards.
Social responsibility to supplier. ExxonMobil treats its suppliers as the main providers of
raw materials to the company. It holds several forums with them to negotiate the ways
forward in terms of environmental and organizational safety. The company also offers the
best pricing policies to hold its suppliers of raw materials like natural gas and plastic. The
company also promotes the growth of its suppliers through participation in its capacity-
building practices.
Social responsibility to the investor. ExxonMobil Company is involved with its investors as
one of the most critical stakeholders. The company keeps the investors updated on the steps
and strategies taken by the management continually. They also provided on feedback
provided by customers regarding the upgrade in products to ensure that the customers’ needs
are meet hence profitability. Finally, the company disseminates information to the investors
on innovation and safety of their input in the future competitive markets. These approaches
attract more investors into ExxonMobil Inc.
Social responsibility to the customer. Consumers are the most critical people in any profit-
making organization, which ExxonMobil is a part of. The company engages its clients
through open dialog to educate them and get their feedback on their products. Besides, the
company provides other benefits like low pricing to attract and maintain more customers.
The company conducts market research and advertisement to read a wide variety of clients.
The practice of product differentiation has made the company to penetrate the market and
reach more clients.
Social responsibility to the community. The relationship between a company and its
operational environment is its key CSR. ExxonMobil plays this role by continually engaging
with the community through communication and scheduled meetings. The company also
employs people from across the globe, hence plays a role to the global economy. The presence
of dedicated community change agents within the company has enabled it to identify,
analyze, track and respond to the concerns of the community.
Social responsibility to the environment. Being a company dealing with plastics as raw
materials, ExxonMobil has played a significant role in ensuring environmental safety. First,
the company monitors and participates in initiatives that are aimed at environmental
protection. Also, the shift from disposing to recycling some of the wastes produced by the
company contributes to global environmental conservation. Finally, the company conducts
environmental research to identify problems and provide solutions to them.
Walmart Inc. The evolving
Walmart’s CSR activities help millions of users around the world anywhere and anytime to path of CSR
save money and live better both online, in retail stores and through their mobile devices. It has
continued to be a leader in employment opportunity with over 2.2 million associates’
worldwide, corporate philanthropy and sustainability (Environmental, Social and
Governance Report, 2019). Walmart’s global responsibility aims at using their strengths to
make a huge difference, advancing ambitious commitments and goals within the thematic
areas of community, sustainability and opportunity (Kampf, 2007). 319
Their work in this area is beneficial to their bottom-line and creates shared values for the
larger society and customers. Walmart is gladly performing this duty in close collaboration
with key stakeholders, industry partners and suppliers. Walmart Foundation has made $100
million philanthropic commitment to help frontline employees in adjacent and retail sectors to
learn new skills and boos their careers (Environmental, Social and Governance Report, 2019).
Walmart is committed to bringing together stakeholders including government,
international agencies, civil society and industries to address global crisis affecting the
dignity of workers ’in a minimum of 10 retail supply chains by 2025 (Environmental, Social
and Governance Report, 2019). Between 2014 and 2019, Walmart and Walmart foundation
provided 4 billion meals all those that need this aid through grants and food donations from
distribution centers, Sam’s Club locations and Walmart stores.
By the year 2022, Walmart is committed to reduce the chemical components in household
cleaning, pet, baby, beauty and personal care categories in the US stores by 10%
(Environmental, Social and Governance Report, 2019). Here we discussed the socially
responsible behavior of Walmart accordingly.
Social responsibility to employee. Walmart’s employees are drawn from all over the world
hence receive global class services. The company tries to make it easier for employees to train
and achieve professional development. They are also paid handsomely to keep working to the
company. The working environment in Walmart is also conducive for the employees to
provide their best.
Social responsibility to supplier. Walmart suppliers are communicated continuously to by
the company; hence feel part of the company. The products they supplied are highly valued,
promoting their individual development. The company also organizes its suppliers to ensure
that they are sustained to keep their relationship with Walmart. The company is committed to
using the power of its organizational structure to support the suppliers with training and
improve their access to markets.
Social responsibility to the investor. Investors in Walmart are updated continuously by the
company on all the activities that take place in the company. This constant communication
ensures that their capital investments are safe. Besides, the financial data and reports on
expenditure and profits are readily available to them. The company treats its investors with
the utmost respect, making them encouraged to cultivate more into its operations.
Social responsibility to the customer. Walmart meets its customers using very many
platforms within which they get feedback and improved the equality of their products. The
company also provides a discount on its products to customers. The marketing wing of
the company also ensures an increased number of clients by promoting their products. The
customer care department of Walmart provides real-time information to its customers.
Social responsibility to the community. Walmart gives back to society through very many
avenues. Through the Walmart Foundation numerous community development programs
have been established across the globe. The company also engages the community in
conducting surveys to establish social problems and provide their solutions. The recruitment
wing of the company also ensures the local area residents within its immediate physical,
operational environment are empowered through employment opportunities
JEAS Social responsibility to the environment. Walmart puts much emphasis on environmental
38,2 protection and conservation. It engages in renewable energy to safeguard the environment
from pollution. Walmart also promotes environmental health practices such as proper
packaging, sustainable agriculture, waste reduction and deforestation, among others. The
company eliminated emissions from its production processes by reducing the size of
machines in the company.
Note: The socially responsible behavior of all these six organizations have been further
320 clarified in Table A1

Issues and controversies of CSR

Right from the inception, CSR has been a heated topic of discourse (Mattila et al., 2016). Some
critics argue that the primary goal of every business is to maximize high return on investment
for the shareholders and argues further that already corporations are solving the societal
needs by providing jobs needed in the society. Other critics maintained that some of the
corporations offering CSR model are merely publicity stunts. However, proponents of this
study contend that there are myriads of underlying benefits in taking active part in socially
responsible behavior. Corporations are happily, daily using their CSR models to recruit and
maintain the best talents, build a solid collaboration with the host communities, as well as
boost their organizational influence on legislation and developmental strategy.
American economist Milton Friedman and his followers in 1970s challenged vehemently
economic bottom-line of CSR (Friedman, 1970). Friedman (1970) clearly stated that: ‘the social
responsibility of the business is to make profit. The proponents of this proposition
maintained that corporations are expected to make profits- financial gain. Furthermore,
Friedman (1970) maintained that if managers ‘involvements in socially responsible actions
reduce the return to shareholders, that is not CSR, rather it is socially irresponsible business
behavior.
Within the last 30 years, lots of literature reports have been developed on this niche, and the
sole objective had been to demonstrate the relationship between financial performance and
corporate social performance. Some scholars argue that if companies make profit from their
good works, then these organizations should take social responsible actions. This assumption
is based on earlier works of Drucker (1954) who was able to establish a formidable link between
a corporation’s profitability and their socially responsible actions. Drucker (1954) posited that
corporations should not just do well, but do good ’that is social responsibility.
After read the vision and mission statements of the selected six organizations (Google,
Twitter, Amazon, Apple, ExxonMobil and Walmart), we discovered that all have good
intentions for the society, but the social media based organization have lacked the capacity,
motivation to drive such good intentions into more appropriate actions and results – that’s
the challenge.

Discussion
CSR occupies a unique conception in the academic study of society and business relations.
Taking cognizance of what is happening around the world; it is worthy to note that CSR has
come to stay. Though, there is still plenty of debate about CSR both in the complementary and
contradictory terms (Moratis, 2016). There is a plethora of opinion around the issue, scope, the
best way to encourage it, how to measure it, whether to introduce elements of compulsion or
even to keep it exclusively voluntary. Most of the contemporary debate are lop-sided, lack
requisite substance and omits central questions. Put simply, if a business is not fulfilling its
primary economic goals, which is to maximize profit, there will be little or no funds to embark
on CSR activities. A business is expected to engage in “good works” in the host communities.
 There is future for CSR; there is recognition that all corporations regardless of their The evolving
jurisdiction are encouraged to comply with the stipulated environmental standards, safety, path of CSR
labor, corporate laws, legislations and agreed conventions on a wide range of issues (B€ogh,
2017). This study observed that there are some developmental strategies taking place today
which are relevant to the issue at stake, here are three of them.
First, most big corporations are expanding and migrating from regional to global
enterprises, thereby contributing to the world economy and ebulliently counting as a larger
part of the world’s GDP. These big corporations are happily uplifting the living standards of 321
the poorest of the poor and least complex environments where they operate. Oftentimes they
do this for multiple reasons not far from staying away from public criticism in their host
country and in the marketplace.
Second, in some increasingly integrated corporate world, with consummate shareholders,
we see corporations donating or engaging in a wide range of philanthropic gestures now than
ever, to events that might have a negative influence on their corporate brand reputations.
However, there is a growing pressure on corporations to be transparent and to become more
active in their host communities. Interestingly, a host of businesses are reacting and abiding
positively to this clarion call.
Thirdly, corporate leaders and shareholders who receive shares for their investment are
contributing to the beauty of the society by meeting rising community expectations. A
cursory look at the comparative study between developed and developing nations observed
that there is huge difference in their various CSR practices. The extent of their economic,
political, religious, cultural and social development is influenced by the level of their CSR
adoption. Hence it could be understood that CSR is basically driven by people and
organizations.

Managerial implications
This study implies that managing a business-society relationship may well be organization-
specific, but it serves better when the firm’s endeavors are likely to focus more on
coordination with society and the environment. CSR allows a corporation to be socially
accountable to itself, the stakeholders and the broader community. By engaging in CSR
programs, business organizations add values to the society and environment without
obstructing the smooth running of their business operations and actions.
Primarily, CSR is uniquely and essentially for larger corporations that have reached the
point of giving back or investing to the society and environment. This is a unique way of
contributing through volunteer and philanthropy efforts.
CSR has the capacity to boost the bond between the corporation and employees thereby
making them to feel truly connected and united with the world around them. When a
company decides to engage in CSR, it means that they have made up their minds to uphold
high ethical values including respecting their communities, environment and people therein.
By engaging in CSR activities, companies can improve their value, profitability,
accountability, transparency with investment analysts, shareholders, the media and local
communities (Fontrodona, 2006). This boosts their reputation among investors (see Figure 4).
Earlier it was stated that the degree of commitment for CSR work as means of risk reduction.
From the perspective of the relation between degree of commitment and immediate economic
impact, we should consider the business factors in a view of business cycle on a company’s
operational process to CSR as a way of putting something back. This relationship states that
adoption of CSR can be a starting point for improve the position of an organization but once
they have started, they may appreciate the benefits for longer term business-society relations.
When an organization starts doing well in this area, there will be very high opportunity to
receive investment proposals from venture capitalists, government and other corporations.
JEAS
38,2 +

Immediate economic impact

322 Risk

Market

Organizaon

Polical Social

Convicon

– +
Figure 4. Degree of commitment
Reasons for CSR
Source(s): Fontrodona, 2006

Implementing CSR policies in an organization increases its goodwill. A study by Unilever

says that one-third of consumers are willing to buy brands based on their social or
environmental impact (Izzo and Vanderwielen, 2018). A recent survey by Landor Associates,
quoted by the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, maintains that corporations
should be socially responsible (Gomez and Vargas-Preciado, 2016). Naturally, consumers
prefer to patronize those companies that have the reputation of being addressed as good
corporate citizens. Another study by Patel et al. (2017) confirmed that consumers are ever
ready to pay higher prices for products they consider to be socially responsible.
Investing in CSR policies will make a company to be recognizable. This will motivate
potential candidates to apply to work with their organization. Thus, when an organization
starts earning goodwill from the larger society through engaging in significant CSR
activities, it will inspire the employees to continue working with the organizations’ brand for a
longer period. This distinguishing action makes the employees to earn some self-pride.
On the regulatory side, the job of the regulatory bodies and government is to scrutinize the
operations of the companies. Thus, when an organization start doing CSR activities on a
bigger scale, it simply giving these regulatory agencies reasons to be less hostile to its brand,
because the brand is now assumed trusted.
On the promotion side, good publicity is good for an organizations’ brand at all times.
Investing in a CSR program will automatically give an organization a high level of publicity
or advertisement. However, it is important to ensure organizational products or services are
greatly aligned with the CSR programs in which it involved in.

Conclusion
The meaning of CSR is complex and relative to each specific discussant, proponent or
opponent. In this study, the author made some attempts to look at the popular business
concept- CSR. It started with dangling on varying definitions, evolutionary process, theories,
issues and controversies, its role in community building and its managerial implications.
Today, the call for increased participation in CSR activities is urgent by corporations,
investors and even government so as to contribute meaningfully in addressing attending The evolving
global crises. The end point is to achieve a win-win situation for these three entities. Severe path of CSR
economic inconsistencies, acute food shortages, climate change and financial market
breakdown are begging for immediate attention.
Each community has their way of understanding of the impact of CSR. Some of these
impacts include interdependencies between community and corporations, closer ties, bearing
some of the cost the community had to pay due to transfer of technology, environmental
degradation, environmental protection measures, human rights advocacy, poverty 323
eradication in the communities and lots more. Most corporate leaders find it difficult to
even know how to start discharging their responsibilities due to the varying needs of the
community such as access to core services as poverty alleviation, education, health, creating
economic opportunities and building infrastructure.
The argument of this study is that sustainable CSR solutions at community, regional,
national and global levels are based on win-win collaborations between civil society,
business, investors and government. It also portrays that the skills and competencies needed
by CSR practitioners varies because of the sophisticated roles and responsibilities of each
CSR initiative and the diverse disciplines involved. However, this conceptual study provides
a meaningful insight toward business and society relationship for future researchers, and on
that basis, the viewpoint of this study could be helpful. As this study is based on viewpoint
analysis, future research can test the evolving path of CSR toward business and society
relationship with some established statistical tools that could bring strong support for this
proposed association.

References
Abukari, A.J. and Abdul-Hamid, I.K. (2018), “Corporate social responsibility reporting in the
telecommunications sector in Ghana”, International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility,
Vol. 3 No. 1, p. 2.
Adi, A. (2018), “Sustainability on twitter: loose ties and green-washing CSR”, Corporate Responsibility
and Digital Communities, Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, pp. 99-122.
Afsar, B., Al-Ghazali, B. and Umrani, W. (2020), “Corporate social responsibility, work
meaningfulness, and employee engagement: the joint moderating effects of incremental
moral belief and moral identity centrality”, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental
Management, Vol. 27 No. 3, pp. 1264-1278.
Agarwal, S., Yadav, Y.S. and Acharya, A. (2015), “Impact of CSR-driven internal employee motivation
on cordiality of employee relations”, Managing in Recovering Markets, Springer, New Delhi,
pp. 315-325..
Agrawal, A.K., Kumar, D. and Rahman, Z. (2017), “An ISM approach for modelling the enablers of
sustainability in market-oriented firms”, International Journal of Business Excellence, Vol. 12
No. 1, pp. 23-45.
Allen, M.W. and Craig, C.A. (2016), “Rethinking corporate social responsibility in the age of climate
change: a communication perspective”, International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility,
Vol. 1 No. 1, p. 1.
Amazon (2015), “Disaster relief support from Amazon”, available at: https://www.aboutamazon.eu/
our-communities/disaster-relief.
Apple (2019), “Supplier responsibility report, Apple”, available at: https://www.apple.com/in/supplier-
responsibility/pdf/Apple_SR_2019_Progress_Report.pdf.
Arzova, S.B. (2009), “Turkey: CSR in practice”, Global Practices of Corporate Social Responsibility,
Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 373-391.
Bair, J. and Palpacuer, F. (2015), “CSR beyond the corporation: contested governance in global value
chains”, Global Networks, Vol. 15 No. s1, pp. S1-S19.
JEAS Baker, M. (2004), “Definitions of corporate social responsibility-What Is CSR, The World Business
Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD)”, available at: http://mallenbaker.net/article/
38,2 clear-reflection/definitions-of-corporate-social-responsibility-what-is-csr (accessed 5
March 2020).
Bauer, T. (2014), “The responsibilities of social networking companies: applying political CSR theory
to Google, Facebook and Twitter”, Communicating Corporate Social Responsibility: Perspectives
and Practice, Emerald Group Publishing.
324 Blowfield, M.E. and Dolan, C.S. (2008), “Stewards of virtue? The ethical dilemma of CSR in African
agriculture”, Development and Change, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 1-23.
B€ogh, J. (2017), “The business case for CSR: estimating future earnings impacts of CSR projects”, CSR
and Sustainability, Routledge, pp. 279-310.
Bohn, S. and Walgenbach, P. (2019), “Is CSR crowding out charity? A case study of CSR
implementation in a German company”, Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Change,
Springer, Cham, pp. 259-270.
Bowd, R., Bowd, L. and Harris, P. (2006), “Communicating corporate social responsibility: an
exploratory case study of a major UK retail centre”, Journal of Public Affairs: International
Journal, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 147-155.
Bowen, H.R. (1953), Social Responsibilities of the Businessman, Harper and Brothers, New York, NY.
Brammer, S., Millington, A. and Rayton, B. (2007), “The contribution of corporate social responsibility
to organizational commitment”, The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
Vol. 18 No. 10, pp. 1701-1719.
Breyer, B.N., Sen, S., Aaronson, D.S., Stoller, M.L., Erickson, B.A. and Eisenberg, M.L. (2011), “Use of
Google Insights for Search to track seasonal and geographic kidney stone incidence in the
United States”, Urology, Vol. 78 No. 2, pp. 267-271.
Brown, D.L., Vetterlein, A. and Roemer-Mahler, A. (2010), “Theorizing transnational corporations as
social actors: an analysis of corporate motivations”, Business and Politics, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 1-37.
Burchell, J. and Cook, J. (2013), “CSR, co-optation and resistance: the emergence of new agonistic
relations between business and civil society”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 115 No. 4,
pp. 741-754.
Busch, T. and Shepherd, T. (2014), “Doing well by doing good? Normative tensions underlying
Twitter’s corporate social responsibility ethos”, Convergence, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 293-315.
Capaldi, N. (2016), “New (other?) directions in corporate social responsibility”, International Journal of
Corporate Social Responsibility, Vol. 1 No. 1, p. 4.
Carroll, A.B. (1979), “A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 497-505.
Caruana, R. and Chatzidakis, A. (2014), “Consumer social responsibility (CnSR): toward a multi-level,
multi-agent conceptualization of the ‘other CSR’”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 121 No. 4,
pp. 577-592.
Castillo, M. (2015), “From corporate social responsibility to global conscious innovation with
Mandalah”, Global Business and Organizational Excellence, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 42-49.
Chapple, W. and Moon, J. (2005), “Corporate social responsibility (CSR) in Asia: a seven-country study
of CSR web site reporting”, Business and Society, Vol. 44 No. 4, pp. 415-441.
Chaudary, S., Zahid, Z., Shahid, S., Khan, S.N. and Azar, S. (2016), “Customer perception of CSR
initiatives: its antecedents and consequences”, Social Responsibility Journal, Vol. 12 No. 2,
pp. 263-279, doi: 10.1108/SRJ-04-2015-0056.
Cheng, Y. (2020), “Contingent organization-public relationship (COPR) matters: reconciling the
contingency theory of accommodation into the relationship management paradigm”, Journal of
Public Relations Research, Vol. 32 Nos 3-4, pp. 140-154, doi: 10.1080/1062726X.2020.1830405.
Claydon, J. (2011), “A new direction for CSR: the shortcomings of previous CSR models and the The evolving
rationale for a new model”, Social Responsibility Journal, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 405-420, doi: 10.1108/
17471111111154545. path of CSR
Cloud, D.L. (2007), “Corporate social responsibility as oxymoron”, The Debate over Corporate Social
Responsibility, Oxford University Press, Vol. 219.
Dahlsrud, A. (2008), “How corporate social responsibility is defined: an analysis of 37 definitions”,
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 1-13.
325
De Roeck, K. and Delobbe, N. (2012), “Do environmental CSR initiatives serve organizations’
legitimacy in the oil industry? Exploring employees’ reactions through organizational
identification theory”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 110 No. 4, pp. 397-412.
Dhanesh, G.S. (2012), “The view from within: internal publics and CSR”, Journal of Communication
Management, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 39-58, doi: 10.1108/13632541211197987.
Diara, M., Alilo, M. and McGuire, D. (2004), “Corporate social responsibility and public–private
partnership: the case of the academy for educational development and ExxonMobil”,
Development, Vol. 47 No. 3, pp. 69-77.
Drucker, P.E. (1954), The Practice of Management, Harper and Row, New York, NY, p. 225.
Dziro, C. (2014), “Community development and corporate social responsibility: a case study of mining
companies in Zvishavane and Mutoko in Zimbabwe”, IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social
Science, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 61-70.
Eisenhardt, K.M. and Graebner, M.E. (2007), “Theory building from cases: opportunities and
challenges”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 25-32.
Elkins, A. (1977), “Toward a positive theory of corporate social involvement”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 128-133.
Environmental, Social and Governance Report (2019), Environmental, Social and Governance Report,
Walmart, available at: https://corporate.walmart.com/media-library/document/2019-
environmental-social-governance-report/_proxyDocument?id50000016c-20b5-d46a-afff-
f5bdafd30000.
European Commission (2001), Green Paper Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social
Responsibility COM(200
ı) 366, Commission of the European Communities, Brussels.
European Commission (2011), Communication to the European Parliament, the Council, the European
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions, A Renewed EU Strategy (2011–
14) for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), COM (2011) 681, Brussels 2011, Euro Commerce,
Brussels.
Falkenberg, J. and Brunsæl, P. (2011), “Corporate social responsibility: a strategic advantage or a
strategic necessity?”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 99 No. 1, pp. 9-16.
Farber, V.A., Prial
e, M.A. and Fuchs, R.M. (2015), “An entrepreneurial learning exercise as a
pedagogical tool for teaching CSR: a Peruvian study”, Industry and Higher Education, Vol. 29
No. 5, pp. 345-360.
Farooq, O., Payaud, M., Merunka, D. and Valette-Florence, P. (2014), “The impact of corporate social
responsibility on organizational commitment: exploring multiple mediation mechanisms”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 125 No. 4, pp. 563-580.
Fieseler, C. and Fleck, M. (2013), “The pursuit of empowerment through social media: structural social
capital dynamics in CSR-blogging”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 118 No. 4, pp. 759-775.
Finch, D., Hillenbrand, C. and Rubin, H. (2015), “Proximity, strategic groups and reputation: an
exploratory study of reputation in higher education”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 18
No. 3, pp. 174-194.
Fontrodona, J. (2006), Turning Words into Action, IESE Alumni Magazine, January-March.
Frick, T. (2016), Designing for Sustainability: A Guide to Building Greener Digital Products and
Services, O’Reilly Media, Sebastopol, CA.
JEAS Friedman, M. (1970), “A Friedman doctrine: the social responsibility of business is to increase its
profits”, The New York Times Magazine, Vol. 13, pp. 32-33.
38,2
Friedman, M. (2009), Capitalism and Freedom, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Garc
ıa-Zamora, E., Gonzalez-Benito, O. and Munoz-Gallego, P.A. (2013), “Organizational and
environmental factors as moderators of the relationship between multidimensional
innovation and performance”, Innovation, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 224-244.
326 Garriga, E. and Mel
e, D. (2004), “Corporate social responsibility theories: mapping the territory”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 53 Nos 1-2, pp. 51-71.
Gomez, L.M. and Vargas-Preciado, L. (2016), “140 Characters for CSR Communication: An Exploration
of Twitter Engagement of Fortune Companies”, Accountability and Social Responsibility:
International Perspectives (Developments in Corporate Governance and Responsibility, Emerald
Group Publishing, Vol. 9, pp. 205-221, doi: 10.1108/S2043-052320160000009009.
Hahn, T., Preuss, L., Pinkse, J. and Figge, F. (2014), “Cognitive frames in corporate sustainability:
managerial sensemaking with paradoxical and business case frames”, Academy of
Management Review, Vol. 39 No. 4, pp. 463-487.
Hemphill, T. (2013), “The ISO 26000 guidance on social responsibility international standard: what are
the business governance implications?”, Corporate Governance: The International Journal of
Business in Society, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp. 305-317, doi: 10.1108/CG-08-2011-0062.
Highhouse, S., Brooks, M.E. and Gregarus, G. (2009), “An organizational impression management
perspective on the formation of corporate reputations”, Journal of Management, Vol. 35 No. 6,
pp. 1481-1493.
Hou, M., Liu, H., Fan, P. and Wei, Z. (2016), “Does CSR practice pay off in East Asian firms? A meta-
analytic investigation”, Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 195-228.
Hsu, C.L. and Liao, Y.C. (2014), “Exploring the linkages between perceived information accessibility
and microblog stickiness: the moderating role of a sense of community”, Information and
Management, Vol. 51 No. 7, pp. 833-844.
Husted, B.W. and Allen, D.B. (2006), “Corporate social responsibility in the multinational enterprise:
strategic and institutional approaches”, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 37 No. 6,
pp. 838-849.
International Organization for Standardization (2010), “ISO 26000 social responsibility”, available at:
www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/management_and_leadership_standards/social_responsibility/
sr_ discovering_iso26000.htm (accessed 3 August 2011).
Izzo, J. and Vanderwielen, J. (2018), The Purpose Revolution: How Leaders Create Engagement and
Competitive Advantage in an Age of Social Good, Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Oakland.
Jahdi, K.S. and Acikdilli, G. (2009), “Marketing communications and corporate social responsibility
(CSR): marriage of convenience or shotgun wedding?”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 88 No. 1,
pp. 103-113.
Jamali, D. and Mirshak, R. (2007), “Corporate social responsibility (CSR): theory and practice in a
developing country context”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 72 No. 3, pp. 243-262.
Jiang, W. and Wong, J.K. (2016), “Key activity areas of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the
construction industry: a study of China”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 113, pp. 850-860.
Kampf, C. (2007), “Corporate social responsibility: WalMart, Maersk and the cultural bounds of
representation in corporate web sites”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal,
Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 41-57.
Kanji, G.K. and Chopra, P.K. (2010), “Corporate social responsibility in a global economy”, Total
Quality Management, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 119-143.
Kapse, C.P., Kumar, A., Dash, M.K., Zavadskas, E.K. and Luthra, S. (2018), “Developing textile
entrepreneurial inclination model by integrating experts mining and ISM-MICMAC”,
International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 56 No. 14, pp. 4709-4728.
Karnani, A. (2011), “‘Doing well by doing good’: the grand illusion”, California Management Review, The evolving
Vol. 53 No. 2, pp. 69-86.
path of CSR
Khan, S. (2008), “Conceptualizing corporate social responsibility: an Indian perspective”, Academy of
Management Proceedings, Academy of Management, Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510, Vol. 2008
No. 1, pp. 1-6.
Khan, U.A., Alam, M.N. and Alam, S. (2015), “A critical analysis of internal and external environment
of Apple Inc”, International Journal of Economics, Commerce and Management, Vol. 3 No. 6,
pp. 955-961. 327
Kim, M.S., Kim, D.T. and Kim, J.I. (2014), “CSR for sustainable development: CSR beneficiary
positioning and impression management motivation”, Corporate Social Responsibility and
Environmental Management, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 14-27.
Lee, M. and Kim, H. (2017), “Exploring the organizational culture’s moderating role of effects of
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) on firm performance: focused on corporate contributions
in Korea”, Sustainability, Vol. 9 No. 10, p. 1883.
Lee, C.K., Kim, J.S. and Kim, J.S. (2018), “Impact of a gaming company’s CSR on residents’ perceived
benefits, quality of life, and support”, Tourism Management, Vol. 64, pp. 281-290.
Lee, S.Y., Zhang, W. and Abitbol, A. (2019), “What makes CSR communication lead to CSR
participation? Testing the mediating effects of CSR associations, CSR credibility, and
organization–public relationships”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 157 No. 2, pp. 413-429.
Logsdon, J.M. and Wood, D.J. (2005), “Global business citizenship and voluntary codes of ethical
conduct”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 59 No. 1, pp. 55-67.
Lythreatis, S., Mostafa, A.M.S. and Wang, X. (2019), “Participative leadership and organizational
identification in SMEs in the MENA Region: testing the roles of CSR perceptions and pride in
membership”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 156 No. 3, pp. 635-650.
Maas, S. and Reniers, G. (2014), “Development of a CSR model for practice: connecting five inherent
areas of sustainable business”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 64, pp. 104-114.
Manning, S., Kannothra, C.G. and Wissman-Weber, N.K. (2017), “The strategic potential of
community-based hybrid models: the case of global business services in Africa”, Global
Strategy Journal, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 125-149.
Manteaw, B.O. (2008), “When businesses go to school: neoliberalism and education for sustainable
development”, Journal of Education for Sustainable Development, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 119-126.
Marin, L., Ruiz, S. and Rubio, A. (2009), “The role of identity salience in the effects of corporate social
responsibility on consumer behavior”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 84 No. 1, pp. 65-78.
Matten, D. and Moon, J. (2008), “‘Implicit’ and ‘explicit’ CSR: a conceptual framework for a comparative
understanding of corporate social responsibility”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 33
No. 2, pp. 404-424.
Mattila, A.S., Wu, L. and Choi, C. (2016), “Powerful or powerless customers: the influence of gratitude
on engagement with CSR”, Journal of Services Marketing, Vol. 30 No. 5, pp. 519-528, doi: 10.
1108/JSM-07-2014-0233.
Meehan, J., Meehan, K. and Richards, A. (2006), “Corporate social responsibility: the 3C–SR model”,
International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 33 Nos 5/6, pp. 386-398, doi: 10.1108/
03068290610660661.
Michelson, G., Waring, P. and Naud
e, P. (2016), “Special issue: international perspectives on corporate
social responsibility: editorial: dilemmas and challenges in corporate social responsibility”,
Journal of General Management, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 1-11, doi: 10.1177/030630701604100301.
Moratis, L. (2016), “Out of the ordinary? Appraising ISO 26000’s CSR definition”, International Journal
of Law and Management, Vol. 58 No. 1, pp. 26-47, doi: 10.1108/IJLMA-12-2014-0064.
Ojo, O. (2009), “Nigeria: CSR as a vehicle for economic development”, Global Practices of Corporate
Social Responsibility, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 393-433.
JEAS Opoku-Dakwa, A., Chen, C.C. and Rupp, D.E. (2018), “CSR initiative characteristics and employee
engagement: an impact-based perspective”, Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 39 No. 5,
38,2 pp. 580-593.
Ozkazanc-Pan, B. (2019), “CSR as gendered neocoloniality in the Global South”, Journal of Business
Ethics, Vol. 160 No. 4, pp. 851-864.
Patel, J., Modi, A. and Paul, J. (2017), “Pro-environmental behavior and socio-demographic factors in
an emerging market”, Asian Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 189-214.
328
Pedersen, E.R. (2010), “Modelling CSR: how managers understand the responsibilities of business
towards society”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 91 No. 2, pp. 155-166.
Preston, L.E. (1975), “Corporation and society: the search for a paradigm”, Journal of Economic
Literature, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 434-453.
Quelch, J.A. and Jocz, K.E. (2009), “Can corporate social responsibility survive recession?”, Leader to
Leader, Vol. 2009 No. 53, pp. 37-43.
Rohini, R. and Mahadevappa, B. (2010), “Social responsibility of hospitals: an Indian context”, Social
Responsibility Journal, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 268-285, doi: 10.1108/17471111011051766.
Secchi, D. (2007), “Utilitarian, managerial and relational theories of corporate social responsibility”,
International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol. 9 No. 4, pp. 347-373.
Seifi, S. and Crowther, D. (2018), “The need to reconsider CSR”, Redefining Corporate Social Responsibility
(Developments in Corporate Governance and Responsibility, Emerald Publishing, Vol. 13, pp. 1-11.
Simionescu, L. and Dumitrescu, D. (2016), “Corporate social responsibility (CSR) and stakeholders
management”, Entrepreneurship, Business and Economics, Springer, Cham, Vol. 2, pp. 637-645.
Slack, R.E., Corlett, S. and Morris, R. (2015), “Exploring employee engagement with (corporate) social
responsibility: a social exchange perspective on organisational participation”, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 127 No. 3, pp. 537-548.
Strategic Direction (2018), “Investigating the relationship between strategic quality management
(SQM) and corporate social responsibility (CSR)”, Strategic Direction, Vol. 34 No. 11, pp. 26-28,
doi: 10.1108/SD-09-2018-0178.
Su, W., Peng, M.W., Tan, W. and Cheung, Y.L. (2016), “The signaling effect of corporate social
responsibility in emerging economies”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 134 No. 3, pp. 479-491.
Szczepankiewicz, E.I. and Mu
cko, P. (2016), “CSR reporting practices of Polish energy and mining
companies”, Sustainability, Vol. 8 No. 2, p. 126.
Tanimoto, K. (2009), “Structural change in corporate society and CSR in Japan”, Corporate Social
Responsibility in Asia, Routledge, pp. 61-82.
Tilt, C.A. (2016), “Corporate social responsibility research: the importance of context”, International
Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, Vol. 1 No. 1, p. 2.
Toft, K.H. (2015), “Liberal CSR and new Marxist criticism”, Corporate Social Responsibility and
Governance, Springer, Cham, pp. 303-316.
Turker, D. (2009), “How corporate social responsibility influences organizational commitment”,
Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 89 No. 2, p. 189.
Vargas, C.M. (2000), “Community development and micro-enterprises: fostering sustainable
development”, Sustainable Development, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 11-26.
Vitolla, F., Rubino, M. and Garzoni, A. (2017), “The integration of CSR into strategic management: a
dynamic approach based on social management philosophy”, Corporate Governance, Vol. 17
No. 1, pp. 89-116, doi: 10.1108/CG-03-2016-0064.
Wiraeus, D. and Creelman, J. (2019), “Further developments: driving sustainable value through
collaborative strategy maps and scorecards”, Agile Strategy Management in the Digital Age,
Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, pp. 243-257.
Yu, H.C., Kuo, L. and Kao, M.F. (2017), “The relationship between CSR disclosure and competitive The evolving
advantage”, Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, Vol. 8 No. 5,
pp. 547-570, doi: 10.1108/SAMPJ-11-2016-0086. path of CSR
Zeng, S.X., Xu, X.D., Yin, H.T. and Tam, C.M. (2012), “Factors that drive Chinese listed companies in
voluntary disclosure of environmental information”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 109 No. 3,
pp. 309-321.
Zerbini, F. (2017), “CSR initiatives as market signals: a review and research agenda”, Journal of
Business Ethics, Vol. 146 No. 1, pp. 1-23. 329

Further reading
Google.org (2019), “Googlers giving back, google”, available at: https://www.google.org/intl/es/local-
giving/.
JEAS Appendix
38,2

Company Google Twitter Amazon Apple ExxonMobil Walmart

Name
330 Founded
Operates as
1998
Multinational
2006
Mulnaonal
1994
Multinational
1976
Multinational
1999
Multinational
1962
Multinational
Business Technology social media technology and technology company oil and gas retail
Company and retail company corporation corporation
networking
platform
Nature of Internet- Microbloggin E-commerce, Designs develop and Refiners, Operates a
Business related g and social cloud sells consumer marketers of chain of
services and networking computing, electronics, petroleum hypermarkets
products service digital computer software, products and , discount
streaming, and and online services chemical department
artificial manufacturers stores, and
intelligence grocery
stores
Sustainability Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Reports
Social Google’s Twitter Amazon Apple Inc. is highly Support the Walmart
responsibility CSR efforts provides embeds committed to the professional takes the
to address the sufficient care sustainability health and safety of development initiative to
Employee interests of its for its principles and its employees. of its more make it easier
employees as employees. It initiatives than 71,000 for
a major also provides throughout its employees employees to
CSR stakeholder workplace corporate globally. gain new
group benefits as per offices, from Invest in skills and
through employees’ green building worker health advance in
competitive desires. design to low - by providing their careers.
compensation carbon transit voluntary Pay
and a fun incentives for health employees
workplace employees. programs. fairly and
design. Support equitably
employee-led regardless of
resource their personal
groups that demographic.
foster a culture
of diversity
and inclusion.
Social The Twitter’s Amazon is To ensure the Hold forums Walmart is
responsibility company’s supplier strongly greatest positive with suppliers committed to
to Supplier CSR efforts relationship committed to impact in terms of to provide using the
have management conducting its sustainability, Apple information on power of its
considerable builds a long- business Inc. has stringent organizational organizationa
effectiveness term lawfully and social and safety, l structure to
in satisfying partnership ethically, environmental environmental support the
the interests with its including standards for its , and human suppliers
of the suppliers. engaging with suppliers. rights with training
suppliers by Twitter’s suppliers who practices. and improved
including supplier respect human Participate in access to
ethics and diversity rights, provide organizations markets.
responsibility program safe and dedicated to
in its Supplier supports inclusive building local
Code of sustainability workplaces, supplier
Conduct. initiatives by and promote a capabilities.
working with sustainable
diverse future.
suppliers.
Social Google’s Twitter has The interests of Apple Inc. Engage Walmart
responsibility CSR adopted a investors are has corporate directly with communicates
to the strategies strategy for not clearly responsibility towards investors to with its
investor also aim to the assurance included in its investors to understand investors
satisfy of its Amazon’s provide them input and through
investors by investors and sustainability optimal returns on feedback, regular calls,
developing creates a report. their investments. including as well as
products and favorable shareholder investment
services that environment proposals. community
Table A1. Disseminate meetings. In
Socially responsible
behavior of selected
organizations (continued )
 are
profitable.
for the
investment.
information to
the investors
each of these
channels,
The evolving
through SEC
filings,
Walmart
provides
path of CSR
investor days, timely and
investor robust data
presentations on financial
and other performance
publications. and other
vital

Social Google’s Twitter treats Amazon strives Apple Inc. provides Collaborate
concerns.
Walmart uses
331
responsibility CSR efforts its customers to be Earth’s continuous support across a variety of
to the address the well and most customer- to its customers so industries to channels to
customer interests of provides them centric that they can take identify solicit
customers by a competitive company, advantage of the customer feedback and
increasing the edge. which means latest features, solutions to to
firm’s market giving its privacy and security sustainability communicate
reach and customers updates, and other issues. with the
effectiveness. access to the vital improvements, Cultivate an customers.
sustainable enabling the open dialogue Walmart also
products they customers to use its with the working to
want. products longer. customers and leverage
provide technology to
education on provide real-
the market - time
based information
approach to to its
sustainable customers.
solutions.
Society and Social Google’s Twitter raises Amazon is Apple Inc. engages Communicate The Walmart
environment responsibility CSR efforts awareness dedicated to communities where with local Foundation
to include about the engaging with it operates and residents in works with
Community charity current social its local manufacture areas where it numerous
programs need in the community to products to provide operates grantees in
through same way that ensuring that them technical through direct communities
Google.org, society they have the guidance and to correspondence around the
which has expects. resources and make sure natural and group U.S. and the
already Twitter skills they need resources are meetings. world,
provided supported to build their protected and Dedicate engaging
more than public health, best and accessible. personnel with them
$100 million promote brightest responsible for through
in grants and gender futures. community proposals,
investments. equality, and engagement as meetings and
Google.org the welfare of well as discussions
aims to community receiving, of progress
address members. tracking, toward goals.
climate analyzing and
change, responding to
global public potential
health, and community
global concerns.
poverty.
Social Google Twitter Amazon is Apple Inc. is Monitor and Walmart
responsibility includes always committed to committed to participate in engages itself
to the international focused on running its protecting the transparency in renewable
environment environmental increasing business in the environment, health, initiatives in energy and
standards environmental most and safety of its countries energy
and ethics in awareness environmentally employees, where it efficiency,
its CSR and friendly way customers, and the operates. waste
policies. education. possible. global communities Work to reduction,
where it operates. support deforestation,
responsible packaging,
economic, sustainable
energy and agriculture
environmental and product
policies and design to
help identify lower the
solutions. emissions in
use.
Source Google Twitter Amazon Apple sustainability ExxonMobil Walmart
sustainability sustainability sustainability report sustainability sustainability
report report report report report
Table A1.
JEAS About the authors
Kuldeep Singh is a Research Scholar at Indian Institute of Information Technology, Allahabad, India. He
38,2 received his master degree in Commerce from Meerut University, Meerut, India. He also holds a master
degree in Business Management with specializations in finance and economics from Uttar Pradesh
Technical University, Uttar Pradesh, India. His area of interest includes financial management, financial
accounting, agricultural economics, technology forecasting and strategic management. He is the author
of several articles published in national and international journals. Kuldeep Singh is the corresponding
332 author and can be contacted at: [email protected]
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8180-4646
SCOPUS ID: 57210336826
WEB OF SCIENCE ID: K-7517-2018
Google SCHOLAR PROFILE: https://scholar\.google.com/citations?user5SzERsG0AAAAJ&hl5en
Dr Madhvendra Misra is an Associate Professor in MBA division at Indian Institute of Information
Technology, Allahabad, India. He received his master degree in Business Management with
specialization in marketing and then his D.Phil. in marketing in 2002 from University of Allahabad,
India. His research interests include marketing, Information technology, operations management, sales
promotion, consumer behavior, information strategy and IT enabled services, strategic management
and so on. He has published various papers in reputed journals and has contributed to many books.

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: [email protected]