The article “Corporate Social Responsibility and Access to Finance” was written by Cheng et al. (2014) in order to show that firms that have better CSR performance are less capital constrained. The aim of the essay is to argue that the analysis of the relationship between CSR policies and the access to finance is a well done research with interesting arguments and analysis; however, it has several limitations, which will be examined. The aim will be achieved through a critical analysis of the paper. It will be done in four stages: first, the key arguments of the article, second, the strong points of the article, third, the limitations of the research, and final stage, the specifications of the outcome. In this paper Cheng et al. (2014) argued that the implementation of successful CSR policies leads to lower idiosyncratic risk due to improved stakeholder engagement, which reduce agency costs of an organisation, and increased transparency, which results a company becoming less capitally constrained and enhances a firm’s access to finance in capital markets. In order to achieve their aim the authors use cross sectional analysis of firms around the world and apply different variables and methods. They concluded that there is a link between good CSR activities and access to finance; however, social and environmental components of CSR are more significant for investors than the factor of governance since the former ones have higher impact on capital constraints. It can be
On the other side, as the legal personality of the corporations evolved in the 1800s, enterprises were no longer responsible for serving the public interest. Consequently, any social welfare was symbolic and procured from the economic function of organizations (Banerjee, 2008). Furthermore, it seems that corporations are using CSR strategies as a window to present favorable images and obtain economic benefits. Historically the relationship between revenues and investment in CSR programs is a controversial issue. Furthermore, the power of the economic CSR rhetoric lies in the ability to validate particular ideologies to consolidate the power of larger corporations (Banerjee,
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is something that affects all companies and should be an active factor in the company’s decision making. It is something all corporations need to care about. CSR is when business’ or corporations take part in an initiative or campaign for a cause that will benefit society and/or in some way make the world a better place (Taylor, 2015). Initially, Corporate Social Responsibility started to take shape around the 1950’s, but some say that it dates all the way back to the 1800s, the idea of CSR was seen (Carroll, 2007). One may think that because it is dated so long ago, it doesn’t have an important impact today nevertheless, it is proven that Corporate Social Responsibility is a pathway for entities to self benefit as they are in the process of benefitting society.
“Businesses are owned by their shareholders - money spent on CSR by managers is theft of the rightful property of the owners-This is the voice of the laisser-faire 1980s, still being given powerful voice by advocates such as Elaine Sternberg. Sternberg argues that there is a human rights case against CSR, which is that a stakeholder approach to management deprives shareholders of their property rights.” (mallenbaker.net). This is one of the opinions which is against the concept of CSR which blames this theory for violating human rights of shareholders. Moreover, Lantos (2001), in the article ‘The boundaries of strategic corporate social responsibility’, while in agreement with the
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) describes programs adopted by a company in addition to their profit-making ventures. These programs are specifically intended to integrate environmental and social concerns into regular business operations. More than just charity, they act as the “conscience” of the company and balance the social and environmental actions of the company with the desires of the shareholders. (“What is CSR?,” 2015) As a multinational corporation valued at billions of dollars, Bank of America has a large impact on its employees and surrounding communities.
The integration of social responsibilities in business that emerged with the financial capitalists spurred a fierce debate on whether or mot CSR should be included in the corporate objective function. the earliest reference to such criticism appears to be Ghent, who in 1902 criticized this new trend for its similarity to the economic feudalism of the middle Ages, and who argued that CSR was being used as a tool for forestalling public criticism and regulation rather than from an actual concern for social issues (as reported by Heald, 1957). Similar but more specific arguments have since been provided by Levitt (1958), Friedman (1962: 1970) and recently Jensen (2002). Ghent did
The popularity of CSR has grown substantially in the last couple of decades. Many people may have grown skeptical of business in the wake of corporate scandals such as Enron, Tyco, and WorldCom followed by the sub-prime mortgage market, which have all gained large amounts of negative publicity. Stakeholders are more aware of the performance of companies along a broader set of metrics that portray the company’s operations in a more comprehensive manner that provides information about social performances and environmental performances. Much of the concept of corporate sustainability is rooted in the notion of sustainable development with can be defined as the ability to meet the needs of the current population without compromising the ability of future generations to
In this paper, I will be arguing that CSR falls within the category of competitive strategy specifically smart risk management and cost minimization. CSR helps create win-win situations that make good business sense. It is not an act of theft from shareholders. Instead, I believe that CSR investments should be analyzed within the context of a firm’s (or a country’s) competitive strategy rather than business
In order to better understand the relationship between CSR and investor relations, Essi Lipponen illustrated the fact that “companies need to differentiate themselves from other companies and communicate their
This paper examines the similarities and findings of three academic papers related to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in accounting. Assumptions are made regarding the importance of CSR to the success of businesses. By looking at three different pieces of literature from the accounting field, there is strong evidence that suggests CSR can be considered an important business function that contributes to profitability. Furthermore, branches of CSR such as Social and Environmental Accounting (SEA) and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions disclosure play important roles in
CSR is quite a recent theme in the world, and even more in Brazil. There is not an exclusive concept accepted when it comes to the definition of CSR, (Araujo, 2006; Oliveira Claro; Pimentel Claro; Lucci, 2009). According to Passador (2002), the first CSR concept in Brazil (between businesses, society and the State) emerged with the publication of the Brazilian Social Report by the Brazilian Institute of Social Analysis (IBASE). In 1998, a non-profit organization called the Ethos Institute was established to extend the work carried out by IBASE, in order to mobilize, encourage and help
When analysing corporate social responsibility (CSR) it’s a concepts of business practice which involving initiatives that benefits society that business operating in. In terms of business practices in the financial industry CSR contributes to sustainable development by delivering economic, social and environment benefits for all stakeholders within the company. CSR is a very broad concept where it address many topic such as economic development, human rights and environmental effects. With current issues that happening in the world CSR specially address the economic
Corporate social commitment is the term used to portray the way that a business considers the cash related, characteristic and social impacts of decisions and exercises it is incorporated in. The piece of Corporate Social Responsibility in the business world has made from a fig leaf publicizing front into a fundamental piece of corporate behavior over the span of late years. Conservative frameworks are regarded, pined for and passed on additional by appropriate players in various business endeavors all around all through the world. Both investigation and corporate practice thusly see CSR as a controlling rule for business accomplishment.
Increasing environmental performance through CSR affects companies’ bottom-line measures by strengthening and improving environmental practices. For example, waste management and reducing pollution. A company can better financial performance through increased revenues and lower costs. Ever since the beginning of industry, companies for the most part have involved themselves in corporate social responsibility. Lately the practice of CSR has grown quite a bit, although there are still concerns about corporations’ roles in social responsibilities.
Also, in referencing the Danish model, although the region may be relatively unique in the widely accepted responsibilities of corporate citizenry, it is not unique in providing such guidelines. The SEC has established a CSR Working Group and provided to the public and firms alike a handbook that discusses principles of Corporate Social Responsibility. (4) The principles discussed within this handbook outline a frame of reference that companies may follow. In addition, CSR disclosure are mandated for listed firms to be provided within each of their annually distributed report, both availing investors to view information pertinent for investment decisions as well as availing corporate leadership the opportunity to compare progress and
This essay will evaluate the relationship between Corporate Strategy, Corporate Social Responsibility and will give some examples in order to give an idea to companies why they should engage in CSR and the consequences of engaging on it. It has been told that engaging on Corporate Social Responsibility is a cost, but recently has been demonstrated that if it is well managed the money that you put on CSR implementation can be taken into account as an investment. Companies engage in CSR not only because moral questions, it has been demonstrated that CSR is a door to an increase in the reputation of the company. In the long term companies realize that customers really appreciate the engagement of the company to social or environmental activities. Managers nowadays realize on how the consumers mind are changing towards a more responsible consumption and how these consumers look for information on how the products they consume have been produced. So these managers in order to increase in a long term base the good reputation of the company are investing nowadays on changing their strategy and trying all the company to engage in responsible practices. As explained in more detail in this paper the consequences of engaging in CSR are worth more than the cost of changing the company’ strategy. Some of them are the increase of consumer loyalty, investor attractiveness, political stability and economic benefits.