The document summarizes and reacts to an article by Henry Mintzberg from 1983 about corporate social responsibility. It discusses how the article viewed large companies using CSR as a "smokescreen" to hide the loss of direct shareholder control. It also emphasizes that an ethical leadership is needed for society to survive and progress. The document notes that the article found CSR activities can boost customer engagement and profits. It concludes by stressing the importance of corporations avoiding just meeting minimum standards and instead personally investing in the communities they impact.
The document summarizes and reacts to an article by Henry Mintzberg from 1983 about corporate social responsibility. It discusses how the article viewed large companies using CSR as a "smokescreen" to hide the loss of direct shareholder control. It also emphasizes that an ethical leadership is needed for society to survive and progress. The document notes that the article found CSR activities can boost customer engagement and profits. It concludes by stressing the importance of corporations avoiding just meeting minimum standards and instead personally investing in the communities they impact.
The document summarizes and reacts to an article by Henry Mintzberg from 1983 about corporate social responsibility. It discusses how the article viewed large companies using CSR as a "smokescreen" to hide the loss of direct shareholder control. It also emphasizes that an ethical leadership is needed for society to survive and progress. The document notes that the article found CSR activities can boost customer engagement and profits. It concludes by stressing the importance of corporations avoiding just meeting minimum standards and instead personally investing in the communities they impact.
The Case for Corporate Social Responsibility Journal of Business Strategy Henry Mintzberg Reaction Paper
Explored cases in Mintzberg (1983) piece provides a firm overview on corporate
social responsibility at the time where large companies were described to use corporate social responsibility as a smokescreen for disappearing direct shareholder control. But more importantly learned the emphasis that without responsible and ethical people in important places, the society we know and wish to improve will never survive. Profits and prose activities were correlated and proved to also be a variable that contribute to costumer engagement which connotes that the proposition of that corporate social responsibility activities entice more profits and retained customer base. Reflecting cases presented corporate structure and competition abridged accomplished social goals over economic goals. Developing more growth in corporate social responsibility can effectively allow more impact to society that can generate more exposure to underdeveloped communities as business cannot solve societies ill as emphasized by Minztberg. Lastly, the point that signifies the importance not to allow corporate behavior to drop to the lowest common denominator and further building the commitment through simple involvement on the personal level were considered to be at the root of the true social responsibility as cited in the article can be capitalized and well appreciated by corporations as they embrace increased branching out and exposure to communities they serve and also depend on supply for resources.
Why do Scherer and Palazzo (2011) argue that there is an increasingly public role for private business firms? What are some of the advantages vs. the disadvantages of firms adopting a stronger ‘public role’ e.g. in administration of public goods and services?