The instrumental approach is here understood as
human resource decisions being based solely upon their expected contribution to the achievement of the goals of the organization
, goals which are set by the ‘owners' of the organization.
What is instrumental stakeholder theory?
Instrumental stakeholder theory
considers the performance consequences for firms of highly ethical relationships with stakeholders
, characterized by high levels of trust, cooperation, and information sharing.
What is the instrumental approach to CSR?
The “instrumental” approach would say that
CSR is a tool in the process whereby the interests of its prime stakeholders are preserved
. The “legitimacy” approach regards CSR as part of the process whereby a firm gains legitimacy in the eyes of the public, and thereby a Social License to Operate.
What is the normative case for CSR?
The normative case follows the reasoning of stakeholder theory, while the business case is in line with shareholder theory. The normative case for CSR proposes
that corporations should engage in CSR because it is valiant and good to do so
.
These four approaches are
obstructive, defensive, accommodating, and proactive
.
What are the three theories of CSR?
Three of the main CSR theories and models have been represented and analyzed in this article:
The Carroll Theory, The Triple Bottom Line Theory, and The Stakeholder Theories
. Since any business corporation has to adopt one of these theories, this study reveals the strength and challenges of every theory.
What are the three different types of stakeholder theory?
Stakeholder Model –
normative, descriptive, instrumental
.
What is the instrumental approach in business?
The instrumental approach is here understood as
human resource decisions being based solely upon their expected contribution to the achievement of the goals of the organization
, goals which are set by the ‘owners' of the organization.
What are the different types of stakeholder theory?
| Categorization of Stakeholder Definitions Source | Primary/secondary (Savage et al., 1991) | Moral/strategic (Goodpaster, 1991) | Active/passive (Mahoney, 1994) | Voluntary/involuntary (Clarkson, 1995) |
|---|
What are the reasons against CSR?
- Contrary to Basic Function of Business. …
- Conflict with Profit Motive. …
- Distortion in Resource Allocation. …
- Imposition of Business Values. …
- Inefficiency in the System. …
- Operational Problems.
How many CSR theories are there?
The present practice of corporate social responsibility has been depicted and informed by
three CSR theories
: The stakeholder theory of CSR. The business ethics theory of CSR. The shareholder value theory of CSR.
What are the theories in CSR?
The literature therefore recognizes four major theories of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) or four theories about the responsibilities of business in society, which can be considered contemporary mainstream theories, namely:
Corporate Social Performance (CSP), Shareholder Value Theory or Fiduciary Capitalism,
…
What are the four approaches?
Instead, shows that there are four approaches:
(1) Intuitive; (2) Incidental; (3) Retrospective; and (4) Prospective
. Offers a description of each of these Four Approaches and presents examples of the thinking involved in each description.
What is obstructionist approach?
The obstructionist approach happens
when managers try to block information from reaching the public and is not a socially responsible approach
, while the defensive approach does not go beyond what the law requires. The proactive approach has the greatest focus on social responsibility.
Proactive corporate social responsibility (CSR) involves
business practices adopted voluntarily by firms that go beyond regulatory requirements in order to actively support sustainable economic, social and environmental development
, and thereby contribute broadly and positively to society.
Who made CSR theory?
Depending on whom you ask,
Howard Bowen
is widely regarded as the father of modern CSR. An American economist, he's been credited with coining the term “Corporate social responsibility”.
