ARTÍCULO

CSR concepts are evolving constantly due to interaction with internal and external influences. Silberhorn and Warren (2007) suggested that the concept of CSR developed in response to the interactions between organisational values and external influences. The key values of an organisation can be described as its resources, culture and structures (Wheelen and Hunger 2002).

Several studies have proposed that despite the internal factors discussed above, organisations are primarily reactive with respect to CSR, responding to external pressures rather than proactively defining CSR (L‘Etang 1994; Vogel 2005). For instance, in the current social and business environment, there is an increasing public demand for business leaders to include social issues as part of their strategies (Lantos 2001). Managers are frequently subjected to pressures from various stakeholder groups to allocate financial resources to CSR activities. These pressures come from

54

stakeholders such as employees, consumers, communities and environmental groups (McWilliams and Siegel 2001) as discussed below.

2.6.1 Employee pressure

The pressures from employees cited by Musah (2008) include the increasing public recognition of certain employee rights in the workplace, including non-discrimination in hiring, firing and promotion. Matten and Moon (2008) stated that CSR has clearly addressed issues such as fair wages, working hours and conditions, health care, redundancy and protection against unfair dismissal. The other important example of employee pressure is that a reputable CSR index, the Kinder, Lydenberg and Domini (KLD), included four dimensions of CSP based on dimensions rated by KLD. These cover workplace and employee issues as union relations, employee benefits and employee participation. KLD uses these employee issues for CSR measurement purposes (Graves and Waddock 1994; Sharfman 1996; Turban and Greening 1997). In addition, developed countries such as the UK and Germany are more concerned about their employees‘ health or social security and contributing to their National Health Services through taxation (Matten and Moon 2008). In some countries, for example, Germany, membership in a health insurance plan is mandatory for every employee, and the legal framework defines the value of the monthly insurance premium paid by the employer and the employee, usually a 50/50 split. The analysis by Aguilera et al. (2007) highlighted that how employees might push corporations to engage in CSR initiatives, suggest that the perception of CSR shapes employee attitudes and behaviours towards companies. In fact, the perceived fairness of any working environment does have an impact on employee wellbeing (i.e., job satisfaction, stress and emotion) in addition to other organisational considerations such as absenteeism and employee commitment (Colquitt 2001). In effect, when an organisation is seen to be acting fairly, employees are happy and hardworking.

When they happy it is not difficult to persuade employees to participate as volunteers for the firm‘s CSR activities. This is called employee voluntarism. The Centre for Corporate Citizenship at Boston College, 1999 concluded that employee voluntarism provides benefits in three ways firstly for the companies, secondly for the employees

55

and finally the community. According to Hahn (2003) the company benefits from voluntarism as it ―improves relationships with surrounding community, improves public image, builds a cohesive, motivated workforce, increases employee performance and productivity, helps establish and enhance corporate or brand reputation in new or existing markets‖ (http://www.serviceleader.org/instructors/studentpaper1).

Here it is important to discuss the need for organisations to work in a more socially responsible manner to avoid strikes or high rates of labour turnover, to improve labour relations and to retain their consumer markets. Collier and Esteban (2007), in their explanation of the role of CSR in improving employee motivation and commitment, stated ‗the effective delivery of corporate social and environmental responsibility initiatives is dependent on employee responsiveness. For employees to deliver on CSR requirements, they have to be motivated and committed to surmounting the challenges and attaining the goals of responsible corporate behaviour. Motivation comes first; commitment reinforces and embeds it‘ (p. 22).

2.6.2 Customer/consumer pressure

Similarly, consumer and customer pressures include the expectation that companies will produce safe products and provide more consumer information (Musah 2008). Organisations need to be aware of these consumer demands and act on them rapidly as a part of their business strategy, for example, after sales services, and customer protection services. This section contains a discussion about firms not involving those marketing strategies under the consumer protection concept, and consumers showing their power to the firms.

Generally, customers expect a warranty period for products they purchase, value adding services and ability to return any item purchased if it does not meet their expectations (Maignan et al. 2005). If the organisation does not consider its customers‘ needs, it will lose it market share. Therefore, customer pressures affect an organisation‘s market risk. Interestingly, the academic and managerial literature has provided little guidance to help marketers integrate various initiatives into a sound program that can cover a wide range of corporate responsibilities. For example, it has been suggested that meeting the needs of customers and motivating employees to provide the companies‘ expectations (George

56

2003). Stakeholder research indicates the treatment of customers and employees has the most influence on CP (Berman et al. 1999). Therefore, a better way to improve the treatment of the customer is to apply CSR as a marketing strategy (Maignan et al. 2005).

Smith and Langford (2009) pointed out that the ‗possible business benefits CSR entails, specifically the commercial benefits resulting from the impact of CSR on consumer behaviour and attitudes‘ (p.100). Bhattacharya and Sen (2004) concluded that consumers are willing to pay more for products from socially responsible organisations. However, if companies ignore their consumers‘ needs, boycotts may result and become a major problem. This is one expression of consumer pressure. Smith (2003) stated that product boycott messages are associated with large negative stock market reactions. For example, as a result of the European boycott of Royal Dutch/Shell in 1995 over its plan to dump the British Spar oil platform at sea, Shell suffered widespread adverse publicity, as well as a 5 per cent decline in sales in their different markets. Smith (2003) explained that ‗boycotts may be only the most manifest example of a broader phenomenon of consumer behaviour influenced by perceived CSR lapses‘ (p. 62).

2.6.3 Community pressure

In addition to the production of goods and services, society expects that organisations will provide safety, improved lifestyle, employment, infrastructure, and environmental protection, without affecting cultural practices and benefits (Agarwal 2008). Social expectations for the improvement of lifestyles include the development of education, health, religion, political and modern technology. Idemudia and Ite (2006) stated that company CSR practices mainly target poverty alleviation, the prevention of human rights violations and environmental protection. These expectations differ from culture to culture. Social and organisational expectations are quite different; organisations expect profit maximisation, while consumers expect good quality, low prices and a range of services. This mismatch places pressure on organisations, since if these consumer expectations are not fulfilled communities may ban their products and enforce many restrictions. However, Idemudia and Ite (2006) stated that even when companies engage in good CSR practices such as philanthropy and social investment, allocating more

57

funds for community development, people may engage in conflicts with organisations. Newell (2005) showed that in the case of the mining industry, the reason for these conflicts was a lack of community representation in the establishment of rules and regulations. These are geographical isolators, and are not linked to globalisation.

2.6.4 Environmental pressure

Company activities cause environmental pollution and even crises; for example, the environmental catastrophes caused by sudden events such as the Chernobyl nuclear power plant accident, the Exxon Valdez oil spill and the Union Carbide pesticide plant accident in Bhopal (Shrivastava 1995). Also pointed out by Shrivastava was that ‗slow emergent crises are exemplified by the Love Canal toxic waste crisis, and the Minamata Mercury poisoning in Japan. This notion of industrial/environmental crises encompasses other chronic global environmental crises‘ (p. 211). Other researchers (e.g., Brown et al. 1989; Clark 1989; Pryde 1992) discussed environmental damage such as ozone depletion caused by chlorofluorocarbons, global warming caused by industrial atmospheric pollution, acid rain, urban air pollution, toxic and nuclear wastes, the extinction of natural resources and the decline in biodiversity (Shrivastava 1995). Conversely, organisations use diminishing natural resources such as oil, water and gas in their production processes. Shrivastava (1995) stated that maintaining a clean environment is a major responsibility for organisations. Due to global environmental policy, protection rather than pollution of the environment is essential. For example, certain countries have implemented rules for the protection of their environmental resources. These include the prohibition of the use of mechanical equipment for exploration, mining and extraction of sand and gems; the prohibition of cultivation of annual crops in high gradient areas; the manufacture of polythene or any polythene product of 20 microns or below; and various emission and noise control regulations. If companies violate these laws, the government and their communities may take legal action against them. For example, a ban was imposed on the Indian Coca Cola Company because their production activities caused decreased water levels in farmers‘ wells. This section covered all the stakeholder pressures which is discussed in this study. The section addressed because of the stakeholders pressure the firms act their CSR policies.

58