How does Corporate Social Irresponsibility exist?
Corporate Social Irresponsibility harps on the concept of psychological licensing which, “refers to perceiving that one can behave in a potentially socially undesirable way without fear of discrediting his or her self-image” (Miller & Effron, 2010, p.115). “Whether an individual feels licensed or not is based on one's past behaviour,” (Monin & Miller, 2001, p.33). Monin and Miller created a study in which detailed the effect of how moral behaviour can lead to morally questionable behaviour at an individual level. Leading to the conclusion that once a company had achieved high success with CSR programs, that after time, their efforts would begin to decline as they feel as if they have ‘already …show more content…
Friedman touches on how corporations must embark on charitable activities in which do not directly generate revenue in any form. (Schrempf-Stirling, Palazzo & Phillips 2015)
Secondly, Friedman expressed his view upon the need to stay within rules of the business game, focusing on avoiding dishonesty and fraud.
Friedman writes… “A corporate executive … has direct responsibility to conduct business in accordance with [shareholder] desires … [i.e.] to make as much money as possible while conforming to their basic rules of the society, both those embodied in law and those embodied in ethical custom.” (Lucid Manager 2017)
The theory argues that it is inappropriate for high corporate partners to venture on sustainable programmes due to the fact there is little to no incentive for prudent expenditure, particularly when sums of money are owed to shareholders through dividend payments. (Schrempf-Stirling, Palazzo & Phillips 2015). Friedman poses the theory that the sole purpose of a corporation is too maximise shareholders returns on investments and to meet shareholders …show more content…
In saying this, the introduction of CSR strategies must all come at a cost, cutting wages and reducing spending on wellbeing of workers becomes a direct oxymoron of the entire idea of Corporate Social Responsibility. If CSR was to be made compulsory, expenses may be cut, however despite this, all companies would be forced to cut or become more efficient, thus the reduction in wellbeing is ‘ghosted’ due to the fact everyone will be affected. Friedman states that “corporations should engage in socially responsible activities as it can be shown that they at least have an indirect positive effect on organisational performance.” (Lucid Manager 2017). Thus with the compulsion of CSR practices, they will then be carried out in a fully moral fashion with the exact intention of social
Corporate Social Irresponsibility harps on the concept of psychological licensing which, “refers to perceiving that one can behave in a potentially socially undesirable way without fear of discrediting his or her self-image” (Miller & Effron, 2010, p.115). “Whether an individual feels licensed or not is based on one's past behaviour,” (Monin & Miller, 2001, p.33). Monin and Miller created a study in which detailed the effect of how moral behaviour can lead to morally questionable behaviour at an individual level. Leading to the conclusion that once a company had achieved high success with CSR programs, that after time, their efforts would begin to decline as they feel as if they have ‘already …show more content…
Friedman touches on how corporations must embark on charitable activities in which do not directly generate revenue in any form. (Schrempf-Stirling, Palazzo & Phillips 2015)
Secondly, Friedman expressed his view upon the need to stay within rules of the business game, focusing on avoiding dishonesty and fraud.
Friedman writes… “A corporate executive … has direct responsibility to conduct business in accordance with [shareholder] desires … [i.e.] to make as much money as possible while conforming to their basic rules of the society, both those embodied in law and those embodied in ethical custom.” (Lucid Manager 2017)
The theory argues that it is inappropriate for high corporate partners to venture on sustainable programmes due to the fact there is little to no incentive for prudent expenditure, particularly when sums of money are owed to shareholders through dividend payments. (Schrempf-Stirling, Palazzo & Phillips 2015). Friedman poses the theory that the sole purpose of a corporation is too maximise shareholders returns on investments and to meet shareholders …show more content…
In saying this, the introduction of CSR strategies must all come at a cost, cutting wages and reducing spending on wellbeing of workers becomes a direct oxymoron of the entire idea of Corporate Social Responsibility. If CSR was to be made compulsory, expenses may be cut, however despite this, all companies would be forced to cut or become more efficient, thus the reduction in wellbeing is ‘ghosted’ due to the fact everyone will be affected. Friedman states that “corporations should engage in socially responsible activities as it can be shown that they at least have an indirect positive effect on organisational performance.” (Lucid Manager 2017). Thus with the compulsion of CSR practices, they will then be carried out in a fully moral fashion with the exact intention of social