International Relations Paper Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

International Relations Paper - Essay Example It has been one of the most researched topics by professionals and academics alike. The field has made more development over the last decade than it ever made in the past. Many scholars suggest different reasons for the implementation of good international relations. They cite different benefits of international relations accruing to the implementing countries and to the entire world as a whole. One scholar suggests that international relations are dominated by two poles. At one end, the sphere of International Relations should be the policies of the United States with the rest of the world, and on the other, it is the EU controlling the flow of policies in the international relations. International Relations gained more prominence after the USSR-USA Cold War in the 1990s. Both of these nations tried to win allies and hence it started a cycle of every country trying to find a partner in the sphere of politics, trade, security and power. International Relations have become an importan t aspect in international relations because every country days is trying to show the strength in number after the US-Iran tensions. There are a lot of advantages of developing a sound policy of international relations, not just by the super powers of the world, but for every nation of the world. (Krotz & Maher, 2005) Many social scientists have argued that International Relations are totally driven by Trade Policies. In fact the economies of the world have become so interlinked that is unimaginable to separate them with the politics and other important facets of the international political environment. Therefore an important part of foreign or international relation is the economic and business development part. No two countries can have stable relations unless they are involved in the international trade. Many social scientists believe that it is the bilateral trade that drives the foreign policy of all countries. The breakdown in the relationship between Iraq and the United States of America happened when Saddam Hussein threatened that Iraqi would not sell oil to American companies. This caused the international crude oil prices to soar and resulted in uncertainty and economic instability around the world. There were question marks regarding what the future holds for Iraq and how will the United States of America going to change its foreign policy in response to Saddam’s threat? It led the two countries to war. It can be said that International Relations policies are a function of trade and economic policies. Not a long ago, there was a tension between the United States of America and Republic of China. But over the years two countries have patched up their difference. Many economists believe that two nations have covertly decided that their economies are too big to go to war. In case, there is a war between the United States of America and Republic of China no one nation could emerge as a winner, but instead it would create economic instability in bo th countries, more so in the United States of America. International Relation hence cannot work alone without the economic policies. Both economic policies and International Relations work together to shape a foreign policy and hence no nation in the world cannot succeed without having sound economic and international relations policies. Another important role that good international relations play is the stable global environment. Without having stable global env

Hp Compaq Merger Essay Example for Free

Hp Compaq Merger Essay The world’s largest corporate Information Technology merger began in September 2001 when HP announced that they would acquire Compaq in an all stock purchase valued at $25 billion. Over an 8 month period ending in May 2002, the merger passed shareholder and regulatory approval with the end result being one company. The new HP has annual sales of approximately $90 billion which is comparable to IBM, and an operating income of almost $4 billion. The merger was led by Carly Fiorina, the chairwoman and CEO of HP.   The president of the new HP was Michael Capellas who was the former chairman and CEO of the old HP and who has recently resigned and is now the CEO of World Com. Overall, many analysts were critical of the merger from the beginning since both Compaq and HP were struggling companies before the merger. The common question that has been raised by analysts is: Do two struggling companies make a better merged company? Some analysts have indicated that the merger is a gamble and that it is difficult to see any focused logic behind the merge considering that most I.T acquisitions are not successful. Prior to the merger, Compaq has been unable to grow despite previously buying Digital, while HP was trying to grow internally, without much success. Both companies were still adjusting to acquisitions they have made in the past and both were adjusting to new leadership (Fiorina and Capellas). The merger deal also means that there are many overlaps in products, technologies, distribution channels, services, facilities and jobs. Employee morale is a threat to a successful merger as there have been numerous layoffs -15,000 employees. The claimed annual cost savings of about $2.5 billion dollars by the year 2004 amounts to only 3 % of the combined costs of both companies. Gartner Group research has indicated that the merged company has failed to do a good enough job of presenting the benefits of an acquisition of this scale to justify the deal’s risk as it is generally known that technology mergers rarely work. In addition, both companies in the past have struggled to resolve conflicts between direct and indirect sales channels. The cultural background of both companies is quite different and integration will take a long time. The culture at HP is based on consensus; Compaq’s culture on the other hand is based on rapid decision making. From a positive perspective, most botched tech mergers involved companies that were trying to buy their way into new businesses they knew little about, this is not the case with the HP/Compaq merger. Apart from servers and PC’s, they have several areas where their products overlap e.g.: they are both are involved in making data -storage equipment and both make hand held computing devices. In addition, both companies also bring different strengths to the table. Compaq has done a better job in regard to engineering an entire line and HP has been strong in consumer products. The justification provided by HP senior management suggests that a merger will enable them to compete with two of their biggest competitors, IBM and Dell.  In conclusion, it is viewed by many analysts that there will be at least 2 more years of bitter infighting which will cause the new HP to lose direction and good personnel. This is great news for competitors such as IBM and Sun as both of them will be able to pick off the market while the new HP is distracted by the merger. The new HP may be a threat to IBM but not anytime soon. It could take several years to determine if the largest merger in I.T history will be a success or a complete flop. THE IT INDUSTRY PROFILE Information technology (IT) is a broad field that covers all aspects of managing and processing information. IT professionals design, develop, support, and manage computer software, hardware, and networks. From the exuberant growth of its early years to the uncertainty of recent times, the IT industry has stabilized—with job growth rates now rising steadily—and continues to change in order to meet the needs of the business world. While the wild optimism that surrounded the IT industry a few years back has been deflated, the IT industry is adapting to a changing market. New developments such as creating infrastructure for mobile technologies will continue to ensure the vitality and viability of the industry. And as the industry responds to new business needs, it will continue to evolve into a mature profession, a profession versatile enough to adapt to new demands and stable enough to support new innovations and developments. In information technology (IT), India has built up valuable brand equity in the global markets. In IT-enabled services (ITES), India has emerged as the most preferred destination for business process outsourcing (BPO), a key driver of growth for the software industry and the services sector. The IT industry is passing through a phase of mergers and consolidations in India largely in line with global trends. Companies are focusing on organic as well as inorganic growth. Indian IT companies are prowling for potential acquisitions both in the domestic as well as foreign markets. 3 Indian software companies – TCS, Infosys, and Wipro have all crossed the billion dollar mark. Competition in the Indian IT arena is increasing leaps and bounds with global giants like IBM, Accenture, and CSC etc.   Trends over the last five years tell the story of Dell’s increasing market share, at the cost of its competitors. This degree of competition prompted a  merger between HP and Compaq in 2001; IBM has refocused its priorities to lucrative corporate customers. In 2003, the PC industry grew 11 % as a whole. Despite differing focuses, all players saw an increased demand by consumers for new systems. INTRODUCTION TO THE COMPANY PROFILE HEWLETT PACKARD In 1938, two electrical engineering graduates from Stanford University called William Hewlett and David Packard started their business in a garage in Palo Alto. In a years time, the partnership called Hewlett-Packard was made and by the year 1947 HP was incorporated. It began offering stocks for public trading 10 years later. The company has been prospering ever since as its profits grew from five and half million dollars in 1951 to about 3 billion dollars in 1981. The pace of growth knew no bounds as HPs net revenue went up to 42 billion dollars in 1997. Starting with manufacturing audio oscillators, the company made its first computer in the year 1966 and it was by 1972 that it introduced the concept of personal computing by introducing the first scientific hand-held. HP introduced its first personal computer in the year 1980. The company is also known for the laser-printer which it introduced in the year 1985. HP – Product Portfolio * Laptop/Notebooks * Palmtops/PDA * Printers and Printing Consumables * Digicams * Scanners * Monitors * Mainframes Major Competitors * IBM – Servers, PCs, Storage and IT services * Dell – PCs * Canon – Printers, Fax, Copiers and Optical Equipment * Compaq – PCs, Servers and Pocket Computers COMPAQ Compaq Computer Corporation is an American personal computer company founded  in the year 1982. It had the charm of being called the largest manufacturers of personal computing devices worldwide. The company was formed by two senior managers at Texas Instruments. The name of the company had come from-Compatibility and Quality. The company introduced its first computer in the year 1983 after at a price of 2995 dollars. In spite of being portable, the problem with the computer was that it seemed to be a suitcase. Nevertheless, there were huge commercial benefits from the computer as it sold more than 53,000 units in the first year with a revenue generation of 111 million dollars. Company existed as an independent corporation until 2002, when it was acquired for $25 billion by Hewlett Packard. COMPAQ – Product Portfolio * Enterprise Computing Group * Mainframes * Servers * Workstations * Internet products * Networking Products * Commercial Products * Portables * Small and Medium Business Solutions Major Competitors * IBM – Servers, PCs, Storage and IT services * Sun Microsystems – Servers * Dell – PCs * HP – PCs, IT Services and Pocket Computers * Palm – Pocket Computers PRE – MERGER STATS FOR HP COMPAQ RELATIVE PERFORMANCE OF HP AND COMPAQ HP – COMPAQ MERGER â€Å"If HP was progressing at such a tremendous pace, what was the reason that  the company had to merge with Compaq?† Carly Fiorina, who became the CEO of HP in the year 1999, had a key role to play in the merger that took place on 3rd September, 2001. She was the first woman to have taken over as CEO of such a big company and the first outsider too. She worked very efficiently as she travelled more than 250,000 miles in the first year as a CEO. Her basic aim was to modernize the culture of operation of HP. She laid great emphasis on the profitable sides of the business. This shows that she was very extravagant in her approach as a CEO. In spite of the growth in the market value of HPs share from 54.43 to 74.48 dollars, the company was still inefficient. This was because it could not meet the targets due to a failure of both company and industry. HP was forced to cut down on jobs and also be eluded from the privilege of having Price Water House Coopers to take care of its audit. So, even the job of Fiorina was under threat. This meant that improvement in the internal strategies of the company was not going to be sufficient for the companys success. Ultimately, the company had to certainly plan out something different. So, it was decided that the company would be acquiring Compaq in a stock transaction whose net worth was 25 billion dollars. Initially, this merger was not planned. It started with a telephonic conversation between CEO HP, Fiorina and Chairman and CEO Compaq, Capellas. The idea behind the conversation was to discuss on a licensing agreement but it continued as a discussion on competitive strategy and finally a merger. It took two months for further studies and by September, 2001, the boards of the two companies approved of the merger. In spite of the decision coming from the CEO of HP, the merger was strongly opposed in the company. The two CEOs believed that the only way to fight the growing competition in terms of prices was to have a merger. But the investors and the other stakeholders thought that the company would never be able to have the loyalty of the Compaq customers, if products are sold with an HP logo on it. Other than this, there were questions on the synchronization of the organizations members with each other. This was because of the change in the organization culture as well. Even though these were supposed to serious problems with respect to the merger, the CEO of HP, Fiorina justified the same with the fact that the merger would remove one serious competitor in the over-supplied PC market of those days. She said  that the market share of the company is bound to increase with the merger and also the working unit would double. GROWING PROBLEMS AT HP * HP was not adapting to technological innovation fast enough * Margins were going down * IPG (HP’s Imaging and Printing Group) was the leader in its market segment but did not rank anywhere among top 3 in servers, storage or services * Printing line was facing competition from Lexmark and Epson which were selling lower-quality inexpensive printers * Needed to build strong complementary business lines HP’s POSITION BEFORE MERGER * By 2001, as the industry stumbled, meeting growth targets became difficult for HP and it was forced to cut jobs and scrap plans * As a result HP stock price dropped drastically * Turning the company around required more than just strategy from within OBJECTIVES OF THE MERGER * Increase competition with major competitors i.e. IBM, Dell * Cut costs by $3 billion annually by 2004 * Increase earnings for shareholders * Face the challenge of a shrinking market EXPECTATIONS FROM THE MERGER OF HP AND COMPAQ * The merger of HP with Compaq will create superior customer value by expanding its product range and together HP and Compaq can focus on R D in a greater extend. * The second best benefit that the merger will emerge is cost benefit by generating cost synergies reaching approximately $2.5 bn annually. * Drive a significantly improved cost structure, approximate assets of $56.4 billion, and annual revenues of $87.4 billion and annual operating earnings of $3.9 billion. * Adds up to world-class innovation and quality through the merger of two of the leading IT companies of the world. * Larger PC position resulting from the merger likely to increase risk and dilute shareholders interest. * Operations in more than 160 countries and over 1,45,000 employees. * Expand the numbers of the company’s service professionals. * Improves access to the market with Compaq’s direct capability and low cost structure. * Work force reduction by around 15,000 employees saving around $1.5 billion per year. * Improve HP’s market share. KEY POINTS THAT ENCOURAGED THE MERGER DECISION * HP’s failure to meet target (in spite of increased share value) * Merger as the way to fight the growing competition in terms of prices * Merger would eliminate one player in an oversupplied PC market * To compete with IBM and other companies * Reduce costs * 1990’s IT recessionary phase * Merger expected to yield savings projected to reach $2.5bn annually by 2004 * Advantage of more volume of sales * Development of direct distribution capability * Strengthen sales force * Improve customer base ADVANTAGES OF MERGER Merger would create a full-service technology firm capable of doing everything from selling PCs and printers to setting up complex networks. Merger would eliminate redundant product groups and costs in marketing, advertising, and shipping, while at the same time preserving much of the two companies’ revenues. MARKET BENEFITS * Merger will creates immediate end to end leadership * Compaq was a clear No.2 in the PC business and stronger on the commercial side than HP, but HP was stronger on the consumer side. Together they would be No.1 in market share in 2001 * The merger would also greatly expand the numbers of the company’s service professionals. As a result, HP would have the largest market share in all hardware market segments and become the number three in market share in services * Improves access to the market with Compaq’s direct capability and low cost structure * The much bigger company would have scale advantages: gaining bargaining power with suppliers. OPERATIONAL BENEFITS * HP and Compaq have highly complementary RD capabilities * HP was strong in mid and high-end UNIX servers, a weakness for Compaq; while Compaq was strong in low-end industry standard (Intel) servers, a weakness for HP * Top management has experience with complex organizational changes * Merger would result in work force reduction by around 15,000 employees saving around $1.5 billion per year FINANCIAL BENEFITS * Merger will result in substantial increase in profit margin and liquidity * 2.5 billion is the estimated value of annual synergies * Provides the combined entity with better ability to reinvest Even though it seemed to be advantageous to very few people in the beginning, it was the strong determination of Fiorina that she was able to stand by her decision. Wall Street and all her investors had gone against the company lampooning her ideas with the saying that she has made 1+1=1.5 by her extravagant ways of expansion. Fiorina had put it this way that after the companys merger, not only would it have a larger share in the market but also the units of production would double. This would mean that the company would grow tremendously in volume. Her dream of competing with the giants in the field, IBM would also come true. She was of the view that much of the redundancy in the two companies would decrease as the internal costs on promotion, marketing and shipping would come down with the merger. This would produce the slightest harm to the collection of revenue. She used the ideas of  competitive positioning to justify her plans of the merger. She said that the merger is based on the ideologies of consolidation and not on diversification. She could also defend allegations against the change in the HP was. She was of the view that the HP has always encouraged changes as it is about innovating and taking bold steps. She said that the company requires being consistent with creativity, improvement and modification. This merger had the capability of providing exactly the same.

Causes of Increased Corporate Social Responsibility

Causes of Increased Corporate Social Responsibility Abstract Aim The main aim of this research was to establish the extent to which the increased priority of CSR is in actuality a reflection of companies acting to meet the interests of society or simply a means for generating profits in a marketing oriented way. In this regard, the research sought to explore CSR behaviour in depth and in turn tried to establish companies rationales for CSR behaviour in the UK food retail industry. Methods A mixed methodology with both qualitative and quantitative methods of data collection and analysis were used in the research. Qualitative content analysis was used for analysing the contents of food retailers websites pertaining to CSR. Store Audits were conducted in order to identify the CSR practices and extent to which they are exercised by different food retailers. In depth formal interviews were conducted with key decision makers with the goal of obtaining information on CSR activities. Lastly, a questionnaire survey was used with the UK consumer population as the population of interest. Results The members of the UK Food Retail Industry showed that they have given paramount importance to CSR in order to somehow become a better neighbour to their customers, render them effective public services and at the same time contribute to the preservation and protection of the environment. The responses to the questions revealed a common rationale behind their CSR policies and ensured that the organisation established a good reputation amongst the members of the community, thereby enabling the latter to maintain a certain level of trust for the UK food retailers. Conclusion The study supported the fact highlighted by previous studies that companies have become more aware and mindful of their responsibilities, roles and rights towards the society. They were seen to have implemented activities, practices and guidelines in order to fulfill their legal, ethical, social and environmental roles and responsibilities towards stakeholders, employees, customers, and environment and society in general. However, it can also be realised that these policies contribute to the building of trust in the customers towards the organisations. Thus, as the trust is established, it is more likely that the customers will remain loyal to the organisation, thereby increasing their chances of generating profit. Chapter 1: Introduction For many years Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has been associated with related terms like business ethics, corporate performance, corporate accountability, corporate responsibility and stake holder involvement. In recent years CSR has grown into a well-known collective expression. The growth of CSR has been a result of organisations realising their responsibility toward their stake holders in the context of business scandals (e.g. Enron) and a growing concern for environmental changes (e.g. global warming). The European Union defines CSR as a concept whereby companies integrate social and environmental concerns in their business operations and in their interactions with their stakeholders on a voluntary basis (European Commission, 2002). According to Vernon and Mackenzie (2007), the question of whether companies should seek to do good by exercising CSR, rather than concentrate solely on wealth creation, is no longer interesting and in fact the focus today is on how well companies do good. Increasingly stake holders expect companies to take on public responsibility. Companies engage in CSR through diverse activities such as donating to charitable organisations (e.g. Ben and Jerrys), green activities (e.g. moves by major retailers to eliminate plastic bags and promote green bags) and by implementing environment friendly purchase and supply policies. A survey conducted by Research International, however, found that while CSR practices are commendable, they need to be viewed with caution as these activities are not sufficient in and of themselves (Social Funds, 2000). The scepticism about CSR activities is related to the growing trend for organisations to drift away from the hard issues and concentrate more on soft issues. The Research International survey revealed that despite ignoring crucial issues such as treatment of employees, and commitment to the local community, some companies portray themselves as socially responsible using charity and other CSR activities, which deal with soft issues (Social Funds, 2000). Sceptics also believe that CSR is often used purely as a marketing tool to improving business performance. In the context of CSR being rated as a priority by companies in the last few years (Cost Sector, 2009), this research aims to study the changing nature of CSR, with particular focus on an organisations motivation for engaging in socially responsible activities (whether it is a response to societys expectations or a strategic move by a company). By contributing to a deeper understanding of rationales, notions, risks and effects of CSR, the proposed research provides strategic insights on the subject. With findings based on both corporate and stake holder perspectives on the subject, this research aims to contribute to useful and interesting reading for both businesses and stake holders. The findings of this study are based on the UK food retail industry. Food retailers make a good context for study especially considering the several socially and environmentally responsible schemes that they are involved in and the significance of CSR asserted by industry standards. In this attempt Chapter Two provides the background and review of literature conducted in order to extensively analyse previous works published with regard to Corporate Social Responsibility and the manner by which it applies to the members of the UK food retail industry. Chapter Three discusses the different methods used in order to obtain data for the study to obtain relevant results. Chapter Four then presents the results obtained from the use of the different methodologies enumerated in the study. The results shall then be discussed in relation to the aim of the study in Chapter Five and conclusions would be provided by answering the research questions. Lastly in Chapter 6 we will give us an understanding of the scope and limitations of this study. Chapter 2: Background and Literature Review 2.1 Background of the study Societys preoccupation with the social responsibility of organisations has existed since at least the early 1930s and probably even before. Wells (2002) notes that it is perhaps the infamous Dodd-Berle correspondence contained within the Harvard Law Review Issue of 1931-32 that launched the debate on corporate social responsibility. The debate started when corporate law professor Adolf A. Berle Jr. published an article arguing for the imposition of legal control on management so that only their shareholders would benefit from their decisions (Berle, 1931). E.M. Dodd, another professor from Harvard, published an article that addressed the issue raised by Berle. He argues that besides focusing on the interests of the shareholders, managers must also take into consideration the concerns of the employees, consumers and the organisations stakeholders. Berle (1931) responded by saying that companies should â€Å"not abandon emphasis on the view that business corporations exist for the sol e purpose of making profits for their stockholders until such time as [one is] prepared to offer a clear and reasonably enforceable scheme of responsibilities to someone else† (Berle, 1932, p. 1365). Since the idea of corporate social responsibility has its roots in the legal community, several academic disciplines have followed the debate with little discussion occurring between and among them (Radin, 1999). More specifically, researchers in the field of business ethics have spent substantial effort in the past two decades to come up with a stakeholder theory that would eventually fall under corporate social responsibility, existing as a separate approach to management. The issue of corporate social responsibility was not discussed after the argument between Berle and Dodd. It resurfaced in the 1960s and the 1970s against the backdrop of the civil rights movement in America. This is due to the fact that the top agendas of politicians, public interest groups, individual citizens and corporations have been largely influenced by concerns about the environment, product safety, workplace health and safety, racial and sex discrimination, urban congestion, political corruption and technological advances. Apart from this, the increasing influence and power that organisations possessed during this period (this period being the 60s and 70s?) has eventually led to a widespread societal belief that large businesses have a duty towards ensuring the betterment of society (Banner, 1979). The power and influence of corporations, actual or perceived, and the impact of their economic, social and political actions on society in general, has led to a broad societal expectation that corporations be held accountable for their actions. Simply put, there is growing public sentiment that organisations must be responsible enough to weigh the impact of their decisions on the different parties involved. As a result, they must be able to eliminate, minimize or compensate for the harmful damages that they may inflict on society. The above mentioned justification is basically derived from a moral position that corporations are expected, and should, behave like any citizen in society. This expectation is also justified on the basis that corresponding responsibilities always accompany power. As Dodd (1932) asserts, â€Å"power over the lives of others tends to create on the part of those most worthy to exercise it a sense of responsibility.† Moreover, the increasing power of organisations has resulted in a societal expectation that corporations act proactively and at the same time, carry out a leadership role in order to provide solutions to problems that the world faces (CSR Survey, 2003). This means that given that organisations frequently have more resources than governments, they should give something back to the society. In the same manner, they are also called to allocate and offer some of their resources to carry out good works and help the less fortunate sectors of society. Overall, this CSR goal is justified as follows: initially, a societal need is identified. For instance, areas such as education, healthcare, low-income housing or the arts may require funding that cannot be generated privately or that government is unable to provide to enable these institutions to continue making goods or services available or even to exist. Second, corporations are identified as capable of filling the gap by providing either funds or infrastructure to address the need. In other words, an appeal to organisations is made because they frequently have the capacity, in accordance with their size and reach, to act as agents of â€Å"social progress† (Kahn, 1997). As repeatedly mentioned earlier, corporate social responsibility has been required of companies that have both, actual or perceived power and influence. This is why multinational corporations that operate parts of the globe where people fear the effects and consequences of Globalisation are expected to perform such duties. This, according to Zinkin (2004) is usually brought about by the fact that these corporations are usually seen as enemies rather than friends. Thus, to regain the trust and confidence of the people, the company must be able to make their social responsibility known as this is said to give them legitimacy to operate in a given country (Zinkins, 2004). 2.2 Literature Review In order to gain a better understanding of the concepts and principles of CSR, the review of literature is divided into the following sections: 1. Corporate Social Responsibility: Definitions and History, 2. Corporate Social Responsibility and the UK Food Retail Industry, and 3. Summary 2.2.1 Corporate Social Responsibility: Definitions and History Globalisation, the increasing influence of companies including small and medium enterprises, a change in the position and opinion of governments, and a paradigm shift in working with and appreciating the importance of building solid relations with stakeholders- are all factors that have contributed to changing the dynamics of the relationship between businesses and society. Businesses have always been mindful of their responsibilities towards society. The concept of companies sharing their resources and influence with other groups has been repeatedly spoken about for centuries (Bowe, 1953). Nowadays, companies have become more aware and mindful of their responsibilities, roles and rights towards the society. They are seen to have implemented activities, practices and guidelines in order to fulfill their legal, ethical, social and environmental responsibilities to stakeholders, which include shareholders, employees, customers, suppliers and the environment and society in general. These actions have been given many terms, including: (1) Corporate Responsibility or CR, (2) Corporate Social and Environmental Responsibility or CSER, (3) Corporate Citizenship, (4) Corporate Accountability, and lastly, (5) Socially Responsible Business (SRB) (Raynard Forstater, 2002). However, the most famous terminology would have to be Corporate Social Responsibility or CSR. CSR first began to be written about by academics in the 20th century. The term Corporate Social Responsibility and the modern view on CSR are largely attributed to Howard Bowen, who is considered by many scholars, especially Carroll, as the father of CSR. Bowen conceived CSR as an integral part of a larger vision of a better American society with a robust and socially responsible business sector. Before Bowen wrote his book in 1953, CSR was not a generally accepted practice among businesses in the United States. Carroll (1991) writes that in the early years, businesses believed that their only obligation was to their shareholders and their only function was the quest of financial improvement in order to provide the greatest financial return to their shareholders. The errors of this way of thinking soon became apparent. For one, businesses still had to work within laws set down by governments. In the 1960s, groups advocating social issues pushed for a more extensive concept of responsibilities for businesses. In the 1970s, various organisations in charge of the social issues pushed by the activist groups were created in the U.S. Some of these organisations were the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). These governmental organisations allowed the establishment of national public policy that now acknowledged the legality of environmen tal issues. The new policies forced businesses to re-examine their own strategies and to learn how to develop a balance between making a profit and the legal and ethical responsibilities placed on them by a widening range of stakeholders. For Bowen (1953), businesses become prominent in society because society needs the products and services provided by these companies. This grants businesses vital decision-making power in the way they affect the lives of many people. Therefore, for a balanced business-society relationship to continue, Bowen (1953) asks what responsibilities society can reasonably expect businessmen to assume. The answer to this question, Bowen states, is corporate social responsibility. He defines CSR as a social obligation that necessitates businessmen to engage in policies, formulate decisions, and implement actions that are considered desirable when connected with the objectives and values of society. He took a broad view when defining what business responsibilities include—responsiveness, stewardship, social audit, corporate citizenship and rudimentary stakeholder theory. Bowens concept of a mutual relationship between business and society is echoed by Porter and Kramer (2006), who point out that the value of CSR lies in the values companies share with societies they exist in. Businesses operate in social contexts and societies need the products and services that businesses provide, thus there is a mutual need for each entity. CSR, therefore, makes it possible to promote a collaborative relationship between business and society. Many have tried to create a definition of corporate social responsibility that encompasses its functions and the range of responsibilities it entails. One of the most comprehensive is that of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (2007), which defines CSR as the long-lasting commitment that businesses create which compels them to behave in an ethical manner and to add to the development of the economy while helping improve the quality of life of their employees and their families in addition to the lives of those in the local communities and society in general. This definition is specific enough to imply the holistic and philanthropic maxim of CSR. It is also broad enough to include activities or programs that companies engage in that do not directly yield income but bring visible and long-term benefits to both the companies and the recipients of the programs and activities such as youth and partner communities. With this definition programs such as scholarships and funds for research, advocacy programs for the environment, and livelihood programs can be considered as CSR. One of the earliest authors on CSR, Carroll (1979) was the first to propose the four categories of ordered layers of CSR—economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary—when he wrote that the social responsibility of businesses includes the economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary expectations that society puts upon enterprises. Aupperle, Carroll, and Hatfield (1985) further defined these categories into: * Economic responsibilities showcase the principle that businesses have the primary responsibility to generate products and profits and fulfill the desires of their customers; * Legal responsibilities highlight the issue that economic responsibilities must be performed within the restriction of rules and regulations as mandated by the laws of the land; * Ethical responsibilities takes into consideration the codes, norms, and values that are not written into laws but are still followed implicitly by society; these responsibilities rise above the complexities of written laws and encompass activities that are vigorously carried out without any clear and defined statements made about them; * Discretionary or philanthropic responsibilities reflect the voluntary nature of actions that are not easy to establish and assess, but are still expected by society. These categories are still widely cited and frequently reproduced in management and CSR journals by researchers and authors on CSR. The reason for its lasting acknowledgement may be the simplicity of the model. Carrolls (1979) categories are logical and easy to understand. The author himself writes that these categories are merely guidelines or reminders that the motives or actions of businesses can be generally classified into any of the categories he presented. The arrangement and relative influence of each category was intended to imply the basic role each had in the progression of significance. When it first came out, Carrolls model reflected a point of view that was simultaneously retrospective and developmental. It was based on the assertion that historically businesses first emphasised only the economic aspects of their trade. The legal aspect came next, and the ethical and discretionary were only emphasised in recent years. Juholin (2004) suggests that companies practice corporate social responsibility (CSR) because of long-term profits that CSR brings to companies. Other reasons may also include the commitment of top management to the moral and ethical standards promoted by CSR, competitiveness of the market today, and the visionary skills of many business leaders that allows them to anticipate the needs of the future. Porter and Kramer (2006) agree that CSR provides long-term profits. The authors note that companies should practice CSR and integrate it in their core strategic plans to ensure long-term prosperity. This is because socially responsible activities can return goodwill for companies. On the other hand, activities that harm the environment or result in any disadvantage to stakeholders can only result in bad karma in the form of bad financial operation, low brand positioning, and, worse, a rift in the relationship between companies and their consumers and suppliers and even expensive litigations. Porter and Kramer (2006) write that corporations are not obligated to solve the problems of the world. They do not have resources to do this. But, a company that is well managed can have a greater impact than any other organisation or charity group when they do something good for society. CSR does not merely imply profitability for companies. Its results go beyond the costs or constraint of altruistic actions. CSR can be a source of market opportunity, improvement, and an edge over the competition (Porter Kramer, 2006). It also does not mean engaging in activities for the sake of doing what is socially required and expected of these companies based on legal and social laws, especially those on environmental issues. CSR implies taking action to go beyond these laws to minimize any harm towards and maximize benefits for all stakeholders in order to fulfill what society desires (Raynard Forstater, 2002). Warhurst (2001) identifies three major elements of CSR—product use, business practice, and distribution of profits. Product use entails the positive involvement of products from businesses that assist in the promotion of welfare and better quality of life for members of society. Business practice entails business governance that observes the rules and regulations and presents a high level of thrust towards welfare of the natural environment and equity for all generations and species. Distribution of profits entails equal distribution of profits across a varied range of sectors of society, with emphasis on local communities. Bowen (1953) also notes that CSR should not be seen as a primary solution to the many problems of society. CSR can only do so much, and it should only be seen by companies and society as a set of guidelines for businesses in the way they perform and carry on their operations within the context of a larger society and the many issues that abound within the social milieu that they operate in. A key concept of CSR is the idea of stakeholders. Stakeholders are all groups or individuals who have an impact on or are affected by the attainment of any organisations goals (Freeman, 1984). It can be said that stakeholders are any entity who have a big â€Å"stake† in what businesses do. The concept of stakeholders therefore goes beyond the shareholders, employees, and clients or customers of a company. It includes communities, public interest groups, social activist groups, environmental groups, and the media which, according to Freeman, author of the Stakeholder Theory, businesses are accountable to. Other researchers (Marcus, 1996; Munilla Miles, 2005) list specific stakeholders as: owners; customers; employees; local, regional and national communities; competitors; suppliers; social activists; public at large; creditors; non-government organisations (NGOs); and even the natural environment, which, although unable to state its opinions, has become a major stakeholder today because of the many laws promulgated to care for the Earth in a sustainable way. Hopkins (2003) writes that CSR primarily deals with ensuring that businesses treat stakeholders in an ethical or responsible way which means treating them in a manner considered suitable by members of any civilized society. The social context of this definition includes economic responsibility. Stakeholders can be both within businesses and outside it. This signifies the natural environment as a stakeholder. In a broader sense, the objective of social responsibility is to establish better and higher standards of living while maintaining the capability of businesses to make a profit. These two components of the objective of social responsibility are both done for the stakeholders within and outside companies. According to Freeman (1984) for successful transactions with stakeholders, businesses must accept the authority and procedures of various stakeholders. Stakeholders will thus have the freedom to communicate their concerns. Furthermore, to manage and develop a strong relationship with stakeholders, businesses must understand their concerns and develop programs that will address these concerns. Stakeholders have various ways to ensure that businesses fulfill societys expectations. Some may opt to organize rallies, some may opt for more peaceful negotiations, some may engage in joint activities such as seminars or tree-planting sessions or other awareness raising activities, and some may use the media to further disseminate their issues. For example, the environmental group Greenpeace printed leaflets and wrote articles against genetically modified food, which led some food manufacturing corporations to either stop production of certain products or to develop new, healthier items. Freeman (1984) points out that the term â€Å"stakeholder† first appeared in management literature in a 1963 international memorandum published by the Stanford Research Institute. The term then was strictly yet broadly defined as the peoples or groups who give their support to companies and without whom businesses would stop to surviving. The main idea in this initial context already shows a measure of the importance of stakeholders. In a way, this definition states that without the support of stakeholders, businesses would not be able to survive. Of course, the limitation of this definition lies in the fact that stakeholders here may mean only the groups that are influential for companies such as the shareholders or government groups or investors. Each business activity has a different group of stakeholders. This is because each individual in society is interested in and promotes a varied and widely different range of concerns (Freeman, 1984). Some are more interested in environmental issues, while others advocate employment benefits, and still others fight for education. One way to determine which stakeholder is relevant to which particular aspect of business is through the generation of a generic stakeholder map, which is a diagram of the various groups relevant to the whole organisation broken down into levels and subdivisions in order to divide big groups into small groups based on specific interests. Some experts, however, think that this mapping procedure does not encapsulate the complex linkages between businesses and the various individuals and groups in society. An approach of corporate social responsibility that centers on stakeholders emphasizes the strategic and effective management of relationships and promotion of what Freeman and McVea (2001) call shared interests. The stakeholder model also puts some emphasis on persuading businesses to rebuild or restore relationships with groups or organisations that they have been at odds with. A good stakeholder management program also involves open communication, negotiation, management, and motivation. The end result of all of these actions leads to the establishment of an attitude of partnership, mutual association and interdependence between businesses and stakeholders. All of these activities are held together by the values and ethical standards that businesses stand for. Freeman and McVea (2001) further emphasise that good stakeholder management promotes a business own company values. CSR does not mean catering to the interests of stakeholders while abandoning all other aspects of business. Rather it entails in-depth deliberations taking into account all factors of social expectations. A well-developed stakeholder management program also allows businesses to create approaches that can serve stakeholders even in the long run. Although some individuals may not be happy with short-term decisions and feel that their causes need more attention, a good stakeholder management program takes all things into considerations so that all stakeholders, not just a chosen few, continue to be firm supporters of businesses. Besides understanding stakeholders concerns, businesses must also look at the other components of CSR to determine the entire range of responsibilities that stakeholders expect them to embrace. When discussing and identifying these components of CSR, scholars and authors have been turning to the CSR pyramid presented by Carroll (1991). The CSR pyramid is arranged to follow the levels of Carrolls (1979) earlier work of the four categories of CSR. The arrangement is in accordance with the degrees of social expectations that have been connected with each category. It has been used to assess businesses performance in terms of quantity, quality, effectiveness, and efficiency in their implementation of CSR initiatives. Table 2.2.1 The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility Be a Good Corporate Citizen Philanthropic Responsibility Contribute Resources to the community; Improve Quality of Life Be Ethical Ethical Responsibility Obligation to do what is right, just and fair; Avoid Harm Obey the Law Legal Responsibility Law is Societys codification of right and wrong; Play the Rules of the game Be Profitable Economic Responsibility The Foundation on which all the others rest (Source : Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility (Carroll, 1991, p. 39)) Obligations or responsibilities included in the pyramid have always existed in the business world. But the importance of philanthropic and ethical responsibilities has only received attention in recent years. Through this pyramid, Carroll (1991) hoped to show that a good CSR program can be broken down into well-defined components that make up a complete package. It can be seen as a framework for comprehending companies ever-evolving CSR activities. In addition, looking at each component can help leaders to distinguish and understand the various obligations of businesses that are in constant conflict with each other but which are mutually exclusive. Based on the expected activities for each level, economic responsibilities seem to be always in tension with the other responsibilities. Carroll (1991) also included the concept of stakeholders in this model, pointing out that taking their perspective into account would allow businesses to recognize the tension between all levels of the pyramid as realities of any organisation. This perspective can also allow businesses to see the pyramid as a united basis or framework of how firms will implement their decisions, actions, and programs. As can be seen, economic profit forms the foundation of the whole pyramid. Carroll (1991) acknowledges the basic fact that businesses were created historically as economic entities that are primarily concerned with making money and creating profit. Without this component, all other responsibilities become moot. Carroll states that the idea he was proposing was that CSR, to be acknowledged as a legitimate action for businesses, had to deal with the whole range of responsibilities these businesses had to answer for to society. Of course this would have to include the most basic responsibility—economic. The next level shows that businesses are obligated to follow the rules of law—various national and international laws—that socie Causes of Increased Corporate Social Responsibility Causes of Increased Corporate Social Responsibility Abstract Aim The main aim of this research was to establish the extent to which the increased priority of CSR is in actuality a reflection of companies acting to meet the interests of society or simply a means for generating profits in a marketing oriented way. In this regard, the research sought to explore CSR behaviour in depth and in turn tried to establish companies rationales for CSR behaviour in the UK food retail industry. Methods A mixed methodology with both qualitative and quantitative methods of data collection and analysis were used in the research. Qualitative content analysis was used for analysing the contents of food retailers websites pertaining to CSR. Store Audits were conducted in order to identify the CSR practices and extent to which they are exercised by different food retailers. In depth formal interviews were conducted with key decision makers with the goal of obtaining information on CSR activities. Lastly, a questionnaire survey was used with the UK consumer population as the population of interest. Results The members of the UK Food Retail Industry showed that they have given paramount importance to CSR in order to somehow become a better neighbour to their customers, render them effective public services and at the same time contribute to the preservation and protection of the environment. The responses to the questions revealed a common rationale behind their CSR policies and ensured that the organisation established a good reputation amongst the members of the community, thereby enabling the latter to maintain a certain level of trust for the UK food retailers. Conclusion The study supported the fact highlighted by previous studies that companies have become more aware and mindful of their responsibilities, roles and rights towards the society. They were seen to have implemented activities, practices and guidelines in order to fulfill their legal, ethical, social and environmental roles and responsibilities towards stakeholders, employees, customers, and environment and society in general. However, it can also be realised that these policies contribute to the building of trust in the customers towards the organisations. Thus, as the trust is established, it is more likely that the customers will remain loyal to the organisation, thereby increasing their chances of generating profit. Chapter 1: Introduction For many years Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has been associated with related terms like business ethics, corporate performance, corporate accountability, corporate responsibility and stake holder involvement. In recent years CSR has grown into a well-known collective expression. The growth of CSR has been a result of organisations realising their responsibility toward their stake holders in the context of business scandals (e.g. Enron) and a growing concern for environmental changes (e.g. global warming). The European Union defines CSR as a concept whereby companies integrate social and environmental concerns in their business operations and in their interactions with their stakeholders on a voluntary basis (European Commission, 2002). According to Vernon and Mackenzie (2007), the question of whether companies should seek to do good by exercising CSR, rather than concentrate solely on wealth creation, is no longer interesting and in fact the focus today is on how well companies do good. Increasingly stake holders expect companies to take on public responsibility. Companies engage in CSR through diverse activities such as donating to charitable organisations (e.g. Ben and Jerrys), green activities (e.g. moves by major retailers to eliminate plastic bags and promote green bags) and by implementing environment friendly purchase and supply policies. A survey conducted by Research International, however, found that while CSR practices are commendable, they need to be viewed with caution as these activities are not sufficient in and of themselves (Social Funds, 2000). The scepticism about CSR activities is related to the growing trend for organisations to drift away from the hard issues and concentrate more on soft issues. The Research International survey revealed that despite ignoring crucial issues such as treatment of employees, and commitment to the local community, some companies portray themselves as socially responsible using charity and other CSR activities, which deal with soft issues (Social Funds, 2000). Sceptics also believe that CSR is often used purely as a marketing tool to improving business performance. In the context of CSR being rated as a priority by companies in the last few years (Cost Sector, 2009), this research aims to study the changing nature of CSR, with particular focus on an organisations motivation for engaging in socially responsible activities (whether it is a response to societys expectations or a strategic move by a company). By contributing to a deeper understanding of rationales, notions, risks and effects of CSR, the proposed research provides strategic insights on the subject. With findings based on both corporate and stake holder perspectives on the subject, this research aims to contribute to useful and interesting reading for both businesses and stake holders. The findings of this study are based on the UK food retail industry. Food retailers make a good context for study especially considering the several socially and environmentally responsible schemes that they are involved in and the significance of CSR asserted by industry standards. In this attempt Chapter Two provides the background and review of literature conducted in order to extensively analyse previous works published with regard to Corporate Social Responsibility and the manner by which it applies to the members of the UK food retail industry. Chapter Three discusses the different methods used in order to obtain data for the study to obtain relevant results. Chapter Four then presents the results obtained from the use of the different methodologies enumerated in the study. The results shall then be discussed in relation to the aim of the study in Chapter Five and conclusions would be provided by answering the research questions. Lastly in Chapter 6 we will give us an understanding of the scope and limitations of this study. Chapter 2: Background and Literature Review 2.1 Background of the study Societys preoccupation with the social responsibility of organisations has existed since at least the early 1930s and probably even before. Wells (2002) notes that it is perhaps the infamous Dodd-Berle correspondence contained within the Harvard Law Review Issue of 1931-32 that launched the debate on corporate social responsibility. The debate started when corporate law professor Adolf A. Berle Jr. published an article arguing for the imposition of legal control on management so that only their shareholders would benefit from their decisions (Berle, 1931). E.M. Dodd, another professor from Harvard, published an article that addressed the issue raised by Berle. He argues that besides focusing on the interests of the shareholders, managers must also take into consideration the concerns of the employees, consumers and the organisations stakeholders. Berle (1931) responded by saying that companies should â€Å"not abandon emphasis on the view that business corporations exist for the sol e purpose of making profits for their stockholders until such time as [one is] prepared to offer a clear and reasonably enforceable scheme of responsibilities to someone else† (Berle, 1932, p. 1365). Since the idea of corporate social responsibility has its roots in the legal community, several academic disciplines have followed the debate with little discussion occurring between and among them (Radin, 1999). More specifically, researchers in the field of business ethics have spent substantial effort in the past two decades to come up with a stakeholder theory that would eventually fall under corporate social responsibility, existing as a separate approach to management. The issue of corporate social responsibility was not discussed after the argument between Berle and Dodd. It resurfaced in the 1960s and the 1970s against the backdrop of the civil rights movement in America. This is due to the fact that the top agendas of politicians, public interest groups, individual citizens and corporations have been largely influenced by concerns about the environment, product safety, workplace health and safety, racial and sex discrimination, urban congestion, political corruption and technological advances. Apart from this, the increasing influence and power that organisations possessed during this period (this period being the 60s and 70s?) has eventually led to a widespread societal belief that large businesses have a duty towards ensuring the betterment of society (Banner, 1979). The power and influence of corporations, actual or perceived, and the impact of their economic, social and political actions on society in general, has led to a broad societal expectation that corporations be held accountable for their actions. Simply put, there is growing public sentiment that organisations must be responsible enough to weigh the impact of their decisions on the different parties involved. As a result, they must be able to eliminate, minimize or compensate for the harmful damages that they may inflict on society. The above mentioned justification is basically derived from a moral position that corporations are expected, and should, behave like any citizen in society. This expectation is also justified on the basis that corresponding responsibilities always accompany power. As Dodd (1932) asserts, â€Å"power over the lives of others tends to create on the part of those most worthy to exercise it a sense of responsibility.† Moreover, the increasing power of organisations has resulted in a societal expectation that corporations act proactively and at the same time, carry out a leadership role in order to provide solutions to problems that the world faces (CSR Survey, 2003). This means that given that organisations frequently have more resources than governments, they should give something back to the society. In the same manner, they are also called to allocate and offer some of their resources to carry out good works and help the less fortunate sectors of society. Overall, this CSR goal is justified as follows: initially, a societal need is identified. For instance, areas such as education, healthcare, low-income housing or the arts may require funding that cannot be generated privately or that government is unable to provide to enable these institutions to continue making goods or services available or even to exist. Second, corporations are identified as capable of filling the gap by providing either funds or infrastructure to address the need. In other words, an appeal to organisations is made because they frequently have the capacity, in accordance with their size and reach, to act as agents of â€Å"social progress† (Kahn, 1997). As repeatedly mentioned earlier, corporate social responsibility has been required of companies that have both, actual or perceived power and influence. This is why multinational corporations that operate parts of the globe where people fear the effects and consequences of Globalisation are expected to perform such duties. This, according to Zinkin (2004) is usually brought about by the fact that these corporations are usually seen as enemies rather than friends. Thus, to regain the trust and confidence of the people, the company must be able to make their social responsibility known as this is said to give them legitimacy to operate in a given country (Zinkins, 2004). 2.2 Literature Review In order to gain a better understanding of the concepts and principles of CSR, the review of literature is divided into the following sections: 1. Corporate Social Responsibility: Definitions and History, 2. Corporate Social Responsibility and the UK Food Retail Industry, and 3. Summary 2.2.1 Corporate Social Responsibility: Definitions and History Globalisation, the increasing influence of companies including small and medium enterprises, a change in the position and opinion of governments, and a paradigm shift in working with and appreciating the importance of building solid relations with stakeholders- are all factors that have contributed to changing the dynamics of the relationship between businesses and society. Businesses have always been mindful of their responsibilities towards society. The concept of companies sharing their resources and influence with other groups has been repeatedly spoken about for centuries (Bowe, 1953). Nowadays, companies have become more aware and mindful of their responsibilities, roles and rights towards the society. They are seen to have implemented activities, practices and guidelines in order to fulfill their legal, ethical, social and environmental responsibilities to stakeholders, which include shareholders, employees, customers, suppliers and the environment and society in general. These actions have been given many terms, including: (1) Corporate Responsibility or CR, (2) Corporate Social and Environmental Responsibility or CSER, (3) Corporate Citizenship, (4) Corporate Accountability, and lastly, (5) Socially Responsible Business (SRB) (Raynard Forstater, 2002). However, the most famous terminology would have to be Corporate Social Responsibility or CSR. CSR first began to be written about by academics in the 20th century. The term Corporate Social Responsibility and the modern view on CSR are largely attributed to Howard Bowen, who is considered by many scholars, especially Carroll, as the father of CSR. Bowen conceived CSR as an integral part of a larger vision of a better American society with a robust and socially responsible business sector. Before Bowen wrote his book in 1953, CSR was not a generally accepted practice among businesses in the United States. Carroll (1991) writes that in the early years, businesses believed that their only obligation was to their shareholders and their only function was the quest of financial improvement in order to provide the greatest financial return to their shareholders. The errors of this way of thinking soon became apparent. For one, businesses still had to work within laws set down by governments. In the 1960s, groups advocating social issues pushed for a more extensive concept of responsibilities for businesses. In the 1970s, various organisations in charge of the social issues pushed by the activist groups were created in the U.S. Some of these organisations were the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). These governmental organisations allowed the establishment of national public policy that now acknowledged the legality of environmen tal issues. The new policies forced businesses to re-examine their own strategies and to learn how to develop a balance between making a profit and the legal and ethical responsibilities placed on them by a widening range of stakeholders. For Bowen (1953), businesses become prominent in society because society needs the products and services provided by these companies. This grants businesses vital decision-making power in the way they affect the lives of many people. Therefore, for a balanced business-society relationship to continue, Bowen (1953) asks what responsibilities society can reasonably expect businessmen to assume. The answer to this question, Bowen states, is corporate social responsibility. He defines CSR as a social obligation that necessitates businessmen to engage in policies, formulate decisions, and implement actions that are considered desirable when connected with the objectives and values of society. He took a broad view when defining what business responsibilities include—responsiveness, stewardship, social audit, corporate citizenship and rudimentary stakeholder theory. Bowens concept of a mutual relationship between business and society is echoed by Porter and Kramer (2006), who point out that the value of CSR lies in the values companies share with societies they exist in. Businesses operate in social contexts and societies need the products and services that businesses provide, thus there is a mutual need for each entity. CSR, therefore, makes it possible to promote a collaborative relationship between business and society. Many have tried to create a definition of corporate social responsibility that encompasses its functions and the range of responsibilities it entails. One of the most comprehensive is that of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (2007), which defines CSR as the long-lasting commitment that businesses create which compels them to behave in an ethical manner and to add to the development of the economy while helping improve the quality of life of their employees and their families in addition to the lives of those in the local communities and society in general. This definition is specific enough to imply the holistic and philanthropic maxim of CSR. It is also broad enough to include activities or programs that companies engage in that do not directly yield income but bring visible and long-term benefits to both the companies and the recipients of the programs and activities such as youth and partner communities. With this definition programs such as scholarships and funds for research, advocacy programs for the environment, and livelihood programs can be considered as CSR. One of the earliest authors on CSR, Carroll (1979) was the first to propose the four categories of ordered layers of CSR—economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary—when he wrote that the social responsibility of businesses includes the economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary expectations that society puts upon enterprises. Aupperle, Carroll, and Hatfield (1985) further defined these categories into: * Economic responsibilities showcase the principle that businesses have the primary responsibility to generate products and profits and fulfill the desires of their customers; * Legal responsibilities highlight the issue that economic responsibilities must be performed within the restriction of rules and regulations as mandated by the laws of the land; * Ethical responsibilities takes into consideration the codes, norms, and values that are not written into laws but are still followed implicitly by society; these responsibilities rise above the complexities of written laws and encompass activities that are vigorously carried out without any clear and defined statements made about them; * Discretionary or philanthropic responsibilities reflect the voluntary nature of actions that are not easy to establish and assess, but are still expected by society. These categories are still widely cited and frequently reproduced in management and CSR journals by researchers and authors on CSR. The reason for its lasting acknowledgement may be the simplicity of the model. Carrolls (1979) categories are logical and easy to understand. The author himself writes that these categories are merely guidelines or reminders that the motives or actions of businesses can be generally classified into any of the categories he presented. The arrangement and relative influence of each category was intended to imply the basic role each had in the progression of significance. When it first came out, Carrolls model reflected a point of view that was simultaneously retrospective and developmental. It was based on the assertion that historically businesses first emphasised only the economic aspects of their trade. The legal aspect came next, and the ethical and discretionary were only emphasised in recent years. Juholin (2004) suggests that companies practice corporate social responsibility (CSR) because of long-term profits that CSR brings to companies. Other reasons may also include the commitment of top management to the moral and ethical standards promoted by CSR, competitiveness of the market today, and the visionary skills of many business leaders that allows them to anticipate the needs of the future. Porter and Kramer (2006) agree that CSR provides long-term profits. The authors note that companies should practice CSR and integrate it in their core strategic plans to ensure long-term prosperity. This is because socially responsible activities can return goodwill for companies. On the other hand, activities that harm the environment or result in any disadvantage to stakeholders can only result in bad karma in the form of bad financial operation, low brand positioning, and, worse, a rift in the relationship between companies and their consumers and suppliers and even expensive litigations. Porter and Kramer (2006) write that corporations are not obligated to solve the problems of the world. They do not have resources to do this. But, a company that is well managed can have a greater impact than any other organisation or charity group when they do something good for society. CSR does not merely imply profitability for companies. Its results go beyond the costs or constraint of altruistic actions. CSR can be a source of market opportunity, improvement, and an edge over the competition (Porter Kramer, 2006). It also does not mean engaging in activities for the sake of doing what is socially required and expected of these companies based on legal and social laws, especially those on environmental issues. CSR implies taking action to go beyond these laws to minimize any harm towards and maximize benefits for all stakeholders in order to fulfill what society desires (Raynard Forstater, 2002). Warhurst (2001) identifies three major elements of CSR—product use, business practice, and distribution of profits. Product use entails the positive involvement of products from businesses that assist in the promotion of welfare and better quality of life for members of society. Business practice entails business governance that observes the rules and regulations and presents a high level of thrust towards welfare of the natural environment and equity for all generations and species. Distribution of profits entails equal distribution of profits across a varied range of sectors of society, with emphasis on local communities. Bowen (1953) also notes that CSR should not be seen as a primary solution to the many problems of society. CSR can only do so much, and it should only be seen by companies and society as a set of guidelines for businesses in the way they perform and carry on their operations within the context of a larger society and the many issues that abound within the social milieu that they operate in. A key concept of CSR is the idea of stakeholders. Stakeholders are all groups or individuals who have an impact on or are affected by the attainment of any organisations goals (Freeman, 1984). It can be said that stakeholders are any entity who have a big â€Å"stake† in what businesses do. The concept of stakeholders therefore goes beyond the shareholders, employees, and clients or customers of a company. It includes communities, public interest groups, social activist groups, environmental groups, and the media which, according to Freeman, author of the Stakeholder Theory, businesses are accountable to. Other researchers (Marcus, 1996; Munilla Miles, 2005) list specific stakeholders as: owners; customers; employees; local, regional and national communities; competitors; suppliers; social activists; public at large; creditors; non-government organisations (NGOs); and even the natural environment, which, although unable to state its opinions, has become a major stakeholder today because of the many laws promulgated to care for the Earth in a sustainable way. Hopkins (2003) writes that CSR primarily deals with ensuring that businesses treat stakeholders in an ethical or responsible way which means treating them in a manner considered suitable by members of any civilized society. The social context of this definition includes economic responsibility. Stakeholders can be both within businesses and outside it. This signifies the natural environment as a stakeholder. In a broader sense, the objective of social responsibility is to establish better and higher standards of living while maintaining the capability of businesses to make a profit. These two components of the objective of social responsibility are both done for the stakeholders within and outside companies. According to Freeman (1984) for successful transactions with stakeholders, businesses must accept the authority and procedures of various stakeholders. Stakeholders will thus have the freedom to communicate their concerns. Furthermore, to manage and develop a strong relationship with stakeholders, businesses must understand their concerns and develop programs that will address these concerns. Stakeholders have various ways to ensure that businesses fulfill societys expectations. Some may opt to organize rallies, some may opt for more peaceful negotiations, some may engage in joint activities such as seminars or tree-planting sessions or other awareness raising activities, and some may use the media to further disseminate their issues. For example, the environmental group Greenpeace printed leaflets and wrote articles against genetically modified food, which led some food manufacturing corporations to either stop production of certain products or to develop new, healthier items. Freeman (1984) points out that the term â€Å"stakeholder† first appeared in management literature in a 1963 international memorandum published by the Stanford Research Institute. The term then was strictly yet broadly defined as the peoples or groups who give their support to companies and without whom businesses would stop to surviving. The main idea in this initial context already shows a measure of the importance of stakeholders. In a way, this definition states that without the support of stakeholders, businesses would not be able to survive. Of course, the limitation of this definition lies in the fact that stakeholders here may mean only the groups that are influential for companies such as the shareholders or government groups or investors. Each business activity has a different group of stakeholders. This is because each individual in society is interested in and promotes a varied and widely different range of concerns (Freeman, 1984). Some are more interested in environmental issues, while others advocate employment benefits, and still others fight for education. One way to determine which stakeholder is relevant to which particular aspect of business is through the generation of a generic stakeholder map, which is a diagram of the various groups relevant to the whole organisation broken down into levels and subdivisions in order to divide big groups into small groups based on specific interests. Some experts, however, think that this mapping procedure does not encapsulate the complex linkages between businesses and the various individuals and groups in society. An approach of corporate social responsibility that centers on stakeholders emphasizes the strategic and effective management of relationships and promotion of what Freeman and McVea (2001) call shared interests. The stakeholder model also puts some emphasis on persuading businesses to rebuild or restore relationships with groups or organisations that they have been at odds with. A good stakeholder management program also involves open communication, negotiation, management, and motivation. The end result of all of these actions leads to the establishment of an attitude of partnership, mutual association and interdependence between businesses and stakeholders. All of these activities are held together by the values and ethical standards that businesses stand for. Freeman and McVea (2001) further emphasise that good stakeholder management promotes a business own company values. CSR does not mean catering to the interests of stakeholders while abandoning all other aspects of business. Rather it entails in-depth deliberations taking into account all factors of social expectations. A well-developed stakeholder management program also allows businesses to create approaches that can serve stakeholders even in the long run. Although some individuals may not be happy with short-term decisions and feel that their causes need more attention, a good stakeholder management program takes all things into considerations so that all stakeholders, not just a chosen few, continue to be firm supporters of businesses. Besides understanding stakeholders concerns, businesses must also look at the other components of CSR to determine the entire range of responsibilities that stakeholders expect them to embrace. When discussing and identifying these components of CSR, scholars and authors have been turning to the CSR pyramid presented by Carroll (1991). The CSR pyramid is arranged to follow the levels of Carrolls (1979) earlier work of the four categories of CSR. The arrangement is in accordance with the degrees of social expectations that have been connected with each category. It has been used to assess businesses performance in terms of quantity, quality, effectiveness, and efficiency in their implementation of CSR initiatives. Table 2.2.1 The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility Be a Good Corporate Citizen Philanthropic Responsibility Contribute Resources to the community; Improve Quality of Life Be Ethical Ethical Responsibility Obligation to do what is right, just and fair; Avoid Harm Obey the Law Legal Responsibility Law is Societys codification of right and wrong; Play the Rules of the game Be Profitable Economic Responsibility The Foundation on which all the others rest (Source : Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility (Carroll, 1991, p. 39)) Obligations or responsibilities included in the pyramid have always existed in the business world. But the importance of philanthropic and ethical responsibilities has only received attention in recent years. Through this pyramid, Carroll (1991) hoped to show that a good CSR program can be broken down into well-defined components that make up a complete package. It can be seen as a framework for comprehending companies ever-evolving CSR activities. In addition, looking at each component can help leaders to distinguish and understand the various obligations of businesses that are in constant conflict with each other but which are mutually exclusive. Based on the expected activities for each level, economic responsibilities seem to be always in tension with the other responsibilities. Carroll (1991) also included the concept of stakeholders in this model, pointing out that taking their perspective into account would allow businesses to recognize the tension between all levels of the pyramid as realities of any organisation. This perspective can also allow businesses to see the pyramid as a united basis or framework of how firms will implement their decisions, actions, and programs. As can be seen, economic profit forms the foundation of the whole pyramid. Carroll (1991) acknowledges the basic fact that businesses were created historically as economic entities that are primarily concerned with making money and creating profit. Without this component, all other responsibilities become moot. Carroll states that the idea he was proposing was that CSR, to be acknowledged as a legitimate action for businesses, had to deal with the whole range of responsibilities these businesses had to answer for to society. Of course this would have to include the most basic responsibility—economic. The next level shows that businesses are obligated to follow the rules of law—various national and international laws—that socie

Eddie Lee :: Essays Papers

Eddie Lee The book I chose was â€Å" Be Good to Eddie Lee† written by Virginia Fleming. The book is based on a little boy who has Down’s syndrome. The three main characters are Christy, Eddie Lee who has Down’s syndrome and JimBud. The story is about a hot summer day and a quest to find frog eggs in the lake that they all live near. Christy was taught by her mother to be nice to Eddie Lee even though he is different. JimBud on the other hand, is unkind to Eddie Lee because he thinks he is a dummy. After reading this book I found that many of the six values of teaching were touched upon. The first value that I noticed was the one called â€Å"Envisioning Great Expectations†. This little boy Eddie Lee was allowed to play and go about as a normal child. There were no restrictions placed upon him based on his exceptionality. He was free to play down by the pond and walk in the woods just like the other kids. The second value that was also used in this book was â€Å"Enhancing Positive Contributions†. This was shown when Eddie Lee took Christy to the pond he had found deep in the woods and showed her the frog eggs. Christy was really surprised by this because she and JimBud had been looking themselves and couldn’t find any. This made Christy realize that Eddie Lee was just as capable of finding things as Jimbud was, even though Eddie Lee was different. The third value that I saw being used in this book was â€Å"Building on Strengths†. I found this when Eddie Lee was standing on the edge of the lake with JimBud and Christy screaming â€Å"BEE-U-TI-FUL.† This is when Christy realizes for the first time that there was more to the lake than just frog eggs. She sees what Eddie Lee is seeing and understands that some people see things different than others. She was to busy looking for frogs eggs that she didn’t even notice how beautiful the lake was and if it wasn’t for Eddie Lee she might not ever have. The fourth value that I found being used in this book was â€Å"Acting on Choice† Even though Eddie was told to stay home by both Christy and JimBud he chose to follow them. After eavesdropping on there conversation, Eddie Lee takes the initiative and grabs Christy’s hand and takes her to where she can really see some frogs eggs.

Comparative Essay: Iphone vs. Samsung Phone

Comparative essay: IPhone vs. Samsung phone Technique: Point by Point In the 21st century, the smart phone has already become an indispensable instrument in human life. Human beings rely on smart phones in recording everything in their daily life. There are different smart phone manufactures all around the world such as Samsung, Apple, Nokia, Motorola and so on. Among the smart phone manufacture, the Apple and Samsung smart phone manufacturer are the leader in the smart phone world. Thus, the products from these two manufacturers are famous among the users, such as the Apple iPhone 5 and the Samsung Galaxy Note 2.Therefore, when we decide to buy a smart phone on either Apple iPhone 5 or the Samsung Galaxy Note 2, we should consider several aspects of the smart phone such as the design of the phone, the camera aspect, the life of battery can stand, call quality and the interface and function of the smart phone. First, we touch about the fabulous design of both the phones. The latest d ebuted iPhone 5 has created an entirely new design that thinner and lighter than the iPhones before. It is just 7. 6 millimeters amazing thin and weighs 112g that made out of glass and aluminum.Moreover, its 4 inches screen is palm-friendly and easily to operate with just one hand. It is not only comfortable you can say about the phone when a crystalline diamond is used to cut the chambers which give the beveled edge wonderful sheen, it makes you gorgeous even when you hold it. On the other hand, Samsung Galaxy Note 2 is much bigger than iPhone5 that is 5. 5 inches screen, 9. 4mm thin and 180g weight. It offers perfect and fantastic viewing experience just like cinema like-viewing. As for one-handed operation, it is not impossible.It provides ways to scooch the on-screen keyboard or the dialer which iPhone5 cannot be beat. Besides, it has a non-unibody chassis that allow us to easily swap SIM cards, batteries or expand storage via a microSD slot. Since the design of the phones is in comparable which means they have their own unique design, we would like to compare other features on both of the phones. By comparing the camera of iPhone 5 and Samsung Galaxy Note II, the iPhone 5 mostly takes care of everything on its own. The iPhone 5 has a fast HDR mode and a new option for panoramic photos, which up to 28 megapixels.The picture quality of iPhone 5 has high levels of details and good colour representation, without excessive noise. The iPhone 5 can manage scenes with high dynamic range better, and it also sports more constrast in its pictures, making them more visually appealing. The 1080 videos of iPhone 5 and the Note II exhibit the same great amount of detail and crisp focus as the still scenes, with 30fps inside and outdoors. The iPhone 5 footage comes with higher contrast, and looks less washed out under bright sunlight.For the Note II, it offers most major options like face/smile recognition, Panorama, HDR, low light mode and many others. It also has an abu ndance of scene and focus modes, as well as number of colour effects. The picture and video gallery on Note II split the screen with folders on the left for faster navigation and has richer editing capabilities built into it. The music players on both devices also offer tune categorizations and minimalistic interface. Note II offers more functions via sound modes and equalizer. Note II also has an FM radio.Both handsets also have excellent quality of loudspeakers, but the iPhone 5 unit sounds a tad fuller and clearer. The interface and functionality of these two phones run different operating system, which the Apple iPhone always run on iOS system, and now the iOS is updated to the version iOS 6 while Galaxy Note II runs the latest version of android system that is Android 4. 1 Jelly Bean. Android also offers plenty of customisation on the home screen and users can utilize widgets, custom launchers, custom keyboards and more.Android also doesn’t have to rely on iTunes for con tent synchronising and transfer and the iPhone 5 has the traditional grid of icons and everything else is pretty much neatly tucked away under settings. In terms of customisation, picking a wallpaper and ringtones can be used. Moreover, the processors and memory inside these two phones are different too. Apple using manually designed with 1. 3 GHz dual-core A6 processor with its own core architecture, while the Galaxy Note II is equipped with a quad-core at 1. 6GHz.The Note II can do multitasks efficient than iPhone 5. Besides that, the performance of the two phones also is depended on the user how to function it. Furthermore, the iPhone 5 has 1 GB of RAM, while the Galaxy Note II has 2 GB of the thing, and both have the basic versions starting with 16 GB of internal memory, going up to 32 GB or 64 GB variants. The Note II, however, sports a microSD slot for cheaper storage expansion. In overall, the interface and functionality of Samsung Galaxy Note II is better than Apple iPhone 5 . In contrast on the attery task, the Note II has the largest screen ever placed in a phone, and also the battery match with a 3,100 mAh unit tucked in neatly into its large body. It is rated for 35 hours talk time in 2G mode and 16 hours of talk time in 3G mode, and furthermore more than a month of standby (up to 890hours). However, the iPhone 5 has a 1,440 mAh battery, and is rated for 8 hours of talk time in 2G and 3G mode. Both handsets will deliver more than 10 hours of browsing or video watching on a charge, which are excellent results.On the other hand, the similarity of these two smart phones is discovered by smart users. There is an aspect that quite alike, which, aspect on calls quality. In the aspect call quality, both iPhone 5 and Note II carrying remarkable call quality, with loud and clear voices in the earpiece, even clean sound relay to the other end. The noise-cancelling do a very good job of weeding out the background noisy, with the iPhone 5 sporting a tad better sound capture probably thanks to the tri-mic setup it has going on. In a nut shell, the two phones functioning well in call quality.In conclusion, both Apple and Samsung products, Apple iPhone 5 and the Samsung Galaxy Note 2 have their own advantages and disadvantages. Thus, it falls upon the user to compare the similarities and differences between Apple iPhone 5 and the Samsung Galaxy Note 2 such as the design of the phone, the camera aspect, the life of battery can stand, call quality and the interface and function of the smart phone before buying the smart phone. Moreover, it’s also depending on the need of the user on the aspect. A- Group members: See Li Min Tan Sheue Ley Tan Siok Ying Chan Yi Qi Pei Leng

Free Essays on You’re Only Allowed To Hurt Yourself

FAS/E (Fetal Alcohol Syndrome/Effects) is a birth defect involving permanent brain damage caused by prenatal alcohol exposure. There are four diagnostic criteria for FAS: alcohol exposure, prenatal and/or postnatal growth deficiencies, a certain pattern of facial features, and Central Nervous System damage. Because neurological damage may/not include mental retardation, learning disabilities can get misdiagnosed as Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD or ADD). In addition FAS is not included as a Developmental Disability (DD). FAS/E is the combination of (FAS) and Fetal Alcohol Effects (FAE), and refers to the full range of disabilities. Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS) is defined and characterized by a number of congenital birth defects that develop in the womb as a result of exposure to alcohol either before or during pregnancy. These birth defects are best recognized by pre and/or postnatal growth deficiencies, a certain pattern of facial malformations, Central Nervous System dysfunctions, and a varying degree of major organ system malformations. The effects are generally visibly recognizable. (Jones, Streissguth 103-105) And Fetal Alcohol Effects (FAE) is defined as structural and functional defects attributed to prenatal exposure of alcohol. FAE is inclusive of FAS and provides a category for those whose birth defects do not fully meet the FAS case definitions and who (for the most part) do not have the facial deformities, so outwardly they appear normal. (Jones, Streissguth 103-105) As the mother consumes alcohol (alcohol exposure), it enters the bloodstream and reaches the developing fetus by crossing the placenta. Because a fetus metabolizes alcohol slower than an adult does, the developing baby's blood alcohol concentrations are higher than those in the mother’s body. The presence of alcohol can reduce the flow of oxygen to the baby's developing tissues and organs and damage brain cells. (Johnson) A baby with prena... Free Essays on You’re Only Allowed To Hurt Yourself Free Essays on You’re Only Allowed To Hurt Yourself FAS/E (Fetal Alcohol Syndrome/Effects) is a birth defect involving permanent brain damage caused by prenatal alcohol exposure. There are four diagnostic criteria for FAS: alcohol exposure, prenatal and/or postnatal growth deficiencies, a certain pattern of facial features, and Central Nervous System damage. Because neurological damage may/not include mental retardation, learning disabilities can get misdiagnosed as Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD or ADD). In addition FAS is not included as a Developmental Disability (DD). FAS/E is the combination of (FAS) and Fetal Alcohol Effects (FAE), and refers to the full range of disabilities. Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS) is defined and characterized by a number of congenital birth defects that develop in the womb as a result of exposure to alcohol either before or during pregnancy. These birth defects are best recognized by pre and/or postnatal growth deficiencies, a certain pattern of facial malformations, Central Nervous System dysfunctions, and a varying degree of major organ system malformations. The effects are generally visibly recognizable. (Jones, Streissguth 103-105) And Fetal Alcohol Effects (FAE) is defined as structural and functional defects attributed to prenatal exposure of alcohol. FAE is inclusive of FAS and provides a category for those whose birth defects do not fully meet the FAS case definitions and who (for the most part) do not have the facial deformities, so outwardly they appear normal. (Jones, Streissguth 103-105) As the mother consumes alcohol (alcohol exposure), it enters the bloodstream and reaches the developing fetus by crossing the placenta. Because a fetus metabolizes alcohol slower than an adult does, the developing baby's blood alcohol concentrations are higher than those in the mother’s body. The presence of alcohol can reduce the flow of oxygen to the baby's developing tissues and organs and damage brain cells. (Johnson) A baby with prena...