Path Dependence And Corporate Social Responsibility Case Study

2116 Words5 Pages

Chapter 4 Path dependence and corporate social responsibility The previous two chapters have comprehensively reviewed the concept and barriers of CCL. In this chapter, some conceptual frameworks about path dependence and corporate social responsibility (CSR) will be presented to provide some new perspectives to achieve RO4 of this dissertation. 4.1 Path dependence Path-dependence theory was illustrated by Arthur (1994), trying to describe the choices made in the past would determine the choices prevailing in the future. Håkansson and Waluszewski (2002) further argued that the solutions embedded into a structure would obstruct the application of new solutions, which could even though break the existing structure. In path dependence, an …show more content…

For Zhang et al. (2014), CSR implies that companies should be responsible not only for their shareholders, but also for their stakeholders including suppliers, customers, and communities. Carroll (1979) identified four types of responsibilities that might be subsumed under CSR: economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary expectations. Economic responsibility means that companies are obligated to achieve profitability and satisfy customer needs. Legal responsibility indicates that companies must operate within the framework of legal regulations. Ethical responsibility includes some moral requirements. Discretionary expectation equals philanthropic responsibilities that contribute to society’s development and welfare. Wang and Juslin (2009) held that the western CSR concept does not fit the Chinese market and adopted the Chinese harmony approach to define CSR: enterprises should apply harmony to business and operate in a harmonious way between people and nature. The overall purpose of CSR should be cultivating humaneness, righteousness, ritual, wisdom, sincerity, and responsibility, and becoming a superior company. However, this concept is too abstract to conduct and few Chinese people can truly understand it without a deep understanding of Chinese culture. Many companies in China do not view CSR as an effective investment to improve organizational value unless CSR has considerable payoffs. In contrast to these misunderstandings, Stewart (2006) argued that companies and society actually have the same interests because enterprises cannot make profit in a corrupt, weak, poor society; and social progress can provide a healthy environment for company governance. As compared, Carroll’s (1979) definition emphasizes simultaneous achievement of a company’s economic, ethical, legal, and philanthropic responsibilities, which can be applicable to all countries. In this dissertation,

Open Document