The Stakeholder Theory Of Corporate Social Responsibility?

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) “calls for corporations to be more accountable to the multiple groups who constitute them and/or are directly impacted by their actions,” which aligns with Freeman 's view that managers are responsible to all groups that affect or are affected by the company 's actions (Menser, p60). There are three ways of being socially responsible: the stakeholder theory of corporate social responsibility (ST CSR), the civil society model of corporate social responsibility (CS CSR) and the solidarity economic view (SE). Although all these models will achieve CSR in different ways, the SE model will benefit more stakeholders than the other two, while the ST CSR fails in comparison to the other two. One CSR is the stakeholder theory of corporate social responsibility (ST CSR) where the managers decide what CSR is and define it from the perspective of profit and maximization of value for the firm, like Sternberg would suggest. One of the reasons why ST CSR so often fails to make corporations more socially responsible is because the definition of “socially responsible” is benefiting groups of stakeholders besides just the owners and management. ST CSR fails to benefit such groups because ST CSR is a means to an end, the end being to keep the stockholders profitable. Managers use CSR to hold onto customers

In a SE, not all workers are owners but all owners are workers. The stakeholders, managers, employees, and owners overlap, and even the suppliers are connected since they supply from a different firm within the federation. Since most of the stakeholders overlap, the SE benefits groups of stakeholders such as employees, managers, owners (who are mostly the workers), suppliers, and the local community, which is more than the ST CSR