Categories
Uncategorized

Porter and Kramer (2006) argue that “the prevailing approaches to CSR are so disconnected from business as to obscure many of the opportunities for companies to benefit society”

SECTION A.
Answer ONE question.
1. a) Porter and Kramer (2006) argue that “the prevailing
approaches to CSR are so disconnected from business as to
obscure many of the opportunities for companies to benefit
society”. Critically discuss this statement focusing on the debate
between the shareholder and stakeholder models of corporate
governance in relation to the strategic purpose of organisations.
b) Using examples and support from wider reading, critically
discuss the challenges for global companies of both maintaining
legitimacy and ensuring financial performance through their CSR
activities.
FOR EXAMPLE, FOR QUESTION 1, AN INDICATIVE STRUCTURE FOR YOUR ANSWER LOOKS LIKE THIS
PART a)
• Engage in a debate on strategic purpose of the firm: mission, purpose and value.
• Critically discuss the paradox (responsibility vs profitability) in relation to strategy – Bring in
• relevant literature – e.g. Friedman (1970) vs Freeman and Reed (1983)
• What are the most relevant pros and cons of each view? Support with examples
• How is it done in practice? Discuss stakeholder mapping
• Can both views be correct? Can both views be wrong? Why?
• Draw critical implications from your analysis
PART b)
• What is commonly understood as CSR? Any issues surrounding how we define it?
• What are the pros and cons of CSR regulation? Use examples and theory critically
• What are the pros and cons of ethical self-regulation? Use examples and theory critically
• Any merits to “creating shared value” (Porter and Kramer 2006)? Use examples.
• Conclude with your views on the long-run success of each approach (critical insight)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *