MODULE 4 - ETHICS AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

● Meaning & Definition of CSR, History & Evolution of CSR.

● Concept of Charity, Corporate Philanthropy,
● Ethics Relating to Environment Protection
● Ethics Relating to Consumer Protection- Social Responsibility & Business Ethics
● Arguments for and against Social Responsibility.
● CSR through Triple Bottom Line and Sustainable Business
● Relation Between Corporate Responsibility & Business Ethics.

1. MEANING & DEFINITION OF CSR, HISTORY & EVOLUTION OF CSR.

a. MEANING:
i. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a self-regulating business model that helps a
company be socially accountable to itself, its stakeholders, and the public. By practicing
corporate social responsibility, also called corporate citizenship, companies can be
conscious of the kind of impact they are having on all aspects of society, including
economic, social, and environmental.
ii. To engage in CSR means that, in the ordinary course of business, a company is operating
in ways that enhance society and the environment instead of contributing negatively to
them. Corporate social responsibility is a broad concept that can take many forms
depending on the company and industry. Through CSR programs, philanthropy, and
volunteer efforts, businesses can benefit society while boosting their brands. For a
company to be socially responsible, it first needs to be accountable to itself and its
shareholders.
iii. Companies that adopt CSR programs have often grown their business to the point where
they can give back to society. Thus, CSR is typically a strategy that's implemented by large
corporations. After all, the more visible and successful a corporation is, the more
responsibility it has to set standards of ethical behavior for its peers, competition, and
industry.
b. DEFINITION: The European Union, in an attempt to offer a framework for companies
wishing to invest in sustainable development, published in 2001 a Green Paper on Corporate
Social Responsibility defining CSR as “The voluntary integration of companies’ social and
ecological concerns into their business activities and their relationships with their stakeholders.
Being socially responsible means not only fully satisfying the applicable legal obligations but
also going beyond and investing ‘more’ in human capital, the environment, and stakeholder
relations.”
c. HISTORY & EVOLUTION
i. While widespread adoption of CSR has been relatively recent, the concept itself has been
around for over a century. It has its roots in the late 1800s, when the rise of philanthropy
combined with deteriorating working conditions made some businesses reconsider their
current production models. Business tycoons began donating to community causes, and
some business owners (although somewhat reluctantly) reduced working hours and
improved factory conditions, laying the foundation of responsible corporations.
ii. The term “Corporate Social Responsibility,” however, was not coined until 1953, when
American economist Howard Bowen published Social Responsibilities of the Businessman.
In this book, Bowen identified the great power of corporations and recognized that their
 actions had a tangible impact on society. Therefore, he argued, businessmen have an
obligation to pursue policies that are beneficial for the common good.
iii. Although the concept of Corporate Social Responsibility has been around for a long time, it
has changed dramatically since its inception. Most notably, the scope of CSR started
extremely narrow, but has since widened to include many more issues and impact a wider
range of business decisions. What started as a movement for businesses to give to charity
and reduce working hours has blossomed into an initiative that has changed the way
business is done and affects every aspect of a business’ operations.
iv. This transformation began in the 1960s, when scholars began to approach CSR as a
response to the emerging problems of the new modern society, and businesses in turn
started implementing these practices. Yet, as before, CSR was viewed through a relatively
narrow lens, with many scholars claiming that companies are not responsible for addressing
large-scale social problems. Instead, their responsibility extends only to the direct
consequences of their decisions and business actions. So while the 1960s did mark progress
in the CSR movement, it in no way mirrored our current understanding of corporate
responsibility.
v. Business adoption of CSR continued steadily in the 1970s and 80s, and became all the
more important in the 80s due to greater deregulation of business, meaning corporations
had to engage in more self-regulation and take responsibility for the social impact of their
operations. However, CSR during this time was mainly limited to human and labor rights,
pollution, and waste management.
vi. Increasing globalization in the 1990s was instrumental in widening the scope of CSR, and
laid the foundation for how we understand Corporate Social Responsibility today. A wide
array of international events and agreements occurred in the 90s, namely the adoption of
Agenda 21, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the Kyoto
Protocol. These events increased CSR concerns for multinational corporations, and for the
first time made businesses consider their impact on the world as a whole compared to just
their local community. Throughout the 90s and into the early 2000s, the rhetoric of CSR
began to shift from minimizing local harm to tackling global issues.
d. CSR TODAY:
i. Today, the corporate world has begun to genuinely systematize CSR. CSR approaches and
techniques allude to the different arrangements set up by organizations that make them
stronger and simultaneously permit them to ensure the earth, decrease ozone-depleting
substance discharges, improve the nature of items or advance social consideration and
workforce equity.
ii. By and large, a CSR approach can possibly affect various regions inside business interior
structures and furthermore in the manner the external workforce and society are composed.
iii. On a worldwide degree, there is no “law” that powers organizations to set up a CSR
technique. All things considered, numerous states have built up a lot of guidelines that
outline CSR, specifically by urging organizations to be progressively capable.
iv. Then again, there is a global organization that distributes guides for organizations to
manage them on their CSR system. The ISO (International Standard Organization) permits
organizations to have a typical casing of reference so as to actualize their CSR system.
v. At present, CSR is developing. Organizations look to characterize better approaches to add
to supportable advancement so as to improve their picture, yet in addition their presentation
and their odds of the venture and flourishing in the long haul. CSR is additionally profiting
 by innovative and financial turns of events and the prescribed procedures today are
probably going to change quickly. Today CSR Communication, Human resources, Supply
chains, SMEs are trending to increase the organization’s sustainability and reputation.
2. CONCEPT OF CHARITY, CORPORATE PHILANTHROPY
a. CHARITY:
i. Charity is the act of extending love and kindness to others unconditionally, which is a
conscious act but the decision is made by the heart, without expecting a reward. When
Charity is carried out selflessly, it is a one-way act where a person gives but asks for
nothing in return.
ii. It is this act of nature that makes it precious and soulful. There are people who believe
charity should begin at home but others believe it should originate from the heart. However,
charity originates from the heart as you feel the urge of giving, begins from home,
ultimately extending to others in the society. Charity begins with the inward recognition of
a need to show compassion to others whether consciously or unconsciously. Everyone has
problems, troubles, and griefs of some sort in life but charity starts with those who learn to
downplay their own problems, in order to extend compassion, kindness, and love to help
others. Hence some people set aside their own pains to relieve the pain of others.
b. PURPOSE OF CHARITY:
i. Charity is essential and therefore meant to be done for public benefit, relief and to provide
assistance to people at times of need in any part of the world, especially those who are the
victims of war, natural disaster, catastrophe, hunger, disease, poverty, orphans by supplying
them with food, shelter, medical aid, and other fundamental needs. Such charitable
purposes can gain momentum from advancing the education of young people for the public
benefit by making grants and awards to students in full-time education. When considering
poverty in the developing world, people feel deep sorrow but seem to put no effort
whatsoever to reduce or eradicate the problem.
ii. Poverty in today’s world has turned out to be sinister and we lay passive towards the
problem, therefore such attitude has made us powerless to stop it. Since this world has been
created it’s been unequal in every way and there will always be rich and poor, strong and
weak living together. While poverty is extreme and widespread, let’s not forget just how
many rich and wealthy people there are in the developed world capable of giving. It’s high
time we must realize the power that we have in our hands when pooled together.
iii. When everyone is giving to an effective charity, the size of our donation would directly
correspond to the number of people we are able to help. We don’t have to be a millionaire
to make a significant difference. Just as every drop in the ocean counts to form a vast water
mass, even small donations have the potential to drastically improve an individual’s quality
of life.
c. CORPORATE PHILANTHROPY:
i. The word philanthropy comes from the Greek word ‘philanthropos’ which includes two
words philos (loving) and anthropos(human being). Thus, philanthropy implies giving or
donating for the well-being of human beings. The giving away of money, especially in
large amounts, to organizations that help people is called philanthropy. We often get
confused or interchangeably use the word charity as philanthropy but there is a difference
between the two words. Charity is the hands-on response to helping meet immediate needs
like food, shelter, medical care, and the like.
 ii. Philanthropy is a more strategic process of giving that seeks to identify the root causes of
systemic issues and make the world a better place by tackling societal problems at their
roots. Corporate philanthropy is the act of a corporation or business promoting the welfare
of others, generally through charitable donations of funds or time. There is a difference
between CSR and corporate philanthropy, CSR is the overall attitude of firms towards
society at large while corporate philanthropy is the small version of CSR.
iii. According to the Council on Foundations, corporate philanthropy refers to the investments
and activities a company voluntarily undertakes to responsibly manage and account for its
impact on society. Philanthropic investments and activities include:
1. Money
2. Donations of products
3. In-kind services
4. Technical assistance
5. Employee volunteerism
6. Other business transactions
iv. Corporate philanthropy involves a corporation or organization supporting the wellbeing of
others, typically through charitable contributions or donations. It involves investments and
actions which a company voluntarily undertakes. These actions are to manage and account
for their effect on society appropriately. However, corporate giving programs need to move
beyond a basic annual donation to a favorite charity. It is becoming a crucial way to engage
workers and further integrate values into the culture.
v. The purpose of these investments and activities is to advance a social cause, issue or the
work of a nonprofit organization. Corporations often feel it is their social responsibility to
give back, building a positive culture and workplace within their companies. They often
want to show gratitude and give back to the communities that have helped make them
profitable. While revising your disaster relief strategy might be one action to consider, you
can expand your corporate giving much further than that.
vi. 7 Types of Corporate Philanthropy: The seven most common forms of corporate
philanthropy are:
1. Matching Gifts: Companies financially match donations that their employees make to
nonprofit organizations.
2. Volunteer Grants: Companies provide monetary grants to organizations where employees
regularly volunteer.
3. Employee & Board Grant Stipends: Corporations award grants to employees and/or public
boards to donate to the nonprofit of their choice.
4. Community Grants: Company programs award nonprofit organizations that apply for grants
based on defined criteria.
5. Volunteer Support Initiatives: Companies partner their employees with nonprofits to
provide specialized support.
6. Corporate Sponsorships: Companies provide financial support to a nonprofit that in return
acknowledges that the business has supported their activities, programs or events.
7. Corporate Scholarships: Corporations provide scholarship dollars to universities on behalf
of students seeking support to continue their studies, encouraging college education and
workforce development.
vii. Companies with successful corporate giving strategies publicly live the values of their
organizations and in return benefit from high employee engagement, employee retention
 and the ability to attract top talent. Corporate philanthropists also see a more positive work
environment, increased employee engagement, a boost to their company’s public image and
brand equity, enhanced customer relationships and consumer confidence as well as
strengthened government relations. With benefits like these, it’s no surprise that some of
the most successful corporations in the U.S. heavily invest in corporate philanthropy,
including Coca-Cola Company, which offers a $20,000 employee matching opportunity,
and Walmart, which provides $250 to employees for 25 volunteer hours.
viii. Corporate Philanthropy Examples: When you think about corporate philanthropy, a few
examples of well-known companies with robust CSR programs probably pop into your
head. Reviewing the activities of leaders in the CSR space can help you develop ideas for
incorporating philanthropy into your own business. Examples include:
1. Starbucks’ corporate social responsibility initiatives: Starbucks isn’t only known for its
delicious coffee — it’s also renowned for its corporate social impact initiatives that seek to
create a positive impact globally. Here are a few facets of Starbucks’ CSR program:
■ Ethically sourced products such as coffee, tea, cocoa and manufactured goods
■ Green initiatives, including donating disease-resistant coffee trees to help farmers
■ Employee opportunities including veteran and military support, DEI initiatives, a
college achievement plan and community service projects
■ With more than 28,000 stores in over 75 countries, Starbucks’ CSR program reaches
far and wide to support employees and local communities.
2. Microsoft’s matching gifts and volunteer grants programs: Microsoft has an ambitious goal
to be carbon negative with their direct emissions and supply and value chains by 2030.
They’re also seeking to remove all of the carbon the company has released into the
environment since its founding by 2050. In day-to-day operations, Microsoft offers plenty
of philanthropic opportunities to its employees, such as:
■ Empowering employees to give $221 million in 2020 with the help of a company
match program
■ Encouraging employee volunteering, leading to volunteers contributing over 750,000
hours in the past year
■ Facilitating opportunities for employees to give back through pro bono services
■ These initiatives help Microsoft employees give back directly to their communities
and work in conjunction with Microsoft’s overarching CSR goals.
3. Walmart’s global responsibility commitment: Global retail corporation, Walmart, has
launched a variety of sustainability and CSR initiatives over the past 15 years. Walmart is
targeting zero emissions in its operations by 2040 as well as zero waste by 2025. Here are
additional features of Walmart’s CSR program:
■ A volunteer grant program that offers a $250 donation for 25 hours or $500 for 50
hours of commitment by its employees
■ A commitment to pay 100% of college tuition and books for its employees
■ Initiatives to source sustainable goods such as coffee, seafood, paper and beef
ix. Walmart’s CSR program reaches into many different areas, from sustainability to
community initiatives and ESG considerations, to create a well-rounded approach to
corporate philanthropy.
x. Review each of these companies’ CSR programs and borrow any ideas or initiatives
that you think would work well for your company. These examples can provide a great
 starting point to gather ideas and build your CSR program with powerful initiatives that
have a proven success record at other businesses.
3. ETHICS RELATING TO ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION
a. Environmental ethics is a branch of applied philosophy that studies the conceptual foundations
of environmental values as well as more concrete issues surrounding societal attitudes, actions,
and policies to protect and sustain biodiversity and ecological systems. As we will see, there
are many different environmental ethics one could hold, running the gamut from
human-centered (or "anthropocentric") views to more nature-centered (or
"non-anthropocentric") perspectives. Non-anthropocentrists argue for the promotion of nature's
intrinsic, rather than instrumental or use value to humans. For some ethicists and scientists, this
attitude of respecting species and ecosystems for their own sakes is a consequence of
embracing an ecological worldview; it flows out of an understanding of the structure and
function of ecological and evolutionary systems and processes. We will consider how newer
scientific fields devoted to environmental protection such as conservation biology and
sustainability science are thus often described as "normative" sciences that carry a commitment
to the protection of species and ecosystems; again, either because of their intrinsic value or for
their contribution to human wellbeing over the long run.
b. The relationship between environmental ethics and the environmental sciences, however, is a
complex and often contested one. For example, debates over whether ecologists and
conservation biologists should also be advocates for environmental protection — a role that
goes beyond the traditional profile of the "objective" scientist — have received much attention
in these fields. Likewise, we will see that issues such as the place of animal welfare concerns
in wildlife management, the valuation and control of non-native species, and the adoption of a
more interventionist approach to conservation and ecological protection (including proposals
to relocate wild species and to geoengineer earth systems to avoid the worst effects of global
climate change) frequently divide environmental scientists and conservationists. This split
often has as much to do with different ethical convictions and values regarding our
responsibility to species and ecosystems as it does with scientific disagreements over the
interpretation of data or the predicted outcomes of societal actions and policies.
c. Some initiatives which can be taken by business enterprises for environmental protection are:
i. A sincere commitment by the top management of the business to cultivate, maintain and
develop work culture for environmental protection and pollution prevention.
ii. To ensure that the commitment towards environmental protection is shared by all the
employees of all the divisions of the business.
iii. Developing clear-cut policies and programmes for purchasing good quality raw
material, using latest technology, using scientific techniques of disposal and waste
management and to develop the skills of the employees for the purpose of pollution
control.
iv. To adapt to the laws and regulations passes by the government for the prevention of
pollution.
v. Participation in government programmes relating to the management of hazardous
substances, clearing up of polluted water bodies, plantation of trees and to reduce
deforestation.
vi. Assessment of pollution control programmes in terms of costs and benefits to increase
the progress with respect to environmental protection.
 vii. Also businesses can arrange workshops and give training material and share technical
information and experience with suppliers and customers to get them involved in
pollution control programmes.
viii. Promoting green energy that reduces the use of fossil fuels.
d. Environmental Ethics and Its Principles: There are several approaches or principles to
determine how we are to value our environment. It is such a huge field, and it is so vast that it
is difficult for one principle to cover all the ground. Many theories have emerged over the
years, and each one has stressed various principles of environmental ethics. The list below
states all the principles that have been predominantly found in those theories.
i. Anthropocentrism: It suggests that human beings are the most important beings. All
other living beings are only accessories that would assist in their survival. Now, there
are two further divisions of anthropocentrism. They are weak anthropocentrism and
strong anthropocentrism. While weak anthropocentrism believes that human beings are
the centre because it is only through their perspective that environmental situations can
be interpreted. Strong anthropocentrism, however, believes that human beings are at the
centre because they rightfully deserve to be there. Peter Vardy made this distinction.
ii. Non-Anthropocentrism: As opposed to anthropocentrism and non-anthropocentrism,
this principle gives value to every object, every animal in nature. It is a principle that
believes in everything that sustains itself in nature.
iii. Psychocentrism: Psychocentrism is the principle that believes that human beings hold
more value in the environment since their mental capacities are better developed and far
more complex than any other element in the environment.
iv. Biocentrism: It is a term that holds not only an ecological but also a political value. It is
a philosophy that imparts importance to all living beings. In terms of environmental
ethics, biocentrism is the principle that ensures the proper balance of ecology on the
planet.
v. Holism: The term holism had been coined by Jan Smuts in his book called Holism and
Evolution (1926). Holism considers environment systems as a whole rather than being
individual parts of something. It considers these environmental systems to be valuable.
vi. Resourcism: The principle of resourcism says that nature is considered to be valuable
only because it has resources to provide with. Thus, nature ought to be exploited.
vii. Speciesism: The principle of speciesism justifies the superiority of the human race.
Thus, it also justifies the exploitation and maltreatment of animals by humankind.
viii. Moral Considerability: This, too, is an important principle of environmental ethics.
Intrinsic value is added to every being, which makes us consider being moral. Moral
considerable towards a being means that we agree that all our interactions whatsoever
with the being is bound by moral laws.
e. Types of Environmental Ethics: With the emergence of several theories, several
environmental ethics have emerged. While some protect human beings, others protect plants,
animals, and other elements of nature. The types include:
i. Social ecology, which is the study of human beings and their relationships to their
environment.
ii. Deep ecology promotes the idea that all beings have an intrinsic value.
iii. Ecofeminism is a branch of feminism that helps us look at the earth as a woman so that
we can respect it in a better way.
f. Importance of Environmental Ethics:
 i. Environmental ethics is quite important because it serves as the moral ground to protect
our planet’s environment and continuously fix the environmental degradation that we
have caused over the years. Through environmental ethics, we are being reminded of
our environmental responsibilities and our ecological consciousness is being awakened.
Without environmental ethics, people would continue to degrade and destroy our planet
and live life as if they are not dependent on nature.
ii. But with the ecological consciousness provided by environmental ethics, we can lead
towards a sustainable future, an ecological balance, and the enrichment of our
environment’s diversity. While humans are the most dominant and superior beings in
nature, we are also expected to be the most responsible for keeping our environment, or
planet, habitable and clean. That is where the importance of environmental ethics comes
in. With environmental ethics, humans are being humbled and reminded of their main
responsibilities to nature. With the capacity of humans, the misbalances that are
occurring in the environment can be fixed by some minor or major actions.
iii. Through environmental ethics, humans are considerate of not only themselves but also
plants, animals, and every object in nature. With the moral grounds and values that
environmental ethics provides, humans are responsibly using nature and not in a way
that results in resource degradation and destruction.
iv. Every object in nature has its own purpose and use, neglecting its uses for humans. With
that being said, it is just right to be a responsible consumer as humans do not have the
right to destroy nature’s richness and diversity.
v. To sum it up, environmental ethics is a safeguard against cruelty to all creatures. It helps
maintain ecological balance and provides a peaceful and beautiful living environment.
vi. Instead of polluting our environment, degrading our resources, and destroying our
planet, environmental ethics leads humans to act accordingly for the welfare of all in
our environment and nature.

4. ETHICS RELATING TO CONSUMER PROTECTION- SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY &

BUSINESS ETHICS
a. Consumers are often given a raw deal by way of substandard products, increased prices
through market manipulation, failed warranties, poor after-sale services and a host of other
unfair trade practices. This is in spite of the fact that the consumer is regarded as the king who
through the market forces dictates the quality and quantity of goods, and leaders like Mahatma
Gandhi consider him as the sole purpose for which an enterprise exists. Good business ethics
should place the customer as one of the important stakeholders and should give the customer
his or her due share.
b. Many businesses are managed in an ethical fashion and focus on providing excellent quality
goods and services to meet customer expectations. However, this is not always the case and the
drive to maximize profit overwhelms some organisations resulting in them resorting to dubious
tactics in order to increase sales and revenue. There are a huge number of suppliers and
retailers operating in the UK and this gives the opportunity for unscrupulous traders to set up
in business. Poor quality goods, substandard services, misleading information and pressurised
selling tactics are among the practices that the UK government seeks to discourage. In order to
control the way in which businesses conduct themselves and offer protection to consumers, the
government has passed a number of laws and set up various organisations. These laws and
organisations are together known as ‘consumer protection’. Consumer protection legislation
c. Section 2(f) of the Competition Act, 2002 defines consumers as a person who purchases any
products or services for a consideration which has been paid and guaranteed under any
arrangement of conceded payment and incorporates any client of such merchandise other than
the person who purchases such merchandise for consideration paid or guaranteed or
incompletely paid or somewhat guaranteed, or under any arrangement of conceded payment
when such use is made with the endorsement of such person, regardless of whether such
acquisition of products is for resale or for any business reasons or for personal use.
d. Thus there are some legal rights which remain violated by these deceptive, false and
misrepresented advertisements, which are often overlooked by authorities but it must not
always be the case as far rights of a person are concerned.
e. Ethical consumerism entails two key shifts in how markets are conceived. First, consumer
goods, once thought of as objects without a history, are redefined to include the ethical (and
unethical) decisions made in the production process. Second, the act of consumption itself
becomes a political choice, not unlike voting, so that democratic values come to be exercised
in the market. Redefining consumption in this way challenges the premise underlying current
market structures, in which legal mechanisms such as confidentiality agreements and
intellectual property rights are often invoked to shroud the details of production from the
inquiring public. The protest lodged by the ethical consumerism movement against these
dominant arrangements constitutes an explicit attempt to renegotiate the boundary between
politics and the market.
f. Unethical Practises: There is no doubt that advertising is very essential in order to get a
consumer about different products, it is a pervasive process and omnipresent as products tend
to produce so for selling this tool is required Advertising contributes to having both negative &
positive influence on society. It is criticized for encouraging materialism, manipulating
consumer to buy things they do not need; stereotyping, fraudulent & so on. So we need
advertising ethics and some self-regulation so as to avoid these criticisms concerning influence
in today’s market on consumers and to know as to why there is need for these ethics and how it
is related with the rights of an honest consumer. Some of them are as follows:
i. Puffery/Fraudulation: Now a day’s ‘puffery’ i.e. “metaphor of idea” forms to be the
main element in advertising. From one viewpoint the critic pundits denounce it, while
supporters opined that it is safeguarded for sponsors and advertising experts opined it as
a helping operator to separate their brands from the contenders. Puffery is viewed as an
‘assessment’ and not ‘truthful data’. Publicists guarantee that the purchasers are
sufficiently wise to recognize truth and distortion. Besides they are not aimlessly going
to think about everything in that capacity introduced in a promotion. In any case, the
investigations uncover that regularly numerous individuals begin trusting them and
purchase those items that have overstated cases in their notices. With the utilization of
enhancements misrepresenting the “quality” and utilizing different “offers” promoters
performed their items to such a degree, that reality takes a rearward sitting arrangement.
E.g. There is a famous slipper portraying that a person can fly in air after he/she buys
that slipper which is really an exaggeration of a fact, also that a mountain climber must
purchase a mountain dew so that he/she could climb the highest peak of a mountain
range.
ii. Deceptiveness or falseness in a product: A study shows that when false and deceptive
things about a product are shown again and again by the means of media, a consumer is
forced to buy the product. False and subjective claims about the products, is sometimes
 believed but are untruthful and misleading. E.g. If a retailer claims that he is offering a
special discount on his goods as part of a festival celebration, while he is actually using
the festival as an excuse to get rid of old and outdated goods, then he is deceiving
consumers.
iii. Offensive and Nudity: Consumers can be seriously injured or offended mentally by
advertising in an infinite number of ways. E.g. the way the advertisements of
Contraceptives & Personal Hygiene are promoted, lays a lethal in the mindset of the
people and has a serious impact on the children. Therefore a strict Regulation must be
taken. It is not necessary to portray particular sex as a symbol for something.
iv. Persuading people to buy products even not needed: As indicated by numerous critical
pundits that advertising ought not to convince by playing with buyers feelings, tensions,
mental needs and wants, such as status, confidence, allure and so on. Be that as it may,
they should simply provide raw data valuable in settling on buy choices, for example,
value, execution and other target criteria. E.g. an advertisement depicting that richness
of a person could be valued through a bathroom freshener.
v. Stereotypes: It includes exhibiting a gathering of individuals in an example or way that
needs singularity. In our general public, we have numerous generalizations like South
Indians are erudite people; Punjabi’s are uproarious and so on. Relative and little girl
in-law consistently battle, father out of the house the board and so on. Ladies. The most
disputable of the generalizations depicted in Ads is that of ladies and neglecting to
perceive the changing job of ladies in our general public. Critics charge promoters to
frequently portray ladies as distracted with excellence, family unit obligations and
parenthood.
vi. Women used as sex symbols in advertisements: The most prone section of society that
is mostly used by these peanut minded advertisers, portraying the modesty of women in
a negative sense, basically in deodorants and condoms ads the modesty of women in
society as a whole is tarnished. They are often portrayed in a salacious state in these
advertisements.
vii. Children and adolescents as target groups: A study shows that children aged from 2-11
years watch 22hours TV per week and see approximately 30000 commercial ads.
Studies also reveal that children are the most sophisticated group who keenly and with
due attention watch advertisement and thus, giving scope to these advertising agencies
to attack these groups and these groups by the means of showing children in their
advertisements gain a lot of market or share in a country. Nearly 80% of the
advertisements are targeted towards the children in one form or the other.
viii. Unhealthy Brand Comparisons: Advertisements nowadays are engaged in unhealthy
competition practises making it tough and tedious for a consumer to think which
product to buy and purchase. This practice often develops a question mark in the
consumer’s mind. A right example that could be seen in this case is the conflicts
between different kinds of toothpaste-like Pepsodent, Colgate and Patanjali.
5. ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
a. There have been arguments and counter-arguments in favor of and against social responsibility
of business. In an effort to present a balanced view of social responsibility of business and its
role as an objective of business, it is worthwhile to present briefly the arguments for and
against it that have surfaced over time. It should be pointed out, however, that each argument
 for and against social responsibility assumes a certain understanding of the concept that may
vary.
b. Arguments for Social Responsibility: There are several core ideas about social responsibility
of business. Over the period of time, the things have changed too much giving new thoughts
and replacing the classical economic view of profit maximization in the business. Based on
this feature in the present context, arguments for social responsibility are as follows:
i. Business is a part of society: Business is a part of society. Society is a system and
business is one of its subsystems. Every subsystem of a system functions for the
betterment of the whole system and not for its own betterment only. This version applies
to business too. Therefore, business is responsible for the society as a whole and profit
motive of the business cannot have precedence over other motives of the society.
ii. Long-term Self-interest of Business: Social responsibility is in the long-term
self-interest of the business. Existence of any business is because of existence of various
social organs like financiers, employees, customers, society as a whole, etc., and not
otherwise. Therefore, business should provide satisfaction to all these organs on
continuous basis for its continued existence. By discharging social responsibility, the
business may provide this satisfaction.
iii. Moral Justification: Social responsibility has moral justification. This moral
justification emerges from the fact that if any one takes something from others, he must
give something to them in return. On moral ground, this equation must be based on
equity so that it continues. A business takes various inputs (money, materials, people,
information, etc.) from the society and gives outputs (goods and services) to the society
by using various inputs. System of taking inputs and giving outputs works well only if it
fulfills social requirements.
iv. Creating Better Public Image: Any business which involves in fulfilling the
aspirations of the society creates a better image in the public. Creation of this type of
image is a source of satisfaction itself for those who operate business. This also helps in
increasing the business volume, both in terms of taking inputs and giving outputs.
v. Avoidance of Government Regulations: Government aims at maintaining equilibrium
in the society on a long-term basis. For this purpose, it tries to ensure that every organ
of society meets social requirements. If any organ fails to do so, the government has
power to take actions against it. Since business is an organ of the society, the
government may take actions against those business organizations which are involved in
activities not meeting social requirements. In order to avoid such actions having
long-term negative impact, it is preferable to adopt social responsibility.
vi. Maintenance of Society: For maintaining society, there are legal provisions but these
provisions cannot be comprehensive because of social changes on a continuous basis.
Therefore, the business has to be socially responsible in order to avoid anti-social
activities so that society is maintained on a continuous basis.
c. Arguments against Social Responsibility: There are various arguments against social
responsibility though most of these are based on classical economics. These arguments are as
follows:
i. Contrary to Basic Function of Business: The basic function of a business is to provide
a product to its customers at a price which is lower than the level of satisfaction
provided by the use of the product or, at the most, equal to that. If this relationship is
reversed, the product becomes meaningless. Generally, cost of production is a
 significant factor in determining the product price. Discharge of social responsibility
adds to cost, hence product price which may reverse the above equation and business
may not remain viable in the long term. Because of this phenomenon, Milton Friedman,
a noted economist, has observed, there is one and only one responsibility of business —
to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profit so long as it
stays within the rules of the game.
ii. Conflict with Profit Motive: Social responsibility is in conflict with profit motive of
business. Undertaking business involves assuming risk. Earning profit is the reward for
this risk. If social responsibility is added as an objective of business, it reduces profit
margin which is against the concept of profit optimization even if not profit
maximization. Thus, social responsibility and profit motive do not proceed in the same
direction.
iii. Distortion in Resource Allocation: Social responsibility leads to distortion of resource
allocation. Resources in an economic system are allocated on the principle that every
resource finds its most optimum utilization. This utilization is best possible without
social responsibility and not with it. Thus, social resources may go in waste if the
concept of social responsibility is added to business operations.
iv. Imposition of Business Values: Discharging social responsibility involves lot of
influence of the business on the society. Therefore, by undertaking social responsibility,
a business is likely to impose its own values on the society, thereby replacing the social
values with business values. This phenomenon has taken place in many cases. This is
highly undesirable from social point of view.
v. Inefficiency in the System: Social responsibility brings inefficiency in the system.
There is no substitute for the power of self-interest to get people to act. Any
replacement of self-interest will, therefore, be fatal to the efficiency of the system.
Social responsibility tends to replace self-interest of business defined in terms of profit
motive to a great extent, thus, making the business as a system inefficient.
vi. Operational Problems: There are certain operational problems in implementing social
responsibility. Conceptually as well as operationally, social responsibility is a confusing
term. Therefore, managers involved in managing business affairs are not very clear
about what they are expected to do under social responsibility. As a result, actions
ranging from mere showing lip sympathy to undertaking multi-crore concrete
programmes are included in social responsibility.
d. Conclusions: The arguments of those who argue that business organizations have nothing to
do with social responsibility except the maximization of shareholders’ wealth are weak on two
points.
i. First, they overstate the trend and ultimate magnitude of business’s voluntary
assumption of social responsibility.
ii. Second, they want business organizations to do something they cannot do and that is to
ignore societal demands on them.
e. In fact, no business can survive for long in total disregard to its social concern. Many forces
will come in its way to destroy it. Therefore, even if business is involved in making profit, it is
done through the creation of utility to the social needs. Better these social needs served, better
will be the prospect of its survival and progress. Even in Western countries, where economic
activities are comparatively free from controls, it has been accepted that profit is not the sole
criterion for measuring the success of a business organization.
 f. Usually, people misinterpret the concept of business objective and view the social
responsibility as a focus which detracts from or is counter to the profit making. This is not the
case at all. Economic concerns and social concerns need not be viewed as opposite ends of a
continuum as shown in the image Mistaken view of Social Responsibility. The correct position
is according to Realistic view of business responsibility. It is corporate activities that fall into
this overlapped area that provide the more realistic view of social responsibility. Therefore, the
issue is not whether business has social responsibility; it has. The fundamental issue is to
identify this responsibility in general and for individual companies in particular.

6. CSR THROUGH TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE AND SUSTAINABLE BUSINESS

a. Introduction:
i. In economics, the triple bottom line (TBL) maintains that companies should commit to
focusing as much on social and environmental concerns as they do on profits. TBL
theory posits that instead of one bottom line, there should be three: profit, people, and
the planet. A TBL seeks to gauge a corporation's level of commitment to corporate
social responsibility and its impact on the environment over time.
ii. In 1994, John Elkington—the famed British management consultant and sustainability
guru—coined the phrase "triple bottom line" as his way of measuring performance in
corporate America. The idea was that a company can be managed in a way that not only
makes money but which also improves people's lives and the well-being of the planet.
iii. In finance, when speaking of a company's bottom line, we usually mean its profits.
Elkington's TBL framework advances the goal of sustainability in business practices, in
which companies look beyond profits to include social and environmental issues to
measure the full cost of doing business. Triple-bottom-line theory says that companies
should focus as much attention on social and environmental issues as they do on
financial issues.
iv. TBL theory also says that if a company focuses on finances only and does not examine
how it interacts socially, it is not able to see the whole picture and therefore cannot
account for the full cost of doing business.
b. The 3 Ps of the Triple Bottom Line: According to TBL theory, companies should be working
simultaneously on these three bottom lines:
i. Profit: This is the traditional measure of corporate profit—the profit and loss (P&L)
account.
ii. People: This measures how socially responsible an organization has been throughout its
history.
iii. Planet: This measures how environmentally responsible a firm has been.
c. Profit: In the context of the triple bottom line, profit can mean more than just how much
money a company makes. A company must ensure it earns its income in ethical, fair manners.
This includes soliciting business partners and vendors with which it aligns philanthropically. It
also defines how a company develops its strategy or financial operating plan. For instance,
profit also ties to a company's responsibility to pay its lenders, creditors, and employees what
is due to them and to have a sense of financial responsibility for these obligations.
i. Some users of the triple bottom line may also say profit refers to not only a company's
profit but the profit of those around the company. This specifically refers to the
community in which the business operates. This may include:
 1. Ensuring the company is paying its fair share of local, state, or federal income
taxes on a timely basis
2. Making sure the company is fostering economic wealth within its community by
shopping local or utilizing small businesses.
3. Committing to financially investing in the community through partnerships,
developments, or corporate sponsorships.
ii. Measuring Profit: A company will still usually report company-wide net income as part
of its triple bottom line. For this reason, profit is the easiest component of triple bottom
line to report as it already has strong guidance. However, it may also report or call out
several other profitability or financial metrics such as:
1. Gross margin by geographical region to demonstrate consistent or equitable
pricing across different demographic groups.
2. Historical federal income tax payments, demonstrating its effective rate.
3. Historical information (or lack of) late payments or penalties as a demonstration
of financial responsibility.
d. People: In the context of triple bottom line, people refers to every individual that is in touch
with a company.
i. This includes but is not limited to:
1. Employees. This means ensuring workers receive a fair wage in a safe
environment that encourages professional development.
2. Vendors. This means ensuring a diverse set of suppliers are used and prioritizing
small businesses or minority-owners when appropriate.
3. Customers. This means ensuring customers have fair access to products and
their feedback regarding equity or safety are considered.
4. Traditionally, a company would prioritize investors or shareholders. Triple
bottom line shifts the focus to individuals potentially not financially invested in
the company but still tangentially involved with its operations. Now, instead of
attempting to create value by only increasing investor returns, triple bottom line
strives to create value by encouraging volunteerism of its employees or support
or business success of small suppliers, for example.
ii. Measuring People: Also referred to as social measures or social metrics, the people
component of triple bottom line may contain financial or non-financial measurements.
Again, some may be stipulated by generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) or
other reporting rules, while others may be internally-sourced data. Examples of
measurements of people include:
1. Average employee payroll to demonstrate livable wages that exceed local
expectations for pay.
2. Average employee benefits per employee beyond pay to demonstrate the full
benefit package per worker.
3. Average number of vacation hours earned and used per employee to ensure
workers can and have been stepping away from work.
4. Employment demographics such as proportion of employees in different age,
race, sexual orientation, or religious groups. Note that some of this information
may be sensitive and must be provided voluntarily by employees (as employers
are not entitled to some demographic information.
 5. Vendor demographics such as businesses identifying as small businesses,
LGBTQ-owned, Veteran-owned, or minority-owned.
6. Number of product returns by geographical regions to ensure certain
demographics are still receiving quality products.
e. Planet: The largest deviation from purely financial reporting relates to reporting on
environmental impacts. Often, a company must be forced between a lower-cost option or a
more environmentally-friendly alternative. A company may also choose between a less
favorable alternative; for example, eco-friendly transit will likely be slower than aircraft.
i. Instead of reporting a company's positive changes to the planet, it is often much easier
to assess the impacts of the alternatives elected by the company. Imagine a company
that redesigned its distribution channels to reduce its energy use; such an activity would
be reported as saving a certain amount of greenhouse gas emissions.
ii. Measuring Planet: Perhaps the most difficult triple bottom line component to measure is
planet. As a company may need to know its existing impact as well as its "eco-friendly"
impact, measuring impacts to the planet may require the most expertise or effort.
However, there are very common environmental measurements such as:
1. Reductions in greenhouse gas emissions based on the difference between former
processes and forecasted changes in new processes.
2. Amount of waste generated in pounds; this may also include amount of recycled
product over a period of time.
3. Amount of energy consumption, adjusted for seasonality.
4. Amount of fossil fuel consumption (may be adjusted for per-employee or
per-sales lead should the company be growing).
5. Proportion of raw materials sourced ethically.

7. RELATION BETWEEN CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY & BUSINESS ETHICS.

a. Business Ethics: moral guidelines for the conduct of business based on notions of what is
right, wrong and fair. Most business people rely upon their own consciences in making
business decisions, falling back upon their own moral and religious backgrounds for guidance.
However, business people are also affected by their superiors and immediate colleagues when
making business decisions and may feel pressurized to behave unethically when seeking to
make profits. Over recent years many firms and industries have attempted to develop codes of
conduct which can be used to guide managers when making decisions.
b. Corporate Social Responsibility: a business philosophy which stresses the need for firms to
behave as good corporate citizens, not merely obeying the law but conducting their production
and marketing activities in a manner which avoids causing environmental pollution or
exhausting finite world resources. Some businesses have begun to behave in a more socially
responsible manner, partly because their managers want to do so, and partly because of fear of
environmentalist and consumer pressure groups and the media, and concern for their public
image. It is argued that socially responsible behaviour can pay off in the long run, even where
it involves some short-term sacrifice of profit.
c. CSR and Business ethics: Managing corporate social responsibility should be seen in the
context of an overall paradigm of business ethics. The normative stakeholder theory of
corporate governance draws its philosophy from ethics. It means that business corporations are
‘morally’ responsible for looking after a larger group of stakeholders’ concerns. The theory
 says that an organization’s internal process affects its identified stakeholders and hence must
be based on moral-ethical standards.
d. To be implemented successfully, sound ethics policy is required for companies. Therefore,
companies that adhere to the highest ethical policy must communicate clearly a strong and
contemporary code of ethics to employees who are formally trained in it and invited to deal
with ethical challenges.
e. The unethical and scrupulous practices always necessitate spirituality and ethical support from
management. Ethics policy is concerned with providing the assurances essential to all
trust-based relationships. It does not regulate only business conduct and personal acts, but also
offers an important form of liability limitation. It constitutes implicit organizational promises
of performance against the set standards whether inspirational or disciplinary. Because of their
inherent concern with ethical norms and policies, these policies can foster legitimate dissent by
those who are at odds with the organization’s performance against its set standards. Managers
and leaders need to understand that ethics and integrity policies that provide a crucial
expression of the organization. Managers who want employees to behave ethically must
exhibit ethical decision-making practices themselves. “A company’s managers play an
important role in establishing company’s ethical tone. If managers behave as if the only thing
that matters is profit, employees are likely to act in a like manner”.
f. Ethical standards necessarily have significant implication for their role as gatekeeper in
relation to those standards. On the other hand, training staff and management to be ethical and
spiritual is always a difficult task and comes with its limitations and disadvantages.
g. Limitations confronted with business ethics training:
i. Limited view regarding spirituality and management Professionals usually practices the
mechanism of “insulation”, keeping spirituality and management in two separate
compartments, thus making it hard to implement.
ii. The media create the erosion of true traditional values through the transnational culture.
iii. It is a time taking and costly process for business to shift from market economies to the
process of humanization.
iv. The growing rate of inflation and recession at times forces people to adopt unethical
practices for earning their living.
v. At times, it is also criticized on the ground of being vague and a form of delusion,
which denies reality.
vi. The criticism also extends to the practice of using authority and power by management
and leaders to impose spiritual and religious beliefs on employees.
vii. Lastly, it can also be used as a form of control through which management can
manipulate their employees.
h. Hence, and according to the vital role that ethics represents for business and for corporate
social responsibility, it is possible to distinguish a relation between business ethics and
corporate social responsibility. Moreover, the interpretation of theory in business literature and
society considers that both CSR and business ethics are the same. In fact, both corporate social
responsibility and business ethics are part of the other, which means that business ethics are
part of corporate social responsibility or vice versa. In addition, locating an organization’s
“pressure points” that highlight the need for CSR action is recommended. The first pressure
point is “The firm’s values and ethics”.
i. The concepts of work ethics and social responsibility are distinct Matches. However, they are
often used to refer to the same argument or symbol. The term business ethics is supposed to be
“a combination of two very familiar words, business and ethics.”.

j. Reiss in his interview with Rodney Martin, CEO, Voya Financial, a leading company that helps
Americans plan, invest and protect their savings; and a 4-time World’s Most Ethical
Companies honoree, brings forward his interviewee comment, “Corporate responsibility
includes key aspects of a company culture, such as ethics and transparency; diversity, inclusion
and equality; environmental sustainability; governance; and volunteerism and philanthropy.”.
k. The call to align business ethics and CSR in practice is mirrored by calls from scholars to
better define the conceptual relationship between business ethics and CSR in the aim to better
support theory development . While still contested, most scholars interpret business ethics and
CSR as having a close relationship. In support of the aforementioned argument, It suggested
from an interviews with participants at various levels of board and management in
petrochemical company which operates in Saudi Arabia, “that the majority of participants
consider Corporate Governance (CG), whose aim is to engage the Board of Directors (BOD) in
supervising CSR activities and the process of integrating these practices into the company’s
operations, is an essential foundation for sustainable CSR activities”. The aforementioned
provides a clear support to the relationship under investigation since Corporate Governance
enforces transparency and ethical business behavior as well as CSR.
l. The normative stakeholder theory in CSR, which draws its philosophy from Ethics, affirms
that business corporations are “morally” responsible to look after the concerns of a larger
group of stakeholders, which could include owners, customers, vendors, employees and
community rather than its stockholders i.e., the owners of the business alone. The above is
confirmed by stating, “a socially-responsible firm holds a holistic view of itself in relation to
its stakeholders and measures its performance via a triple bottom-line: Economic, financial,
environmental, and social. CSR seeks a path which advances all the three measures, none at
the cost of the others”.
m. Corporate responsibility to stakeholders is described as a fundamental principle of business
ethics, and corporate social responsibility is focused on beneficial outcomes for stakeholders.