Management culture and corporate social responsibility (CSR) are not separate, but they are two complementary dimensions. This part introduces the theoretical model of evaluation of the level of management culture in order to implement corporate social responsibility. It is constructed after the analysis of the concepts proposed by various authors, focusing on factors determining the effectiveness of implementation of corporate social responsibility, the quality of the relationship with stakeholders. The steps of the implementation in companies using internal and external resources are described. By offering a new conceptual model, it is emphasized that the management culture is a deliberately constructed and developed system that can have a significant impact on the quality of organizational performance, providing both an instrumental and an ethical framework for addressing corporate social responsibility objectives given a clear value decision of the majority of the company shareholders.
- corporate social responsibility
- management culture
Relevance of the research and the level of problem exploration. In the theoretical part of this book, the problem of corporate social responsibility was widely analyzed and the concept of management culture was formulated. The corporate social responsibility and management culture connections are checked and verified by performing empirical research procedures. Models of corporate social responsibility [1, 2, 3, 4], etc., highlight the fundamental values, which can be implemented by adapting managerial methods. There are some models that develop corporate social responsibility in various aspects. For example, Ardichvili  proposes a theoretical model linking human resource development, corporate social responsibility, corporate sustainability, and business ethics. Human resource development plays an important role in changing the behavior of employees and organizational values, and there are significant affinities between human resource development and corporate social responsibility and corporate sustainability concerning behavior and change . Other authors focus on problems of corporate social responsibility, sustainability and ethics , employees’ perceptions, attitudes, and behavioral intentions toward their firm , influence of social responsibility on talent and different generations of employees management , the impact on workplace gender diversity , etc. However, corporate social responsibility also requires the alternation of the management system of the company and its quality. Any culture, as well as the culture of organizational management, is characterized by inertness and attachment to the conventional methods, which are often interpreted by the tradition that “serves the purpose,” behind which the subjective motives are hidden. This is a very wide problem field, which can be dealt with by formulating the socially relevant value requirements, on the basis of which the management system is changed, taking into account the perspectives of the change of competencies and values of the managerial staff. Therefore, in preparation for the change it is essential to evaluate the management culture and level of its development. This process requires an instrument synchronized with corporate social responsibility.
The problem of the research is raised by the question: how to develop a theoretical –hypothetical model of management culture level determination in order to implement corporate social responsibility after distinguishing the components of corporate social responsibility?
The object of this research is theoretical –hypothetical model of management culture level determination in order to implement corporate social responsibility.
The purpose of the research is after distinguishing the criteria of corporate social responsibility to develop a theoretical-hypothetical model of management culture level determination in order to implement corporate social responsibility.
The objectives of the research are (1) to review the components of the models of corporate social responsibility and (2) to present the developed theoretical-hypothetical model of management culture level determination in order to implement corporate social responsibility and methodology of its use.
Methods of the research. During the research, the methods of the analysis of academic literature, logical comparative analysis, and document content analysis were used. The systematic analysis method allowed carrying out the synthesis of various authors’ approaches, assessments, and interpretations on corporate social responsibility models based on a logical abstraction. The specificity of activity is analyzed according to the individual components of the models. After generalization of components of the models reviewed and the analysis of academic literature, the theoretical-hypothetical model of management culture level determination in order to implement corporate social responsibility and methodology of its use have been prepared.
2. The overview of models
This part provides an overview of the diversity of models corresponding to the analyzed themes. It is expected that short theoretical discourse will help the reader to better understand the culture level determination model, in order to implement corporate social responsibility, compiled by the authors of this book. Thus, further on the description of management culture level determination, in order to implement corporate social responsibility is presented and theoretical model in which its individual stages are discussed by presenting the stakeholder roles in the evaluation process. The model was created by analyzing scientific literature, based on the conclusions and the insights of the authors, based on the logical sequence resulting from individual steps.
The models in scientific literature are discussed by scientists from different areas and fields [11, 12, 13], etc. The term “model” is rather vague and broad; it is used in very different fields of human activity and in different aspects. Models reflect our way of thinking: in our consciousness, we use models all the time, and they are the base in many of our decisions and actions . The models formed by many authors make it possible to assess the factors determining corporate social responsibility installation efficiency and provide its installation steps.
3. Theoretical-hypothetical model of determining management culture level in order to implement corporate social responsibility
This is a theoretical concept that demonstrates how management culture and its development can serve solving corporate social responsibility objectives. Before starting the formation of the model of management culture determination level in order to implement corporate social responsibility, the analysis of connection between management culture and social responsibility essential principles was made, based on the components of previously reviewed scientific papers and management culture and corporate social responsibility concepts (Figure 1). After analysis of corporate social responsibility and management culture connection, management culture instrumentality emerged in order to realize the principles of social responsibility. Therefore, corporate social responsibility commitments are presented as objectives which could be dealt with high level management culture.
This section accentuates corporate social responsibility imperative to actively participate in social responsibility policy change processes, with the emphasis on a significant role of initiatives in shaping changes not only for individual companies, but also reflecting on national policy developments. As shown in Figure 1, connection between management culture and social responsibility are disclosed through certain obligations guidelines. In order to improve the community’s quality of life, the component of civic responsibility is especially important in conjunction with the management specifics. Raising the commitment to act in accordance with the set rules, the components of observing laws and following the requirements are naturally highlighted. When behaving fairly and correctly in order to prevent every damage, the attention is focused on ethics, self-improvement, and aspects of following moral principles. In order to meet the commitment to satisfy shareholders’ interests, the components of profitability, processes organization, and supply are distinguished. In addition, it is important to reflect these processes on the moral ethical aspects.
The theoretical-hypothetical model is formed generally as a four-step sequence, after that, when the shareholders decide to assess the situation, management staff is included, the employees are included and external consultants are attracted. The model includes the following main steps: data collection, information assessment, decision-making, and changes (at all stages maintaining the feedback and adjusting) (Figure 2).
Separate fragments of the model are presented below. Figure 3 visualizes the initial phase consisting of the shareholders’ decision, examination of the situation, and involving employees belonging to different links into the process.
Shareholders’ decision plays a crucial role, as at this stage the process initiation is already the result of critical moral and economic interests mass set and social and financial consequences can be designed, because there are a wide range of stakeholders inside the organization and their expectations, material, human resources, and so on included. This decision is encouraged by both internal and external factors and their combinations: internal and external stakeholders, socializing in community (social capital meaning awareness and accumulation), and commercial. In this case, a voluntary action named by the noun “involvement” is emphasized. Thus, the share capital managers have the task of finding a consensus between personal and public interests. It is often guided by internal feeling and/or available social competence, but it is useful to use objective methods which when used define stakeholder groups, their expectations and values. It is useful to carry this out at an early stage in order to prevent future internal contradictions which would have a negative impact on corporate social responsibility implementation processes. To successfully develop these processes, direct (decisions) and indirect company shareholders’ support is required (Figure 4).
The aim of attracting external consultants (experts) is argued with the purpose of obtaining objective information, its independent assessment and presentation of decision-guidance package. When analyzing and evaluating the situation several approaches are possible which have both advantages and disadvantages.
First, the evaluation can be performed by using their skilled staff specialists if the resource is available. However, there are several threats: lack of professionalism of the organizers and subjective bias, and limited openness of the respondents when giving evaluation, as there may be fear that information may “leak” to management.
Second, previously mentioned threats may be avoided by inviting consultants (experts) from outside. However, the organizations, especially the small ones, still have the actual service price issue. Therefore, the first option may be given priority that is an attempt to clarify the situation “on their own.” In practice, there is a vivid dangerous stereotyped attitude that the manager and/or owner “knows best.”
Third, it is possible to use external consultants and internal resources could be invoked only when analyzing the aggregated data (after the collection of information), thus partially saving direct costs. But here again, there is an issue of a company’s internal resources competence. Selecting the optimal solution variant, there is transition to the next step: the collection of information (Figure 5).
Attention should be drawn to the fact that the employees should be motivated to participate voluntarily in the research. One of the strongest motives: a guarantee that the position expressed or their opinion will affect positive changes. This task becomes complex in organizations where there is a strong distrust between subordinates and management staff, also in organizations where there is an authoritarian style of management. Among other things, the employees should be given favorable conditions to fill in the questionnaire. The task of management staff is to organize the process so that it does not affect the production (services) process, privacy, physical, and emotional disturbances should be avoided, not abusing employees’ personal time meant for rest. By the way, respect of these circumstances not only determines the reliability of the data, but can also be one of the signs that the organization is determined to be socially responsible in the contents of their activities. The next stage: the assessment of the data collected (Figure 6).
In the absence of further decisions on social responsibility, these decisions can be used as an internal management system optimization.
Although this chapter presents a theoretical-hypothetical model, management culture, and corporate social responsibility connection which is proven by statistical methods are described in other part of the monograph.
When analyzing the model (Figure 2), there is a possibility to raise a question for discussion, why external stakeholders are not included.
Carroll AB. The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons. 1991; 34(4):39-48. DOI: 10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-G
Geva A. Three models of corporate social responsibility: Interrelationships between theory, research, and practice. Business and Society Review. 2008; 113(1):1-41. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8594.2008.00311.x
Avetisyan E, Ferrary M. Dynamics of stakeholders’ implications in the institutionalization of the CSR field in France and in the United States. Journal of Business Ethics. 2013; 115(1):115-133. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-012-1386-3
Andriukaitienė R. Vadybos kultūros raiška Siekiant įgyvendinti įmonių socialinę atsakomybę. [Expression of Management Culture Aiming to Implement Corporate Social Responsibility.]. Kaunas: Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas; 2015. p. 253 [in Lithuanian]
Ardichvili A. The role of HRD in CSR, sustainability, and ethics: A relational model. Human Resource Development Review. 2013; 12(4):456-473. DOI: 10.1177/1534484313478421
Garavan TN, Heraty N, Rock A, Dalton E. Conceptualizing the behavioral barriers to CSR and CS in organizations: A typology of HRD interventions. Advances in Developing Human Resources. 2011; 12(5):587-613. DOI: 10.1177/1523422310394779
Gupta AD. Corporate social responsibility and strategy: A bird’s eye view. Global Business Review. 2012; 13(1):153-165. DOI: 10.1177/097215091101300110
West B, Hillenbrand C, Money K. Building employee relationships through corporate social responsibility: The moderating role of social cynicism and reward for application. Group & Organization Management. 2014; 40(3):295-322. DOI: 10.1177/1059601114560062
Ohlrich K. Exploring the impact of CSR on talent management with generation Y. South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases. 2015; 4(1):111-121. DOI: 10.1177/2277977915574044
Mun E, Jung J. Change above the glass ceiling: Corporate social responsibility and gender diversity in Japanese firms. Administrative Science Quarterly. 2017. DOI: 10.1177/0001839217712920
Tidikis R. Socialinių mokslų tyrimų Metodologija. [Methodology in Social Science Research.]. Vilnius: Lietuvos teisės universitetas; 2003. p. 626 [in Lithuanian]
Paliulis N, Chlivickas E, Pabedinskaitė A. Valdymas Ir Informacija. Monografija. [Management and Information. Monograph.]. Vilnius: Technika; 2004. p. 357 [in Lithuanian]
Bujauskas V, Simanauskas L, Skyrius R. Kompiuterinis sprendimų Modeliavimas. [Computer Modelling of Solutions.]. Vilnius: Vilniaus universiteto leidykla; 2009. p. 139 [in Lithuanian]
Gjolberg M. Varieties of corporate social responsibility (CSR): CSR meets the “Nordic model”. Regulation & Governance. 2010; 4(2):203-229. DOI: 10.1111/j.1748-5991.2010.01080.x
Fairbrass J, Zueva-Owens A. Conceptualising corporate social responsibility: ‘Relational governance’ assessed, augmented, and adapted. Journal of Business Ethics. 2012; 105(3):321-335. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-011-0968-9
Whelan G. The political perspective of corporate social responsibility: A critical research agenda. Business Business Ethics Quarterly. 2012; 22(4):709-737. DOI: 10.5840/beq201222445
Mäkinen J, Kourula A. Pluralism in political corporate social responsibility. Business Ethics Quarterly. 2012; 22(4):649-678. DOI: 10.5840/beq201222443
Baumann-Pauly D, Wickert C, Spence LJ, Scherer AG. Organizing corporate social responsibility in small and large firms: Size matters. Journal of Business Ethics. 2013; 115(4):693-705. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-013-1827-7
Lundgren TA. Microeconomic model of corporate social responsibility. Metroeconomica. 2011; 62(1):69-95. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-999X.2010.04087.x
Blaga S. Rethinking business sustainability. Review of Economic Studies and Research Virgil Madgearu. 2013; 6(1):5-21. DOI: 10.1057/9781137015891_5
Carden LL, Boyd RO. Integrating corporate social responsibility with a risk management methodology: A strategic approach. Southern Journal of Business and Ethics. 2011; 3:161-170
Knowiton LW, Phillips C, Knowiton PW. Corporate giving gets smarter: Conagra foods foundation fights childhood hunger. The Foundation Review. 2012; 49(2):72-83. DOI: 10.4087/FOUNDATIONREVIEW-D-11-00034.1
Heyder M, Theuvsen L. Determinants and effects of corporate social responsibility in German agribusiness: A PLS model. Agribusiness. 2012; 28(4):400-420. DOI: 10.1002/agr.21305
Potašinskaitė M, Draugelytė A. Įmonių socialinės atsakomybės dedamųjų fragmentiškas naudojimas Lietuvoje. [Corporate social responsibility constituents’ fragmentary use in Lithuania.]. Management Theory and Studies for Rural Business and Infrastructure Development. 2013; 35(3):416-423 [in Lithuanian]
Pedersen ER. Modeling CSR: How managers understand the responsibilities of business towards society. Journal of Business Ethics. 2010; 91(2):155-166. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-009-0078-0
Homburg C, Stierl M, Bornemann T. Corporate social responsibility in business–to–business markets: How organizational customers account for supplier corporate social responsibility engagement. Journal of Marketing. 2013; 77(6):54-72. DOI: 10.1509/jm.12.0089
Dougherty ML, Olsen TD. Taking terrain literally: Grounding local adaptation to corporate social responsibility in the extractive industries. Journal of Business Ethics. 2014; 119(3):423-434. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-013-1643-0
Segal E. A social empathy: A model built on empathy, contextual understanding, and social responsibility that promotes social justice. Journal of Social Service Research. 2011; 37(3):266-277. DOI: 10.1080/01488376.2011.564040
Lee O. Teacher candidates' implementation of the personal and social responsibility model in field experiences. The Physical Educator. 2012; 69(2):150-170
Delmas MA, Etzion D, Nairn-Birch N. Triangulating environmental performance: What do corporate social responsibility ratings really capture? The Academy of Management Perspectives. 2013; 27(3):255-267. DOI: 10.5465/amp.2012.0123
Claydon J. Two models of CSR and sustainability. A comparison between the ‘pyramid of corporate social responsibility’ and the ‘model of sustainable development. Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting. 2009; 2(2):260-265
Millon D. Two models of corporate social responsibility. Wake Forest Law Review. 2011; 46:523-540
Valdes-Vasquez R, Klotz L. Incorporating the social dimension of sustainability into civil engineering education. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education & Practice. 2011; 137(4):187-197. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)EI.1943-5541.0000066
Jenkins H. A ‘business opportunity’ model of corporate social responsibility for small– and medium–sized enterprises. Business Ethics: A European Review. 2009; 18(1):21-36. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8608.2009.01546.x
Grayson D, Hodges A. Everybody’s Business: Managing Risks and Opportunities in Today‘s Global Society. London: Dorling Kindersley; 2001. p. 320
Tung VWS, Mourali M. A dynamic model of corporate social responsibility. In: AMA winter educators’ conference 2011. Marketing Theory and Applications AMA Educators Proceedings. 2011; 22:161-162
Pedersen ERG, Gwozdz W. From resistance to opportunity–seeking: Strategic responses to institutional pressures for corporate social responsibility in the Nordic fashion industry. Journal of Business Ethics. 2014; 119(2):245-264. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-013-1630-5
Thornton JC, Byrd JT. Social responsibility and the small business. Academy of Entrepreneurship Journal. 2013; 19(1):41-75. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-006-9187-1
Shum PK, Yam SL. Ethics and law: Guiding the invisible hand to correct corporate social responsibility externalities. Journal of Business Ethics. 2011; 98(4):549-571. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-010-0608-9
Vilkė R. Organizacijų socialinės atsakomybės Diegimo Veiksmingumo Didinimas Lietuvoje: Vietos Savivaldos įtraukimo Modelis. Disertacijos Santrauka. [Corporate Social Responsibility Implementation Effectiveness Improvement in Lithuania: Model of Local Government Involvement [Dissertation Summary].]. Vilnius: Mykolo Romerio universitetas; 2011. p. 60 [in Lithuanian]