The concept of CSR was, to quote Bruce Springsteen, born in the U.S.A, which made my year studying International Business there the perfect time to research how the concept evolved from the simplistic early definitions offered in the 1950’s to a dynamic and complex concept that is practiced in every corner of the world. The research explored if and how national culture affects CSR implementation and success.
What is CSR?
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) eludes to the idea of businesses acknowledging a responsibility to the society in which they operate. The European Commission (2001) defines CSR as “the voluntary integration of social and environmental concerns in their companies' operations and in their interactions with stakeholders”.
While some companies have always been involved in philanthropy or aware of their social responsibility, it is undeniable that in recent years the trend of participating in socially responsible practices has grown exponentially.
The concept of CSR has been discussed and researched for years however, as the concept has evolved and became more nuanced, frameworks and definitions have lacked the ability to encompass exactly what CSR is. CSR literature has largely been dominated by a US/Western European viewpoint but rapid globalization has led to a different forms of CSR emerging around the world.
Research has failed to analyse how CSR manifests in different countries and cultures or how it impacts its effect on firm performance.
Why would national culture affect CSR and its impact on firm performance?
“People build organisations according to their values, and societies are composed of institutions and organisations that reflect the dominant values within their culture”
(Hofstede 1984, p.81).
Hofstede explains how institutions and the actions of management are constrained and shaped by the cultural context of a society. Given that CSR is centered around the obligation of a business to the society it operates in, it appears clear that the cultural context of that society should influence how a business responsibility is perceived.
Culture will both affect how CSR is implemented and how it is rewarded. The first point can be exemplified by the Trans-Atlantic divide which has already been discovered in CSR research; CSR in the U.S.A is more explicit than in Europe, with a focus on corporate philanthropy. Whereas the strong social obligations that stem from cultural norms in Europe results in CSR being adopted implicitly into the core operations of European firms.
The latter point extends from the fact that cultural differences have been found to affect multiple facets of ethics including ethical sensitivity, judgements and values and therefore what society deems to be appropriate business actions and what it will accept and reward.
.
