AN ANALYSIS OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (CSR) VIEWS FROM MALAYSIAN COMPANIES ABSTRACTS Purpose – The aim of this paper is to explore the views of managers among Malaysian companies towards corporate social responsibility and how it influences business ethics. Design/methodology/approach – This paper analyses the views of Malaysian managers regarding corporate social responsibility. Interviews were conducted to 12 organizations in Malaysia comprising of major corporations as well as Small Medium Enterprises (SMEs).
Findings – The findings reveal that out of 12 companies selected across the Klang Valley, Malaysia, seven companies execute corporate social responsibility for the sake of its brand image and good reputation. Majority of the managers interviewed agreed that corporate social responsibility should be implemented in order to contribute to the society. Originality – The literature review is expected to provide the link between conventional CSR concept with Islamic values and principles.
This paper recommends companies especially in Malaysia to adopt corporate social responsibility as an ethical motivation rather than instrumental means. Keywords – Business, Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, Organization, Malaysia INTRODUCTION Over the last recent years, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has been termed to be a significant issue within global business organisations. The core purpose of CSR is to fulfil a company’s responsibility towards its stakeholders in terms of economic, social and environment (Siwar & Md Tareq, 2009).
However, the fundamental basis act of selfless contribution for the public has been tarnished and downgraded by huge corporate businesses when CSR began to be treated as a means to gain profit maximization which is driven by self-interest by enlarge. There are several meanings to define the concept of corporate social responsibility. First, CSR are the obligations entrusted upon business organisations to utilise its resources efficiently in order to bring benefits to the stakeholders by fulfilling its duties as a member of the society itself (Kok et al, 2001; Adam & Zutshi, 2004).
The conventional definition of CSR is derived from the concept of vicegerency in Islam according to Surah Al-Baqarah, verse 31. Albeit the concept of CSR is defined in positive aspects, it does not disregard the possibility of being carried out and practiced in an unethical paradoxical manner. Business ethics is understood to be what is acceptable and not acceptable that can be conducted in the business based on stakeholders. The main objective of this article is to focus on the perspective of Malaysian managers towards the views of CSR and how it is implemented in the organization.
LITERATURE REVIEW Based on the study of our articles, CSR manifests several business benefits, namely, good image and reputation, building a positive relationship with the customers, a better recruitment and retention of talented employees, positive motivation in better working environment, improving financial returns and reducing CSR related risks. These benefits are measured based on the preference of (a) consumers, (b) employees, and (c) upholding the organization’s reputable name. Firstly, consumers are one of the most important stakeholders of an organization.
Firms, which are socially responsible, transparent, and trustworthy, are at a better position of gaining consumer preferences (Willmott, 2001 & Mitchell, 2001; Knox & Maklan, 2004). The higher the awareness of social contribution, the more enhanced positive effects are on consumer purchase intention (Lee & Shin, 2009). The organization can also improve their consumption experience with customers by conducting CSR activities. Customers are commonly in favour to buy products from well-established companies that practice CSR activities, giving these organizations a good marketing strategy by word-of-mouth (Knox & Maklan, 2004).
They believe that the company will be ethically responsible to the product and services that they produce. Thus, this increases brand loyalty from the customers. Secondly, stakeholders of an organization also consist of its employees. When a company is known for its responsible background, people will be more attracted to be given a position in that particular organization. The ethically defined practice assists the organization in attracting and retaining talented employees in order to improve organization performance Adams & Zutshi, 2004; Knox & Maklan, 2004). Besides that, Weber, (2008) agreed that CSR can also directly motivate its employees. This shows that the practise of CSR by the company enhances an ethical working environment, which will influences the motivation level of the companies employees. Moreover, CSR will diminish employee turnover. In exploring the relationship between CSR and employee turnover, Galbreath, (2010) relies on the employee justice perceptions theory. The key mechanism for this theory measures an organization’s level of fairness.
The firms exhibit fairness in their actions, if the firms show concern for both internal and external stakeholders through social contribution. Thus, the employees evaluate the firm as one that is just and fair. Both directly and indirectly, employees are influenced to stay and continue to contribute to the company in reaching its main goal. Following (Reich, 2007; Devinney, 2009), an organization that practices CSR would have more satisfied customers, employees, and owners, which would contribute to long-term sustainable development.
Lastly, maintaining an organization’s respectable name is just as important as preserving the welfare of its stakeholders. Performing CSR in an organization helps in building a positive image and reputation (Weber, 2008; Galbreath, 2010). A good image and reputation will help the organization to gain and retain customers easily. Furthermore, CSR can also be treated as a means to manage and minimize CSR risks of powerful consumer boycott by external parties (Weber, 2008) as well as loss of corporate reputation (Knox & Maklan, 2004).
CSR can also increase corporate revenue through higher sales and market shares (Weber, 2008). These financial returns can be achieved directly by CSR-driven products or market development or even indirectly through an improved brand image and reputation. This is however, seen from a different point of view by Friedman, (1970). He argues that CSR should not be a part of an organization’s social responsibility. This was preceded by an elaboration of focusing on profit maximization as the only importance of an organization. It is rational to oppose this theory as businesses should not lace profit maximization as its only main goal, but instead take time to satisfy the stakeholders and be socially responsible (Samy, Odemilin & Bampton, 2010). From a strategic point of view, the fact that CSR benefits the firm and stakeholders will only be true if the firms conduct it efficiently. There is a difference between doing the right thing and doing things right. Conducting CSR is doing the right thing and to conduct it efficiently means doing it right. Thus, firms must ensure that they conduct strategic CSR as it brings significant business related benefits to the firm.
It supports core business activities, which contributes to the firm’s effectiveness towards achieving its mission (Burke & Logsdon, 1996). The obligations of organizations regarding the practice of CSR are not extended beyond their most valuable stakeholders. Organizations are less able to set priorities among the rest, as there is no constant approach to placing importance on their secondary stakeholders (Knox and Maklan, 2004). The downside of most organizations is that they will only take notice of current social situations when there is a possibility of gaining economic returns.
Devinney (2009) has discovered five points of natural vices, which draw attention to the major philosophical problems with CSR. Firstly, the role of corporation is only for generating profit not to solve the problems of society. This is in line with Friedman (1970), which claimed that the only responsibility of a corporation is to maximize economic returns. Next, corporation alter the societal standards based on their own demands. Although corporations have a much better understanding of the benefits and cost of practising CSR, this gives them the advantage to make sure that the most valuable constituencies are in their favour.
Besides, corporations are not representing the society as a whole. Major corporations are considered to be among the urban upper middle class, which inevitably does not cater for the poor and less fortunate ones of the society. Above and beyond of that, most of corporations are socially conservative as they resist making changes towards their organization practices unless the changes will produce profit to them. Lastly, CSR allows government to forgo some of their responsibilities, thus making social services provided by private companies more distinct in the eyes of the society.
CSR does not ensure the ethical behavior of the company (Mostovicz, Kakabadse & Kakabadse, 2009). Instead, the common major benefits recognized by corporate management are what distinguish between an ethical or non-ethical company as organizations are forced to be at a decision point of balancing the incurring costs of CSR activities and the impact of their ethical operations for the society. From the statement underlined, we have focused our findings on the purpose of these organizations conducting CSR and their opinions on the basis of CSR being implanted in all organizations nationwide.
METHODOLOGY We chose to conduct an interview in order to collect data for our study. We posed three open ended questions with 12 companies around Kuala Lumpur and the Klang Valley area because our study is to explore the view of Malaysian managers towards corporate social responsibility and the influence of business ethics. We designed our interview questions based on the literature review in order to suit the Malaysian context. The questions we used for our personal interviews were; Question 1: Does your organization practice corporate social responsibility? Question 2:
What motivates your organization to execute corporate social responsibility? Question 3: Do you agree that Corporate Social Responsibility should be implemented in all organizations in the country? State your reasons why? According to the 15 articles we used, we identified that the previous studies used various methods in examining significant issues on CSR. Majority of the previous studies adopted surveying method and used literature in conducting their studies. Above and beyond, there are a few authors used other distinguished methods. First of all four authors used survey as their method of studies.
Galbreath (2009) examined three potential benefits of demonstrating CSR; reduced employee turnover, increased customer satisfaction, and improved reputation through a survey of chief executive officers in Australia. Likewise, Lee & Shin (2009) used questionnaire survey involving Korean customers to examine the positive of CSR on customer behaviour. Further, Ditlev-Simonsen & Midttun (2010) conducted a survey with three panels: a corporate leaders’ panel, a business students’ panel and an NGO panel to clarify and compare what motivates managers to pursue corporate responsibility from positive and normative perspectives.
Lastly, Siwar & Md Tareq (2009) conducted a study on relationship between concepts of Islam with the Malaysian managers’ opinion regarding CSR. They used open and close-ended questionnaire to 50 listed organizations in Malaysia including multinational, government, and nongovernment and SME companies. Secondly, using literature is one of the methods that have been used by in following studies. Abul & Hjh Salma (2009) conducted a study on the current practices of CSR of the business organization as well as Islamic Financial Institutions (IFIs).
Next, Mostovicz, Kakabadse & Kakabadse (2009) explained the reason why CSR policy has failed to render organization more ethical and to purpose the concept of using CSR for improving the ethics of organization. Besides that, Devinney (2009) argued that the notion of socially responsible corporation is potentially an oxymoron because of the naturally conflicted nature of the corporation. Further, Burke & Logsdon (1996) examined social responsibility programs which create strategic benefits for firms. Lastly, Adam & Zutshi (2004) identified drivers which are forcing organization to adopt CSR and produces corporate social reports.
Finally, the other remaining authors exercised distinguished methods between each other. Drews (2010) used two step approaches to measure and evaluate the benefits of CSR. First, a measurement model is developed based on theoretical analysis. It is then applied in an in-depth case study. Next, Samy, Odemilin & Bampton (2010) adopted a quantitative analysis and exploratory approach to prove that CSR will maximize profit while satisfying the demand from multiple stakeholders. They study on CSR practices of 20 selected United Kingdom’s companies.
Besides, Knox & Maklan (2004) used empirical study of CSR policy and practices across a number of multinational companies to examine the reasons why CSR reporting has a low impact on business decision making. Moreover, Holme (2010) used a representative selection of recently published articles to study deeply on practitioner review on the concept of CSR. In addition, Weber (2008) adopted a study which focuses on the question on how to measure the business impact of CSR activities from company perspectives using theoretical approach and literature as references.
Friedman (1970) argued on the only social responsibility of business is to increase its profits using his own views or reasoning. FINDINGS We have successfully conducted the interviews through three medium of communications; Personal interview, telephone call and email. This interview was conducted in the period between 3rd June 2011 and 10th June 2011. We have interviewed 12 managers around Kuala Lumpur and Klang Valley. Based on the questions posed, we succeeded in 5 companies providing substantial answers personally, 3 companies responded based on phone calls, and 4 companies offered feedback through email.
The table below provides the profiles of the 12 managers that we have interviewed that comprises of major corporations and SMEs. Table 1: Summary of the profiles of the 12 managers interviewed. Manager 1 (M. 1)| MPH Bookstore| Manager 2 (M. 2)| Signature Kitchen| Manager 3 (M. 3)| Toy R Us| Manager 4 (M. 4)| Kimberly-Clark Malaysia (Kotex)| Manager 5 (M. 5)| MediBiz| Manager 6 (M. 6)| Petronas Gas Berhad| Manager 7 (M. 7)| Skrine| Manager 8 (M. 8)| SME Bank| Manager 9 (M. 9)| Bank Islam Malaysia Berhad| Manager 10 (M. 0)| Petronas Gas Berhad (KLCC)| Manager 11 (M. 11)| TM Berhad| Manager 12 (M. 12)| Rush Hati SdnBhd| For the first part of the interview, we examined which of the following managers practiced CSR in their respectable organizations. Based on their response, M. 1, M. 4, M. 6, M. 7, M. 8, M. 9, M10, and M. 11 proceeded with a positive feedback while M. 2, M. 3, M. 5, and M. 12 answered otherwise. Question 1: Does your organization practice corporate social responsibility? Table 2: The summary the respective answers from the 12 managers on question 1.
Manager 1| Yes| Manager 7| Yes| Manager 2| No| Manager 8| Yes| Manager 3| No| Manager 9| Yes| Manager 4| Yes| Manager 10| Yes| Manager 5| No| Manager 11| Yes| Manager 6| Yes| Manager 12| No| The pattern of this question is that most of the Malaysian companies practice CSR in their organizations. The second question was posed for among the 12 managers who performed CSR in their organizations. The question asked was to investigate the motive of their companies in executing CSR, providing with them several choices of answers for this question.
M. 1 claimed that the motive of his/her company conducting CSR is solely for the benefit of the society while M. 4 stated a different answer in which the company adopts CSR in order to create a long term value for stakeholders and to build a positive reputation and brand image. M. 5 also gave the same answer on building a positive reputation and branding image. In addition to that, M. 5 also stated other two motives of his/her company executing CSR which is to do the right thing and to contribute to long term sustainable development. Next, M. sincerely admitted that his/her company conducts CSR solely for profit maximization. Subsequently, M. 7 said that the reason of his/her company implementing CSR is to build a positive reputation and brand image while M. 8 claimed that his/her company’s motive is to create long term value for stakeholder. Then, M. 9 chose two answers from the choices which includes building a positive reputation and brand image and to do the right thing. Next, M. 10 claimed that his/her company has five motives in carrying out CSR which are; profit maximization, creating long term value for stakeholders, building a ositive reputation and brand image, doing the right thing, and contributing to long term sustainable development. M. 11 then chose five motives of his/her company conducting CSR which are; profit maximization, creating long term value for stakeholder, building a positive reputation and brand image, doing the right thing and contributing to long term sustainable development. Lastly, M. 12 said that all the choices given by us are relevant motives of conducting CSR. Question 2: What motivates your organization to execute corporate social responsibility?
Table 3: The summary the respective answers from the 12 managers on question 2. Manager 1| Solely for the benefit of the society| Manager 2| -| Manager 3| -| Manager 4| To create long term value for stakeholder To build positive reputation and brand image| Manager 5| To build positive reputation and brand image To do the right thingTo contribute to long term sustainable development| Manager 6| Profit maximization| Manager 7| To build positive reputation and brand image| Manager 8| To create long term value for stakeholder|
Manager 9| To build positive reputation and brand image to do the right things| Manager 10| To create long term value for stakeholderTo build positive reputation and brand imageTo do the right thingTo contribute to long term sustainable development | Manager 11| Profit maximizationto create long term value for stakeholderTo build positive reputation and brand imageTo do the right thingsTo contribute to long term sustainable development | Manager 12| All Business organizations worldwide would have their own business strategies and their strategies must not get strayed or derailed from their business principles or motives that is financial leverage or pecuniary advantage so all the facts which are given as options are significant for business strategies. |
To conclude, building a positive reputation and brand image is the main motive that motivates the companies to implement CSR while there are no companies that conducted CSR to resemble others. Our last question was to examine the managers’ personal views whether CSR should be implemented by all organizations in Malaysia and if yes, why it should be implemented. All the managers agreed that CSR should be implemented by all organizations in Malaysia. Above and beyond, some of the managers gave common views on the reason why CSR should be carried out. M. 1, M. 4, M. 5, M. 6, M. 8, and M. 10 have the same opinion that CSR should be executed for the sake of giving back to the society. Next, M. 2, M. 3, and M. 1 proposed that organizations should conduct CSR in order to gain good reputation and brand image. In addition, M. 7 suggested that CSR is a means for major corporations to work together towards a better future for society. Plus, M. 9 gave opinion that CSR should not only be practiced by the organizations that work in line with the Islamic principles but also conventional organizations. Moreover, M. 10 claimed that the concept of CSR is quite similar with the concept of zakat. Next, M. 11 also gave four other relevant reasons; to be a GLC’s CSR, to create long term value for the stakeholders, indirectly boost revenue and to be a par ahead of other corporations. Finally, M. 2 recommended that the act of CSR should be treated as a voluntary action and government plays a significant role in ensuring the prosperity of the public. Question 3: Do you agree that Corporate Social Responsibility should be implemented in all organizations in the country? State your reasons why? Table 4: The summary the respective answers from the 12 managers on question 3. Manager 1| Yes, definitely. It’s every organization’s responsibility to give back to the less fortunate. | Manager 2| Yes, for the good reputation| Manager 3| Yes, for the trust and the good reputation for the company. Customer will have the positive view towards the company. | Manager 4| Yes, because it is every organization’s duty to give back to the society.
It is much more than just taking part in a long term relationship with end users but to actually contribute back to its loyal customers. | Manager 5| Yes, because organizations should give back to the society especially for those profit making ones. It also builds a sense of belonging and responsibility towards the people and the environment where the organization is established. | Manager 6| Yes. All organizations should give back to the society especially in the area that they operate. They will then get the support and acceptance of the community around them. | Manager 7| Yes, because all major corporations must work together towards a better future for the society. | Manager 8| Yes, because it’s good to give back to the society. | Manager 9| Yes.
CSR does not only limit itself to organizations that work in line with the teachings of Islam, but to all corporations which include the conventional ones. | Manager 10| In general, yes. Where possible, organization should implement CSR. For all the positive values that it created, is it to the company, employee, and community or to the receiver. CSR is about giving back to the community and contribute to the development of others. Most of organization existences depend on the surrounding community and resources e. g. oil and gas company – base on the local resources, consumers or stakeholders. A better surroundings/resources, either physically or emotionally will contribute in strengthening ones position.
In line with the “Energy Received, Energy Return” value. Spiritually, CSR practices are quite similar to the zakat concept. The more you received, the more you should return. More profit you make, bigger CSR it should be. | Manager 11| Fully Agreed. Reasons as follow: a) To build positive reputation and brand image b) Being GLC’s CSR is part of our culture c) To create long term value for stakeholder d) Indirectly to boost revenue and gain customer support e) To be at par or ahead of other corporate entity| Manager 12| All Yes.
Corporate social responsibility must be classified as voluntary any attempt to make it compulsory is inappropriate. The government is to be held the sole responsible for the prosperity of the public citizen of this country. | In short, all the managers agreed that CSR should be implemented into their organization and also into the other organizations worldwide. DISCUSSION Multiple organizations from various kinds of background industries differ from its perspective on the implementation of CSR as its ethical duty towards the community. From the data collected, we have studied rigorously the outcome of interviewing 12 managers and were able to identify companies practicing CSR as opposed to non-practicing ones.
Based on empirical performance, eight managers stated that its organization successfully conducts CSR (Manager 1, Manager 4, Manager 6, Manager 7, Manager 8, Manager 9, Manager 10, and Manager 11) while the remaining four (Manager 2, Manager 3, Manager 5, and Manager 12) have not had the opportunity to perform beneficial impacts toward the society. Although the results were in favour of CSR practicing organizations, it should be highlighted that these corporations are consisted of major branded companies where as the latter comprised of Small Medium Enterprise (SMEs) corporations. Based on our research, we have discovered that non practicing CSR companies (SME’s) justifies the study conducted by Siwar & Md Tareq (2009).
They uphold the theory of SME’s to be underdeveloped and still in the working progress to grasp the meaning of CSR and of its importance to the society today. Most of the SME’s among Malaysian organizations have no solid plan and structure of performing CSR as companies’ managers are still lacking in consciousness regarding the concept of CSR. On top of that, SME’s are in doubt of how big of an impact can its organization bring to the society as they are not likely to claim themselves as “corporate” (Holme, 2010). The third and final question posed to all respective managers resulted in a unanimous response that CSR should indeed be restored and carried out in all organizations throughout the country.
Among the reasons stated by all following managers, we can part the answers based on two ethical conflicting views; stressing on the importance of giving back to the community for common basic social needs versus CSR motivated organizations’ with uplifting its brand image and reputation. Results illustrate that Manager 1, Manager 4, Manager 5, Manager 6, Manager 8, and Manager 10 agree that CSR ought to be conducted for the benefit of the society where as Manager 2, Manager 3 and Manager 11 gave answers subjected to the positive aspects of gaining customer’s trust and loyalty when an organization withstands by a good reputation. According to the latter opinion, these managers believe that customer’s brand loyalty by enlarge relies on the ethical activities performed commercially by reputable named major companies.
However, the concept of contributing back to the social, economic and environment by ethical responsible corporate management contrasts the view of Friedman (1970), who claims that the only social responsibility held by a certain organization is limited to using the resources efficiently and effectively for profit maximization. Many viewpoints exist in this study, including the conceptualization of the responsibilities of firms by Carroll (1979). Among the four social responsibilities brought forward by Carroll (1979), this conceptualization includes the economic responsibility of an organization to generate profits, provide jobs, and create products that consumers want (Galbreath, 2010).
Indirectly, this substantiates Friedman’s (1970) theory that an organization’s interest of profit maximization does not necessarily disregard their responsibility as a firm in economic terms. In comparison to corporations which utilizes CSR as a means for gaining economic returns, organizations who are opinionated to provide beneficial impact to the society are at an ethical based level because its CSR activities are solely based on doing the right thing and enhancing the well-being of a society. Relating back to Carroll’s (1979) conceptualization of the responsibilities of firms, placing importance towards the social needs of the community is the ethical responsibility to meet other social expectations, such as respecting people’s moral rights and doing what is right and just (Galbreath, 2010).
Through our findings, we were able to recognize the evident relationship between the main priorities of the organizations purpose in the performance of CSR and the sole personal views from the managers themselves regarding the influence of CSR in today’s corporate management. We extracted that Manager 4, Manager 5, and Manager 10 shared views that did not entirely coincide with its own corporation’s perspective pertaining to the importance of CSR. They firmly deem CSR to be a social obligation for all organizations in order to contribute back to the society in spite of its own corporate motive which states gaining a positive image and reputation as its main concern.
With much relevance to our research, there are ways for us to extend our studies based on an Islamic perspective. In Islam, our actions are judged by our sincere motives (niyyah). It is narrated on the authority of Amirul Mu’minin, Abu Hafs ‘Umar bin al-Khattab, radiyallahu ‘anhu, who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah, sallallahu ‘alayhi wasallam, say: “Actions are (judged) by motives (niyyah), so each man will have what he intended.. ” [Al-Bukhari & Muslim] Based on the hadith, it is compulsory to conduct our daily activities in this world for the sake of Allah S. W. T. which includes our responsibility as a vicegerent in economic terms. CSR is a manifestation of Tawhidic paradigm, serving Allah through our Fardh’ Kifayah obligations.
The shahadah shows us the conditions for accepting a deed or performing an action; one, it should be for the sake of Allah because He is the only One we worship, and two, it should be in accordance with the Shariah. Employees with authority in decision making must be honest and sincere as well as ethical in their motives especially when it concerns the well being of others. According to Imam al-Harawi, there are seven types of self-desires, one of which includes seeking the wealth of others. To abstain ourselves from this selfish nafs’, it is in our power to do righteous deeds as the more good deeds we do and hence get closer to Allah, the more sincere we will be. The implementation of CSR in business organizations gives us the chance to ensure that our responsibility as a khalifah in this world is performed in an ethical manner. Limitation
We recognized three limitations throughout the process of conducting this project paper. The first limitation is the number of managers to be interviewed. We intended to interview 15 managers but unfortunately we just managed to interview 12 managers. This is due to the second limitation which is time constraint. The process of searching the contacts of the managers to be interviewed and the procedures of making appointments with major companies’ managers required a lot of time. In addition, we took quite a lot of time to get the response from the managers which we interviewed through email. Lastly, we were limited by the poor response from the managers especially from the major companies. Some of them claimed they could not espond to our interview questions because the information is confidential to their company and most of the managers we interviewed through email failed to reply our email. Implications for Practice We propose that the practice of CSR by Malaysian companies should be in line with the CSR policy in which it is supposed to only focus on encouraging the positive impact towards the stakeholders and not for benefits to the company itself. Apart from that, Malaysia as a Muslim country, we recommend the Malaysian companies to revise the Tawhidic Paradigm concept which claims man as a vicegerent. Hence, the companies should treat act of CSR as part of their responsibility as vicegerent.
Moreover, there is supposed to be government intervention in order to encourage the practice of CSR by SMEs. Implication for Theory Our study examines the practice of CSR in Malaysian companies. We come into the theory that most of the Malaysian companies execute CSR because of their concern to contribute back to society and for the sake of their reputation and branding. Plus, this study adds on a new idea on the theory of CSR from the Islamic perspective. In short, CSR is already part of the basic Islamic concept; vicegerency. The foundations of the CSR’s notion from conventional theories came from the values and principles that have been central to Islam since the times of the Holy Prophet Muhammad S. W. T. Future Research
We advocate those who desire to do the similar studies to adopt the couple of methods below to conduct this study. * Interview on the managers from each company. * Survey on customers regarding their perspectives on CSR CONCLUSION Our study concerned on business ethics and corporate social responsibility. After pursuing through this study, we discovered mixed views on CSR concept. To conclude, there are generally two basic motives of CSR; ethical motivation and instrumental motivation. Ethical motivation is to achieve the right thing to do. If the company treats CSR as a voluntary act rather than just a compliance based act and they conduct it for the sake of creating good society, it is considered as ethical motivation.
In contrast, companies which consider CSR as an instrumental motivation tend to just to achieve an economic goal. They treat CSR as a means for profit maximization. According to our findings, most of the Malaysian companies take CSR as an instrumental motivation as their core motive in executing CSR to gain good reputation and branding image. Nevertheless, from the views of the managers of the companies, CSR should be done to give back to society. We desire this project paper to end as an article for IIUM journal. REFERENCES Adam, C. , & Zutshi, A. (2004). Corporates Social Responsibility:Why business should act responsible and be accountable.
Australia Accounting Review, 14(3), 31-39. Burke, L. , & Logsdon, J. M. (1996). How corporate social responsibility pays off. Long Range Planning, 29(4), 495-502. Devinney, T. M. (2009). Is socially responsible corporation a myth? The good, the bad, and the ungly of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Perspectives, 44-56. Ditlev-Simonsen, C. D. , & Midttun, A. (2010). What motivates managers to pursue corporate responsibility? A survey among key stakeholders. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 25-38. Drews, M. (2010). Measuring the business and societal benefits of corporate responsibility.
Corporate Governance, 10(4), 421-431. Friedman, M. (1970). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. The New York Times Magazine, 173-178. Galbreath, J. (2009). How does corporate social responsibility benefit firms? Evidence from Australia. European Business Review, 22(4), 411-431. Abul, H. , & Hjh Salma, A. L. (2009). Corporate social responsibility of Islamic financial institutions and businesses optimizing charity value. Humanomics, 25(3), 177-188. Holme, C. (2010). Corporate social responsibility: A strategic issue or a wasteful distraction? Industrial and Commercial Training, 42(4), 179-185. Knox, S. , & Maklan, S. October, 2004). Corporate social responsibility: Moving beyond investment towards measuring outcomes. European Management Journal, 22(5), 508-516. Lee, K. -H. , & Shin, D. (2010). Consumers’ responses to CSR activities: The linkage between increased awareness and purchase intention. Public Relations Review 36, 193-195. Mostovicz, I. , Kakabadse, N. , & Kakabadse, A. (2009). CSR: the role of leadership in driving ethical outcomes. Corporate Governance, 9(4), 448-460. Samy, M. , Odemilin, G. , & Bampton, R. (2010). Corporate social responsibility: A strategy for sustainable business success. An analysis of 20 selected British companies.
Corporate Governance, 10(2), 203-217. Siwar, C. , & Md Tareq, H. (2009). An analysis of Islamic CSR concept and the opinions of Malaysian managers. Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, 20(3), 290-298. Smith, K. H. , & Nystad, O. (2006). Is the motivation for CSR profit or ethics? Retrieved 11 June, 2011, from www. crrconference. org/downloads/2006hauglandsmithandnystad. pdf. The Hadiths. (n. d. ). Retrieved 11 June, 2011, from http://fortyhadith. iiu. edu. my/hadiths. htm. Weber, M. (2008). The business case for corporate social responsibility: A company-level measurement approach for CSR. European Management Journal, 247-261.