Corporate societal duty ( CSR, besides called corporate duty, corporate citizenship, responsible concern and corporate societal chance ) is a construct whereby organisations consider the involvements of society by taking duty for the impact of their activities on clients, providers, employees, stockholders, communities and other stakeholders, every bit good as the environment. This duty is seen to widen beyond the statutory duty to follow with statute law and sees organisations voluntarily taking farther stairss to better the quality of life for employees and their households every bit good as for the local community and society at big. In the modern concern many Corporates are coming preface to assist the local community in many ways. The disablement concern is going more and more addressed issue by the corporate sectors.
In this survey an effort has been made to reexamine the position of disablement related issues under CSR policies of assorted corporate sectors of India. For this survey the 50 studies of Corporates sector were studied to place the issues addressed by corporate sector. The studies were reviewed under four spheres vise ; 1 ) . Top direction committednesss, 2 ) . Corporate policy and patterns, 3 ) . Social inclusion and handiness and 4 ) . Corporate investing and partnership in disables enterprisers.
The consequence of this analysis indicates that bulk of the studies 22 % has mentioned the corporate policies and patterns for the public assistance of people with disablements followed by steps taken for societal inclusion and handiness. The top direction committedness towards people with disablement was following addressed issue followed by corporate investing and partnership in handicapped enterprisers.
A. Corporate SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY – AN Introduction
Gupta D.K & A ; Saxena K ( 2006 ) in their paper “ Corporate Social Responsibility in Indian Service Organizations: An Empirical Survey ” presented at International Conference on “ CSR-Agendas for Asia ” at Kuala Lumpur, elucidates the Corporate Social Responsibility by citing a Sanskrit stating, ‘Atithi Devo Bhav ‘ , intending – ‘the 1 who comes to you to be served should be taken to be God ‘ , sets the cord for services to be rendered with highest order of duty, be it to persons or to the society. Therefore, the tone for Corporate Social Responsibility ( CSR ) with highest philosophical atmosphere is already set in Indian context. Corporate Social Responsibility ( CSR ) is a phrase with wider significance and deepness. This phrase has long been in usage with growing of industries and Corporates. It has long been debated, over its conceptual-extent, pertinence, viability and issues like, existent execution etc. inclusive of the issues like nature and size of the organisations.
Harmonizing to Dr. Manne ( Goralski, 1972 ) , any working definition of Corporate Social Responsibility requires three facets: A concern outgo or activity must be ‘one for which the fringy returns to the corporation are less than the returns available from some alternate outgo ‘ ; it must be strictly voluntary ; and must be an existent corporate outgo instead than a conduit for single breadth. Saxena & A ; Gupta, 2005 defines CSR as ‘Part – lying with corporates – of entire committedness required to accomplish complete harmoniousness between footings and demands, even conflicting 1s, of three nucleus participants – Society, Government and Corporates – for growing of healthy, meaningful and sustainable ‘Business ” .
Historical position of CSR
Thomas G & A ; Nowak M ( 2006 ) explains the historical position of CSR in GSB ( Graduate School of Business ) working paper no. 62 “ Corporate Social Responsibility: A Definition ” that the term CSR may look to be comparatively new to the corporate universe, the literature reveals that the development of the construct itself has taken topographic point over several decennaries. It has been suggested by Windsor that ‘business leaders have since the 1920s widely adhered to some construct of duty and reactivity patterns ‘ ( Windsor 2001 ) . In 1953, Bowen conceptualized CSR as societal duty – the duty ‘to pursue those policies, to do those determinations, or to follow those lines of action which are desirable in footings of the aims and values of our society ‘ ( Bowen in Maignan & A ; Ferrell 2004, p. 4 ) .
Carroll has described Bowen as the modern ‘Father of Corporate Social Responsibility ‘ and believes that his work marks the beginning of the modern period of literature on CSR. ( Carroll 1999, p. 270 ) Bowen took a wide attack to concern duties, including reactivity, stewardship, societal audit, corporate citizenship and fundamental stakeholder theory ( Windsor 2001, p. 230 ) . Peter Drucker was one of the first to explicitly turn to CSR, including public duty as one of the eight key countries for concern aims developed in his 1954 book, The Practice of Management. While Drucker believed that direction ‘s first duty to society involved doing a net income, ‘he felt it was besides most of import that direction see the impact of every concern policy and action upon society ‘ ( Joyner & A ; Payne 2002, p. 302 ) .
In 1960, Frederick wrote that ‘Social duty in the concluding analysis implies a public position toward society ‘s economic and human resources and a willingness to see that those resources are used for wide societal terminals and non merely for the narrowly limited involvements of private individuals and houses ‘ . ( Frederick in Carroll 1999, p. 271 ) The US Committee for Economic Development ‘s ( CED ) 1971 theoretical account of CSR described that CSR is ‘related to merchandises, occupations and economic growing ; related to social outlooks ; and related to activities aimed at bettering the societal environment of the house ‘ ( US Committee for Economic Development in Wheeler et Al, 2003 ) .
The literature of 1980s quotation marks the outstanding work of R Edward Freeman on the emerging Stakeholder Theory and Carroll ‘s believes on alternate constructs and subjects such as corporate societal reactivity, Corporate Social Performance, public policy, concern moralss, and stakeholder theory/management ‘ . ( Carroll 1999, p. 284 ) During this period The World Conservation Strategy describe provinces that ‘Sustainable development seeks to run into the demands and aspirations of the present without compromising the ability to run into those of the hereafter ‘ ( World Commission on Environment and Development 1987 ) .
In 1990s CSR used construct ‘as the base point, edifice block, or point-of-departure for other related constructs and subjects, many of which embraced CSR-thinking and were rather compatible with it. An of import part to the literature was made by Wood in 1991 when she ‘placed CSR into a broader context than merely a stand-alone definition. An of import accent in her theoretical account was on results or public presentation ‘ ( Carroll 1999, p. 289 ) .
Swanson ( 1995 ) suggested that there were three chief types of motive for CSR:
The useful position ( an instrument to assist accomplish public presentation aims ) ;
The negative responsibility attack ( irresistible impulse to follow socially responsible enterprises to pacify stakeholders ) ; and
The positive responsibility position ( concerns self-motivated regardless of societal force per unit areas ) ( Swanson in Maignan & A ; Ralston 2002 ) .
It is besides a position that was overtaken in the 90s by a broadening treatment of the construct of stakeholder, and whether ‘the first precedence of a corporation is to its stockholders ‘ ( Nahan in Ryan, 2002 ) or whether policymakers should develop ‘a flexible multistakeholder attack to advancing CSR ‘ , as Aaronson suggests has occurred in Britain in response to concern about planetary corporate duty ( Aaronson 2003, p. 312 ) . Global influences on CSR continued in the 1990s as the functions of concern and authorities continued to film over. Writing in 1999, as the new millenary approached, Carroll suggested that, ‘the CSR construct will stay as an indispensable portion of the concern linguistic communication and pattern, because it is a critical underpinning to many of the other theories and is continually consistent with what the public expects of the concern community today ‘ . ( Carroll 1999, p. 292 )
CSR in India
The construct of CSR had ever been portion of Indian concern tradition, though it had non been highlighted in footings of CSR, as understood or defined today. Peoples being extremely societal, the tradition of CSR had existed even before the industrial revolution in India in twentieth Century, and manifested itself in pattern and nucleus philosophical ideas. In contention to above, the term, ‘Loksamagrah ‘ , finds reference in chapter III ( 20 ) of ‘Gita’- the sacred Indian Bible elaborating Indian doctrine, defines what should be the ultimate end of actions and interactions. In item, ‘Loksamagraha ‘ means-binding work forces together, and protecting, keeping & A ; modulating them in such a manner that they might get that strength, which consequences from common cooperation, thereby seting them on the way of geting virtue, while keeping their good conditions ( Tilak, 2000 ) . It implies that society shall stay, if there is common cooperation among the functioning elements, one of them being the Corporates. Harmonizing to Jose, Bandi & A ; Mehra ( 2003 ) , the construct of ‘Trusteeship ‘ , as propounded by Mahatma Gandhi, finds echo in the construct of ‘Triple Bottom Line ‘ impact of concern.
They further opine that, faith and charity have ever been linked in India with concern, and people being nurtured in a societal environment founded on the belief that ‘giving ‘ is good. The conceptualisation of CSR in Indian traditional sense of concern has ever been about Corporates traveling for general good. It can be concluded here that, the construct of ‘social good as portion of concern ‘ is more deep seated in Indian and other Asiatic states for the ground given by Chua, Hannah Faye, Leu and Nisbett ( 2005 ) , that East Asians are more holistic than westerners and the groundss suggest that, east Asians are more attuned to emotions than Americans. Around mid 19th century, the energy and material resources available in India, attracted the attending of West & A ; Europe and concern community in India to travel for industrialisation and development to run into the demands and demands of an imperium and its topics. This initiated development of concern houses and Corporates in India, with integrating of traditional charity and philosophical content of concern, in footings of societal duty in their ventures.
Post independent epoch has been markedly different in India. The democratic apparatus and the rights enshrined in the Indian Constitution shaped out a new socio-political order in which, development of society required ‘Heavy Industrialization ‘ as pillar. But, in late eightiess it was realized that with all good purposes of societal duty, the policies and programmes led to the ‘Quota Raj ‘ or ‘Licence Raj ‘ i.e. Rule of License in India, due to which, societal duty construct suffered really severely, and everything turned into a deadwood and growing really got stopped. Then economic experts, executive and trade & A ; commercialism pools together made attempts to come out of the dead end, and envisaged the paradigm displacement in which, the societal duty became duty of all participants including the authorities.
Floodgates were opened and private sector function came up in a really large manner ; And since liberalisation of economic system in 1991, the private sector has grown to go an entity in itself, and has been assigned function to spouse developmental duties with the authorities. This set house foundation for CSR and the demand for its pattern. The 2001 State of CSR in India canvass ‘ provinces 4 Models of CSR in India: The ‘Ethical theoretical account ‘ as suggested by Mahatama Gandhi, the ‘Statist theoretical account ‘ , by Jawaharlal Nehru, the ‘Liberal theoretical account ‘ by Milton Friedman and the ‘Stakeholder theoretical account ‘ championed by R. Edward Freeman and harmonizing to the study all the four theoretical accounts co-exist in India today ( Prakash-Mani, 2002 ) .
There is huge literature available, and positions of Ambani ( Bakshi, 2004 ) can all be quoted as statements in favor of CSR, but the effect of all is reflected in the words of JRD Tata, Doyen of Indian Business as quoted by Srivastava & A ; Venkatswaran ( 2000 ) , that the private sector should recognize that they have to play back their portion in the spirit of trust territory advocated by Mahatma Gandhi and that, no Business is worthwhile, unless it serves the demands or involvements of the state and its people.
Post Independence epoch in India had seen CSR patterns grow in India. In banking sector, reported enterprises of ‘Bank of India ‘ & As ; ‘NABARD ‘ ( National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development ) and ‘Union bank of India ‘ as quoted by Goswami ( 2005 ) show that CSR patterns have contributed to the positive image of the establishments, have brought them closer to the society, and have resulted in the paid self-employment of downtrodden.
The Management establishments such as SP Jain Institute of Management and Research, IIM Ahmedabad, IIM Bangalore, IIM Calcutta, IIM Lucknow and IIT Bombay ‘s School of Management are lending by manner of sensitising their direction pupils for corporate citizenship. Sing CSR patterns, the work of organisations like BILT, Tata Motors Ltd. ITC HLL ‘s etc. in India ( Mazumdar, 2002 ) show the engagement of organisations in one or the other activity for people, which organizations refer to as portion of their CSR enterprises and patterns. Other surveies, like joint survey conducted by UNDP, BC, CII, PwC between September-October, 2002 ( CSR Survey, 2002 ) , survey for ‘India ‘s Best Managed Companies ‘ conducted by Business Today, a concern magazine in India along with planetary consulting house A.T. Kearney ( BT-A.T. Kearney Study, 2005 ) , and ‘Third study ‘ undertaken by Spouses in Change ( PIC, 2002-03 ) in the period 2002-2003 led the research workers to reason that, the corporate sector has grown beyond the size of making concern with limited subdivisions of society, affecting limited resources with limited net incomes, as it used to make in tardily 19th to middle of twentieth century. Today, corporate sector and establishments have grown to such a size, that their clasp on universe resources, capital generated out of concern and concern with all the subdivisions of society, has become tremendous. This has brought the organisations in an sphere, where the component of duty is to be exercised by them as CSR patterns, in order to hold sustained development along with growing of concern and endurance of ego, without striving and burthening the society.
CSR in Service Sector – Disability Rehabilitation
The above concluded subdivision entirely does non warrant the CSR patterns and enterprises because service sector stands out markedly from general sphere of Corporates, as an entity to think with. Observations have been made sing the importance of growing of service sector in relation to the whole universe economic system. Whatever informations on CSR is available is limited to the service sectors like banking, insurance, agribusiness, and kid & A ; adult females wellness. The other of import sector “ Rehabilitation ” and Disability Rehabilitation in peculiar has really limited coverage. It can be concluded that there is famine of surveies about CSR in the field of rehabilitation. Chandrasekhar D.S ( 2006 ) made an effort to analyze the coverage of disablement and related issues in the corporate sectors involved in publicity of CSR. In this survey the writer has reviewed the studies of the Corporates. These studies were CSR studies, one-year studies or any other study where the issues related to disablement is been addressed. These studies were accessed through cyberspace by sing the several web site of the corporate organisation. The list of these 50 corporate organisations is enclosed as Annexure – 1.
The corporate studies were reviewed against 13 indexs from four spheres. The spheres and indexs are as follows:
Spheres with Indexs
Top Management Committednesss
Equal chance for individuals with disablements
Explicit committednesss in CSR schemes
Committedness to prosecute stakeholders with disablement
Duty of Top direction in corporate administration of disablement issues
Corporate Policies and Practices
Performance measuring in relation to disablement dimensions
Recruitment, keeping and calling development of employees with disablements
Impact survey on the employment patterns on people with disablements
Social Inclusion and Accessibility
Measures undertaken to do organisation ‘s environment disabled friendly
Encouragement of societal inclusion and economic development of people with disablements
Documentation and coverage in disablement friendly formats
Corporate Investment & A ; Partnership in Disabled Entrepreneurs
Partnership with Govt. or NGOs peculiarly run by people with disablement
Sourcing of supplies from handicapped enterprisers
Equity investing in handicapped enterprisers
The analysis of studies against the indexs is populated in Table – 1 and diagrammatically represented in Exhibit – 1, Exhibit – 2, Exhibit – 3, Exhibit – 4, and Exhibit – 5.
Table – 1
The analysis of the studies revels that on an mean 16.5 % studies indicate the concern towards individuals with disablements in their Corporate Social Responsibility coverage. The Corporate Policies and Practices ( 22 % ) is more addressed sphere than the Social Inclusion and handiness ( 17.3 % ) , Top Management committednesss ( 16 % ) and Corporate Investment & A ; Partnership in Disabled Entrepreneurships ( 10.7 % ) . This representation clearly indicates that the corporate sector has established Corporate Policies for the public assistance of individuals with disablements, but seems to be less interested in puting and partnering with handicapped enterprisers. The committedness of top direction and their concern about societal inclusion and handiness is noticeable in their studies.
Exhibit – 1
The analysis of studies indicates that they are officially committed towards the execution of CSR activities for the public assistance of Persons with Disabilities. Most of the corporate studies ( 28 % ) had suggests that their Top Management committed towards supplying equal chances for the individuals with disablements in their several corporate sectors. 16 % studies highlights the committednesss of the directors in prosecuting stakeholders with disablement in the organisations. The duty of top direction in corporate administration of disablement issues and committednesss towards CSR schemes recorded as 10 % .
Exhibit – 2
It is observed that corporate policies and patterns toward disablement were most focussed and incorporated in 22 % of the studies. Under this sphere 36 % studies mentioned that the public presentation measuring of employee with disablement is carried out by maintaining the dimensions of disablement into consideration. 12 % studies had mentioned that their several corporate had specific policies and patterns for enlisting, keeping and calling development of employees with disablements. 18 % studies had shown that the corporate took stairss to analyze the impact of employment patterns on people with disablements.
Exhibit – 3
In 17.3 % corporate studies societal inclusion and handiness was included. Under this domain the studies reflects that 20 % studies have mentioned steps taken by the Corporates to do the organisations disable friendly. 22 % studies highlights the stairss taken by the organisation to promote the societal inclusion and economic development of people with disablements. 10 % studies have specified their attempts in documenting and describing in disablement friendly formats.
Exhibit – 4
In relation to corporate investing and partnership with handicapped enterprisers 10.7 % studies mentioned the organisational concerns in making so. In this sphere 22 % studies illustrate that the corporate involve themselves in set uping partnership with Government and Non Government bureaus peculiarly run by people with disablement. 06 % studies set up the fact that the corporate is outsourcing the supplies from handicapped enterprisers. 04 % studies high spots that the corporate besides invest equity in handicapped enterprisers.
Exhibit – 5
The analysis of the consequence indicate that bulk of the studies 22 % has mentioned the corporate policies and patterns for the public assistance of people with disablements followed by steps taken for societal inclusion and handiness. The top direction committedness towards people with disablement was following addressed issue followed by corporate investing and partnership in handicapped enterprisers.
By sing the consequences, one can non disregard the sensitiveness and concern of the corporate sector towards individuals with disablements but the demand of hr requires more aggressive and emphasized attack for the inclusion of individuals with disablements. To make so the Corporates demands to be reinforced for taking such actions at expansive graduated table.