Approaches to Innovative Business Social Responsibility: Alternatives for Today's Organizations
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22579/23463910.52Keywords:
Corporate Social Responsability, CSR, Innovative CSR, CSR approaches, Instrumental theory, Value chainAbstract
Issues such as poverty, inequality and inefficient use of natural resources create difficulties in the operation of productive equipment and have become a topic of interest in the agendas of the industrialized nations. In turn, a change is evident in consumer behavior, demanding the participation of the company in society through the generation of responsible practices. The above scenario raises the need to strengthen support from private enterprise to sustainable development of the nation, based on the dimension of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).
In this sense, the document focuses its objective to identify and classify innovative approaches to CSR as a strategic tool for today's organizations. Both innovation and CSR frame a complex and multidimensional relationship, therefore, the document opts for a view from the instrumental theory to offer three approaches as a framework of innovative CSR and organizational impact.
The proposed approaches are related to the instrumental theory, given the interaction between innovative CSR stakeholders, guidance for generating competitive advantage and marketing with cause, all these aspects of value creation. So are strategic alternatives for companies seeking to boost their CSR as a differentiating strategic aspect for both corporate value chain and for social actors with which it relates and directs their CSR practices.
References
Abdulai M.M.; Hinson, R. (2012) Market orientation, innovation and corporate social responsibility practices in Ghana's telecommunication sector. Social Responsibility Journal 8:3, 327-346.
Arévalo, J., Bayona, R., y Rico, D. (2015). Responsabilidad social empresarial e innovación: Una mirada desde las tecnologías de la información y comunicación de organizaciones. RevistaClíoAmérica, 9(18), 180-189. doi:ISSN 1909 -941X
Bellow, E. (2012). Corporate Social Responsibility and Organizations Innovation Strategy. Journal of Strategic Innovation and Sustainability, 8(2), 37-45.
Conseil de la Science et de la Technologies (CST) (2001). Innovation etdéveloppementdurable.L’économie de demain. Avis, Gouvernement du Québec, available on the web site http://www.cst.gov.qc.ca/
European Commission (EC) (2007) “Responsible and Sustainable Innovation for European SMEs: response”, Response Project.
Ferauge, P. (2012). A conceptual framework of corporate social responsibility and innovation. Global Journal of Business Research, 6(5), 85-96.
Gallego, I.; Prado, J.; García, I. (2011).Corporate social responsibility and innovation: A resource-based theory. Management Decision, 49(10), 1709-1727. doi:10.1108/00251741111183843
Garriga, E.; Melé, D. (2004).Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of Business, 53(1), 51-71.
Hillestad, T.; Xie, C.; Haugland, S. (2010). Innovative corporate social responsibility: the founder’s role in cretin a trustworthy corporate brand through “green innovation”. Journal of Product y Brand Management, 19(6), 440-451.
Hillman, A.J.; Keim, G.D. (2001). Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: What’s the botton line?. StrategicManagement Journal, 22(2), 125-139.
Hull, C. E.; Rothenburg, S. (2008).Firm performance: The interactions of corporate social performance with innovation and industry differentiation. Strategic Management Journal, 29, 781–789.
Husted, B.; Allen, D. (2007).Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility and Value Creation among Large Firms.Lesson from the Spanish Experience. Long Range Planning, 40, 594-610.
Macgregor, S.; Espinach, X.; Fontrodona, J. (2007) “Social innovation: using design to generate business value through corporate social responsibility”, International Conference on Engineering Design, Cité des Sciences et de l’Industrie, Paris, France.
Midttun, A.; Granda, G. (2007). La innovación y la responsabilidad social empresarial. Madrid: Cuadernos Forética, 10.
Pavelin, S.; Porter.L.A (2008). The Corporate Social Performance Content of Innovation in the U.K. Journal of Business Ethics 80 (4): 711–725.
Perrini, F.; Russo, A.; Tencati, A.; Vurro, C. (2009). Going beyond a long-lasting debate: What is behind the relationship between corporate social and financial performance? The Valuing Business research programme: Beyond CSP-CFP. Documento de trabajo.Universidad de Bocconi: Milan.
PNUD (2015). Objetivos de desarrollo del Milenio: Informe de 20015. UnitedNations Publications.
Porter, M.; Kramer, M.R. (2006).Strategy and society: the link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility.Harvard Business Review, December, 1-15.
Red Pacto Global Colombia. (2015), ¿Qué es el pacto global?, Recuperado en: http://www.pactoglobal-colombia.org/index.php/pacto-global/que-es-pacto-global
Rennings, K. (2000). Redefining Innovation–Eco-Innovation Research and the Contribution from Ecological Economics. Ecological Economics 32 (2): 319–332.
Schultz, M.; Antorini, Y.; Csaba, F. (2005), Towards the Second Wave of Corporate Branding: Corporate BrandingPurpose/People/Process. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School.
Sharma, S.; Vredenburg, H.. (1998). Proactive corporate environmental strategy and the development of competitively valuable capabilities. Strategic Management Journal 19, 729-753.
Strandberg, L. (2010). La responsabilidad Social Corporativa en la Cadena de Valor. Cuadernos de la catedra “laCaixa” de Responsabilidad Social de la Empresa y Gobierno Corporativo. 6, 25-27.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2020 Fabián Arley Ninco Hernández, Yenni Viviana Duque Orozco
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The author must review the editorial policy of the GEON Journal.
To increase their visibility, documents are sent to databases and indexing systems.
The content of the articles is the responsibility of each author and does not compromise, in any way, the magazine or the institution.
