In this paper, we develop our argument in three steps: Firstly, we elaborate on some theoretical perspectives for industry-specific CSR by referring to cultural business ethics, a theoretical approach which is located between purely business perspectives and purely normative perspectives on CSR. Secondly, we briefly introduce the papers of this special issue, which covers a wide range of theoretical approaches and empirical studies in the field of industry-specific CSR. Thirdly, we draw attention to shortcomings of an industry-specific approach and sketch some theoretical—but also empirically applicable—perspectives for further research that stress cross-sectoral perspectives based on societal needs.
Based on the findings of a qualitative empirical study of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in Swiss MNCs and SMEs, we suggest that smaller firms are not necessarily less advanced in organizing CSR than large firms. Results according to theoretically derived assessment frameworks illustrate the actual implementation status of CSR in organizational practices. We propose that small firms possess several organizational characteristics that are favorable for promoting the internal implementation of CSR-related practices in core business functions, but constrain external communication and reporting about CSR. In contrast, large firms possess several characteristics that are favorable for promoting external communication and reporting about CSR, but at the same time constrain internal implementation. We sketch a theoretical explanation of these differences in organizing CSR in MNCs and SMEs based on the relationship between firm size and relative organizational costs.
The main question of this final section of the book is: What theoretical lessons can we learn from sector-specific corporate responsibility in Europe? We will develop our argument in five steps:First, a perspective on cultural business ethics will be sketched that can be located between pure business perspectives, on the one hand, and pure normative perspectives on CR, on the other. Thus, cultural business ethics is characterised as a third way that emphasises the factual normative orientations of actors and the normative social dynamics in societies. Second, we will suggest a road leading from CR blue-prints to culturally embedded responsibility that is based on four still very general theoretical key elements: interests and power, institutional change, negotiation and deliberation, and the new role of actors. Third, based on per-spectives of the embeddedness of practices and their contextualisation, the merits of SCR will be outlined.Fourth, these merits will be analysed through the lenses of the following key dimensions: issues, actors, organizational fields, locality and modes of cooperation. Finally, we will draw attention to some shortcomings of a sectoral approach and sketch some theoretical-but also empirically applicable-perspectives for further research that stress
cross-sectoral perspectives based on societal needs.
In diesem Beitrag wollen wir an zwei aktuellen und prominenten Gegenentwürfen
zu CSR die konzeptionellen und praktischen Probleme aufzeigen, die mit den jeweiligen
Begriffen einhergehen. Es handelt sich um den "ehrbaren Kaufmann" und "Shared Value", beides Konzepte, die sich in der unternehmensethischen Diskussion zunehmender Beliebtheit erfreuen.
Thomas Manns Meistererzählung "Die Buddenbrooks" lobt den "ehrbaren Kaufmann". Angesichts von Finanzkrise und Wirtschaftsskandalen erscheint dieser manchen als ein Leitbild für Wirtschaftslenker der Gegenwart. Doch Märchenstunden für
das Management können in die Irre führen. In dem Konzept sind "Ursachenbeschreibung" und "Therapievorschlag"
zu einfach.
