Definition | CSR
“It refers to the obligation of businessmen to pursue those policies, to make those decisions, or to follow those lines of action which are desirable in terms of objectives and values of our society.”
Howard R. Bowen (1953)
Source: Bowen, Howard Rothmann: Social Responsibilities of the Businessman, Harper, 1953
The definition is precise and accurately describes the role of CSR, however I would not say that it is “the obligation of businessmen”. More likely I would refer to it as the obligation of all individuals.
I somehow agree with you. I wouldn’t use the term ‘businessmen’ neither ‘all individuals’ in this context to avoid drawing conclusions to a general public. However, I couldn’t really give a better term.
In this definition a good aspect is added, as it is mentioned “voluntary” – I like it, as it shows that an intrinsic motivation is required & given by the participating companies.
In my opinion, this definition leaves a lot of room for discussion, because it could be put into the wrong perspective. It doesn’t give a clear understanding what those desirable actions and and values of the society are.
As Bowen refers to the actions of businessmen “which are desirable in terms of objectives and values of our society”, he just mentions the actions that refer on society and doesn’t highlight the responsible actions on the environment. This definition also leaves out the stakeholders and their expectations, which can not only be defined to values and objectives. Without their expectation, CSR would not have the same impact.
I think that CSR is not only responsible for obligations of our society as it is mentioned in the definition. Environmental and ecological issues are missing in my opinion in this definition and are as important as social concernes.
I agree with my colleagues that this definition leaves too much room for discussion. In my opinion the term entrepreneur is problematic. For example, entrepreneurs pursue different goals than NGOs. This definition is too vague, it would need a more precise definition of what is considered to be desirable goals and values of the society.
I find this definition particularly interesting because it is the oldest definition quoted here. As my colleagues have already described above, I think that the term “businessmen” is no longer accurate today, but otherwise this definition contains the most important points for me.
To me it sounds like “we are doing everything for the customer” – all our decisions etc. But I think it should not only be done for the customer. It should also be done for the organization itself: e. g. for employees, for its image, for the revenues, products, … everything can be impacted by that.
I think these are not just goals and values of our society but they have to be integrated and implemented. At the end of the day they have to be lived.
As the term should really be SR instead of CSR, I believe that this definition is too narrow-minded. Social responsibility should not only be in the hands of the businessmen in charge. It really should be in the hands of the customers, who no longer buy their products or support their brands. This way those very businessmen will no longer be the ones in charge.
CSR is in my opinion not only in the position to pursue the fulfillment of social demands but also to ensure that other goals (internally set in order to create more secure and employer friendly processes) have to pursued.