The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility - Toward the Moral Article - 2

The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility - Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders - Article ExampleThe article by Archie B. Carroll deals with the conceit of CRS in analogy to businesses and organizations, for all of which the main task is to be profitable. Carroll distinguishes three types of business management immoral, amoral and moral, each of which entails a different organizations sermon of its stakeholders and the society in general. The power claims that each comp whatevers management should act in a moral way in order to sate its corporate social responsibilities. Background Information Though the article was published in 1991, its ideas are valid today too, since it provides certain definitions of such hurt as corporate social responsibility, stakeholders, immoral management, amoral management and moral management, among others. Such definitions are based on the works of earlier authors. Nevertheless, they asshole be said to be valid since they determine the general concept related to the CSR theory used by businesses nowadays. Therefore, the article should be judged on the basis of applicability of the concepts and ideas presented in it. Furthermore, it seems obligatory to determine how in particular the presented ideas can be applied in an organization if it is possible at all. Summary One of the major ideas presented by A. Carroll is that businesses and organizations can become more socially responsible if managers of such organizations become more moral instead of being immoral or amoral. Being immoral, in the authors understanding, means acting in the financial and economic interests of the company and the manager. Similarly, being amoral means managers acting without considering any moral or good principles of the society or even the company itself the major focus in this case is on the managers interests only. A moral manager, on the contrary, is an individual who acts in the best interests of both the compa ny and the society. Such a person, therefore, is to manage the companys economic, legal, ethical and philanthropic responsibilities of the company in relation to all of the stakeholders owners, customers, employees, community, competitors, suppliers, social activistic groups, public at large, and others. Evaluation The authors goal was to explore the nature of CSR having defined its major components. A. Carroll intended to delimit the different types of CSR strategies a manager might use in order to make his or her organization more effective and efficient in terms of corporate social responsibility. Finally, the authors desire was to determine what it means to treat the stakeholders, who were to be determined in the article as well, in an ethical and moral manner. All these tasks have been accomplished by the writer. Carroll suggests that a moral manager should consider the interests of such stakeholders as customers, employees, community or social activist groups in order to ru n a business in an ethical and moral manner. Still, it might be noted that the author does not provide any practical advice on how such a state of the business can be achieved. While the theoretical background looks quite sufficient the author bases the statement on earlier works of the scientists.