Criteria for Evaluating the Legitimacy of Corporate Social Responsibility

Abstract

The goal of this paper is to provide a general discussion about the legitimacy of corporate social responsibility. Given that social responsibility projects entail costs, it is not always obvious under what precise conditions managers will have a responsibility to engage in activities primarily designed to promote societal goals. In this paper we discuss four distinct criteria for evaluating the legitimacy of corporate projects for institutionalizing social responsibility: (1) local knowledge (2) level of responsibility (3) shared consensus, and (4) relationship to financial performance. We conclude our discussion by noting that in those cases where the firm possesses knowledge about a specific problem and its solution, is directly responsible for causing harm, where a shared consensus among all relevant stakeholders exists, and financial performance will be enhanced, social responsibility projects are ideal. Obviously, no program will meet all of the criteria. In fact, our model specifically suggests that there is often a trade-off between the first three criteria and the last. For example, in those situations where the corporation directly imposes harm on third parties, and where a high degree of consensus exists among all stakeholders, there is little need to link the social responsibility program to financial performance. By contrast, as the corporation seeks proactive solutions to problems which are only incidental to the corporation, and where little consensus exists, the predicted relationship to financial performance becomes more crucial. By formally examining the trade-offs among these four criteria we more fully understand the complex relationship between social responsibility and financial impacts.