SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN TEACHING CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: EVIDENCE FROM MEXICO AND CANADA

  • Santiago Gonzalez Universidad Panamericana, Banaterra Campus
  • Murat Sakir Erogul Thompson Rivers University
  • Salvador Barragan Thompson Rivers University
Keywords: Corporate Social Responsibility, Stakeholder Theory, Case study, Education and Business, Mexico, Canada

Abstract

The need to incorporate and develop Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) within university programs is necessary for future leaders, managers and entrepreneurs. Within the framework of CSR and stakeholder theory the paper contributes a comparative case study that utilizes curriculum and in-depth interview analysis to illustrate not only the similarities and differences in the CSR programs, but how social responsibility is taught in a Mexican and Canadian University context. The main findings are: the CSR program in Mexico is perceived as a strategic management tool that adds value to the organization and does not pay any special attention to the globalization phenomena. Whereas in Canada, social responsibility is founded on ethics, attention to the different stakeholders in a globalized environment is emphasized and the strategic importance of CSR is widely accepted. The paper provides academics and researcher insight into exploring how universities can further facilitate students as stakeholders in considering social responsibility as important and necessary to ensure CSR sustainability in practice.

References


  • Aguinis, H., Glavas, A. (2012) ‘What we know and don’t know About Corporate Social Responsibility: A Review and Research Agenda’, Journal of Management, vol. 4, no. 38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0149206311436079

  • Alvesson, M., Sköldberg, K. 2000. Reflexive Methodology. London: Sage.

  • Armstrong M.B., Ketz, J.E., Owsen, D. (2003) ‘Ethics education in accounting: moving toward ethical motivation and ethical behaviour’, Journal of Accounting Education, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 1-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0748-5751(02)00017-9

  • Atakan, M.G.S., Eker, T. (2007) ‘Corporate identity of a socially responsible university: a case from the Turkish higher education sector’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 76, pp. 55-68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9274-3

  • Augier, M., March, J. (2011) The Roots, Rituals and Rhetorics of Change, North American Business Schools After the Second World War. Stanford Business Books, Stanford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.3917/mana.145.0372

  • Bampton, R., Maclagan, P. (2005) ‘Why teach ethics to accounting students? A response to the skeptics’, Business Ethics: A European Review, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 290–300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8608.2005.00410.x 

  • Block, W., Cwik, P.F. (2007) ‘Teaching business ethics: a classificationist approach’, Business Ethics: A European Review, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 98–106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8608.2007.00480.x

  • Bowen, H.R. (1953) Social Responsibilities of the Businessman, Harper and Row, New York.

  • Carroll, A.B. (1979) ‘A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance’, Academy of Management Review, vol. 4, pp. 497-505. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amr.1979.4498296

  • Carroll, A.B. (1991) ‘The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders’, Journal of Business Horizons, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 39-48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-g

  • Cochran, P.L. (2007) ‘The evolution of corporate social responsibility’, Business Horizons, vol. 50, no. 6, pp. 449–454. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2007.06.004

  • Cornelius, N., Wallace, J., Tassabehji, R. (2007) ‘An analysis of corporate social responsibility, corporate identity and ethics teaching in business schools’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 76, no. 1, pp. 117–135. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9271-6

  • Dahan, G.S., Senol, I. (2012) ‘Corporate social responsibility in higher education institutions: Istanbul Bilgi University case’, American International Journal of Contemporary Research, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 95-103.

  • Derry, R. (2012) ‘Reclaiming Marginalized Stakeholders’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 111, no. 2, pp. 253-264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1205-x

  • Dimaggio, P.J., Powell, W. (1983)  ‘The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields’, American Sociological Review, vol. 48, pp. 147-160. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2095101

  • Donaldson, T., Preston, L.E. (1995) ‘The stakeholder theory of the corporation: concepts, evidence, and implications’, The Academy of Management Review, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 65–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9503271992

  • Forray, J.M., Leigh, J.S.A. (2012) ‘A primer on the Principles of Responsible Management Education: Intellectual roots and waves of change’, Journal of Management Education, vol. 36, pp. 295-309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1052562911433031

  • Freeman, E.R. (1984) Strategic Management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman Publishing, Business and Public Policy Series.  Cambridge University Press. New York.

  • Freeman, E.R. (1994) ‘The Politics of Stakeholder Theory: Some Future Directions’, Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 409-422. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3857340

  • Freeman, E.R., Donaldson, T., Preston, L.E. (1995) ‘The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications. The Academy of Management Review, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 65-91. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9503271992

  • Freeman E., Harrison J., Wicks A. (2007) ‘Managing for Stakeholders: Survival, Reputation and Success’, Yale University Press.

  • Freeman, E.R., Harrison, J.S., Wicks, A.C. (2010) Stakeholder Theory, the State of the Art. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2010.495581

  • Gaa, J.C., Thorne, L. (2004) ‘An introduction to the special issue on professionalism and ethics in accounting education. Issues in Accounting Education, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 1–6.

  • Geva, A. (2008) ‘Three Models of Corporate Social Responsibility: Interrelationships Between Theory, Research and Practice’, Business and Society Review, vol. 113, no. 1, pp. 1-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8594.2008.00311.x

  • Holland, D., Albrecht, C. (2013) ‘The worldwide academic field of business ethics: scholar’s perceptions of the most important issues’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 117, pp. 777-788. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1718-y

  • Jamali, D. (2008) ‘A stakeholder approach to corporate social responsibility: a fresh prespective into theory and practice’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 82,  pp. 213-231. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9572-4

  • Johnson, H.L. (1971) Business in Contemporary Society: Framework and Issues, Wadsworth, Belmont, CA.

  • Kvasničková Stanislavská, L., Kvasnička, R., Kuralová, K., Margarisová, K. (2014) ‘Social Responsibility of Higher Educational Institutions - the Comparison of the View of Students and Potential Students’, Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, vol. 7, no. 3-4, pp. 95-99. http://dx.doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2014.070308

  • Lee, M-D.P. (2008) ‘A review of the theories of corporate social responsibility: its evolutionary path and the road ahead’, International Journal of Management Reviews, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 53–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2007.00226.x

  • Logsdon, J., Wood, D. (2002) ‘Business citizenship: From domestic to global level of analysis’, Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 155-187. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3857809

  • Long, D.M., Rao, S. (1995) ‘The wealth effects of unethical behavior’, Journal of Economics and Finance, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 65-73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf02920510

  • Luthar, H.K., Karri, R. (2005) ‘Exposure to ethics education and the perception of linkage between organizational ethical behavior and business outcomes’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 61, pp. 353-368. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-005-1548-7

  • Maignan, I. (2001) ‘Consumer’s Perceptions of Corporate Social Responibilities: A Cross-Cultural Comparison’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 30, pp. 57–72.

  • OECD (2015) OECD´s document with regards to bribes, [online] http://www.oecd.org (accessed 22 July 2015).

  • Orlitsky, M., Schmidt, F.L., Rynes, S.L. (2003) ‘Corporate Social and Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis’, Organization Studies, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 403-441. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0170840603024003910

  • Pfeffer, J., Fong, C.T. (2004) ‘The business school “business”: some lessons from the US experience’, Journal of Management Studies, vol. 41, no. 8, pp. 1501–1520. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2004.00484.x

  • Popa, O. (2010) ‘Organizational Social Responsibility - State of The Art. Revista Tinerilor Economisti’, The Young Economists Journal, vol. 1, no. 15S, pp. 59-68.

  • Porter, M.E., Kramer, M. (2002) ‘The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy’, Harvard Business Review, vol. 80, no. 12, pp. 57–68.

  • Schwartz, M.S., Carroll, A.B. (2003) ‘Corporate Social Responsibility: A Three Domain Approach’, Business Ethics Quarterly, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 503-530. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/beq200313435

  • Stensaker, B. (2007) ‘The relationship between branding and organizational change’, Higher Education Management and Policy, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 13-29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/hemp-v19-art1-en

  • Transparency International, (2013) Corruption by Country / Territory, Canada and Mexico [online] http://www.transparency.org/country#CAN and http://www.transparency.org/country#MEX (accessed 24 May 2014).

  • Tricker, RI. (2012) ‘The Cultural Dependence of Corporate Governance’, Keeping Good Companies, vol. 64, no. 1, pp. 27-31.

  • UN Global Compact. (2014) What Is UN Global Compact. [online] https://www.unglobalcompact.org/what-is-gc/mission/principles (accessed 3 July 2014).

  • Tudev, O., Lkhagvasuren, E. (2011) ‘The Implementation of Corporate Social Responsibility in Mongolian Business Sector’, Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 89-96, ISSN 1803-1617.

  • Vogel, D. (2008) The Market for Virtue, The Potential and Limits of Corporate Social Responsibility, Brookings Institution Press. USA. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bse.535

  • Waddock, S.A., Boyle, M. (1995) ‘The dynamics of change in corporate community relations’, California Management Review, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 125–141. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/41165814

  • Waddock, S., Graves, S. (1997) ‘The corporate social performance – financial performance link’, Strategic Management Journal, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 303-319.

  • Waples, E.P., Antes, A.L., Murphy, S.T., Connelly, S., Mumford, M.D. (2008) ‘A meta-analytic investigation of business ethics instruction’, Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 87, no. 1, pp. 133–151. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-008-9875-0

  • Wexler Mark N. (2000) Confronting Moral Worlds: Understanding Business Ethics, Corporate Social Responsibility, Scarborough: Prentice Hall: 75-111.

  • Weymans, W. (2010) ‘Democracy, knowledge and critique: rethinking European universities beyond tradition and the market’, London Review of Education, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 117-126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14748460.2010.487329

  • World Bank Group (2015) World Bank Group. [online] http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/canada http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/mexico (accessed 25 March 2015).  

  • Yin, R.K. (2003) Case Study Research: Design and Methods (Third ed. Vol. 5), Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.

Published
2016-09-29
How to Cite
Gonzalez, S., Erogul, M. S. and Barragan, S. (2016) ’SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN TEACHING CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: EVIDENCE FROM MEXICO AND CANADA’, Journal on Efficiency and Responsibility in Education and Science, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 70-80 https://doi.org/10.7160/eriesj.2016.090303.
Section
Research Paper