The Jade Peony

Thesis: one’s personal culture and sense of tradition will always be a strong part of the self, regardless of external factors which can have a profound influence on one’s life. Subtopic 1: one’s value, habits and loyalty to his culture and tradition are not easily changed. Example:â€Å" But we collect for the heart, Kiam-Kim,† Father said. â€Å"We help all the people of China. † I was puzzled. â€Å"Even those who kill other Chinese? † â€Å"Yes,† Father said. â€Å"Of course. † â€Å"But never help the Japanese? † â€Å"Never. †(Page 208) Explanation: This discussion is between Kiam-Kim and his father, which is a Chinese family in Canada for a long time. At that time, there is just a war between China and Japanese, and Kiam-Kim, who is the main character in the novel, is collecting money for the donation of Chinese soldiers. Kiam-Kim thinks this money is for blankets, medical supplies, food for orphans but not for bullets or guns. Because at that time, Kiam-Kim just 9 years old, his child’s mind wants everyone in peace but not in war. But in fact, there are so many wars in China. Not only between Chinese people but also between China and Japan. When he asks his father about what these denotation is for, his father tells him that is for all Chinese people including the people who is fighting with another Chinese people. Because of the hatred of Japan, his father never wants to give anything to Japan. That proves that he will never help his country’s enemy because of his loyalty of China . Subtopic 2: One’s culture can have a profound hold on one’s personality, gravity influencing a course of behavior. Example: â€Å"Teach Jung-sum how to kick and pass the ball,† Father said to me. â€Å"Canada never need soldiers. † â€Å"Need soldiers in China,† Poh-Poh said, slapping the last bandage on my arm. She poured her stinging homemade lotion on one of Jung’s battle wounds. â€Å"Fight the warlords!Fight the Japanese! †(Page 230 ) Explanation: Poh-Poh is an old lady from old China; she used to be in China for such a long time so the impression of China’s culture has a important part in her life. Although she is in Canada, but she still memorizes the Old China and cares about the things happening here. When the war between China and Japan is broken out, she is always worried about the Old China’s situation although there is not any war in Canada, so no soldiers are needed. But Kiam-Kim’s father said â€Å"Canada never needs soldiers†. Poh-Poh thinks about her country, the old China, which needs so many soldiers to attend to the war. So she said â€Å" Need soldiers in China! † because the culture of China has such a influence to her. Subtopic 3: We are all placed in a category and perceived in a certain way become of our background’s culture, and the human aspect of prejudgment will probably never changed. Example: Overnight, the news ran through Chinatown. Perfect Meiying had given herself to a Japanese boy. She had to do something and failed terribly. She had bled to death. Two ambulance arrived, and a crowd gathered to watch them take away the bundled body. Explanation: When the war between China and Japan becomes more and more intensely, every Chinese people including the aboard hate Japan because Japan invade their land and attack their compatriots. But Meiying, who is a wonderful girl in Chinatown, has a boyfriend as a Japanese people. In that time, it is such a terrible thing because the Chinese people believe that people who has communication with Japanese is a traitor. Meiying keeps the secret for such a long time but finally it is exposed so she can not be under this hard pressure and also don't want to Implicate her parents so she decides to kill herself. So at that time, people think all Japanese people are bad and harmful and attribute them into a category which is bad. So whether the people is good or bad, if he is a Japanese, he will be judged into a harmful people.

“Youth Is Our Future Hope”

Youth are the building blocks of a nation. It is a fact that the more stronger the youth, the more developed the nation is. The role of the youth in the nation-building occupies the central place. The countries which utilize their youth in as right direction are more developed. The energy and brightness of minds of youth act as torch-bearer for a nation. On the contrary, the countries which fail to realize the importance of the youth lag behind in every department of life. If youth is not in the right direction and is unconcerned about the future of the nation, it will become a burden for the nation.Consequently, it will not play any productive role. Pakistan has a large youth population. An estimated 63% of the population fall under the age of 25 years. Due to endemic poverty, the majority of youth in Pakistan do not have the opportunity to experience a childhood. Male youth literacy rate is estimated to be 53% and female youth literacy rate is even lower at 42%. As far employment i s concerned 15% of the youth is unemployed. Despite constituting a major chunk of our population, our youth are lagging behind in every field.Thy have a major role to play in country’s progress but due to government’s negligence they are facing many new challenges in today’s society. They have been afflicted by an identity crisis, lack of self-confidence and low self-esteem, a sense of hopelessness and confusion and ambiguity concerning about moral issues and future. They have been trapped in a culture marked by guns, violence and drugs. All this has resulted in an unstable economy, a shattered confidence of foreign investors, lawlessness and a break-up of the social fabric.Education is the most powerful weapon of the youth. With this weapon they could lead their country towards progress. But unfortunately, quality and skill based education has been a dream for our youth especially for the poor. There is no formal guidance for students in logical selection of a specific course of study. There is no unified and single education system in the country. Our universities and colleges have become degree distributing machines. Education does not mean only degrees but in its true sense it is the future of the youth.Poverty is another major problem of our youth. Due to lack of resources they are unable to get quality education and pursue their field of interest. Poverty is a sort of disease which is weakening our youth. They are unable to fully use their talent and serve their country. Another major problem being faced by our youth is unemployment. After completing their education, they find no job to utilize their skills to serve their country. This is the result of negligence of government towards utilization of the youth in a proper manner.Deteriorating conditions are also responsible for low investment in the country resulting in less job opportunities. Unemployment is a multi-dimensional and complex issue which starts a vicious circle of assoc iated problems Some other major problems faced by our youth are child labour , committing sucide , growing use of narcotics and frustration. Despite the multiplicity of problems, it is still a right time for government to take some pragmatic steps. Of the 15 largest countries in the world in terms of population, Pakistan has by far the youngest population.Government should not regard the young population as a burden but an asset. We need to bear in mind that â€Å"the destiny of nations is in the hands of youth†. Keeping in view this fact, here are some suggestions to make good use of our youth.Competitive teachers must be recruited who could encourage and guide our youth to right lines.Politics must be prevented in the educational institutions.Campaign be started by the media that it is only education which can make our country more prosperous.We must have 100% literacy.It has become a common psyche among the well-educated people that after the completion of the education th ey would leave their country in the lurch.Government must prevent brain-drain in our country by providing full employment and act as a magnet for bright minds.Parents should teach youngsters patience to face the difficulties and be steadfast.Youth be given ample opportunities to prove and cash their skill in every field.Right men be placed on right places.Youth should be clear about their future.Youth should be at arm’s length from the bad company.To conclude, the youth of today can do a marvellous job for the nation. With all the modern means of this computer age, where everything seems to be possible, why can’t the youth override the things done by the people in the past? We always consider the heroes of the past to be the evergreen characters. But today the youth with the proper use of the modern facilities should be evergreen characters for the times to come.

Defenders; Prospectors; Analyzers; and, Reactors Essay

Defenders; Prospectors; Analyzers; and, Reactors - Essay Example Unequivocally, GM is a prospector as it has adopted a proactive approach in the industry. It focuses heavily on R&D function to create premium quality, authentic, reliable and safe want-satisfying automobiles (MSN report, 2010). GM’s strategy and approach is absolutely correct because of cutthroat competition among corporations such as Ford, Toyota, Honda, Nissan, BMW, Fiat, Daimler, VW etc in the global automobile industry. The intense competition among producers increases rivalry; therefore, each company focuses heavily on technological development, adaptability, value-addition, brand recognition and product differentiation to grab maximum market share. Hence, GM has to continue its marketing approach to ensure business growth and sustainability in future. The bargaining power of suppliers (raw material providers, machinery, spare parts etc) is medium because of recent improvements in global economy. The automobile demand is stronger in 2010 compared to extremely low demand in 2009. GM successfully posted profits in first two quarters, which has also improved suppliers bargaining power. The world has still not completely come out of recession; therefore, the threat of new entrants and investors is low. Also, this is an oligopolistic industry dominated by well-established giants with colossal financial, technological, human resources and managerial expertise. In addition, there are various barriers to entry such as huge investments, registration, licensing and advertising budgets etc., which reduce this threat. Chances of rivalry among competitors, in the form of price-wars, introduction of new products and after sales services, are very high because of oligopolistic nature as it corporation seeks to increase its market share. General Motors and its renowned global competitors would continue focusing on innovation, product and market development, quality maintenance and improvement, fuel-efficiency, differentiation, advertising

Terrorist Organization Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Terrorist Organization - Assignment Example Due to the paralysis that the FARC experienced after most of its guerilla leaders and some high-ranking officials were killed and sent to prison, respectively, it was initially labeled as a group with a low chance of committing terrorist acts. However, it was also highly-capable of resurgence, which keeps it in the official list of designated terrorist groups of the Bureau of Counterterrorism. Foreign Terrorist Organizations or FTO’s are defined as foreign organizations that were designated by the Secretary of State as groups that engage in terrorist activities, as well as having intentions of threatening and terrorizing regions or whole countries, including the US (Bureau of Counterterrorism, US State Department, 2012). There are currently 51 recognized and designated FTO’s around the world as of September this year, all of which are known to operate underground. While these FTO’s have various means of getting financial assistance, as well as having their own set of goals such as liberation from the current government in the home country, these groups are all known to pose large threats due to their military-like capabilities. An example of a FTO that already has a long history is the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, or FARC (Fuerzas Armada Revolucionarias de Colombia), which is one of the oldest and largest leftist groups in Latin America (Atkins, 2004). The founding leader of the group is Manuel Marulanda, and he established a group with some of his kin and separated from the state in 1949 after an uncle was killed during the civil war between liberals and conservatives. After being invaded by the army in May 1964, Marulanda and most of the members escaped and regrouped in the south, and combining his group with the Columbian Communist Party headed by Jacobo Arenas, a new group was formed, which was FARC (Atkins, 2004). The group

Gay rights in america Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Gay rights in america - Essay Example While public perception of homosexuality has improved over the years, there are strong political and religious forces that are endeavoring to curtail this progress. As a result, despite nominal changes to the status of homosexuals, there is widespread discrimination and harassment of members of the community. In the year 2004 alone, â€Å"sexual orientation bias motivated 15.6 percent of the 9021 reported offenses within single-bias hate crime incidents in the Unites States. In 1998, Matthew Shepard died after he was tied to a split-rail fence, tortured, beaten and pistol-whipped by his attackers, while he begged for his life.† (Brammer, 2006, p.996) In this context, many of the gay rights movements efforts attempt to address legitimate concerns such as anti-gay violence, anti-gay derogatory speech, discrimination at the workplace and unjust, unconstitutional laws that have held back the community. The gay rights movement has not a gained mass support the way the civil rights movement and anti-war agitations against Vietnam and Iraq wars did. This is because of a few reasons. Firstly, homosexuality is still a taboo in some parts of the country, especially those dominated by Christian orthodoxy. Secondly, gays and lesbians in America only comprise a minority of the population, not amounting to more than 10 percent (which makes their strength as a voting block less than that of blacks and Hispanics). Hence, the push for rights and recognition for homosexuality has happened in a sporadic, uncoordinated manner. The North East region of the United States, which is known for its liberal culture, has been at the forefront of gay emancipation. Some of the landmark legislations and verdicts that would act as legal precedents in the future were issued here. Yet, gays, lesbians, bisexuals and trans-genders in the country continue to face discrimination and oppression in many areas of lif e. A case in point is the

Conflict of Interest Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Conflict of Interest - Essay Example The biasness he will show at that point will give rise to conflicts. Moreover, an example may be, if there is some kind of affection between the boss and the employee and as a result the boss gives advantage to that specific employee. In this process unintentionally or intentionally other employees will suffer and this is what conflict of interests is all about. Now there are actually two types of conflicts; potential conflicts and actual conflicts. The potential conflict occurs when there is a divergence between the personal and professional interests of an individual. The above examples are potential conflict based. The actual conflict depends on the situation not on the actions of the individuals. Nowadays actual conflicts are not as common as potential conflicts are. Potential conflict can be considered as a red flag, which means that the person involved in the conflict must be careful with whatever he is doing before it turns out to transform into an actual conflict. As the pote ntial conflict can take the shape of an actual conflict that is why the officials should remain vigilant and they should keep a keen eye on whatever is happening in the organization (Campbell and Keith, 122-126). Conflict of interest has always been an indicator of moral wrongness. Moral wrongness refers to the act of doing something that is morally wrong. It is prohibited and prevented at all cost but if it happens then the consequences are devastating. There are two reasons on the basis of which conflict of interest are considered as an indicator of moral wrongness; 1. If a person who is involved in the conflict of interest does not know what he is doing, this negligent behavior has an adverse effect on the people he is being biased for and for those whom he is not being bias as well. This is morally wrong because every employee should be treated equally according to his rank and any kind of biasness among the employees will be considered morally wrong. 2. If the people who are su ffering don’t know at the moment that a conflict is taking place and the person who is involved in the conflict also doesn’t reveal this to them, then this whole act will be termed as deception. Deceiving someone is also morally wrong. It not only hurts the person but it also disappoints him. If equal effort is being made then what is the reason of this conflict of interest. Let us take the same example given above. It is related to an organization in which an employer hires his wife for a job. Their personal relation will obviously affect their professional life. The husband will obviously be bias for his wife. He will not consider her as an employee and as a result other employees will suffer. The amount of bonuses and promotions she will get will be much more then the amount given to other employees. Apart from this she will also not be fired for her lousy performance but she will be given many chances to improve herself while other employees will be fired at the in stant no matter how hardworking and efficient they are. This act will sometimes be noticed by the other employees and sometimes they will not be able to note that conflict is taking place. The moment they know that their boss is involved in a conflict they will definitely be disappointed and if in some cases they do not get to know then also the boss will be involved in a case of deception. This act of biasness and deception shows that conflict of interest is always an indicator of

Consepts in political science Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Consepts in political science - Essay Example This also implies that democracy could also create tyrants out of the majority, since it would be expected that they would be able to give representations as to what the public needs, without having to answer for any from the minorities. Thus, while the democracy in America during Tocqueville’s time may have been borne out of the need for changes, there was still more work to be needed. Due to this view, he was able to generate the idea that democracy is a dynamic concept, which has no stopping at any point, and is constantly remodeled and reformulated to suit the needs of the people (Hoffman and Graham 140). In line with democracy, other principles such as self-accountability in maintaining peace and order in a society were also developed. One of the most influential essays to be written, Mill’s work On Liberty discusses the main premise that freedom must start from the happiness, or intended pleasure of the people (Hoffman and Graham 40). Identifying with this kind of freedom would make sure that the peace and order within a group of people would be maintained, since the citizens experiencing liberty are expected to be satisfied and content. Also, by implementing such humane principles of freedom, the lives of human beings grow into a distinct and separate existence from animals (Hoffman and Graham 41). In Mill’s belief, in order to be fully recognized as a rational human being, the ability to think, express ideas, and to live as one chooses to without doing any intended harm would be the ultimate expression of freedom (Hoffman and Graham 41). While Mill’s definition of freedom and liberty may seem at most utopian, this kind of freedom would only be effective if it is rightfully exercised, without the... In this essay, three ideas of well-known writers of political ideas, John Stuart Mill, Alexis de Tocqueville, and John Rawls will be discussed, as well as the federalist ideas of a group of writers under the pen name Publius would be summarized. The impact of their ideas or the possible influence in affecting the participation of citizens in politics would also be integrated in the course of the analysis. Democracy as seen from a foreigner’s viewpoint can be read in Alexis de Tocqueville’s book titled Democracy in America. Coming from a country where political power was previously owned by the aristocrats, Tocqueville wanted to see how a country such as the United State would be implementing democracy despite having not many leaders with deep political roots. In line with democracy, other principles such as self-accountability in maintaining peace and order in a society were also developed. In Mill’s belief, in order to be fully recognized as a rational human bei ng, the ability to think, express ideas, and to live as one chooses to without doing any intended harm would be the ultimate expression of freedom. In his book, A Theory of Justice, Rawls presented methods on how to distribute resources to all of the citizens as equally as possible. In conclusion, the essay reminds that in defining democracy as a political method, politicians are elected based on the number of votes. The main role of the people is to select the candidate whom they see as the most appropriate in the position (Hoffman and Graham 107).

Is Bigger Government Better Government, based from the arguments of Research Paper

Is Bigger Government Better Government, based from the arguments of Jim demint and Jeff Madrick - Research Paper Example Perhaps the most important of these are: making laws that are fair and just for all citizens, organizing and policing society, providing infrastructure such as healthcare, education, transport and financial systems, and representing the country’s interests in the wider world. It must also, of course, provide for elections and engage in dialogue with the public over policies in order to ensure that it reflects in a broad sense the will of the majority of the people, and considers the interests of minorities and those who are not in agreement with the ruling faction. In each of these areas there are arguments for more or less government involvement, and consequently bigger or smaller investment in government offices and budgets to undertake these tasks. This paper will explore first the ideas of Jeff Madrick, who favors the big government approach and then the ideas of Jim DeMint, who is a supporter of the smaller government approach. Finally these opposing views will be compare d in order to establish which of the two is better. Jeff Madrick in his book The Case for Big Government argues that people in modern America cling to a myth about the early stages of American History. This myth suggests that in the days before modern cities arose and mass industrialization became the norm, people had less government, and were able to live as they want to. The age of the pioneers and settlers is one which people like to idealize, praising the virtues of self-reliance and freedom from an interfering state which only wants to create unnecessary rules. Madrick cites a letter which Jefferson wrote, saying that a good government must be a â€Å"wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, which shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.† (Madrick, 2009, p. 33) The letter was written when Jefferson was not in charge , and Madrick points out that in practice, when he had responsibility for managing the expansion of the territory to include Louisiana, Jefferson did not follow through on this ideal view of government. He realized that land ownership of the vast new territories was the crucial factor which would determine the prosperity of individuals and organizations alike and he did not trust market forces to ensure that the new land would be distributed fairly: â€Å"The broad distribution of land he thought ideal could be accomplished only through government control and regulation.† (Madrick, 2009, p. 33) Throughout America’s history, from this time onwards, critical investments such as railroads, canals, and schools were supervised and regulated by state and local government officials. The benefits of this involvement can still be seen today: standardized gauges for the wagons, a transport network which serves both local and national needs and a fundamental and ever-increasing c ommitment to high quality education for all children and young people. While commitment to the free market economy has been an important factor in America’s economic success in the twentieth century, it has also seen several disastrous depressions and crashes, with cycles of boom and bust that have a serious impact on large sections of the population. In Madrick’

Organizational Structure Essay Example for Free

Organizational Structure Essay An organizational structure is a composition that specifies a companys hierarchical structure. There are various kinds of conformations that organizations can choose to build their business around. The organizational structure exemplifies the way in which control and business affairs have been appointed within the organization. Organizational structure encompasses the design of an organization though people positioning and responsibilities in order for organizational goals can be reached. Some of the time, a formal structure is not necessary due to a small informal business setting. In large organization responsibilities must be distributed. Hence, the reason that policies and procedures are established that assign responsibilities for numerous positions. The determination of these organizational functions (such as marketing, finance, human resources, and operations) influence and determine the organizational structure of your an organization. The three main types of organizational structures are functional structure, divisional structure, and matrix structure. Divisional Structure The structure that an organization is based around also is contingent on the enormity of the company. Divisional structure separates the faculty based on the commodity and customer demand verses geographical location. For example, each area within the organization is accountable for certain divisions. Each division has individual support systems such as finance department, marketing department, warehouse department, and maintenance department. Divisional structure is grants flexibility and is a decentralized structure. Divisional structure also grants quick adaptability to geographical changes. Divisional structure embellishes advancements in the market and industry and allows for various plans of action. However, this structure causes replication of resources due to each unit having the necessity of every resource. PepsiCo’s Organizational Design An example of an organization design around divisional structure is PepsiCo. PepsiCo is a flexible company that is constantly looking for new innovations and consistently adapts to the geographical market. PepsiCo has a decentralized organizational structure. The functional determinations are made in individual units with corporate control and direction. PepsiCo has one CEO and three division presidents. The companys hierarchical structure continues as each division is broken down into market units. Each market unit has a director. Furthermore each market unit is divided into regional units, then down the chain to sales units. Each unit has its own resources, such as marketing, finance, human resources, and operations departments. PepsiCo determines responsibilities by departmentalization. Departmentalization is a conglomeration of common duties and characterization of tasks. The influences of departmentalization are function, product, geographic, process and customer. PepsiCo maintains a span of control by making sure of correct distribution of responsibility among employees and task obligations are accounted for. For example, units are tasked with weekly, monthly, quarterly, and yearly forecast for sales, operations, overhead, and labor. Reports are sent weekly to account for these actions. Human resources departments are in each division to ensure control over the organization. There are guidelines and procedures in place to ensure the rules are being followed across the globe. Formalization sets the standard for the administered responsibility. Each unit at PepsiCo has management teams in place to ensure control of task performances. For example, a if a location has been tasked with a 1,000 case distribution for week one in the period and the sales teams are severely falling short on sales, management will step in to centralize the issue, reiterate the method of actions, and ensure the actions are conducted in a certain manner to achieve results. PepsiCo is multinational organization made up of three units which are PepsiCo Americas Foods, PepsiCo Americas Beverages and PepsiCo International. This structure allows the organization to focus on manifesting international markets, which will grant independence revenues, enabling focus on better product advancement. The organization is spread across the globe. However, the control is local, unlike a matrix structure that is located only in a single area (PepsiCo 2012). Matrix Structure A matrix structure formalizes line teams as well as the typical divisional hierarchy. The matrix structure is a hybrid between the functional and divisional structure, effectively creating independent business units for each product or service created or each unique market targeted. The matrix-structured organization is a project-based business that divides individual groups based on functional specializations. Variation of the matrix structure divides the authority by both functional and project areas. The functional manager heads up the functional areas of the organization. The project supervisor oversees the assigned project. This allows for management to focus on areas of proficiency. Companies such as General Motors has based its organization around the matrix structure due to the ability to specialize in specific areas, and organizational communication through other fields. General Motors believes the differentiation of ideas creates innovational determinations. The matrix structure also allows the human resources department to be shared throughout the organization. General Motors is made up of one main chief information officer (CIO) and several divisional CIOs that control the functionalities in the organization. General Motors also has process information officers that work in various areas of expertise across the organization. General Motors believes the matrix structure develops global commercialism (Daft 2007). Functional Structure Functional Structured organizations group tasks according to the target. Functional structured organizations work well for organizations that have a need for departments to rely on expertise of its faculty. A major disadvantage to a functional structured organization is the communication boundaries due to variation in departments that work individually. One company that a functional structure works well is Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart is one of America’s largest retailers. Wal-Mart is designed by a functional structure. Wal-Mart’s target market is a consumer with median incomes. Wal-Mart has a limited amount of functions in specialized areas with in the organization. Wal-Mart does not produce its goods, but has enough buying power to supply the demanded products. The organizational structure and large size enables the buying power to purchase goods at low prices. This buying power enables Wal-Mart to offer its target market lower prices creating a competitive edge over other retailers. A functional structured organization; such as Wal-Mart have a chief executive officer, limited executive staff, and department heads in domineering areas of expertise such as accounting, marketing, human resources and warehouse. Wal-Mart’s headquarters and executive staff is made up of a Chief of Executive Officer, Chairman of the Board and Board of Directors, with supporting committees. Conclusion Determining an organizations structural design that will be the most effective for a specific company has great significance on organizational success. Using an unsuitable design structure can be consequential in communication, product development, customer service, and countless situations of other organizational issues. Organizational structure can determine the successful outcome of the organization. Reference Bateman, T. S., Snell, S. A. (2011). Management: Leading Collaborating in a Competitive World (ninth ed.). New York, NY: McGrall Hill. Retrieved May 7, 2012 (2012). PepsiCo. Retrieved May 7, 2012, from www.pepsico.com Daft, Richard (2007). Organizational Theory and Design (ninth ed.). Manson, OH: Thompson Higher Education. Retrieved May 7, 2012.

Indo-European languages Essay Example for Free

Indo-European languages Essay The corpus of Sanskrit literature encompasses a rich tradition of poetry and drama as well as scientific, technical, philosophical and dharma texts. Sanskrit continues to be widely used as a ceremonial language in Hindu religious rituals and Buddhist practice in the forms of hymns and mantras. Spoken Sanskrit has been revised in some villages with traditional institutions, and there are attempts at further popularisation. The Sanskrit verbal adjective sa? sk? ta- may be translated as put together, constructed, well or completely formed; refined, adorned, highly elaborated. It is derived from the root sa? -skar- to put together, compose, arrange, prepare,[5] where sa? together (as English same) and (s)kar- do, make. The term in the generic meaning of made ready, prepared, completed, finished is found in the Rigveda. Also in Vedic Sanskrit, as nominalised neuter sa? sk? tam, it means preparation, prepared place and thus ritual enclosure, place for a sacrifice. As a term for refined or elaborated speech the adjective appears only in Epic and Classical Sanskrit, in the Manusmriti and in the Mahabharata. The language referred to as sa? sk? ta the cultured language has by definition always been a sacred and sophisticated language, used for religious and learned discourse in ancient India, and contrasted with the languages spoken by the people, prak? ta- natural, artless, normal, ordinary. Classical Sanskrit is the standard register as laid out in the grammar of Pa? ini, around the 4th century BCE. [6] Its position in the cultures of Greater India is akin to that of Latin and Greek in Europe and it has significantly influenced most modern languages of the Indian subcontinent, particularly in India, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Nepal. [7] The pre-Classical form of Sanskrit is known as Vedic Sanskrit, with the language of the Rigveda being the oldest and most archaic stage preserved, its oldest core dating back to as early as 1500 BCE. [8] This qualifies Rigvedic Sanskrit as one of the oldest attestations of any Indo-Iranian language, and one of the earliest attested members of the Indo-European languages, the family which includes English and most European languages. [9] Sanskrit, as defined by Pa? ini, had evolved out of the earlier Vedic form. The beginning of Vedic Sanskrit can be traced as early as 1500–1200 BCE (for Rig-vedic and Indo-Aryan superstrate in Mitanni). Scholars often distinguish Vedic Sanskrit and Classical or Pa? inian Sanskrit as separate dialects. Though they are quite similar, they differ in a number of essential points of phonology, vocabulary, grammar and syntax. Vedic Sanskrit is the language of the Vedas, a large collection of hymns, incantations (Samhitas), theological and religio-philosophical discussions in the Brahmanas and Upanishads. Modern linguists consider the metrical hymns of the Rigveda Samhita to be the earliest, composed by many authors over several centuries of oral tradition. The end of the Vedic period is marked by the composition of the Upanishads, which form the concluding part of the Vedic corpus in the traditional view; however the early Sutras are Vedic, too, both in language and content. [10] Around the mid-1st millennium BCE, Vedic Sanskrit began the transition from a first language to a second language of religion and learning. For nearly 2,000 years, a cultural order existed that exerted influence across South Asia, Inner Asia, Southeast Asia, and to a certain extent, East Asia. [11] A significant form of post-Vedic Sanskrit is found in the Sanskrit of the Hindu Epics—the Ramayana and Mahabharata. The deviations from Pa? ini in the epics are generally considered to be on account of interference from Prakrits, or innovations and not because they are pre-Paninean. [12] Traditional Sanskrit scholars call such deviations ar? a ( ), meaning of the is, the traditional title for the ancient authors. In some contexts, there are also more prakritisms (borrowings from common speech) than in Classical Sanskrit proper. Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit is a literary language heavily influenced by Middle Indic, based on early Buddhist prakrit texts which subsequently assimilated to the Classical Sanskrit standard in varying degrees. [13] According to Tiwari (1955), there were four principal dialects of classical Sanskrit: pascimottari (Northwestern, also called Northern or Western),madhyadesi (lit. , middle country), purvi (Eastern) and dak? i? i (Southern, arose in the Classical period). The predecessors of the first three dialects are even attested in Vedic Brahma? as, of which the first one was regarded as the purest (Kau? itaki Brahma? a, 7. 6).

Causes of Increased Corporate Social Responsibility

Causes of Increased Corporate Social Responsibility Abstract Aim The main aim of this research was to establish the extent to which the increased priority of CSR is in actuality a reflection of companies acting to meet the interests of society or simply a means for generating profits in a marketing oriented way. In this regard, the research sought to explore CSR behaviour in depth and in turn tried to establish companies rationales for CSR behaviour in the UK food retail industry. Methods A mixed methodology with both qualitative and quantitative methods of data collection and analysis were used in the research. Qualitative content analysis was used for analysing the contents of food retailers websites pertaining to CSR. Store Audits were conducted in order to identify the CSR practices and extent to which they are exercised by different food retailers. In depth formal interviews were conducted with key decision makers with the goal of obtaining information on CSR activities. Lastly, a questionnaire survey was used with the UK consumer population as the population of interest. Results The members of the UK Food Retail Industry showed that they have given paramount importance to CSR in order to somehow become a better neighbour to their customers, render them effective public services and at the same time contribute to the preservation and protection of the environment. The responses to the questions revealed a common rationale behind their CSR policies and ensured that the organisation established a good reputation amongst the members of the community, thereby enabling the latter to maintain a certain level of trust for the UK food retailers. Conclusion The study supported the fact highlighted by previous studies that companies have become more aware and mindful of their responsibilities, roles and rights towards the society. They were seen to have implemented activities, practices and guidelines in order to fulfill their legal, ethical, social and environmental roles and responsibilities towards stakeholders, employees, customers, and environment and society in general. However, it can also be realised that these policies contribute to the building of trust in the customers towards the organisations. Thus, as the trust is established, it is more likely that the customers will remain loyal to the organisation, thereby increasing their chances of generating profit. Chapter 1: Introduction For many years Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has been associated with related terms like business ethics, corporate performance, corporate accountability, corporate responsibility and stake holder involvement. In recent years CSR has grown into a well-known collective expression. The growth of CSR has been a result of organisations realising their responsibility toward their stake holders in the context of business scandals (e.g. Enron) and a growing concern for environmental changes (e.g. global warming). The European Union defines CSR as a concept whereby companies integrate social and environmental concerns in their business operations and in their interactions with their stakeholders on a voluntary basis (European Commission, 2002). According to Vernon and Mackenzie (2007), the question of whether companies should seek to do good by exercising CSR, rather than concentrate solely on wealth creation, is no longer interesting and in fact the focus today is on how well companies do good. Increasingly stake holders expect companies to take on public responsibility. Companies engage in CSR through diverse activities such as donating to charitable organisations (e.g. Ben and Jerrys), green activities (e.g. moves by major retailers to eliminate plastic bags and promote green bags) and by implementing environment friendly purchase and supply policies. A survey conducted by Research International, however, found that while CSR practices are commendable, they need to be viewed with caution as these activities are not sufficient in and of themselves (Social Funds, 2000). The scepticism about CSR activities is related to the growing trend for organisations to drift away from the hard issues and concentrate more on soft issues. The Research International survey revealed that despite ignoring crucial issues such as treatment of employees, and commitment to the local community, some companies portray themselves as socially responsible using charity and other CSR activities, which deal with soft issues (Social Funds, 2000). Sceptics also believe that CSR is often used purely as a marketing tool to improving business performance. In the context of CSR being rated as a priority by companies in the last few years (Cost Sector, 2009), this research aims to study the changing nature of CSR, with particular focus on an organisations motivation for engaging in socially responsible activities (whether it is a response to societys expectations or a strategic move by a company). By contributing to a deeper understanding of rationales, notions, risks and effects of CSR, the proposed research provides strategic insights on the subject. With findings based on both corporate and stake holder perspectives on the subject, this research aims to contribute to useful and interesting reading for both businesses and stake holders. The findings of this study are based on the UK food retail industry. Food retailers make a good context for study especially considering the several socially and environmentally responsible schemes that they are involved in and the significance of CSR asserted by industry standards. In this attempt Chapter Two provides the background and review of literature conducted in order to extensively analyse previous works published with regard to Corporate Social Responsibility and the manner by which it applies to the members of the UK food retail industry. Chapter Three discusses the different methods used in order to obtain data for the study to obtain relevant results. Chapter Four then presents the results obtained from the use of the different methodologies enumerated in the study. The results shall then be discussed in relation to the aim of the study in Chapter Five and conclusions would be provided by answering the research questions. Lastly in Chapter 6 we will give us an understanding of the scope and limitations of this study. Chapter 2: Background and Literature Review 2.1 Background of the study Societys preoccupation with the social responsibility of organisations has existed since at least the early 1930s and probably even before. Wells (2002) notes that it is perhaps the infamous Dodd-Berle correspondence contained within the Harvard Law Review Issue of 1931-32 that launched the debate on corporate social responsibility. The debate started when corporate law professor Adolf A. Berle Jr. published an article arguing for the imposition of legal control on management so that only their shareholders would benefit from their decisions (Berle, 1931). E.M. Dodd, another professor from Harvard, published an article that addressed the issue raised by Berle. He argues that besides focusing on the interests of the shareholders, managers must also take into consideration the concerns of the employees, consumers and the organisations stakeholders. Berle (1931) responded by saying that companies should â€Å"not abandon emphasis on the view that business corporations exist for the sol e purpose of making profits for their stockholders until such time as [one is] prepared to offer a clear and reasonably enforceable scheme of responsibilities to someone else† (Berle, 1932, p. 1365). Since the idea of corporate social responsibility has its roots in the legal community, several academic disciplines have followed the debate with little discussion occurring between and among them (Radin, 1999). More specifically, researchers in the field of business ethics have spent substantial effort in the past two decades to come up with a stakeholder theory that would eventually fall under corporate social responsibility, existing as a separate approach to management. The issue of corporate social responsibility was not discussed after the argument between Berle and Dodd. It resurfaced in the 1960s and the 1970s against the backdrop of the civil rights movement in America. This is due to the fact that the top agendas of politicians, public interest groups, individual citizens and corporations have been largely influenced by concerns about the environment, product safety, workplace health and safety, racial and sex discrimination, urban congestion, political corruption and technological advances. Apart from this, the increasing influence and power that organisations possessed during this period (this period being the 60s and 70s?) has eventually led to a widespread societal belief that large businesses have a duty towards ensuring the betterment of society (Banner, 1979). The power and influence of corporations, actual or perceived, and the impact of their economic, social and political actions on society in general, has led to a broad societal expectation that corporations be held accountable for their actions. Simply put, there is growing public sentiment that organisations must be responsible enough to weigh the impact of their decisions on the different parties involved. As a result, they must be able to eliminate, minimize or compensate for the harmful damages that they may inflict on society. The above mentioned justification is basically derived from a moral position that corporations are expected, and should, behave like any citizen in society. This expectation is also justified on the basis that corresponding responsibilities always accompany power. As Dodd (1932) asserts, â€Å"power over the lives of others tends to create on the part of those most worthy to exercise it a sense of responsibility.† Moreover, the increasing power of organisations has resulted in a societal expectation that corporations act proactively and at the same time, carry out a leadership role in order to provide solutions to problems that the world faces (CSR Survey, 2003). This means that given that organisations frequently have more resources than governments, they should give something back to the society. In the same manner, they are also called to allocate and offer some of their resources to carry out good works and help the less fortunate sectors of society. Overall, this CSR goal is justified as follows: initially, a societal need is identified. For instance, areas such as education, healthcare, low-income housing or the arts may require funding that cannot be generated privately or that government is unable to provide to enable these institutions to continue making goods or services available or even to exist. Second, corporations are identified as capable of filling the gap by providing either funds or infrastructure to address the need. In other words, an appeal to organisations is made because they frequently have the capacity, in accordance with their size and reach, to act as agents of â€Å"social progress† (Kahn, 1997). As repeatedly mentioned earlier, corporate social responsibility has been required of companies that have both, actual or perceived power and influence. This is why multinational corporations that operate parts of the globe where people fear the effects and consequences of Globalisation are expected to perform such duties. This, according to Zinkin (2004) is usually brought about by the fact that these corporations are usually seen as enemies rather than friends. Thus, to regain the trust and confidence of the people, the company must be able to make their social responsibility known as this is said to give them legitimacy to operate in a given country (Zinkins, 2004). 2.2 Literature Review In order to gain a better understanding of the concepts and principles of CSR, the review of literature is divided into the following sections: 1. Corporate Social Responsibility: Definitions and History, 2. Corporate Social Responsibility and the UK Food Retail Industry, and 3. Summary 2.2.1 Corporate Social Responsibility: Definitions and History Globalisation, the increasing influence of companies including small and medium enterprises, a change in the position and opinion of governments, and a paradigm shift in working with and appreciating the importance of building solid relations with stakeholders- are all factors that have contributed to changing the dynamics of the relationship between businesses and society. Businesses have always been mindful of their responsibilities towards society. The concept of companies sharing their resources and influence with other groups has been repeatedly spoken about for centuries (Bowe, 1953). Nowadays, companies have become more aware and mindful of their responsibilities, roles and rights towards the society. They are seen to have implemented activities, practices and guidelines in order to fulfill their legal, ethical, social and environmental responsibilities to stakeholders, which include shareholders, employees, customers, suppliers and the environment and society in general. These actions have been given many terms, including: (1) Corporate Responsibility or CR, (2) Corporate Social and Environmental Responsibility or CSER, (3) Corporate Citizenship, (4) Corporate Accountability, and lastly, (5) Socially Responsible Business (SRB) (Raynard Forstater, 2002). However, the most famous terminology would have to be Corporate Social Responsibility or CSR. CSR first began to be written about by academics in the 20th century. The term Corporate Social Responsibility and the modern view on CSR are largely attributed to Howard Bowen, who is considered by many scholars, especially Carroll, as the father of CSR. Bowen conceived CSR as an integral part of a larger vision of a better American society with a robust and socially responsible business sector. Before Bowen wrote his book in 1953, CSR was not a generally accepted practice among businesses in the United States. Carroll (1991) writes that in the early years, businesses believed that their only obligation was to their shareholders and their only function was the quest of financial improvement in order to provide the greatest financial return to their shareholders. The errors of this way of thinking soon became apparent. For one, businesses still had to work within laws set down by governments. In the 1960s, groups advocating social issues pushed for a more extensive concept of responsibilities for businesses. In the 1970s, various organisations in charge of the social issues pushed by the activist groups were created in the U.S. Some of these organisations were the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). These governmental organisations allowed the establishment of national public policy that now acknowledged the legality of environmen tal issues. The new policies forced businesses to re-examine their own strategies and to learn how to develop a balance between making a profit and the legal and ethical responsibilities placed on them by a widening range of stakeholders. For Bowen (1953), businesses become prominent in society because society needs the products and services provided by these companies. This grants businesses vital decision-making power in the way they affect the lives of many people. Therefore, for a balanced business-society relationship to continue, Bowen (1953) asks what responsibilities society can reasonably expect businessmen to assume. The answer to this question, Bowen states, is corporate social responsibility. He defines CSR as a social obligation that necessitates businessmen to engage in policies, formulate decisions, and implement actions that are considered desirable when connected with the objectives and values of society. He took a broad view when defining what business responsibilities include—responsiveness, stewardship, social audit, corporate citizenship and rudimentary stakeholder theory. Bowens concept of a mutual relationship between business and society is echoed by Porter and Kramer (2006), who point out that the value of CSR lies in the values companies share with societies they exist in. Businesses operate in social contexts and societies need the products and services that businesses provide, thus there is a mutual need for each entity. CSR, therefore, makes it possible to promote a collaborative relationship between business and society. Many have tried to create a definition of corporate social responsibility that encompasses its functions and the range of responsibilities it entails. One of the most comprehensive is that of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (2007), which defines CSR as the long-lasting commitment that businesses create which compels them to behave in an ethical manner and to add to the development of the economy while helping improve the quality of life of their employees and their families in addition to the lives of those in the local communities and society in general. This definition is specific enough to imply the holistic and philanthropic maxim of CSR. It is also broad enough to include activities or programs that companies engage in that do not directly yield income but bring visible and long-term benefits to both the companies and the recipients of the programs and activities such as youth and partner communities. With this definition programs such as scholarships and funds for research, advocacy programs for the environment, and livelihood programs can be considered as CSR. One of the earliest authors on CSR, Carroll (1979) was the first to propose the four categories of ordered layers of CSR—economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary—when he wrote that the social responsibility of businesses includes the economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary expectations that society puts upon enterprises. Aupperle, Carroll, and Hatfield (1985) further defined these categories into: * Economic responsibilities showcase the principle that businesses have the primary responsibility to generate products and profits and fulfill the desires of their customers; * Legal responsibilities highlight the issue that economic responsibilities must be performed within the restriction of rules and regulations as mandated by the laws of the land; * Ethical responsibilities takes into consideration the codes, norms, and values that are not written into laws but are still followed implicitly by society; these responsibilities rise above the complexities of written laws and encompass activities that are vigorously carried out without any clear and defined statements made about them; * Discretionary or philanthropic responsibilities reflect the voluntary nature of actions that are not easy to establish and assess, but are still expected by society. These categories are still widely cited and frequently reproduced in management and CSR journals by researchers and authors on CSR. The reason for its lasting acknowledgement may be the simplicity of the model. Carrolls (1979) categories are logical and easy to understand. The author himself writes that these categories are merely guidelines or reminders that the motives or actions of businesses can be generally classified into any of the categories he presented. The arrangement and relative influence of each category was intended to imply the basic role each had in the progression of significance. When it first came out, Carrolls model reflected a point of view that was simultaneously retrospective and developmental. It was based on the assertion that historically businesses first emphasised only the economic aspects of their trade. The legal aspect came next, and the ethical and discretionary were only emphasised in recent years. Juholin (2004) suggests that companies practice corporate social responsibility (CSR) because of long-term profits that CSR brings to companies. Other reasons may also include the commitment of top management to the moral and ethical standards promoted by CSR, competitiveness of the market today, and the visionary skills of many business leaders that allows them to anticipate the needs of the future. Porter and Kramer (2006) agree that CSR provides long-term profits. The authors note that companies should practice CSR and integrate it in their core strategic plans to ensure long-term prosperity. This is because socially responsible activities can return goodwill for companies. On the other hand, activities that harm the environment or result in any disadvantage to stakeholders can only result in bad karma in the form of bad financial operation, low brand positioning, and, worse, a rift in the relationship between companies and their consumers and suppliers and even expensive litigations. Porter and Kramer (2006) write that corporations are not obligated to solve the problems of the world. They do not have resources to do this. But, a company that is well managed can have a greater impact than any other organisation or charity group when they do something good for society. CSR does not merely imply profitability for companies. Its results go beyond the costs or constraint of altruistic actions. CSR can be a source of market opportunity, improvement, and an edge over the competition (Porter Kramer, 2006). It also does not mean engaging in activities for the sake of doing what is socially required and expected of these companies based on legal and social laws, especially those on environmental issues. CSR implies taking action to go beyond these laws to minimize any harm towards and maximize benefits for all stakeholders in order to fulfill what society desires (Raynard Forstater, 2002). Warhurst (2001) identifies three major elements of CSR—product use, business practice, and distribution of profits. Product use entails the positive involvement of products from businesses that assist in the promotion of welfare and better quality of life for members of society. Business practice entails business governance that observes the rules and regulations and presents a high level of thrust towards welfare of the natural environment and equity for all generations and species. Distribution of profits entails equal distribution of profits across a varied range of sectors of society, with emphasis on local communities. Bowen (1953) also notes that CSR should not be seen as a primary solution to the many problems of society. CSR can only do so much, and it should only be seen by companies and society as a set of guidelines for businesses in the way they perform and carry on their operations within the context of a larger society and the many issues that abound within the social milieu that they operate in. A key concept of CSR is the idea of stakeholders. Stakeholders are all groups or individuals who have an impact on or are affected by the attainment of any organisations goals (Freeman, 1984). It can be said that stakeholders are any entity who have a big â€Å"stake† in what businesses do. The concept of stakeholders therefore goes beyond the shareholders, employees, and clients or customers of a company. It includes communities, public interest groups, social activist groups, environmental groups, and the media which, according to Freeman, author of the Stakeholder Theory, businesses are accountable to. Other researchers (Marcus, 1996; Munilla Miles, 2005) list specific stakeholders as: owners; customers; employees; local, regional and national communities; competitors; suppliers; social activists; public at large; creditors; non-government organisations (NGOs); and even the natural environment, which, although unable to state its opinions, has become a major stakeholder today because of the many laws promulgated to care for the Earth in a sustainable way. Hopkins (2003) writes that CSR primarily deals with ensuring that businesses treat stakeholders in an ethical or responsible way which means treating them in a manner considered suitable by members of any civilized society. The social context of this definition includes economic responsibility. Stakeholders can be both within businesses and outside it. This signifies the natural environment as a stakeholder. In a broader sense, the objective of social responsibility is to establish better and higher standards of living while maintaining the capability of businesses to make a profit. These two components of the objective of social responsibility are both done for the stakeholders within and outside companies. According to Freeman (1984) for successful transactions with stakeholders, businesses must accept the authority and procedures of various stakeholders. Stakeholders will thus have the freedom to communicate their concerns. Furthermore, to manage and develop a strong relationship with stakeholders, businesses must understand their concerns and develop programs that will address these concerns. Stakeholders have various ways to ensure that businesses fulfill societys expectations. Some may opt to organize rallies, some may opt for more peaceful negotiations, some may engage in joint activities such as seminars or tree-planting sessions or other awareness raising activities, and some may use the media to further disseminate their issues. For example, the environmental group Greenpeace printed leaflets and wrote articles against genetically modified food, which led some food manufacturing corporations to either stop production of certain products or to develop new, healthier items. Freeman (1984) points out that the term â€Å"stakeholder† first appeared in management literature in a 1963 international memorandum published by the Stanford Research Institute. The term then was strictly yet broadly defined as the peoples or groups who give their support to companies and without whom businesses would stop to surviving. The main idea in this initial context already shows a measure of the importance of stakeholders. In a way, this definition states that without the support of stakeholders, businesses would not be able to survive. Of course, the limitation of this definition lies in the fact that stakeholders here may mean only the groups that are influential for companies such as the shareholders or government groups or investors. Each business activity has a different group of stakeholders. This is because each individual in society is interested in and promotes a varied and widely different range of concerns (Freeman, 1984). Some are more interested in environmental issues, while others advocate employment benefits, and still others fight for education. One way to determine which stakeholder is relevant to which particular aspect of business is through the generation of a generic stakeholder map, which is a diagram of the various groups relevant to the whole organisation broken down into levels and subdivisions in order to divide big groups into small groups based on specific interests. Some experts, however, think that this mapping procedure does not encapsulate the complex linkages between businesses and the various individuals and groups in society. An approach of corporate social responsibility that centers on stakeholders emphasizes the strategic and effective management of relationships and promotion of what Freeman and McVea (2001) call shared interests. The stakeholder model also puts some emphasis on persuading businesses to rebuild or restore relationships with groups or organisations that they have been at odds with. A good stakeholder management program also involves open communication, negotiation, management, and motivation. The end result of all of these actions leads to the establishment of an attitude of partnership, mutual association and interdependence between businesses and stakeholders. All of these activities are held together by the values and ethical standards that businesses stand for. Freeman and McVea (2001) further emphasise that good stakeholder management promotes a business own company values. CSR does not mean catering to the interests of stakeholders while abandoning all other aspects of business. Rather it entails in-depth deliberations taking into account all factors of social expectations. A well-developed stakeholder management program also allows businesses to create approaches that can serve stakeholders even in the long run. Although some individuals may not be happy with short-term decisions and feel that their causes need more attention, a good stakeholder management program takes all things into considerations so that all stakeholders, not just a chosen few, continue to be firm supporters of businesses. Besides understanding stakeholders concerns, businesses must also look at the other components of CSR to determine the entire range of responsibilities that stakeholders expect them to embrace. When discussing and identifying these components of CSR, scholars and authors have been turning to the CSR pyramid presented by Carroll (1991). The CSR pyramid is arranged to follow the levels of Carrolls (1979) earlier work of the four categories of CSR. The arrangement is in accordance with the degrees of social expectations that have been connected with each category. It has been used to assess businesses performance in terms of quantity, quality, effectiveness, and efficiency in their implementation of CSR initiatives. Table 2.2.1 The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility Be a Good Corporate Citizen Philanthropic Responsibility Contribute Resources to the community; Improve Quality of Life Be Ethical Ethical Responsibility Obligation to do what is right, just and fair; Avoid Harm Obey the Law Legal Responsibility Law is Societys codification of right and wrong; Play the Rules of the game Be Profitable Economic Responsibility The Foundation on which all the others rest (Source : Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility (Carroll, 1991, p. 39)) Obligations or responsibilities included in the pyramid have always existed in the business world. But the importance of philanthropic and ethical responsibilities has only received attention in recent years. Through this pyramid, Carroll (1991) hoped to show that a good CSR program can be broken down into well-defined components that make up a complete package. It can be seen as a framework for comprehending companies ever-evolving CSR activities. In addition, looking at each component can help leaders to distinguish and understand the various obligations of businesses that are in constant conflict with each other but which are mutually exclusive. Based on the expected activities for each level, economic responsibilities seem to be always in tension with the other responsibilities. Carroll (1991) also included the concept of stakeholders in this model, pointing out that taking their perspective into account would allow businesses to recognize the tension between all levels of the pyramid as realities of any organisation. This perspective can also allow businesses to see the pyramid as a united basis or framework of how firms will implement their decisions, actions, and programs. As can be seen, economic profit forms the foundation of the whole pyramid. Carroll (1991) acknowledges the basic fact that businesses were created historically as economic entities that are primarily concerned with making money and creating profit. Without this component, all other responsibilities become moot. Carroll states that the idea he was proposing was that CSR, to be acknowledged as a legitimate action for businesses, had to deal with the whole range of responsibilities these businesses had to answer for to society. Of course this would have to include the most basic responsibility—economic. The next level shows that businesses are obligated to follow the rules of law—various national and international laws—that socie Causes of Increased Corporate Social Responsibility Causes of Increased Corporate Social Responsibility Abstract Aim The main aim of this research was to establish the extent to which the increased priority of CSR is in actuality a reflection of companies acting to meet the interests of society or simply a means for generating profits in a marketing oriented way. In this regard, the research sought to explore CSR behaviour in depth and in turn tried to establish companies rationales for CSR behaviour in the UK food retail industry. Methods A mixed methodology with both qualitative and quantitative methods of data collection and analysis were used in the research. Qualitative content analysis was used for analysing the contents of food retailers websites pertaining to CSR. Store Audits were conducted in order to identify the CSR practices and extent to which they are exercised by different food retailers. In depth formal interviews were conducted with key decision makers with the goal of obtaining information on CSR activities. Lastly, a questionnaire survey was used with the UK consumer population as the population of interest. Results The members of the UK Food Retail Industry showed that they have given paramount importance to CSR in order to somehow become a better neighbour to their customers, render them effective public services and at the same time contribute to the preservation and protection of the environment. The responses to the questions revealed a common rationale behind their CSR policies and ensured that the organisation established a good reputation amongst the members of the community, thereby enabling the latter to maintain a certain level of trust for the UK food retailers. Conclusion The study supported the fact highlighted by previous studies that companies have become more aware and mindful of their responsibilities, roles and rights towards the society. They were seen to have implemented activities, practices and guidelines in order to fulfill their legal, ethical, social and environmental roles and responsibilities towards stakeholders, employees, customers, and environment and society in general. However, it can also be realised that these policies contribute to the building of trust in the customers towards the organisations. Thus, as the trust is established, it is more likely that the customers will remain loyal to the organisation, thereby increasing their chances of generating profit. Chapter 1: Introduction For many years Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has been associated with related terms like business ethics, corporate performance, corporate accountability, corporate responsibility and stake holder involvement. In recent years CSR has grown into a well-known collective expression. The growth of CSR has been a result of organisations realising their responsibility toward their stake holders in the context of business scandals (e.g. Enron) and a growing concern for environmental changes (e.g. global warming). The European Union defines CSR as a concept whereby companies integrate social and environmental concerns in their business operations and in their interactions with their stakeholders on a voluntary basis (European Commission, 2002). According to Vernon and Mackenzie (2007), the question of whether companies should seek to do good by exercising CSR, rather than concentrate solely on wealth creation, is no longer interesting and in fact the focus today is on how well companies do good. Increasingly stake holders expect companies to take on public responsibility. Companies engage in CSR through diverse activities such as donating to charitable organisations (e.g. Ben and Jerrys), green activities (e.g. moves by major retailers to eliminate plastic bags and promote green bags) and by implementing environment friendly purchase and supply policies. A survey conducted by Research International, however, found that while CSR practices are commendable, they need to be viewed with caution as these activities are not sufficient in and of themselves (Social Funds, 2000). The scepticism about CSR activities is related to the growing trend for organisations to drift away from the hard issues and concentrate more on soft issues. The Research International survey revealed that despite ignoring crucial issues such as treatment of employees, and commitment to the local community, some companies portray themselves as socially responsible using charity and other CSR activities, which deal with soft issues (Social Funds, 2000). Sceptics also believe that CSR is often used purely as a marketing tool to improving business performance. In the context of CSR being rated as a priority by companies in the last few years (Cost Sector, 2009), this research aims to study the changing nature of CSR, with particular focus on an organisations motivation for engaging in socially responsible activities (whether it is a response to societys expectations or a strategic move by a company). By contributing to a deeper understanding of rationales, notions, risks and effects of CSR, the proposed research provides strategic insights on the subject. With findings based on both corporate and stake holder perspectives on the subject, this research aims to contribute to useful and interesting reading for both businesses and stake holders. The findings of this study are based on the UK food retail industry. Food retailers make a good context for study especially considering the several socially and environmentally responsible schemes that they are involved in and the significance of CSR asserted by industry standards. In this attempt Chapter Two provides the background and review of literature conducted in order to extensively analyse previous works published with regard to Corporate Social Responsibility and the manner by which it applies to the members of the UK food retail industry. Chapter Three discusses the different methods used in order to obtain data for the study to obtain relevant results. Chapter Four then presents the results obtained from the use of the different methodologies enumerated in the study. The results shall then be discussed in relation to the aim of the study in Chapter Five and conclusions would be provided by answering the research questions. Lastly in Chapter 6 we will give us an understanding of the scope and limitations of this study. Chapter 2: Background and Literature Review 2.1 Background of the study Societys preoccupation with the social responsibility of organisations has existed since at least the early 1930s and probably even before. Wells (2002) notes that it is perhaps the infamous Dodd-Berle correspondence contained within the Harvard Law Review Issue of 1931-32 that launched the debate on corporate social responsibility. The debate started when corporate law professor Adolf A. Berle Jr. published an article arguing for the imposition of legal control on management so that only their shareholders would benefit from their decisions (Berle, 1931). E.M. Dodd, another professor from Harvard, published an article that addressed the issue raised by Berle. He argues that besides focusing on the interests of the shareholders, managers must also take into consideration the concerns of the employees, consumers and the organisations stakeholders. Berle (1931) responded by saying that companies should â€Å"not abandon emphasis on the view that business corporations exist for the sol e purpose of making profits for their stockholders until such time as [one is] prepared to offer a clear and reasonably enforceable scheme of responsibilities to someone else† (Berle, 1932, p. 1365). Since the idea of corporate social responsibility has its roots in the legal community, several academic disciplines have followed the debate with little discussion occurring between and among them (Radin, 1999). More specifically, researchers in the field of business ethics have spent substantial effort in the past two decades to come up with a stakeholder theory that would eventually fall under corporate social responsibility, existing as a separate approach to management. The issue of corporate social responsibility was not discussed after the argument between Berle and Dodd. It resurfaced in the 1960s and the 1970s against the backdrop of the civil rights movement in America. This is due to the fact that the top agendas of politicians, public interest groups, individual citizens and corporations have been largely influenced by concerns about the environment, product safety, workplace health and safety, racial and sex discrimination, urban congestion, political corruption and technological advances. Apart from this, the increasing influence and power that organisations possessed during this period (this period being the 60s and 70s?) has eventually led to a widespread societal belief that large businesses have a duty towards ensuring the betterment of society (Banner, 1979). The power and influence of corporations, actual or perceived, and the impact of their economic, social and political actions on society in general, has led to a broad societal expectation that corporations be held accountable for their actions. Simply put, there is growing public sentiment that organisations must be responsible enough to weigh the impact of their decisions on the different parties involved. As a result, they must be able to eliminate, minimize or compensate for the harmful damages that they may inflict on society. The above mentioned justification is basically derived from a moral position that corporations are expected, and should, behave like any citizen in society. This expectation is also justified on the basis that corresponding responsibilities always accompany power. As Dodd (1932) asserts, â€Å"power over the lives of others tends to create on the part of those most worthy to exercise it a sense of responsibility.† Moreover, the increasing power of organisations has resulted in a societal expectation that corporations act proactively and at the same time, carry out a leadership role in order to provide solutions to problems that the world faces (CSR Survey, 2003). This means that given that organisations frequently have more resources than governments, they should give something back to the society. In the same manner, they are also called to allocate and offer some of their resources to carry out good works and help the less fortunate sectors of society. Overall, this CSR goal is justified as follows: initially, a societal need is identified. For instance, areas such as education, healthcare, low-income housing or the arts may require funding that cannot be generated privately or that government is unable to provide to enable these institutions to continue making goods or services available or even to exist. Second, corporations are identified as capable of filling the gap by providing either funds or infrastructure to address the need. In other words, an appeal to organisations is made because they frequently have the capacity, in accordance with their size and reach, to act as agents of â€Å"social progress† (Kahn, 1997). As repeatedly mentioned earlier, corporate social responsibility has been required of companies that have both, actual or perceived power and influence. This is why multinational corporations that operate parts of the globe where people fear the effects and consequences of Globalisation are expected to perform such duties. This, according to Zinkin (2004) is usually brought about by the fact that these corporations are usually seen as enemies rather than friends. Thus, to regain the trust and confidence of the people, the company must be able to make their social responsibility known as this is said to give them legitimacy to operate in a given country (Zinkins, 2004). 2.2 Literature Review In order to gain a better understanding of the concepts and principles of CSR, the review of literature is divided into the following sections: 1. Corporate Social Responsibility: Definitions and History, 2. Corporate Social Responsibility and the UK Food Retail Industry, and 3. Summary 2.2.1 Corporate Social Responsibility: Definitions and History Globalisation, the increasing influence of companies including small and medium enterprises, a change in the position and opinion of governments, and a paradigm shift in working with and appreciating the importance of building solid relations with stakeholders- are all factors that have contributed to changing the dynamics of the relationship between businesses and society. Businesses have always been mindful of their responsibilities towards society. The concept of companies sharing their resources and influence with other groups has been repeatedly spoken about for centuries (Bowe, 1953). Nowadays, companies have become more aware and mindful of their responsibilities, roles and rights towards the society. They are seen to have implemented activities, practices and guidelines in order to fulfill their legal, ethical, social and environmental responsibilities to stakeholders, which include shareholders, employees, customers, suppliers and the environment and society in general. These actions have been given many terms, including: (1) Corporate Responsibility or CR, (2) Corporate Social and Environmental Responsibility or CSER, (3) Corporate Citizenship, (4) Corporate Accountability, and lastly, (5) Socially Responsible Business (SRB) (Raynard Forstater, 2002). However, the most famous terminology would have to be Corporate Social Responsibility or CSR. CSR first began to be written about by academics in the 20th century. The term Corporate Social Responsibility and the modern view on CSR are largely attributed to Howard Bowen, who is considered by many scholars, especially Carroll, as the father of CSR. Bowen conceived CSR as an integral part of a larger vision of a better American society with a robust and socially responsible business sector. Before Bowen wrote his book in 1953, CSR was not a generally accepted practice among businesses in the United States. Carroll (1991) writes that in the early years, businesses believed that their only obligation was to their shareholders and their only function was the quest of financial improvement in order to provide the greatest financial return to their shareholders. The errors of this way of thinking soon became apparent. For one, businesses still had to work within laws set down by governments. In the 1960s, groups advocating social issues pushed for a more extensive concept of responsibilities for businesses. In the 1970s, various organisations in charge of the social issues pushed by the activist groups were created in the U.S. Some of these organisations were the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). These governmental organisations allowed the establishment of national public policy that now acknowledged the legality of environmen tal issues. The new policies forced businesses to re-examine their own strategies and to learn how to develop a balance between making a profit and the legal and ethical responsibilities placed on them by a widening range of stakeholders. For Bowen (1953), businesses become prominent in society because society needs the products and services provided by these companies. This grants businesses vital decision-making power in the way they affect the lives of many people. Therefore, for a balanced business-society relationship to continue, Bowen (1953) asks what responsibilities society can reasonably expect businessmen to assume. The answer to this question, Bowen states, is corporate social responsibility. He defines CSR as a social obligation that necessitates businessmen to engage in policies, formulate decisions, and implement actions that are considered desirable when connected with the objectives and values of society. He took a broad view when defining what business responsibilities include—responsiveness, stewardship, social audit, corporate citizenship and rudimentary stakeholder theory. Bowens concept of a mutual relationship between business and society is echoed by Porter and Kramer (2006), who point out that the value of CSR lies in the values companies share with societies they exist in. Businesses operate in social contexts and societies need the products and services that businesses provide, thus there is a mutual need for each entity. CSR, therefore, makes it possible to promote a collaborative relationship between business and society. Many have tried to create a definition of corporate social responsibility that encompasses its functions and the range of responsibilities it entails. One of the most comprehensive is that of the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (2007), which defines CSR as the long-lasting commitment that businesses create which compels them to behave in an ethical manner and to add to the development of the economy while helping improve the quality of life of their employees and their families in addition to the lives of those in the local communities and society in general. This definition is specific enough to imply the holistic and philanthropic maxim of CSR. It is also broad enough to include activities or programs that companies engage in that do not directly yield income but bring visible and long-term benefits to both the companies and the recipients of the programs and activities such as youth and partner communities. With this definition programs such as scholarships and funds for research, advocacy programs for the environment, and livelihood programs can be considered as CSR. One of the earliest authors on CSR, Carroll (1979) was the first to propose the four categories of ordered layers of CSR—economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary—when he wrote that the social responsibility of businesses includes the economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary expectations that society puts upon enterprises. Aupperle, Carroll, and Hatfield (1985) further defined these categories into: * Economic responsibilities showcase the principle that businesses have the primary responsibility to generate products and profits and fulfill the desires of their customers; * Legal responsibilities highlight the issue that economic responsibilities must be performed within the restriction of rules and regulations as mandated by the laws of the land; * Ethical responsibilities takes into consideration the codes, norms, and values that are not written into laws but are still followed implicitly by society; these responsibilities rise above the complexities of written laws and encompass activities that are vigorously carried out without any clear and defined statements made about them; * Discretionary or philanthropic responsibilities reflect the voluntary nature of actions that are not easy to establish and assess, but are still expected by society. These categories are still widely cited and frequently reproduced in management and CSR journals by researchers and authors on CSR. The reason for its lasting acknowledgement may be the simplicity of the model. Carrolls (1979) categories are logical and easy to understand. The author himself writes that these categories are merely guidelines or reminders that the motives or actions of businesses can be generally classified into any of the categories he presented. The arrangement and relative influence of each category was intended to imply the basic role each had in the progression of significance. When it first came out, Carrolls model reflected a point of view that was simultaneously retrospective and developmental. It was based on the assertion that historically businesses first emphasised only the economic aspects of their trade. The legal aspect came next, and the ethical and discretionary were only emphasised in recent years. Juholin (2004) suggests that companies practice corporate social responsibility (CSR) because of long-term profits that CSR brings to companies. Other reasons may also include the commitment of top management to the moral and ethical standards promoted by CSR, competitiveness of the market today, and the visionary skills of many business leaders that allows them to anticipate the needs of the future. Porter and Kramer (2006) agree that CSR provides long-term profits. The authors note that companies should practice CSR and integrate it in their core strategic plans to ensure long-term prosperity. This is because socially responsible activities can return goodwill for companies. On the other hand, activities that harm the environment or result in any disadvantage to stakeholders can only result in bad karma in the form of bad financial operation, low brand positioning, and, worse, a rift in the relationship between companies and their consumers and suppliers and even expensive litigations. Porter and Kramer (2006) write that corporations are not obligated to solve the problems of the world. They do not have resources to do this. But, a company that is well managed can have a greater impact than any other organisation or charity group when they do something good for society. CSR does not merely imply profitability for companies. Its results go beyond the costs or constraint of altruistic actions. CSR can be a source of market opportunity, improvement, and an edge over the competition (Porter Kramer, 2006). It also does not mean engaging in activities for the sake of doing what is socially required and expected of these companies based on legal and social laws, especially those on environmental issues. CSR implies taking action to go beyond these laws to minimize any harm towards and maximize benefits for all stakeholders in order to fulfill what society desires (Raynard Forstater, 2002). Warhurst (2001) identifies three major elements of CSR—product use, business practice, and distribution of profits. Product use entails the positive involvement of products from businesses that assist in the promotion of welfare and better quality of life for members of society. Business practice entails business governance that observes the rules and regulations and presents a high level of thrust towards welfare of the natural environment and equity for all generations and species. Distribution of profits entails equal distribution of profits across a varied range of sectors of society, with emphasis on local communities. Bowen (1953) also notes that CSR should not be seen as a primary solution to the many problems of society. CSR can only do so much, and it should only be seen by companies and society as a set of guidelines for businesses in the way they perform and carry on their operations within the context of a larger society and the many issues that abound within the social milieu that they operate in. A key concept of CSR is the idea of stakeholders. Stakeholders are all groups or individuals who have an impact on or are affected by the attainment of any organisations goals (Freeman, 1984). It can be said that stakeholders are any entity who have a big â€Å"stake† in what businesses do. The concept of stakeholders therefore goes beyond the shareholders, employees, and clients or customers of a company. It includes communities, public interest groups, social activist groups, environmental groups, and the media which, according to Freeman, author of the Stakeholder Theory, businesses are accountable to. Other researchers (Marcus, 1996; Munilla Miles, 2005) list specific stakeholders as: owners; customers; employees; local, regional and national communities; competitors; suppliers; social activists; public at large; creditors; non-government organisations (NGOs); and even the natural environment, which, although unable to state its opinions, has become a major stakeholder today because of the many laws promulgated to care for the Earth in a sustainable way. Hopkins (2003) writes that CSR primarily deals with ensuring that businesses treat stakeholders in an ethical or responsible way which means treating them in a manner considered suitable by members of any civilized society. The social context of this definition includes economic responsibility. Stakeholders can be both within businesses and outside it. This signifies the natural environment as a stakeholder. In a broader sense, the objective of social responsibility is to establish better and higher standards of living while maintaining the capability of businesses to make a profit. These two components of the objective of social responsibility are both done for the stakeholders within and outside companies. According to Freeman (1984) for successful transactions with stakeholders, businesses must accept the authority and procedures of various stakeholders. Stakeholders will thus have the freedom to communicate their concerns. Furthermore, to manage and develop a strong relationship with stakeholders, businesses must understand their concerns and develop programs that will address these concerns. Stakeholders have various ways to ensure that businesses fulfill societys expectations. Some may opt to organize rallies, some may opt for more peaceful negotiations, some may engage in joint activities such as seminars or tree-planting sessions or other awareness raising activities, and some may use the media to further disseminate their issues. For example, the environmental group Greenpeace printed leaflets and wrote articles against genetically modified food, which led some food manufacturing corporations to either stop production of certain products or to develop new, healthier items. Freeman (1984) points out that the term â€Å"stakeholder† first appeared in management literature in a 1963 international memorandum published by the Stanford Research Institute. The term then was strictly yet broadly defined as the peoples or groups who give their support to companies and without whom businesses would stop to surviving. The main idea in this initial context already shows a measure of the importance of stakeholders. In a way, this definition states that without the support of stakeholders, businesses would not be able to survive. Of course, the limitation of this definition lies in the fact that stakeholders here may mean only the groups that are influential for companies such as the shareholders or government groups or investors. Each business activity has a different group of stakeholders. This is because each individual in society is interested in and promotes a varied and widely different range of concerns (Freeman, 1984). Some are more interested in environmental issues, while others advocate employment benefits, and still others fight for education. One way to determine which stakeholder is relevant to which particular aspect of business is through the generation of a generic stakeholder map, which is a diagram of the various groups relevant to the whole organisation broken down into levels and subdivisions in order to divide big groups into small groups based on specific interests. Some experts, however, think that this mapping procedure does not encapsulate the complex linkages between businesses and the various individuals and groups in society. An approach of corporate social responsibility that centers on stakeholders emphasizes the strategic and effective management of relationships and promotion of what Freeman and McVea (2001) call shared interests. The stakeholder model also puts some emphasis on persuading businesses to rebuild or restore relationships with groups or organisations that they have been at odds with. A good stakeholder management program also involves open communication, negotiation, management, and motivation. The end result of all of these actions leads to the establishment of an attitude of partnership, mutual association and interdependence between businesses and stakeholders. All of these activities are held together by the values and ethical standards that businesses stand for. Freeman and McVea (2001) further emphasise that good stakeholder management promotes a business own company values. CSR does not mean catering to the interests of stakeholders while abandoning all other aspects of business. Rather it entails in-depth deliberations taking into account all factors of social expectations. A well-developed stakeholder management program also allows businesses to create approaches that can serve stakeholders even in the long run. Although some individuals may not be happy with short-term decisions and feel that their causes need more attention, a good stakeholder management program takes all things into considerations so that all stakeholders, not just a chosen few, continue to be firm supporters of businesses. Besides understanding stakeholders concerns, businesses must also look at the other components of CSR to determine the entire range of responsibilities that stakeholders expect them to embrace. When discussing and identifying these components of CSR, scholars and authors have been turning to the CSR pyramid presented by Carroll (1991). The CSR pyramid is arranged to follow the levels of Carrolls (1979) earlier work of the four categories of CSR. The arrangement is in accordance with the degrees of social expectations that have been connected with each category. It has been used to assess businesses performance in terms of quantity, quality, effectiveness, and efficiency in their implementation of CSR initiatives. Table 2.2.1 The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility Be a Good Corporate Citizen Philanthropic Responsibility Contribute Resources to the community; Improve Quality of Life Be Ethical Ethical Responsibility Obligation to do what is right, just and fair; Avoid Harm Obey the Law Legal Responsibility Law is Societys codification of right and wrong; Play the Rules of the game Be Profitable Economic Responsibility The Foundation on which all the others rest (Source : Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility (Carroll, 1991, p. 39)) Obligations or responsibilities included in the pyramid have always existed in the business world. But the importance of philanthropic and ethical responsibilities has only received attention in recent years. Through this pyramid, Carroll (1991) hoped to show that a good CSR program can be broken down into well-defined components that make up a complete package. It can be seen as a framework for comprehending companies ever-evolving CSR activities. In addition, looking at each component can help leaders to distinguish and understand the various obligations of businesses that are in constant conflict with each other but which are mutually exclusive. Based on the expected activities for each level, economic responsibilities seem to be always in tension with the other responsibilities. Carroll (1991) also included the concept of stakeholders in this model, pointing out that taking their perspective into account would allow businesses to recognize the tension between all levels of the pyramid as realities of any organisation. This perspective can also allow businesses to see the pyramid as a united basis or framework of how firms will implement their decisions, actions, and programs. As can be seen, economic profit forms the foundation of the whole pyramid. Carroll (1991) acknowledges the basic fact that businesses were created historically as economic entities that are primarily concerned with making money and creating profit. Without this component, all other responsibilities become moot. Carroll states that the idea he was proposing was that CSR, to be acknowledged as a legitimate action for businesses, had to deal with the whole range of responsibilities these businesses had to answer for to society. Of course this would have to include the most basic responsibility—economic. The next level shows that businesses are obligated to follow the rules of law—various national and international laws—that socie