CSR as contractarian model of multi-stakeholder corporate governance and the game-theory of its implementation
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is here defined as a multi-stakeholder model of corporate governance and fiduciary duties naturally emerging from a critical assessment of the incomplete contracts view of the firm based on concepts like as authority and residual rights of control. As far as the normative point of view is concerned, multi-stakeholder fiduciary duties are deduced from a theory of the firm's stakeholders Social Contract. This provide for a clear cut and calculable objective function, a criterion for governance and strategic management no less able to set a bottom-line to the firm management than the profit maximization principle. The theory of co-operative bargaining games, and the Nash bargaining solution in particular, provides the key concepts. By the way this also answers some criticisms raised by Michael Jensen (2001) against the notion of stakeholders value. As far as implementation of the normative model is concerned, four roles of voluntary but explicit CSR norms or social standard are presented in terms of a non-cooperative game theory of implementation. It is shown that they allow the description of strategies and equilibria, even if multiple, in a game played under unforeseen contingencies. Secondly, a CSR norm permits the ex ante selection of the equilibrium point that meets the requirements of an impartial choice. An explicit agreement on a contractarian norm is moreover a way to introduce psychological conformist equilibria, and quite surprisingly to derive the significant result that mixed strategy equilibria are absent in a psychological repeated Trust Game. Lastly, a cognitive and predictive role is played by an agreed CSR norm as the appropriate starting point for an equilibrium selection mechanism that, from a state of predictive uncertainty about possible equilibria, generates a state of mutually consistent expectations consistent with the prediction that all players will converge on the psychological equilibrium fully conforming with the norm as the effective solution of the game.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Lorenzo Sacconi (1999). Codes of Ethics as Contractarian Constraints on the Abuse of Authority Within Hierarchies: A Perspective From the Theory of the Firm. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 21 (2-3):189 - 202.
Pedro Francés-Gómez (2003). Some Difficulties in Sacconi's View About Corporate Ethics. Journal of Business Ethics 42 (2):165 - 180.
C. B. Bhattacharya, Daniel Korschun & Sankar Sen (2009). Strengthening Stakeholder–Company Relationships Through Mutually Beneficial Corporate Social Responsibility Initiatives. Journal of Business Ethics 85 (2):257 - 272.
Silvia Ayuso & Antonio Argandoña, Responsible Corporate Governance: Towards a Stakeholder Board of Directors?
Angeloantonio Russo & Francesco Perrini (2010). Investigating Stakeholder Theory and Social Capital: Csr in Large Firms and Smes. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 91 (2):207 - 221.
Lorenzo Sacconi & Giacomo Degli Antoni, A Theoretical Analysis of the Relationship Between Social Capital and Corporate Social Responsibility: Concepts and Definitions.
Pedro Francés-Gómez & Ariel Ridelo (2008). Stakeholder's Preference and Rational Compliance: A Comment on Sacconi's “CSR as a Model for Extended Corporate Governance II: Compliance, Reputation and Reciprocity”. Journal of Business Ethics 82 (1):59 - 76.
Lorenzo Sacconi (2007). A Social Contract Account for CSR as an Extended Model of Corporate Governance (II): Compliance, Reputation and Reciprocity. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 75 (1):77 - 96.
Lorenzo Sacconi (2006). A Social Contract Account for CSR as an Extended Model of Corporate Governance (I): Rational Bargaining and Justification. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 68 (3):259 - 281.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads5 ( #176,067 of 1,008,715 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,702 of 1,008,715 )
How can I increase my downloads?