Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Corporate Social Responsibility Theories: Mapping the Territory

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) field presents not only a landscape of theories but also a proliferation of approaches, which are controversial, complex and unclear. This article tries to clarify the situation, “mapping the territory” by classifying the main CSR theories and related approaches in four groups: (1) instrumental theories, in which the corporation is seen as only an instrument for wealth creation, and its social activities are only a means to achieve economic results; (2) political theories, which concern themselves with the power of corporations in society and a responsible use of this power in the political arena; (3) integrative theories, in which the corporation is focused on the satisfaction of social demands; and (4) ethical theories, based on ethical responsibilities of corporations to society. In practice, each CSR theory presents four dimensions related to profits, political performance, social demands and ethical values. The findings suggest the necessity to develop a new theory on the business and society relationship, which should integrate these four dimensions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ackerman, R. W.: 1973, ‘How Companies Respond to SocialDemands’, Harvard University Review 51(4), 88–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ackerman, R. and R. Bauer: 1976, Corporate Social Responsiveness (Reston, Virginia).

  • Agle, B. R. and R. K. Mitchell: 1999, ‘Who Matters to CEOs? An Investigation of Stakeholder Attributes and Salience, Corporate Performance and CEO Values’, Academy of Management Journal 42(5), 507–526.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alford, H. and M. Naugthon: 2002, ‘Beyond the Shareholder Model of the Firm: Working toward the Common Good of a Business’, in S. A. Cortright and M. Naugthon (eds.), Rethinking the Purpose of Business. Interdisciplinary Essays from the Catholic Social Tradition (Notre Dame University Press, Notre Dame), pp. 27–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altman, B. W.: 1998, ‘Corporate Community Relations in the 1990s: A Study in Transformation’, Business and Society 37(2), 221–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Altman, B. W. and D. Vidaver-Cohen: 2000, ‘Corporate Citizenship in the New Millennium: Foundation for an Architecture of Excellence’ Business and Society Review 105(1), 145–169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andriof, J. and M. McIntosh (eds.): 2001, Perspectives on Corporate Citizenship (Greenleaf, Sheffield, UK).

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrioff, J.: 2001, ‘Patterns of Stakeholder Partnerhsip Building’, in J. Andriof and M. McIntosh, (eds.) Perspectives on Corporate Citizenship (Greenleaf, Sheffield, UK), pp. 200–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argandoña, A.: 1998, ‘The Stakeholder Theory and the Common Good’, Journal of Business Ethics 17, 1093–1102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barney, J.: 1991, ‘Firm Resource and Sustained Competitive Advantage’, Journal of Management 17, 99–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bendheim, C. L., S. A. Waddock and S. B. Graves: 1998, ‘Determining Best Practice in Corporate-Stakeholder Relations Using Data Envelopment Analysis’, Business and Society 37(3), 306–339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman, S. L., A. C. Wicks, S. Kotha and T. M. Jones: 1999, ‘Does Stakeholder Orientation Matter? The Relationship between Stakeholder Management Models and the Firm Financial Performance’, Academy of Management Journal 42(5), 488–509.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowie, N.: 1991, ‘New Directions in Corporate Social Responsibility’, Business Horizons 34(4), 56–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowie, N.: 1998, ‘A Kantian Theory of Capitalism’, Business Ethics Quarterly, Ruffin Series, Special Issue, No. 1, 37–60.

  • Brandy, F. N.: 1990, Ethical Managing: Rules and Results (Macmillan, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, T. L.: 1992, ‘An Issue Area Approach to the Analysis of MNE-Government Relations’, Journal of International Business Studies 23, 295–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brummer, J.: 1991, Corporate Responsibility and Legitimacy (Greenwood Press, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, L. and J. M. Logsdon: 1996, ‘How Corporate Social Responsibility Pays Off’, Long Range Planning 29(4), 495–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burton, B. K. and C. P. Dunn: 1996, ‘Feminist Ethics as Moral Grounding for Stakeholder Theory’, Business Ethics Quarterly 6(2), 133–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carey, J. B.: 2001, ‘The Common Good in Catholic Social Thought’, St. John's Law Review 75(2), 311–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B.: 1979, ‘A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance’, Academy of Management Review 4(4), 497–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B.: 1991, ‘The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Towards the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders’, Business Horizons (July/August), 39–48.

  • Carroll, A. B.: 1994, ‘Social Issues in Management Research’, Business and Society 33(1), 5–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B.: 1999, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility. Evolution of Definitional Construct’, Business and Society 38(3), 268–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. and A. K. Buchholtz: 2002, Business and Society with Infotrac: Ethics and Stakeholder Management, 5th ed. (South-Western, Cincinnati).

  • Cassel, D.: 2001, ‘Human Rights Business Responsibilities in the Global Marketplace’, Business Ethics Quarterly 11(2), 261–274.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, C., T. Craig and S. Hart: 2001, ‘The Great Disruption’, Foreign Affairs 80(2), 80–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, C. M. and M. Overdorf: 2000, ‘Meeting the Challenge of Disruptive Change’, Harvard Business Review 78(2), 66–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K.: 1960, ‘Can Business Afford to Ignore Corporate Social Responsibilities?’, California Management Review 2, 70–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K.: 1967, ‘Understanding The Social Responsibility Puzzle’, Business Horizons 10(4), 45–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, K.: 1973, ‘The Case For and Against Business Assumption of Social Responsibilities’, Academy of Management Journal 16, 312–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dion, M.: 2001, ‘Corporate Citizenship and Ethics of Care: Corporate Values, Codes of Ethics and Global Governance’, in J. Andriof and M. McIntosh (ed.), Perspectives on Corporate Citizenship (Greenleaf, Sheffield, UK), pp. 118–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T.: 1982, Corporations and Morality (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliff, NJ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T. and T. W. Dunfee: 1994, ‘Towards a Unified Conception of Business Ethics: Integrative Social Contracts Theory’, Academy of Management Review 19, 252–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T. and T. W. Dunfee: 1999, Ties That Bind: A Social Contracts Approach to Business Ethics (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T. and T. W. Dunfee: 2000, ‘Prècis for Ties that Bind’, Business and Society 105(Winter), 436–444.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T. and L. E. Preston: 1995, ‘The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence, and Implications’, Academy of Management Review 20(1), 65–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donati, P.: 1991, Teoria relazionale della società (Franco Agnelli, Milano).

    Google Scholar 

  • Donnelly, J.: 1985, The Concept of Human Rights (Croom Helm, London).

    Google Scholar 

  • Emshoff, J. R. and R. E. Freeman: 1978, ‘Stakeholder Management’, Working Paper from theWharton Applied Research Center (July). Quoted by Sturdivant (1979).

  • Etzioni, A.: 1988, The Moral Dimension. Towards a New Economics (The Free Press, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Evan, W. M. and R. E. Freeman: 1988, ‘A Stakeholder Theory of the Modern Corporation: Kantian Capitalism’, in T. Beauchamp and N. Bowie (eds.), Ethical Theory and Business (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs), pp. 75–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fort, T. L.: 1996, ‘Business as Mediating Institutions’, Business Ethics Quarterly 6(2), 149–164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fort, T. L.: 1999, ‘The First Man and the Company Man: The Common Good, Transcendence, and Mediating Institutions’, American Business Law Journal 36(3), 391–435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frederick, W. C.: 1987, ‘Theories of Corporate Social Performance’, in S. P. Sethi and C. M. Flabe (ed.), Business and Society: Dimensions of Conflict and Cooperation (Lexington Books, New York), pp. 142–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frederick, W. C.: 1992, ‘Anchoring Values in Nature: Towards a Theory of Business Values’, Business Ethics Quarterly 2(3), 283–304.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frederick, W. C.: 1998, ‘Moving to CSR4’, Business and Society 37(1), 40–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E.: 1984, Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach (Pitman, Boston).

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E.: 1994, ‘The Politics of Stakeholder Theory: Some Future Directions’, Business Ethics Quarterly 4(4), 409–429.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. and W. M. Evan: 1990, ‘Corporate Governance: A Stakeholder Interpretation’, Journal of Behavioral Economics 19(4), 337–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. and R. A. Philips: 2002, ‘Stakeholder Theory: A Libertarian Defence’, Business Ethics Quarterly 12(3), 331–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M.: 1970, ‘The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits’, New York Times Magazine, September 13th, 32–33, 122, 126.

  • Friedman, M. and R. Friedman: 1962, Capitalism and Freedom (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).

    Google Scholar 

  • Frooman, J.: 1997, ‘Socially Irresponsible and Illegal Behavior and Shareholder’, Business and Society 36(3), 221–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gladwin, T. N. and J. J. Kennelly: 1995, ‘Shifting Paradigms for Sustainable Development: Implications for Management Theory and Research.’ Academy of Management Review 20(4), 874–904.

    Google Scholar 

  • Global Sullivan Principles, The: 1999, http:// globalsullivanprinciples.org (September 2003).

  • Goodpaster, K. E.: 1999, ‘Bridging East and West in Management Ethics: Kyosei and the Moral Point of View’, in G. Enderle (ed.), International Business Ethics. Challenges and Approaches (University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame), pp. 151–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greening, D. W. and B. Gray: 1994, ‘Testing a Model of Organizational Response to Social and Political Issues’, Academy of Management Journal 37, (467–498).

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, J. J.: 2000, ‘Corporate Social Performance: Research Directions for the 21st Century’, Business and Society 39(4), 479–493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, J. J. and J. F. Mahon: 1997, ‘The Corporate Social Performance and Corporate Financial Performance Debate: Twenty-five Years of Incomparable Research’, Business and Society 36(1), 5–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, J. S. and C. H. St. John: 1996, ‘Managing and Partnering with External Stakeholders’, Academy of Management Executive 10(2), 46–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. L.: 1995, ‘A Natural-Resource-Based View of the Firm’, Academy of Management Review 20(4), 986–1012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. L. and C. M. Christensen: 2002, ‘The Great Leap. Driving Innovation from the Base of the Pyramid’, MIT Sloan Management Review 44(1), 51–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heald, M.: 1988, The Social Responsibilities of Business: Company and Community, 1900–1960 (Transaction Books, New Brunswick).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A. J. and G. D. Keim: 2001, ‘Shareholder Value, Stakeholder Management, and Social Issues: What's the Bottom Line’, Strategic Management Journal 22(2), 125–140.

    Google Scholar 

  • Husted, B.W. and D. B. Allen: 2000, ‘Is It Ethical to Use Ethics as Strategy?’, Journal of Business Ethics 27(1–2), 21–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C.: 2000, ‘Value Maximization, Stakeholder Theory, and the Corporate Objective Function’, in M. Beer and N. Nohria (eds.), Breaking the Code of Change (Harvard Business School Press, Boston), pp. 37–58. Reprinted (2002) as ‘Value Maximization, Stakeholder Theory, and the Corporate Objective Function’, Business Ethics Quarterly 12(2), 235-256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C. and W. Meckling: 1976, ‘Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Cost, and Capital Structure’, Journal of Financial Economics 3(October), 305–360.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. M.: 1980, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility Revisited, Redefined’, California Management Review 22(2), 59–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. M.: 1983, ‘An Integrating Framework for Research in Business and Society: A Step Toward the Elusive Paradigm?’, Academy of Management Review 8(4), 559–565.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaku, R.: 1997, ‘The Path of Kyosei’, Harvard Business Review 75(4), 55–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaptein, M. and R. Van Tulder: 2003, ‘Toward Effective Stakeholder Dialogue’, Business and Society Review 108(Summer), 203–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keim, G. D.: 1978, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility: An Assessment of the Enlightened Self-Interest Model’, Academy of Management Review 3(1), 32–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kempshall, M. S.: 1999, The Common Good in Late Medieval Political Thought (Oxford University Press, Oxford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Key, S. and S. J. Popkin: 1998, ‘Integrating Ethics into the Strategic Management Process: Doing Well by Doing Good’, Management Decision 36(5–6), 331–339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leavitt, T.: 1958, ‘The Dangers of Social Responsibility’, Harvard Business Review 36(September–October), 41–50.

  • Litz, R. A.: 1996, ‘A Resourced-Based-View of the Socially Responsible Firm: Stakeholder Interdependence, Ethical Awareness, and Issue Responsiveness as Strategic Assets’, Journal of Business Ethics 15, 1355–1363.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahon, J. F. and R. A. McGowan: 1991, ‘Searching for the Common Good: A Process-Oriented Approach’, Business Horizons 34(4), 79–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maritain, J.: 1966, The Person and the Common Good (Notre Dame University Press, Notre Dame).

    Google Scholar 

  • Maritain, J.: 1971[c1943], The Rights of Man and Natural Law (Gordian Press, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Matten, D. and A. Crane: in press, ‘Corporate Citizenship: Towards an Extended Theoretical Conceptualization’, Academy of Management Review.

  • Matten, D., A. Crane and W. Chapple: 2003, ‘Behind de Mask: Revealing the True Face of Corporate Citizenship’, Journal of Business Ethics 45(1–2), 109–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMahon, T. F.: 1986, ‘Models of the Relationship of the Firm to Society’, Journal of Business Ethics 5, 181–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A. and D. Siegel: 2001, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility: A Theory of the Firm Perspective’, Academy of Management Review 26(1), 117–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mele, D.: 2002, Not only Stakeholder Interests. The Firm Oriented toward the Common Good (University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. K., B. R. Agle and D. J. Wood: 1997, ‘Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts’, Academy of Management Review 22(4), 853–886.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray, K. B. and J. R. Montanari: 1986, ‘Strategic Management of the Socially Responsible Firm: Integrating Management and Marketing Theory’, Academy of Management Review 11(4), 815–828.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ogden, S. and R. Watson: 1999, ‘Corporate Performance and Stakeholder Management: Balancing Shareholder and Customer Interests in the U.K. Privatized Water Industry’, Academy of Management Journal 42(5), 526–538.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T.: 1961, ‘An Outline of the Social System’, in T. Parsons, E. A. Shils, K. D. Naegle and J. R. Pitts (eds.), Theories of Society (Free Press, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrick, J. and J. Quinn: 2001, ‘The Challenge of Leadership Accountability for Integrity Capacity as a Strategic Asset’, Journal of Business Ethics 34, 331–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, R. A.: 1997, ‘Stakeholder Theory and a Principle of Fairness’, Business Ethics Quarterly 7(1), 51–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, R. A.: 2003, ‘Stakeholder Legitimacy’, Business Ethics Quarterly 13(1), 25–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, R. A., E. Freeman and A. C. Wicks: 2003, ‘What Stakeholder Theory Is Not’, Business Ethics Quarterly 13(1), 479–502.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pope John Paul II: 1991, Encyclical ‘Centesimus Annus’ (Catholic Truth Society, London) and www.vatican.va.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E.: 1980, Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors (Free Press, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. and M. R. Kramer: 2002, ‘The Competitive Advantage of Corporate Philanthropy’, Harvard Business Review 80(12), 56–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E. and C. Van der Linde: 1995, ‘Green and Competitive: Ending the Stalemate’, Harvard Business Review 73(5), 120–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Post, J. E., L. E. Preston, S. Sauter-Sachs and S. Sachs: 2002, Redefining the Corporation: Stakeholder Management and Organizational Wealth (Stanford University Press, Stanford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K.: 2002, ‘Strategies for the Bottom of the Economic Pyramid: India as a Source of Innovation’, Reflections: The SOL Journal 3(4), 6–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prahalad, C. K. and A. Hammond: 2002, ‘Serving the World's Poor, Profitably’, Harvard Business Review 80(9), 48–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Preston, L. E.: 1975, ‘Corporation and Society: The Search for a Paradigm’, Journal of Economic Literature 13(2), 434–454.

    Google Scholar 

  • Preston, L. E. and J. E. Post: 1975, Private Management and Public Policy. The Principle of Public Responsibility (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Preston, L. E. and J. E. Post: 1981, ‘Private Management and Public Policy’, California Management Review 23(3), 56–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, D. P. and T. M. Jones: 1995, ‘An Agent Morality View of Business Policy’, Academy of Management Review 20(1), 22–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roman, R., S. Hayibor and B. R. Agle: 1999, ‘The Relationship between Social Performance and Financial Performance’, Business and Society 38(1), 109–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S.: 1973, ‘The Economy Theory of the Agency: The Principal's Problem’, American Economic Review 63, 134–139.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowley, T. J.: 1997, ‘Moving Beyond Dyadic Ties: A Network Theory of Stakeholder Influences’, Academy of Management Review 22(4), 887–911.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rowley, T. and S. Berman: 2000, ‘New Brand of Corporate Social Performance’, Business and Society 39(4), 397–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, M. S. and A. B. Carroll: 2003, ‘Corporate Social Responsibility: A Three-Domain Approach’, Business Ethics Quarterly 13(4), 503–530.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, S. P.: 1975, ‘Dimensions of Corporate Social Performance: An Analytical Framework’, California Management Review 17(3), 58–65.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shrivastava, P.: 1995, ‘The Role of Corporations in Achieving Ecological Sustainability’, Academy of Management Review 20, 936–960.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, Y. R.: 1992 (1965), in V. Kuic (ed.), The Tradition of Natural Law. A Philosopher's Reflections. (Fordham University Press, New York).

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, T. W.: 1999, ‘Aristotle on the Conditions for and Limits of the Common Good’, American Political Science Review 93(3), 625–637.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, W. and M. Higgins: 2000, ‘Cause-Related Marketing: Ethics and the Ecstatic’, Business and Society 39(3), 304–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, R. C.: 1992, ‘Corporate Roles, Personal Virtues: An Aristotelian Approach to Business Ethics’, Business Ethics Quarterly 2(3), 317–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stead, J. G. and E. Stead: 2000, ‘Eco-enterprise strategy: Standing for sustainability’, Journal of Business Ethics 24(4), 313–330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sturdivant, F. D.: 1979, ‘Executives and Activist: Test of Stakeholder Management’, California Management Review 22(Fall), 53–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sulmasy, D. P.: 2001, ‘Four Basic Notions of the Common Good’, St. John's Law Review 75(2), 303–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, D. L.: 1995, ‘Addressing a Theoretical Problem by Reorienting the Corporate Social Performance Model’, Academy of Management Review 20(1), 43–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swanson, D. L.: 1999, ‘Toward an Integrative Theory of Business and Society: A Research Strategy for Corporate Social Performance’, Academy of Management Review 24(3), 506–521.

    Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J., G. Pisano and A. Shuen: 1997, ‘Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management’, Strategic Management Journal 18(7), 509–533.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Clarkson Center for Business Ethics: 1999, Principles of Stakeholder Management (Joseph L. Rotman School of Management, Toronto, Canada). Reprinted (2002) on, Business Ethics Quarterly 12(4), 257–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tichy, N. M., A. R. McGill and L. St. Clair: 1997, Corporate Global Citizenship (The New Lexington Press, San Francisco).

    Google Scholar 

  • Treviño, L. K. and G. R. Weaver: 1994, ‘Normative and Empirical Business Ethics’, Business Ethics Quarterly 4(2), 129–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations: 1999, Global Compact (www. unglobalcompact.org).

  • Van Marrewijk, M.: 2003, ‘Concept and Definitions of CSR and Corporate Sustainability: Between Agency and Communion’, Journal of Business Ethics 44, 95–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Marrewijk, M. and M. Werre: 2003, ‘Multiple Levels of Corporate Sustainability’, Journal of Business Ethics 44(2/3), 107–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Varadarajan, P. R. and A. Menon: 1988, ‘Cause-Related Marketing: A Coalignment of Marketing Strategy and Corporate Philanthropy’, Journal of Marketing 52(3), 58–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Velasquez, M.: 1992, ‘International Business, Morality and the Common Good’, Business Ethics Quarterly 2(1), 27–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, D.: 1986, ‘The Study of Social Issues in Management: A Critical Appraisal’, California Management Review 28(2), 142–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Votaw, D.: 1972, ‘Genius Became Rare: A Comment on the Doctrine of Social Responsibility Pt 1’, California Management Review 15(2), 25–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. A. and S. B. Graves: 1997, ‘The Corporate Social Performance-Financial Performance Link’, Strategic Management Journal 18(4), 303–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wartick, S. and P. L. Cochran: 1985, ‘The Evolution of Corporate Social Performance Model’, Academy of Management Review 10(4), 758–769.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wartick, S. L. and R. E. Rude: 1986, ‘Issues Management: Corporate Fad or Corporate Function?’, California Management Review 29(1), 124–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wartick and Mahon: 1994: ‘Towards a Substantive Definition of the Corporate Issue Construct: A Review and Synthesis of Literature’, Business and Society 33(3), 293–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, J. W.: 2003, Business Ethics: A Stakeholder and Issues Management Approach, 3rd ed. (Thomson–South-Western, Ohio).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wernelfelt, B.: 1984, ‘A Resource Based View of the Firm’, Strategic Management Review 5, 171–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wheeler, D., B. Colbert and R. E. Freeman: 2003, ‘Focusing on Value: Reconciling Corporate Social Responsibility, Sustainability and a Stakeholder Approach in a Network World’, Journal of General Management 28(3), 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wicks, A. C., D. R. Gilbert, Jr. and R. E. Freeman: 1994, ‘A Feminist Reinterpretation of the Stakeholder Concept’, Business Ethics Quarterly 4(4), 475–497.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wijnberg, N. M.: 2000, ‘Normative Stakeholder Theory and Aristotle: The Link between Ethics and Politics’, Journal of Business Ethics 25, 329–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • Windsor, D.: 2001, ‘The Future of Corporate Social Responsibility’, International Journal of Organizational Analysis 9(3), 225–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D. J.: 1991a, ‘Social Issues in Management: Theory and Research in Corporate Social Performance’, Journal of Management 17(2), 383–406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D. J.: 1991b, ‘Corporate Social Performance Revisited’, Academy of Management Review 16(4), 691–718.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood, D. J. and J. M. Lodgson: 2002, ‘Business Citizenship: From Individuals to Organizations’, Business Ethics Quarterly, Ruffin Series, No. 3, 59–94.

  • World Business Council for Sustainable Development: 2000, Corporate Social Responsibility: Making Good Business Sense (World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Geneve).

    Google Scholar 

  • World Commission on Environment and Development: 1987, Our Common Future (Oxford University Press, Oxford).

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamaji, K.: 1997, ‘A Global Perspective of Ethics in Business’, Business Ethics Quarterly 7(3), 55–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zadek, S.: 2001, ‘Partnership Alchemy: Engagement, Innovation, and Governance’, in J. Andriof and M. McIntosh (eds.), Perspectives on Corporate Citizenship (Greenleaf, Sheffield, UK), pp. 200–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Business Ethics, IESE Business School, University of Navarra, Av. Pearson, 21, 08034 Barcelona, Spain E-mail: mele@iese.edu, egarriga@iese.edu

Download references

Authors
  1. Elisabet Garriga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Domènec Melé
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Garriga, E., Melé, D. Corporate Social Responsibility Theories: Mapping the Territory. Journal of Business Ethics 53, 51–71 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000039399.90587.34

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000039399.90587.34

Search

Navigation