Corporate social responsibility is often framed in terms of opposing constructions of the firm. These reflect, respectively, different accounts of its obligations: either to shareholders or to stakeholders. Although these opposing constructions of corporate responsibility are diametrically opposed, they are also much more fluid and mobile in certain contexts, since they can act as discursive resources that are deployed and brought into play in the struggle over shaping what responsibility means. They are less the fixed, ideological “signposts” they might appear, (...) and more like “weathervanes” that move alongside changing rhetorical currents. To show this, we analyse the Securities and Exchange Commission consultation process, and legislation, relating to the provenance of “conflict minerals”. We identify two dialectically opposed camps, each seeking to influence final legislation and with end goals in keeping with the shareholder/stakeholder dichotomy. One camp lobbied for firms to scrutinize their entire supply chain, constructing the firm as a “global citizen” with very wide social responsibilities. The second camp lobbied for a lighter touch approach, constructing the firm as a “trader”, with much narrower social responsibilities. We analyse the complex interplay between these two opposed camps, our contribution being to show how both deploy competing conceptions of the corporation as discursive resources. (shrink)

A pesar de los enormes cambios de mentalidad que hubo a lo largo de la Historia, el ser humano continúa él mismo en su naturaleza, teniendo en sí los trascendentales –unum, bonum, verum, pulchrum–, las perfecciones del ser que lo llevan a comunicarse con el Ser Absoluto, trascendente en plenitud. Pero los relativismos y subjetivismos de la actualidad dejaron apenas la puerta del pulchrum abierta a esa comunicación. Se trata de comprender el verdadero lenguaje de la belleza para que, por (...) medio de ella, pueda darse el encuentro con la trascendencia absoluta en nuestros días. (shrink)