IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/ordojb/v63y2012i1p241-260n18.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unternehmensverantwortung als Vermeidung relevanter Inkonsistenzen / Corporate Responsibility: The Avoidance of Relevant Inconsistencies

Author

Listed:
  • Suchanek Andreas

Abstract

Markets are based on individual freedom and, as a consequence, on a responsible exercise of this freedom. This holds also true for corporate actors and their (corporate) responsibility.This contribution develops a conception of corporate responsibility which is effectively addressed to corporate representatives and offers them two imperatives of ethical corporate behavior as heuristics. These heuristics offer focal points for the acceptance and fulfillment of corporate responsibility. The imperatives are derived from an understanding of corporate responsibility which recognizes the maintenance of trustworthiness and thereby, the reputation for being a reliable cooperation partner, as the foundation for sustainable value creation. Behaviors - and communication - which undermine the corporation′s trustworthiness are thereby irresponsible. Based on this understanding of corporate responsibility, the concept of relevant inconsistencies is utilized to provide further clarity on the issues at hand. The concept refers to inconsistencies between the expectations held by cooperation partners (stakeholders)based on their role as trust-givers and (perceived) behaviors of the trusttaker (the corporation) which (can) lead to the trustful nature of the relationship being undermined. The qualification as ‘relevant’ is important in reference to the fact that many inconsistencies may arise in daily business which do not have grave consequences. As a result, a systematic approach to corporate responsibility requires corporations to concentrate on identifying - and insofar as possible, implementing mechanisms to avoid - relevant inconsistencies in cooperative relationships. This includes the identification and amendment of structural conditions which may lead to relevant inconsistencies materializing.

Suggested Citation

  • Suchanek Andreas, 2012. "Unternehmensverantwortung als Vermeidung relevanter Inkonsistenzen / Corporate Responsibility: The Avoidance of Relevant Inconsistencies," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 63(1), pages 241-260, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:bpj:ordojb:v:63:y:2012:i:1:p:241-260:n:18
    DOI: 10.1515/ordo-2012-0118
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1515/ordo-2012-0118
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1515/ordo-2012-0118?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ingo Pies & Markus Beckmann & Stefan Hielscher, 2010. "Value Creation, Management Competencies, and Global Corporate Citizenship: An Ordonomic Approach to Business Ethics in the Age of Globalization," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 94(2), pages 265-278, June.
    2. Alexander Dahlsrud, 2008. "How corporate social responsibility is defined: an analysis of 37 definitions," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, January.
    3. Anant K. Sundaram & Andrew C. Inkpen, 2004. "The Corporate Objective Revisited," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 350-363, June.
    4. R. Edward Freeman & S. Ramakrishna Velamuri, 2006. "A New Approach to CSR: Company Stakeholder Responsibility," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Andrew Kakabadse & Mette Morsing (ed.), Corporate Social Responsibility, chapter 1, pages 9-23, Palgrave Macmillan.
    5. Suchanek Andreas & Lin-Hi Nick, 2007. "Corporate Responsibility in der forschenden Arzneimittelindustrie / Corporate Responsibility in the Research-Based Pharmaceutical Industry," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 227(5-6), pages 547-562, October.
    6. Jan Sammeck, 2012. "A New Institutional Economics Perspective on Industry Self-Regulation," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-8349-3542-7, June.
    7. Andy Lockett & Jeremy Moon & Wayne Visser, 2006. "Corporate Social Responsibility in Management Research: Focus, Nature, Salience and Sources of Influence," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(1), pages 115-136, January.
    8. Andrew Kakabadse & Mette Morsing, 2006. "Introduction: Corporate Social Responsibility — Reconciling Aspiration with Application," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Andrew Kakabadse & Mette Morsing (ed.), Corporate Social Responsibility, pages 1-6, Palgrave Macmillan.
    9. Anant K. Sundaram & Andrew C. Inkpen, 2004. "Stakeholder Theory and “The Corporate Objective Revisited”: A Reply," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(3), pages 370-371, June.
    10. Jeffrey H. Dyer & Wujin Chu, 2003. "The Role of Trustworthiness in Reducing Transaction Costs and Improving Performance: Empirical Evidence from the United States, Japan, and Korea," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(1), pages 57-68, February.
    11. Pies, Ingo & Hielscher, Stefan & Beckmann, Markus, 2009. "Moral Commitments and the Societal Role of Business: An Ordonomic Approach to Corporate Citizenship," Business Ethics Quarterly, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(3), pages 375-401, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pies, Ingo & Beckmann, Markus & Hielscher, Stefan, 2012. "The political role of the business firm: An ordonomic concept of corporate citizenship developed in comparison with the Aristoleian idea of individual citizenship," Discussion Papers 2012-1, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    2. Ingo Pies & Philipp Schreck & Karl Homann, 2021. "Single-objective versus multi-objective theories of the firm: using a constitutional perspective to resolve an old debate," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 779-811, April.
    3. Petya Koleva, 2021. "Towards the Development of an Empirical Model for Islamic Corporate Social Responsibility: Evidence from the Middle East," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 171(4), pages 789-813, July.
    4. Petya Koleva & Maureen Meadows, 2021. "Inherited Scepticism and Neo-communist CSR-washing: Evidence from a Post-communist Society," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 174(4), pages 783-804, December.
    5. Sergiy D. Dmytriyev & R. Edward Freeman & Jacob Hörisch, 2021. "The Relationship between Stakeholder Theory and Corporate Social Responsibility: Differences, Similarities, and Implications for Social Issues in Management," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 58(6), pages 1441-1470, September.
    6. Natalia Yakovleva & Diego Vazquez-Brust, 2012. "Stakeholder Perspectives on CSR of Mining MNCs in Argentina," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 106(2), pages 191-211, March.
    7. Will, Matthias Georg & Hielscher, Stefan, 2013. "How do companies invest in corporate social responsibility? An ordonomic contribution for empirical CSR research," Discussion Papers 2013-3, Martin Luther University of Halle-Wittenberg, Chair of Economic Ethics.
    8. Pies, Ingo & Hielscher, Stefan & Everding, Sebastian, 2020. "Do hybrids impede sustainability? How semantic reorientations and governance reforms can produce and preserve sustainability in sharing business models," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 174-185.
    9. Daniel G. Arce, 2007. "Is Agency Theory Self‐Activating?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 45(4), pages 708-720, October.
    10. Tomina Saveanu & Daniel Badulescu & Sorana Saveanu & Maria-Madela Abrudan & Alina Badulescu, 2021. "The Role of Owner-Managers in Shaping CSR Activity of Romanian SMEs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-19, October.
    11. Andrew C. Inkpen & Anant K. Sundaram, 2022. "The Endurance of Shareholder Value Maximization as the Preferred Corporate Objective," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 555-568, March.
    12. Danilo Drago & Concetta Carnevale, 2020. "Do CSR Ratings Affect Loan Spreads? Evidence from European Syndicated Loan Market," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-30, September.
    13. Lee Siew Tee & Ismail Nizam, 2020. "The Influence of Corporate Governance on Financial Performance Mediated by Gender Diversity," Journal of Asian Business Strategy, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 10(1), pages 61-79, January.
    14. Witold J. Henisz & Sinziana Dorobantu & Lite J. Nartey, 2014. "Spinning gold: The financial returns to stakeholder engagement," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(12), pages 1727-1748, December.
    15. Jan Kultys, 2016. "Controversies About Agency Theory As Theoretical Basis For Corporate Governance," Oeconomia Copernicana, Institute of Economic Research, vol. 7(4), pages 613-634, December.
    16. Lorenzo Sacconi, 2013. "Ethics, economic organization and the social contract," Chapters, in: Anna Grandori (ed.), Handbook of Economic Organization, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Matthias Georg Will & Stefan Hielscher, 2014. "How do Companies Invest in Corporate Social Responsibility? An Ordonomic Contribution for Empirical CSR Research," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-23, July.
    18. Midtgård, Kenneth & Selart, Marcus, 2024. "The cognitive perspective in strategic choice," SocArXiv 4xpza, Center for Open Science.
    19. Donal Crilly, 2013. "Recasting Enterprise Strategy: Towards Stakeholder Research That Matters to General Managers," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(8), pages 1427-1447, December.
    20. Kim, Chung Hee & Amaeshi, Kenneth & Harris, Simon & Suh, Chang-Jin, 2013. "CSR and the national institutional context: The case of South Korea," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(12), pages 2581-2591.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:ordojb:v:63:y:2012:i:1:p:241-260:n:18. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.