JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.
Rationalizing Responsibility: Weber's Theory of Rationality and the Corporate Social Responsibility Debate

Author
Ahlquist, Daniel B.
Abstract
The corporate social responsibility (CSR) debate arose out of the recognition
that corporations today hold tremendous power, and that the direct and indirect
implications of their actions are far-reaching, affecting a wide array of stakeholders in
both positive and negative ways. Corporate decision-makers are confronted daily with
a complex set of often conflicting demands, including economic, ethical, legal,
personal and professional demands. They are forced to weigh these competing
demands in their decision-making processes, ultimately deciding which demands will
influence their corporations? actions. Understanding the rationality employed by
corporate decision-makers and business scholars is important in the study of CSR
because it allows us to gain insight into how they interpret the constellation of
demands placed upon them and how they orient their actions ? and their corporations?
actions ? accordingly.
I approach this analysis of the CSR discourse with two primary research
questions. First, what patterns exist in the arguments put forth in the CSR literature,
and can these patterns be classified into theoretical categories of CSR? Second,
what rationalities underlie the predominant arguments (theories) in the CSR
literature, and how do these rationalities inform the CSR debate? Upon coding the
CSR literature according to four points of paradigmatic contention between
adherents to different arguments for or against CSR, three endogenous theoretical
frameworks began to emerge: corporate libertarian theory, enlightened self-interest
theory, and moral theory. While most critics and advocates of CSR in the
mainstream discourse point to one or more of the dozens of empirical studies on the
CSR-firm financial performance relationship to support their arguments, I suggest
that many of the arguments put forth in the CSR discourse are not predicated on
empirical evidence, but rather on an underlying normative orientation and rationality. Through this qualitative analysis of the CSR discourse ? both the academic and nonacademic
discourse ? the conflicting rationalities employed by participants in the
CSR discourse become apparent.
In the face of economic globalization, characterized by transnational capital
flows, highly mobile corporations, and increasing power of corporations in relation
to the state, corporations have become some of the most powerful actors in the world
today. Despite the fact that their agency is constrained by the demands of the market
system, their actions greatly affect our lives, our world, and our future. The need for
a moral discourse on the role and responsibilities of business corporations in society
today is pressing. In addition to seeking to understand the rationalities underpinning
the predominant arguments for and against CSR, this research seeks to contribute to
this growing moral discourse.
Description
Content file updated at author's request on 2014-10-22.
Date Issued
2007-04-06Subject
Corporate Social Responsibility; Rationality; Weber; Corporations; Bureaucracy; Discourse Analysis; Moral Discourse; Corporate Accountability; Enlightened self-interest; Corporate Libertarian
Type
dissertation or thesis
Related items
Showing items related by title, author, creator and subject.