Social Responsibility and Organizational Behavior
Rupp, D., Ganapathi, J., Aguilera, R., & Williams, C. (2006). Employee Reactions to Corporate Social Responsibility: An Organizational Justice Framework. Journal of Organizational Behavior 27, 537-543.
The researchers in this study, attempt to explore the relationship between the micro-concept of organizational justice and the macro-concept of corporate social responsibility. The authors present the view that, employees’ perceptions of corporate social responsibility usually influences their attitudes, behaviors, and emotions, in a manner that is mediated by their needs, as well as the organization’s social accounts.
Madison, T., Ward, S., Royalty, K. (2012). Corporate Social Responsibility, Organizational Commitment, and Employer-Sponsored Volunteerism. International Journal of Business and Social Science 3(1), 1-14.
The authors explore the effect that an organization sponsored volunteer program has on its employees’ level of commitment. Indeed the findings indicate that increased social responsibility and encouragement by the organization for its employees to volunteer resulted in increased organizational commitment, and generally greater levels of job satisfaction, relative to the employee’s education level, as well as number of years employed.
Bauman, C., & Skitka, L. (2012). Corporate Social Responsibility as a Source of Employee Satisfaction. Research in Organizational Behavior 32, 62-86 Retrieved from http://tigger.uic.edu/labs/skitka/public_html/Bauman%20&%20Skitka%20ROB.pdf
The researchers explore the issue of how corporate social responsibility affects employees, arguing that employees are the primary stakeholders charged with the responsibility of directly influencing the fortunes of the organizations they work for. The authors proceed to posit that corporate social responsibility actually presents a unique opportunity through which a company can influence the employees’ impression of the company, affecting the relationship in terms of self esteem, belongingness, security and meaningful existence.
Knights, D., & Willmott, H. (2006). Introducing Organizational Behavior & Management. Cengage Learning. 296-348
The authors essentially argue that while rules and laws are usually instrumental in shaping organizational behavior, certain approaches are usually essential when it comes to cultivating an ethical atmosphere that promotes ethical behavior (506). Essentially, Knights and Willmott argue that while the law exists, it is a blunt tool when it comes to ensuring ethical and appropriate organizational behavior. This claim essentially lends credence to claims by Bauman and Skitka (2012) that corporate social responsibility can be an important tool for improving organizational behavior.
Gond, J., El-Akremi, A., Igalens, J., & Swaen, V. (2010). Corporate Social Responsibility Influence on Employees. ICCSR Research Paper Series 54.
The researchers explored the influence that Corporate Social Responsibility has on employees, specifically focusing on the social exchange and identity theories. The authors argue that, employee perceptions of corporate social responsibility, usually triggers behaviors as well as attitudes that affect environmental, social and organizational performance. Essentially, the researchers argue that CSR affects corporate performance by influencing employee behavior.
Brammer, S., Millington, A., & Rayton, B. (2005). The Contribution of Corporate Social Responsibility to Organizational Commitment. International journal of Business and Social Science 3, 1-14.
The research aims to explore the relationship between how employees perceive corporate social responsibility and their levels of organizational commitment, drawing on the social identity theory. The researchers carried out an investigation on how three aspects of socially responsible behavior affect organizational commitment. The three aspects explored included: perceptions of corporate social responsibility, provision of training for employees and the organization’s approach to procedural justice
Chen, X. (2007). Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes. The Special Issue on contemporary Issues in Business and Economics 2(5), 118-207.
The journal provides a clear relationship between organizational behavior, organizational psychology and human cognition and their relationship to judgment and decision making. According to the journal author combining these topics in organizational process assist in building motivation, emotional satisfaction and high performance in any organization.
Ashraf, T. (n.d). Organizational Behavior. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/education/aladin/paldin/pdf/course02/unit_14.pdf
Ashraf (n.d) in his article focuses on organizational behavior in relation to authority, power and politics. Combining the main organizational principles which relates to the three forces of decision making that is power, authority and politics will mean that all decisions in the organizational will be in line with the set vision, mission and long term objectives of the organization. As a result the organization will be in a position to satisfy all the stakeholders.
Salles, D., (2011). Responsibility based environmental governance S.A.P.I.EN.S. Veolia Environment 4(1), 1-7. Retrieved from http://sapiens.revues.org/1092?file=1
According to the article by Salles, environmental factors strongly dictate organizational performance. This is because environmental problems such as poverty levels, poor infrastructure and political scale influence the ability of organizations to achieve competitive advantage. The author also recognizes that it is difficult to govern environmental factors and therefore he provides a detailed description of standard policy tools that organizations can use to maintain their social responsibility.
Carrol, A. & Buchholts, A. (2006). Business and Society: Ethics and Stakeholder Management: Thomson/South-Western.
Business and Society book emphasizes on the social, legal, political and ethical responsibility of both external and internal stakeholders or any member with interest in an organization or a company. It should be a fundamental goal for all organizations to balance responsible business decisions and interest of the community. The authors prove that it is by fact that business situations will always arise in the community that teat the values and ethics of organization stakeholders.
Inyang, B. (2001). CSR-HRM Nexus: Defining the Role Engagement of the Human Resources Professionals. International Journal of Business and Social Science 2(5), 118-126.
The study explores the relationship between corporate social responsibility and human resource management. Though corporations may known the benefits of the two strategies in organizational success it is essential to ensure that they are well managed. Relating the two CSR and HRM will require the organization to educate employees on the need for providing social responsibility and provide control and action plans for CSR. Finally the study discusses that the two concepts require strategic business decisions and human capital.
Mallen, B., (2008) Arguments against Corporate Social Responsibility. Business Respect. Retrieved from http://www.mallenbaker.net/csr/against.php
The researcher focuses of the existing different arguments on corporate social responsibility consider that some find it essential while others do not. The discussion begins by highlighting that avoiding social responsibility is actually going against human rights. Stakeholders expect an organization to embrace decency, honesty and fairness in all its operations. By so doing, it will be achieving its social responsibility.