Journal of Business Ethics (2007) 72:243262 DOI 10.

1007/s10551-006-9168-4

Springer 2006

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): Theory and Practice in a Developing Country Context

Dima Jamali Ramez Mirshak

ABSTRACT. After providing an overview of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) research in different contexts, and noting the varied methodologies adopted, two robust CSR conceptualizations one by Carroll (1979, A ThreeDimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance, The Academy of Management Review 4(4), 497505) and the other by Wood (1991, Corporate Social Perfor-

Dr. Jamali is Assistant Professor of Management at the Olayan School of Business, American University of Beirut. She holds a BA in Public Administartion from the American University of Beirut, and a Ph.D. in Social Policy and Administration, from the University of Kent at Canterbury, UK. Her research interests encompass corporate social responsibility, public private partnerships, learning organizations and women issues. She worked as an expert consultant on projects funded by the World Bank, the US Agency for International Development, NGOs, and other regional and local public and private rms. She is the author of numerous studies and international peer reviewed publications in various international journals, including the Journal of Management Development, the International Journal of Public Sector Management, the International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, Business Process Management Journal, Public Works, Management and Policy and Women in Management Review. Ramez Mirshak Graduated with honors from the American University in Cairo (AUC) with a Bachelor of Arts in Business Administration in February 2001, then worked for two years in Egypt in the eld of marketing and management. In 20042005, pursued his Masters of Business Administration at the American University of Beirut (AUB), researching primarily issues relating to change management and corporate social responsibility under the supervision of Dr. Dima Jamali, then joined a leading international nancial institution as a regional Management Associate, while maintaining links with AUB and working on several research based projects.

mance Revisited, The Academy of Management Review 16(4), 691717) have been adopted for this research and their integration explored. Using this newly synthesized framework, the research critically examines the CSR approach and philosophy of eight companies that are considered active in CSR in the Lebanese context. The ndings suggest the lack of a systematic, focused, and institutionalized approach to CSR and that the understanding and practice of CSR in Lebanon are still grounded in the context of philanthropic action. The ndings are qualied within the framework of existing contextual realities and relevant implications drawn accordingly. KEY WORDS: Corporate social responsibility (CSR), theory and practice, developing countries, Lebanon

Introduction Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is a concept that has attracted worldwide attention and acquired a new resonance in the global economy. Heightened interest in CSR in recent years has stemmed from the advent of globalization and international trade, which have reected in increased business complexity and new demands for enhanced transparency and corporate citizenship. Moreover, while governments have traditionally assumed sole responsibility for the improvement of the living conditions of the population, societys needs have exceeded the capabilities of governments to fulll them. In this context, the spotlight is increasingly turning to focus on the role of business in society and progressive companies are seeking to differentiate themselves through engagement in CSR. The World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) denes CSR as the commitment of business to contribute to sustainable

244

Dima Jamali and Ramez Mirshak important variables inuencing CSR understanding and practice. In this context, there is value added in exploring CSR conceptions and perceptions in a developing country context, and gauging the extent to which CSR practice in developing countries has matured beyond the boundaries of compliance and public relations. Accordingly, after providing a literature overview of CSR studies in different contexts, this research makes the case for adopting two well grounded CSR conceptualizations, one by Carroll (1979) and the other by Wood (1991) and explores how they can be combined. Using this newly synthesized framework, the paper examines empirically the CSR performance of select companies operating in Lebanon, documenting their views and practice of CSR. In the process, the paper also sheds light on practical considerations, which have not been accorded enough attention in the CSR literature, pertaining for example to the housing of CSR within corporate structures, the governance choices in the context of CSR, and the challenges faced in the pursuit of CSR in a developing country context.

economic development, working with employees, their families and the local communities (WBCSD, 2001). Hence the fundamental idea of CSR is that business corporations have an obligation to work towards meeting the needs of a wider array of stakeholders (Clarkson, 1995; Waddock et al., 2002). More generally, CSR is a set of management practices that ensures the company maximizes the positive impacts of its operations on society or operating in a manner that meets and even exceeds the legal, ethical, commercial and public expectations that society has of business (BSR, 2001). At the core of the CSR debate is the idea that corporations should transition from a state of mere compliance to a mode of engagement, from harm minimization to value creation (Luetkenhorst, 2004; Novak, 1996). This view has become central to the CSR discourse. Also implied in the debate is the idea that the private sector is the dominant engine of growth the principle creator of value and managerial resources and that it has an obligation to contribute to economic growth and opportunity equitable and sustainable. CSR is therefore founded on a stronger recognition of the role of business as an active partner in a world of scarcity and dwindling resources. But while increasing attention has been accorded in recent years to CSR, as a postulate for ethical and responsible behavior in business, very little is known of the practice of CSR in developing countries. Various scholars have indeed highlighted the Western centric nature of academic publication on the topic. Belal (2001) notes for example that most of the CSR studies conducted so far have been in the context of developed countries such as Western Europe, the U.S.A., and Australia and that we still know too little about practices in ex-colonial, smaller, and emerging countries. He highlights the need for more CSR research in developing country contexts given the valuable insights it can offer to the jaded palettes of Western scholars. There is thus a certain level of lingering academic curiosity about diverging CSR understanding and practice in light of vastly different economic, social, and cultural conditions. In his exploration of the institutional determinants of social responsibility, Jones (1999) for example highlights the importance of the national socio-cultural environment and the level of national economic development as

Literature overview Corporate Social Responsibility principles have long been part of enlightened business practice, but the concept has witnessed an astounding ascendancy and resurgence in recent years. Nevertheless, the concept has not been uniformly embraced, with lingering diverging views about its potential usefulness and applicability. To skeptics, CSR is antithetical to sound business practice and serves to dilute its focus on wealth creation (Clement-Jones, 2005; Murray, 2005). Proponents however characterize CSR as essential for successful business operations and as an opportunity for business to look beyond narrow economic returns and take the wider social concern into consideration (Jackson and Nelson, 2004; Rudolph, 2005). While views about CSR continue to oscillate between these two extremes, a growing body of evidence seems to suggest that cultural differences affect CSR dynamics with companies in different contexts exhibiting varied responses to this change in the business conduct landscape. A study by Abreu et al. (2005) on the CSR-related experience and

Corporate Social Responsibility practice of Portuguese companies notes cultural differences, pointing to the need for more research on the socio-cultural determinants of CSR in the newly expanded European Community. Research by Papasolomou-Doukadis et al. (2005) on the CSR approach of Cypriot businesses suggests the importance of managerial initiative, as well as nancial gain as a key motive for the adoption of CSR by the business sector in Cyprus for tax deduction purposes. Research by Juholin (2004) in the Finnish context similarly suggests the importance of top management initiative, the limited attention accorded to philanthropy, and long-term protability as the prominent driving force behind CSR in Finland. Research by Fulop et al. (2000) in the Hungarian context notes differences between the CSR orientation of large and small rms, with more accentuated attention to issues of protability among managers of smaller rms. A study by Tencati et al. (2004) shows a positive attitude towards CSR on the part of Italian companies and the lack of public support and publicity on CSR as the main reported obstacles. Another study by Longo et al. (2005) in the Italian context suggests that the majority (60%) of companies can be considered as socially responsible using a stakeholder approach, noting obstacles relating to time and cost constraints. A similar study by Uhlaner et al. (2004) suggests the usefulness of a mix of CSR perspectives (economic benets, conformance to legal and ethical expectations, and philanthropic/community involvement) as helpful in explaining variations in CSR orientations amongst a sample of Dutch family rms. A study in the Spanish context similarly shows variation among rms, with one cluster adhering to a philanthropic conception of responsibility (opting to maintain social involvement even as it entails net costs to the company) and another adhering to a pure prot maximization view (de la Cruz Deniz Deniz and Cabrera Suarez, 2005). Aside from cross-cultural differences, it is interesting to note the variety of methodologies adopted when examining CSR empirically. Some studies considered CSR to entail ethical responsibility, looking at philanthropic responsibility as an optional add-on (Longo et al., 2005). Other studies have made a distinction between CSR as simple legal compliance Vs CSR as conducting business with a high regard for morality (Juholin, 2004). Some

245

studies have referred to various types of CSR economic, legal, ethical, philanthropic (Uhlaner et al., 2004); others have utilized a stakeholder approach, examining the CSR obligations and contributions of rms vis-a-vis an array of key stakeholders (Longo et al., 2005); while others have made distinctions between classical, socio-economic, philanthropic, and modern views of CSR (de la Cruz Deniz Deniz and Cabrera Suarez, 2005; Quazi and OBrien, 2000). This variation stems in part from the lingering confusion as to what CSR precisely entails. Two major camps in the CSR debate can be delineated. The rst camp believes rather rmly that a corporation is a legal construct and has only the two responsibilities bestowed by the law creating it, namely making money for owners and obeying relevant rules (Greeneld, 2004). Another group believes that corporations act intentionally via the intentional actions of their members and hence bear the duties and obligations of any good person or citizen, but on a corporate scale (Hancock, 2005; Goodpaster and Matthews, 2003; Pettit, 2005). The rst view translates into a narrow conception of corporate responsibility as simply entailing economic and legal responsibilities, while the second translates into a broader conception of CSR entailing a wider range of economic, legal, ethical, moral, and philanthropic responsibilities. The narrow vision of responsibility of the rst camp is closely associated with the classical perspective, suggesting that the main function of business is to provide goods and services that lead to the maximization of prot within the framework of legal requirements (de la Cruz Deniz Deniz and Cabrera Suarez, 2005; Quazi and OBrien, 2000). The focus here is on the economic and legal responsibilities of business. The broader view of responsibility associated with the second camp translates into attempts at meeting a wider spectrum of expectations, as in protecting the environment, developing the community, conserving resources, and philanthropic giving (de la Cruz Deniz Deniz and Cabrera Suarez, 2005; Quazi and OBrien, 2000). From this perspective, business like ordinary persons or citizens, is expected to assume responsibility and conform to the principles of morality, accountability, and integrity with a much wider scope for potential contributions and interventions.

246

Dima Jamali and Ramez Mirshak CSP. In this model, Carroll (1979) differentiated between four types of corporate social responsibilities: economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary. He also presented the argument that rms wishing to effectively engage in CSP needed to have (a) a basic denition of CSR; (b) an understanding of the issues for which a social responsibility existed; and (c) a specication of the philosophy of responsiveness to the issues. A basic starting point for effective CSP from this perspective is the assimilation and adoption of the basic types of CSR. The rst category that Carroll (1979) delineated is a responsibility that is economic in nature, entailing for example providing a return on investment to owners and shareholders; creating jobs and fair pay for workers; discovering new resources; promoting technological advancement, innovation, and the creation of new products and services. Business from this perspective is the basic economic unit in society and all its other roles are predicated on this fundamental assumption (Carroll, 1979). The legal responsibility is the second part of the denition and entails expectations of legal compliance and playing by the rules of the game. From this perspective, society expects business to fulll its economic mission within the framework of legal requirements. But while regulations may successfully coerce rms to respond to an issue, it is difcult to ensure that they are applied equitably (Pratima, 2002). Moreover, regulations are reactive in nature, leaving little opportunity for rms to be proactive. Laws therefore circumscribe the limits of tolerable behavior, but they neither dene ethics nor do they legislate morality (Solomon, 1994). In essence, ethical responsibility overcomes the limitation of law by creating an ethics ethos that companies can live by (Solomon, 1994). It portrays business as being moral, and doing what is right, just, and fair. Therefore, ethical responsibility encompasses activities that are not necessarily codied into law, but nevertheless are expected of business by societal members such as respecting people, avoiding social harm, and preventing social injury. Such responsibility is mainly rooted in religious convictions, humane principles, and human rights commitments (Lantos, 2001). However, one limitation to this type of responsibility is its blurry denition

That the corporate should be held responsible has been nicely argued by Pettit (2005). In his words, by incorporating with one another, human beings can have effects such that it is difcult to nd them individually responsible...and so there will be a serious decit in the allocation of responsibility, unless we are willing to assign responsibility to the corporate(s) that such agents constitute. The broader conception of responsibility associated with this view is certainly more commensurate with the prominence of the modern corporation as a vital center of power and decision-making. It is also consistent with the earliest conceptions of responsibility articulated by early scholars including McGuire (1963) and Davis (1973), who insisted that the rm has obligations that extend beyond narrow economic and legal requirements. Moreover, from an iron law of responsibility perspective, it is clear that modern corporations have to assume responsibilities that extend beyond mission fulllment within the boundaries of legal compliance, with visible repercussions for the rm when philanthropic and especially ethical responsibilities are not attended to. In view of the above, and with the aim of adopting a clear and justied methodology that is consistent with the broader more progressive conception of responsibility, this research has opted to capitalize on two robust CSR conceptualizations that are well grounded in the literature. The rst is Carroll (1979) four-part denition of CSR that was embedded into a conceptual model of corporate social performance (CSP). The other is the CSP model by Wood (1991), which placed CSR into a comprehensive framework, emphasizing principles guiding responsibility behavior, processes of responsiveness and outcomes of performance. The next section will shed briey the light on those two conceptualizations respectively, given their importance in guiding the empirical component of this research. The possible integration of the two models is also probed and discussed.

Theoretical framework Carrolls 1979 conceptualization In 1979, Carroll proposed a four-part denition of CSR that was embedded in a conceptual model of

Corporate Social Responsibility and the consequent difculty for business to concretely deal with it (Carroll, 1979). The nal type of responsibility is where rms have the widest scope of discretionary judgment and choice, in terms of deciding on specic activities or philanthropic contributions that are aimed at giving back to society. The roots of this type of responsibility lie in the belief that business and society are intertwined in an organic way (Frederick, 1994). Examples of such activities might include philanthropic contributions, conducting in-house training programs for drug abusers, or attempts at increasing literacy rates (Carroll, 1979). This type of responsibility is the most controversial of all since its limits are broad and its implications could conict with the economic and prot-making orientation of business rms. In 1991, Carroll revisited his four-part denition of CSR and organized the notion of multiple corporate social responsibilities in a pyramid construct (Figure 1). In this pyramid, economic responsibility is the basic foundation and discretionary or volitional is the apex. This revisited conceptualization implies that the four responsibilities are aggregative in the sense that corporations that want to be ethical for example must be economically and legally responsible. From this perspective, economic and legal responsibilities are socially required, ethical responsibility is socially expected, while philanthropy is socially desired (Windsor, 2001) and each of these responsibilities comprises a component of the total social responsibility of a rm. The other components of the CSP model originally proposed by Carroll (1979) entailed an identication of the social issues that business must address and a specication of the philosophy of responsiveness to the issues. Recognizing that social
Total Responsibility Discretionary Responsibility Ethical Responsibility Legal Responsibility Economic Responsibility

247

issues may change over time depending on the industry in which rms exist, an effective responsibility performance entails a systematic attempt at eshing out the social issues that are of most interest to the rm. A strategy or mode of responsiveness must also be identied, although this component was vaguely addressed in Carrolls (1979) conceptualization, with a simple differentiation between a reactive, defensive, accommodative or proactive responsiveness strategy.

Wood 1991 conceptualization In 1991, Wood revisited the CSP model and introduced important renements by going beyond an identication of the different types of responsibilities to examine issues relating to the principles motivating responsible behavior, the processes of responsiveness and the outcomes of performance. Her rened postulation therefore placed CSR into a broader context than just a stand-alone denition, and conceptualized CSP as the product of a business rms particular conguration of principles of social responsibility, processes of social responsiveness, as well as observable outcomes as they relate to the rms societal relationships (Table I). The model offered by Wood (1991) constitutes a signicant advance in CSR research. A researcher using the model would rst consider the principles that motivate a rms social responsibility actions at three levels of analysis: institutional, organizational,
TABLE I The Corporate Social Performance model (Wood, 1991) Principles of corporate social responsibility Institutional principle: legitimacy Organizational principle: public responsibility Individual principle: managerial discretion Processes of corporate social responsiveness Environmental assessment Stakeholder management Issues management Outcomes of corporate behavior Social impacts Social programs Social policies

Figure 1. A hierarchy of Corporate Social Responsibilities (Carroll, 1991).

248

Dima Jamali and Ramez Mirshak investigation of the rms approach to devising and monitoring responses to social issues. The outcomes of corporate behavior are in turn of direct and obvious interest in the assessment of CSP. According to Woods CSP model, outcomes are divided into three types: the social impacts of corporate behavior, the programs companies use to implement responsibility and the policies developed by companies to handle social issues and stakeholder interests. Whether corporate behavior is having positive or negative impact should objectively be assessed (positive impact as in the provision of jobs, the creation of wealth or technological innovation and negative impact as in toxic wastes or illegal payments to politicians). The nature of programs selected for investment of resources to achieve specic ends is also important as is the extent of the integration of social issues and impacts within the body of company policy.

and individual. Therefore, the motivation for a rms social responsibility actions may stem from the principle of legitimacy (institutional level), i.e., from a desire to maintain credibility and legitimacy as a responsible societal actor in a shared environment. Alternatively, the motivation could stem from an organizational sense of public responsibility, particularly for outcomes related to the rms primary and secondary areas of involvement. Finally, the motivation could stem from the choices of individual managers and their personal responsibility preferences and inclinations. There is also room for interactivity among two or more of these principles in motivating CSP. Responsiveness according to Wood (1991) constitutes an action dimension that is needed to complement the normative and motivational component of social responsibility. It is conceptualized as comprising three facets environmental assessment, stakeholder management, and issues management, which are effectively interlocked. Responsiveness is rooted in knowledge about the external environment and in rigorous environmental scanning/analysis. This knowledge could then be used to devise strategies for adapting to the environment or conversely changing it. Stakeholder management is another tenet of responsiveness and can be investigated by examining particular kinds of stakeholder management devices (e.g., employee newsletters, public affairs ofcials, and corporate social reporting). Issues management on the other hand entails an

Integration of the two models The two models of Carroll (1979) and Wood (1991) are not mutually exclusive but rather complementary. As illustrated in Table II, the two models can be effectively reconciled and integrated. Carrolls categories of CSR can be viewed as the domains within which the CSR principles, processes, and outcomes are enacted. Woods (1991) model can in fact be considered as an extension of Carrolls con-

TABLE II An integration of the two models Domains Cell 1: Economic CSR principles Social legitimacy Public responsibility Managerial discretion Social legitimacy Public pesponsibility Managerial discretion Social legitimacy Public responsibility Managerial discretion Social legitimacy Public responsibility Managerial discretion Processes of responsiveness Environmental assessment Stakeholder management Issues management Environmental assessment Stakeholder management Issues management Environmental assessment Stakeholder management Issues management Environmental assessment Stakeholder management Issues management Outcomes of corporate behavior Social Social Social Social Social Social Social Social Social Social Social Social impacts programs policies impacts programs policies impacts programs policies impacts programs policies

Cell 2: Legal

Cell 3: Ethical

Cell 4: Discretionary

Corporate Social Responsibility tribution in the sense that it directs attention to the importance of considering within each domain of responsibility be it economic, legal ethical or discretionary the principles motivating this particular responsibility, the specic processes of responsiveness and the outcomes of corporate social behavior. A comprehensive and integrated CSR approach would ideally entail according attention to all three aspects of CSP (principles, processes, and outcomes), across all domains of the rms operations (economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary). In practice, however, rms may exhibit incomplete adherence to social responsibility principles and sketchy processes and outputs across various domains. Alternatively, some rms may opt to prioritize their responsibilities and fully concentrate on the fulllment of one or two types of responsibility at the expense of others, but this runs at the risk of being judged as irresponsible, particularly when the focus is only on the traditional economic domain. As far as the principles are concerned, some rms may be motivated by a combination of all three principles in one or more domains. It is possible to argue, along the same lines as Wood (1991), that the most proactive rms are motivated by all three principles across all domains while reactive rms are concerned with fewer principles and fewer domains. These principles may also operate independently of each other in one or more domain. Some managers may for example seek to maximize their personal discretion in the pursuit of philanthropic CSR, without regard to institutional legitimacy or public responsibility (Wood, 1991). But it is possible to reason that the managerial discretion principle, while potentially relevant in each domain, is in fact most salient in the discretionary domain, in the sense that there exists most room here for managers to maneuver and exercise their personal preferences in the selection of CSR programs and interventions. In a similar vein, responsiveness strategies need to be ideally devised across all domains of responsibility (economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary). As articulated by Wood (1991), responsiveness provides an action complement or counterpoint to the principled reection of social responsibility. It is clear that managers need to monitor changing realities, manage relationships with specic stakeholder groups and devise strategies for dealing with

249

emerging issues in each responsibility domain respectively. However, some rms may exhibit better responsiveness processes in some domains than in others, but it is difcult to imagine a rm not according due diligence to responsiveness issues across various domains in this changing and increasingly dynamic environment. Similarly, companies need to track their policies, programs, and outputs across all domains of responsibility. The social impacts of business behavior are visible across the four domains of responsibility, whether in the provision of jobs, goods, and services (economic), payment of taxes (legal), grease payments to bureaucrats and politicians (ethical) or social charitable contributions (discretionary). Aside from impacts, it is also important to monitor the nature of programs selected for investment across domains as well as the integration of social issues within the body of company policy. It is clear that the alignment of principles, processes, and outcomes in each respective domain is a challenge, but it is effective integration across the four domains that is most challenging and that needs to be nurtured and rened over time. A researcher making use of Table II can therefore proceed through a systematic assessment of CSP. The rst step would be to identify the specic type of responsibility in question. Once this is determined, the specic conguration of principles of CSR, processes of responsiveness, and outcomes of corporate behavior within that particular domain can be delineated or assessed. Not only does this approach allow a mapping of the various dimensions of social performance, but it also permits to undertake a systematic assessment, avoiding potential confusion as to the nature of responsibility being addressed and the facets of social performance being investigated. Other domains can also be sequentially examined, resulting in a gradual comprehensive and rounded assessment of CSP. Guided by this approach, the empirical component of this research proceeded to investigate the CSP of Lebanese operating rms that enjoy a reputation as being active in CSR. The research methodology capitalized on in-depth interviews with eight companies that are considered active in CSR in the Lebanese context. The next section

250

Dima Jamali and Ramez Mirshak the war, which Lebanon endured, interrupted the normal course of development, leading to an overall deterioration in political, economic, and social conditions. Lebanon is now in the phase of reconstitution of its political, economic, and social structures and institutions. The rst phase of reconstruction and development, namely the rehabilitation of the physical infrastructure has been completed and has largely re-established normal operations of public services. Daunting challenges however lie ahead particularly in terms of economic recovery. Post-war governments have pursued monetary stabilization policies aiming at curbing ination rates and regaining condence in the national currency. Recent governments have had to go further in their stabilization policy to nance the growing decit in the budget. The main economic challenge confronted by successive governments in recent years has indeed been large recurring budget decits, averaging more than 18% of estimated GDP over 19972003. Efforts to restore scal balance have generally been undermined by the high costs and expenditures allocated for sustaining the post-war reconstruction program. Fiscal issues have therefore tended to dominate policy-making in the post-war years, limiting the governments scope to adopt more growth-orientated measures, and accentuating the need for greater reliance on the private sector to promote growth, generate employment, and improve standards of living.

provides relevant information about the Lebanese socio-economic environment to allow an interpretation of the ndings within their proper contextual framework. The research methodology is then presented, followed by the main ndings and conclusions.

Background information about Lebanon Lebanon is a small country located along the eastern shore of the Mediterranean sea bounded on the north and east by Syria and on the south by Israel (Figure 2), with a total area of 10,452 square kilometers and a population of around 4 million inhabitants. Lebanon qualies as a parliamentary republic with a centralized, multi-religious, and multiparty government. Its quasi-democratic political system is based on power-sharing between the countrys confessional groups. The grouping of people by religion plays a critical role in Lebanons political and social life and has given rise to Lebanons most persistent and bitter conicts. Since its independence from French rule in 1943, Lebanon has been characterized by large public freedoms, which have given it a distinctive position that made it a haven in the region, a place where different ideas, currents, and trends can thrive and interact. Peaceful multicultural coexistence, however, collapsed into violent warfare in the years 19751989. The conclusion of the Taef Accord of 1989 led to the reinstatement of security. However,

Figure 2. Lebanons location in the middle east.

Corporate Social Responsibility While the Lebanese private sector has traditionally been the dominant engine of growth in a relatively open and liberal economic environment, its resilience is now being invoked to lead the reemergence of Lebanon as a preeminent regional hub for trade and services. The private sector is rising to the challenge, but the constraints imposed by scal macro-economic realities are real and the scope for private sector maneuver seems limited at best. The CSR initiatives which will be explored in the following sections therefore need to be viewed within this contextual framework of economic turmoil and uncertainty.

251

Research methodology The empirical section of this paper comprised a primary research, which was conducted in the Lebanese context during the months of April and May 2005. The sample consisted of eight companies operating in Lebanon that were selected based on their level of CSR activity. Some of the companies were identied through their previous involvement in a United Nations Volunteers (UNV) Program, which represented a rst attempt

in 2002 to document information on business community practices in the Lebanese context. Other companies were selected because of the visibility of their CSR programs. For example, the two banks that participated in this study are renowned in Lebanon for their community and philanthropic contributions. The selected companies spanned different industries (Table III). The sample therefore comprised two banks, one insurance company, one hotel, one manufacturer of hygienic products, one bottler of refreshment brands, one food processor, and one IT company. It is interesting to note that four of the companies are subsidiaries of international corporations (Microsoft, Tetra Pak, SMLC, and Le Vendome). The remaining four companies (or otherwise half the sample) are local in origin and scope. Such sample composition is potentially interesting, allowing a comparison of the extent to which the CSR practices of these local companies differ from their international counterparts operating in Lebanon, as well as the extent to which local subsidiaries have been inuenced by the philosophy and CSR approach of their mother rms. Comparisons along these lines can indeed potentially enrich the discussion (Table III).

TABLE III Sample prole Company name Microsoft Byblos Bank Full details Microsoft-Beirut ofce, a subsidiary of Microsoft International A member of the Byblos Bank Group, a leading Lebanese nancial institution Societe Nationale dAssurances, a leading Lebanese insurance rm Member of Indevco for Development, a national conglomerate Societe Moderne Libanaise Pour Le Commerce, a Pepsi Franchise Tetra Pak Lebanon, a subsidiary of Tetra Pak international A member of the Audi Group, a leading Lebanese nancial rm A member of the Intercontinental Hotel Chain Line of business Provider of software, services, and IT for personal and business computing. Retail and commercial banking, and nancial markets.

SNA Sanita SMLC Tetra Pak Audi Bank Le Vendome

Life and non-life insurance, reinsurance, and retirement insurance. Manufacturer of disposable hygienic products for retail and industrial markets. Bottler of refreshment brands: Pepsi, Mirinda, 7UP, Mountain Dew, and Tropicana. Provider of integrated processing, packaging, and distribution lines for food manufacturing. Banking, nancial, investment, and insurance group. A boutique hotel combining Lebanese hospitality with French standards.

252

Dima Jamali and Ramez Mirshak also been recorded and dwelled upon. The following sections are therefore not intended to provide an exhaustive overview of each companys CSR practices, but rather to reect critically on the interviews conducted in relation to the basic CSP dimensions outlined in Table IV.

The companies were contacted rst by phone, and then a formal introductory letter highlighting the aims of the research and its queries was sent to the companies. An in-depth interview was then scheduled and conducted by the authors with the person(s) responsible for CSR. The interviewees were all managers, occupying top managerial positions in their respective organizations (e.g., heads of public relations/communications units; marketing and communications managers and development regional directors). The interviews consumed on average two hours, were conducted in English, taperecorded and transcribed. The research made use of semi-structured interviews whereby an interview guide was prepared outlining topics/issues to be covered, but also leaving the interviewer to decide on the sequence/ wording of questions in the course of the interview. As illustrated in Table IV, the interview guide was designed to tackle the basic CSP dimensions derived from both Carroll (1979) and Wood (1991) frameworks. Semi-structured interviews have been described as particularly suited for interviewing professionals who cannot be reached on many separate occasions, and as a midway between the extremes of formality/informality, or standardization/ un-standardization (Bernard, 2000), thus allowing the reconciliation of systematic data collection with exibility.

Type of CSR/CSR domain Without exception, all the executives interviewed adhered to a voluntary action or philanthropic type conception of CSR. When asked about the type of CSR performed, all companies consistently referred to philanthropic type activities and programs, with no mention of the importance of ethical conduct, legal compliance, or economic viability. The understanding of CSR in the Lebanese context thus seems anchored in the context of voluntary action, with the economic, legal, and ethical dimensions assumed as taken for granted. Indeed a consistent theme emerged, emphasizing the organic link between an organization and its local environment and the perceived need for social interventions that would benet society generally and local stakeholders more specically. There was thus an overall consensus on the importance of the community as a critically important stakeholder, with a parallel emphasis on the discretionary CSR domain. As articulated by one of the respondents A company needs to be in tune with the societies and communities in which it makes a living; this implies going beyond economic, legal and ethical responsibility and aligning itself with the community in which it operates (Manager, Microsoft). A similar conception of CSR was expressed by one of the banks, highlighting that We realize that we operate within a bounded space and that giving back to the com-

Research findings Aggregate ndings for the entire sample are presented in a systematic manner pertaining to the dimensions outlined in Table IV. Content analysis allowed the detection of a general level of conformity/consistency in answers, while divergences have

TABLE IV Dimensions of CSP examined Overall dimension Type of CSR CSR principles Responsiveness strategies Outcomes of behavior Detailed components Economic/legal/ethical/discretionary Institutional/organizational/individual Environmental assessment/stakeholder management/issues management Social impacts/social programs/social policies

Corporate Social Responsibility munity is paramount; investing in the community implies a better environment to conduct our business (Manager, Byblos). Another bank manager articulated a similar view, noting that We hold strongly to our civic responsibility and we strive to make a visible difference in our community (Manager, Audi). Although a sense of ethical obligation/responsibility was implicitly detected, the type of CSR explicitly referred to and emphasized invariably took the form of discretionary type activity. CSR in the Lebanese context is therefore largely understood to comprise the philanthropic contributions that business rms make over and above their mainstream activities. Nevertheless, the everyday activity of business has a much more profound social impact than its small voluntary community contributions, however valuable. The realization of this profound connection between the different facets of everyday activity of companies (e.g., economic, legal) and the well-being of society seems to be less than fully appreciated in the Lebanese context. As articulated by Bush (2005), CSR is not just about philanthropic/charitable giving; rather it is the whole way in which a company interacts with society.

253

Principles of CSR The principles that were most frequently mentioned by the interviewed executives as motivating the responsibility behavior of the rm were the principle of legitimacy and the principle of managerial discretion. With no exception, all executives mentioned the interdependence of social institutions and the obligation of rms to act responsibly vis-a-vis their local stakeholders. All the rms included in the sample therefore expressed genuine concern with maintaining legitimacy and credibility in a shared environment, and providing their share of reciprocal benets, resources, and investments. Responsibility is thus conceived as a license for continued operation and appreciation by society. As mentioned by one of the respondents CSR earns us our license to operate, by allowing us to meet societal needs and expectations (Manager, SNA). The other frequently mentioned principle was the principle of managerial discretion. The four local companies mentioned in this respect that they started to perform CSR activities since their inception, as

CSR was a core value of the founder (i.e., Byblos Bank, SNA, Sanita, Audi Bank). As articulated by one bank manager Our bank, which has been in business for over fty years, has always helped the community by giving donations, thanks to the vision of our chairman, Mr. Francois Bassil, who strongly believes in the social role of corporations (Manager, Byblos). Another manager expressed the view Exactly ten years after its inception in 1963, SNA started its social work under the support and supervision of its founder Mr. Jean Chidiac and his progressive views about the role of business in society (Manager, SNA). The CSR interventions of the subsidiaries of international companies on the other hand are in most cases based on the direction and guidance of their mother companies (e.g., Microsoft, Tetra Pak, Intercontinental). As articulated by one of the managers Microsoft initiated its CSR interventions in Lebanon three years ago, and this was based on the direction and guidance of Microsoft International, which promotes community involvement in all locations in which it operates (Manager, Microsoft). Some of these companies also mentioned the philosophy of founders as important in catalyzing their CSR orientation. As expressed by one manager CSR at Tetra Pak is rooted in the ethos of Ruben Rausing, the founder of the company, who is always remembered for saying that a good package should save more than its costs. We still live by this ethos, which permeates our various CSR interventions (Regional Manager, Tetra Pak). While international companies seem to be transplanting their CSR philosophy to the local contexts in which they set shop, motivated by a combination of legitimacy and managerial discretion principles, the motivation for local organizations seems grounded in the context of voluntary initiative as a result of enlightened entrepreneurship exercised by owners/ managers of the rm. Only two of the rms interviewed made reference to the organizational public policy principle and the importance of addressing problems and social issues related to their business operations and interests. Microsoft-Beirut subsidiary ofce for example explicitly mentioned its public responsibility to promote IT skills in Lebanon, and Tetra Pak dwelled on the alignment of its CSR interventions with its core business activities out of a sense of public responsibility. It is worth noting here that the two companies reporting a public responsibility in

254

Dima Jamali and Ramez Mirshak scanning, monitoring the social, political, economic, legal, and technological components of their environments. Several executives noted the volatility of the political environment, and how political turbulence often serves to divert their attention from their social responsibility activities, reversing the order of priorities and the focus of attention. As mentioned by one manager It is difcult to sustain the spark for CSR when political developments in the region generally and the country specically often force you to turn attention to issues of basic survival/viability (Manager, Le Vendome). Environmental scanning also plays a critical role in determining the nature of CSR interventions for the majority of the rms interviewed. Several rms indeed mentioned the need to regularly screen proposals and local social reports to anticipate and interpret changes in the environment and decide on the nature and scope of their social interventions. One manager put it in these words Social needs are not static and for effective social programs/interventions, we need to continuously educate ourselves on the changing needs of our local communities (Manager, Audi). Some of the companies elicit the help of NGOs in the environmental scanning process, We rely on and screen the proposals provided by NGOs and accept those proposals that are most coherent with our values and overall CSR orientation (Manager, Byblos).

line with the rms core interests/operations are subsidiaries of international organizations (Table V). Our observations hence lend tentative support to the view expressed by Wood (1991) that the most proactive rms tend to be motivated by all three principles, responsive rms by legitimacy and public responsibility, and reactive rms tend to be motivated by the principle of legitimacy only. While our observations are mostly limited to the discretionary CSR domain, which was the focus of attention of our managers, they seem to suggest that the active rms in our sample (whether qualied as proactive or responsive) are motivated by a combination of at least two principles, whereas legitimacy was the only principle motivating the rm that was mostly oriented towards public relations (i.e., SMLC). These observations deserve however to be revisited and conrmed.

Corporate responsiveness strategies With no exception, all the executives interviewed emphasized the importance of continuous environmental scanning and monitoring, particularly in a volatile political context. Hence, all the executives interviewed engage in regular environmental

TABLE V CSR motivation/principles Company name Microsoft Byblos Bank SNA Sanita SMLC Tetra Pak Motivation for embracing CSR Supporting the local community CSR aligned with core operations Giving back to society It is a core value of the founder Giving back to society It is a core value of the founder Giving back to society It is a core value of the founder Supporting the local community Giving back to society CSR aligned with core business It is a core value of the group Giving back to society It is a core value of the founder Giving back to society It is a core value of the group Corresponding principle Legitimacy (institutional) Public responsibility (organizational) Legitimacy (institutional) Managerial discretion (individual) Legitimacy (institutional) Managerial discretion (individual) Legitimacy (institutional) Managerial discretion (individual) Legitimacy (institutional) Legitimacy (institutional) Public responsibility (organizational) Managerial discretion (individual) Legitimacy principle (institutional) Managerial discretion (individual) Legitimacy principle (institutional) Managerial discretion (individual)

Audi Bank Le Vendome

Corporate Social Responsibility The companies interviewed also mentioned the use of different stakeholder management techniques in managing their relationships with their internal and external stakeholders. Internally, communication with staff about CSR activities was consistently emphasized, and this communication capitalized on different media as the intranet, newsletters, bulletin boards, and staff meetings. All the executives interviewed considered that communication with employees about CSR is essential and has positive spillover effects on their morale and motivation. Companies made use of at least one medium (the intranet) in communicating CSR information internally, but the majority of the rms capitalized on multiple forums (meetings, newsletters, and intranet) for spreading the word and sharing information. Externally, several companies opted for partnering arrangements in managing their relationships with primary CSR stakeholders. Several managers emphasized the importance of collaboration in the context of CSR. As articulated by one of the respondents Collaboration allows the leveraging of opportunities, resources, competencies and networks, supporting in turn the scaling-up of CSR activities while broadening/deepening their impact (Manager, Microsoft). One manager underlined the importance of collaborative relationships in the pursuit of CSR in a difcult context, The need for collaboration is even more acute in the context of developing countries in view of the complexity and interdependence of challenges, defying easy solutions and ready consensus and requiring more innovative interactions/solutions (Manager, Audi). The understanding of partnerships, however, differed between companies. Some of the companies understood partnerships to mean the outsourcing of CSR activities to local NGOs who have the expertize, outreach, and capacity to implement social projects. As articulated by one of the managers, Most of the donations of Microsoft are channeled to reputable NGOs that handle our social projects as agreed upon (Manager, Microsoft). Another manager put it this way We do not have expertise in the management of social projects, and we regularly turn to NGOs as our natural partners in the pursuit of CSR (Manager, Byblos). Accordingly, some companies maintained minimal involvement in their CSR projects, opting to channel direct resources to social organizations that are experts in the particular issue at hand.

255

The remaining companies opted for more collaborative type projects, in which the NGO and the business partner carry out CSR activities jointly; this was the case for SNA and Tetra Pak. The two companies explicitly mentioned their involvement in the various phases of program design, planning, and execution. A more sophisticated view highlighting the benets of collaboration was expressed by the Audi Bank manager, suggesting that Through collaborative projects we seek to engage new actors, mobilize new resources, cross-fertilize ideas and consolidate efforts between sectors to help deliver superior solutions that spread the benets of CSR more widely (Manager, Audi). Some of the companies expressed preference to handle their CSR activities in house, including Sanita and SMLC. The two companies preferred to take charge of their social activities, with Sanita in specic eliciting extensive corporate participation in the planning, execution and evaluation of its social projects. While both companies commended partnerships/collaborative efforts, they also appreciated the exibility wielded by in-house projects and the satisfaction derived from their involvement in the full project cycle from beginning to end. Moreover, according to SMLC, in-house type projects allow for tailoring the CSR activities to meet both organizational and community needs. Most of the rms interviewed emphasized the importance of stakeholder management in the planning stages of CSR interventions, but the majority of the companies also failed to communicate the outcomes and impacts of their CSR programs, making it a point not to overexpose their activities and preferring to practice the so called silent CSR. While few companies opted for press releases, or depended on their non-prot partner to communicate about their joint projects, the majority confessed their attempts not to publicly advertise their philanthropic activities. The silent CSR seems predominantly widespread in Lebanon, possibly grounded in the fear of stigmatizing CSR programs and interventions as pure public relations campaigns. While none of the companies had a dedicated CSR ofcial or CSR ofce, the majority of the companies interviewed managed responsibility issues through an ad hoc committee comprising marketing, public relations, and management representatives (e.g., SNA, Bank Audi). In other instances, the marketing department assumed sole responsibility for

256

Dima Jamali and Ramez Mirshak various social interventions. In discussing the motivation for pursuing specic themes, reference was made to the CSR principles discussed earlier, which in most cases included the social legitimacy principle as well as managerial discretion principle, and in few cases the public responsibility principle (e.g., Microsoft and Tetra Pak). None of the companies interviewed had a clearly articulated corporate social policy, fully institutionalized and operational. One company only (Audi Bank) incorporated social issues within the body of company policy through a clearly articulated set of core values, comprising innovation, quality, heritage, human capital, transparency and social responsibility, and a mission statement emphasizing the importance of good citizenship in the communities in which we live and work. Moreover, none of the companies had formally institutionalized their social programs, given that CSR budgetary allocations continue to be determined in all cases on a yearly basis in relation to expected prots and at the discretion of managers and marketing managers. The institutionalization of these social programs is the rst step in translating them into more concrete policy formulations. Several companies seemed to be grappling with the implications of CSR for their bottom line performance, with diverging views about net benets or costs. Microsoft for example insists that its motivation for pursuing CSR stems from a pure sense of responsibility while admitting that embracing CSR is associated with business-related advantages including a motivated workforce, improved relations with the government, and enhanced public image (Manager, Microsoft). A more enlightened view was expressed by another manager, noting that By proving that we are in tune with the spirit of greater responsibility, we will enjoy the competitive advantage that increased goodwill can bring, which in the long run implies greater value creation for our owners and shareholders (Manager, SNA). That CSR has any direct impact on protability however was questioned by another manager who noted that While the most frequently reported measure of CSR effect has been nancial performance in terms of increased protability, it is not evident from our practice that this is an appropriate indicator of CSR effects (Manager, Tetra Pak). The contrast between shortterm and long-term benets was nicely captured by another manager, noting that CSR programs do not

social issues management, in accordance to guidelines set by top management. Issues management thus continues to be considered in the Lebanese context a public corporate affairs function, with the marketing or public relations department assuming responsibility for devising and monitoring the companys responses to social issues.

Outcomes of behavior None of the companies interviewed measure systematically the social impacts of their CSR interventions and the ndings suggest that corporate social reporting has not picked up momentum in the Lebanese context. The companies interviewed indeed seem to be according no attention to social assessment devices, such as social indicators and the social balance sheet. In discussions of CSR impacts, none of the executives mentioned economic factors like a companys contribution to national productivity and levels of employment, nor indicators of workplace practices (e.g., occupational health, diversity) conrming their conceptualization of CSR as purely philanthropic and discretionary. It is also worth noting that despite extensive descriptions of monetary contributions and various community philanthropic programs, all companies reported on their community investments, describing committed inputs (e.g., money, equipment) rather than outcomes. The nature of social programs that were selected for investment was thus thoroughly addressed in the interviews and this is an area where all the companies interviewed had interesting information to share. The scope and spectrum of social interventions was extremely wide and diversied, ranging from donations or programs involving the orphans and handicapped, to art and cultural development type activities, to sports and music events, to educational and learning programs. Table VI gives a avor of the social programs mostly emphasized by the companies interviewed. It is interesting to note a level of coherence between the social programs selected by each company, implying a level of directed investment of resources to achieve specic socially desired ends. This was particularly the case with Microsoft and Tetra Pak, but most of the companies were able to identify an overarching theme that integrates their

TABLE VI Social programs CSR theme Examples of social programs

Company

Microsoft

IT development theme

Byblos Bank

Educational and learning theme

SNA

Civic action theme revolving around the arts and cultural development

Sanita

National and patriotic theme touching on economic, cultural and environmental issues

Corporate Social Responsibility

SMLC

Sports and music events that are of interest to the youth the target market of the company

Tetra Pak

Audi Bank

Supply chain development from the dairy production to the dairy consumers Community development and cultural enrichment theme

Le Vendome

Charitable and in-kind donations theme

-Creation of an electronic library in the childrens science museum in Beirut -Sponsoring of a smart bus, that rotates in rural areas, providing IT training -Donation of software to numerous NGOs and charitable organizations -Sponsoring of the construction of various university campuses -Provision of student scholarships based on nancial need -Introduction of mobile bus library that rotates in public schools -In kind donations to public schools -Sponsoring of cultural festivals -Rehabilitation and face lifting of buildings in underprivileged areas -Yearly sponsoring of an International Sculpture Forum -Distribution and planting of trees in a yearly environmental week -Awareness campaign emphasizing coexistence in a pluralist context -Employment of nationals only -Cleaning campaigns at public beaches and creation of points of sale -Sponsoring of the national football team for six consecutive years -Cash donations to humanitarian, religious and charitable associations -Education of school children about balanced nutrition and hygiene -Free public school feeding programs, aimed at ensuring adequate milk intake -Sponsoring of various banking conferences -Sponsoring of major festivals -Granting of school scholarships -In kind donations to poor families -In kind donations to elderly homes -Donations to children cancer center

257

258

Dima Jamali and Ramez Mirshak or levels of employment. On the legal front, there is room for contributions by companies in such areas as enhancing capacity in detecting tax fraud, antitrust, and the unveiling of corruption cases. On the management front, companies can pay closer attention to human capital issues including workplace safety, and employee satisfaction. Any of these issues is a potentially viable CSR avenue, yet none of the rms made an explicit reference to other than philanthropic type activities/interventions. It is worth noting here that while many companies seem to be grappling with the bottom line implications of their CSR performance, none of the companies seem to be entertaining deeper fundamental questions about whether and what kinds of responsibilities corporations should indeed assume. This may either reect that they have matured beyond these basic philosophical questions or more plausibly that many of the companies have uncritically opted for the adoption of philanthropic CSR as the latest hype of the business community. In contrast to ndings in the Finnish context (Juholin, 2004), our ndings suggest high level priority accorded to the discretionary domain and voluntary philanthropic action. This is potentially an interesting cultural phenomenon that is deserving of further attention. The motivational principles that were most salient in the Lebanese context included the legitimacy and managerial discretion principles with only two companies making reference to the public responsibility principle. The ndings suggest that all companies (both local and global) are motivated by a sense of institutional necessity, and a desire to seek social betterment in their local communities. This nding is particularly interesting vis-a-vis multinational enterprises that seem to be exhibiting a sense of responsibility in the host societies in which they are setting shop. On the other hand, public responsibility was mentioned by only two of the global companies suggesting that local organizations are still a long way from aligning their CSR interventions with their areas of core competence. The motivation of local organizations also seems to be grounded in most cases in the context of voluntary initiative as a result of enlightened entrepreneurship exercised by owners or managers of the enterprise. This is particularly true as all local companies referred to the philosophy and inuence of founders in catalyzing their CSR orientation. This

result in immediate short term payoffs to the rm. CSR activities consume nancial and non nancial resources, undermining opportunity for demonstrating favorable bottom line results. Benets, however are likely to accrue over time through accumulated goodwill or favorable responses on the part of different stakeholders (Manager, Audi). Some managers, while not concerned with profitability per se, admitted their concern with the strong corporate branding and enhanced public image that are by-products of CSR adoption (Manager, Sanita). Another manager expressed openly that CSR activities are excellent public relations and promotion tools (Manager, SMLC). The majority of respondents however considered CSR as a long-term investment with long-term benets (Manager, Audi) and that the market somehow rewards responsible companies (Manager, Tetra Pak). Overall, concerns with the tangible benets and payoffs of CSR have been openly debated and brought to the fore, which in most cases is counterbalanced in the Lebanese context by a strong sense of enlightened self-interest amongst managers. The diversity of views about the expected outcomes of social performance reects in turn the lingering lack of consensus in the literature as to the actual impacts of CSR programs and how to precisely approach the evaluation of social programs.

Discussion of findings The ndings suggest a number of issues that deserve further discussion. In the rst place, all the companies interviewed adhered to a discretionary conception of CSR implying an inclination among all companies operating in Lebanon to conceive of CSR as comprising the philanthropic contributions that business rms make over and above their mainstream activities. While this may be interpreted as a natural evolution through Carrolls (1991) hierarchical CSR pyramid (Figure 1), a more plausible explanation pertains to a lack of appreciation of the other domains of CSR and their critical importance particularly in a developing country context. There is indeed a wide range of issues that are deserving of attention in developing countries, in the pursuit of CSR. These include economic factors like a companys contribution to national productivity,

Corporate Social Responsibility may suggest that in developing countries, in view of weak regulatory capacities and nascent community organization, founders assume direct responsibility as moral actors steering the social responsibility choices of their respective organizations. This nding is certainly deserving of further attention, particularly in regard to how these managers perceive choices and constraints in their environments and the particular approaches adopted to circumvent constraints and exercise choice. The ndings also suggest limited sophistication regarding the corporate responsiveness strategies adopted by the companies interviewed both local and global- with the majority of companies engaged in environmental assessment and limited types of stakeholder management. While all companies communicate their CSR activities internally, external communication and systematic social reporting are virtually non-existent. Partnerships with NGOs are elicited in some cases as a pure outsourcing exercise and issues management continues to be considered by the majority of companies as a public corporate affairs function. There is thus room and indeed a need for these companies to revisit various facets of their social responsiveness if CSR practice in developing countries is to mature beyond the boundaries of public relations. A closer investigation of the outcomes of responsibility behavior on the other hand suggests a range of social programs in which the companies interviewed have maintained involvement, ranging from donations involving the orphans and handicapped, to art and cultural development type activities, to sports and music events, to educational and learning programs. While the added value of these programs is not to be undermined, the companies interviewed seem to be making no systematic attempts at measuring the effectiveness and impact of their interventions. The majority of these programs are not institutionalized (qualifying as one shot ventures or time-specic projects). Institutionalized corporate social policies are also conspicuously absent suggesting that social issues and impacts have not been seriously incorporated within the body of company policy. Several companies have admitted their concern with the benets and payoffs of their CSR programs, yet direct short-term nancial gain cannot be considered as the key driving force behind CSR in

259

Lebanon. This nding is slightly different from what has been reported in the Cypriot and Finnish contexts (Juholin, 2004; Papasolomou-Doukadis et al., 2005), suggesting a clear cultural dimension to CSR that is worth exploring further. In other words, protability, while certainly important in the Lebanese context, may not qualify as the driving force for CSR adoption as in Cyprus or Finland, particularly that Lebanese rms do not benet from tax deduction or other direct scal incentives when pursuing CSR. Other shorter-term indirect benets (e.g., branding, reputation, and public relations) seem more salient in the Lebanese context, noting that these are likely to reect positively on bottom line performance over time. There is thus an overall focus on the discretionary domain of responsibility and a selective adherence within this domain to responsibility principles, sketchy social responsiveness processes and programs, suggesting a still evolving amateur type stance from corporate social responsibility rather than a systematic, focused, and institutionalized approach. If we consider CSR to be merely about convictions and rhetoric, then some of the companies in our sample may qualify as highly responsible. But CSR must be evaluated at two levels philosophic and programmatic and must be reected in the goals, values, mission, and policies of the rm, and permeate its processes of planning, decision-making, communication, training, and rewards. As articulated by Makower (1994) companies must understand that CSR programs are more than a means for philanthropy. Through their policies and programs, through the way they conduct daily business, these forward thinking companies respect the tremendous power business exercises in shaping our daily lives, our communities and the world both today and for decades to come. The modest approach detected however needs to be qualied within the parameters of existing contextual realities, which in a post-war environment of macro-economic austerity, often divert the attention of rms to issues of basic survival and economic viability. The limited sophistication of the social responsibility discourse and the conspicuous absence of CSR drivers/incentives in the Lebanese context also merit attention. Many of the interviewed executives noted in this respect the limited CSR advocacy and awareness raising in Lebanon, and the

260

Dima Jamali and Ramez Mirshak prominence and sophistication of the CSR discourse within a particular society. The constellation of these contextual factors will either create an environment in which CSR is structurally possible and normatively legitimate or alternatively a context in which the pursuit of CSR is largely the result of personal discretion, hindsight, and initiative. The Lebanese post-war environment cannot be characterized as the most fertile ground for CSR initiatives to ourish. Existing scal imbalances are bound to affect the outlook and orientation of private sector rms and divert attention to issues of basic economic viability. When this is coupled with weak drivers for CSR adoption on the supply and demand side, limited CSR advocacy/awareness raising, limited regulatory capacity, and nascent community organizations, the motivation for CSR is likely to be severely attuned and the private sector cannot be expected to be effectively engaged in a sustainable CSR drive. Paradoxically, it is precisely in a developing country context that the need for CSR type initiatives is most acute. The improvement of living conditions is unlikely to materialize in the absence of active private sector participation within the framework of responsible business practice. Developing countries thus seem to be caught in a vicious circle, where private sector CSR initiative is desperately needed, yet effectively impeded by less than favorable contextual conditions. This is certainly the case for the companies in this study, which have opted to continue their CSR involvement despite prevailing constraints. Taking CSR a step forward in the context of developing countries is thus likely to require more systematic planning and stronger determination on the part of the private sector to set this new trend in motion. This must be founded in the realization that embarking on a CSR program is a major commitment, one which may require changes in the way responsibility management has traditionally been approached. It is also likely to require a concerted effort and collaboration between the private sector, public sector and NGO sector and the leveraging of the strengths and resources of all partners. The effective metamorphosis of CSR in developing countries beyond the boundaries of public relations is indeed difcult to imagine in the absence of the synergies resulting from such cross-sector collaboration.

need for deliberate public action seeking to reshape markets and strengthen the drivers of CSR practice in the Lebanese context through the provision of nancial incentives to companies that take the lead in moving CSR forward and the stimulation of consumer preferences in support of responsible companies and products.

Concluding remarks Corporate Social Responsibility represents the new millennium challenge and a truly paradigmatic shift for business corporations. There is increasing evidence that the CSR movement has picked up enough momentum to continue unabated into the next century. But while there have been important breakthroughs in the theoretical understanding of CSR, empirical studies have generally remained scant. Specically, there is a scarcity of research addressing the philosophy and practice of CSR in developing countries. Building on Carrolls (1979) and Woods (1991) conceptualizations, this paper has attempted to offer a preliminary assessment of the CSP of select organizations operating in Lebanon that are considered as active in CSR. Our ndings suggest that despite good awareness and intentions, the CSR approach of the companies in the sample remains amateurish and sketchy. This applies to local organizations, as well as subsidiaries of international organizations operating in Lebanon. An assessment of the various CSP dimensions (domains, principles, but especially processes and outcomes) suggests that none of the companies interviewed have developed clear targets, rigorous metrics, and due diligence in their pursuit of CSR. CSR is still largely conceived in the context of voluntary philanthropic initiative as a result of enlightened entrepreneurship exercised by owners of the enterprise, with the corresponding responsiveness processes and outcomes modest at best. These ndings however need to be qualied within the parameters of existing contextual realities. The understanding and practice of CSR are indeed likely to be molded by specic national and institutional realities, which may foster an environment in which CSR is actively promoted, latently sustained, or silently discouraged. The level of societal development is also likely to inuence the

Corporate Social Responsibility References

Abreu, R., F. David and D. Crowther: 2005, Corporate Social Responsibility in Portugal Empirical Evidence of Corporate Behavior, Corporate Governance 5(5), 3 18. Bernard, R.: 2000, Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches (Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi) Belal, A.: 2001, A Study of Corporate Social Disclosures in Bangladesh, Managerial Auditing Journal 15(5), 274 289. Bush, G.: 2005, Corporate Citizenship As Part of the Business Model, in J. Hancock (ed.), Investing in Corporate Social Responsibility: A Guide to Best Practice, Business Planning and the UKs Leading Companies (Kogan Page, London), pp. 1526. Business for Social Responsibility: 2001, Introduction to Corporate Social Responsibility. [Online] available: http://www.bsr.org/bsrresources/WhitePapers_IssueArea.cfm. Carroll, A. B.: 1979, A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance, The Academy of Management Review 4(4), 497505. Carroll, A. B.: 1991, The Pyramid Of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders, Business Horizons 34, 39 48. Clarkson, M.: 1995, A Stakeholder Framework For Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate Social Responsibility, The Academy of Management Review 20(1), 92 118. Clement-Jones, T.: 2005, Bottom Line Issue Or Public Relations Exercise?, in J. Hancock (eds.), Investing in Corporate Social Responsibility: A Guide to Best Practice, Business Planning and the UKs Leading Companies (Kogan Page, London), pp. 513. Davis, K.: 1973, The Case For and Against Business Assumption of Social Responsibility, Academy of Management Journal June, 312322. De la Crus Deniz Deniz, M. and K. Cabrera Suarez: 2005, Corporate Social Responsibility and Family Business in Spain, Journal of Business Ethics 56, 2741. Frederick, W. C.: 1994, From CSR1 to CSR2, Business and Society 33(2), 150164. Fulop, G., R. Hisrich and K. Szegedi: 2000, Business Ethics and Social Responsibility in Transition Economies, Journal of Management Development 19(1), 5 31. Goodpaster, K. and J. Matthews: 2003, Can A Corporation Have A Conscience? Harvard Business Review on Corporate Social Responsibility, Harvard Business School Press: 131155.

261

Greeneld, W. M.: 2004, In the Name of Corporate Social Responsibility, Business Horizons JanuaryFebruary, 1928. Hancock, J.: 2005, Introduction: Why This Subject? Why This Book?, in J. Hancock (eds.), Investing in Corporate Social Responsibility: A Guide to Best Practice, Business Planning and the UKs Leading Companies (Kogan Page, London), pp. 14. Jackson, I. and J. Nelson: 2004, Values-Driven Performance: Seven Strategies For Delivering Prots With Principles, Ivey Business Journal 69(2) November/ December, 18. Jones, M.: 1999, The Institutional Determinants of Social Responsibility, Journal of Business Ethics 20(2), 163 179. Juholin, E.: 2004, For Business Or The Good Of All? A Finnish Approach To Corporate Social Responsibility, Corporate Governance 4(3), 2031. Lantos, G. P.: 2001, The Boundaries of Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility, Journal of Consumer Marketing 18(7), 595630. Longo, M., M. Mura and A. Bonoli: 2005, Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Performance: The Case of Italian SMEs, Corporate Governance 5(4), 2842. Luetkenhorst, W.: 2004, Corporate Social Responsibility and the Development Agenda, Intereconomics 39(3), 157168. Makower, J.: 1994, Beyond the Bottom Line (Simon and Schuster, London) McGuire, J.: 1963, Business and Society (McGraw Hill, New York) Murray, A.: 2005, The Economy, Business: Will Social Responsibility Harm Business? The Wall Street Journal May 18, A2. Novak, M.: 1996, Business as a Calling: Work and the Examined Life (The Free Press, New York, NY) Papasolomou-Doukakis, I., M. Krambia-Kapardis and M. Katsioloudes: 2005, Corporate Social Responsibility: The Way Forward? Maybe Not, European Business Review 17(3), 263279. Pettit, P.: 2005, Responsibility Incorporated, Paper presented at the Kadish Center for Morality, Law and Public Affairs, Workshop in Law, Philosophy and Political Theory, March 23, 2005. Pratima, B.: 2002, The Corporate Challenges of Sustainable Development, Academy of Management Executive 16(2), 122132. Quazi, A. and D. OBrien: 2000, An Empirical Test of a Cross-National Model of Corporate Social Responsibility, Journal of Business Ethics 25, 3351. Rudolph, P. Letters To The Editor: 2005, An Adam Smith Look At Green Regulations, The Wall Street Journal June 6.

262

Dima Jamali and Ramez Mirshak

Wood, D.: 1991, Corporate Social Performance Revisited, The Academy of Management Review 16(4), 691 717. World Business Council for Sustainable Development: 2001, The Business Case for Sustainable Development: Making a Difference Towards the Johannesburg Summit 2002 and Beyond. [Online] available: http:// www.wbcsd.org.

Solomon, R. C.: 1994, The New World of Business: Ethics and Free Enterprise in the Global Nineties (Rowman & Littleeld Publishers Inc, USA) Tencati, A., F. Perrini and S. Pogutz: 2004, New Tools To Foster Corporate Socially Responsible Behavior, Journal of Business Ethics 53, 173190. Uhlaner, L., A. van Goor-Balk and E. Masurel: 2004, Family Business and Corporate Social Responsibility In A Sample of Dutch Firms, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development 11(2), 186194. Waddock, S., C. Bodwell and S. Graves: 2002, Responsibility: The New Business Imperative, The Academy of Management Executive 16(2), 132147. Windsor, D.: 2001, The Future of Corporate Social Responsibility, The International Journal of Organizational Analysis 9(3), 225256.

D. Jamali and R. Mirshak Olayan School of Business American University of Beirut Bliss Street, Beirut, 11-0236, Lebanon E-mail: dj00@aub.edu.lb