]INTRODUCTION OF CSR :-

CSR is stands for Cooperative Social Responsibility , which means kinds of responsibility of
the organization towards the society. It is an evolving concept which is yet to command a standard
definition or a fully recognized set of criterion. With the given understanding that businesses have a
key role of job and wealth creation in society.

CSR generally understood to be the way an organization achieve a balance between economic,
environment and social imperative while they address the exception if shareholders and stakeholders.
It is generally accepted that business firms have so vial responsibilities that extend well beyond what
in the past was commonly referred to simply as the business economic function.

Corporate social responsibility ("CSR" for short, and also called corporate conscience,
citizenship, social performance, or sustainable responsible business) is a form of corporate self-
regulation integrated into a business model. CSR policy functions as a built-in, self-regulating
mechanism whereby business monitors and ensures its active compliance with the spirit of the law,
ethical standards, and international norms. The goal of CSR is to embrace responsibility for the
company's actions and encourage a positive impact through its activities on the environment,
consumers, employees, communities, stakeholders and all other members of the public sphere.
Furthermore, CSR-focused businesses would proactively promote the public interest by encouraging
community growth and development, and voluntarily eliminating practices that harm the public
sphere, regardless of legality. CSR is the deliberate inclusion of public interest into corporate decision-
making, and the honouring of a triple bottom line: people, planet, profit.
 The term "corporate social responsibility" came in to common use in the early 1970s, after
many multinational corporations formed. The term stakeholder, meaning those on whom an
organization's activities have an impact, was used to describe corporate owners beyond shareholders as
a result of an influential book by R. Edward Freeman, Strategic management: a stakeholder approach
in 1984. Proponents argue that corporations make more long term profits by operating with a
perspective, while critics argue that CSR distracts from the economic role of businesses. Others argue
CSR is merely window-dressing, or an attempt to pre-empt the role of governments as a watchdog
over powerful multinational corporations.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) of companies has become a subject of much debate.
Despite this, I had been unable to understand what exactly companies are supposed to do as their CSR.
Is it philanthropy and charity? Is it social and humanitarian work or protecting the environment? Is it
undertaking public service tasks which normally government should be doing? Or is it all of these? I
believe that the CSR of a company should be undertaking all actions as would maximize the
probability of its long-term survival and sustained growth

CSR is titled to aid an organization's mission as well as a guide to what the company stands for
and will uphold to its consumers. Development business ethics is one of the forms of applied ethics
that examines ethical principles and moral or ethical problems that can arise in a business environment.
ISO 26000 is the recognized international standard for CSR (currently a Draft International Standard).
Public sector organizations (the United Nations for example) adhere to the triple bottom line (TBL). It
is widely accepted that CSR adheres to similar principles but with no formal act of legislation. The UN
has developed the Principles for Responsible Investment as guidelines for investing entities.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has variously been described as a ‘motherhood issue’,
‘the hot business issue of the naughtiest’ and ‘the talk of the town in corporate circles these days’.
There seems to be an infinite number of definitions of CSR, ranging from the simplistic to the
complex, and a range of associated terms and ideas (some used interchangeably), including ‘corporate
sustainability, corporate citizenship, corporate social investment, the triple bottom line, socially
responsible investment, business sustainability and corporate governance’ (Prime Minister's
Community Business Partnership). It has been suggested that ‘some…researchers…distort the
definition of corporate social responsibility or performance so much that the concept becomes morally
vacuous, conceptually meaningless, and utterly unrecognizable’; or CSR may be regarded as ‘the
panacea which will solve the global poverty gap, social exclusion and environmental degradation’.

An approach for CSR that is becoming more widely accepted is community-based

development approach. In this approach, corporations work with local communities to better
themselves. For example, the Shell Foundation's involvement in the Flower Valley, South Africa. In
Flower Valley they set up an Early Learning Centre to help educate the community's children as well
as develop new skills for the adults. Marks and Spencer is also active in this community through the
building of a trade network with the community - guaranteeing regular fair trade purchases. Often
activities companies participate in are establishing education facilities for adults and HIV/AIDS
education programmes. The majority of these CSR projects are established in Africa. JIDF For You, is
an attempt to promote these activities in India.

A more common approach of CSR is philanthropy. This includes monetary donations and aid
given to local organizations and impoverished communities in developing countries. Some
organizations do not like this approach as it does not help build on the skills of the local people,
whereas community-based development generally leads to more sustainable development.

Another approach to abcd CSR is to incorporate the CSR strategy directly into the business strategy
of an organization. For instance, procurement of Fair Trade tea and coffee has been adopted by
various businesses including KPMG. Its CSR manager commented, "Fairtrade fits very strongly into
our commitment to our communities."

Another approach is garnering increasing corporate responsibility interest. This is called

Creating Shared Value, or CSV. The shared value model is based on the idea that corporate success
and social welfare are interdependent. A business needs a healthy, educated workforce, sustainable
resources and adept government to compete effectively.
 In earlier times the managers in most cases had only to concern themselves with the economic
results of their decisions. Todays managers must also consider & weigh the lehgal, ethical, moral &
repercussion of each of their decisions. All companies have to ensure that their activities do not
adversely affect the environment. Depletion of natural resources, like forests or ground water is a case
in point. Recovery of heat or minerals from flue gases or effluents reduces pollution and the
consumption of scarce resources, while saving money. Atmospheric pollution affects the health of
people and so must be minimized. Laws relating to the environment should be observed both in letter
and in spirit.

After a comprehensive study of competitor strategy and an internal policy review performed,
a comparison can be drawn and a strategy developed for competition with CSR initiatives.
 The CSR is the most important concept for leading business in competitive world and to follow
that many definition has been introduce in market followed it. Many authorized peoples have defined
CSR in their way are as follow –

• Corporate social responsibility is operating a business in manner which meets or excels the
ethical, legal, commercial & public expectation that society has from business.

• In the year 1953 the Bowen has said that “to pursue those policies and to make those decisions
or to follow those lines of actions which are desirable in terms of objectives & values of society.

• According to Lord Holme & Richard Watts defines CSR as, “Corporative Social
Responsibility is the continuity commitment by businesses to behave ethical and contribute to
economic development while improving community and society at large”.

• According to Wood, “the basic idea of corporate social responsibility is that businesses and
society are interwoven rather than distinct entities.

• The World Business Council for Sustainable Development in its publication "Making Good
Business Sense" by Lord Holme and Richard Watts, used the following definition. "Corporate
Social Responsibility is the continuing commitment by business to behave ethically and
contribute to economic development while improving the quality of life of the workforce and
their families as well as of the local community and society at large".

• Business for Social Responsibility America’s largest organisation devoted to CSR, Business
decision making linked to ethical values, compliance with legal requirements, and respect for
people, communities, and the environment around the world.
 • Prince of Wales Business Leaders Forum
Open and transparent business practices that are based on ethical values and respect for
employees, communities, and the environment. It is designed to deliver sustainable value to
society at large, as well as to shareholders.

• European Commission
A concept whereby CSR companies decide voluntarily to contribute to a better society and a cleaner
environment.

• Anonymous respondent to an Accountancy Ireland survey CSR is ‘doing the right thing
even when no-one is looking’.

Usually CSR concentrates on the activity that typically address the aspects of a firms behavior
(including its policies & practices) with respect to such key elements as health & safety, environmental
protection, human rights, human resources management practices, corporate governance community
development, consumer protection, labour protection, suppliers relations, business ethics &
stakeholders rights.
 HISTORICAL DEFINITON :-

While the term CSR may appear to be relatively new to the corporate world, the literature
reveals that the evolution of the concept itself has taken place over several decades. The fact that the
terminology itself has changed over this time also suggests that the meaning ascribed to concepts such
as CSR will continue to evolve in tune with business, political and social developments. The impact of
globalisation and mass communication also means that while definitions will reflect local 3 situations,
they will also be strongly influenced by global trends and changes in international law.

1920s – 1950s
It has been suggested by Windsor that ‘business leaders have since the

1920s
Widely adhered to some conception of responsibility and responsiveness practices’. Others have
argued that the genesis of CSR was in the

1930s with the debate between AA Berle and E Merrick Dodd over the role of managers. Merrick
Dodd contended ‘that the powers of corporate management are held in trust for the entire community’.

In 1953, Bowen conceptualised CSR as social obligation – the obligation ‘to pursue those policies, to
make those decisions, or to follow those lines of action which are desirable in terms of the objectives
and values of our society’. Carroll has described Bowen as the modern ‘Father of Corporate Social
Responsibility’ and believes that his work marks the beginning of the modern period of literature on
CSR. Bowen took a broad approach to business responsibilities, including responsiveness,
stewardship, social audit, corporate citizenship and rudimentary stakeholder theory.
Peter Drucker was one of the first to explicitly address CSR, including public responsibility as one of
the eight key areas for business objectives developed in his 1954 book, The Practice of Management.
While Drucker believed that management’s first responsibility to society involved making a profit, ‘he
felt it was also most important that management consider the impact of every business policy and
action upon society’.
1960s
The literature of the 1960s is not heavily represented in CSR discourse. However, Carroll believed that
this decade ‘marked a significant growth in attempts to formalize, or more accurately, state what CSR
means’. He suggested that some of the most prominent writers during that time were Keith Davis,
Joseph W McGuire, William C Frederick and Clarence C Walton. Davis’s assertion that ‘some
socially responsible business decisions can be justified by… having a good chance of bringing long-
run economic gain to the firm, thus paying it back for its socially responsible outlook’ is an interesting
precursor 4 to contemporary debates about the financial implications of CSR. Davis’s later assertion
that ‘The substance of social responsibility arises from concern for the ethical consequence of one’s
acts as they might affect the interests of others’ introduces the notion of business ethics to CSR.

In 1960, Frederick wrote that ‘Social responsibility in the final analysis implies a public posture
toward society’s economic and human resources and a willingness to see that those resources are used
for broad social ends and not simply for the narrowly circumscribed interests of private persons and
firms’. Clarence C Walton emphasized that ‘the essential ingredient of the corporation’s social
responsibilities include a degree of voluntarism, as opposed to coercion’, an argument that business
continues to put forth today. Walton also counselled ‘the acceptance that costs are involved for which
it may not be possible to gauge any direct measurable economic returns’.
1970s
The literature on CSR includes many references to Milton Friedman’s
‘minimalist’ view of corporate responsibility and his famous comment in 1970 . It is useful to include
the quotation here because it is such a business-centric view and is one end of a continuum that is still
being debated today in terms of CSR:
There is one and only one social responsibility of business – to use its resources and engage
in activities designed to increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to
say, engage in open and free competition, without deception or fraud.
Friedman’s view has continued to be debated over the decades, for example
McAleer, who concluded that Friedman’s arguments were unsound and his views unclear, and
Oketch, who suggested that ‘Today, many would not be comfortable with such a profit-oriented
statement’. The US Committee for Economic Development’s (CED)1971 model of CSR reveals that
despite Friedman’s pronouncement, there were other evolving views about the role of business in
CSR. The Committee described CSR as being ‘related to products, jobs and economic growth; related
to societal expectations; and related to activities aimed at improving the social environment of the
firm’. Carroll describes the CED’s model 5 as ‘a landmark contribution to the concept of CSR’ which
illustrated the changing relationship between business and society.
Business is being asked to assume broader responsibilities to society than ever before and to
serve a wider range of human values. Business enterprises, in effect, are being asked to contribute
more to the quality of American life than just supplying quantities of goods and services. Inasmuch
as business exists to serve society, its future will depend on the quality of management’s response to
the changing expectations of the public’. The relationship between business and society was being
questioned at a time when the United States was embroiled in the social and political protests of the
civil rights and peace movements, when issues such as ‘human values’ and morality were being
publicly debated. This would also have impacted on corporate America.
Wallich expanded the debate about voluntarism versus coercion by equating CSR with the
freedom to be a free agent: I take responsibility to mean a condition in which the corporation is at least
in some measure a free agent. To the extent that any of the foregoing social objectives are imposed on
the corporation by law, the corporation exercises no responsibility when it implements them. Business
therefore abrogates its responsibility to government and the wider society.

In 1974, Eells and Walton’s discussion of CSR could perhaps be seen as moving toward the issue of
social licence that was to emerge more fully nearly thirty years later.
In its broadest sense, corporate social responsibility represents a concern with the needs and
goals of society which goes beyond the merely economic. Insofar as the business system as it exists
today can only survive in an effectively functioning free society, the corporate social responsibility
movement represents a broad concern with business’s role in supporting and improving the social
order.

In Sethi’s 1975 three-level model, the concept of corporate social performance is discussed, and
distinctions made between various corporate behaviours. Sethi’s three tiers were ‘social obligation (a
response to legal and market constraints); social responsibility (congruent with societal norms); and
social responsiveness (adaptive, anticipatory and preventive)’.
Early research studies on CSR conducted in the 1970s included Bowman and Haire’s measurement of
corporate involvement in CSR. Their research used a variant of content analysis to measure the
number of lines covering social responsibility in company annual reports. The headings they used
included ‘corporate responsibility, social responsibility, social action, public service, corporate
citizenship, public responsibility, and social responsiveness’.

1980s
The 1980s have been described as having ‘a more responsible approach to corporate strategy’
(Freeman in Lucas, Wollin & Lafferty 2001, p. 150). Prominent was the work of R Edward Freeman
on the emerging Stakeholder Theory. Freeman saw ‘meeting shareholders’ needs as only one element
in a value-adding process’ and identified a range of stakeholders (including shareholders) who were
relevant to the firm’s operations.

Freeman’s 1984 paper continues to be identified as a ‘seminal paper on stakeholder theory’, and
stakeholder theory as the ‘dominant paradigm’ in CSR.
Carroll believes that in the 1980s, ‘the focus on developing new or refined definitions of
CSR gave way to research on CSR and a splintering of writings into alternative concepts and themes
such as corporate social responsiveness, CSP, public policy, business ethics, and stakeholder
theory/management’.
Carroll outlined the work of a number of researchers, including Jones, who ‘posited that CSR
ought to be seen not as a set of outcomes but as a process’, and Tuzzolino and Armandi who ‘sought to
develop a better mechanism for assessing CSR by proposing a need-hierarchy framework patterned
after Maslow’s’.
The authors developed the organisational hierarchy as a conceptual tool that could be used to
assess socially responsible organizational performance.
A prominent development in terms of CSR was the global debate on sustainable development
that emerged in this decade. The World Conservation Strategy that was published in 1980 stressed the
interdependence of conservation and development and was the first to conceptualise ‘sustainable
development’ .

In 1987 the World Commission on Environment and

Development (WCED) published the Brundtland Report, ‘Our Common Future’. The 7 report states
that ‘Sustainable development seeks to meet the needs and aspirations of the present without
compromising the ability to meet those of the future’ (World Commission on Environment and
Development 1987). This early definition of sustainable development is often quoted, but it is
interesting from the viewpoint of the CSR debate that most authors to not seem to quote the next
sentence from the report:
Far from requiring the cessation of economic growth, it recognizes that the problems of poverty
and underdevelopment cannot be solved unless we have a new era of growth in which developing
countries play
a large role and reap large benefits. (World Commission on
Environment and Development 1987)
The report clearly links sustainable development with economic growth and sets the direction
for future debate on this issue. Although we have seen examples of earlier work that touched on the
issue of CSR and financial profit, Carroll identified the 1980s as the period when ‘scholars were
becoming interested in the question of whether socially responsible firms were also profitable firms.
If it could be demonstrated that they were, this would be an added argument in support of the CSR
movement. Aupperle, Carroll, and Hatfield’s 1985 study of the relationship between CSR and
profitability ordered the priorities of four components of CSR previously identified by Carroll, as
‘economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary’.

1990s
The literature of the 1990s has not so much expanded the definition of CSR, but used the CSR
concept ‘as the base point, building block, or point-of-departure for other related concepts and themes,
many of which embraced CSR-thinking and were quite compatible with it. CSP, stakeholder-theory,
business ethics theory, and corporate citizenship were the major themes that took center stage in the
1990s’.

An important contribution to the literature was made by Wood in 1991 when she revisited the
CSP model and ‘placed CSR into a broader context than just a standalone definition. An important
emphasis in her model was on outcomes or performance’. The CSP framework developed by Wood
and the pyramid of responsibilities developed by Carroll, with economic responsibilities at the base
and philanthropy at the apex, are discussed in depth in the literature,
including Carroll (1999) and Windsor (2001).
 Swanson (1995) suggested that there were three main types of motivation for CSR:

i. The utilitarian perspective (an instrument to help achieve performance objectives);

ii. The negative duty approach (compulsion to adopt socially responsibleinitiatives to appease
stakeholders); and iii. The positive duty view (businesses self-motivated regardless of social pressures)
(Swanson in Maignan & Ralston 2002).
Wood also identified three main types of processes used by businesses to implement their CSR
motivational principles: environmental management, issues management and stakeholder
management.
‘Once implemented throughout the organization, these processes help the firm to keep abreast
of, and to address successfully, stakeholder demands’. However, this may be a somewhat simplistic
view of CSR and relationships with stakeholders. It is also a view that was overtaken in the 90s by a
broadening discussion of the concept of stakeholder, and whether ‘the first priority of a corporation is
to its shareholders’ or whether policymakers should develop ‘a flexible multistakeholder approach to
promoting CSR’, as Aaronson suggests has occurred in Britain in response to concern about global
corporate responsibility. Even within the group that O’Rourke has described as the ‘primary’
stakeholders – the shareholders – ‘the boundary zone of CSR is currently being negotiated’ with
companies.
O’Rourke writes that: A trend also noteworthy in the late 1990s was that of shareholder
activists linking their environmental or social issue to financial performance and/or risks faced by the
company. By claiming that environmental and social issues have a direct effect on shareholder value,
shareholder activists are moving the rhetoric of their activism out of the realm of “ethics” or good
versus bad behaviour, and into that of traditional issues of profitability, risk and shareholder value.

An example of shareholder activism is the group BHP

Shareholders for Social Responsibility, which was formed in 1994 as a result of shareholder concerns
about environmental damage done by the company in Papua New Guinea. The group has concerns
about environmental, social and economic issues and has actively engaged BHP Billiton management
about its concerns (BHP
Shareholders for Social Responsibility). Similar advocacy groups have been formed in Australia for
shareholders of Boral Green, Gunns, and PaperlinX.
Global influences on CSR continued in the 1990s as the roles of business and government continued
to blur. In 1997, Solomon wrote that ‘now that businesses are often the most powerful institutions in
the world, the expanse of social responsibility has enlarged to include areas formerly considered the
domain of governments…The more powerful business becomes in the world, the more responsibility
for the wellbeing of the world it will be expected to bear’ .

Writing in 1999, as the new millennium approached, Carroll suggested that, ‘the CSR concept will
remain as an essential part of the business language and practice, because it is a vital underpinning to
many of the other theories and is continually consistent with what the public expects of the business
community today’.

Corporate Social Responsibility in the 21st Century

If the issue of CSR came to public prominence as a result of highlypublicised events such as the
collapse of Enron and the James Hardie asbestos scandal in Australia, how have these concerns been
addressed in the literature of the new century? The debate about the place of CSR in the global
economy continues, with writers such as Scherer and Smid echoing Solomon’s opinion that
multinational corporations ‘should take responsibility for the improvement of world-wide social and
environmental conditions’.
Windsor takes this point further by investigating examples of Western oil production projects
currently operating in a number of war-torn, impoverished African states that are noted for corruption
and human rights abuse. James Buckee, the CEO of one of these companies, is quoted as saying that ‘it
is socially responsible for a corporation to invest in certain places that some elements of popular
opinion find objectionable’. Clearly this illustrates Windsor’s conclusion that ‘There are fundamental
differences of opinions and values in the global economy’. Oketch’s simplistic contention that ‘there is
need to ensure that the global market operates according to a certain set of rules and institutions that a
majority of people see as being legitimate’ raises more questions than it answers.
As well as the development of global business, recent literature appears to be moving away
from a US-dominated discourse to a more international one. Academics such as Maignan and Ralston
– CSR in France, the Netherlands and the UK; Aaronson – UK; Perrini et al – Italy; and Lucas et al –
Australia have extended the debate to other countries, as well as comparing national perceptions of
CSR and the role of business in society. Significant international developments that have influenced
this move include the appointment of a UK Minster for
Corporate Social Responsibility in March 2000; the release of the
European Commission’s Green Paper, Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social
Responsibility; and the United Nations Global Compact regarding human rights, labour and the
environment. Such developments are also reflected in the literature, where the linkage between
government and CSR has been explored.
Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Implications The issue of CSR and its effects on
financial performance continued to be addressed in the literature. Windsor quotes the 1998 findings of
Verschoor, that ‘among the 500 largest US public corporations, the 26.8% committing in annual
reports to ethical behaviour toward stakeholders or compliance with corporate code of conduct have
higher financial performance measures than other firms that do not’. However, this is a very narrow
measurement of CSR and does not allow for the fact that companies such as Enron can engage in
philanthropy while being guilty of moral misconduct. Windsor suggests that ‘The Enron collapse is a
reminder that such deviation [between responsibility and wealth] is never far away in the increasingly
competitive landscape of global business operations’.
He believes that there has been ‘A marked tendency in the
relevant literature…to examine alternatives – such as citizenship or stakeholder management –
precisely because of the difficulties inherent in the responsibility construct’.
Orlitzky argues that his research shows a positive correlation between corporate social
performance (CSP) and corporate financial performance, that CSP actually reduces financial risk and
that organisations of all size may benefit financially from socially responsible activities. In a
discussion about the business case for CSR, Hopkins suggests that while it is difficult to prove a causal
link between CSR actions and financial indicators, an in-depth benefit-cost analysis of CSR by the
Cooperative Bank of the UK ‘declared that between 15 and 18% of its pre-tax profits could be directly
attributed to its ethical stance’.
Hopkins undertook a study of the top UK companies, examining the correlation between social
responsibility and their stock market performance. He concluded that ‘the public’s purchasing of
shares was still not greatly affected by the companies’ level of social responsibility [but]…that CSR
standing does not necessarily badly affect a company’s share price’. Of course, share market price is
only one measure of profitability and the narrowness of Hopkins’ research supports his contention that,
‘Definition, measurement and data problems exist for assessing both social responsibility and financial
performance’.
 In terms of corporate financial investment in CSR, McWilliams and Siegel postulated that
‘there is some level of CSR that will maximize profits while satisfying the demand for CSR from
multiple stakeholders.
The ideal level of CSR can be determined by cost-benefit analysis’. Another aspect of investment in
CSR that has financial implications is what Brammer and Pavelin have termed ‘insurance-motivated
social investment’, a risk-management strategy aimed at reducing reputational and financial losses
caused by adverse stakeholder reaction to negative events.
The authors suggested that ‘Social investment, by establishing a positive reputation in the eyes
of stakeholder groups, helps to mitigate the impact of those negative events by reducing the likelihood
that stakeholders attribute blame to the company concerned’.
Corporate Citizenship and Moral/Ethical Responsibility One of the complexities of CSR is that
in defining what it means to be a ‘good’ corporate citizen, some lobbyists talk in terms of absolutes,
while others speak in terms of degrees. In this age of multi-facetted international corporations,
practices within and across corporate boundaries may vary. In a recent analysis of Business Ethics
magazine’s ‘100 Best Corporate Citizens for 2006’, Mattera points out that high-tech firms, such as
Hewlett-Packard, make up seven of the ‘top’ eleven companies. However, he disputes this view of the
high-tech industry as a top environmental performer, citing concerns about its creation of toxic waste
sites, the wastage generated by obsolete hardware, and workplace exposure to toxic chemicals. Mattera
categorises the divergency between Wal-Mart’s environmental reforms and its retrograde labour
policies as symbolising was he sees as ‘the selective business ethics that prevail today’. The difficulty
in discussing moral/ethical responsibility, of course, is whose morality/ethics? Ryan asks ‘who should
be the judge of a company’s reputation’, and how should it be measured? Nevertheless, an increasing
number of writers are raising the issue of moral/ethical responsibility as an identifiable aspect of CSR.
In a discussion of Shareholder Theory versus Stakeholder Theory,
Post contends that ‘Implementing management principles derived from Stakeholder Theory will
broader and enhance the moral quality of decisions. In the modern era, having management serve only
the interests of the shareholder or itself is morally untenable’. The linkage between CSR and corporate
morality has also been explored by Richards and Maignan and Ralston.
In their study of business ethics and CSR, Joyner and Payne identified a time lag between
socially responsible behaviour by a company and financial gain. They have called for larger
longitudinal studies of this linkage over a five-ten year period, and comment that although ‘in a perfect
world such studies would not be necessary, …in this less-than-perfect-world…, where success for
business is measured almost exclusively by financial performance, the ability to show that ethical and
socially responsible behaviour can boost financial results might provide the impetus for real change in
many organizations’.
Social Licence A recent addition to the vocabulary of CSR is the concept of ‘social licence’.
Gunningham et al offered the following description:
… social licence…is based not on compliance with legal requirements (although breach of these
requirements may jeopardise the social licence), but rather upon the degree to which a corporation
and its activities are accepted by local communities, the wider society, and various constituent
groups.
Sweeney compares society’s treatment of corporations with its treatment of persons, with the attendant
rights and responsibilities. Thus corporations are allowed the right to operate provided they fulfil their
duties by providing benefits to society. ‘In this sense, corporations have a social licence to operate’.
The concept of ‘social licence’ is an abstract one, the interpretation of which varies. This is
understandable in a corporate world grappling with varying degrees of success with a range of
concepts such as CSR, triple bottom line, and socially responsible investment. However, it is critical
that corporations understand and embrace this relationship with the broader society in which they
operate. The websites of the
Association of Market & Social Research Organisations and the Mineral Policy Institute suggest that
these organisations interpret ‘social licence’ as the Government allowing them to operate, or a way of
operating that will allow companies to avoid regulation (Evans 2001 ; Sergeant 2005) Social licence is
not a licence to avoid government regulation, in fact it has been described as a way of operating
‘beyond compliance’. Matilda Minerals has stated that, ‘The “social licence to operate” is a
compliment [sic] to the regulatory licence issued by government’. The Minerals Council of Australia
has expanded on this statement:
The Australian minerals industry is committed to developing its social licence to operate as
a complement to the regulatory licence issued by government. To the minerals industry ‘social
licence to operate’ is about operating in a manner that is attuned to community expectations and
which acknowledges that businesses have a shared responsibility with government, and more
broadly society, to help facilitate the development of strong and sustainable communities. Simply
defined the ‘social licence to operate’ is an unwritten social contract…
Similarly, the Ministerial Council on Mineral and Petroleum Resources defines social licence as:
…the recognition and acceptance of a company’s contribution to the community in which it operates,
moving beyond meeting basic legal requirements, towards developing and maintaining the
constructive relationships with stakeholders necessary for business to be sustainable. Overall it
comes from striving for relationships based on honesty and mutual respect.
While the above are examples of corporate commitment to social licence, the literature also
provides examples of the ‘corporate misreading’ of the terms of their social licence’, which ‘caused a
broader corporate rethink’. These examples include Monsanto’s failure to appreciate the European
consumer backlash against genetically modified food and the perception of Nike as an exploiter of
labour in impoverished countries. Both situations led to damage to brand image and necessitated
corporate restructuring. Wheeler et al provide further comment on these examples in their discussion
of CSR and a stakeholder approach to the creation of value.
 FEATURES OF CSR :-

• Increasing inconsistencies between corporate actions.

• Creating the good relationship between customers & firm.

• Improvement of responsibilities towards the employees.

• Improving the company status in the market.

• Helping to solve the social problem.

 NEED OF CSR :-

 While the interests of shareholders and the actions of managers of any business
enterprise have to be governed by the laws of economics, requiring an adequate

 financial return on investments made, in reality the operations of an enterprise need to

be driven by a much larger set of objectives that are today being defined under the term
CSR.

 The CSR is important for broad rationale for a new set of ethics for corporate decisions
making, which clearly constructs and upholds a organization’s social responsibility,
arises form the fact that a business enterprise derives several benefits from society,
which must, therefore, require the enterprise to provide returns to society as well.

 The CSR is beneficial for clearly establishes the stake of a business organization in the
good health and well being of a society of which it is a part.

 Most importantly in this age of widespread communication and growing emphasis on

transparency, customers of any product or services are unlikely to feel satisfied in
buying from an organization that is seen to violate the expectations of what is deemed
to be ethically and socially responsible behavior.

 The CSR now a days becoming increasingly evident that organizations that pay genuine
attention to the principles of socially responsible behavior are also finding favor with
the public and are the preferred choice for their goods and services.
 WHY CSR IS SO IMPORTANT
IMPORTANCE OF CSR :-

1. The CSR is important to improve the financial performance of firm :-

 The management literature has acknowledged social responsibility as an
important corporate duty. Given the significance of corporate social
responsibility in corporate decision making the relationship between a
firm’s social
 and ethical policies or actions and its financial performance is an
important topic.

2. Heightened public creditability :-

 In this regard the number of companies is maintaining their public
relationship for inventing their business status good in the people’s eyes.
The CSR is very important to provide the good services to their customers
and other surrounding peoples.

3. It helping to reduce cost :-

 The CSR is helping to the customers to reduce the cost of good and
services in many ways. By maintaining good relation with the people
leads to increase the business activity with the demand.

4. To increase attractiveness of investors :-

 The CSR helps to the company to earn huge profit by maintaining CSR
among their members and surrounding people.
5. Improve relationship with stakeholders :-
 Good public relation among the members helps the business to maintain
their goodwill in the market.

6. Early identification of potential liability :-

 The CSR is important to identify the public demand towards the
companies activities. It helps to identify the potentiality of the liability

7. Market place advantage :-

 The CSR helps at the market place for set-up the good business

8. Improve overall management :-

 The CSR improving the whole department wise management of the
organization.

9. Improve organization effectiveness.

10. Decrease risk of adverse publicity.

 CHALLENGES OF CSR
CHALLENGES OF CSR :-

 Lack of awareness of general public in CSR activities

There is a lack of interest of the
general public in participating and contributing to CSR activities of companies. This is because of the
fact that there exists little or no knowledge about CSR. The situation is further aggravated by a lack of
communication between the companies involved in CSR and the general public at the grassroots.

 Need to build local capacities

There is a need for capacity building of the local non
governmental organizations as there is serious dearth of trained and efficient organizations that can
effectively contribute to the ongoing CSR activities initiated by companies. This seriously
compromises scaling up of CSR initiatives and subsequently limits the scope of such activities.

 Issues of transparency
Lack of transparency is one of the key challenge for the
corporate as there exists lack of transparency on the part of the small companies as they do not make
adequate efforts to disclose information on their programmed, audit issues, impact assessment and
utilization of funds. This negatively impacts the process of trust building among the companies which
is key to the success of any CSR initiative.

 Non-availability of well organized non-governmental organizations

There is non-availability of well organized non governmental organizations in remote and rural areas
that can assess and identify real needs of the community and work along with companies to ensure
successful implementation of CSR activities.

 Visibility factor
The role of media in highlighting good cases of successful CSR initiatives is welcomed as it spread
good stories and sensitizes the population about various ongoing CSR initiatives of companies. This
appa.rent influence of gaining visibility and branding exercise often leads many non-governmental
organizations to involve themselves in eventbased programmers in the process; they often miss out on
meaningful grassroots interventions.

 Narrow perception towards CSR initiatives

Non-governmental organizations and Government agencies usually possess a narrow outlook towards
the CSR initiatives of companies, often defining CSR initiatives more as donor-driven. As a result,
corporate find it hard to decide whether they should participate in such activities at all in medium and
long run.

- Non availability of clear CSR guidelines

There are no clear cut statutory guidelines or policy directives to give definitive directions to CSR
initiatives of companies. The scale of CSR initiatives of companies should depend upon their business
size and profile. In other words, the bigger the company, the larger its CSR programmed.

- Lack of consensus on implementing CSR issues

There is a lack of consensus amongst implementing agencies regarding CSR projects. This lack of
consensus often results in duplication of activities by corporate houses in areas of their intervention.
This results in a competitive spirit between implementing agencies rather than building collaborative
approaches on issues. This factor limits company’s abilities to undertake impact assessment of their
initiatives from time to time.
 INTRODUCTION OF MAHINDRA CO.
PROFILE OF THE COMPANY

Mahindra is one of the leading business group of India, it is one of the largest corporate group
of India. Mahindra Groups has global presence & it is ranked amongst Forbes Top 200 list of the
world’s most Reputable companies & in the Top 10 of Most Reputable Indian Companies.

The origins of Mahindra & Mahindra company can be traced back to Oct 2, 1945 when
Mahindra brothers, J.C. Mahindra & K.C.Mahindra joined hands with Ghulam Mohammad &
Mohammad was set up as a franchise for assembling Jeep from Willys (U.S.A). When this company
name was Mahindra & Mohammad but after India independence in 1947, Mahindra & Mohammad
returned back to Pakistan & became the first Finance Minister of Pakistan.

At the beginning time this company was introduced first Indigenous Jeep in the year 1949 in
market and then this company proceeds with new brands vehicles. Some of the famous automobiles
brands of Mahindra are- Scorpio & Bolero. The Mahindra company is also the largest producer of
tractors in India & now it is fourth largest tractor company in the world. Mahindra & Mahindra is one of
the leading tractor brands in the world. It is also the largest manufacture of tractor in India with substain
market leadership of over 25 year. It designs, developes, manufacturers and market tractors as well as
farm implements. Mahindra Tractors (CHINA) CO. Ltd. Manufacturer tractors for the growing Chinese
market and is a hub for tractor exoports to the USA and other nation. Mahindra & Mahindra has a 100%
subsidiary, Mahindra USA, which assembles products for the American markets.
 HISTORICAL SCENARIO :-

1945

- The Company was Incorporated and converted into Public Limited in 1955 at Mumbai. The
Company Manufacture Jeep type vehicles, petrol industrial engines, industrial process control
instruments and flow meters. Trading in steel and manufacture of professional grade electronic
components. Jeeps are manufactured under a license and an agreement with Willys Motors Inc.,
Toledo, Ohio, U.S.A., for whom the Company also acts as exclusive distributors for the whole of
India
for their entire range of vehicles including utility vans, cargo/personnel carriers and pick-up trucks.

1958

- The Company entered into an agreement with Birfield Ltd., to form Mahindra Sintered Products
Private Limited for the manufacture of a wide range of self lubricating bearings.

1968

- The Instrumentation & Electronics Division came into existence as a result of merger of the wholly-
owned subsidiary of Mahindra Engineering Co. Ltd., with the Company with effect from 1st April
1968. The activities of the merged company were being carried on in this division.

- The Company acquired the whole paid-up capital of Mahindra Electro-Chemicals Products Ltd.
Company.

- With effect from 1st April, the wholly owned subsidiary Mahindra
Engineering Co. Ltd., was merged with the Company. International Tractor Company of India Ltd.,
was merged with the Company effective from 1st November 1977.
1970

- The name was changed from Mahindra Van Wijk & Visser Ltd. to Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. This
was merged with the Indian National Diesel Engine Co., Ltd., during 1977-78.

1977 - 74,

- 700-9.3% Pref. and 12,98,202 No. of Equity share allotted without payment in cash to shareholders
of International Tractor Co. Ltd., on its merger in prop 1:1 Pref. and 2:3 Equity. 12,500-7.8% Pref.
shares redeemed on 1.2.1979.

1978

- The Company started negotiation with Balania K. Zacharopoulos Ltd., Athens for jointly promoting
a new company in Greece for the manufacture of Jeep vehicles and trucks. Initially, it was
proposed to assemble these vehicles mainly from CKD packs to be shipped from India.

1979

- 57,22,764 Bonus equity share issued in prop. 1:1.

1983

- 76,30,352 Bonus equity shares issued in prop. 2:3 in October 1984.

1984

- Mahindra Spicer Ltd. (MSL), was amalgamated with Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. (MML) with effect
from 3rd April. Pursuant to the scheme of amalgamation of MSL with MML, the shareholders of
MSL were allotted 1,88,166 equity shares of MML in the ratio of 1 equity share of MML for every 6
shares held in MSL.

- The Company entered into a collaboration agreement with Foramer

S. A., an associate of Forasol S.A., for purchase of Ile d' Amsterdam an offshore drilling rig at a price
U.S. .75 million. The Company arranged for a foreign currency loan through Bank of Baroda. In
view of this purchase, the Company obtained a firm order from ONGC for drilling services for 2
years.
1985

- A letter of intent was obtained for the manufacture of 50,000 lines of EPABX/PAXs in collaboration
with OKL Electric Co. of Japan.

- The Company also signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the British Telecom p.l.c. of
London under which the two companies were to jointly explore and develop opportunities in
telecommunication and technical fields in India.

- MBT was made a subsidiary of the Company with 60% holding and the remaining 40% was
subscribed by the foreign partners, the British Telecommunications p.l.c., U.K. (BT) for provision
of software engineers of MBT to work on various projects of BT in the U.K. MBT also decided to
issue equity capital to the extent of Rs 4 crores out of which shares worth Rs 2.40 crores were to be
offered to Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd., for subscription and the balance shares worth Rs 1.60 crores
were to be offered to BT.

1987

- (17 months), approval from Government was received for the manufacture of Peugeot 504 pick-up
vehicles in collaboration with Automobiles Peugeot of France.

- A new model M-595 tractor in the 50 H.P. range was introduced.

1988

- The Company acquired a off-shore drilling rig Ile d' Amsterdam from Foramer S. A., France as on
1st March. A firm letter of intent was received for one land rig for drilling operations at
Jwalamukhi, Himachal Pradesh against a tender from ONGC. The Company already entered into an
agreement with Forasol S.A., for purchase of a land rig and related equipment.
1989

- During the year improved versions of CJ 500 range of jeeps and FJ range of LCVs were introduced.
Also a sporty model of jeep was introduce which was well received by the target audience.

- During September, the Company acquired the automotive pressing unit at Kanhe from Guest Keen
Williams, Ltd. for a gross consideration of Rs28.75 crores. The unit has an installed capacity of
10,000 tonnes per annum.

1990

- The Automotive division faced adverse market conditions resulting in a drastic reduction in
production and sales of vehicles. The Automotive division introduced a direct injection diesel
engine, the MDI 2500 A engine on the CJ 500 vehicles. A new fuel efficient 10 seater vehicle
having a direct injection diesel engine was introduced.

- A letter of intent was obtained from ONGC for extension of the contract for a further period of one
year. However, on account of certain procedural delays ONGC dehired the rig and it remained
non-operational for about 160 days. However, the Company received a contract from ONGC for a
much higher day rate and the rig was rendering service to ONGC with effect from 9th November.

- The Company issued 48,16,012-12.5% fully convertible debentures of Rs 110 each with a provision
to apply, instead, for 58,86,236 fully convertible zero interest bonds of Rs 90 each. An option was
given
to apply for a combination of debentures and bonds subject to an aggregate value of Rs 52,97,61,320.
These debentures/bonds were offered on rights basis to the then existing equity shareholders in the
ratio of one debenture for every four equity shares held. The issue was fully subscribed. Additional
bonds/debentures were issued to retain the over-subscription to the extent of 15% of the issue which
is equivalent to 7,22,401 debentures of Rs 110 each.

- Through another letter of offer, two blocks consisting of 8,64,049 debentures each were offered to
Mahindra Companies and
International Finance Corporation, Washington, respectively with an option to apply for bonds subject
to the aggregate value of Rs
9,50,45,390 for each block. The issue was fully subscribed. Additional bonds/debentures were issued
to retain the over-subscription to the extent of 15% of the issue which is equivalent to 1,29,607
debentures of Rs 110 each for each block.

- The employees (including Indian working directors)/workers of the Company were also offered on
an equitable basis 2,40,801 debentures of Rs 110 each with a provision to apply for bonds within
the aggregate limit of the issue. The issue was under subscribed. Only 16,750 debentures and
68,250 bonds were allotted. The balance debentures/bonds were allowed to lapse.

- As on 1st April, 49,90,354 debentures and 26,20,371 bonds were allotted.

- As on 1st May, the Company allotted on private placement basis 14% redeemable non-convertible
debentures for a total value of Rs 20 crores to UTI, LIC, ICICI, Army Group Insurance Fund and
GIC and its subsidiaries. These debentures are redeemable in full at a premium of 5% on 1st May
1997.

1991

- New replacement kits for the series of diesel engines, the XDP 4.90 were successfully launched in
order to replace petrol engines in passenger cars and create new demands for the series of diesel
engines manufactured by the Company.

- During the second half of the year, the Company introduced the new range of `Commander' vehicles
which were well received in the market. A new model on the anvil was a five door ten seater
vehicle Armada with a factory built body for which dies were imported from Japan.

- To meet the changing needs of the market, the Company introduced a new model 225 DI (25HP)
tractor.
- Another 8,64,049 zero interest fully convertible bonds of Rs 90 each for a total value of 9,50,45,390
were allotted to Peugeot India Holding, France, a subsidiary of Automobiles Peugeot, France as on
18th January.

- As per the terms of the issue, a portion of Rs 55 of each debenture was converted into one equity
share of Rs 10 at a premium of Rs 45 per share and a portion of Rs 45 each bond was converted into
one equity share of Rs 10 at a premium of Rs 35 per share an on 1st April.

- Accordingly, the Company allotted 49,90,354 equity shares on conversion of debentures and
34,84,420 equity shares on conversion of bonds. The balance amount of each bond and debenture
was to be converted as per the same terms given above at the end of 18 months from the date of
allotment.

- In order to meet the long term working capital requirements, the Company issued in January 1991,
14% redeemable non-convertible debentures aggregating Rs 25 crores to Infrastructure Leasing and
Financial Services, Ltd. on a private placement basis. The debenture are redeemable in full at
premium of 5% on 8th January, 1998.

1992

- It was proposed to launch a new LCV with a much larger platform, imported driving comfort and
better styling.

- The Company issued 72,42,719 - 14.5% secured Non-convertible redeemable debentures of Rs 100
each with a detachable warrant attached to each debenture entitling the holder thereof to apply for 1
equity share of Rs 10 each at a premium of Rs 20 per share in the ratio 1 debenture: 5 equity shares
held, on the expiry of six months and 36 months from the date of allotment of debentures.

- Another 3,62,136 non-convertible debentures with detachable warrants were also offered to
employees on an equitable basis. Only 2,20,300 debentures taken up.
- 76,04,855 oridinary shares of Rs 10 each at a premium of Rs 20 per share were to be issued to those
exercising the rights attached to the warrants between 6 months and 36 months from the date of
allotment of debentures. The debentures were to be redeemed not earlier than the end of 7th year
but not later than the end of the 10th year from the date of allotment of debentures.

1993

- The Automotive division undertook to introduce a wide range of products such as mini bus, MM
Deluxe, Armada deluxe, Cabking pick-up,CL-Classic & a single/double Cab pick-up etc.

- Mahindra Nissan Allwyn Ltd. (MNL) was amalgamated with Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. (MML)
with effect from 1st November. Pursuant to the scheme of amalgamation, the shareholders of
MNAL were allotted 9,73,200 equity shares of MML in the ratio of 1 equity share of MML for
every 2 shares held in MNAL. With the merger modern automotive plant owned
MNAL became a Unit of the Company's automotive division.

- The Company issued 100,47,043 Global depository receipts valued at US $ 74.75 million. Each
GDR was issued at a market price of US .44 and was supported by equal number of underlying
shares. Accordingly 1,00,47,043 shares were allotted at a premium of Rs 22.50 per share.

1994

- During the year a new Company Mahindra USA Inc. had been established in Texas, U.S.A. with the
objective of increasing tractor sales in U.S.

- 9,73,200 shares allotted to the erstwhile sharehodlers of MNAL 11,14,682 shares allotted against the
detachable warrants. 35,85,874 shares allotted to Ford Motor Company USA, at a premium of Rs
370 per shares. 28,00,000 shares allotted to the promoter group.
1995

- A New LCV model-cabking DI 3150 - with a payload of 2.5 tonnes, a 5-speed transmission and
high quality components was launched. Also, a sporty 4-wheel drive vehicle Mahindra Classic
with modern fitments such as Vacuum assisted brakes, disc brakes in front, wire wheels & bull
bar was launched for the domestic market. In addition, a new commander 5-Door Hard Top
vehicle, primarily targeted for semi-urban and rural transportation was introduced.

- Two new models - 365 DI and 585 - DI were also launched in 30-35 HP and 45-50 HP segments
respectively.

- The Company entered into a joint venture agreement with Ford Motor Company USA (Ford) for
promotion of a new Company for the manufacture and marketing of Ford range of passenger and
other vehicles. The Company has an equity participation of Rs 160 crores each by Ford and the
Company.

- 22,71,322 No. of Equity shares allotted in conversion of warrants. 407,17,489 bonus equity shares
issued in proportion 2:3.

- The tractor division received the ISO 9001 certification from TUV of
Germany.

1996

- The Company proposed to introduce the `Armada Grand' with XD3 diesel engine, 5 speed BA 10
transmission with air-conditioning and power steering as standard features. New models like, soft
top and FRP versions of CL/MM 550 models, comfortable 8 seater Armada with Disc Brakes and
an optional factory fitted air conditioner, Commander 650 DI on a longer wheel base and MM
540/550 XDB models with the powerful 2.5 lines XD3 engine and the all-synchromesh 5 speed BA
10 transmission were launched during the year.
- During July, the Company offered US 0,00,000-5% convertible note during July 9, 2001 came into
GDRs each representing one share at a cover sum price of US .955 per GDR. Till date 15,73,830
shares issued.

1997

- The Zaheerabad plant and R&D division were awarded Iso 9002 and ISO 9001 certification
respectively. With the technology received from Fuji Technica, Japan the company undertook to
manufacture dies for vehicle bodies in the new Die Shop. During the year, 7 new models to cater
to different nice markets were introduced.

- New products viz. 275 DI TU upgrades B-275 model with increased power and 585-C, 585 DI
model with constant mesh transmission for ease operation were introduced.

- M&M is setting up an engineering and product development centre at Thane to strengthen its
technology and designing capacities.

- M&M is setting up a joint venture with Mondragon Corporation of Spain in the area of iron foundry.
The joint venture agreement was signed in Spain by M-M at an Indo-Spain joint business council
meeting organised by the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry and the
Association of Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India.

- M&M is entering into a 50:50 joint venture with the billion Case of the US for manufacturing high
horse power tractors.

- The M&M-Sealand joint venture is considering introducing a Ro-Ro (Roll-on, Roll-off) railway
service in India.

- The Mahindra group has tied up with Sega Enterprises Ltd andMitsubishi Corporation of Japan to
form a joint venture (JV) in India to develop and launch Sega branded family entertainment
centres.
- M&M has signed an agreement with Chemoleums Ltd under which M&M will use a special quality
of Chemoleums lubricating oil, Mahindra Singlestar, for its tractors.

- M&M has signed a wage agreement with its union at its automotive plant at Kandivali, evolving a
Mahindra Production System (MPS) which is an amalgamation of latest work measurement
techniques and Toyota Production Systems.

1998

-A joint venture company is being promoted by Mahindra and Mahindra Limited, Infrastructure
Leasing and Financial Services and Tamil Nadu Industrial Development Corporation to set up an
industrial park near Chennai to attract auto ancillary units and all categories of non-polluting
industries.

- Utility vehicle manufacturer, Mahindra and Mahindra (M&M) on May 27 signed a productivity and
capacity linked wage agreement with its union (Bharatiya Kamghar Sena) at its tractor plant at
Kandivali.

- M&M has signed new productivity agreements with its workers at the Kandivli (Mumbai), Nashik
and Zaheerabad (Andhra Pradesh) plants.

- Mahindra Ford is likely to sign a MoU with the government to import auto kits.

- Mercedes-Benz India Ltd and Mahindra Ford India Ltd have signed a MoU with the Directorate-
General of Foreign Trade (DGFT), under the new MoU policy for car manufacturing in the
country.

- Danish company Maersk, Mahindra & Mahindra and the Tamil Nadu Industrial Development
Corporation (Tidco) propose to establish a joint venture to develop Colachel on western coast of
south Tamil Nadu into a hub port.
- Mahindra & Mahindra (M&M) is all set to float a 50:50 joint venture company with the Punjab
state government for setting up a hi-tech agro-commodity exchange in the state.

1999

- M&M has set up a new company - Mahindra Auto Specialities Ltd - for bullet-proofing passenger
vehicles and providing specialised services. M&M has signed an MoU with Plasan Sasa of Israel
for design and development of armoured (bullet proof) solutions on M&M utility vehicles for use
by Indian security forces.

- The Mahindra & Mahindra group and the TVS group have floated a joint venture to provide
software solutions to the automobile sector.

- Mahindra and Mahindra (M&M) is working towards introducing a slew of models in India from the
Mitsubishi stables, including its famed Pajero brand of multi-utility vehicles (MUVs) and jeeps.

- Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd (M&M) has created a tier-IT structure under Mahindra Holdings &
Financial Ltd whereby individual subsidiaries will tap the capital market depending upon their need
for cash.

- Utility vehicle major, Mahindra and Mahindra (M&M), is entering the Rs 1,000-crore three-wheeler
market for the first time. The company will launch its first three-wheeler a diesel-driven eight
seater within 8-10 months from now.

2000

- The Company will be launching its first CNG-powered utility vehicle in Delhi.
- The Company consequent to disciplinary action taken by the Management against certain workmen
and Union representative, the workmen of Kandivli Plant of Tractor Division of the company
initially stopped work and thereafter resorted to illegal strike on 11th January.

- The Company proposes to make a call for redeeming Bonds of value US .378 million out of current
outstanding of US .866 million.

- The Company tie-up with Citibank for a channel financing agreement for their dealers.

- Mahindra & Mahindra launched its eight seater Marshal DI Deluxe

2000 in Western Maharashtra.

- Mahindra Auto Specialisites Ltd, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the company delivery of the first
Neticle (net-vehicle) - brand named Quadro - in India.

- The Company has launched its new generation tractors Arjun 605 DI at the Kandivali plant.

- The Company and French car maker Renault have signed an agreement to explore the possibility of
using Renault petrol engines for M&M's planned Scorpio utility vehicle.

- The Company has launched a fresh voluntary scheme for employees in its tractor division. The
Scheme will open on June 8 and will continue till July 31.

- The Company is set to launch its 2.5-litre multi-utility vehicle, Bolero.

- The Company launched the 39 HP and 40 HP models of its `Bhoomi Putra' range of tractors.

- The Company has entered into a technical alliance with Austrian engine manufacturer AVL list
GmbH for production of light commercial vehicles of 3.5 tonne capacity.
- M&M will launch the LCV under the `Loadking' name in January next year.

- M&M has launched its first 60 HP class tractor Arjun 605 DI here, will from now roll out a new
mode very six months.

- The Company the utility vehicle market leader, launch of its latest
UV, the Bolero GLX.

- The Company will launch Scorpio, its urban utility vehicle, by the end of the year.
- The Company has launched the first of its new series of Horizin Tractors, the Mahindra Arjun 605
DI in Andhra Pradesh.

- The Company launched diesel version of Bolero in a short time.

- Mahindra & Mahindra is to go for a expansion, keeping pace with its plans for the introduction of
new models, including the Scorpio.

- Mahindra & Mahindra is likely to introduce agricultural related implement and equipment in the
near fugure.

- Mahindra and Mahindra Limited (M&M) launched yet another range of new generation tractors to
grab a large share of an emerging mature market.

- The Company has launched its fourth portal business with an investment of million.

- Mahindra Intertrade, subsidiary of Mahindra & Mahindra, has launched a steel trading portal,
steelmartindia.com.

- Fitch Ratings India has assigned `Ind AAA' rating to the proposed five-year Rs 100-crore non-
convertible debenture programme of the company.
- The Board has approved an ESOS and decided to allot 55,24,219 No. of
equity shares to the Mahindra & Mahindra Employee Stock Option Trust.

2001

- The Company has set up a farm extension services division called Mahindra Shubh Labh, which will
pioneer the building of a chain of one-stop shops offering a comprehensive range of farm-gate
services.

- Mahindra Intertrade, the largest non-automotive company of the Mahindra & Mahindra group, has
entered into a distribution alliance with Lego.

- Mr. Anand G. Mahindra has been appointed as Vice-Chairman and Managing Director.

- Mahindra & Mahindra is set to launch three new variants of its utility vehicle Bolero to boost its
presence in the urban segment.

- The strike at the company's Nashik automotive plant which began on March 4, has been called off
with effect from 8th March.

- Credit Rating and Information Services of India Ltd. has revised the rating assigned to the
company's long-term debentures to `AA+' to `AAA'.

- Mahindra & Mahindra has tied up with French auto giant Renault for sourcing petrol engines for its
premium utility vehicle Scorpio which would be launched later this year.

-The price of Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd (M&M) shares hit a 92month
low on the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) on june 14 fuelled by market apprehensions of a
steep fall in the company’s sales in May 2001
- Mahindra & Mahindra launched the premium version of its 7 seater multi-utility vehicle, Bolero
GLX.
2002

-Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd has informed BSE that ICICI Bank Ltd has withdrawn the nomination
of Mr Inder Chand Jain as their Nominee Director from the Board of M& M with immediate
effect.Consequently
Mr
Inder Chand Jain ceases to be a Director of Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd with immediate effect.

-Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd has informed BSE that Mr. David Friedman
(currently the Alternate Director to Mr.Lewis W. K. Booth) has been appointed as a Director of the
Company w.e.f. October 30, 2002 in the vacancy caused by the cessation of Directorship of Mr.
Lewis W.K. Booth. Mr. V.K. Chanana has been appointed as a Nominee Director of UTI w.e.f.
October 30, 2002 in place of Mr. Sanjiv Kapoor whose nomination has since been withdrawn by UTI.

2003

-Unleashes MaXX Pik Up utility vehicle

- Signed an agreement with Canara Bank . Where in, Canara Bank will provide loan to those
farmers who are willing to buy Mahindra's tractors and other farm implements.

- Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd on December 24th showcased its new products, Bolero XL and
Bolero XLS, for prospective customers in Karnataka.

2004

-Mahindra & Mahindra delisting of shares from DSE

-M&M launches two variants of Bolero utility vehicle in TN

-The former managing director of Rallis India, Mr Rajeev Dubey, is joining Mahindra & Mahindra
Ltd (M&M) as Executive VicePresident
(Human Resources & Corporate Services). Mr Dubey has previously held senior positions at
Tata Steel and was the managing director of Tata Metaliks.

-Auto giant Mahindra and Mahindra has launched its latest variants of Bolero XL range here on
January 19, 2004, thus heralding its launch across the State.

-M&M enters into agreement for acquiring majority stake in US based Bristlecone Inc

-Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd has informed that the equity shares of the Company have been delisted
from Pune Stock Exchange Ltd w.e.f. January 16, 2004.

-M&M unveils innovation matrix to enhance performance

-Mahindra Special becomes M&M's new IT unit

-Equity shares delisted from Madras Stock Exchange

- tied up with an Iran-based company Barchinkar for localising M&M tractors in the Iran market

- Mahindra Tractors in accord with Castrol

-M&M rolls out India's first turbo tractor

-Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd has informed that HSBC Global Investment
Fund has acquired 3,99,825 equity shares of the company through market on May 17
-- Andhra Bank has announced that it has joined hands with Mahindra Tractors for financing the
distribution of tractors through the bank branches across the country
-Mahindra & Mahindra (M&M) has forayed into the Latin American markets through the opening of
an assembly line in Uruguay

-Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd (M&M) on announced its foray into the South African automobile market

-Hemant Luthra to head M&M's new MSAT Sector

-Dena Bank inks MoU with M&M for tractor loans

2005

- Mahindra & Mahindra tractors' top dealer in the US has become the largest tractor dealer in the US,
muscling past dealers of John Deer, New Holland and Kubota.

-M&M forays into Australian tractor market on February 14, 2005.

-Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd (M&M) launches its Common Rail Diesel Engine (CRDEe) fitted-
Scorpio, which conforms to BS III emission norms on February 22, 2005,

-Mahindra & Mahindra executes JV Agreement with Renault

-Scorpio unveiled in Malaysia on May 4, 2005

-M&M, Renault ink MoU to set up Rs 550 crore car manufacturing plant in Nasik
-M&M introduces new pick-up vehicle on July 6, 2005

-Mahindra unveils 3-wheeler cargo carrier Champion Alfa model

-Mahindra & Mahindra inks a JV with International Truck & Engine

Corporation, USA
-Mahindra & Mahindra enters into agreement with Plexion Technologies, Mauritius

-M&M has signed a memorandum of understanding with the Saigal family of Pakistan for
exporting tractors to that country..

2006

-M&M unleashes Scorpio Pik-Up in South Africa

-M&M unveils three-wheeler car

-M&M Hingna unit enters into new new wage agreement

- Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd on Oct 11,2006 signed a agreement with ITMCo (Iran Tractor
Manufacturing Co) to sell tractors in Iran. The agreement was signed in Tehran.

-Mahindra & Mahindra (M&M) and French automaker Renault have joined hands yet again to
establish a greenfield passenger car manufacturing plant in India within five years.

- Mahindra & Mahindra inks deal with Global Vehicles USA Inc

2007

- Mahindra & Mahindra acquires a leading German Forging Company Schoneweiss & Co. GmbH.

- Mahindra unveils new Bolero in Gujarat.

-Mahindra and Mahindra (M&M) has launched the line of sports utility vehicles (SUV) and
pick up trucks that it plans to begin selling in the United States starting from 2009.

- M&M unveils Mahindra Pik-Up in Australia.

-The latest product from Mahindra Defence Systems, the Axe FAV is an extreme offroading
multi terrain defence purpose vehicle.

2008

-Mahindra & Mahindra acquires renowned Italian design house, GRD

Italy.

2009

- Mahindra & Mahindra unveiled its fourth generation Scorpio at an unbeatable price.

- Mahindra & Mahindra (M&M) signed a memorandum of understanding with the State Bank of
Bikaner and Jaipur (SBBJ) for vehicle finance.

2010

- Mahindra & Mahindra has hiked prices of its products by up to Rs 18,000 due to the in excise duty
announced in the Budget.

- Anand Mahindra, vice-chairman and managing director, M&M, is keen

on attaining companies that boost M&M’s global aspirations. This can be done by giving a
combination of facilities, technology and dealer network. Meanwhile, M&M came out as the ideal
bidder for getting hold of a majority stake in Ssangyong Motor Company (SMC).