Social Responsible Of International Business - Myassignmenthelp.Com

Question: Discuss about the Social Responsible Of International Business. Answer: Introduction In the current business scenario, business organizations should also look after the social welfare also apart from their core business objective of profit maximization. This is due to the reason that, the current business scenario is much more competitive in nature with the presence of number of players in the same sectors. Thus, in order to maintain and enhance the goodwill and reputation and to stray ahead in the competition, it is important for the business organizations to initiate the process of corporate social responsibility (Blomqvist, 2014). This refers to the process of allocation of corporate fund for the wellbeing of the society. In the recent times, more contemporary business organizations are initiating activities related to the corporate social responsibilities (Zellweger et al., 2013). Tata is one of the leading conglomerates in the world with their operational facilities present in different locations around the world. They are based in India and have their presence in automobile sector, FMCG sector, fashion sector and steel industries (Tatamotors.com, 2018). This essay will only discuss about the automobile division of Tata or Tata motors. They are known for their preference for humane approach over commercial approach. In accordance to that, Tata motors follow extensive approach of corporate social responsibilities (Tatamotors.com, 2018). This essay will critically analyze the theories of social responsibility from the perspective of Tata motors. Moreover, different management theories will also be discussed for the critical analysis. Corporate social responsibility of the Tata motors Activities related to corporate social responsibility of Tata motors covers different areas ranging from health, education and skill development to environment welfare and community development. One of the key social activities in the health sector is setting up of community hospital in Jamshedpur, India along with activities in different locations. However, there are various implications on their business operation due to these activities. One of the key aspects that should be considered is the stakeholder analysis (Costa Menichini, 2013). This is due to the reason that, an organization will have different stakeholders with different interest and they will have diverse perception in view to the corporate social responsibilities. The interest between the customer and management of the organization will be conflicting due to the reason that, the objective of the customers will be to have more value creation from the organization. On the other hand, the objective of the upper level ma nagement will be to maximize profit by reducing the unwanted cost. Thus, with the initiation of the social activities, the reputation of the organization will get enhanced in the market. Customers will have more satisfaction by consuming their products. On the other hand, initiation of the corporate social responsibility will reduce the profit maximization for the upper level management. This is due to the reason that, corporate social responsibility will incur cost from the corporate fund without having any short term or materialistic profit (ORiordan Fairbrass, 2014). Thus, it is being considered as an extra cost for the organization by the upper level management. This led to the generation of conflict between the key stakeholders including the customers and the management. Theories of social responsibility There are various theories being stated by different authors regarding the social responsibility. However, two are the most important theories being used in the mainstream business scenario. Classical view of the social responsibility is one of them (Frynas Stephens, 2015). This theory is being stated by Milton Friedman. According to this theory, the first priority for any business organizations should be the profit and business maximization rather than concentrating on welfare of the society. He also stated that, initiation of the corporate social responsibility lead to the unwanted cost for the company along with taking extra responsibility. This theory states that, the responsibility of community development is with the government and not with the business organizations (Crane Matten Spence, 2013). Thus, in the case of Tata motors, initiation of different initiatives in different sectors causing more cost for them. As of 2016, Tata motors have spent more than 205.70 INR for the activities related to corporate social responsibility. In addition, this cost is not having any benefits for them in terms of increase in profit or revenue. This is due to the reason that, social activities are mainly being promoted for the bottom of the pyramid society and they are not the target customers for Tata motors. Thus, according to this theory, Tata motors should concentrate more on their core business activities over their existing social activities. The second theory is the socioeconomic view of social responsibility. According to this theory, social wellbeing initiatives by the organizations are as important as their core business objective for profit maximization (Huang et al., 2014). This is due to the reason that, this theory states contemporary business organizations are not only seen as economic establishment, rather than they are being considered as an institution, which will have influence in the surroundings and in the society. Thus, this theory promotes that the contemporary business organizations should initiate different social activities. In the case of the Tata motors, this theory is can get more effectively aligned due to the reason that, the business approach of the Tata motors matches with the socioeconomic theory of social responsibility. Due to the extensive social activities being practiced by Tata motors, the social image of them is being enhanced along with their brand identity effectively penetrated in the market. in the South Asian region, the brand of Tata motors is being considered as reliable and authentic. This is being made possible with the social activities that they maintain. Moreover, according to the socioeconomic theory, business organizations are not only for economic benefits, rather they should also engage in social welfare (Kolk, 2016). In accordance to that, Tata motors allocate a portion of their revenue for the social welfare. This helps them to have positive brand image in the market, which eventually helps them to push their products in the market effectively. Critical analysis through ethical theories According to the theory of Kantianism, the principles behind the actions should be right and should be considered in ethical way no matter what the result will be. Thus, the principles will be considered as ethical even if the output is not effective. In the case of the Tata motors, even if the output of their corporate social activities is not positive or effective, then also their initiatives will be considered as ethical (Segal Lehrer, 2013). This is due to the reason that, the investment that Tata motors have made in different sectors will have positive impact on the community and the society. Thus, according to the theory of Kantian ethics, the corporate social responsibilities of Tata motors can be considered as ethical. Limitations of the theories of corporate social responsibilities The classical view of social responsibilities is having various limitations, which are being identified. One of the key limitations is the lack of concentration on the social cause. According to this theory, business organizations should only look after their core business activities rather than doing social welfare. However, in the current business scenario, business organizations should also keep in mind their goodwill and reputation, which are not being stated in the theory. Thus, this theory does not adhere to the contemporary business scenario (Fooks et al., 2013). Another limitation identified is the lack of any details of the ideal approach of social responsibility. This is due to the fact that, according to this theory, business organizations should not promote social responsibilities. Thus, this theory is not stating any form or approach of social responsibility for the business organizations. On the other hand, socioeconomic view of the social responsibility is also having multiple limitations being identified. One of the key limitations being identified is having no clear idea about how to recover the cost incurred in initiating the social activities. This theory stated that, business organizations should promote social activities for the welfare of the society. However, it does not state the way of earning the revenue for these activities. Another limitation being identified is the negative implication of the social initiatives of the business organizations. This is due to the reason that, there may have negative implications for the particular social activity being initiated by the organizations. However, in this theory it is not being stated about how to mitigate these implications. Conclusion Thus, from the above discussion, it can be concluded that, Tata motors follows extensive approach of corporate social responsibilities in their business operation. This essay discussed about the approach of social responsibilities being followed by Tata motors with the help of two of the most popular theories of social responsibilities. It is being concluded that, approach of social responsibility of Tata motors is more aligned with the socioeconomic view theory compared to the classical view. Thus, Tata motors follow the contemporary approach rather than the old school approach. The social activities of them are also being critically analyzed with the help of ethical theories. It is being seen that, the approach of the Tata motors in view of their social responsibilities is ethical from the view of Kantian ethics. Stakeholder analysis is also being initiated in this essay in order to identify the conflict between different stakeholders. Reference Blomqvist, K. (2014). Building sustainable organizational trust in radical changethe interplay of organizational trust and mindfulness. InMindful Change in Times of Permanent Reorganization(pp. 131-145). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Costa, R., Menichini, T. (2013). A multidimensional approach for CSR assessment: The importance of the stakeholder perception.Expert Systems with Applications,40(1), 150-161. Crane, A., Matten, D., Spence, L. J. (2013). Corporate social responsibility in a global context. Fooks, G., Gilmore, A., Collin, J., Holden, C., Lee, K. (2013). The limits of corporate social responsibility: techniques of neutralization, stakeholder management and political CSR.Journal of Business Ethics,112(2), 283-299. Frynas, J. G., Stephens, S. (2015). Political corporate social responsibility: Reviewing theories and setting new agendas.International Journal of Management Reviews,17(4), 483-509. Huang, C. C., Yen, S. W., Liu, C. Y., Huang, P. C. (2014). The relationship among corporate social responsibility, service quality, corporate image and purchase intention.International Journal of Organizational Innovation (Online),6(3), 68. Kolk, A. (2016). The social responsibility of international business: From ethics and the environment to CSR and sustainable development.Journal of World Business,51(1), 23-34. ORiordan, L., Fairbrass, J. (2014). Managing CSR stakeholder engagement: A new conceptual framework.Journal of Business Ethics,125(1), 121-145. Segal, L., Lehrer, M. (2013). The conflict of ethos and ethics: A sociological theory of business peoples ethical values.Journal of business ethics,114(3), 513-528. Tatamotors.com. (2018).Corporate Social Responsibility | Tata Motors Limited. [online] Available at: https://www.tatamotors.com/corporate-social-responsibility/ [Accessed 6 Jan. 2018]. Tatamotors.com. (2018).Overview | Tata Motors Limited. [online] Available at: https://www.tatamotors.com/about-us/ [Accessed 6 Jan. 2018]. Zellweger, T. M., Nason, R. S., Nordqvist, M., Brush, C. G. (2013). Why do family firms strive for nonfinancial goals? An organizational identity perspective.Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,37(2), 229-248.