An organization can adopt a variety of approaches to social responsibility. Social responsibility in this case, simply refers to the obligation of an organization's management to make decisions and take actions which would enhance the welfare and interests of the society as a whole. (Anon, n.d.)
According to the concept of corporate social responsibility, a manager must strive his hardest in order to achieve both organizational and societal goals. (Marion, 2001) Social responsibility may be shown by the organization's determination to treat its customers, employees, and investors both in an honest and fair manner. An organization's social responsibility may be ranked from the lowest to the highest stance, with the lowest being the obstructionist stance. It is then followed by the defensive stance, and the accommodative stance before it leads to the highest stance - the proactive. (Anon, n.d.)
The diagram below illustrates a clearer picture of the different degrees in social responsibility: (Griffin, 2012)
1. Obstructionist Stance
An obstructionist stance is an approach to social responsibility in which firms do as little as possible to solve any social or environmental problem. (Griffin, 2012) These firms also often go against laws and ethics that are preset, and will do everything in their power to avoid being penalized for their mistakes.
An obstructionist stance is an approach to social responsibility in which firms do as little as possible to solve any social or environmental problem. (Griffin, 2012) These firms also often go against laws and ethics that are preset, and will do everything in their power to avoid being penalized for their mistakes.
In other words, these firms avoid corporate social responsibility, while their managers engage in unethical and illegal behavior that they try to hide from organizational stakeholders and the society. (Anon 2, n.d.) These firms also reflects mainly on economic priorities and try to stop whatever is going on. (Anon, n.d.)
An example of the obstructionist would be Hertz. Hertz was the first rental car company to have reached an agreement with safety group, Consumers for Auto Reliability, calling on Congress to grant NHTSA authority to prohibit rental car companies from leasing, or selling recalled vehicles until those vehicles are deemed safe. (Emison, 2012)
After substantial public outcry and years of opposition, Enterprise said in February 2012 that it would formally support legislation “to oversee the way car rental companies manage the safety recall process for vehicles in their fleets.” (Emison, 2012)
This agreement that was agreed upon to support logical regulations, and to prevent rental companies from leasing out recalled vehicles is a good start in order to enhance the safety of unsuspecting companies. (Emison, 2012)
A 2004 tragedy in California, USA , that involved two girls, was mainly caused by a defective rental from Enterprise. Enterprise had known about the defect, but still chose to rent the vehicle without having it repaired first. The vehicle caught fire as they were driving down Highway 101, got hit by an oncoming truck, and both girls were killed on the spot. (Emison, 2012)
However, Emerson refused to be held accountable for the tragedy, and the two girls were blamed instead. Despite the tragedy, and Hertz's agreement with Consumers for Auto Reliability, the American Car Rental Association is still lobbying against this much reasonable rule. (Emerson, 2012)
Through this, it is evident that Enterprise is an obstructionist company as it had refused to be accountable for its mistakes, but instead, placed the blame on two innocent girls who was not aware of the defect.
.png)
2. Defensive Stance
The defensive stance is a social responsibility stance in which an organization does everything that is required of it legally, but nothing more than that. (Griffin, 2012) For example, some companies provide their staff with a certain number of annual leave days as per required by the Employment Act 1965, and no more than that.
Managers of these firms rely only on legally established rules to take the most minimal position toward corporate social responsibility (Anon 2, n.d.), while also seeking protection by doing the minimum legally required. These managers often argue that nothing has been done wrong despite possible negative outcomes. (Anon, n.d.)
Nowadays, there are so many
companies in the world, and all of them have their own ways of playing by the law. Companies like Camel, R. J. Reynolds, and Phillip
Morris, all tobacco companies, are examples of companies that take a defensive stance to social
responsibility. (Anon 3, 2011)
Camel,
R.J. Reynolds and Phillip Morris, all tobacco companies, do place warnings on the cigarette packs. Were it not for the law, these companies would not place warnings on the pack. Hence, in countries where this is
not the law, they will go all out to sell their products, even if that
means discarding their warnings. They will not advertise the risks
involved with the products on purpose, fearing that consumers will not buy them. (Anon 3, 2011)
3. Accommodative Stance
A firm that adopts the accommodative stance usually meets its legal and ethical obligations, but will also go beyond their obligations in selected cases. (Griffin, 2012) These firms generally accept social responsibility while it tries to satisfy economic, legal, and ethical criteria. They will also be more than willing to provide information and facts to interested parties without trying to shield information. (Anon, n.d.)
Hence, managers of these firms make choices that try to balance both the interests of shareholders and those of other stakeholders. (Anon 2, n.d.) A general example of an accommodative manager would be one who would grant an earlier release time for Muslim colleagues during the month of Ramadhan as they are fasting, and have to rush home to break fast with their families.
In 2012, the Bank of Korea mentioned that it plans to maintain an accommodative policy stance. They had managed to hold the base rate during the latter half of 2011 at 3.25%, and intends to retain a financial accommodative stance, as mentioned in a booklet prepared for a two-day conference for Southeast Asian central banks in Seoul, Korea. (Nam, 2012)
The Bank of Korea had kept the mentioned interest rate steady for an eighth straight month, citing external uncertainties and elevated domestic inflation expectations. When asked in a survey if there were other external vulnerabilities that may affect the economy in the near future, the Bank of Korea said a possible hard landing by the Chinese economy and a surge in oil prices would pose downside risks to the Korean economy. (Nam, 2012)
4. Proactive Stance
The proactive stance in one in which an organization views itself as a citizen in the society and proactively seeks for opportunities to contribute to the society. (Griffin, 2012) Managers of the firms who adopt the proactive stance are more than willing to go out of their way to actively promote the interests of both stockholders and stakeholders, using organizational resources to do so. (Anon 2, n.d.)
These firms meet all the criteria of social responsibility, including discretionary performance while also actively providing for stockholders and stakeholders. Instead of being reactive, proactive firms try to figure out ways to solve the problems at hand. (Anon, n.d.)
L'Occitane's founder, Olivier Baussan, sold his products at local French markets. His stall attracted a lot of attention, particularly from blind and partially sighted people who had an appreciation of the distinct scents and different textures of the products. (Anon 4, 2013)
When Baussan noticed a blind woman having difficulties while shopping for perfume in one of his stores, he went on and launched an initiative to have Braille labels on most L'Occitane products. (Griffin, 2012)
REFERENCES:
Anonymous, n.d., Approaches to Social Responsibility. Available at <http://www.scribd.com/doc/26162497/Approaches-to-Social-Responsibility> [Accessed 30 April 2013]
Anonymous 3, 2011, Three Stances. Available at <http://www.studymode.com/essays/Three-Stances-838626.html> [Accessed 1 May 2013]
Anonymous 4, 2013, L'Occitane - Braille Labelling. Available at <http://www.rnib.org.uk/professionals/retail/retailbestpractice/Pages/loccitane.aspx> [Accessed 1 May 2013]
Emison, Brett A., 2012, Rental Car Roulette [online] Available at <http://thesafetyreport.com/2012/11/rental-car-roulette/> [Accessed 1 May 2013]
Griffin, Ricky W., 2012, Management [e-book] Ohio, USA: Cengage Learning. Available at: <http://books.google.com.my/books?id=ht6ca2s4NNMC&pg=PA105&lpg=PA105&dq=obstructionist+stance+to+social+responsibility&source=bl&ots=RxKd_e5bCP&sig=JmaG3UQYnShDo_fFTfQsFVpZXIg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=SOl_UdunEcPTrQfp6YDYCw&ved=0CEAQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=obstructionist%20stance%20to%20social%20responsibility&f=false> [Accessed 30 April 2013]
Marion, Allison McClintic, 2001, "Social Responsibility and Organizational Ethics." Encyclopedia of Business and Finance. Ed. Vol. 2. Gale Cengage. Available at <http://www.enotes.com/social-responsibility-organizational-ethics-reference/> [Accessed 30 April 2013]
Nam, In-Soo, 2012, Bank of Korea to Maintain Accommodative Policy. Dow Jones Newswires & The Wall Street Journal, [online] Available at <http://online.wsj.com/article/sb10001424052970204883304577220280892166426.html> [Accessed 1 May 2013]
