Marketing Strategy and Competitive Positioning pdf ebook

CHAPTER 17 CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS
Some suggest, for example, that ‘ethical shopping’ is no more than a middle-class indul-
gence that offers very limited benefits to the good causes espoused (Hattersley, 2008). 
Indeed, one commentator suggests that the deadliest greenhouse gas is actually the ‘hot air 
of CSR’ – inclining to the view that the truly responsible thing is to run a business compe-
tently, not to be involved in social causes (Stern, 2009). Similarly, others suggest that organic 
food is ‘a tax on the gullible’ (Lawson, 2009). It is perhaps telling that with economic 
downturn, many government environmental policies were quietly dropped amid business 
opposition and signs that voter priorities were changing (Pickard and Harvey, 2008). Others 
believe that the more focused concept of sustainability (in the sense of meeting current needs 
without harming future generations) will replace that of CSR in management thinking.
17.4.1 Criticisms of CSR initiatives
The development of CSR initiatives by businesses is not universally welcomed. For exam-
ple, some managers talk about the ‘little green lies’ – challenging the notion that making a 
company environmentally friendly can be cost-effective and also profitable, and accusing 
advocates of these initiatives of ‘empty boasting’ (Elgin, 2007).
Cynics also point to the collapse of markets such as that for organic foods in the UK 
under the pressure of rising food prices and economic pressures on the consumer. Indeed, 
2008 did see a 19 per cent fall in organic food sales, as consumers filled their shopping bas-
kets with cheaper, non-organic food. Some believe that organic farming is now in decline 
in the UK (Daneshkhu, 2014). Certainly, there are strong signs that when times are difficult 
financially, the shopper is prepared to sacrifice ‘green’ credentials in favour of cheaper food 
(Rigby, 2008).
Critics also suggest that the rush to ‘carbon credit’ projects yielded few if any environ-
mental benefits – some organisations are paying for emissions reductions that do not take 
place; others are making large profits from carbon trading for clean-ups that would have 
been made anyway. The ‘green gold rush’ of carbon trading stimulated by environmental 
concerns appears seriously flawed (Harvey and Fidler, 2007).
Indeed, some opponents argue that although CSR can improve a company’s reputation 
(perhaps rebuilding goodwill in the wake of corporate scandals and regulatory scrutiny) 
and attract talent (from employees who expect their companies to be active in social issues), 
it costs too much (possibly at the expense of other priorities such as R&D), and is often 
misguided and ineffective (Grow et al., 2005).
The tobacco industry provides an interesting illustration of the limitations of CSR. 
Notwithstanding vehement criticism by anti-smoking groups, and opponents such as the 
World Health Organisation – which categorically questions the very possibility of social 
responsibility in the tobacco industry – recent years have seen tobacco companies start-
ing to position themselves as good corporate citizens. These moves include corporate phi-
lanthropy – such as donations to universities for research, and to environmental groups; 
CSR reporting – in annual reports and other publications; and self-regulation – for exam-
ple, BAT, Philip Morris and Japan Tobacco launching an international voluntary code of