No significant gains in corporate social performance are to be expected during the Reagan era. Mandated social performance standards have been relaxed, and voluntary private initiatives cannot match social needs. One way to move beyond present levels of corporate social responsiveness is to form social partnerships or coalitions of business, government, labor unions, universities, and various community groups. These coalitions might be able to address social needs that are beyond the economic and technological reach of corporations acting alone.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
HealdMorrell, The Social Responsibilities of Business: Company and Community, 1900–1960 (Cleveland: Case Western Reserve University Press, 1970); BowenHoward R., Social Responsibilities of the Businessman (New York: Harper, 1953); and BerleAdolf A., The Twentieth Century Capitalist Revolution (New York: Harcourt, 1954).
2.
Reported in Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 1 May 1982.
3.
PolanyiKarl, The Great Transformation: The Political and Economic Origins of Our Times (New York: Rinehart, 1944); PolanyiKarl, Trade and Market in the Early Empires (Glencoe, IL: The Free Press, 1957).
4.
For a fuller discussion of this distinction, see AckermanRobert W.BauerRaymond A., Corporate Social Responsiveness: The Modern Dilemma (Reston, VA: Reston, 1976), chapter 1; and FrederickWilliam C., “From CSR1 to CSR2: The Maturing of Business-and-Society Thought,” Working Paper 279 (Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh, 1978).
5.
“Issues Management: Preparing for Social Change,”Chemical Week (28 October 1981), pp. 46–51; CatheyPaul, “Industry has a New Advance Guard—Issues Managers,”Iron Age (23 April 1982), pp. 64–70; HanleyJohn W., “Monsanto's ‘Early Warning’ System,”Harvard Business Review (November/December 1981), pp. 107–122; and NewgrenKenneth E.CarrollArchie B., “Social Forecasting in U. S. Corporations—A Survey,”Long Range Planning (August 1979), pp. 59–64.
6.
NewgrenCarroll, op. cit., pp. 60 and 64.
7.
NovakMichaelCooperJohn W., (eds.), The Corporation: A Theological Inquiry (Washington D. C.: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, 1981); and NovakMichael, The Spirit of Democratic Capitalism (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1982).
8.
ChamberlainNeil W., The Limits of Corporate Responsibility (New York: Basic Books, 1973).
9.
VogelDavid, Lobbying the Corporation: Citizen Challenges to Business Authority (New York: Basic Books, 1978), p. 225.
10.
GreiderWilliam, “The Education of David Stockman,”The Atlantic Monthly (December 1981), pp. 27–54. Greider quotes Stockman, Reagan's director of the Office of Management and Budget, as stating: “Do you realize the greed that came to the forefront [in the battle over the President's economic program]? The hogs were really feeding. The greed level, the level of opportunism, just got out of control.” Stockman was referring to the corporate interests who advocated and largely won generous tax advantages in this legislative struggle. See also Robert Lekachman, Greed is Not Enough: Reaganomics (New York: Pantheon, 1982).
11.
McGuireE. PatrickWeberNathan, Business Voluntarism: Prospects for 1982, Research Bulletin 111 (New York: The Conference Board, n.d.).
12.
FlahertyMary Pat, “Big Business Bucks Back the Arts, but Firms Say They Can't Do It All,”Pittsburgh Press (November 1981).
13.
McGuireWeber, op. cit., p. 7.
14.
Business Week (6 July 1981), p. 27. Also, see Wall Street Journal (2 August 1982), p. 17.
15.
“Executives Still Support Reaganomics,”Business Week (26 April 1982), p. 20.
16.
ChamberlainNeil W., Remaking American Values: Challenge to a Business Society (New York: Basic Books, 1977). In his more recent Social Strategy and Corporate Structure (New York: Macmillan, 1982), Chamberlain seems to have abandoned, or at least ignored, this approach.
17.
The distinction between “intended values” and “adopted values” is made by EnglandGeorge W., The Manager and His Values (Cambridge, MA: Ballenger, 1975). See also William G. Scott and David K. Hart, Organizational America (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1979) for a critical view of organizational pressures to conform.
18.
A somewhat similar concept, labelled “social federation,” has been described by BruynSeveryn T. in The Social Economy: People Transforming Modern Business (New York: Wiley, 1977), chapters 5, 6, and 7. Bruyn's insightful discussion deserves the serious consideration of business and society scholars.
19.
Committee for Economic Development, Social Responsibilities of Business Corporations (New York: Committee for Economic Development, 1971), chapter 5.
20.
Committee for Economic Development, Redefining Government's Role in the Market System (New York: Committee for Economic Development, 1979). For a comparison of the contrasting philosophies of the 1971 (see ref. 19) and 1979 CED statements, see FrederickWilliam C., “Free Market vs. Social Responsibility: Decision Time at the CED,”California Management Review (Spring 1981), pp. 20–28.
