{"title":"When Public and Business Interests Collide: An Integrated Approach to the Altruism-Instrumentalism Tension and Corporate Social Responsibility Theory","authors":"S. Ofori-Parku","doi":"10.1080/23736992.2020.1857254","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article attends to the debate of what motivations – instrumental or altruistic – should drive corporate social responsibility (CSR) decisions and practice; I offer an integrated instrumental and duty-based framework. While the win-win instrumentalism that underlies much of CSR practice is problematic and needs addressing, the notion of altruism is also flawed. Such an application of deontological principles, while well-intentioned, is a) based on a misreading of Kant’s humanity formula, b) does not lend itself to the inherent duality of the CSR concept, and c) constrains the quest and need to mainstream ethical CSR. Instead, I propose that a more pertinent question is how to address firms’ tendency to choose those societal issues that yield private benefits. In this regard, drawing on W.D. Ross’ moral philosophy, I provide a three-level decision criterion for addressing situations where firms’ private interests and social aspirations collide.","PeriodicalId":45979,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Media Ethics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Media Ethics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23736992.2020.1857254","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
ABSTRACT This article attends to the debate of what motivations – instrumental or altruistic – should drive corporate social responsibility (CSR) decisions and practice; I offer an integrated instrumental and duty-based framework. While the win-win instrumentalism that underlies much of CSR practice is problematic and needs addressing, the notion of altruism is also flawed. Such an application of deontological principles, while well-intentioned, is a) based on a misreading of Kant’s humanity formula, b) does not lend itself to the inherent duality of the CSR concept, and c) constrains the quest and need to mainstream ethical CSR. Instead, I propose that a more pertinent question is how to address firms’ tendency to choose those societal issues that yield private benefits. In this regard, drawing on W.D. Ross’ moral philosophy, I provide a three-level decision criterion for addressing situations where firms’ private interests and social aspirations collide.