Neden Şirketlerin Sosyal Sorumluluğu: 21. Yuzyilda Yeni Bir Kavram

Why Corporate Social Responsibility: A New Concept In The 21st Century

Journal Name:

Publication Year:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author Name
Abstract (2. Language): 
Corporate social responsibility is not a new issue. The main aim of a company is to minimise the costs and maximize profits. On the other hand, ethical business people recognise their responsibility to the public and to themselves. Fulfilment of these responsibilities constitutes ethical and socially responsible behaviour. Although corporate social performance (CSP) has been used for several years in the business and society literature, in many cases it has been used synonymously with corporate social responsibility, corporate social responsiveness, or any other interaction between business and the social environment. This study will briefly examine the corporate social responsibility, the performance and reporting issues.
Abstract (Original Language): 
Sirketlerin sosyal sorumlulugu kavrami yeni degildir. Bir sirketin ana amaci en az maliyet ile en cok gelir elde etmektir. Ote taraftan etik degerlere onem veren isadamlari halka ve kendilerine karsi sorumluluklarinin da bilincinde olurlar. Bu sorumluluklarin yerine getirilmesi ahlaki ve sosyal sorumluluk davranisini olusturur. Sirketlerin Sosyal performansi kavrami is ve toplum literaturunde yillarca kullanilmis ise de cogunlukla bu kavram Sirketlerin sosyal sorumlulugu, sirketlerin sosyal activiteleri ya da is dunyasi ve sosyal cevre arasindaki iletisim kavramlari ile esanlamli olarak kullanilmistir. Bu makale kisaca Sirketlerin sosyal Sorumlulugu kavramini performans ve raporlama konularini ele alarak inceleyecektir.

JEL Codes:



Banarjee, B., Corporate Social Responsibility: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, Critical Sociology,
Vol. 34, No. 1, 51-79 (2008)
BITC Workshop, "Trends in Reporting," using data from www.CorporateRegister.com, access date
Bohlman, Herbert M. and Dundas, Mary J. (1999). The Legal Ethical and International Environment
of Business. West Educational Publishing, Cincinatti et al.
Campbell, J.L., 'Why Would Corporations Behave in Socially Responsible Ways? An Institutional
Theory of Corporate Social Responsibility' Academy of Management Review, 2007, Vol.
32, No. 3, 946-967
Daft, Richard L. and Marcic, Dorothy. (1998). Understanding management, Philadelphia et.al. The
Dryden Press.
Godfrey, P.C., Hatch, N.W., 'Researching Corporate Social Responsibility: An Agenda for the 21s t
Century' Journal of Business Ethics (2007) 70: 87-98
Handy, C. 'What's a business for?' (2003) Harvard Business Review on corporate social
responsibility: 65-82. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Hopkins, Michael. (2004). Corporate social responsibility: an issues paper. International Labour
Organization, Geneva
Jenkins, H. 'Small Business Champions for Corporate Social Responsibility' Journal of Business
Ethics (2006) 67:241-256
Kaku, R. 'The path of Kyosei' (2003) Harvard Business Review on corporate social responsibility:
105-130. Boston: Harvard Business School Press
Parker, L. (1986), "Polemical Themes in Social Accounting: A Scenario for Standard Setting",
Advances in Public Interest Accounting, Vol. 1, pp. 67 - 93
Pierick, E. ten, Beekman, V. et.al. (2004). A framework for analysing corporate social performance
Beyond the Wood model. The Hague, Agricultural Economics Research Institute (LEI),
Porter, M.E., Kramer, M.R., 'Strategy & Society, The Link Between Competitive Advantage and
Corporate Social Responsibility', Harvard Business Review, December 2006
Prahalad, C. K., & Hammond, A. 'Serving the world's poor, profitably' (2003) Harvard Business
Review on corporate social responsibility: 1-26. Boston: Harvard Business School Press
Preston, L.E. (Ed.), Research in corporate social performance and policy. Volume 10. JAI Press,
Greenwich (CT), 1988.
Seidler, L. & L. Seidler (1975), "Social Accounting: Theory, Issues, and Cases", Melville
Publishing Company, US.
Sethi, S.P. (1975). Dimensions of corporate social performance: An analytical framework.
California Management Review, 17, (3), 58-64.
Sethi, S.P. (1995). Introduction to AMR's special topic forum on shifting paradigms: Societal
expectations and corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 20, (1), 18¬
M.Tumay / Why Corporate Social Responsibility: A New Concept In The 21st Century
Schermerhon, John R. (2002). Management. New York et al. John Wiley & Sons Inc
Steg, L., C. Vlek, S. Lindenberg, T. Groot, H. Moll, T. Schoot Uiterkamp, and A. van Wit-
teloostuijn, (2003).Towards a comprehensive model of sustainable corporate performance.
Groningen :University of Groningen, Swanson, D.L. (1995). Addressing a theoretical problem by reorienting the corporate social
performance model. Academy of Management Review, 20, (1), 43-64. Waddock, S.A. & Graves, S.B. (1997b). Quality of management and quality of stakeholder
relations, are they synonymous? Business and Society, 36, (3), 250-279 Wartick, S.L. & Cochran, P.L. (1985). The evolution of the corporate social performance model.
Academy of Management Review, 10, (4), 758-769. Welford R, Frost S. 'Corporate social responsibility in Asian supply chains' (2006) Corporate
Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 13(3): 166-176. Wood, D.J. (1991). Corporate social performance revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16,
(4), 691-718.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com