In 2006, Carroll and Buchholtz’s
study of corporate social responsibilities defined that philanthropic
responsibilities are “being a good corporate citizen (P.38).” That is,
entrepreneurs should make contributions to the community. The philanthropic
responsibilities are the public’s expectations of current business. Therefore,
they become a kind of business strategies, which makes the corporations have
competitive vantage. All of entrepreneurs want the win-win situation, which
makes them get both economic and social advantages. However, only engaging in corporate
philanthropy do make you step forward this situation.
There is an idea about “community
involvement (P.268)” in philanthropy, which is mentioned in Corporate Social Responsibility (Crane, Matten
& Spence, 2008). Entrepreneurs and the general public are members of the
community. If entrepreneurs are voluntary to help the society progress, it would
not only have positive impact on the society, but also benefit the companies. The
process of achieving the business success involves many elements, the most
important one of which is “people.” J. Michael Cook, retired leader of Deloitte
& Touche, argued that “If we have good educational systems, good safety,
and good activity programs for young people, we’re going to be much more
effective in attracting and retaining quality people.” (P.472, Carroll &
Buchholtz) Therefore, entrepreneurs need to serve the general public with
charity for financial and social goals. As the UK retailer Marks and Spencer
said, “We have long believed that healthy high streets need healthy back
streets.” (P.267, Crane, Matten & Spence)
According
to Living Water Social Ventures, it claims that corporate social
responsibilities are chances entrepreneurs need to catch. There are five categories:
“serving underserved market/ customer, providing socially responsible product/
service, creating employment for underprivileged people, purchasing from local
or smallholder providers, and reinventing value chain for greater competitiveness.”
(Living Water Social Ventures website, 2011) Some people are disadvantaged
minority in the society, so the competent people should try their best to make
up the others’ weakness. For example, Children Are Us Foundation is an
organization, which helps people with disabilities find their value and
confidence and makes them live by themselves.
According
to The Competitive Advantage of Corporate
Philanthropy (Porter & Kramer, 2002), “Charitable contributions by U.S.
companies fell 14.5% in real dollars last year, and over the last 15 years,
corporate giving as a percentage of profits has dropped by 50%.” It is clear
that entrepreneurs’ aspiration to provide charitable contributions for
supporting community keeps decreasing. Most entrepreneurs think that charitable
contribution is a wasteful action. However, if they can understand how to do it
well, it would become the effective advertising way to promote companies’ image
and quickly penetrate the community. After all, “competing on price and
corporate citizenship is smarter than competing on price alone.” (P.271, Crane,
Matten & Spence)
References:
1. Buchholtz,
A. K. & Carroll, A. B. (2006). Business, society, and stakeholders:
Corporate citizenship: social responsibility, responsiveness, and performance; External
stakeholder issues: Business and community stakeholders. In D. Shaut (Ed.), Business & Society: Ethics and
Stakeholder Management, 6th edition (pp.
29-60; 471-500). Mason, Ohio: South-Western.
2. Crane,
A., Matten D. & Spence L. J. (Eds.). (2008). Understanding CSR: CSR in the
community. Corporate Social
Responsibility, 1st edition (pp. 265-283). Abingdon, Oxon:
Routledge.
3. Chen,
Y. C. (2011). Social business’ chance.
Retrieved December 3, 2013, from Living Water Social Ventures Web site: http://www.livingwater.asia/3526440670.html
4. Kramer,
M. R. & Porter, M. E. (2002). The
Competitive Advantage of Corporate Philanthropy. Retrieved October 20, 2013, from Expert2business.com: http://www.expert2business.com/itson/Porter%20HBR%20Corporate%20philantropy.pdf
In the first paragraph:
回覆刪除1. Page number should put outside the quotation mark
2. All of entrepreneurs→ delete “of”
3. However, only engaging→ add “by” between only and engaging
4. step forward this situation → add “to” between forward and this
In the second paragraph:
1. same as the first item above
2. The process of achieving the business success → The process of achieving successful business
3. As the UK retailer Marks and Spencer “said” → commented
In the third paragraph:
1. According to Living Water Social Ventures, it claims that corporate social responsibilities are chances entrepreneurs need to catch. → According to Living Water Social Ventures, corporate social responsibilities are chances that entrepreneurs need to catch.
2. About the five categories below, make them into bullet point(? For example, (1) serving underserved market/ customer
3. For example, Children Are Us Foundation is an organization, which helps people with disabilities find their value and confidence and makes them live by themselves → For example, Children Are Us Foundation is an organization, which helps people with disabilities “to” find their value and confidence thus assisting them with their living
In the fourth paragraph:
1. You should move (Porter & Kramer, 2002) behind the quoting sentence
2. (P.271, Crane, Matten & Spence) → (Crane, Matten & Spence, year? p.271)
If u can’t understand what I’m talking about, I have sent u Word by email, it’s clearly in that way…
Thank you for correction!
刪除The half of your comment disappears.
回覆刪除I will make my opinion more obvious.
Thank you!