Preface |
|
xi | |
|
|
xiii | |
|
|
xv | |
|
|
xvii | |
|
1 The Boundaries of Corporate Social Responsibility: A Managerial Perspective |
|
|
1 | (30) |
|
|
|
1 | (3) |
|
1.2 The Singularity of Corporations |
|
|
4 | (5) |
|
1.2.1 Unique Attributes of Corporations |
|
|
5 | (2) |
|
1.2.2 Fictitious Entity or Contractual Nexus? |
|
|
7 | (2) |
|
1.3 Dualisms and Dilemmas |
|
|
9 | (4) |
|
1.3.1 Recognizing Dualisms and Responding to Dilemmas |
|
|
9 | (1) |
|
1.3.2 Reframing Dualisms, Avoiding Dilemmas, and Negotiating Impasses |
|
|
10 | (1) |
|
1.3.3 Internal Stakeholders and Micro-level CSR Dilemmas |
|
|
11 | (2) |
|
1.4 Triple Bottom Lines and Trilemmas |
|
|
13 | (4) |
|
1.4.1 Triple Bottom Line Perspectives |
|
|
14 | (1) |
|
1.4.2 Corporate Trilemmas and Sensemaking |
|
|
15 | (2) |
|
1.5 The Boundaries of Corporate Social Responsibility |
|
|
17 | (5) |
|
1.5.1 Motivations for Corporate Social Responsibility |
|
|
18 | (1) |
|
1.5.2 Parallel Universes and Porous Boundaries |
|
|
19 | (3) |
|
|
22 | (9) |
|
|
24 | (7) |
|
2 Future-Focused Entrepreneurship Assessment (FFEA) |
|
|
31 | (68) |
|
|
|
32 | (5) |
|
|
32 | (3) |
|
2.1.2 Future-Proof Resilience of Companies and Society |
|
|
35 | (2) |
|
2.2 (Not) Ready for the Future |
|
|
37 | (5) |
|
2.2.1 The Eastman Kodak Case |
|
|
38 | (1) |
|
|
39 | (1) |
|
2.2.3 The Music Industry Case |
|
|
40 | (2) |
|
2.3 The Four Perspectives of Future-Focused Entrepreneurship Assessment |
|
|
42 | (6) |
|
2.3.1 Traveling toward the Future |
|
|
43 | (2) |
|
2.3.2 Company Perspectives |
|
|
45 | (2) |
|
2.3.3 Cumulative Perspectives |
|
|
47 | (1) |
|
|
48 | (17) |
|
2.4.1 The Five Modules of Future-Focused Entrepreneurship Assessment |
|
|
48 | (4) |
|
2.4.2 Six Topics to Each Module |
|
|
52 | (2) |
|
2.4.3 The Royal Dutch Shell Case |
|
|
54 | (8) |
|
2.4.4 Details of the FFEA System |
|
|
62 | (3) |
|
|
65 | (9) |
|
2.5.1 Assessment Principles |
|
|
65 | (2) |
|
2.5.2 The FFEA Assessment |
|
|
67 | (1) |
|
2.5.2.1 Individual scoring |
|
|
67 | (1) |
|
2.5.2.2 Consensus meeting |
|
|
67 | (4) |
|
2.5.3 The Results, or: What You Get |
|
|
71 | (1) |
|
2.5.4 MSPOE: From Mission to Strategy to Policy to Operations to Evaluation to Mission |
|
|
72 | (2) |
|
|
74 | (6) |
|
2.6.1 The Tilburg Mentaal Case |
|
|
74 | (3) |
|
|
77 | (3) |
|
|
80 | (6) |
|
2.7.1 An Extension for Topic S1: The CSR Motivation Mix Assessment |
|
|
81 | (1) |
|
2.7.2 An Extension for Topic 14: STELES, The Self-Test of Leadership Styles |
|
|
82 | (1) |
|
2.7.3 An Extension for Topics P4 and 04: RESFIA+D, or the Seven Competences |
|
|
83 | (1) |
|
2.7.4 An Extension for Topic 16: The FFEA Certificate for Future-Proof Resilience |
|
|
84 | (2) |
|
2.8 Origins and Theoretical Backgrounds of FFEA |
|
|
86 | (4) |
|
|
86 | (1) |
|
2.8.2 Quality Management; Environmental Management; CSR |
|
|
87 | (1) |
|
2.8.3 AISHE: Assessment and Certification of Sustainability in Higher Education |
|
|
88 | (2) |
|
|
90 | (9) |
|
|
91 | (8) |
|
3 Corporate Social Responsibility: The Case of East Timor Multinationals |
|
|
99 | (48) |
|
|
|
|
|
100 | (3) |
|
3.2 Theoretical Framework: Corporate Social Responsibility Theories |
|
|
103 | (11) |
|
3.2.1 The Stakeholder Theory |
|
|
103 | (5) |
|
3.2.2 The Institutional Theory |
|
|
108 | (3) |
|
3.2.3 The Theory of Legitimacy |
|
|
111 | (2) |
|
3.2.4 Multiple Approaches |
|
|
113 | (1) |
|
|
114 | (7) |
|
3.3.1 Procedure and Description of the Data Collection Instrument |
|
|
114 | (2) |
|
|
116 | (5) |
|
|
121 | (10) |
|
3.4.1 Identifying the Stakeholders |
|
|
121 | (3) |
|
3.4.2 Balancing Moral and Economic Motivations in CSR |
|
|
124 | (3) |
|
3.4.3 Pursuing Legitimacy and the License to Operate |
|
|
127 | (3) |
|
3.4.4 Adjusting Parent-company Policies to Local Needs |
|
|
130 | (1) |
|
|
131 | (16) |
|
|
133 | (14) |
|
4 Gender Diversity and Equality in the Boardroom: Impacts of Gender Quota Implementation in Portugal |
|
|
147 | (34) |
|
|
|
|
148 | (1) |
|
4.2 Theoretical Framework |
|
|
149 | (5) |
|
4.2.1 Gender Quotas in the Boardroom |
|
|
149 | (1) |
|
|
149 | (1) |
|
4.2.1.2 Quotas: Controversies and dilemmas |
|
|
150 | (3) |
|
|
153 | (1) |
|
|
154 | (20) |
|
|
154 | (2) |
|
|
156 | (5) |
|
4.3.3 Legislative Framework in Portugal |
|
|
161 | (1) |
|
4.3.4 Analysis of the Interview Results |
|
|
162 | (1) |
|
4.3.4.1 Perceptions of gender equality |
|
|
162 | (3) |
|
4.3.4.2 Perceptions of gender diversity impacts |
|
|
165 | (1) |
|
|
166 | (5) |
|
4.3.5 Discussion of Results |
|
|
171 | (3) |
|
|
174 | (7) |
|
|
175 | (3) |
|
|
178 | (3) |
|
5 Reconstructing CSR in the Construction Industry |
|
|
181 | (32) |
|
|
|
|
|
181 | (3) |
|
5.2 Theoretical Underpinnings |
|
|
184 | (6) |
|
5.2.1 Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) |
|
|
184 | (1) |
|
5.2.2 History and Nature of Corporate Social Responsibility in Ghana |
|
|
185 | (1) |
|
5.2.3 Factors that Drive CSR in Ghana |
|
|
186 | (1) |
|
5.2.4 Sectorial Analysis of CSR Activities in Ghana |
|
|
187 | (2) |
|
5.2.5 Institutional and Regulatory Framework of CSR in Ghana |
|
|
189 | (1) |
|
|
190 | (1) |
|
5.4 Results and Discussion |
|
|
191 | (14) |
|
5.4.1 Respondent Demographics (Section 1 of the Instrument) |
|
|
191 | (1) |
|
5.4.2 Perspectives on CSR among Construction Workers (Section 2 of the Instrument) |
|
|
192 | (1) |
|
5.4.2.1 Knowledge and conceptualization of CSR |
|
|
192 | (3) |
|
5.4.2.2 CSR direction of construction firms in Ghana |
|
|
195 | (2) |
|
5.4.2.3 Drivers of CSR in the construction industry |
|
|
197 | (1) |
|
5.4.2.4 Nature of firm's operation |
|
|
198 | (1) |
|
5.4.2.5 Environmental sustainability factors |
|
|
198 | (1) |
|
5.4.2.6 Stakeholder and legal and institutional pressures |
|
|
199 | (1) |
|
5.4.2.7 Humanitarian and Human Rights reasons |
|
|
200 | (1) |
|
5.4.2.8 Management discretion |
|
|
201 | (1) |
|
5.4.3 Profession's Influence on Firms' CSR Practice (Section 3 of the Instrument) |
|
|
202 | (1) |
|
5.4.3.1 The influence of profession on respondents' conceptualization of CSR |
|
|
202 | (2) |
|
5.4.3.2 The influence of respondents' profession on firms' direction of CSR |
|
|
204 | (1) |
|
5.5 Implication and Conclusion |
|
|
205 | (8) |
|
|
207 | (6) |
|
6 Work-Family Conciliation Policies: Answering to Corporate Social Responsibility -- A Case Study |
|
|
213 | (20) |
|
|
Carolina Feliciana Machado |
|
|
|
214 | (1) |
|
6.2 Conciliatory Work-Family Organizational Policies |
|
|
215 | (3) |
|
6.3 Methodological Options |
|
|
218 | (1) |
|
6.4 Case Study: Analysis and Discussion of Results |
|
|
219 | (10) |
|
6.4.1 Company Characterization |
|
|
219 | (1) |
|
6.4.2 Human Resource Characterization |
|
|
220 | (1) |
|
6.4.3 Human Resource Management Practices |
|
|
221 | (1) |
|
6.4.4 Diversity Management |
|
|
222 | (2) |
|
6.4.5 Organizational Policies for Work-Family Conciliation |
|
|
224 | (5) |
|
|
229 | (4) |
|
|
230 | (3) |
Index |
|
233 | (6) |
About the Editors |
|
239 | |