¶ … Corporate Social Responsibility Programs Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) programs are effective forms of management that directly and indirectly impact the "social, environmental and economic environment in which" the corporation functions (Castka, Bamber, Sharp, 2005, p. vii). In this context, corporations are viewed by societies as influential in the development of a "better world" (Friedman, Miles, 2002, p. 1). By using an ethical foundation for a business model, corporations have gained substantial market share and public trust because they are viewed as being good for the environment and for communities (as well as delivering a good product) while other companies have come under fire and social pressure for not living up to an ethical standard (Pearce, Doh, 2005). The factors that affect the implementation of CSR programs can range from governmental standards to stakeholder involvement to moral and ethical cultures (or lack thereof) within the corporate entity (AnyangoOoko, 2014). This paper will discuss these various factors and show how some act as facilitators towards implementation of CSR while others act as barriers.

Adopting a "spirit of mission" (Samaan, Verneuil, 2009) can be one of the best facilitators towards implementation of CSR. A spirit of mission within an organization creates an atmosphere of collective consciousness in which everyone at every level is a willing participant in the company's movement towards an ethical goal and objective. The company's aim, whether to provide a service or produce a product, is deemed beneficial to society, and the achievement of this aim is effected by way of ethical means, such as a virtue system or culture within the corporation/organization. This means providing guidance (corporate guidance for stakeholders) in terms of the value and importance of organizational culture maintenance and quality management. From a top-down perspective, this includes two-way communication flows and a theoretical model such as transactional management in order to facilitate internal growth in virtue behavior and external growth in community outreach and the maintaining of community/governmental standards (in terms of accounting, environmental waste, etc.).

Organizational discipline and "spirit of mission" are intimately linked in an organization's successful operation (Samaan, Vernueil, 2009) and greatly impact the implementation of CSR programs. The spirit of mission is collective in the sense that it is the motivating factor, the common interest, among individuals within an organization, driving them to achieve a specific aim or common good. Each individual adds to or takes away from the total spirit of mission. An apt metaphor may be found in the idea that each individual is a cylinder in an engine. If all cylinders are firing, working together and according to the precepts to which they are bound, the spirit of mission can be said to be operating optimally. The metaphor may be expanded in the sense that other factors contribute to the successful operation of an engine. However, for the purpose of this study, the essential "spirit" is such that it represents a guiding force or intelligence, without which no operation can succeed. When a discernible spirit is manifested, the surrounding community and consumer public are more likely to take note and show their appreciation, as the manifestation of a "spirit" demonstrates corporate social responsibility.

In organizations where the "spirit" is perceived to be reckless, say in a company like Enron, for instance, no CSR is demonstrated. As in the case of Enron, there was considerable irresponsibility in the keeping of financial records and oversight as the "spirit" of mission within the corporation was to get-rich-quick its way to the top. Some perceived this as a good, while others like Sherron Watkins did not. Conflict within an organization inevitably arises when the mission is perceived differently by two or more groups within the organization. One may accuse the other of lacking the right spirit. Aims may differ as a result and the corporation loses both cohesion and any grasp of CSR in the eyes of the public.

The idea of spirit of mission is, of course, thousands of years old. Sun Tzu (2010, p. 37) wrote, "He will win whose army is animated with the same spirit throughout all its rank." This idea is still commonly held today although generically and generally used in simplistic expressions, as in: team spirit, esprit de corps, community of interests, group spirit, etc. Regardless of the exact term, the idea is consistent in the sense of an entity (organization) rooted in achieving the common good, which is a notion that goes beyond the borders...

Thus, when NAFTA made it so that companies could go overseas for cheap labor, the level of corporate social responsibility that was displayed fell through the floor. Today, one of the talking points of front-running Republican candidate Trump is that his aim is to make companies more accountable and to bring jobs back home. This would line up well with the program of CSR because it would illustrate how the common good of a society is interwoven with its business practices. Thus, relaxed trade laws that tempt companies away from a desire to unite themselves to the national good is one barrier to the affective implementation of CSR -- and if Trump wants to be true to his promises, then ending the NAFTA will be a positive first step.
Another factor that affects the implementation of CSR is whether or not a company has an effective system of organizational discipline. Enron did not and its level of CSR, whatever it was, quickly fell apart. Organizations which suffer from corruption from within have failed to adopt a right spirit, a system of ethics, a habit of rightful acting and thinking, or a habit of virtue. A discussion of the merit of virtue ethics could coincide with a discussion of CSR because it is ethics which drives the mission, and as Samaan and Verneuil show in their study of the U.S. Coast Guard's response to Hurricane Katrina, it is this "spirit of mission" or level of corporate social responsibility that allowed them to be one of the only successful responding organizations at the time of that tragedy. Thus, the best recommended course of action for leaders responding to change in an organization would be to develop a "spirit of mission" that is ethical in the sense that it supports transparency and accountability.

In the U.S., Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) demonstrated a complete lack of CSR when it set aside law and ethics when it engaged in price-fixing of the lysine market with its competitors. Price-fixing is illegal in the U.S. and when the FBI was alerted to the actions of ADM, a sting operation was put into effect. Top executives at ADM were found guilty and sentenced to prison (Eichenwald, 2000). Here is an example of a business failing implement an effective CSR program within the accepted parameters of society's ethical/moral system and the codified laws of the nation. Instead of adhering to an ethical code, it participated in the act of dividing up market share, violating the trust of the U.S. government and costing itself millions of dollars in fines. It also contributed to the loss of the public's trust in large corporate entities as it served as a perfect example of how corporations are primarily concerned with their own good first and not that of the average citizen or consumer.

The reason that law and ethics are so readily flaunted in corporate systemology is fundamentally simple: there is a lack of respect either for the value of law or for the value of the other side of the negotiating party. Oftentimes, unsuccessful implementations of CSR will show that corporations view their competitors and even their consumers with distrust, trying to judge how the counterpart is taking advantage of him. This mentality goes against the principle of mutual respect and the spirit of collaboration that is so helpful in successful CSR implementations.

What fosters this lack of respect? Graham's (1983) study hints at the different cultural mentalities that breed unsuccessful negotiating skills. In America, for instance, Graham cites representational bargaining strategies as the most fundamental in American negotiations. By contrast, Brazilian negotiations are hotbeds of deceptive bargaining strategies, utilized to create outcomes that favor only one side of the negotiating table. Graham examines how cultural mentalities affect the way negotiators respect law, ethics, and the counterpart at the negotiating table.

In Leung and Tong's (2004) study of corporate models, they discuss culture as the arbiter of law and ethics. In this sense, it may be argued that the development of culture is essential in the maintaining of a law-abiding and ethical mentality, which can then be used to support successful, principled negotiations. Leung and Tong state that "cultural differences in justice practices may constitute significant barriers to intercultural negotiation" (Leung, Tong, 2004, p. 330). Because of cultural differences, however, (as the example of Russia's Gazprom and its European counterparts, for instance, shows), ideas of justice, fairness, law and ethics can actually become barriers. One side of the party, for instance,…