CSR as a Marketing and HR Tool: Critical Review

Introduction

This paper presents a critical review of the subject known as corporate social responsibility (CSR). Rather than offering a general literature survey, it focuses on specific analytical points — most notably, a comparison and contrast between the marketing and human resources departments with respect to CSR practices and initiatives. The purpose of this compare-and-contrast approach is to critically evaluate whether CSR can function as a marketing tool or whether it typically represents a net drain on the bottom line. The discussion draws on academic theories, models, research, and case studies. While adhering to the agreed-upon tenets of CSR does require adjustment and strategic positioning, it is entirely possible to do so — and when businesses attract and retain like-minded customers as a result, CSR can become a genuine marketing and sales advantage.

The Business Ethics Foundation of CSR

Corporate social responsibility has become a major focal point through which many business practices are assessed and critiqued. However, the topic is itself preceded by a broader discussion about the role of business: what it is supposed to accomplish and what is ethical for it to do. This wider paradigm is best typified by the arguments and debates between Milton Friedman and his critics regarding the proper purpose of the firm. Friedman held that the one and only priority of running a business well was generating as much profit and shareholder value as possible while remaining within the constraints of the law. Many of the rules and guidelines now associated with CSR, however, are less about legal compliance and more about ethical conduct.

To use an extreme example: a gas station sharply raising the price of gasoline when a hurricane is approaching could be done to maximize revenues and profits. Even in jurisdictions where price gouging is technically legal, such behavior is viewed extremely dimly because it is seen as exploiting an emergency situation in which demand is artificially high. Since lives are at risk and market conditions are abnormal, most people would consider such gouging unethical and impermissible. To be fair, most CSR questions are not nearly that clear-cut. A more moderate example would be whether a pharmaceutical company should offer low-cost or free doses of its drug to those who cannot afford it. Companies are not legally required to do so, but healthcare is a field where a lack of charitable generosity can be a significant political and reputational liability. While such charity does weigh on the bottom line, many hold that it is simply the right thing to do — and the fact that quality of life and even life itself are at stake makes this argument more compelling (Nguyen & Boubaker, 2014).

Marketing, Human Resources, and CSR Alignment

With this foundation in mind, CSR should be examined through the lens of different job functions and departments within a business — specifically how they perceive, react to, and integrate with CSR practices. Even when clear strategic management objectives exist around CSR, human resources and marketing can find themselves at odds when it comes to employing CSR as a business and marketing tactic. The general task of human resources personnel is to hire, terminate, and administer the affairs of employees. Depending on the organization, the HR department may or may not hold significant strategic influence — but this influence tends to be more prominent in firms that take CSR seriously. Alongside HR sits the marketing function, whose general task is to market and sell the firm's goods or services in ways that maximize customer acquisition, retention, and revenue (Chernev & Blair, 2015).

Both human resources and marketing may be tempted to regard CSR as something done for appearances rather than something that genuinely boosts customer count or improves the bottom line. While that perception may have had some basis before CSR became as widespread as it is today, much has changed. What cannot be permitted, however, is for these two departments — or any other critical functional area — to act in a disparate or misaligned manner with respect to a major strategic initiative like CSR. The actions, procedures, and priorities of both departments must be aligned with the firm's broader strategic objectives, which in turn must be strongly linked to the principles of CSR.

For example, a firm that is genuinely committed to CSR would hire people who support or actively lead its CSR frameworks, while the marketing department would simultaneously publicize the CSR progress and values the firm demonstrates. Both efforts must occur together, because any proven or even perceived incongruence between a firm's stated values and its underlying behavior will invite criticism from CSR advocates who will assail the firm for being disingenuous and dishonest (Johnson & Holub, 2003).

Conclusion

In the end, it is clear that both marketing and human resources departments would be wise to take corporate social responsibility seriously. At the same time, not all businesses and consumers are currently on board with CSR. Much like many other aspects of management, the CSR paradigm is far from uniform. Even so, it is the responsibility of many stakeholders — within and outside firms — to shift that status in a more positive and sustainable direction. Only through the creation of new cultural and business norms can CSR truly take flight. Even amid the mixed picture of consumer and corporate engagement, there is an ethical imperative to pursue CSR diligently and comprehensively — and there is a genuine financial incentive to do so as well. That incentive will only grow as CSR becomes more deeply integrated into personal and organizational culture.

References

Chernev, A., & Blair, S. (2015). Doing well by doing good: The benevolent halo of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Consumer Research, 41(6), 1412–1425.

Fenwick, T., & Bierema, L. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: Issues for human resource development professionals. International Journal of Training & Development, 12(1), 24–35.

Ingenbleek, P., Meulenberg, M., & Van Trijp, H. (2015). Buyer social responsibility: A general concept and its implications for marketing management. Journal of Marketing Management, 31(13/14), 1428–1448.

Jamali, D., El Dirani, A., & Harwood, I. (2015). Exploring human resource management roles in corporate social responsibility: The CSR-HRM co-creation model. Business Ethics: A European Review, 24(2), 125–143.

Jeffers, A., Lin, B., Romero, S., & DeGaetano, L. (2014). Is it time for companies to capitalize on sustainability? CPA Journal, 84(3), 6.

Johnson, J., & Holub, M. (2003). Questioning organizational legitimacy: The case of U.S. expatriates. Journal of Business Ethics, 47(3), 269–293.

Mishra, S., & Modi, S. (2016). Corporate social responsibility and shareholder wealth: The role of marketing capability. Journal of Marketing, 80(1), 26–46.

Nguyen, D., & Boubaker, S. (2014). Corporate governance & corporate social responsibility: Emerging markets focus. World Scientific Publishing Company.

Smith, N., Palazzo, G., & Bhattacharya, C. (2010). Marketing's consequences: Stakeholder marketing and supply chain corporate social responsibility issues. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20(4), 617–641.