Walt Disney Company CSR Strategy and Stakeholder Analysis
This paper examines the corporate social responsibility (CSR) strategy of the Walt Disney Company through the lenses of Freeman's stakeholder theory and Porter and Kramer's shared value framework. It begins with an overview of Disney's history, global scope, and financial scale, then maps the company's key stakeholders using both narrow and wide definitions. The analysis evaluates Disney's existing CSR initiatives—including environmental conservation, community volunteerism, and diversity representation—while identifying gaps in worker rights and theme park safety. The paper concludes with an ethical implementation plan addressing the alligator safety crisis at Disney's Florida theme park, offering practical managerial recommendations grounded in the Josephson Institute's six pillars of character.
- Company Overview: Disney's history, global scale, and financial profile
- Stakeholder Mapping: Narrow and wide stakeholder categories applied to Disney
- Corporate Social Responsibility Strategy: Disney's CSR initiatives evaluated against academic frameworks
- CSR Gaps and Alternative Strategies: Worker rights, safety weaknesses, and proposed improvements
- Implementing an Ethical Plan: Ethical analysis of alligator safety crisis with recommendations
- Conclusion: Disney's path to stronger CSR reputation through responsible action
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Grounds the analysis in named academic frameworks — Freeman's stakeholder theory and Porter and Kramer's shared value model — applying each systematically to a real company rather than describing them in the abstract.
- Balances praise for Disney's CSR achievements with clear identification of specific weaknesses (worker rights, park safety), avoiding a one-sided assessment.
- Moves logically from description (company overview, stakeholder mapping) to evaluation (CSR analysis) to prescription (ethical implementation plan), giving the paper a coherent three-part arc.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates applied stakeholder analysis: it first defines the theoretical distinction between narrow and wide stakeholders (Freeman), then populates each category with Disney-specific actors and explains the reciprocal relationship each has with the firm. This two-level mapping — theory first, application second — is a reliable structure for any business ethics assignment that asks students to connect course concepts to a real organization.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a factual company profile (history, financials, global footprint), moves into stakeholder identification and classification, then evaluates Disney's published CSR performance against the Zadek and Porter-Kramer frameworks. A dedicated section identifies CSR gaps and proposes alternatives, and the paper closes with an ethical dilemma case study (alligator fatality) complete with barriers analysis and two concrete managerial recommendations. The bibliography follows standard academic format.
Company Overview
The Walt Disney Company began as a small cartoon studio in 1923. It produced its first sound-synchronized short five years later and its first full-color cartoon short in 1932, for which it received an Academy Award. From there the company catapulted to greatness with hits such as Snow White, Dumbo, and Pinocchio. Disney expanded into live-action production, television, theme parks, and global productions over the decades, with Walt Disney World among its major attractions. It grew the Disney Channel, merged with ABC in 1996, purchased Pixar in 2006, acquired Marvel Entertainment in 2009, and acquired LucasFilm in 2012, rebooting the Star Wars franchise.1 The company appeals to a broad-based audience ranging from young children to older generations, with cross-cultural demographic appeal as well. Its vision is to be a "leading diversified international family entertainment and media enterprise," encompassing media networks, parks, resorts, studios, Broadway shows, consumer products (toys, games, books, and videos), and interactive media.2
The company employs 180,000 persons in over 40 countries around the world.3 Its 2015 financial results included revenue of US$52.46 billion, net income of US$8.38 billion, operating income of US$14.68 billion, and total assets of US$88.18 billion. The company is global in every sense of the word, with parks in Europe, Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and the Americas, and an audience reach just as wide. Its headquarters are located in Burbank, California.
Bibliography
Brown, J., and Nuttall, R. Beyond Corporate Social Responsibility: Integrated External Engagement. 2013.
Business Review. "The Walt Disney Company — A Leader in Corporate Social Responsibility." 2013. Web. Accessed 5 Jun 2016 from
Freeman, E. R. "A Stakeholder Theory of Modern Corporation." In L. P. Hartmann (ed.), Perspectives in Business Ethics, 3rd edition, pp. 112–122. New York, 2005.
Gioia, Dennis. "Pinto Fires and Personal Ethics: A Script Analysis of Missed Opportunities." Journal of Business Ethics 11, no. 5–6 (1992).
Josephson Institute. Making Ethical Decisions: The Six Pillars of Character.
Porter, M. E., and Kramer, M. R. "The Big Idea: Creating Shared Value." Harvard Business Review 89, no. 1 (2011): 4.
Walt Disney Company. About — History. Web. Accessed 5 Jun 2016 from https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/about/.
Walt Disney Company. Our Businesses. Web. Accessed 5 Jun 2016 from https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/about/#our-businesses.
Walt Disney Company. Global Footprint. Web. Accessed 5 Jun 2016 from http://disneycareers.com/en/about-disney/global-footprint/.
Walt Disney Company. Citizenship Performance Summary, 2014. Web. Accessed 5 Jun 2016 from
"You'll Never Guess the One Woman Who Owns More of Disney Than Anyone Else." Motley Fool. Web. Accessed 5 Jun 2016 from
Zadek, S. "The Path to Corporate Social Responsibility." Harvard Business Review 82, no. 12 (2004): 126.
Zadek, S. The Civil-Learning Tool. 2004.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.