Kate Trajkova
Marko Andonov
Zoran Mihajloski


University American College Skopje, Street: Treta Makedonska Brigada no. 60 Skopje, Macedonia

2nd International Scientific Conference on Recent Advances in Information Technology, Tourism, Economics, Management and Agriculture – ITEMA 2018 – Graz, Austria, November 8, 2018, CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS published by the Association of Economists and Managers of the Balkans, Belgrade, Serbia; ISBN 978-86-80194-13-4

Abstract

In conditions of strong global pressure from the socio-economic and environmental demands of the environment, the transformative model of creating social values becomes a growing challenge for the business community. The transformative approach to socially responsible action focuses on the macro (national) level implies the interconnection of social-economic and environmental systems, for which, through deeper changes in national strategies, management is optimized for achieving higher changes in the human and eco-system. This level of approach has the key to essential changes at the societal, organizational and individual levels. The transformative approach to CSR, known as the DNA model for CSR 2.0 is the new holistic approach to strategizing the concept in the current economic conditions – ages of responsibility. The article analyses and evaluates CSR 2.0, and also shows basic differences between the classic and new approach for the concept strategy.

The focus of scientific interest is degree of creating CSR policies based on the DNA 2.0 model. Research was conducted in 155 Macedonian companies from a deliberate target sample of companies. According to the principles of general methodology and specifics of the subject, research was conducted on two levels: theoretical and empirical level.

Key words

CSR policy, CSR strategic dimension, Social shared values


References

  1. Porter, M. E. and M. R. Kramer: (2002). ‘The Competitive Advantage of Corporate Philanthropy’, Harvard Business Review
  2. Porter, M. and M. Kramer: 2006, “Strategy & Society”, Harvard Business Review 84(12), 78–92
  3. Porter, Michael E., and Mark R. Kramer. “Creating Shared Value”, Harvard Business Review 89, nos. 1-2 (January–February 2011): 62–77
  4. Militaru, G. and Ionescu, S (2006). THE COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY. U.P.B. Sci. Bull., Series D, Vol. 68, No. 2, 2006
  5. Zadek, S. (2006). Corporate responsibility and competitiveness at the macro level: responsible competitiveness: reshaping global markets through responsible business practices. Corporate Governance, 6(4), pp. 334-348.
  6. Gaberman, B. (2007) A GLOBAL OVERVIEW OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY. The John D. Gerhart Center for Philanthropy and Civic Engagement American University in Cairo Spring 2008.
  7. Jones, R. G., & George, M. J. (2008) Contemporary management. Global communication.
  8. Visser, W (2006). Revisiting Carroll‘s CSR pyramid, Corporate citizenship in developing countries: new partnership perspectives, p. 29.
  9. Weaver, G. R., Treviño, L. K., & Cochran, P. L. (1999). Corporate ethics programs as control systems: Influences of executive commitment and environmental factors. Academy of Management Journal, 42: 41-57
  10. Bernardis, De L., Carli, L., Maiolini, R., and Braccini, A., M. (2011). Corporate Social Responsibility in Private and Public Sector, Sustainability of business versus effectiveness of action. (Available at: Academia.edu)
  11. Stabel, C.B., Fjeldstad ØD (1998) Configuring value for competitive advantage: on chains, shops and networks. Strategic Management Journal, 19(55): 413-437. Bernardis, L., Maiolini, R., and Braccini, A. M. Corporate Social Responsibility in Private and Public Sector Sustainability of business versus effectiveness of action. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/1131793/Corporate_Social_Responsibility_in_Private_and_Public_Sector_Sustainability_of_business_versus_effectiveness_of_action (16.11.2013)
  12. Lamberti, L & Noci, G. (2012) The relationship between CSR and corporate strategy in medium-sized companies: evidence from Italy. Business Ethics 21 (4):402-416 (2012)
  13. Fuller T. & Tian, Y (2006). Social and Symbolic Capital and Responsible Entrepreneurship: An Empirical Investigation of SME Narratives.Journal of Business Ethics 67 (3):287 – 304.

 

trajkova_andonov_mihajloski_corporate_challenge_for_transformative_approach_in_process_of_social_value_creation_pp_761-772

Association of Economists and Managers of the Balkans – UdEkoM Balkan
179 Ustanicka St, 11000 Belgrade, Republic of Serbia