CSR and the Neoliberal Imagination

Building A Beyond Corporate Social Responsibility Conceptual Model Based on Harmonic Cosmological Philosophy and Priest Heliocentric Al Ghazali

“…. Third, corporate responsibility activities to society reflect neoliberalism, and CSR has explicitly turned into a proportion of economic value or Economic Value Proportion (Vallentin & Murillo, 2019).…”

“…CSV arises due to friction and tension between business problems and social problems, and the intersection of corporate power and social impact includes resources, expertise, and management to create favorable social conditions rather than philanthropic institutions and organizations. Porter and Kramer claim as quoted by Vallentin & Murillo (2019) that corporate success and social welfare can provide opportunities for corporate success and social progress. The framework of the Creation of Shared Value (CSV) reflects policies and operating practices that enhance the competitiveness of companies while advancing economic and social conditions in the communities in which companies operate but Creation of Shared Value (CSV) has rational limitations.…”

Ideologies of Corporate Responsibility: From Neoliberalism to “Varieties of Liberalism”

“…Against sweeping characterizations of contemporary CSR as neoliberal CSR (Djelic & Etchanchu, 2015; see also Kinderman, 2011; Midttun, 2005; Sadler & Lloyd, 2009; Shamir, 2008), we argue for the need to consider the “varieties of liberalism” that are at play in CSR (Vallentin & Murillo, 2019). Hence, we approach CSR as a liberal conception, and we propose that there is a variety of liberal imaginations that lend support to and construe CSR in different ways.…”

“…Our constitutive focus on liberalism is supported by the fact that most understandings and institutional manifestations of CSR maintain a considerable level of corporate discretion and thus voluntariness (Knudsen & Moon, 2021;Vallentin & Murillo, 2012). Furthermore, most scholarly work uses the liberal model of a market economy-the neoclassical theory of the firm and its liberal underpinnings-as an analytical reference point (Richter, 2010;Vallentin & Murillo, 2019). Theoretically, our sidelining of nonliberal alternatives means that we bracket the more radical critical scholarship (Banerjee, 2007(Banerjee, , 2018Fleming & Jones, 2012;Hanlon, 2008;Shamir, 2008) and its wholesale rejection of all that is potentially positive and transformative about CSR-seeing it as a signifier of deregulation, privatization, marketization.…”

“…Hence, we approach CSR as a liberal conception, and we propose that there is a variety of liberal imaginations that lend support to and construe CSR in different ways. More specifically, we propose that the bulk of the modern (post–World War II) CSR debate is constituted ideologically by four analytically distinct but interrelated liberal positions: 1) the embedded liberalism that sustains the classical, normative literature on CSR and is reflected in later developments in stakeholder theory and institutional approaches; 2) the ideals of classical liberalism that underpins the “business of business is business” mindset promoted by Milton Friedman and likeminded commentators; 3) the neoliberalism found in the literature on CSR as a mode of value creation; and 4) the re-embedded liberalism found in recent contributions that places the responsibility debate in a global(ized) setting (Vallentin & Murillo, 2019).…”