200571 Management Dynamics Written assignment #1

200571 Management Dynamics Written assignment #1Corporate social responsibility is a continuing trend among business owners and corporate companies. Many businesses have come to accept this practice as an important requirement in popularizing a company’s name, image, and brand among community members, who form the company’s customers. It is important that CSR policies are adopted to effectively reflect the organization’s culture and reputation. There, therefore, is need that an organization’s management and leadership works to ensure that the CSR policies and approach the company takes is in line with its core policies and objectives, and that personal interests and ideologies of the management does not influence these policies. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the practice and purpose of CSR, to determine the extent to which a company’s leadership and management influences the policies regarding the practice, to assess the applicability of leadership and behavioral theories on the practice, to explore the application of authentic and unauthentic CSR policies in an organization, and to determine the role of a company’s employees in the development and implementation of CSR.In as much as a company might attempt to come up with CSR policies that fully focus on the needs and image of the organization, the company’s leadership and management play a great role in influencing the type of CSR policies that the company will adopt. Political ideologies play a big role in informing the decisions of managers and other leaders in the organization regarding the nature of CSR that they feel will be suitable for the company in achieving its needs. Although the management would like to assume that such a step would be in the benefit of the company, it is, in the real sense, in the benefit of their own objectives as may be enshrined in the operations and activities of the company (Chin, Hambrick & Treviño 2013).The two wide political ideologies of conservatism and liberalism are responsible for the decisions that these managers will make. Managers who with a liberalist approach to decision making will prefer the performance of CSR at all times of the organization, even when the company’s financial prospects are low. Conservative managers, on the other hand, will not prefer CSR policies, especially when the financial performance of the company is low. They will only give it a thought when the performance of the company is high enough, so that to them, CSR is only a bonus to the good performance of the organization. Such ideological backgrounds will influence the course that the company will take in its adoption and implementation of CSR (Folger 1987). A good example of a company whose leadership has positively impacted its CSR policies is Walt Disney. The company has enjoyed a highly liberal form of leadership, which has facilitated its top position in the entertainment industry. The company’s management has applied this stance on its CSR, making it topin its CSR policies, which are aimed at empowering communities.There are two forms of explanations presented for the behavior of leaders in an organization regarding CSR. The behavioral theory of leadership assumes that people acquire leadership traits by interacting with the environment rather than being born with them. Contingency theories, on the other hand, assume that there is no single best way that an organization can be organized. Organizations can only be organized to suit the present situation, and are open to changes as the situations change. Behavioral theories propose that leaders of an organization are rigid in their decision making, while the contingency theories propose that leaders in an organization are flexible and can adapt to change easily.  Scholars Chin, Bambrick, and Trevino (2013) propose that in an organization setting, leaders take on the behavioral approach in the manner that they make decisions in the company. Managers often rely on their own personal experiences and knowledge in the decisions and actions that they perform in the organization.  Although these managers are required to allow and factor in the ideas and suggestions of other members of the organization in the decision making process, they are likely to give a higher precedence to their own preferences and rely on their own knowledge rather than the technicality of the issue at hand. It is these individualized perspectives that shape the kind and type of decisions that the managers make, meaning that managers in an organizational setup follow the behavioral theories in their actions more than they do the contingency theories. Managers are rigid in their adoption of change and in their thinking and reasoning, thus promoting homogeneity in the organization (Kreiner & Ashforth 2004). Ford motor Company and Toyota are examples of two companies that have adopted the behavioral and contingency theories respectively. While Ford’s management is quite rigid to change and innovation, Toyota’s is quite flexible and receptive of change and innovation. This explains why Ford is almost becoming extinct, while Toyota continues to flourish and increase its relevance to the global market.Analyzing the literature written on CSR, one can say that the CSR practices have to dimensions to them. One dimension is the superficial and unauthentic form of CSR, and the second one is that of the true embedded CSR, which is truly committed and aimed at bringing positive change to the communities in which companies operate. Some companies take on a superficial CSR approach, through which they hope not to benefit the members of community, but to win these members over in order to increase their sales and profitability (Bertels & Peloza 2008). Other companies take up these practices on the context that they hope to improve the livelihoods of the public, while their very actions at corporate levels means otherwise. Such companies allow immoral things and practices to take place in the organizations, and then once a year, embark on pay out charities, which are aimed not at enhancing the good work they have been doing, but to ease their conscious on the immoral practices by hoping that they will make up with the community on this (McShane & Cunningham 2012).Other companies have taken up on the embedded form of CSR, which pays more attention to values and issues of morality in the manner of their CSR practices. Such companies have worked to ensure that they integrate the values of the CSR practices with the core values of the business. Rather than perform CSR practices to please the community they interact with, the companies put in effort to ensure that they give earnest assistance to the community so that they can improve their livelihoods through the services or goods they offer the community. From this argument, virtually all major organizations today have CSR practices, but some of them are superficial while others are embedded (Jackson 2005). One example of a company with a superficial type of CSR is Nike. Despite the good work that the company is doing in providing athletes with high quality sports gear, the company has been accused of engaging in dubious and demeaning activities in its company operations. The company operates sweatshops in many third world countries, exploiting the labor of workers in these shops, and no amount of CSR can compensate for the poor treatment that is accorded to these workers.A company’s employees have a role to play in the implementation of the company’s CSR. It is the role of the employees, for instance, to implement the company’s core values as reflected in its CSR practices through their interactions with customers and the type and quality of products that they manufacture for the company (Godfrey 2005). If a company, for instance, is based on the values of honesty and prudence, it is the employees who can uphold these values in their activities in the company. Leaders should work to ensure that they implement an authentic CSR for the company, one which works in the bottom up approach. Such a strategy will ensure that the CSR practices are developed from the bottom of the organization, capturing the needs and views of the lower stakeholders of the organization. In doing this, the organization will be attending to the most pressing needs of the stakeholders of the organization (Devinney 2009), so that the CSR practices that they promote will be those that serve to address the true needs of the community, which will work to promote the development of these groups of people. Besides, this approach will involve the employees in the development of the CSR policies, thus paying attention to the needs the employees as well as those of the top management, who have the capability to impose to the employees CSR policies.A company’s leadership must work together with the employees in reinforcing their CSR policies and aligning them with their day to day activities. One company where employees have integrated with their leaders in reinforcing their CSR policies is Apple. In this company, both the employees and leaders engage in innovative activities in efforts to come up with new technology and ideas through which they can improve their products. Leaders allow their employees high levels of freedom and flexibility so that they can explore a wide range of opportunities that might enable them reach their highest potentials.  Reference ListBertels, S & Peloza, J 2008. Running just to stand still? Managing CSR reputation in an era ofratcheting expectations, Corporate Reputation Review, vol.11, no.1, pp.56–72, viewed 31/8/2013.Chin, M, Hambrick, D & Treviño, L 2013, ‘Political Ideologies of CEOs: The Influence ofExecutives’ Values on Corporate Social Responsibility’, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 58, No. 2, pp. 197–232, viewed 31/8/2013, DOI: 10.1177/0001839213486984.Devinney, TM 2009, Is the socially responsible corporation a myth? The good, bad and ugly ofcorporate social responsibility, Academy of Management Perspectives, vol.23, no.2, pp.44–56, viewed 31/8/2013.Folger, R 1987, Distributive and procedural justice in the workplace, Social Justice Research, vol.1, no.2, pp.143–159, viewed 1/9/2013.Godfrey, PC 2005, The relationship between corporate philanthropy and shareholder wealth: A riskmanagement perspective, Academy of Management Review, vol.30, no.4, pp.777–98, viewed 1/9/2013.Jackson, K 2005. Towards authenticity: A Sartrean perspective on business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, vol.58, no.1, pp.307–25, viewed 1/9/2013.Kreiner, GE & Ashforth, BE 2004, Evidence toward an expanded model of organizationalIdentification, Journal of Organizational Behavior