Examination of General Managers Individual Values Related to CSR Among Hungarian Small Organizations

• Authors: Benedek, Andrea , Takács, István , Takács-György, Katalin

Abstracts

EN

More and more corporations , both multinationals and SMEs, decide that during their business activities they take into consideration such strict social and environmental aspects that are beyond the rules and requirements of the country they operate in. One of its reasons is that the corporate decisions have impacts not only on the immediate environment but also on the whole society. The present study examines and reveals the value priorities of the chief executives and the impact of those on CSR among Hungarian small and medium enterprises. The study also represents the value of the sample. The results of the primary research reveals that the value preferences of the general managers have their impact on the CSR activities of the company and hence certain main values of the individual determine the practice of the CSR. Those leaders who can be characterised by goodwill and universalism are more concerned with CSR and it is clearly shown in their CSR activities. In the examined Hungarian sample a group of leaders (25%) could be distinguished who consider CSR as a competitive advantage. These leaders are considered to be leaders with modern CSR viewpoint. They are committed to CSR and implement the modern CSR approach into practice, into the strategy of the corporation and into their activity and guide their organisation along these aspects.

Keywords

EN

corporate social responsibility; individual value; manager behaviour; SMEs

• Publisher: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu w Białymstoku
• Journal: Optimum. Studia Ekonomiczne
• Year: 2015
• Volume: 6(78)

Dates

published

2015

Contributors

author

Benedek, Andrea

author

Takács, István

author

Takács-György, Katalin

References

• Agle B. R., Caldwell C. B. 1999 Understanding Research on Values in ’Business, “Business and Society”, 38. No. 3, pp. 326-387.
• Akaah L. 1994 The Influence of Personal and Organisational Values on Marketing Professionals Ethical Behaviour, “Journal of Business Ethics”, 13, pp. 417-430.
• Angyal Á. 2009 Vállalatok társadalmi felelőssége. Műhelytanulmány (working paper). Vállalatgazdaságtan Intézet, Budapest.
• Bendell J. 2004 Barricades and Boardrooms, “A Contemporary History of the Corporate Accountability Movement, Technology, Business and Society Programme”, Paper Number 13 (United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, Geneva).
• Brammer S., Millington A. I. 2004 The Development of Corporate Charitable Contributions in the UK A Stakeholder Analysis, “Journal of Management Studies” 41, pp.1411-1434.
• Carroll A. B. 1999 Corporate Social Responsibility Evolution of a Definitional Construct, “Business and Society”, Vol. 38, No. 3. pp. 268-95.
• Chell E., Haworth B., Sally A. 1991 The Entrepreneurial Personality Concepts, Cases and Categories, Routledge, London.
• Connor P. E., Becker B. W. 1994 Personal Values and Management. What Do We Know and Why Don’t we Know more? , “Journal of Management Inquiry”, 3, No. 1, pp. 67-73.
• Csath M. 2012 A humán tőke, mint versenyképességi tényező. In. Poór J., Karoliny M., Berde CS., Takács S. (szerk) Átalakuló emberi erőforrás menedzsment, Budapest Complex Kiadó, pp. 37-52.
• Császár, Horváth G. 2010 Lélek, érték, stratégia A vállalkozói lét alapdimenzióiról, Budapest HÉTFA Kutatóintézet.
• Dahlsrud A. 2008 How Corporate Social Responsibility is Defined an Analysis of 37 Definitions. “Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management”, 2008, pp. 1-13.
• Davis K. 1960 Can Business Afford to Ignore Social Responsibilities? “California Management Review” 2, pp. 70-76.
• Desai A. B., Rittenburg T. 1997 Global Ethics an Integrative Framework for MNEs, “Journal of Business Ethics”, Vol. 16, No. 8, June 1997 , pp. 791-800 (10).
• Deshpandé R., Webster Jr F.E. 1989 Organisational Culture and Marketing Defining the Research Agenda, “Journal of Marketing”, 53, No. 1, pp. 3-15.
• Dodd S. C. 1950 How to Measure Values, “University of Washington Research Studies”, 1950, Vol. 18. pp.163-168.
• England 1967 Personal Value System of American Managers, “Academy of Management Journal”, 10. pp. 53-68.
• Füstös L., Szakolczai Á. 1994 Értékek változásai Magyarországon 1978-1993 Kontinuitás és diszkontinuitás a kelet-közép-európai átmenetben, 1, pp. 57-90.
• Füstös L. 2011 Európa értékrendszere Magyarország értéktere – Európa értéktere. In Füstös László – Guba László (szerk.) A változó értékrendszer 2011/1, Budapest MTA PTI – MTA SZKI.
• Goodpaster K. E., Matthews J. B. 1982 Can a Corporation Have a Conscience? “Harvard Business Review” 60, No. 1, pp.132-141.
• Hemingway C. A. 2002 An Exploratory Analysis of Corporate Social Responsibility Definitions, Motives and Values, Research Memorandum 34, Centre for Management and Organisational Learning Hull University Business School, Hull, UK. pp. 1-25.
• Inglehart R. 1997 Modernization and Postmodernization-Cultural and Political Change in 43 Societies, “New Jersey Journal”, 10. No. 1, pp. 53-68.
• Koivula N. 2008 Basic Human Values in the Workplace, Vol. 17, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, pp. 1-141.
• Kun A. 2009 A multinacionális vállalatok szociális felelőssége, AdLibrum Kiadó Budapest.
• Lightle S., Baker B., Castellano J. 2009 The Role of Boards of Directors in Shaping Organizational Culture, “CPA Journal”, 79, No. 11. pp. 68-72.
• McClelland 1961 The Achieving Society, Van Nostrand, New York.
• McGuire J. W. 1963 Business and Society, McGraw-Hill, New York.
• Meglino B. M., Ravlin E. C., Adkins C. L. 1992 The Measurement of Work Value Congruence. A Field Comparison, “Journal of Management”, 18, pp. 33-43.
• Post F. R. 2003 A Response to the Social Responsibility of Corporate Management A Classical Critique, “Mid-American Journal of Business”, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 25-35.
• Robin D. P., Reidenbach R. E. 1987 Social Responsibility Ethics and Marketing Strategy Closing the Gap between Concept and Application, “Journal of Marketing”, 51, pp. 44-58.
• Rotter J. B. 1966 Generalised Expectancies for Internal versus External Control of Reinforcement. “Psychological Monographs General and Applied”, 80, No. 1. pp. 26-28.
• Schumpeter J. A. 1980 A gazdasági fejlődés elmélete Vizsgálódás a vállalkozói profitról, a tőkéről, a hitelről, a kamatról és a konjunktúraciklusról, Budapest Közgazdasági és Jogi Könyvkiadó.
• Schwartz S. H. 2001 A Proposal for Measuring Value Orientations across Nations.
• Schwartz S. H. 2003 A Proposal for Measuring Value Orientations across Nations, [in:] Questionnaire development report of the European Social Survey (chap. 7). http//naticent02.uuhost.uk.uu.net/questionnaire/chapter_07.doc
• Schwartz 2006 Value Orientations Measurement, Antecedents and Consequences across Nations, [in:] Measuring attitudes cross-nationally – lessons from the European Social Survey, R. Jowell, C. Roberts, R. Fitzgerald, G. Eva (eds.), Sage, London.
• Singhapakdi A., Vitell S. J. 1993 Personal and Professional Values Underlying the Ethical Judgements of Marketers, “Journal of Business Ethics”, 12, pp. 525-533.
• Szabó-Benedek 2014 A CSR-gyakorlat vizsgálata a vállalatvezetői értékek és attitűdök tükrében. PhD értekezés Szent István Egyetem, Gazdálkodás és Szervezéstudományok Doktori Iskola.
• Wood D. L. 1991 Corporate Social Performance Revisited, “The Academy of Management Review”, 16, No. 4, pp. 691-718.

Identifiers

URI

http://hdl.handle.net/11320/4449

DOI

10.15290/ose.2015.06.78.03