By going through the previous academic researches, it is known that the definitions of corporate social responsibilities are varied. The phrase of corporate social responsibility was originated in 1953 while Bowen (1953) said that business persons should be in line with corporate social responsibilities to make objective decisions that were of value to society. Then, in 1979, Carrol (1979) claimed that corporate social responsibility described the expectation that is exerted by society on companies. Specifically, the expectation is varied and may ranges from economic to discretionary. Subsequently, he has simplified and summarized this concept that to act certain level of corporate social responsibilities, companies are required to generate certain level of profits, to ensure their activities are complied with laws and regulations and to behave ethically (Carrol, 1991). Nevertheless, further academic research has expended this concept. Drucker (1984) believed that enacting certain level of corporate social responsibilities should be considered as part of business opportunities of companies. To the importance of corporate social responsibilities Porter and Kramer (2006) claimed that taking social responsibilities may help companies to improve its overall corporate images in communities and it is regarded as an important component of brand building process. And the process of taking corporate social responsibility can be treated as the process of influencing the external stakeholders and customers. In addition, for the benefits of corporate social responsibilities in human resource management, Morgeson et al., (2013) said that researches of corporate social responsibilities guide human resource specialists and senior executives of companies to consider more broadly about individuals as embedded within firms.
In terms of it, in my view, the ideas of corporate social responsibilities are the contribution that should be made by companies to the society as whole. In detail, companies should pay tax to afford social security system and other public expenditures; companies should conduct their business operations in line with laws and regulations to maintain the market order and companies may engage some donation activities to support some charities activities.
Cost of Corporate Social Responsibilities
Donald et al., (2006) believed that social responsible manner is opposite to the idea of mind their own business. And they further claimed that conducting social responsibilities may more or less reduce the overall efficiency of companies. In detail, acting social responsibilities are costly to the companies despite that these activities may provide with positive externalities. They believed that this problem is caused by the inherent paradox between the corporate social responsibility and the financial performance of companies. Also, Donald et al., (2006) believed that this kind