Kapitsa S.I., Pokrovskaya N.N.

Saint-Petersburg State Economic University, Russia

Truth and verities in negotiations for corporate social responsible behaviour

The homo oeconomicus in the Adam Smith’s “rational egoist” model included the moral sense [1] as a limit for liberal obsession with profit. Reminding the A. Smith’ example of a baker [2], the selfishness is the foundation of society, but there are some limits, such as moral and reputation [3], as well as the risk [4] of non-conform behaviour. The neo-liberal deregulation is based on the hypothesis of invisible hand of market, but the chaotic equilibrium demonstrated some perverse effects, including the externalities and public goods governance. The social responsibility is seeking for a concerned agent to represent the interests of the society or local community.

Today, the society is restoring and harmonising the societal system, according T. Parsons’ vision [5, 6] of the society structure: human beings are unified in the society and differentiate functions in societal subsystems, where the economy, especially, the business and entrepreneurship represents the best way to transform the nature according the human wants: “Labour is, in the first place, a process in which both man and Nature participate, and in which man of his own accord starts, regulates, and controls the material re-actions between himself and Nature.  He opposes himself to Nature as one of her own forces… in order to appropriate Nature’s productions in a form adapted to his own wants. By thus acting on the external world and changing it, he at the same time changes his own nature” [7]. Now, the economic subsystem improves the efficiency of Nature transforming, there is the consciousness of the imbalanced of values (the financial objectives are obviously overestimated), and the environment and social communication is to rebuild the equilibrium of the Human life.

The communication about the business responsibility is, in reality, a way to remind to the economic agents on the social embeddedness of the economic action [8, 9], among other axes of human existence, to attract and involve people with using organisational (as NGO or quasi-institutionalised movements as Occupy Wall Street, the informational technologies simplify the organising initiative actions, such as Jasmine revolutions on the North of Africa, or the local events, i.e., blocking the railway for a train with nuclear waste) and non-organised ways (as “atypical civil society networks” [10], or the violence and destroying NorilskNikel equipment, in the Voronezh, june 2013), legal and non-legal [11] tools, including the propaganda as a manipulative talk in a system of pressure on corporations.

The subject of the analysis is the structure of negotiations between an organisation (corporation, governmental establishment, international institution etc.) and different stakeholders, who express their interest to take part into the regulating a process. An interesting example is done by the transparent safety system in USA nuclear plants, there the largest groups of population are invited to control the indicators [12]: the USA Nuclear Regulatory Commission has an oversight and assessment process to yield publicly-accessible information on the performance of plants. Each indicator is reported quarterly on the NRC web site according to whether it is normal, attracting regulatory oversight, provoking regulatory action, or unacceptable, and all stakeholders, the inhabitants or the journalists have the access to this information and can take part into the control procedures. This example demonstrates an efficient monitoring system resulted of understanding the interests of all agents of society.

The theoretical foundation of the research is based on the institutional approach and inter-actionist concepts, the empirical analysis surveyed, what are the mechanisms to organise the communication in a way to assure such a result, a transparent system to “listen to people” [13], to perceive and understand their verities - and to find the integrating solutions focused on the whole truth. Even inside organisation, managers sometimes forget the classical remark of F. Taylor: “The words “maximum prosperity” are used, in their broad sense, to mean not only large dividends for the company or owner, but the development of every branch of the business to its highest state of excellence, so that the prosperity may be permanent. In the same way maximum prosperity for each employee means not only higher wages than are usually received by men of his class, but, of more importance still, it also means the development of each man to his state of maximum efficiency, so that he may be able to do, generally speaking, the highest grade of work for which his natural abilities fit him, and it further means giving him, when possible, this class of work to do” [14]. The research builds the psycho-social tool of questioning all the stakeholders on the real implementing [15] of the theoretical principles of the responsibility and sustainable growth concepts in each concrete case of negotiating, taking into account the complex and constantly changing context of communities and organisations.

The forming of a model of the communication in N-dimension space of values and social subsystems [16], including the environmental and social issues, is the aim of regulating the internal and external of social practices [17] of business companies.

The communicative competences should permit to find optimising way to achieve the diverse goals of all participants of the social, economic and political relationship.

References:

1. Smith A. Theory of Moral sentiments. – London: A. Millar, 1790.

2. “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker, that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities but of their advantages”. (Smith A. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. – London: Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1776. - URL: http://www.econlib.org/library/Smith/smWN1.html )

3. “He gains their esteem and affection by that plan of life which his own interest and situation would lead him to follow… Their kindness naturally provokes his kindness.” (Smith A. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. – London: Methuen & Co., Ltd., 1776. - URL: http://www.econlib.org/library/Smith/smWN1.html )/

4. “Nobody will be so mad as to expose himself upon the highway, when he can make better bread in an honest and industrious manner” (Lectures on Justice, Police, Revenue and Arms, delivered in the University of Glasgow by Adam Smith. Reported by a student in 1763, and edited with an Introduction and Notes by Edwin Cannan, 1896, p. 156. ).

5. Parsons T. The structure of Social Action. – N.-Y.: The Free Press, 1968.

6. Parsons Т., Smelser N. Economy and society. New York: Free press, 1956.

7. Marx K. (1867) Capital. A Critique of Political Economy. – Vol. I. Book 1. – Moscow: Progress Publisher, 1965. – P. 124.

8. Polanyi K. The Economy as Instituted Process // Economic Anthropology. E LeClair, H Schneider (eds) New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1968.

9. Granovetter, Mark (1985), “Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness,” The American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481-510.

10. Nasioulas I. Exploring the Social Business Initiative // Social Innovation Europe, 07.03.2013. URL: https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/socialinnovationeurope/node/3960

11. Zhang J., Luo X.R. Dared to Care: Organizational Vulnerability, Institutional Logics, and MNCs' Social Responsiveness in Emerging Markets // Organization Science orsc.1120.0813, March 21, 2013.

12. Oversight of Nuclear Power Plants // US NRC. February, 2002. URL: http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/oversight.html .

13. New style // DE Magazin Deutschland. N.1 (January), 2013. – P. 8.

14. Frederick Winslow Taylor (1911) Principles of Scientific Management. – P. // https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/economics/taylor/principles/ch01.htm.

15. Kelly Th. Five Simple Rules for Evaluating Complex Community Initiatives // Community Investments. Spring 2010. Vol. 22. Issue 1. – P. 19-36. – P. 20-22.

16. Капица С.И. Решения 3D-менеджмента для управления компанией: 15-летний опыт управленческого консультирования. – СПб.: ЗАО «Гуманитарный фонд», 2008. – 132 с.

17. Pokrovskaya N.N. Global and Local Regulating Approach for Sustainable Development // in: Sustainable Manufacturing – Shaping Global Value Creation. – Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 2012. – Pp. 287-292.