This is what is required
You need to include my weekly analysis on the CSR article and elaborate more for week 1 and 4. weekly analysis
Assignment Weekly and feedback
Below is my weekly feedback and the instructor’s feedback. and I am attaching the readings in which we have cited for this activity. We have to include the analysis in the coming assignment.
week 1 and week 4 needed more elaboration, so I am attaching the articles from which referencing is needed.
MHezutis K/E A: Reconnecting Business and Society: Perceptions of Authenticity in Corporate Social Responsibility
Mazutis K/E A: Reconnecting Business and Society: Perceptions of Authenticity in Corporate Social Responsibility
1. Mazutis, D., & Slawinski, N. (2015). Reconnecting business and society: Perceptions of authenticity in corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 131(1), 137-150. doi:10.1007/s10551-014-2253-1
2. The article explores the authenticity of Corporate Social responsibility approach, and provides evidence within the literature on how CSR initiatives lack bridges between firms and societies, which is resulting in questioning CSR credibility. The authors recommend that organizations, need to be connected with the society, and to stay authentic and true to their CSR goals; they must recognize their own distinctiveness within their social context.
3. This article is transdisciplinary because it discusses the social, economic and business aspects of CSR approach. It also highlights authenticity as a core component in CSR, and examined this component within other disciplines: philosophy, psychology, leadership, marketing and strategy; those disciplines to be induced to a firmâ€™s CSR activities.
Thank you for getting started on the K/E A. It looks like an interesting article!
As you develop this into the final K/E A assignment, you are going to want to provide more detail. What kind of research was conducted, and how was the research conducted in order to arrive at the conclusions? Also, please provide specifics from the article showing how different disciplines were brought together and then transcended to make something new. Use the week 1 reading and study guide, as well as specific examples from your article to support your claim that the article is transdisciplinary. Doing these things will help you when it’s time to hand in the complete version of assignment 2 at the end of week 5.
2. The article explores the authenticity of Corporate Social responsibility through qualitative research and literature reviews, they identify two main streams of approaches; “firm-centric” which is business-oriented research and a â€˜society-centricâ€™ stream, a social discipline approach. Moreover, the article provides evidence within the literature on how CSR initiatives lack bridges between firms and societies, which is resulting in questioning CSR credibility. The authors recommend that organizations, need to be connected with the society, and to stay authentic and true to their CSR goals; they must recognize their own distinctiveness within their social context.
3. The authors study “authenticity as conceptualized in representative research emanating in the fields of philosophy, psychology, leadership, marketing, strategy/organizational theory and CSR/business and society. We review this literature broadly to induce the core dimensions required for perceptions of authenticity to be attributed to a firmâ€™s CSR activities”. (Mazutis & Slawinski, 2015, p. 139)
I believe that the paradigm used in this article is constructivism, the article draws on constructivist research, in which the authors re-identified the logic of appropriateness of CSR and its authenticity, they re-construct a framework of explained genuine CSR activities within a multidisciplinary application. It develops two new dimensions where CSR activities can be perceived as genuine by the stakeholders; distinctiveness and social connectedness. Instead of using the critical theory in arguing whether CSR is ethical and the right thing to do; the purpose of this article is “..to explore the question â€˜when are a firmâ€™s CSR efforts most likely to be perceived as authentic by stakeholders?” (Mazutis & Slawinski, 2015).
I’ve created the below table to help me identify the constructivism paradigm in the Mazutis and Slawinski’ article.
Example from Mazutis & Slawinski
â€œConstructions are not more or less “true,” in any absolute sense, but simply more or less informed and/or sophisticated. Constructions are alterable, as are their associated “realities.” This position should be distinguished from both nominalism and idealism.â€ (Guba & Lincoln, 1994, p. 111)
â€œIn this paper, we have sought to develop a framework to explain why this phenomenon might occur. By highlighting the importance of perceptions of authenticity, we explain how CSR efforts must be both distinct and socially connected in order for these to be perceived as authentic by stakeholders. Without both of these attributes, the increase in CSR efforts by corporations is likely to continue to appear disingenuous, misguided or simply inauthenticâ€. (Mazutis & Slawinski, 2015, p. 147)
â€œThese varying constructions are interpreted using conventional hermeneutical techniques, and are compared and contrasted through ted using conventional hermeneutical techniques, and are compared and contrasted through a dialectical interchange. The final aim is to distill a consensus construction that is more informed and sophisticated than any of the predecessor constructionsâ€. (Guba & Lincoln, 1994, p. 111)
â€œWe then examine the concept of authenticity, drawing on disciplines such as philosophy, psychology, leadership, marketing and strategy. Next, we develop a set of propositions to explain how firmsâ€™ CSR activities are related to stakeholder perceptions of authenticityâ€. (Mazutis & Slawinski, 2015, p. 138)
â€œThe aim of inquiry is understanding and reconstruction of the constructions that people (including the inquirer) initially hold, aiming toward consensus but still open to new interpretations as information and sophistication improve. The criterion for progress is that over time, everyone formulates more informed and sophisticated constructions and becomes more aware of the content and meaning of competing constructions. Advocacy and activism are also key concepts is this view. The inquirer is cast in the role of participant and facilitator in this process, a position that some critics have faulted on the grounds that it expands the inquirer’s role beyond reasonable expectations of expertise and competenceâ€. (Guba & Lincoln, 1994, p. 113)
â€œFinally, we have focused here on authenticity in corporations; however, there are other organizational forms that may better lend themselves to authenticity. For example, social enterprises, which are usually built around a social mission supported by profit-making activities, are perhaps in the best position to balance social and economic goals. By putting their social mission ahead of their financial goals, however, they are likely in a better position to be true to their values and to connect to societyâ€. (Mazutis & Slawinski, 2015, p. 148)
â€œMultiple (knowledges) can coexist when equally competent (or trusted) interpreters disagree, and/or depending on social, political, cultural, economic, ethnic, and gender factors that differentiate the interpreters. These constructions are subject to continuous revision, with changes most likely to occur when relatively different constructions are brought into juxtaposition in a dialectical context.â€ (Guba & Lincoln, 1994, p. 113)
â€œFuture research is needed to explore other such organizational forms and their relationship to authenticityâ€. (Mazutis & Slawinski, 2015, p. 148)
â€œKnowledge accumulates only in a relative sense through the formation of ever more informed and sophisticated constructions via the hermeneutical dialectical process, as varying constructions are brought into juxtaposition. One important mechanism for transfer of knowledge from one setting to another is the provision of vicarious experience, often supplied by case study reportsâ€. (Guba & Lincoln, 1994, p. 114)
â€œWe examine two aspects of authenticity that are at the core of the concept: distinctiveness and social connectedness. Distinctiveness captures the extent to which a firmâ€™s CSR activities are true to their core mission, vision and values while social connectedness refers to the degree to which an organizationâ€™s CSR efforts is embedded in a larger social context. As such, we explore stakeholder perceptions of authenticity when a firmâ€™s CSR efforts are aligned with firm values and/ or are embedded in the firmâ€™s social context.â€ (Mazutis & Slawinski, 2015, p. 138)
(Fig 1: Mazutis & Slawinski, 2015, p. 144)
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y.S. (1994). Chapter 6: Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105-117). Thousand Oaks.
Mazutis, D., & Slawinski, N. (2015). Reconnecting business and society: Perceptions of authenticity in corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 131(1)
It sounds like your assessment of constructivism is right on. Going back to the week 1 stuff, can you make the link between the different disciplines you’ve stated above, and how they’ve been combined to give a complete assessment of whether the article is inter- trans- or multidisciplinary? You don’t have to do that here on the discussion board, but will want to do that as you put together your final K/E A.
In my K/E article, the foundational theory is; the socio-economic theory within the context of the social corporate responsibility which is used to identify the gap between businesses and society and the economic benefits; if corporations are to close this gap. The scio-economical theory discusses the subject matter outside the focus of mainstream economics, it includes the effect of the environment and ecology on consumption and wealth, it’s concerned with the relationship between social and economic factors within society. These factors influence how a particular group or socioeconomic class behave within society, including their actions as stakeholders; the factors in which the article recognizes as: firm-centric and society-centric. (Mazutis & Slawinski, 2015, p.138).
The main theory that branched out of the foundational one is the authenticity theory of CSR; the article discusses in depth the role of authenticity in CSR practice, and identifies the theory in multiple disciplines; ethical theory in business addressing the topic of corporate social responsibility; is that companies should develop practices and products that benefit the environment or society. This includes business practices that do not require compliance and that will benefit entities other than the company. The article defines authenticity in CSR as â€œa state of simultaneous distinctiveness and connectedness to the organizationâ€™s social context”. (Mazutis & Slawinski, 2015, p.142).
The third one is the stakeholder theory, used in the article to map authentic CSR practices and stakeholders’ perceptions. Stakeholder theory states that the purpose of a business is to create value for stakeholders not just shareholders, and to consider customers, suppliers, employees, communities and shareholders, which is core value of CSR initiatives.
Good work so far Aseel!
As you develop this into your final K/E A assignment, use supporting materials to describe each theory before you show how it fits into your article. The easiest way to do this is to read the specific references that are cited in your article and reference those articles to explain each theory. See my example final K/E A assignment to see how I recommend people approach this.
My K/A example suggests that structure (corporations) has more influence than actors (stakeholders/society) in adopting CSR model, the authors identified this structure over agency phenomena as â€œfirm-centricâ€. The article provides guidelines in which structure can balance that influence by employing the authenticity framework into the organizational CSR module â€œsociety-centricâ€. Moreover; the article illustrates the stakeholder perceptions of authenticity of CSR efforts, in a quest to empower the agencyâ€™s position in CSR practices. In the below figure, the authors distinguish between different CSR implantations associated with their connectedness to actors and structureâ€™s distinctiveness. To reach the balance of structureagency middle ground CSR module must be distinct and connected (Authentic) â€œorganizations open to feedback from stakeholdersâ€¦ incorporate a broader range of issues into their decision makingâ€¦ take into account the impacts of their business decisions on society â€¦and may even advance causes and social changeâ€ (Mazutis & Slawinski, 2015).
(Fig 1: Mazutis & Slawinski, 2015, p. 144)
Good start Aseel!
Where does your article sit with respect to the chaos/stability debate?
Below is the assignment description, I will send you my weekly analysis and the researched article which is referred to as the K/E article. I will also send the readings articles from which I have cited my weekly analysis, and I should be including in my paper.
So every week we’ve analyzed the article of our choice, reflecting on readings of that certain week. I have sent you week 1 and 4 readings, attached is week 2. Week 3 was more of an exploration of what we have observed from the article and theories that can be obtained from the article under study the K/EA.
I have some more articles to come that I have used to determine the theories from my article,
Assignment 2: Key or Exemplary Article Analysis
As an interdisciplinary studies student, your interests and program of study are probably very different from that of your peers. This means you must begin to locate yourself and your scholarship within a broader conversation that may not be the same as the people who are in the course with you. How can we begin to do this in a scholarly way? The answer to this question lies in your literature, and you will be asked to build your understanding of the literature in your unique area of study both in this course and in 510.
To begin this project, I am going to ask you to begin to think about your interdisciplinary area of interest early, and you are going to identify an article that fits within that area of interest, highlighting key theoretical features of that literature. This assignment is one that can lead to your online theory resource assignment, since any theories used in your K/E A can also be used in your online theory resource. The assignment is in two parts, as follows:
- Drawing upon what you have learned in the Ask a Librarian Forum, you will find a Key or Exemplary Article that speaks to your unique interdisciplinary area of interest. Each week from weeks 1-4 you will post an answer to one of these questions in our Key or Exemplary Article (K/E A) Forum. Your answer to each of these questions should be approximately, 150 – 250 words long.
- What is the main topic of the article, and is it multidisciplinary, transdisciplinary or interdisciplinary in nature?
- What paradigm does the article fit into, and how do you know?
- What key theories does the article draw upon? And, how are these theories positioned in the article?
- What are the broader debates about system/structure vs. actor/agency; society vs. the individual; and conflict or stability as defined explicitly or implicitly in your article?
Your participation in the K/E A forum in the first 4 weeks will contribute to your participation grade and will also allow me to provide you with formative feedback to guide you in the second part of this assignment.
At the end of week 5, you will post a full K/E A analysis to the appropriate assignment drop box in Moodle. This analysis will include your answers to each of the questions, as well as an overview of the main findings of the article and a final section showing how this article relates to your own interdisciplinary area of interest. It will be in .doc or .docx format, formatted in APA style, and include excellent writing, with strong transitions, appropriate citations and no typos or spelling errors. Excluding the title page and reference list, the K/E A analysis must be a minimum of 1200 words and must not exceed 1400 words in length.
Your K/E A analysis will be evaluated based on the following criteria:
- On-time (Was the K/E A analysis posted on or before the due date?)
- Well-edited (Are there spelling, grammar, punctuation errors? Does it follow APA style?)
- Clear in the expression of ideas (Is there strong writing, flow, transitions?)
- Accurate (Is the information presented as fact accurate?)
- Original (Does the K/E A analysis offer a new perspective or new information?)
- Relevant (Does the K/E A analysis address the assignment criteria as specified above?)
- Substantive (Does the K/E A analysis reflect comprehension and ability to apply course readings in meaningful ways?)
- Makes use of appropriate supporting material (Does the K/E A analysis draw upon additional scholarly sources not contained in the course material in order to make the argument stronger?)
- Arguments are valid (Conclusions and declarative statements are supported by premises. Premises are referenced as appropriate and required by APA style)
Please note that i have not attached the articles i will attach them once i assign the work