The debate over the philosophy of social
responsibility has brought a lot of controversy into the subject of
management. The proponents of social responsibility asked for a limit to the profit maximization objective through the execution of social programmes. The second school of thought vehemently rejected this proposition on the basis that the only social responsibility of
business is to make profit and thus improve the society. The third school of thought however, believed that nothing should hinder the firm''s profit making ability but suggested that both profit making and social responsibility should go hand in hand if the business is to survive. David McCall in his contribution suggested that for firms to be socially responsible, government should play a role in awarding contracts to the firms in social programme areas (McCall 1977). This has the advantage of yielding earnings to firm (while being socially responsible) and saving tax earnings to the government. McCall further suggested that loan subsidies and tax benefits should be given to firms to encourage them to establish plants in rural areas. This school of thought has also stressed the need to rid the word "Profit" of all the evil connotations attached to it. Once this can be done, most of the cries for social responsibility are bound to die down, because many supporters of social responsibility perceive profit to be bad or ill - gotten riches which must be taken away from the business. Indeed the views of this school of thought can be summed up in the words of Philips. "Business should seek society''s good in ways that are good for business". (Issue in Business and Society, Boston 1977). The idea of social responsibility implies that business decision makers recognize some
obligations to protect and improve the welfare of society as a whole along with their own corporate interests. In this way, cordial relationship exists between business organizations and the society. It accepts the fact that business is attached to an extended social system in which it is partly dependent. Consequently, certain obligations or social responsibilities arise from the attachment.According to the United States Business Ethics Advisory Councils, (1985) "Every business enterprise has manifold responsibilities to the society of which it is a part". The prime legal and social obligations of a business are to operate it for long - term profit. The position is that business concerns already have enough headaches trying to rise over the tide in uncertain market waves such as Nigeria especially during the years of economic crunch. The burden is heavy and responsibilities so many Business Organizations feel that they should not bother themselves with obligations that may weaken their economic viability. The economic recession has imposed severe strains on business prospects.Analysts of business social responsibility identify three broad facets. The first relates to direct charity for social causes like education, health, art and culture. Secondly, it is a compensation for social costs arising from their normal business operations such as environmental pollution and oil spillage which pose health and safety hazards. Thirdly, it promotes the adoption and observation of ethical code aimed at removing social and sex discrimination.Advocates of business social responsibility contend that social responsibility is a fundamental necessity in the modern business world. Economic activities in the social system are so related to everything else in the system that business must operate with social responsibility towards all works that it affects. Business cannot isolate itself into just one specialty, such as economic outputs because the activities are interwoven with the society. Society expectations from business have been related to Maslow''s hierarchy of needs, which are physiological, security and social needs. Since human expectations are changing, it follows that business activities shouldtowards societal needs for the business to remain in operation.
REFERENCESAndrew, 1979 Harvard Business Review Vol. 51 No 3 PP. 57 - 64 Business Times 1986 (Feb) P.7 Butterworth 1970 " Dictionary of Economic Terms " (P.203)Drucker, F.P. 1977 Practice of Management Pan Books Ltd PP. 263 - 382. Denham, 1977 " Social Significance of Business " Harvard Business Review. Ejiofor P. 1989 Foundations of Business Administration African FEB. Publishers Ltd, Onitsha PP. 52 - 54. Friedman, " Modern Value and Corporate Social Responsibility " M.S.U. Business Topics 1982 Aug. Ikpeze, 1981 " Business Social Responsibility " Management in Nigeria P. 11.