This article highlights the reasons why Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiatives of corporates may not work in the true sense. The corporation is self-serving by nature and the manager needs to maximize shareholder return. This creates pressure to improve profits in the short term, which obstructs any planned implementation of sustainability programs. CSR remains a PR tool only.

Considering the hype (and the hyperbole) surrounding Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), it may be a bit too late to sound cautious about the idea or the theme. The investment and research on CSR has gained volume and importance beyond its critical mass. While acknowledging the fact that CSR is nothing new or groundbreaking, most corporate leaders have steered away from denouncing the mantra of doing well as well as doing good. Milton Friedman and other critics who believed that the only social responsibility of business is to make profits are finding little support. Their voices have been drowned by angry protests from NGOs, emotional rebuffs from civil society groups, stern actions from governments and a handful of poster boys of the corporate citizenship movement.

Almost all Fortune 500 companies today mention CSR or sustainability in their reports and many publish professional sustainability reports to buttress their claim of being a kind corporate soul. The ever vigilant magazine The Economist has also beaten a hasty retreat. In 2005, the magazine launched a scathing attack on CSR, saying that managers had no business playing around with the shareholder's money. Their ultimate responsibility lies with the owners, who, if they feel so, can invest on their own in charity.

Global CEO Magazine, Corporate Social Responsibility, CSR, British Petroleum, BP, British American Tobacco, BAT, Multinational Companies, MNCs, Organizational Structure, Innovative Regulations, Emerging Economies, Global Experiences, Social Accountability, Corporate Responsibility, Corporate Ethics, Business Ethics.