the role of hrd in embedding corporate social ... · of multiple stakeholders (freeman, 1984) and...
TRANSCRIPT
Running head: HRD IN EMBEDDING CSR 1
The Role of HRD in Embedding
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in Organizations
Working Paper submitted to
the 17th International Research Conference on HRD across Europe
Stream: Scholarly Practitioner Research
Soebin Jang and Alexandre Ardichvili
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities
HRD AND CSR 2
Abstract
While corporate social responsibility (CSR) has attracted significant interest from both
scholars and practitioners, an emerging challenge is to understand the link between
CSR and human resource development (HRD) functions to benefit stakeholders and
improve human sustainability. We propose to critically examine and identify the
important roles of HRD in embedding CSR in business organizations. We draw on
Karen Watkins’ (1989) five philosophical metaphors for HRD and focus on the roles that
are deeply rooted in HRD philosophy and on areas of CSR-related work, in which HRD
can make most important contributions through its core expertise, processes, and tools.
The paper starts by providing a brief overview of the CSR embedding process in
business organizations, followed by a discussion on the purpose of HRD and its
relevance to CSR. Then, a conceptual framework is proposed describing how and
under what conditions HRD professionals can make an important contribution to
embedding CSR. We conclude with implications for research and practice.
Keywords: Human resource development, corporate social responsibility,
business ethics, theory and practice
HRD AND CSR 3
The Role of HRD in Embedding Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in Organizations
Introduction
Business organizations around the world face increasing pressure to behave in a
socially responsible and ethical way (Carroll and Shabana, 2010; Garriga and Mele,
2004). A recent global survey reported that an increasing number of companies are
disclosing their non-financial performance in an effort to become transparent and
responsible in doing business (KPMG, 2013). While the topic of corporate social
responsibility (CSR) has attracted significant interest from both scholars and
practitioners (Hart, 2005; Porter and Kramer, 2002), an emerging challenge is to
understand the link between CSR and human resource development (HRD) functions to
benefit stakeholders and improve human sustainability (Ardichvili, 2011; Fenwick, 2014;
Garavan and McGuire, 2010; Pfeffer, 2010).
Problem Statement
HRD can play an important role in embedding CSR, sustainability, and ethics in
organizations (Ardichvili and Jondle, 2009; Ardichvili, 2013; Fenwick and Bierema,
2008; Garavan and McGuire, 2010; Hatcher, 2002). HRD scholars have conducted
research in related areas, including socially-conscious HRD (Bierema and D’Abundo,
2004; Fenwick and Bierema, 2008), the role of HRD in societal development (e.g. Kim,
2012), stakeholder-based HRD (Baek and Kim, 2014), and green HRD (e.g. Valentin,
2015). However, research on roles that HRD can play in embedding CSR and research
on specific approaches that could be most efficient in embedding and promoting CSR is
still limited. Further research is needed to provide HRD practitioners with specific
guidance on how to embed CSR in organizations (Fenwick, 2014; Garavan and
McGuire, 2010). The purpose of this paper is to critically examine and identify the
important roles of HRD in embedding CSR in business organizations. To make an
effective contribution, we argue that HRD professionals need to better position
themselves through strategically aligning HRD interventions with organizational goals
and the CSR agenda, grounding HRD’s contributions in the philosophy and values of
the field, and taking a balanced and collaborative approach in the process. Thus, we
HRD AND CSR 4
focus on the roles that are deeply rooted in HRD philosophy and on areas of CSR-
related work, in which HRD can make most important contributions through its core
expertise, processes, and tools. We draw on Karen Watkins’ (1989) five philosophical
metaphors for HRD, namely Organizational Problem Solver, Organizational Change
Agent/Interventionist or Helper, Organizational Designer, Organizational
Empowerer/Meaning Maker, and Developer of Human Capital. Metaphors can be useful
in adding meaning to concepts and developing new theories (Cornelissen, 2004; Weick,
1989). The importance to understand and apply metaphors in research has been
highlighted (Kuchinke, 2001; Short, 2001), and previous studies have identified and
effectively used metaphors within the HRD field (e.g. Ardichvili, 2001; Daley, 2001;
Hutchins and Wang, 2008; Kraemer, 2001).
Drawing on the five philosophical metaphors for HRD and the underlying theories
that inform each role, we sought to answer the following questions:
1. What are the roles of HRD in embedding CSR in organizations?
2. What specific approaches are most effective in embedding and promoting
CSR in organizations?
Methodology
We reviewed the related literature in HRD and other relevant fields such as
management, human resource management (HRM), business ethics, organization
studies, and adult education through online databases including Academic Search
Premier, EBSCO Information Services, Business Source Premier, and Emerald. In
addition, we conducted targeted search of a sample of most relevant to this project
journals, to include: Academy of Management Journal, Academy of Management
Learning & Education, Journal of Business Ethics, Business Ethics: A European
Review, Organization Science, The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, Human Resource Development Review, Human Resource Development
International, Human Resource Development Quarterly, Advances in Developing
Human Resources, and European Journal of Training and Development.
We start by providing a brief overview of the CSR embedding process in
business organizations, followed by a discussion on the purpose of HRD and its
HRD AND CSR 5
relevance to CSR. Then, we propose a conceptual framework describing how and
under what conditions HRD professionals can make an important contribution to
embedding CSR, drawing on the five philosophical metaphors for HRD. We conclude
with implications for research and practice.
Embedding Corporate Social Responsibility
A common definition of corporate social responsibility is “the continuing
commitment by business to contribute to economic development while improving the
quality of life of the workforce and their families as well as of the community and society
at large.” (World Business Council for Sustainable Development, n.d.). This entails that
businesses not only have the responsibility to make profit through producing goods and
services but also attend to legal responsibilities and meet ethical norms in doing
business (Carroll, 1991). In doing so, organizations need to consider the wider interests
of multiple stakeholders (Freeman, 1984) and balance economic, social and
environmental goals, often described as the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) (Elkington, 1997).
Embedding CSR is perceived as a change process and requires an organization
to alter its current norms, values, and business goals towards CSR principles (Cramer,
2005; Maon, Lindgreen, and Swaen, 2009). Extant research describes two different
perspective on drivers of adopting the CSR agenda: internal drivers and external drivers
(Swanson, 1999). External drivers may include institutional and regulatory pressure,
stakeholder demands, and market competition (Bansal, 2003; Carroll, 1999). Internal
drivers may arise from personal values of top management, moral and ethical norms,
and the organizational culture (Aguilera, Rupp, Williams, and Ganapathi, 2007; Carroll,
2000). Others have argued to integrate the two perspectives in understanding the
motivations towards CSR (Jones, 1995).
From the extant CSR literature, a number of aspects have been identified as
critical in embedding and promoting CSR in organizations (Haugh and Talwar, 2010;
Lyon, 2004; Maignan, Farrell, and Farrell, 2005; Maon et al., 2009; Werre, 2003).
Strong commitment and support of top-management are the foundation for formulation
and communication to the organization of a long-term CSR vision (Cramer, 2005;
Werre, 2003). Stakeholder engagement is important in identifying and integrating
HRD AND CSR 6
different needs within the organization and in the broader society (Maignan et al., 2005).
CSR values and principles need to be embedded at the core of the organizational
culture that embraces responsibility (Rimanoczy and Pearson, 2010). This in turn allows
employees to be more receptive of long-term CSR values of the organization (Lyon,
2004). The organizational culture needs to be supported by CSR-enabling structures
such as codes of conduct, policies, monitoring and evaluating systems, and effective
communication channels (Maon et al., 2009). A learning and development orientation is
critical in raising awareness among employees and sustaining long-term CSR strategies
(Ardichvili, 2012; Haugh and Talwar, 2010). This requires fostering continuous learning,
double-loop learning, and critical reflection in the organization (Bierema and D’Abundo,
2004; Cramer, 2005).
The Purpose of HRD and its Relevance to CSR
As an interdisciplinary field, the definition and purpose of HRD have long been
contested (Hamlin and Stewart, 2011; Wang and Sun, 2009; Weinberger, 1998). With a
primary focus on improving performance of individuals and organizations, HRD has
been defined as ‘a process of developing and/or unleashing human expertise through
organization development (OD) and personnel training and development (T&D) for the
purpose of improving performance’ (Swanson, 2001, pp. 304). This positions
organization development and training and development as central domains of HRD
with the aim to develop human expertise and implement systematic organizational
change (Swanson, 2001; Weinberger, 1998).
However, HRD professionals have been criticized for focusing its efforts on short-
term profit maximization rather than long-term human development in organizations
(Fenwick and Bierema, 2008; Garavan and McGuire, 2010; Sambrook, 2009). HRD
professionals are often expected to capitalize on shareholder value through the
improvement of employee performance (Hatcher, 2002). Consequently, the design of
HRD interventions privileges organizational needs such as improving performance and
maximizing profit over social responsibility (Fenwick and Bierema, 2008).
A common role shared among HRD and CSR is the commitment towards the
development of employees and the organization (Collier and Esteban, 2007; Fenwick
HRD AND CSR 7
and Bierema, 2008). Linking employee development principles to triple bottom-line
objectives of the organization can lead to long-term sustained competitive advantage
(Colbert and Kurucz, 2007). HRD professionals need to be reflective and consciously
focus on the moral and ethical dimensions of the field when approaching human
development (Fenwick and Bierema, 2008; Kuchinke, 2014). Further, HRD models and
frameworks in both research and practice to be re-examined to incorporate socially
responsible and ethical principles along with efficiency and performance (Hatcher,
2002). This can be realized through HRD’s active engagement in various interrelated
activities such as culture change efforts and education and training in ethics and
corporate responsibility for both employees and the organization (Ardichvili, 2013;
Jamali, Dirani, and Harwood, 2015).
A Conceptual Framework: The Role of HRD in Embedding CSR
Despite the growing interest in promoting ethical and socially responsible
practices within the workplace, researchers have found a noticeable gap between
normative statements, made in research articles, and the reality of organizational
practice (Ehnert, 2009; Fenwick and Bierema, 2008). Thus, Fenwick and Bierema
(2008) found that HRD professionals were seldom involved in CSR activities in
organizations. At the same time, their findings suggested that not only the organizations’
industry, structure, and culture but also how the HRD function is positioned in the
organization influenced the extent of HRD’s involvement in CSR initiatives.
HRD’s ability can be more often limited in addressing such issues and drive
significant change within the organization (Fenwick and Bierema, 2008; Watkins, 2000).
HRD professionals may not be able to play lead roles in all cases as important roles
may be taken by functional leaders in other divisions of the organization, including CSR,
business ethics, risk and compliance, and public relations departments. (Ardichvili,
2012). This may require HRD professionals to balance their involvement by taking on
active lead roles or supportive and collaborative roles depending on the needs of the
organization. Nevertheless, HRD professionals should be aware of CSR-related issues
and be prepared with the necessary tools to promote long-term change of members and
core values of the organization (Ardichvili, 2012; Hatcher, 2002).
HRD AND CSR 8
Drawing on Karen Watkins’ (1989) five philosophical metaphors for HRD theory
and practice, we propose a conceptual framework to demonstrate the specific roles of
HRD professionals in embedding and promoting CSR in organizations. The five
philosophical metaphors are well established to demonstrate HRD’s important
contributions in embedding CSR as each role is deeply grounded in HRD’s diverse
philosophical foundations including but not limited to systems theory, gestalt
psychology, action science, critical theory, and human capital theory (Watkins, 1989).
This is not an attempt to describe the step-by-step process of embedding CSR. Rather,
our goal is to highlight the specific roles and approaches, through which HRD
professionals can make significant contributions to embedding and promoting CSR in
organizations.
Figure 1. A Conceptual Framework for the Roles of HRD in Embedding CSR
The conceptual framework (Figure 1) describes how HRD professionals can
make important contributions in embedding CSR in business organizations.
Organizations are driven by different motivations in adopting CSR (Swanson, 1999),
and the embedding process needs to be tailored to the organizational goals and the
specific business context (Maon et al., 2009). Thus, the specific roles and focus of HRD
professionals will depend on the drivers and stage of implementation.
Further, HRD professionals need to better position themselves by strategically
aligning HRD’s contribution to the organizational mission, vision, and goals that support
HRD AND CSR 9
the CSR agenda (Garavan and McGuire, 2010) and grounding HRD’s tools, processes,
and expertise in the philosophical foundations of the field (Kuchinke, 1999). HRD
professionals also need to be aware of the key CSR issues and take a balanced
approach through coordinated efforts in supporting effectiveness, human development,
and long-term sustainability of the organization (Ardichvili, 2012; Kuchinke, 2010).
In the following section, we illustrate how each of the five HRD metaphors,
namely Organizational Problem Solver, Organizational Change Agent, Organizational
Empowerer and Meaning Maker, Organizational Designer, and Developer of Human
Capital, based on their underlying theories and philosophical foundations, can
specifically contribute in embedding and promoting CSR in organizations.
Problem solver
HRD professionals as problem solvers adopt a holistic view in understanding and
responding to complex problems surrounding the organization and provide effective
solutions (Watkins, 1989). This view is grounded in systems theory, which is widely
accepted as a core foundation of the HRD field and enables HRD professionals to
understand complex systems through unfolding the whole and the interactions of its
parts (Ruona, 1998; Swanson, 2001; Yawson, 2012). The process of embedding CSR
varies among organizations depending on the specific circumstances and requires a
tailored approach (Cramer, Van Der Heijden, and Jonker, 2006). Through systems
thinking, HRD professionals can provide customized and systematic solutions to take
into account various factors specific to the organization such as size, industry, and
institutional context and avoid a ‘one size fits all’ approach (Garavan and McGuire,
2010).
Further, implementing a CSR agenda requires considering multiple levels,
including the societal, the organizational, and the individual level in developing the CSR
agenda (Cavagnaro and Curiel, 2012). HRD professionals can contribute to the process
of developing CSR objectives and strategies through articulating the importance and
benefits of learning and development strategies at all levels of the organization as a
core part of the CSR agenda. This requires HRD to strategically incorporate CSR issues
into the HRD vision, mission, and strategies (Garavan and McGuire, 2010) and balance
HRD AND CSR 10
the focus on all economic, social, and environmental performance in daily operations
(Ardichvili, 2012; Colbert and Kurucz, 2007).
Change agent
Grounded in Lewinian values of organizational change, HRD professionals as
change agents aim to support both individual and organizational change (Watkins,
1989). Field theory, Gestalt psychology, and action research primarily inform this role,
and it is believed that HRD professionals can improve the lives of people and
organizations through learning and change efforts (Watkins, 2000). In embedding CSR,
organizational members need to first understand and make sense of CSR issues and
principles (Cramer, 2005). Change agents play an important catalyst role in developing
a specific CSR meaning pertaining to the values and long-term goals of the organization
(Cramer, 2005; Maon et al., 2009). This also requires change agents to continuously
reflect on their own behaviors to ensure and maintain autonomy, informed choice, and
health of stakeholders involved in the change process (Maon et al., 2009; Watkins,
1989). HRD professionals are equipped with the knowledge and tools to facilitate the
CSR embedding process through fostering change readiness within the organization
(Garavan, Heraty, Rock, and Dalton, 2010; Jamali et al., 2015). HRD interventions at
the management level can play an important role in overcoming resistance to CSR
initiatives and place learning and development in the center of implementing CSR
(Fenwick and Bierema, 2008). HRD professionals can also utilize approaches such as
force-field analysis to analyze and identify effective change interventions to reduce
barriers to change (Watkins, 1989).
CSR-oriented organizations contribute to the wider society through continuous
engagement with broader stakeholders to understand changing societal values,
demands, and expectations (Freeman, 1984; Porter and Kramer, 2002). HRD
professionals can leverage stakeholders to develop ongoing dialogues and build
consensus on important CSR-related issues to the organization (Garavan and McGuire,
2010). This involves active participation in identifying and prioritizing key stakeholders
and designing systems that enable stakeholders to engage in numerous CSR-related
policy developments (Fenwick and Bierema, 2008).HRD professionals can also promote
HRD AND CSR 11
and reinforce behaviors benefiting communities through organizational learning tools
and collaborative social learning approaches (Garavan et al., 2010). This requires HRD
to utilize large-scale organization development interventions along with training and
education programs in close partnerships with broader stakeholders (Kim, 2012).
Stolz (2014) discussed the importance for HRD to utilize its organization
development (OD) expertise to increase organizations’ responsiveness to societal
demands and argued that OD needs to redefine its role to address the triple bottom line,
which needs to be in conjunction with efforts in identifying best practices and developing
the capacity of leaders and employees in effectively managing corporate citizenship.
Further, many CSR initiatives require cross-functional collaboration among multiple
functions and teams (Garavan and McGuire, 2010). HRD professionals can foster
collaborative efforts and learning for employees and stakeholders through utilizing
action learning, social learning, and communities of practice approaches, among others
(Ardichvili, 2012; Garavan et al. 2010).
Empowerer and meaning maker
HRD professionals as empowerers and meaning makers promote critical
reflection to transform individuals and organizations, and aim to achieve long-term
health and effectiveness (Watkins, 1989). This role is grounded in critical theory, and
critical theorists challenge the masculine and performative orientation of HRD and argue
for a critical and socially conscious approach to transform the workplace through
including diverse stakeholders, balancing power relations, and providing non-oppressive
models (Bierema and D’Abundo, 2004; Bierema, 2009). This alternative view focuses
on critiquing “what is” and offering “what might be” through stimulating self-reflection of
organizational members and valuing a democratic HRD approach (Bierema and
Callahan, 2014; Watkins, 1989).
Adopting a CSR agenda requires a process of redefining current organizational
missions, values, and assumptions to embed value-driven and CSR-oriented principles
(Maon et al., 2009). This involves constant reflection upon behaviors of leaders and
employees during the implementation process (Cramer, 2005). To effectively contribute
to the CSR agenda, HRD professionals need to familiarize themselves with CSR-related
HRD AND CSR 12
principles and initiatives within the organization and determine their roles in contributing
to the objectives (Fenwick and Bierema, 2008). They need to first be more reflective of
their own practices in being ethical and socially responsible (Bierema and D’Abundo,
2004; Fenwick and Bierema, 2008; Hatcher, 2002). This requires HRD professionals to
be more socially conscious in daily practice and “educate organizations about social
responsibility and use HRD strategies to integrate social consciousness into
organization activities that could potentially affect significant social change” (Bierema
and D’Abundo, 2004, p.444). HRD professionals need to act as a role model in
promoting continuous reflection, fostering socially conscious and responsible behaviors,
and negotiating conflicting interests and power-relations in the organization (Ardichvili,
2012; Bierema and D’Abundo, 2004).
Furthermore, HRD should be mindful of the power differentials within
organizations and take on the role as a ‘power broker’ in managing complex
relationships in effectively embedding CSR and ethics (Ardichvili, 2013). HRD
professionals need to recognize that specific interest groups may be underprivileged in
decision-making processes and advocate for diverse stakeholder needs through
analyzing and negotiating power relationships and ensuring equal opportunities for
learning and development in the organization (Ardichvili, 2013; Bierema and D’Abundo,
2004).
Organizational designer
Drawing on Herbert Simon’s (1965) administrative decision-making theory, HRD
professionals as organizational designers are capable of connecting the organization,
the structure, and the development of employees in achieving organizational goals
(Watkins, 1989). This involves diagnosing the environment, inventing and designing
structures and programs, and selecting effective actions based on available options
(Watkins, 1989). Thus, HRD professionals can take a systems approach in continuously
assessing the needs to design and implement structures and programs to support CSR-
related goals. This may require consultation with key business functions and
stakeholders in identifying important CSR issues to the organization (Maon et al., 2009).
HRD AND CSR 13
Implementation of codes of conduct, policies, monitoring and evaluating systems,
and effective communication channels are considered critical in embedding and
internalizing CSR (Haugh and Talwar, 2010). For example, HRD professionals can
promote responsible business practices by designing and communicating ethical and
CSR-related codes of conduct, training employees on CSR-related issues, and
managing compliance and monitoring systems (Hatcher, 2002; Winstanley and
Woodall, 2000). Formal and informal reward systems, when effectively aligned with
CSR goals and principles, can encourage positive behaviors of employees towards
CSR principles and continuous learning (Lyon, 2004; Garavan et al., 2010).
Further, communicating such policies and codes of conduct within the
organization is essential in embedding CSR initiatives (Haugh and Talwar, 2010), and
HRD professionals can utilize their expertise in promoting continuous dialog through
effective communication channels (Garavan et al., 2010). Transparent communication
of CSR principles and progress towards CSR objectives to employees and stakeholders
can increase awareness and commitment to the organization’s social responsibility
(Garavan et al., 2010; Jamali et al., 2015).
Deep integration of CSR principles into everyday practices requires CSR to be
embedded at the core of the organizational culture (Ehnert, 2009). HRD professionals
are known to play a central role in cultural change efforts and can support the
organization in developing a culture that embraces CSR (Liebowitz, 2010; Sroufe,
Liebowitz, and Sivasubramaniam, 2010). Researchers have argued that HRD’s efforts
in promoting CSR and sustainability should be supported through creating an ethical
business culture (Ardichvili and Jondle, 2009; Foote and Ruona, 2008). Studies have
found that the role of top leadership, formal training programs, an explicit code of
conduct, and clear communication were crucial in developing ethical corporate cultures
(e.g. Small, 2006). HRD professionals can contribute to embedding an ethical culture
through engaging leaders and building necessary infrastructures in promoting ethical
and responsible business practices (Foote and Ruona, 2008).
Developer of human capital
HRD AND CSR 14
Human capital theory posits that the investment in human capital to develop
employees’ skills and knowledge can enhance productivity and improve organizational
performance (Becker, 1964). Rooted in economics, human capital theory serves HRD
professionals with a strong bottom-line approach to learning and development as a
foundation in the HRD field (Nafukho, Hairston, and Brooks, 2004; Swanson, 2001).
Investment in developing human capital not only returns economic value to the
organization but also addresses the long-term value and quality of work life of
employees (Watkins, 1989; Weinberger, 1998). HRD leaders need to proactively
educate organizational members about the central roles of HRD in embedding CSR and
ethics through demonstrating what can be done through utilizing core HRD interventions
(Ardichvili, 2013). This involves fostering continuous learning and critical reflection on
past values and principles through a form of double-loop learning (Cramer, 2005; Maon
et al., 2009). HRD professionals may actively promote organizational learning,
leadership development interventions, and other learning and development strategies in
supporting CSR principles and engaging employees at all levels of the organization
(Fenwick and Bierema, 2008; Garavan et al., 2010). Such training and development
programs are a key area where HRD professionals’ expert role is unchallenged and
where they can make one of the most important contributions to the organization
(Ardichvili, 2011).
Leadership development is regarded as one of the most important strategies for
promoting CSR (Ardichvili et al., 2009; Gond, Igalens, Swaen, and Akremi, 2011). A key
role of HRD professionals is to ensure that leaders and employees clearly understand,
appreciate, and value the concept of CSR (Fenwick and Bierema, 2008). Learning and
development strategies such as global service learning, experiential learning, and
knowledge sharing can be used effectively in promoting CSR in organizations (Haugh
and Talwar, 2010). Such learning experiences are known to be highly effective in
sensitizing participants to broader social and ethical issues through fostering reflection
and consciousness-raising (Lester, Tomkovick, Wells, Flunker, and Kickul, 2005; Mirvis,
2008). Pless, Maak and Stahl (2011) reported on an integrated service-learning
program aiming to develop responsible leadership of executives. The program sent
team of leaders to work on CSR-related issues in developing countries through
HRD AND CSR 15
partnering with NGOs, social entrepreneurs, or international organizations. The authors
found evidence that these experiences helped the participants develop a more
responsible mind-set through learning at the cognitive, affective, and behavioral levels.
Similarly, Gitsham (2012) described successful experiential learning programs at two
global organizations: HSBC and IBM. Both programs aimed to develop the mindsets
and skills of employees and future leaders in dealing with CSR-related issues through
working closely with NGOs and CSR-related organizations. Findings showed that
participants were able to develop greater commitment towards global and sustainability-
related issues and gain further confidence in advocating change in the workplace.
Ethics and CSR awareness programs aim to support employees in learning and
adopting responsible business practices (Cramer, 2005; Garavan et al., 2010). Studies
have found that implementing CSR programs and providing training on CSR-related
issues in organizations yielded positive attitudes among employees towards both the
organization and the society (e.g. Rodrigo and Arenas, 2008). The main purpose is to
increase employee motivation towards CSR-related issues and promote responsible
work practices through improving CSR literacy and raising awareness (Fenwick and
Bierema, 2008; Schminke, Ambrose, and Neubaum, 2005). Proper implementation of
such programs can strengthen an organization’s ethics and culture and put CSR-related
initiatives at the center of attention (Garavan et al., 2010).
Further, CSR-related learning and development interventions need to be
continuously measured, evaluated, and reported to employees to ensure continuous
improvement and commitment (Garavan and McGuire, 2010; Maon et al., 2009). HRD
professionals need to ensure HRD efforts are included in the evaluations and provide
the appropriate tools and processes to develop measures aligned with the CSR agenda
(Garavan and McGuire, 2010). This should also involve transparently demonstrating
how the organization’s business practices and CSR agenda affect stakeholders in the
wider community (Bierema and D’Abundo, 2004).
Conclusion
Through our conceptual framework, we have described the important areas
where HRD professionals can contribute to embedding CSR in business organizations.
HRD AND CSR 16
Deeply embedding CSR in organizations requires above all long-term leadership
commitment, continuous learning and development, and the collaborative efforts of
multiple functions and stakeholders (Cramer, 2005; Maon et al., 2009). If CSR is not
embedded properly into the culture and daily business practices, the organization’s
reputation may be at risk and the CSR agenda may be perceived as mere public
relations campaigns or “window dressing” (Weaver, Trevino, and Cochran, 1999). Thus,
it is important for HRD professionals to effectively contribute by grounding its tools,
processes, and expertise in the philosophical foundations of the field, strategically
aligning HRD interventions and strategies with the organizational and CSR vision and
goals, and taking a balanced and collaborative approach.
The significance of this paper is twofold. Our study proposes a conceptual
framework drawing on the five important roles grounded in HRD philosophy by
integrating research in the field of CSR and HRD. It provides a foundation for future
studies to explore and empirically test HRD’s contribution in contributing to CSR in
organizations. This way, we hope to contribute to addressing the gap in literature and
the call for developing clearly articulated models in regards to responsible HRD practice
(Fenwick, 2014; Kuchinke, 2010). From a practical standpoint, we hope our framework
provides useful guidance to HRD professionals and organizations to effectively navigate
their way in embedding a CSR agenda grounded in learning and development
strategies, responsible culture, and organization development interventions.
The roles of HRD professionals in contributing to the CSR agenda should not be
limited to the five roles proposed in this paper. Future research may explore other
possible and effective approaches, through which HRD professionals can play an
important role in supporting and embedding CSR in business organizations and in other
sectors. One promising area would be to explore how HRD professionals may
contribute to embedding responsible business practices in small-to-medium sized
organizations (SME) where resources are scarce as opposed to large business
organizations (Fenwick, 2007).
HRD AND CSR 17
References
AGUILERA, R.V., RUPP, D.E., WILLIAMS, C.A. and GANAPATHI, J. (2007). Putting
the S back in corporate social responsibility: A multilevel theory of social change
in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), pp.836-863.
ARDICHVILI, A. (2001). Three metaphors for the lives and work of HRD consultants.
Advances in Developing Human Resources, 3(3), 333-343.
ARDICHVILI, A. (2011). Sustainability of nations, communities, organizations, and
individuals: The role of HRD. Human Resource Development International,
14(4), 371-374.
ARDICHVILI, A. (2012). Sustainability or limitless expansion: Paradigm shift in HRD
practice and teaching. European Journal of Training and Development, 36(9),
873-887.
ARDICHVILI, A. (2013). The Role of HRD in CSR, Sustainability, and Ethics a
Relational Model. Human Resource Development Review, 12(4), pp. 456-473.
ARDICHVILI, A. and JONDLE, D. (2009). Integrative literature review: Ethical business
cultures: A literature review and implications for HRD. Human Resource
Development Review, 8(2), pp.223-244.
ARDICHVILI, A., MITCHELL, J. A., and JONDLE, D. (2009). Characteristics of ethical
business cultures. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(4), pp. 445-451.
BAEK, P. and KIM, N. (2014). Exploring a theoretical foundation for HRD in society:
Toward a model of stakeholder-based HRD. Human Resource Development
International, 17(5), 499-513.
BANSAL, P. (2003). From issues to actions: The importance of individual concerns and
organizational values in responding to natural environmental issues.
Organization Science, 14(5), pp.510-527.
BECKER, G. S. (1964) Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with
Special Reference to Education, New York: Columbia University Press.
HRD AND CSR 18
BIEREMA, L.L. (2009). Critiquing human resource development's dominant masculine
rationality and evaluating its impact. Human Resource Development Review,
8(1), pp.68-96.
BIEREMA, L. and D’ABUNDO, M. (2004). HRD with a conscience: Practicing socially
responsible HRD. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 23(5), pp.443-458.
BIEREMA, L. and CALLAHAN, J.L. (2014). Transforming HRD A Framework for Critical
HRD Practice. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 16(4), pp.429-444.
CARROLL, A.B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the
moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4),
pp.39-48.
CARROLL, A.B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility evolution of a definitional
construct. Business & Society, 38(3), pp.268-295.
CARROLL, A.B. (2000). Ethical challenges for business in the new millennium:
Corporate social responsibility and models of management morality. Business
Ethics Quarterly, 10(1), pp.33-42.
CARROLL, A. B. and SHABANA, K. M. (2010). The business case for corporate social
responsibility: A review of concepts, research and practice. International Journal
of Management Reviews, 12(1), pp.85-105.
CAVAGNARO, E. and CURIEL, G. (2012). The three levels of sustainability. Sheffield:
Greenleaf Publishing.
COLBERT, B. A. and KURUCZ, E. C. (2007). Three conceptions of triple bottom line
business sustainability and the role for HRM. Human Resource Planning, 30(1),
pp.21-19.
COLLIER, J. and ESTEBAN, R. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and employee
commitment. Business Ethics: A European Review, 16(1), pp.19-33.
CORNELISSEN, J. P. (2004). What are we playing at? Theatre, organization, and the
use of metaphor. Organization Studies, 25(5), pp.705-726.
HRD AND CSR 19
CRAMER, J. (2005). Company learning about corporate social responsibility. Business
Strategy and the Environment, 14(4), pp.255-266.
CRAMER, J., VAN DER HEIJDEN, A. and JONKER, J. (2006). Corporate social
responsibility: making sense through thinking and acting. Business Ethics: A
European Review, 15(4), pp.380-389.
DALEY, B. J. (2001). Metaphors for professional learning. Advances in Developing
Human Resources, 3(3), pp.322-332.
EHNERT, I. (2009). Sustainability and Human Resource Management: Reasoning and
applications on corporate websites. European Journal of International
Management, 3(4), pp.419-438.
ELKINGTON, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks. The triple bottom line of 21st century. CT:
New Society.
FENWICK, T. (2007). Developing organizational practices of ecological sustainability: A
learning perspective. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 28(7),
pp.632-645.
FENWICK, T. and BIEREMA, L. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: Issues for
human resource development professionals. International Journal of Training and
Development, 12(1), pp.24-35.
FENWICK, T. (2014). Corporate Social Responsibility and HRD. In N. E. Chalofsky, T.
S. Rocco & M. L. Morris (Eds.), Handbook of human resource development (pp.
164-179). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
FOOTE, M. and ROUNA, W. (2008). Institutionalizing ethics: A synthesis of frameworks
and implications for HRD. Human Resource Development Review, 7(3), pp.292-
308.
FREEMAN, R.E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder perspective. Boston:
Pitman.
HRD AND CSR 20
GARAVAN, T. and MCGUIRE, D. (2010). Human resource development and society:
Human resource development’s role in embedding corporate social
responsibility, sustainability, and ethics in organizations. Advances in Developing
Human Resources, 12(5), pp.487-507.
GARAVAN, T.N., HERATY, N., ROCK, A. and DALTON, E. (2010). Conceptualizing the
behavioral barriers to CSR and CS in organizations: A typology of HRD
interventions. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 12(5), pp.587-613.
GARAVAN, T.N., MCGUIRE, D. and LEE, M. (2015). Reclaiming the “D” in HRD A
Typology of Development Conceptualizations, Antecedents, and Outcomes.
Human Resource Development Review, 14(4), pp.359-388.
GARRIGA, E. and MELÉ, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping
the territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1-2), pp.51-71.
GITSHAM, M. (2012). Experiential learning for leadership and sustainability at IBM and
HSBC. The Journal of Management Development, 31(3), pp.298-307.
GOND, J.P., IGALENS, J., SWAEN, V. and El AKREMI, A. (2011). The human
resources contribution to responsible leadership: An exploration of the CSR–HR
interface. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(1), pp.115-132.
HAMLIN, B. and STEWART, J. (2011). What is HRD? A definitional review and
synthesis of the HRD domain. Journal of European Industrial Training, 35(3),
pp.199-220.
HART, S. L. (1995). A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Academy of
Management Review, 20(4), pp.986-1014.
HATCHER, T. G. (2002). Ethics and HRD: A new approach to leading responsible
organizations. MA: Basic Books.
HAUGH, H.M. and TALWAR, A. (2010). How do corporations embed sustainability
across the organization?. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9(3),
pp.384-396.
HRD AND CSR 21
HUTCHINS, H.M. and WANG, J. (2008). Organizational Crisis Management and
Human Resource Development: A Review of the Literature and Implications to
HRD Research and Practice. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 10(3),
pp.310-330.
JAMALI, D.R., El DIRANI, A.M. and HARWOOD, I.A. (2015). Exploring human resource
management roles in corporate social responsibility: the CSR‐HRM co‐creation
model. Business Ethics: A European Review, 24(2), pp.125-143.
JONES, T.M. (1995). Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and
economics. Academy of Management Review, 20(2), pp.404-437.
KIM, N. (2012). Societal development through human resource development contexts
and key change agents. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 14(3),
pp.239-250.
KPMG. (2013). The KPMG survey of corporate responsibility reporting 2013. KPMG
International. Retrieved from
http://www.kpmg.com/global/en/issuesandinsights/articlespublications/corporate-
responsibility/pages/default.aspx
KRAEMER, T.J. (2001). Generating new metaphors: Downsizing as cancer. Advances
in Developing Human Resources, 3(3), pp.355-365.
KUCHINKE, K.P. (1999). Adult development towards what end? A philosophical
analysis of the concept as reflected in the research, theory, and practice of
human resource development. Adult Education Quarterly, 49(4), pp.148-162.
KUCHINKE, K. P. (2001). Metaphors and paradigms for HRD research and practice.
Advances in Developing Human Resources, 3(3), pp.366-378.
KUCHINKE, K.P. (2010). Human development as a central goal for human resource
development. Human Resource Development International, 13(5), pp.575-585.
HRD AND CSR 22
KUCHINKE, P. K. (2014). Perspectives on the concept of development for HRD. In N.
E. Chalofsky, T. S. Rocco & M. L. Morris (Eds.), Handbook of human resource
development (pp. 112-125). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
LESTER, S. W., TOMKOVICK, C., WELLS, T., FLUNKER, L., and KICKUL, J. (2005).
Does service-learning add value? Examining the perspectives of multiple
stakeholders. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(3), pp.278-294.
LIEBOWITZ, J. (2010). The role of HR in achieving a sustainability culture. Journal of
Sustainable Development, 3(4), pp.50-57.
LYON, D. (2004). How can you help organizations change to meet the corporate
responsibility agenda?. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental
Management, 11(3), pp.133-139.
MAIGNAN, I., FERRELL, O.C. and FERRELL, L. (2005). A stakeholder model for
implementing social responsibility in marketing. European Journal of Marketing,
39(9/10), pp.956-977.
MAON, F., LINDGREEN, A. and SWAEN, V. (2009). Designing and implementing
corporate social responsibility: An integrative framework grounded in theory and
practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(1), pp.71-89.
MIRVIS, P. (2008). Executive development through consciousness-raising experiences.
Academy of Management Learning & Education, 7(2), pp.173-188.
NAFUKHO, F.M., HAIRSTON, N. and BROOKS, K. (2004). Human capital theory:
Implications for human resource development. Human Resource Development
International, 7(4), pp.545-551.
PFEFFER, J. (2010). Building sustainable organizations: The human factor. Academy of
Management Perspectives, 24(1), 34-45.
PLESS, N.M., MAAK, T. and STAHL, G.K. (2011). Developing responsible global
leaders through international service-learning programs: The Ulysses
experience. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10(2), pp.237-260.
HRD AND CSR 23
PORTER, M. E. and KRAMER, M. R. (2002). The competitive advantage of corporate
philanthropy. Harvard Business Review, 80(12), pp.56-68.
RIMANOCZY, I. and PEARSON, T. (2010). Role of HR in the new world of
sustainability. Industrial and Commercial Training, 42(1), pp.11-17.
RODRIGO, P. and ARENAS, D. (2008). Do employees care about CSR programs? A
typology of employees according to their attitudes. Journal of Business Ethics,
83(2), pp.265-283.
RUONA, W.E.A. (1998). Systems theory as a foundation for HRD. In Proceedings of the
1998 Academy of Human Resource Development Conference. Baton Rouge, LA:
Academy of Human Resource Development.
SAMBROOK, S. (2009). Critical HRD: A concept analysis. Personnel Review, 38(1),
pp.61-73.
SCHMINKE, M., AMBROSE, M. L., and NEUBAUM, D. O. (2005). The effect of leader
moral development on ethical climate and employee attitudes. Organizational
Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97(2), pp.135-151.
SHORT, D. C. (2001). Shining a torch on metaphor in HRD. Advances in Developing
Human Resources, 3(3), 297-308.
SIMON, H.A. (1965). Administrative decision making. Public Administration Review,
pp.31-37.
SMALL, M. W. (2006). Management development: developing ethical corporate culture
in three organisations. Journal of Management Development, 25(6), pp.588-600.
SROUFE, R., LIEBOWITZ, J., and SIVASUBRAMANIAM, N. (2010). Are you a leader
or a laggard? HR’s role in creating a sustainability culture. People and Strategy,
33(1), pp.34-42.
STOLZ, I. (2014). The role of OD practitioners in developing corporations’ capacity to
practice corporate citizenship: a sociomaterial case study. European Journal of
Training and Development, 38(5), 436-455.
HRD AND CSR 24
SWANSON, D.L. (1999). Toward an integrative theory of business and society: A
research strategy for corporate social performance. Academy of Management
Review, 24(3), pp.506-521.
SWANSON, R.A. (2001). Human resource development and its underlying theory.
Human Resource Development International, 4(3), pp.299-312.
VALENTIN, C. (2015). Greening HRD conceptualizing the triple bottom line for HRD
practice, teaching, and research. Advances in Developing Human Resources,
17(4), pp.426-441.
WANG, G.G. and SUN, J.Y. (2009). Clarifying the boundaries of human resource
development. Human Resource Development International, 12(1), pp.93-103.
WATKINS, K. E. (1989). Five metaphors: alternative theories for human resource
development, in D. B. Gradous (ed.) Systems Theory Applied to Human
Resource Development. Alexandria, VA: ASTD Press, pp. 167–84.
WATKINS, K.E. (2000). Aims, roles, and structures for human resource development.
Advances in Developing Human Resources, 2(3), pp.54-59.
WEAVER, G.R., TREVINO, L.K. and COCHRAN, P.L. (1999). Integrated and decoupled
corporate social performance: Management commitments, external pressures,
and corporate ethics practices. Academy of Management Journal, 42(5), pp.539-
552.
WEINBERGER, L.A. (1998). Commonly held theories of human resource development.
Human Resource Development International, 1(1), pp.75-93.
WEICK, K. E. (1989). Theory construction as disciplined imagination. Academy of
Management Review, 14(4), pp.516-531.
WERE, M. (2003). Implementing corporate responsibility—The Chiquita case. Journal of
Business Ethics, 44(2-3), pp.247-260.
HRD AND CSR 25
WINSTANLEY, D. and WOODALL, J. (2000). The ethical dimension of human resource
management. Human Resource Management Journal, 10(2), pp.5-20.
WORLD BUSINESS COUNCIL FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT. (n.d.). Retrieved
from http://www.wbcsd.org/home.aspx
YAWSON, R.M. (2012). Systems Theory and Thinking as a Foundational Theory in
Human Resource Development—A Myth or Reality?. Human Resource
Development Review, 12(1), pp.53-85.