34 gesichtete, geschützte Fragmente: Plagiat
| [1.] Msc/Fragment 012 02 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 24. December 2014, 08:08 Hindemith Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 23:25 (Hindemith) | Fragment, Gesichtet, KomplettPlagiat, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, StudyMode 2008 |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 12, Zeilen: 2-8 |
Quelle: StudyMode 2008 Seite(n): 1, Zeilen: - |
|---|---|
| The practice of corporate social responsibility is subject to much debate and criticism. Proponents argue that there is a strong business case for corporate social responsibility, in that corporations benefit in multiple ways by operating with a perspective broader and longer than their own immediate, short-term profits. Critics argue that corporate social responsibility distracts from the fundamental economic role of businesses, others argue that it is nothing more than superficial window-dressing; still others argue that it is an attempt to pre-empt the role of governments as a watchdog over powerful multinational corporations. | The practice of CSR is subject to much debate and criticism. Proponents argue that there is a strong business case for CSR, in that corporations benefit in multiple ways by operating with a perspective broader and longer than their own immediate, short-term profits. Critics argue that CSR distracts from the fundamental economic role of businesses; others argue that it is nothing more than superficial window-dressing; still others argue that it is an attempt to pre-empt the role of governments as a watchdog over powerful multinational corporations. |
The source is not mentioned. |
|
| [2.] Msc/Fragment 023 03 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 10:19 PlagProf:-) Erstellt: 22. December 2014, 22:35 (WiseWoman) | Fragment, Gesichtet, KomplettPlagiat, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Wikipedia Social Market Economy 2007 |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 23, Zeilen: 3-19 |
Quelle: Wikipedia Social Market Economy 2007 Seite(n): Internetquelle, Zeilen: - |
|---|---|
| The social market economy was the main economic model used in Western and Northern Europe during the Cold War era. It originated in West Germany, and it is known as Soziale
Marktwirtschaft in German. In West Germany, the social market model was created and implemented by the Christian Democrat Ludwig Erhard, Minister of Economics under Konrad Adenauer's chancellorship and German Chancellor in his own right from 1963 to 1966. While social market economies are often seen as the realization of ordoliberalism and do in fact chiefly stem from the theories of the ordoliberals, the systems actually put into effect in Europe after the Second World War were strongly influenced by social democracy and generally have a slight social-democratic bent. The social market economy seeks a middle path between socialism and capitalism (i.e. a mixed economy) and aims at maintaining a balance between a high rate of economic growth, low inflation, low levels of unemployment, good working conditions, social welfare, and public services, by using state intervention. Basically respecting the free market, the social market economy is opposed to both a planned economy and laissez-faire capitalism. Erhard once told Friedrich Hayek that the free market economy did not need to be made social but was social in its origin. In a social market economy, collective bargaining is often done on a national level not between one corporation and one union, but national employers' organizations and national trade unions. |
The social market economy was the main economic model used in Western and Northern Europe during the Cold War era. It originated in West Germany, and it is known as Soziale Marktwirtschaft in German.
In West Germany, the social market model was created and implemented by the Christian Democrat Ludwig Erhard, Minister of Economics under Konrad Adenauer's chancellorship and German Chancellor in his own right from 1963 to 1966. While social market economies are often seen as the realization of ordoliberalism and do in fact chiefly stem from the theories of the ordoliberals, the systems actually put into effect in Europe after the Second World War were strongly influenced by social democracy and generally have a slight social-democratic bent. Model The social market economy seeks a middle path between socialism and capitalism (i.e. a mixed economy) and aims at maintaining a balance between a high rate of economic growth, low inflation, low levels of unemployment, good working conditions, social welfare, and public services, by using state intervention. Basically respecting the free market, the social market economy is opposed to both a planned economy and laissez-faire capitalism. Erhard once told Friedrich Hayek that the free market economy did not need to be made social but was social in its origin.[1] In a social market economy, collective bargaining is often done on a national level not between one corporation and one union, but national employers' organizations and national trade unions. |
Wikipedia is not mentioned in the thesis. |
|
| [3.] Msc/Fragment 023 20 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 10:32 PlagProf:-) Erstellt: 22. December 2014, 22:45 (WiseWoman) | Fragment, Gesichtet, KomplettPlagiat, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Wikipedia Freiburg School 2007 |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 23, Zeilen: 20-21 |
Quelle: Wikipedia Freiburg School 2007 Seite(n): Internetquelle, Zeilen: - |
|---|---|
| The Freiburg School is a school of economic thought founded in the 1930s at the University of Freiburg. It builds somewhat on the earlier historical school of economics. | The Freiburg School is a school of economic thought founded in the 1930s at the University of Freiburg.
It builds somewhat on the earlier Historical school of economics. |
Wikipedia is not mentioned in the thesis. This short fragment connects two other instances of unattributed copy & paste from Wikipedia articles. |
|
| [4.] Msc/Fragment 023 22 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 10:33 PlagProf:-) Erstellt: 22. December 2014, 22:57 (WiseWoman) | Fragment, Gesichtet, KomplettPlagiat, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Wikipedia Ordoliberalism 2007 |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 23, Zeilen: 22-45 |
Quelle: Wikipedia Ordoliberalism 2007 Seite(n): Internetquelle, Zeilen: - |
|---|---|
| Ordoliberalism (also called German neoliberalism) is a school of liberalism emphasizing the need for the state to ensure that the free market produces results close to its theoretical potential (see allocative efficiency). The theory was developed by German economists and legal scholars such as Wilhelm Röpke (who spent the Nazi period in exile in Turkey), Walter Eucken, Franz Böhm and Hans Grossmann-Doerth from about 1930-1950; Ordoliberal ideals (with modifications) drove the creation of the post-World War II German social market economy and its attendant “Wirtschaftswunder”.
Ordoliberal theory holds that the state must create a proper legal environment for the economy and maintain a healthy level of competition through measures that adhere to market principles. The concern is that, if the state does not take active measures to foster competition, firms with monopoly or oligopoly power will emerge, which will not only subvert the advantages offered by the market economy, but also possibly undermine good government, since strong economic power can be transformed into political power. Quoting Stephen Padgett: "A central tenet of ordo-liberalism is a clearly defined division of labor in economic management, with specific responsibilities assigned to particular institutions. Monetary policy should be the responsibility of a central bank committed to monetary stability and low inflation, and insulated from political pressure by independent status. Fiscal policy - balancing tax revenue against government expenditure - is the domain of the government, whilst macro-economic policy is the preserve of employers and trade unions." The state should form an economical order instead of directing economical processes. Wilhelm Röpke considered Ordoliberalism to be "liberal conservatism" against capitalism. Alexander Rüstow also has criticized laissez-faire capitalism. The Ordoliberals thus separated themselves from classical liberals like Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek. For their political philosophy, Ordoliberals were influenced by Aristotle, Tocqueville, Hegel, Spengler and Karl Mannheim. |
Ordoliberalism (also called German neoliberalism) is a school of liberalism emphasizing the need for the state to ensure that the free market produces results close to its theoretical potential (see allocative efficiency). The theory was developed by German economists and legal scholars such as Wilhelm Röpke (who spent the Nazi period in exile in Turkey), Walter Eucken, Franz Böhm and Hans Großmann-Doerth from about 1930-1950; Ordoliberal ideals (with modifications) drove the creation of the post-World War II German social market economy and its attendant Wirtschaftswunder.
Ordoliberal theory holds that the state must create a proper legal environment for the economy and maintain a healthy level of competition through measures that adhere to market principles.[1] The concern is that, if the state does not take active measures to foster competition, firms with monopoly (or oligopoly) power will emerge, which will not only subvert the advantages offered by the market economy, but also possibly undermine good government, since strong economic power can be transformed into political power. Quoting Stephen Padgett: "A central tenet of ordo-liberalism is a clearly defined division of labor in economic management, with specific responsibilities assigned to particular institutions. Monetary policy should be the responsibility of a central bank committed to monetary stability and low inflation, and insulated from political pressure by independent status. Fiscal policy- balancing tax revenue against government expenditure- is the domain of the government, whilst macro-economic policy is the preserve of employers and trade unions." The state should form an economical order instead of directing economical processes. [...] Wilhelm Röpke considered Ordoliberalism to be "liberal conservatism," against capitalism in his work Civitas Humana (A Humane Order of Society, 1944). Alexander Rüstow also has criticized laissez-faire capitalism in his work Das Versagen des Wirtschaftsliberalismus (The Failure of Economic Liberalism, 1950). The Ordoliberals thus separated themselves from other traditional liberals, the "paleoliberals," like Ludwig von Mises and Friedrich Hayek. For their political philosophy, Ordoliberals were influenced by Aristotle, Tocqueville, Hegel, Spengler and Karl Mannheim. |
Wikipedia is not mentioned in the thesis. |
|
| [5.] Msc/Fragment 023 46 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 10:22 PlagProf:-) Erstellt: 22. December 2014, 23:06 (WiseWoman) | Fragment, Gesichtet, KomplettPlagiat, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Wikipedia Social Market Economy 2007 |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 23, Zeilen: 46-47 |
Quelle: Wikipedia Social Market Economy 2007 Seite(n): Internetquelle, Zeilen: - |
|---|---|
| Following the fall of the Berlin Wall on 9 November 1989, most centre right parties gradually moved towards the highly capitalist economic policies of neoliberalism, and a significant por[tion of the centre left made a similar move, developing the "Third Way". Nevertheless, a commitment to some form of social market economy was present in the European Union Constitution (now in limbo following the referendums in France and the Netherlands).] | Following the fall of the Berlin Wall on 9 November 1989, most centre right parties gradually moved towards the highly capitalist economic policies of neoliberalism, and a significant portion of the centre left made a similar move, developing the "Third Way". Nevertheless, a commitment to some form of social market economy was present in the European Union Constitution (now in limbo following the referendums in France and the Netherlands). |
Wikipedia is not mentioned in the thesis. |
|
| [6.] Msc/Fragment 024 04 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 09:55 PlagProf:-) Erstellt: 22. December 2014, 21:32 (WiseWoman) | Fragment, Gesichtet, KomplettPlagiat, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Wikipedia Konrad Adenauer 2007 |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 24, Zeilen: 4-48 |
Quelle: Wikipedia Konrad Adenauer 2007 Seite(n): Internetquelle, Zeilen: - |
|---|---|
| Konrad Adenauer was born as the third of five children of Johann Konrad Adenauer (1833-1906) and his wife Helene (1849-1919) (née Scharfenberg) in Cologne. His siblings were August (1872-1952), Johannes (1873-1937), Lilli (1879-1950) and Elisabeth, who died shortly after birth. In 1894, he completed his matura and started to study law and politics at the universities of Freiburg, Munich and Bonn. He was a member of several Roman Catholic students’ associations under the K.St.V. Arminia in Bonn. He finished his studies in 1901. Afterwards he worked as a lawyer at the court in Cologne. As a devout Roman Catholic, he joined the Centre Party in 1906 and was elected to Cologne’s city council in the same year. In 1909, he became Vice-Mayor of Cologne. From 1917 to 1933, he served as Mayor of Cologne. He had the unpleasant task of heading Cologne in the era of British occupation following the First World War and lasting until 1926. He managed to establish faithful relations with the British military authorities and flirted with Rhenish separatism (a Rhenish state as part of Germany, but outside Prussia). During the Weimar Republic, he was president of the Prussian State Council (“Preußischer Staatsrat”) from 1922 to 1933, which was the representative of the Prussian cities and provinces. When the Nazis rose to power in 1933, the Centre Party lost the “elections” in Cologne and Adenauer fled to the abbey of Maria Laach, threatened by the new government after he had refused even to shake hands with a local Nazi leader. The hosting of Adenauer for a year at this abbey was cited by its abbot after the war, when accused by Heinrich Böll and others of collaboration with the Nazis. He was imprisoned briefly after the Night of the Long Knives. During the next two years, he changed residences often due to reprisals inflicted on him by the Nazis. In 1937, he was successful in claiming at least some compensation for his once confiscated house and managed to live in seclusion for some years. According to Albert Speer Hitler expressed admiration for Adenauer, noting his building of a road circling the city as a bypass, and of a “green belt” of parks. However, both Hitler and Speer felt that due to Adenauer’s principal political views and general stubbornness, he couldn’t possibly play any role within their movement nor be helpful to the Nazi party in any way. After the failed assassination attempt on Hitler, in 1944, he was imprisoned for the second time, being known as an opponent of the regime. But no active role in the plot could be connected to him by the Gestapo and he was released some weeks later. Shortly after the war, the Americans installed him again as Mayor of Cologne, but the British administration dismissed him for his alleged incompetence.
After his dismissal as Mayor of Cologne, Adenauer devoted himself to building a new political party, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), which hoped to embrace Protestants as well as Roman Catholics in a single party. In January 1946, Adenauer started a political meeting of the future CDU in the British zone as its doyen (the oldest man in attendance, “Alterspräsident”) and was informally accepted as its leader. Adenauer worked diligently at building up contacts and support in the CDU over the next few years, and he sought with varying success to impose his particular ideology on the party. His was an ideology at odds with many in the CDU who wished to unite socialism and Christianity; Adenauer preferred to stress the dignity of the individual, and he considered both communism and Nazism materialist world views that violated that dignity. Adenauer’s leading role in the CDU of the British zone won him a position at the Parliamentary Council of 1948, called into existence by the Western Allies to draft a constitution for the three western zones of Germany. He was the chairman of this constitutional convention and, like George Washington in the United States, vaulted from this position to being chosen as the first head of government once the new “Basic Law” had been [promulgated in May 1949.] |
Konrad Adenauer was born as the third of five children of Johann Konrad Adenauer (1833-1906) and his wife Helene (1849-1919) (née Scharfenberg) in Cologne. His siblings were August (1872-1952), Johannes (1873-1937), Lilli (1879-1950) and Elisabeth, who died shortly after birth. In 1894, he completed his Abitur and started to study law and politics at the universities of Freiburg, Munich and Bonn. He was a member of several Roman Catholic students' associations under the K.St.V. Arminia Bonn in Bonn. He finished his studies in 1901. Afterwards he worked as a lawyer at the court in Cologne.
Early political career As a devout Roman Catholic, he joined the Centre Party in 1906 and was elected to Cologne's city council in the same year. In 1909, he became Vice-Mayor of Cologne. From 1917 to 1933, he served as Mayor of Cologne. He had the unpleasant task of heading Cologne in the era of British occupation following the First World War and lasting until 1926. He managed to establish faithful relations with the British military authorities and flirted with Rhenish separatism (a Rhenish state as part of Germany, but outside Prussia). During the Weimar Republic, he was president of the Prussian State Council (Preußischer Staatsrat) from 1922 to 1933, which was the representative of the Prussian cities and provinces. When the Nazis rose to power in 1933, the Centre Party lost the "elections" in Cologne and Adenauer fled to the abbey of Maria Laach, threatened by the new government after he had refused even to shake hands with a local Nazi leader. The hosting of Adenauer for a year at this abbey was cited by its abbot after the war, when accused by Heinrich Boll and others of collaboration with the Nazis. He was imprisoned briefly after the Night of the Long Knives. During the next two years, he changed residences often due to reprisals inflicted on him by the Nazis. In 1937, he was successful in claiming at least some compensation for his once confiscated house and managed to live in seclusion for some years. According to Albert Speer in his Spandau: The Secret Diaries, Hitler expressed admiration for Adenauer, noting his building of a road circling the city as a bypass, and of a "green belt" of parks. However, both Hitler and Speer felt that due to Adenauer's principal political views and general stubbornness, he couldn’t possibly play any role within their movement nor be helpful to the Nazi party in any way. After the failed assassination attempt on Hitler, in 1944, he was imprisoned for the second time, being known as an opponent of the regime. But no active role in the plot could be connected to him by the Gestapo and he was released some weeks later. Shortly after the war, the Americans installed him again as Mayor of Cologne, but the British administration dismissed him for his alleged incompetence. [...] After his dismissal as Mayor of Cologne, Adenauer devoted himself to building a new political party, the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), a successor to the Catholic Center Party which hoped to embrace Protestants as well as Catholics in a single party. In January 1946, Adenauer started a political meeting of the future CDU in the British zone as its doyen (the oldest man in attendance, Alterspräsident) and was informally accepted as its leader. Adenauer worked diligently at building up contacts and support in the CDU over the next few years, and he sought with varying success to impose his particular ideology on the party. His was an ideology at odds with many in the CDU who wished to unite socialism and Christianity; Adenauer preferred to stress the dignity of the individual, and he considered both communism and Nazism materialist world views that violated that dignity. Adenauer's leading role in the CDU of the British zone won him a position at the Parliamentary Council of 1948, called into existence by the Western Allies to draft a constitution for the three western zones of Germany. He was the chairman of this constitutional convention and, like George Washington in the United States, vaulted from this position to being chosen as the first head of government once the new "Basic Law" had been promulgated in May 1949. |
The German Abitur is changed to Austrian/Czech matura, otherwise this is a word-for-word copy from the Wikipedia. |
|
| [7.] Msc/Fragment 025 01 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 10:01 PlagProf:-) Erstellt: 22. December 2014, 21:57 (WiseWoman) | Fragment, Gesichtet, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Verschleierung, Wikipedia Konrad Adenauer 2007 |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 25, Zeilen: 1-27, 28-32 |
Quelle: Wikipedia Konrad Adenauer 2007 Seite(n): Internetquelle, Zeilen: - |
|---|---|
| At the German federal election, 1949, Adenauer became the first Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany (Ger. Bundeskanzler) after World War II. He held this position from 1949 to 1963, a period which spans most of the preliminary phase of the Cold War. During this period, the post-war division of Germany was consolidated with the establishment of two separate German states, the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany) and the German Democratic Republic (East Germany). The first elections to the “Bundestag” of West Germany were held on August 15, 1949, with the Christian Democrats emerging as the strongest party. Theodor Heuss was elected first President of the Republic, and Adenauer was elected Chancellor on September 16, 1949.
Adenauer’s achievements include the establishment of a stable democracy in defeated Germany, a lasting reconciliation with France, a general political reorientation towards the West, recovering limited but far-reaching sovereignty for West Germany by firmly integrating it with the emerging Euro-Atlantic community (NATO and the Organisation for European Economic Cooperation). Adenauer is also associated with establishing an efficient pension system, which ensured an unparalleled prosperity for retired persons, and - along with his Minister for Economic Affairs and successor, Ludwig Erhard - with the West German model of a social market economy, which showed itself as a mixed economy with capitalism moderated by elements of social welfare and Catholic social teaching allowing for the boom period known as the “Wirtschaftswunder” (“economic miracle”) and produced broad prosperity. Thus, Adenauer ensured a truly free and democratic society which had been almost unknown to the German people before - notwithstanding that more or less hopeless attempt between 1919 and 1933 (the Weimar Republic) - and which is today not just normal but also deeply integrated into modern German society. He thereby laid the groundwork for the Western world to trust Germany again in spite of the crimes that had been committed by the Nazis. Precisely because of Adenauer’s former policy, a later reunification of both German states was possible. A unified Germany remained part of the European Union and NATO. In retrospect, mainly positive assessments of his chancellorship – especially the establishment of a social market structure which might be called the roots of the movement of Corporate Social Responsibility - prevail, not only with the German public, which voted him the “greatest German of all time” in a 2003 television poll, but even with some of today’s left-wing intellectuals, who praise his unconditional commitment to western-style democracy and European integration. |
At the German federal election, 1949 Adenauer became the first Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany after World War II. He held this position from 1949 to 1963, a period which spans most of the preliminary phase of the Cold War. During this period, the post-war division of Germany was consolidated with the establishment of two separate German states, the Federal Republic of Germany (West Germany) and the German Democratic Republic (East Germany). The first elections to the Bundestag of West Germany were held on August 15, 1949, with the Christian Democrats emerging as the strongest party. Theodor Heuss was elected first President of the Republic, and Adenauer was elected Chancellor on September 16, 1949.
Adenauer's achievements include the establishment of a stable democracy in defeated Germany, a lasting reconciliation with France, a general political reorientation towards the West, recovering limited but far-reaching sovereignty for West Germany by firmly integrating it with the emerging Euro-Atlantic community (NATO and the Organisation for European Economic Cooperation). Adenauer is also associated with establishing an efficient pension system, which ensured an unparalleled prosperity for retired persons, and - along with his Minister for Economic Affairs and successor, Ludwig Erhard - with the West German model of a "social market economy" (a mixed economy with capitalism moderated by elements of social welfare and Catholic social teaching), which allowed for the boom period known as the Wirtschaftswunder ("economic miracle") and produced broad prosperity. Thus Adenauer ensured a truly free and democratic society which had been almost unknown to the German people before - notwithstanding that more or less hopeless attempt between 1919 and 1933 (the Weimar Republic) - and which is today not just normal but also deeply integrated into modern German society. He thereby laid the groundwork for the western world to trust Germany again in spite of all the horrible crimes that had been committed in Germany's name under the Nazis. Precisely because of Adenauer’s former policy, a later reunification of both German states was possible. A unified Germany remained part of the European Union and NATO. [...] In retrospect, mainly positive assessments of his chancellorship prevail, not only with the German public, which voted him the "greatest German of all time" in a 2003 television poll, but even with some of today's left-wing intellectuals, who praise his unconditional commitment to western-style democracy and European integration. |
A sentence pertaining to the topic of the dissertation is inserted. The few differences could be because a different version of the Wikipedia page was used, this was the first page with the correct spelling of "unparalleled". |
|
| [8.] Msc/Fragment 034 07 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 20:29 Hindemith Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 15:19 (Graf Isolan) | Fragment, Gesichtet, Mgmtguru 2006, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Verschleierung |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 34, Zeilen: 7-9 |
Quelle: Mgmtguru 2006 Seite(n): 1 (internet version), Zeilen: - |
|---|---|
| Whose structures are not fitted to the environment will not perform well and will fail. Most new organisations fail within the first few years. | Organizations whose structures are not fitted to the environment will not perform well and will die-out. Indeed, most new organizations fail within the first few years. |
The source is not mentioned. More will be taken from the same source further down the page. |
|
| [9.] Msc/Fragment 034 12 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 20:35 Hindemith Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 15:17 (SleepyHollow02) | Fragment, Gesichtet, Mgmtguru 2006, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Verschleierung |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 34, Zeilen: 12-33 |
Quelle: Mgmtguru 2006 Seite(n): 1 (online source), Zeilen: - |
|---|---|
| We tend to view organising a matter of decision-making: we decide to arrange the people, jobs, and positions that we have available to meet management’s needs. But, there are real constraints on the forms of organisation available to us. Hospitals tend not to be structured like fast food restaurants, and banks are not organized like a manufacturing plant. The task - or type of work to be done, the technology - the way we know how to do something -, and our knowledge of what has worked and what does not work influence and limit our choice of organisational design. The classic theorists, Taylor, Fayol, and Weber contributed to the architectural perspective on organisations by focusing on their structural attributes like size and span of control. For most of America’s and Europe’s business history firm’s produced a single product for a local market.
The organisational structure to support this business strategy is the functional form. This simple form is organized around a division of labor into specialized functions (or departments) that interrelate to create, deliver and manage a product. This form is often characterized as organizing inputs for transformation into a single output. By the 1950’s nearly all of the diversified firms used the multi-divisional form (MDF). The MDF structure organized businesses under a corporate headquarters - with the board of directors and chief officers - that functions as banker, strategist, and coordinator for multiple business units - sometime termed “strategic business units”. In the business units functional activities, e.g. marketing, are organised as departments with division managers on top. This form is often characterized as organising by outputs or products. To retain direct control of each business unit’s functions - human resources, finance, and production -, the matrix form has been suggested by some theorists and has been embraced by a few corporations. |
We tend to view organizing a matter of decision-making: we decide to arrange the people, jobs, and positions that we have available to meet management’s needs. But, there are real constraints on the forms of organization available to us. Hospitals tend not to be structured like fast food restaurants, and banks are not organized like a manufacturing plant. The task (or type of work to be done), the technology (the way we know how to do something), and our knowledge of what has worked and what does not work influence and limit our choice of organizational design.
The classic theorists, Taylor, Fayol, and Weber contributed to the architectural perspective on organizations by focusing on their structural attributes: Size [...] [...] Span of Control [...] [...] Strategy – For most of America’s business history firm’s produced a single product for a local market. The organizational structure to support this business strategy is the functional form. This simple form is organized around a division of labor into specialized functions (or departments) that interrelate to create, deliver and manage a product. This form is often characterized as organizing inputs for transformation into a single output. [...] By the 1950’s nearly all of the diversified firms listed in the Fortune 500 organized using the Multi-Divisional form (MDF). The MDF structure organized businesses under a headquarters that functions as banker, strategist, and coordinator for multiple business units (sometime termed “strategic business units” or SBU’s). This form is often characterized as organizing by outputs (products). [...] To retain direct control of each business unit’s functions (human resources, finance, and production), the matrix form has been suggested by some theorists and has been embraced by a few corporations. |
The source is not given. |
|
| [10.] Msc/Fragment 037 26 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 24. December 2014, 08:21 Hindemith Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 19:16 (Graf Isolan) | BauernOpfer, Fragment, Gesichtet, Imparato 1995, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 37, Zeilen: 26-33 |
Quelle: Imparato 1995 Seite(n): 1 (internet version), Zeilen: - |
|---|---|
| 5.1.1 Enthusiasm or power
As Dr. Imparato [15] sees, less-effective managers consider their power to get things done severely limited, since they believe that real power resides with top management. They say, "It doesn't pay to try to get things done until senior management gets its act together." They also believe that power comes from job titles and positions on organizational charts. Highly effective managers distinguish formal authority and power. Although they recognize that top management has more formal authority, they believe that power, like respect, is earned, not given out. Since these managers´ views, [sic] anyone can have power as the ability to influence people and get things done. [15] IMPARATO, N. Dr., professor of business, University of San Francisco, and consults on management. With Oren Harari, he published Jumping the Curve: Innovation and Strategic Choice in an Age of Transition, Jossey-Bass Management, San Francisco, 1994, 324p., ISBN-10: 0787901830 ISBN-13: 978-0787901837 |
Dr. Imparato is professor of business, University of San Francisco, and consults on management. With Oren Harari, he published Jumping the Curve: Innovation and Strategic Choice in an Age of Transition (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1994), from which this article was adapted. Phone (415) 666-6771.
[...] Creating power. Less-effective managers consider their power to get things done severely limited, since they believe that real power resides with top management. They say, "It doesn't pay to try to get things done until senior management gets its act together." They also believe that power comes from job titles and positions on organizational charts. Highly effective managers distinguish formal authority and power. Although they recognize that top management has more formal authority, they believe that power, like respect, is earned, not given out. Since these managers view power as the ability to influence people and get things done, anyone can have power. |
The source is mentioned at the beginning, but nothing has been marked as citation. |
|
| [11.] Msc/Fragment 038 06 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 25. December 2014, 10:46 Hindemith Erstellt: 24. December 2014, 11:37 (WiseWoman) | BauernOpfer, Fragment, Gesichtet, Imparato 1995, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 38, Zeilen: 1-2, 6-9 |
Quelle: Imparato 1995 Seite(n): 1 (online source), Zeilen: - |
|---|---|
| [How Dr. Imparato [15] found out, less-effective managers dislike change, and prefer predictability, order and stability. Effective managers stand for their ideas and are tough, persistent, and] consistent in how they express those ideas. They’re also eager to enroll others in the same point of view. They go to great length to avoid acting expediently or appearing opportunistic. [...]
5.2 Results Inaccurate role perception explains why so many managers can’t translate their knowledge into higher job performance. And if they don't understand their role, managers won't be able to accumulate the qualities and capacities they need to channel their motivation in the right direction, to motivate others, and in the end their companies or institutions to the proper goals like economic performance, efficiency and sustainability. [15] IMPARATO, N. Dr., professor of business, University of San Francisco, and consults on management. With Oren Harari, he published Jumping the Curve: Innovation and Strategic Choice in an Age of Transition, Jossey-Bass Management, San Francisco, 1994, 324p., ISBN-10: 0787901830 ISBN-13: 978-0787901837 |
Dr. Imparato is professor of business, University of San Francisco, and consults on management. With Oren Harari, he published Jumping the Curve: Innovation and Strategic Choice in an Age of Transition (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 1994), from which this article was adapted. Phone (415) 666-6771.
[...] [...] Less-effective managers dislike change, and prefer predictability, order and stability. [...] [...] Highly effective managers stand for one or two ideas—self-management or speed, for example—and are tough, persistent, and consistent in how they express those ideas. They’re also eager to enroll others in the same point of view. They go to great lengths to avoid acting expediently or appearing opportunistic. [...] [...] Inaccurate role perception explains why so many mangers [sic] -- no matter how many seminars they attend and management tapes they audit--can’t translate their knowledge into higher job performance. And if they don't understand their role, managers won't be able to accumulate the skills and capacities they need to channel their motivation in the right direction, let alone to motivate others toward the proper goals. |
The source is mentioned in the beginning, but nothing has been marked as a citation, and it is not clear that text taken from the source continues into the results section. |
|
| [12.] Msc/Fragment 039 18 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 24. December 2014, 08:11 Hindemith Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 16:44 (Hindemith) | Fragment, Gesichtet, KomplettPlagiat, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Wikipedia Corporate social responsibility 2007 |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 39, Zeilen: 18-22 |
Quelle: Wikipedia Corporate social responsibility 2007 Seite(n): 1 (online source), Zeilen: - |
|---|---|
| In crowded marketplaces, companies strive for a unique selling proposition which can separate them from the competition in the minds of consumers. Corporate social responsibility can play a role in building customer loyalty based on distinctive ethical values. Several major brands are built on ethical values. Business service organisations can benefit too from building a reputation for integrity and best practice [26].
[26] PALUSZEK, J. Ethics and Brand Value: Strategic Differentiation (PowerPoint). Business and Organizational Ethics Partnership Meeting. Markkula Center for Applied Ethics, Santa Clara University, 2005 |
Brand differentiation
In crowded marketplaces companies strive for a unique selling proposition which can separate them from the competition in the minds of consumers. CSR can play a role in building customer loyalty based on distinctive ethical values[14]. Several major brands, such as The Co-operative Group and The Body Shop are built on ethical values. Business service organisations can benefit too from building a reputation for integrity and best practice. 14. Ethics and Brand Value: Strategic Differentiation [ http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/ focusareas/business/ethics-and-brand-value.ppt ] |
The source is not mentioned. The reference given does not contain the parallel text. |
|
| [13.] Msc/Fragment 040 34 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 24. December 2014, 08:08 Hindemith Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 16:27 (Hindemith) | Fragment, Gesichtet, KomplettPlagiat, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Wikipedia Corporate social responsibility 2007 |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 40, Zeilen: 34-39 |
Quelle: Wikipedia Corporate social responsibility 2007 Seite(n): 1 (online source), Zeilen: - |
|---|---|
| 6.4 The meaning of corporate social responsibility for risk management
Managing risk is a central part of many corporate strategies. Reputations that take decades to be built up can be ruined in hours through incidents such as corruption scandals or environmental accidents. These events can also draw unwanted attention from regulators, courts, governments and media. Building a genuine culture of 'doing the right thing' within a corporation can offset these risks [20]. [20] KYTLE, B., RUGGIE, J. Corporate Social Responsibility as Risk Management: A Model for Multinationals (PDF), 2005, 21p., Social Responsibility Initiative Working Paper No. 10. John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University. |
Risk management
Managing risk is a central part of many corporate strategies. Reputations that take decades to build up can be ruined in hours through incidents such as corruption scandals or environmental accidents. These events can also draw unwanted attention from regulators, courts, governments and media. Building a genuine culture of 'doing the right thing' within a corporation can offset these risks[13]. 13. Risk: A model for multinationals [ http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/m-rcbg/CSRI/ publications/workingpaper_10_kytle_ruggie.pdf ] |
The source is not mentioned. The reference given does not contain the parallel text. |
|
| [14.] Msc/Fragment 056 01 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 15:05 PlagProf:-) Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 13:05 (SleepyHollow02) | BauernOpfer, Fragment, Gesichtet, Mackey et al 2007, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 56, Zeilen: 1, 3ff. |
Quelle: Mackey et al 2007 Seite(n): 817f, Zeilen: 817: left col.. 1 ff; 819: left col., 1ff. |
|---|---|
| 11. Corporate Social Responsibility and firm performance
General implications With Mackay, Mackay, Barney debates continue to rage about whether or not firms should engage in socially responsible behavior. On the one hand, traditional economic arguments suggest that managers should make decisions that maximize the wealth of their firm’s equity holders. Managers do this by making decisions that maximize the present value of the firm’s future cash flows. To the extent that socially responsible activities are inconsistent with these economic objectives, traditional financial logic suggests that they should be avoided. Indeed, firms that engage in such activities - especially when they are very costly - may be subject to various forms of market discipline, including limited access to low-cost capital, the replacement of senior managers, and takeovers. On the other hand, some business and society scholars have argued that firms have a duty to society that goes well beyond simply maximizing the wealth of equity holders. These scholars argue that such a narrow focus can lead management to ignore other important stakeholders - including employees, suppliers, customers, and society at large - and that sometimes the interests of these other stakeholders should supersede the interests of a firm’s equity holders in managerial decision making, even if this reduces the present value of the firm’s cash flows. One way to resolve this conflict is to observe that at least some forms of socially responsible behavior may actually improve the present value of a firm’s future cash flows and, thus, may be consistent with the wealth-maximizing interests of the firm’s equity holders. For example, socially responsible behavior can enable a firm to differentiate its products in its product market, can enable a firm to avoid costly governmentimposed fines, and can act to reduce a firm’s exposure to risk. All of these socially responsible actions can increase the present value of a firm’s future cash flows and are therefore consistent with maximizing the wealth of the firm’s equity holders. However, from a broader theoretical perspective, the entire effort to discover how socially responsible activities can increase the present value of a firm’s future cash flows is problematic. After all, the essential point of many business and society scholars is that the interests of a firm’s equity holders sometimes need to be set aside in favor of the interests of the firm’s other stakeholders. That is, according to social responsibility theorists, firms should sometimes engage in activities that benefit employees, suppliers, customers, and society at large, even if those activities reduce the present value of the cash flows generated by the firm. Focusing the study of corporate social responsibility on those actions that increase the present value of a firm’s cash flows fails to address this central theme in the corporate social responsibility literature. In this context, not just examples of socially responsible actions that can have a positive impact on a firm’s cash flows - so-called profit-maximizing “ethics” - are required but, rather, a theory that suggests the conditions under which firms will engage in socially responsible activities, even if those activities reduce the present value of a firm’s cash flows - so-called costly philanthropy. In this paper we propose such a theory. This theory builds on the simple observation that equity holders may sometimes have interests besides simply maximizing their wealth when they make their investment decisions. Sometimes, they may want the firms they invest in to pursue socially responsible activities, even if these activities reduce the present value of the cash flows generated by these firms. Assumptions and Definitions Before developing the model, it is helpful to define its key terms and specify its central assumptions. It may be noted that much of the current confusion in the Corporate Social Responsibility Literature is due to a lack of clarity about definitions and assumptions. |
Debates continue to rage about whether or not firms should engage in socially responsible behavior. On the one hand, traditional economic arguments suggest that managers should make decisions that maximize the wealth of their firm’s equity holders (Friedman, 1962). Managers do this by making decisions that maximize the present value of a firm’s future cash flows (Copeland, Murrin, & Koller, 1994). To the extent that socially responsible activities are inconsistent with these economic objectives, traditional financial logic suggests that they should be avoided. Indeed, firms that engage in such activities — especially when they are very costly — may be subject to various forms of market discipline, including limited access to low cost capital, the replacement of senior managers, and takeovers (Jensen & Meckling, 1976).1
On the other hand, some business and society scholars have argued that firms have a duty to society that goes well beyond simply maximizing the wealth of equity holders (Swanson, 1999; Whetten, Rands, & Godfrey, 2001). These scholars argue that such a narrow focus can lead management to ignore other important stakeholders — including employees, suppliers, customers, and society at large — and that sometimes the interests of these other stakeholders should supersede the interests of a firm’s equity holders in managerial decision making, even if this reduces the present value of the firm’s cash flows (Clarkson, 1995; Donaldson & Preston, 1995; Freeman, 1984; Mitchell, Agle, & Wood, 1997; Paine, 2002; Wood & Jones, 1995). One way to resolve this conflict is to observe that at least some forms of socially responsible behavior may actually improve the present value of a firm’s future cash flows and thus may be consistent with the wealth maximizing interests of the firm’s equity holders. For example, socially responsible behavior can enable a [p. 818] firm to differentiate its products in its product market (McWilliams & Siegel, 2001; Waddock & Graves, 1997), can enable a firm to avoid costly governmentimposed fines (Belkaoui, 1976; Bragdon & Marlin, 1972; Freedman & Stagliano, 1991; Shane & Spicer, 1983; Spicer, 1978), and can act to reduce a firm’s exposure to risk (Godfrey, 2004). All of these socially responsible actions can increase the present value of a firm’s future cash flows and are therefore consistent with maximizing the wealth of the firm’s equity holders. However, from a broader theoretical perspective, the entire effort to discover how socially responsible activities can increase the present value of a firm’s future cash flows is problematic. After all, the essential point of many business and society scholars is that the interests of a firm’s equity holders sometimes need to be set aside in favor of the interests of the firm’s other stakeholders (Banfield, 1985; Carroll, 1995; Windsor, 2001). That is — according to social responsibility theorists — firms should sometimes engage in activities that benefit employees, suppliers, customers, and society at large, even if those activities reduce the present value of the cash flows generated by the firm (Mitchell et al, 1997; Paine, 2002; Wood & Jones, 1995). Focusing the study of corporate social responsibility on those actions that increase the present value of a firm’s cash flows fails to address this 2 central theme in the corporate social responsibility literature (Windsor, 2001). In this context, not just examples of socially responsible actions that can have a positive impact on a firm’s cash flows — so-called profit-maximizing “ethics” (Windsor, 2001) — are required but, rather, a theory that suggests the conditions under which firms will engage in socially responsible activities even if those activities reduce the present value of a firm’s cash flows — so-called “costly philanthropy” (Windsor, 2001). In this paper we propose such a theory. This theory builds on the simple observation that equity holders may sometimes have interests besides simply maximizing their wealth when they make their investment decisions. Sometimes, they may want the firms they invest in to pursue socially responsible activities, even if these activities reduce the present value of the cash flows generated by these firms. ASSUMPTIONS AND DEFINITIONS Before developing the model, it is helpful to define of its key terms and specify its central assumptions. Margolis & Walsh (2003) have noted that much of the current confusion in the corporate social responsibility literature is due to a lack of clarity about definitions and assumptions. |
The source is mentioned at the beginning of the page, but nothing has been marked as citation. Line 1 is copied from the main title of the source ("Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Performance". The author also copies the sentence: "In this paper we propose such a theory." |
|
| [15.] Msc/Fragment 057 01 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 15:16 PlagProf:-) Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 12:56 (SleepyHollow02) | BauernOpfer, Fragment, Gesichtet, Mackey et al 2007, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 57, Zeilen: 1 ff. |
Quelle: Mackey et al 2007 Seite(n): 818f, Zeilen: 818: right col., lines 9ff; 819: left col., 1ff |
|---|---|
| What Is Socially Responsible Behavior?
A wide variety of definitions of Corporate Social Responsibility have been proposed in the literature. While these definitions vary in detail, many focus on voluntary firm actions designed to improve social or environmental conditions. This is the definition of corporate social responsibility we adopt here. Of course, within this broader definition, different stakeholders may have different preferences for specific socially responsible activities they would like to see their firm invest in. Moreover, these preferences may vary as the currency of social issues evolves over time. However, as long as a firm’s actions are consistent with this general definition of social responsibility - that is, as long as they are voluntary and designed to improve social or environmental conditions — they are considered socially responsible for the purposes of the model developed here. The specific decision-making context modelled here focuses on determining the total demand for investment opportunities in firms engaging in specific socially responsible activities; the current supply of those opportunities in the market; and whether current supply is less than, equal to, or greater than demand. In this sense, the opportunity to invest in a firm that is engaging in specific socially responsible activities can be thought of as a “product” that is sold by firms to potential equity investors as “customers.” Of course, equity holders as “customers” for opportunities to invest in socially responsible firms may vary in the kinds of corporate social responsible activities they would. What Is Firm Performance? A wide variety of definitions of firm performance have also been proposed in the literature. Both accounting and market definitions have been used to study the relationship between corporate social responsibility and firm performance. However, since most social responsibility scholars seek to understand the ways that socially responsible corporate activities can create or destroy shareholder wealth, market definitions of firm performance seem likely to be more appropriate than accounting definitions of firm performance in this context. In fact, in the model developed here, we adopt such a market definition of firm performance by focusing on how socially responsible corporate activities affect a firm’s market value. Market value is defined as the price of a firm’s equity multiplied by the number of its shares outstanding. Thus, our model addresses the following question: Supposing managers seek to maximize the market value of their firm in their decision making, will they ever choose to invest in socially responsible activities that reduce the present value of their firm’s cash flows? Of course, there is some controversy about the assumption that managers seek to maximize the market value of their firms in their decision making. Some have suggested that under conditions of uncertainty and imperfect information, managers cannot know, ex ante, how to maximize the market value of their firm. Others have suggested that managerial interests are often inconsistent with maximizing the value of a firm. However, some of these same authors argue that managers who fail to maximize the market value of their firm, ex post, may be subject to a variety of market sanctions, and, thus, the assumption that managers seek to maximize the value of their firm is a useful approximation. For our purposes here, whether or not managers can or do seek to maximize the value of their firm in their decision making is less important. Rather, we conduct a simple “thought experiment”: since corporate social responsibility scholars have been interested in understanding the economic consequences for a firm implementing socially responsible activities, we develop a model where managers are assumed to focus on maximizing the market value of their firm, and we examine the impact of socially responsible activities on this market value. In this sense, the assumption that managers seek to maximize the market value of their firm in their decision making provides a standard against which to evaluate the economic consequences of engaging in socially responsible activities that reduce the present value of a firm’s cash flows. |
What Is Socially Responsible Behavior?
A wide variety of definitions of corporate social responsibility have been proposed in the literature (Margolis & Walsh, 2003). While these definitions vary in detail, many focus on voluntary firm actions designed to improve social or environmental conditions (Aguilera, Rupp, Williams, & Ganapathi, 2004; Davis, 1973; Wood, 1991a; 1991b; Wood & Jones, 1995; Waddock, 2004). This is the definition of corporate social responsibility we adopt here. Of course, within this broader definition, different stakeholders may have different preferences for specific socially responsible activities they would like to see their firm invest in (Grass, 1999). Moreover, these preferences may vary as the currency of social issues evolves over time (Clarkson, 1995; Davis, 1973; Moskowitz, 1975; Wartick & Cochran, 1985; Wood, 1991a). However, as long as a firm’s actions are consistent with this general definition of social responsibility — that is, as long as they are voluntary and designed to improve social or environmental conditions — they are considered socially responsible for purposes of the model developed here. The specific decision making context modeled here focuses on determining the total demand for investment opportunities in firms engaging in specific socially responsible activities, the current supply of those opportunities in the market, and whether current supply is less than, equal to, or greater than demand. In this sense, the opportunity to invest in a firm that is engaging in specific socially responsible activities can be thought of as a “product” that is sold by firms to potential equity investors as “customers.”2 [p. 819] What Is Firm Performance? A wide variety of definitions of firm performance have also been proposed in the literature (Barney, 2002). Both accounting and market definitions have been used to study the relationship between corporate social responsibility and firm performance (Orlitzky, Schmidt, & Rynes, 2003). However, since most social responsibility scholars seek to understand the ways that socially responsible corporate activities can create or destroy shareholder wealth, market definitions of firm performance seem likely to be more appropriate than accounting definitions of firm performance in this context (Margolis and Walsh, 2001). In fact, in the model developed here, we adopt such a market definition of firm performance by focusing on how socially responsible corporate activities affect a firm’s market value. Market value is defined as the price of a firm’s equity multiplied by the number of its shares outstanding. Thus, our model addresses the following question: Supposing managers seek to maximize the market value of their firm in their decision making (Copeland et al., 1994; Friedman, 1962), will they ever choose to invest in socially responsible activities that reduce the present value of their firm’s cash flows? Of course, there is some controversy about the assumption that managers seek to maximize the market value of their firms in their decision making. Some have suggested that under conditions of uncertainty and imperfect information, managers cannot know, ex ante, how to maximize the market value of their firm (Alchian, 1950). Others have suggested that managerial interests are often inconsistent with maximizing the value of a firm (Jensen & Meckling, 1976). However, some of these same authors argue that managers who fail to maximize the market value of their firm, ex post, may be subject to a variety of market sanctions (Jensen & Meckling, 1976), and, thus, the assumption that managers seek to maximize the value of their firm is a useful approximation. For our purposes here, whether or not managers can or do seek to maximize the value of their firm in their decision making is less important. Rather, we conduct a simple “thought experiment”: since corporate social responsibility scholars have been interested in understanding the economic consequences for a firm implementing socially responsible activities, we develop a model where managers are assumed to focus on maximizing the market value of their firm, and we examine the impact of socially responsible activities on this market value. In this sense, the assumption that managers seek to maximize the market value of their firm in their decision making provides a standard against which to evaluate the economic consequences of engaging in socially responsible activities that reduce the present value of a firm’s cash flows. 2 Of course, equity holders as “customers” for opportunities to invest in socially responsible firms may vary in the kinds of corporate social responsible activities in which they would prefer to invest. [...] |
The source is given on the preceding and on the following page. Note that one sentence has been copied incompletely: "firms may vary in the kinds of corporate social responsible activities they would" is reproduced without the proper ending "they would prefer to invest", which is found in the original. |
|
| [16.] Msc/Fragment 058 01 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 20:06 Hindemith Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 12:38 (SleepyHollow02) | BauernOpfer, Fragment, Gesichtet, Mackey et al 2007, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 58, Zeilen: 1 ff. (entire page) |
Quelle: Mackey et al 2007 Seite(n): 819, 820, Zeilen: 819: right col., lines 22ff; 820: left col., 1 ff. |
|---|---|
| [Yet while we examine the market value conse]quences of firms’ pursuit of socially responsible activities that reduce the present value of their cash flows, we do not assume that maximizing the present value of a firm’s cash flows and maximizing a firm’s market value are equivalent. Such an assumption is only justifiable if all of a firm’s current and potential equity holders are solely interested in maximizing their wealth in making their investment decisions. If, however, at least some of these investors have interests besides simply maximizing their wealth in making investment decisions, then “maximizing the present value of a firm’s cash flows” and “maximizing firm value” are no longer equivalent concepts.
Market Efficiency Assumptions The model presented here also assumes that capital markets are semi-strong efficient. This means that publicly available information about the perceived value of a firm’s assets will, on average, be reflected in the market price of those assets. Semi-strong efficiency, in particular, implies that if firms engage in specific socially responsible activities in a public way, current and potential equity holders will be aware of both the nature of these activities and their impact on the present value of a firm’s future cash flows and will, on average, prefer to invest in. The model developed here adopts the simplifying assumption that these equity investors all have a preference for investing in firms pursuing a particular socially responsible activity-although this specific activity is not important in the model. Without loss of generality, this preference can also be interpreted as a preference for a particular bundle of socially responsible activities. This simplifying assumption is relaxed in the model extensions section of the paper. Mackey, Mackey, and Barney adjust their valuation of a firm’s equities accordingly. There is substantial evidence that U.S. capital markets are, overall, semi-strong efficient. This does not mean that the value of a firm’s equity always equals the true underlying value of the firm; certainly, there is a great deal of private information about the value of those assets and investor decisions are often systematically nonrational and affected by emotions. However, semi-strong efficiency does suggest that whatever public information exists about the value of a firm’s assets is, on average, likely to be reflected in the price of those assets. In this context semi-strong efficiency suggests that when a firm publicly pursues socially responsible activities that reduce the present value of its cash flows, current and potential investors will factor these actions and their consequences into decisions about whether or not to buy or sell this firm’s stock. Socially Responsible Activities and Firm Cash Flows Finally, while acknowledging that some socially responsible activities can sometimes have a positive impact on the present value of afirm’s [sic] cash flows , our model examines the consequences of only those socially responsible activities that reduce the present value of a firm’s cash flows. In this way the model focuses on a central theoretical issue raised by those who study corporate social responsibility that managers should sometimes abandon efforts to maximize the present value of their firm’s future cash flows in favor of socially responsible activities that reduce the value of those cash flows. Obviously, identifying socially responsible activities that increase the present value of a firm’s cash flows is interesting in its own right. However, no new theory is required to explain why firms will pursue such activities, once identified. Such actions are consistent with received economic and financial theories of firm behavior. But new theory is required to explain why firms might pursue socially responsible actions that reduce the present value of their cash flows. Focusing the model only on these situations helps develop this critical aspect of the theory of corporate social responsibility. |
Yet while we examine the market value consequences of firms' pursuit of socially responsible activities that reduce the present value of their cash flows, we do not assume that maximizing the present value of a firm’s cash flows and maximizing a firm’s market value are equivalent. Such an assumption is only justifiable if all of a firm’s current and potential equity holders are solely interested in maximizing their wealth in making their investment decisions. If, however, at least some of these investors have interests besides simply maximizing their wealth in making investment decisions, then “maximizing the present value of a firm’s cash flows” and “maximizing firm value” are no longer equivalent concepts.
Market Efficiency Assumptions The model presented here also assumes that capital markets are semi-strong efficient (Fama, 1970). This means that publicly available information about the perceived value of a firm’s assets will, on average, be reflected in the market price of those assets. Semi-strong efficiency, in particular, implies that if firms engage in specific socially responsible activities in a public way, current and potential equity holders will be aware of both the nature of these activities and their impact on the present value of a firm’s future cash flows, and will, on average, [p. 820] adjust their valuation of a firm’s equities accordingly. There is substantial evidence that U.S. capital markets are, overall, semi-strong efficient (Copeland et al., 1994). This does not mean that the value of a firm’s equity always equals the true underlying value of the firm; certainly, there is a great deal of private information about the value of those assets (Fama, 1970) and investor decisions are often systematically nonrational (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974) and affected by emotions (Schiller, 1999; Shefrin, 2000; Thaler, 1987a,b). However, semi-strong efficiency does suggest that whatever public information exists about the value of a firm’s assets is, on average, likely to be reflected in the price of those assets (Fama, 1998)3. In this context, semi-strong efficiency suggests that when a firm publicly pursues socially responsible activities that reduce the present value of its cash flows, current and potential investors will factor these actions and their consequences into decisions about whether or not to buy or sell this firm’s stock. Socially Responsible Activities and Firm Cash Flows Finally, while acknowledging that some socially responsible activities can sometimes have a positive impact on the present value of a firm’s cash flows (Godfrey, 2004; McWilliams & Siegel, 2001; Waddock & Graves, 1997; Godfrey, 2004), our model examines the consequences of only those socially responsible activities that reduce the present value of a firm’s cash flows.4 In this way, the model focuses on a central theoretical issue raised by those who study corporate social responsibility — that managers should sometimes abandon efforts to maximize the present value of their firm’s future cash flows in favor of socially responsible activities that reduce the value of those cash flows. Obviously, identifying socially responsible activities that increase the present value of a firm’s cash flows is interesting in its own right (Godfrey, 2004; McWilliams & Siegel, 2001; Waddock & Graves, 1997). However, no new theory is required to explain why firms will pursue such activities, once identified. Such actions are consistent with received economic and financial theories of firm behavior. But new theory is required to explain why firms might pursue socially responsible actions that reduce the present value of their cash flows. Focusing the model only on these situations helps develop this critical aspect of the theory of corporate social responsibility. 2 [...] prefer to invest in. The model developed here adopts the simplifying assumption that these equity investors all have a preference for investing in firms pursuing a particular socially responsible activity - although this specific activity is is not important in the model. Without loss of generality, this preference can also be interpreted as a preference for a particular bundle of socially responsible activities. This simplifying assumption is relaxed in the model extensions section of the paper. |
The source is mentioned in the text and on the previous pages, but without the slightest indication that the entire page is taken from it. It is worth having a look at the outline of the source:
One can see that at the end of page 819 -- in the middle of a sentence -- the part of footnote 2 that is on page 819 is copied, followed by page 820, where one finds the end of the sentence that has been started on page 819. This pattern is naturally created if the text is selected across the turn of the page in the PDF version of the source and then copied and pasted. In order to give the second part of that sentence a subject, "Mackey, Mackey, and Barney" has been inserted, although the original sentence rather refers to "current and potential equity holders", which leads to a total confusion of the meaning of the original text. |
|
| [17.] Msc/Fragment 059 01 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 24. December 2014, 08:03 PlagProf:-) Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 12:12 (SleepyHollow02) | BauernOpfer, Fragment, Gesichtet, Mackey et al 2007, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 59, Zeilen: 1 ff. |
Quelle: Mackey et al 2007 Seite(n): 820, 830, Zeilen: 820: right col., 18 ff.; 830: left col.: 4 ff.; 11: left col.: 1 ff. |
|---|---|
| Mackey, Mackey and Barney’s model
In this section they present a simple model of the supply of and demand for opportunities to invest in socially responsible firms. They use this model to describe the impact that beginning or ending socially responsible activities that reduce the present value of a firm’s cash flows will have on the firm’s market value. As is always the case, they adopt a variety of simplifying assumptions. Many of these assumptions are technical in nature and do not have an impact on the conclusions drawn from the model. Some are more substantive in nature and might have an impact on these conclusions. However, several of these substantive assumptions are relaxed, and the conclusions of the model are reexamined. While relaxing these assumptions does generate important insights, it does not affect the model’s central conclusion: the impact of socially responsible activities that reduce the present value of a firm’s cash flows on a firm’s market value depends on the supply of and demand for opportunities to invest in these types of firms. Implications and discussion The central assertion of Mackey, Mackey and Barney’s[21b, p.823,824] model is that the opportunity to invest in a firm engaging in socially responsible activities is a “product” firms sell to current and potential investors. Sometimes, current and potential equity holders may prefer to invest in firms pursuing such activities, even if those activities reduce the present value of the firms’ cash flows. The central conclusion of Mackey, Mackey and Barney is that the supply of and demand for these investment opportunities determine when socially responsible activities that reduce the present value of a firm’s cash flows will be positively or negatively related to that firm’s market value. Beyond this central assertion and conclusion, the arguments developed here have a variety of other empirical, theoretical, and practical implications. Empirical Implications Overall, the model suggests that there will be a positive correlation between firm choices about investing in socially responsible activities and firm value. This is because the model adopts the assumption that managers make these choices - to begin socially responsible activities, to cease socially responsible activities, or to maintain their current strategies whether they are socially responsible or not - in a way that maximizes the market value of a firm. Recent reviews of the empirical corporate social responsibility literature generally are consistent with this expectation although it may be suggested that the empirical results, while positive overall, are nevertheless mixed. However, the model developed here suggests that efforts to examine the “overall” correlation between socially responsible activities and firm performance may be less interesting than examining the relationship between the supply and demand conditions under which these decisions are made and a firm’s market value. Sometimes, beginning socially responsible activities will increase a firm’s market value; sometimes it will reduce its market value. Sometimes, ending socially responsible activities will decrease a firm’s market value; sometimes it will increase its market value. And, sometimes, continuing current socially responsible activities - by either continuing to invest in these activities or continuing to not invest in these activities – will increase a firm’s market value; sometimes it will decrease a firm’s market value. Only by examining the supply of and demand for socially responsible investment opportunities at the time these decisions are made can the relationship between a firm’s social responsibility strategies and its market value be understood. Of course, it will often be difficult to directly measure the supply of and demand for socially responsible investment opportunities. However, it may be possible to develop surrogate measures of these concepts. For example, changes in the number of firms who score high on various aggregate measures of social responsibility might indicate changes in the supply of so[cially responsible investment opportunities.] |
THE MODEL
In this section we present a simple model of the supply of and demand for opportunities to invest in socially responsible firms. We use this model to describe the impact that beginning or ending socially responsible activities that reduce the present value of a firm’s cash flows will have on the firm’s market value. As is always the case, we adopt a variety of simplifying assumptions. Many of these assumptions are technical in nature and do not have an impact on the conclusions drawn from the model. Some are more substantive in nature and might have an impact on these conclusions. However, later in the paper, several of these substantive assumptions are relaxed, and the conclusions of the model are reexamined. While relaxing these assumptions does generate important insights, it does not affect the model’s central conclusion: the impact of socially responsible activities that reduce the present value of a firm’s cash flows on a firm’s market value depends on the supply of and demand for opportunities to invest in these types of firms. [page 830:] IMPLICATIONS AND DISCUSSION The central assertion of this paper is that the opportunity to invest in a firm engaging in socially responsible activities is a “product” firms sell to current and potential investors. Sometimes, current and potential equity holders may prefer to invest in firms pursuing such activities, even if those activities reduce the present value of the firms’ cash flows. The central conclusion of this paper is that the supply of and demand for these investment opportunities determine when socially responsible activities that reduce the present value of a firm’s cash flows will be positively or negatively related to that firm’s market value. Beyond this central assertion and conclusion, the arguments developed here have a variety of other empirical, theoretical, and practical implications. We examine some of these other implications below.11 Empirical Implications Overall, the model suggests that there will be a positive correlation between firm choices about investing in socially responsible activities and firm value. This is because the model adopts the assumption that managers make these choices — to begin socially responsible activities, to cease socially responsible activities, or to maintain their current strategies whether they are socially responsible or not — in a way that maximizes the market value of a firm. Recent reviews of the empirical corporate social responsibility literature generally are consistent with this expectation (Orlitzky et al., 2003), although Margolis and Walsh (2003) suggest that the empirical results, while positive overall, are nevertheless mixed.13 However, the model developed here suggests that efforts to examine the “overall” correlation between socially responsible activities and firm performance may be less interesting than examining the relationship between the supply and demand conditions under which these decisions are made and a firm’s market value. Sometimes, beginning socially responsible activities will increase a firm’s market value; sometimes it will reduce its market value. Sometimes, ending socially responsible activities will decrease a firm’s market value; sometimes it will increase its market value. And, sometimes, continuing current socially responsible activities — by either continuing to invest in these activities or continuing to not invest in these activities — will increase a firm’s market value; sometimes it will decrease a firm’s market value. Only by examining the supply of and demand for socially responsible investment opportunities at the time these decisions are made can the relationship between a firm’s social responsibility strategies and its market value be understood. Of course, it will often be difficult to directly measure the supply of and demand for socially responsible investment opportunities. However, it may be possible to develop surrogate measures of these concepts. For example, changes in the number of firms who score high on various aggregate measures of social responsibility might indicate changes in the supply of socially responsible investment opportunities. |
The source is mentioned at the beginning of the page. The author appears to summarise or paraphrase some of the source's findings. The reader would not expect this to be taken verbatim from the source. |
|
| [18.] Msc/Fragment 060 01 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 22:33 WiseWoman Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 12:05 (SleepyHollow02) | BauernOpfer, Fragment, Gesichtet, Mackey et al 2007, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 60, Zeilen: 1 ff. |
Quelle: Mackey et al 2007 Seite(n): 830-831, Zeilen: 830: right col.: 30 ff; 831: left column, 1ff |
|---|---|
| [For example, changes in the number of firms who score high on various aggregate measures of social responsibility might indicate changes in the supply of so-]cially responsible investment opportunities. Also, changes in the total dollars invested in socially responsible mutual funds as a percentage of the total dollars invested in all mutual funds might be an indicator of changes in total demand for socially responsible investment opportunities. Public opinion polls on the importance of various social issues in an economy might also provide some indication of the level of demand for socially responsible investment opportunities. Whatever measures are ultimately developed, the model presented here suggests that understanding the relationship between the supply of and demand for socially responsible investment opportunities is central to understanding the relationship between socially responsible activities and firm performance, at least as measured by a firm’s market value.
Theoretical Implications The model also has a variety of theoretical implications, both for the study of firm value more broadly and for the study of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and firm value. Decoupling cash flow and firm market value. Traditional financial logic suggests that firms maximize their market value by maximizing the present value of their cash flows. This link between a firm’s market value and the present value of its cash flows is based on the often unstated assumption that all of a firm’s equity holders have the same interests: to see their wealth maximized in making their investment decisions. However, by recognizing that some equity holders may sometimes have interests besides simply maximizing their wealth in making their investment decisions, we decouple “maximizing a firm’s market value” from “maximizing the present value of a firm’s cash flows.” Here, a firm’s market value is determined by the supply of and demand for the kind of investment opportunities created by the firm’s strategies - in this case, the opportunity to invest in firms implementing different corporate social responsibility strategies. In fact, there is some reason to believe that at least some current and potential equity investors may be willing to sacrifice some of their wealth-maximizing interests to invest in firms pursuing socially responsible activities. For example, there continues to be significant and steady demand for mutual funds that specialize in investing in firms that meet certain corporate social responsibility criteria. Indeed, in 2003 about one out of every ten dollars under professional management in the United States was invested in these kinds of mutual funds. Moreover, those who invest in these funds often pay a financial penalty for doing so. This penalty can be as high as 3.5 percent for actively managed socially responsible mutual funds. Thus, at least some investors are apparently willing to invest in firms that engage in socially responsible activities even though these investments may generate lower returns than investments without regard to a firm’s socially responsible activities. It is this demand for opportunities to invest in socially responsible firms, and its relationship to the supply of these investment opportunities, that determines the market value of a firm. Thus, even though the present value of the cash flows generated by socially responsible firms may suffer, the market value of these firms can still increase. Managerial values and socially responsible investments. This analysis also has implications for the study of the relationship between senior managers and socially responsible activities. In particular, it suggests that senior managers do not have to have particularly strong or unusual moral or value-based commitments to lead their firms to engage in socially responsible activities that reduce the present value of their cash flows. Rather, as long as demand for socially responsible investment opportunities is greater than supply, managers looking to maximize the market value of their firm will find it in their self-interest to make such investments. Managerial or corporate altruism is not required to explain why firms may sometimes make these kinds of investments. Indeed, throughout this paper we [adopt the standard economic assumption that firms are trying to maximize their market value.] |
For example, changes in the number of firms who score high on various aggregate measures of social responsibility might indicate changes in the supply of socially responsible investment opportunities. Also, changes in the total dollars invested in socially responsible mutual funds as a percentage of the total dollars invested in all mutual funds might be an indicator of changes in total demand for socially responsible investment opportunities. Public opinion polls on the importance of various social issues in an economy might also provide some indication of the level of demand for socially responsible investment opportunities. Whatever measures are ultimately developed, the model presented here suggests that understanding the relationship between the supply of and demand for socially responsible investment opportunities is central to understanding the relationship between socially responsible activities and firm performance, at least as measured by a firm’s market value.
[p. 831] Theoretical Implications The model also has a variety of theoretical implications, both for the study of firm value more broadly and for the study of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and firm value. DeCoupling Cash Flow and Firm Market Value. Traditional financial logic suggests that firms maximize their market value by maximizing the present value of their cash flows (Copeland et al., 1994). This link between a firm’s market value and the present value of its cash flows is based on the often unstated assumption that all of a firm’s equity holders have the same interests—to see their wealth maximized in making their investment decisions (Brealey & Myers, 2003). However, by recognizing that some equity holders may sometimes have interests besides simply maximizing their wealth in making their investment decisions, this paper decouples “maximizing a firm’s market value” from “maximizing the present value of a firm’s cash flows.” Here, a firm’s market value is determined by the supply of and demand for the kind of investment opportunities created by a firm’s strategies—in this case, the opportunity to invest in firms implementing different corporate social responsibility strategies. In fact, there is some reason to believe that at least some current and potential equity investors may be willing to sacrifice some of their wealth maximizing interests to invest in firms pursuing socially responsible activities. For example, there continues to be significant and steady demand for mutual funds that specialize in investing in firms that meet certain corporate social responsibility criteria. Indeed, in 2003, one out of every ten dollars under professional management in the United States was invested in these kinds of mutual funds (Social Investment Forum, 2005). Moreover, those that invest in these funds often pay a financial penalty for doing so. This penalty can range as high as 3.5% for actively managed socially responsible mutual funds (Geczy, Stanbaugh, & Levin, 2003). Thus, at least some investors are apparently willing to invest in firms that engage in socially responsible activities, even though these investments may generate lower returns than investing without regard to a firm’s socially responsible activities. It is this demand for opportunities to invest in socially responsible firms, and its relationship to the supply of these investment opportunities, that determines the market value of a firm. Thus, even though the present value of the cash flows generated by socially responsible firms may suffer, the market value of these firms can still increase. Managerial Values and Socially Responsible Investments. This analysis also has implications for the study of the relationship between senior managers and socially responsible activities. In particular, it suggests that senior managers do not have to have particularly strong or unusual moral or value-based commitments to lead their firms to engage in socially responsible activities that reduce the present value of their cash flows. Rather, as long as demand for socially responsible investment opportunities is greater than supply, managers looking to maximize the market value of their firm will find it in their self interest to make such investments. Managerial or corporate altruism is not required to explain why firms may sometimes make these kinds of investments.14 Indeed, throughout this paper, the standard economic assumption—that firms are trying to maximize their market value—is adopted. 14 Although managerial morality is not required to motivate corporate social responsibility in the model we present here, such considerations may nevertheless influence firm decisions concerning such activities (Aguilera et al., 2007; Schneider, Oppegaard, Zollo, & Huy, 2005). |
The source is given on p. 58 f. References from the source were removed. |
|
| [19.] Msc/Fragment 061 01 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 22:22 WiseWoman Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 11:48 (SleepyHollow02) | BauernOpfer, Fragment, Gesichtet, Mackey et al 2007, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 61, Zeilen: 1 ff. |
Quelle: Mackey et al 2007 Seite(n): 831, Zeilen: right col.: 23 ff. |
|---|---|
| [Managerial or corporate altruism is not required to explain why firms may sometimes make these kinds of investments. Indeed, throughout this paper we] adopt the standard economic assumption that firms are trying to maximize their market value. Because firms are profit maximizing, they are willing to change their type - from socially responsible to traditional profit maximizing and back - to the extent that these actions maximize their market value. In other words, this is a theory of social responsibility that does not depend on the existence of agency conflicts between a firm’s managers and its equity holders.
Practical Implications Finally, the theory developed here has practical implications, both for those charged with making decisions about whether or not invest in socially responsible activities—managers—and those who would like to see the absolute level o [sic] such investments in society increase. The managerial task. At first, the task managers face in firms contemplating whether or not to change their social responsibility policies seems daunting. After all, in the model, managers are required to estimate the supply of socially responsible investment opportunities in an economy and the demand for these investment opportunities, and then evaluate whether or not they should change their social responsibility policies accordingly. While daunting, this task is actually not materially different from the task managers face when estimating the supply of and demand for any of their products or services in the product market. While the product - socially responsible investment opportunities - and the market - current and potential equity investors - are different, the essential challenge of discovering the level of supply and demand is very similar. Thus, it would not be surprising to see managers adopt many of the same mechanisms and tools they use to gauge supply and demand in the product market to gauge supply and demand in the market for socially responsible investment opportunities. For example, firms often use customer focus groups and product tests to estimate demand in the product market. In the market for socially responsible investment opportunities, it is likely that firms will use focus groups with current and potential investors, along with smaller tentative changes in their social responsibility policies, to estimate the demand for these types of investment opportunties [sic]. Ascertaining the current level of supply of these investment opportunities may be more difficult. Managers can attempt to measure this supply through benchmarking the activities and disclosures of their product market and equity market competitors. Indeed, it seems reasonable to expect that the relationship between the supply of and demand for socially responsible investment opportunities will change over time. In some economic conditions - for example, when there are significant earnings pressures and large numbers of unfriendly takeovers—there may well be a shortage of socially responsible investment opportunities. In other settings there may be an excess number of these investment opportunities. While at first the decision about whether or not to invest in socially responsible activities seems very complex, the model presented here does suggest a way that these decisions can be significantly simplified. In particular, the model suggests that the only time a firm seeking to maximize its market value should change its social responsibility policies is when either the demand for or the supply of these investment opportunities changes dramatically. Thus, managers need not directly estimate the size of this demand or supply - only significant changes in these parameters. Shifts in demand for these investment opportunities will often reflect specific exogenous shocks in the economy. Thus, for example, when the government in South Africa abandoned its apartheid principles, socially responsible activities that supported a ban on business in South Africa were no longer in demand. Obviously, in this kind of setting, continuing to maintain these policies, because they reduced the present value of a firm’s cash flows without any compensating firm value advantages, would have reduced a firm’s market value. More recently, various business scandals may have increased demand for socially responsible activities, as investors look to put their money into companies whose management they respect [and trust.] |
Managerial or corporate altruism is not required to explain why firms may sometimes make these kinds of investments.14
Indeed, throughout this paper, the standard economic assumption that firms are trying to maximize their market value. Because firms are profit maximizing, they are willing to change their type—from socially responsible to traditional profit maximizing and back—to the extent that these actions maximize a firm’s market value. In other words, this is a theory of social responsibility that does not depend on the existence of agency conflicts between a firm’s managers and its equity holders (Wright & Ferris, 1997). Practical Implications Finally, the theory developed here has practical implications, both for those charged with making decisions about whether or not invest in socially responsible activities—managers—and those that would like to see the absolute level of such investments in society increase. [p. 832] The Managerial Task. At first, the task facing managers in firms contemplating whether or not to change their social responsibility policies seems daunting. After all, in the model, managers are required to estimate the supply of socially responsible investment opportunities in an economy, the demand for these investment opportunities, and then evaluate whether or not they should change their social responsibility policies accordingly. While daunting, this task is actually not materially different than the task managers face when estimating the supply of and demand for any of their products or services in the product market. While the product—socially responsible investment opportunities—and the market—current and potential equity investors—are different, the essential challenge of discovering the level of supply and demand is very similar. Thus, it would not be surprising to see managers adopt many of the same mechanisms and tools they use to gauge supply and demand in the product market to gauge supply and demand in the market for socially responsible investment opportunities. For example, firms often use customer focus groups and product tests to estimate demand in the product market. In the market for socially responsible investment opportunities, it is likely that firms will use focus groups with current and potential investors, along with smaller tentative changes in their social responsibility policies, to estimate the demand for these types of investment opportunities. Ascertaining the current level of supply of these investment opportunities may be more difficult. Managers can attempt to measure this supply through benchmarking the activities and disclosures of their product market and equity market competitors. Indeed, it seems reasonable to expect that the relationship between the supply and demand for socially responsible investment opportunities will change over time. In some economic conditions, e.g., when there are significant earnings pressures and large numbers of unfriendly takeovers, there may well be a shortage of socially responsible investment opportunities. In other settings, there may be an excess number of these investment opportunities. While, at first, the decision about whether or not to invest in socially responsible activities seems very complex, the model presented here does suggest a way that these decisions can be significantly simplified. In particular, the model suggests that the only time a firm seeking to maximize its market value should change its social responsibility policies is when either the demand for or the supply of these investment opportunities changes dramatically. Thus, managers need not directly estimate the size of this demand or supply—only significant changes in these parameters. Shifts in demand for these investment opportunities will often reflect specific exogenous shocks in the economy. Thus, for example, when the government in South Africa abandoned its apartheid principles, socially responsible activities that supported a ban on business in South Africa were no longer in demand. Obviously, in this kind of setting, continuing to maintain these policies, because they reduced the present value of a firm’s cash flows without any compensating firm value advantages, would have reduced a firm’s market value. More recently, various business scandals may have increased demand for socially responsible activities, as investors look to put their money into companies whose management they respect and trust. 14 Although, managerial morality is not required to motivate corporate social responsibility in the model presented in this paper, such considerations may, nevertheless, influence firm decisions concerning such activities (Aguilera, Rupp, Williams, & Ganapathi, 2005; Schnedier, Oppegaard, Zollo, & Huy, 2005). |
The source is given on pp 58 f. |
|
| [20.] Msc/Fragment 062 01 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 22:06 WiseWoman Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 11:40 (SleepyHollow02) | BauernOpfer, Fragment, Gesichtet, Mackey et al 2007, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 62, Zeilen: 1 ff. |
Quelle: Mackey et al 2007 Seite(n): 832f, Zeilen: right col.: 22 ff., 833: left col., 1ff |
|---|---|
| [More recently, various business scandals may have increased demand for socially responsible activities, as investors look to put their money into companies whose management they respect] and trust. Firms can also create their own “exogenous hocks” [sic] by becoming more international in scope. While equity holders in one country market may have one set of preferences for investing in socially responsible firms, equity holders in a second country market may have a different set of preferences. By beginning to trade in different markets, firms may have to adjust their social responsibility policies to be more consistent with the preferences of the new stockholders they are trying to attract. Of course, this could mean that a firm will become either more or less socially responsible, depending on the preferences of equity holders in the markets into which it is entering. Estimating changes in supply and demand for socially responsible investment opportunities is likely to be more challenging when these parameters evolve slowly over time in an economy. In these settings it would not be surprising to see managers change their policies toward social responsibility only very slowly and incrementally. In this way firms can estimate the total demand for and supply of socially responsible investment opportunities in an economy and adjust their own policies accordingly.
Changing the demand for socially responsible investment opportunities Finally, this model also has implications for those interested in increasing the level of socially responsible firm activities in the economy. Thus far, we have assumed that the demand for socially responsible investment opportunities was given, and the task facing firms was to estimate that demand and the relevant supply of these investment opportunities in determining their strategic actions. However, the actionsof [sic] various individuals and groups in an economy could have an impact on this demand. Successful efforts to increase the demand for socially responsible investment opportunities would have the effect of making it in the valuemaximizing [sic] interests of more firms to make such investments. According to the model developed here, the task facing those interested in seeing the level of socially responsible investments made by firms in an economy increased is to engage in activities that change the preferences of potential investors. Marketing campaigns that highlight the social responsibility failures of some firms, the social responsibility successes of other firms, and how investment dollars are used to either help or hurt society may have the effect of increasing the number of people looking for socially responsible investment opportunities in an economy over time. When demand for these investment opportunities increases, value-maximizing managers will find it in their self-interest to begin to make these investments, even if doing so reduces the present value of their cash flows. The model also suggests that direct appeals to managers to increase their level of investment in socially responsible activities without a corresponding increase in demand for these kinds of investment opportunities are unlikely to be successful. Managers have the market enforced responsibility to maximize the market value of their firm. While the model developed here demonstrates that engaging in socially responsible activities that reduce the present value of a firm’s cash flows can sometimes increase a firm’s market value, it can only be expected to do so when demand for these investment opportunities is greater than supply. In this sense, increasing the overall level of demand for these investment opportunities is likely to precede firm decisions to increase socially responsible activities, especially when those activities reduce the present value of a firm’s cash flows. Results In the beginning it could be argued arguing [sic] that efforts to examine how socially responsible activities can increase the present value of a firm’s cash flows do not address a central issue in the corporate social responsibility literature - that sometimes firms should invest in socially responsible activities, even if those activities reduce the present value of a firm’s cash flows. This examination provides an explanation of when investments in these kinds of socially responsible activities will occur. In developing this theory, it is to be suggested that some inves-[tors may have interests besides wealth maximization in making their investment decisions.] |
More recently, various business scandals may have increased demand for socially responsible activities, as investors look to put their money into companies whose management they respect and trust.
Firms can also create their own “exogenous shocks” by becoming more international in scope. While equity holders in one country market may have one set of preferences for investing in socially responsible firms, equity holders in a second country market may have a different set of preferences. By beginning to trade in different markets, firms may have to adjust their social responsibility policies to be more consistent with the preferences of the new stockholders they are trying to attract. Of course, this could mean that a firm will become either more or less socially responsible, depending on the preferences of equity holders in the markets into which it is entering. Estimating changes in supply and demand for socially responsible investment opportunities is likely to be more challenging when these parameters evolve slowly over time in an economy. In these settings it would not be surprising to see managers change their policies toward social responsibility only very slowly and incrementally. In this way firms can estimate the total demand for and supply of socially responsible investment opportunities in an economy and adjust their own policies accordingly. [p. 833] Changing the demand for socially responsible investment opportunities. Finally, this model also has implications for those interested in increasing the level of socially responsible firm activities in the economy (Waddock, 2006). Thus far, we have assumed that the demand for socially responsible investment opportunities was given, and the task facing firms was to estimate that demand and the relevant supply of these investment opportunities in determining their strategic actions. However, the actions of various individuals and groups in an economy could have an impact on this demand. Successful efforts to increase the demand for socially responsible investment opportunities would have the effect of making it in the value-maximizing interests of more firms to make such investments. According to the model developed here, the task facing those interested in seeing the level of socially responsible investments made by firms in an economy increased is to engage in activities that change the preferences of potential investors. Marketing campaigns that highlight the social responsibility failures of some firms, the social responsibility successes of other firms, and how investment dollars are used to either help or hurt society may have the effect of increasing the number of people looking for socially responsible investment opportunities in an economy over time. When demand for these investment opportunities increases, value-maximizing managers will find it in their self-interest to begin to make these investments, even if doing so reduces the present value of their cash flows. The model also suggests that direct appeals to managers to increase their level of investment in socially responsible activities without a corresponding increase in demand for these kinds of investment opportunities are unlikely to be successful. Managers have the market-enforced responsibility to maximize the market value of their firm. While the model developed here demonstrates that engaging in socially responsible activities that reduce the present value of a firm’s cash flows can sometimes increase a firm’s market value, it can only be expected to do so when demand for these investment opportunities is greater than supply. In this sense, increasing the overall level of demand for these investment opportunities is likely to precede firm decisions to increase socially socially responsible activities, especially when those activities reduce the present value of a firm’s cash flows. CONCLUSION We began this paper by arguing that efforts to examine how socially responsible activities can increase the present value of a firm’s cash flows do not address a central issue in the corporate social responsibility literature — that sometimes firms should invest in socially responsible activities, even if those activities reduce the present value of a firm’s cash flows. This paper provides an explanation of when investments in these kinds of socially responsible activities will occur. In developing this theory, we suggest that some investors may have interests besides wealth maximization in making their investment decisions. |
The source is given on pp 58 ff. |
|
| [21.] Msc/Fragment 063 01 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 20:14 PlagProf:-) Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 11:34 (SleepyHollow02) | BauernOpfer, Fragment, Gesichtet, Mackey et al 2007, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 63, Zeilen: 1 ff. |
Quelle: Mackey et al 2007 Seite(n): 833, Zeilen: right col.: 25 ff. |
|---|---|
| [In developing this theory, it is to be suggested that some inves-]tors may have interests besides wealth maximization in making their investment decisions. If the demand for socially responsible investment opportunities generated by these investors is greater than the supply of these investment opportunities, then such investments can create economic value for a firm. However, this consideration also suggests that if supply and demand conditions are not favorable, engaging in the same socially responsible activities can actually reduce the market value of a firm. | In developing this theory, we suggest that some investors may have interests besides wealth maximization in making their investment decisions. If the demand for socially responsible investment opportunities generated by these investors is greater than the supply of these investment opportunities, then such investments can create economic value for a firm. However, the paper also suggests that if supply and demand conditions are not favorable, engaging in the same socially responsible activities can actually reduce the market value of a firm. |
The source is given on pp 58 ff. |
|
| [22.] Msc/Fragment 066 101 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 24. December 2014, 09:00 Hindemith Erstellt: 24. December 2014, 08:32 (Hindemith) | Fragment, Gesichtet, KomplettPlagiat, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Wikipedia Charles Spearman 2007 |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 66, Zeilen: 101-102 |
Quelle: Wikipedia Charles Spearman 2007 Seite(n): 1, Zeilen: - |
|---|---|
| 23 Charles Edward Spearman (Sept. 10, 1863 - Sept. 17, 1945) was an English psychologist known for work in statistics, as a pioneer of factor analysis, and for Spearman's rank correlation coefficient, which is equivalent to Pearson correlation on ranks | Charles Edward Spearman (September 10 1863 - September 17 1945) was an English psychologist known for work in statistics, as a pioneer of factor analysis, and for Spearman's rank correlation coefficient. |
The source is not mentioned. |
|
| [23.] Msc/Fragment 068 04 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 24. December 2014, 14:13 WiseWoman Erstellt: 24. December 2014, 11:19 (Hindemith) | Fragment, Gesichtet, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Verschleierung, Zairi 2008 |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 68, Zeilen: 4-8 |
Quelle: Zairi 2008 Seite(n): 10, Zeilen: 8ff |
|---|---|
| Today’s leading companies are expected not only to create wealth and produce superior goods but also to conduct themselves as moral actors - accepting responsibility for their misdeeds, being responsive to the needs of others, and managing their own values and commitments. Contrary to theorists who have declared for centuries the corporation to be amoral, society today has endowed the corporation with a moral personality. | As the following argument explains, “today’s leading companies are expected not only to create wealth and produce superior goods, but also to conduct themselves as moral actors ‐ accepting responsibility for their misdeeds, and being responsive to the needs of others, and managing their own values and commitments. Contrary to theorists who for centuries have declared the corporation to be amoral, society today has endowed the corporation with a moral personality.” |
A source is not mentioned. A similar text can also be found here: Msc/Dublette/Fragment 068 04 |
|
| [24.] Msc/Fragment 069 12 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 24. December 2014, 08:24 Hindemith Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 22:56 (Hindemith) | Fragment, Gesichtet, KomplettPlagiat, Mackey et al 2007, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 69, Zeilen: 12-20 |
Quelle: Mackey et al 2007 Seite(n): 820, Zeilen: l.col: 33 ff. |
|---|---|
| It could be wise, if managers sometimes abandon efforts to maximize the present value of their firm’s future cash flows in favor of socially responsible activities that reduce the value of those cash flows. Obviously, identifying socially responsible activities that increase the present value of a firm’s cash flows is interesting in its own right. However, no new theory is required to explain why firms will pursue such activities, once identified. Such actions are consistent with received economic and financial theories of firm behavior. But new theory is required to explain why firms might pursue socially responsible actions that reduce the present value of their cash flows. Focusing only on these situations helps develop this critical aspect of the theory of CSR. | In this way the model focuses on a central theoretical issue raised by those who study corporate social responsibility— that managers should sometimes abandon efforts to maximize the present value of their firm’s future cash flows in favor of socially responsible activities that reduce the value of those cash flows.
Obviously, identifying socially responsible activities that increase the present value of a firm’s cash flows is interesting in its own right (Godfrey, 2004; McWilliams & Siegel, 2001; Waddock & Graves, 1997). However, no new theory is required to explain why firms will pursue such activities, once identified. Such actions are consistent with received economic and financial theories of firm behavior. But new theory is required to explain why firms might pursue socially responsible actions that reduce the present value of their cash flows. Focusing the model only on these situations helps develop this critical aspect of the theory of corporate social responsibility. |
The source is not mentioned. This passage has been used already 11 pages further up: Fragment 058 01 |
|
| [25.] Msc/Fragment 069 24 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 24. December 2014, 08:24 Hindemith Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 23:00 (Hindemith) | BauernOpfer, Fragment, Gesichtet, Mackey et al 2007, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 69, Zeilen: 24-37 |
Quelle: Mackey et al 2007 Seite(n): 823, 824, Zeilen: 823: r.col: 34 ff.; 824: l.col: 1 ff. |
|---|---|
| In general, firms can take three different actions with respect to their socially responsible activities: firms that currently do not engage in these activities can begin doing so; firms that currently do engage in these activities can stop and firms can maintain their current policies — that is, those that currently engage in socially responsible activities can continue to do so, and those that currently do not engage in such activities can also continue to do so. Each of these different activities can have an effect on the market value of a firm, depending on the context within which these activities take place. It can be suggested that the most important determinant of the impact of these activities on a firm’s market value is the relative supply of and demand for opportunities to invest in socially responsible firms in an economy. With Mackay, Mackay and Barney[21b, p.823,824] three possibilities exist again: demand for socially responsible investment opportunities may be greater than their supply, supply for these investment opportunities may be greater than demand, and demand for these opportunities may equal supply. | In general, firms can take three different actions with respect to their socially responsible activities: (1) firms that currently do not engage in these activities can begin doing so; (2) firms that currently do engage in these activities can stop; and (3) firms can maintain their current policies — that is, those that currently engage in socially responsible activities can continue to do so, and those that currently do not engage in such activities can also continue to do so. Each of these different activities can have an effect on the market value of a firm, depending on the context within which these activities take place.
Equation 9 suggests that the most important determinant of the impact of these activities on a firm’s market value is the relative supply of and demand for opportunities to invest in socially responsible firms in an economy. Again, three pos- [page 824] sibilities exist: (1) demand for socially responsible investment opportunities may be greater than their supply, (2) supply for these investment opportunities may be greater than demand, and (3) demand for these opportunities may equal supply. |
The source is mentioned, but only for the last passage. |
|
| [26.] Msc/Fragment 071 05 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 15:29 Hindemith Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 08:46 (SleepyHollow02) | BauernOpfer, Daimler Sustainability Report 2008, Fragment, Gesichtet, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 71, Zeilen: 5-46 |
Quelle: Daimler Sustainability Report 2008 Seite(n): 9, Zeilen: left col.: 6 ff. |
|---|---|
| Rüdiger Grube, chairman of the recently established Sustainability Board, points out in the Sustainability Report 2008 that conducting business in line with the principles of sustainability was alwaways a key element of Daimler’s corporate strategy. For example, Daimler established binding corporate values many years ago and they also have sustainability principles in place. Another example of Daimler’s long-standing commitment to sustainability was offered by Environmental Guidelines, which were approved by the Board of Management back in 1990. For quite some time now, the Group has also been operating corporate functions that have been very successful in monitoring and controlling the three dimensions of sustainability - economy, ecology, and social responsibility. Environmental protection, for example, is not only addressed at the top management level by the Chief Environmental Officer; it was also an integral part of the activities at the Research & Development department, which since 1990 has played a crucial part in helping to ensure that environmental protection measures are successfully implemented throughout the entire product lifecycle – from product development and production to sales. For Daimler Sustainability requires addressing the big picture, which means that the concept behind it extends well beyond the environmental protection activities. As a major automobile manufacturer, Daimler accepts to focus not only on ecological aspects but also on key social and economic challenges. Sustainability therefore for Daimler also involves community projects, social commitment, traffic safety issues, supplier relations, and being a good corporate citizen toward neighbors at the locations where they operate. Ultimately, successful sustainability management means achieving a successful balance between the three dimensions mentioned before. And although these dimensions may sometimes have conflicting interests, Daimler sees no possibility to afford to address them separately. In the future Daimler intends to coordinate their diverse sustainability activities even more closely. They actually took the first step toward consolidating our strengths and intensifying our top management approach to this issue back in 2005, when they established the Sustainability Task Force. This interdisciplinary team initially focused on improving Daimler sustainability reporting system. Since then, they’ve been producing an annual integrated sustainability report that conforms to internationally recognized reporting guidelines. Because the quality of reporting is dependent on their activities as a company, they’ve been focusing more and more on Daimler‘s performance in key areas related to sustainability, and the new Sustainability Board will now systematically integrate the relevant operational disciplines into our sustainability management approach. Over the last three years we [sic] have created new management functions such as our Global Diversity Management system, which is supervised by the head of Human Resources and Labor Relations, Günter Fleig. Daimler also established a compliance organization back in 2006, and they have continually expanded the scope of its activities since that time. This organization also reports directly to the chairman of the Board of Management. The Sustainability Board is wanted to more closely align and coordinate the activities of these various functions and enable us to respond more effectively to interdisciplinary situations where action needs to be taken. It was therefore very important to ensure that the new Sustainability Board would report directly to Daimler’s CEO, Dieter Zetsche. The first thing they did was to identify the specific areas where they need to improve coordination and take action in order to improve sustainability management. Then ambitious 72 goals were formulated for each topic area and developed measures to achieve them. | Rüdiger Grube: No, not at all. Conducting our business in line with the principles of sustainability has always been a key element of our corporate strategy. For example, we established binding corporate values many years ago and we also have sustainability principles in place. Another example of our long-standing commitment to sustainability is offered by our Environmental Guidelines, which were approved by the Board of Management back in 1990. For quite some time now, the Group has also been operating corporate functions that have been very successful in monitoring and controlling the three dimensions of sustainability – economy, ecology, and social responsibility. Environmental protection, for example, is not only addressed at the top management level by our Chief Environmental Officer; it’s also an integral part of the activities at the Research & Development department, which since 1990 has played a crucial part in helping to ensure that environmental protection measures are successfully implemented throughout the entire product lifecycle – from product development and production to sales.
——— It sounds as though you already have a well-functioning management system in place – so why set up a new corporate body now? Sustainability requires addressing the big picture, which means that the concept behind it extends well beyond our environmental protection activities. As a major automobile manufacturer, we need to focus not only on ecological aspects but also on key social and economic challenges. Sustainability therefore also involves community projects, social commitment, traffic safety issues, supplier relations, and being a good corporate citizen toward our neighbors at the locations where we operate. Ultimately, successful sustainability management means achieving a successful balance between the three dimensions I mentioned before. And although these dimensions may sometimes have conflicting interests, we can’t afford to address them separately. ——— Are you saying that the new top-level organization will address the balance between the three dimensions? Yes, but it will also do more, because in the future we will be coordinating our diverse sustainability activities even more closely. We actually took the first step toward consolidating our strengths and intensifying our top management approach to this issue back in 2005, when we established the Sustainability Task Force. This interdisciplinary team initially focused on improving our sustainability reporting system. Since then, we’ve been producing an annual integrated sustainability report that conforms to internationally recognized reporting guidelines. Because the quality of our reporting is dependent on our activities as a company, we’ve been focusing more and more on our performance in key areas related to sustainability, and the new Sustainability Board will now systematically integrate the relevant operational disciplines into our sustainability management approach. ——— Can you give us some examples of what you mean here? Over the last three years we have created new management functions such as our Global Diversity Management system, which is supervised by the head of Human Resources and Labor Relations, Günter Fleig. We also established a compliance organization back in 2006, and we have continually expanded the scope of its activities since that time. This organization also reports directly to the chairman of the Board of Management. The Sustainability Board will more closely align and coordinate the activities of these various functions and enable us to respond more effectively to interdisciplinary situations where action needs to be taken. It was therefore very important to ensure that the new Sustainability Board would report directly to our CEO, Dieter Zetsche. ——— What specific type of work will the Sustainability Board carry out? The first thing we did was to identify the specific areas where we need to improve coordination and take action in order to improve sustainability management. We then formulated ambitious goals for each topic area and developed measures to achieve them. |
The source is given in the beginning, but the reader would not suspect that the following two and a half pages are taken from it verbatim. The replacement "we" --> "they" has not been done consistently in the dissertation: " Over the last three years we [sic] have created new management functions such as our Global Diversity Management system" |
|
| [27.] Msc/Fragment 072 01 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 15:34 Hindemith Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 08:57 (SleepyHollow02) | BauernOpfer, Daimler Sustainability Report 2008, Fragment, Gesichtet, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 72, Zeilen: 1ff (entire page) |
Quelle: Daimler Sustainability Report 2008 Seite(n): 9. 10. 11, Zeilen: 9: right col.: 14 ff.; 10: 14ff; 11: 2ff |
|---|---|
| [Then ambitious] goals were formulated for each topic area and developed measures to achieve them. The Sustainability Board will now coordinate the implementation of these measures and evaluate their effectiveness, whereby the implementation will be carried out by the corporate functions and business units responsible for each particular issue. They already have the experts and the expertise we [sic] need for this in place at those organizations, so the real challenge is to utilize existing structures and areas of responsibility more effectively. One important measure of success in the opinion of Mr. Grube is the sustainability ratings issued by accredited agencies. Scoring well in such rankings would demonstrate that external experts believe they’re on the right track and have taken the proper measures. That’s also why Daimler authorities are so pleased to have Daimler been listed on the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI) for the third consecutive year in 2007. Mr. Grube accepts that there’s always room for improvement. Daimler’s goal is to receive worldwide approval for business activities not just from rating agencies but, more importantly, from their various stakeholders, by which customers, employees, shareholders, politicians, government agencies, NGOs, the media, and direct neighbors are meant. Daimler needs to improve here, and one way to do this will be to intensify and restructure the system of engaging in dialogue with their stakeholders. It’s very important not only to tell the stakeholders what they‘re already doing right but also to discuss with them what could be done better in the future.
Some achievements of Daimler 2007 (2008): Green Car of the year 2007: in New York the Mercedes-Benz E 320 BlueTEC beat out 14 competitors for the title of “World Green Car 2007“. The E 320 BlueTEC is among the cleanest and most economical vehicles in its class. Daimler share in the DJSI world: The Daimler AG share has been listed for the third time in a row in the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI World). Art on world tour: The “from bauhaus to (now!)” traveling exhibition from the Daimler Art Collection was displayed at the Brazilian national gallery MASP from August to October 2007. The exhibition featured around 100 paintings, installations, sculptures, photographs, and video creations from the 1920s to the present. City buses in practical tests with biodiesel: Mercedes-Benz do Brasil has tested the biodiesel compatibility of its entire engine range. To this end, Mercedes-Benz city buses traveled a total distance of 420,000 km (260,000 miles) on “B5” fuel (5 percent biodiesel admixture). Environment Grand Prize for the diesoTTo engine concept: The 2007 “Environment Grand Prize” was awarded in Paris to the DIESOTTO engine developed by Mercedes-Benz. The prize honors technological achievements in environmental protection and safety, and their integration into automotive design. First practical testing of hybrid trucks in Europe (Stuttgart): Deutsche Post World Net is testing the use of hybrid trucks in its business operations in Germany and the UK. At the beginning of 2008, the tests commenced with a Mercedes-Benz Atego BlueTec Hybrid and a Mitsubishi Fuso Canter Eco Hybrid, with the aim of demonstrating the vehicles’ efficiency potential to reduce fuel consumption by up to 20 percent. Additional vehicles are intended to follow. Compliance officer: Daimler has taken a further step toward sustainably reinforcing its self [surveillance with a view to ethically appropriate corporate management and has established in Stuttgart a newly created, promoted position of “Chief Compliance Officer” at Senior Vice President level, directly below the Board of Management.] |
We then formulated ambitious goals for each topic area and developed measures to achieve them. The Sustainability Board will now coordinate the implementation of these measures and evaluate their effectiveness, whereby the implementation will be carried out by the corporate functions and business units responsible for each particular issue. We already have the experts and the expertise we need for this in place at those organizations, so the real challenge is to utilize existing structures and areas of responsibility more effectively.
——— How will you assess the performance of the sustainability management system? One important measure of success is the sustainability ratings issued by accredited agencies. Scoring well in such rankings demonstrates that external experts believe we’re on the right track and have taken the proper measures. That’s also why we’re so pleased to have been listed on the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI) for the third consecutive year in 2007. Still, there’s always room for improvement. ——— What are the major challenges Daimler faces with regard to sustainability management? Our goal must be to receive worldwide approval for our business activities not just from rating agencies but, more importantly, from our various stakeholders, by which I mean customers, employees, shareholders, politicians, government agencies, NGOs, the media, and of course our direct neighbors. We need to improve here, and one way to do this will be to intensify and restructure our system of engaging in dialogue with our stakeholders. It’s very important to me to not only tell our stakeholders what we’re already doing right but also to discuss with them what we can do better in the future. [page 10:] “Green Car of the Year 2007”: E 320 BlueTEC. In the contest for the title of “World Green Car 2007,” the Mercedes-Benz E 320 BlueTEC beat out 14 com- petitors. The E 320 BlueTEC is among the cleanest and most economical vehicles in its class. Daimler share in the DJSI World. The Daimler AG share has been listed for the third time in a row in the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI World). Art on world tour. The “from bauhaus to (now!)” traveling exhibition from the Daimler Art Collection was displayed at the Brazilian national gallery MASP from August to October 2007. The exhibition featured around 100 paintings, installations, sculptures, photographs, and video creations from the 1920s to the present. City buses in practical tests with biodiesel. Mercedes-Benz do Brasil has tested the biodiesel compatibility of its entire engine range. To this end, Mercedes-Benz city buses traveled a total distance of 420,000 km (260,000 miles) on “B5” fuel (5 percent biodiesel admixture).
“Environment Grand Prize” for the DIESO TTO engine concept. The 2007 “Environment Grand Prize” was awarded to the DIESOTTO engine developed by Mercedes-Benz. The prize honors technological achievements in environmental protection and safety, and their integration into automotive design. First practical testing of hybrid trucks in Europe. Deutsche Post World Net is testing the use of hybrid trucks in its business operations in Germany and the UK. At the beginning of 2008, the tests commenced with a Mercedes-Benz Atego BlueTec Hybrid and a Mitsubishi Fuso Canter Eco Hybrid, with the aim of demonstrating the vehicles’ efficiency potential to reduce fuel consumption by up to 20 percent. Additional vehicles will follow. A new position: Chief Compliance Officer. Daimler has taken a further step toward sustainably reinforcing its self-surveillance with a view to ethically appropriate corporate management and has established a newly created, promoted position of “Chief Compliance Officer” at Senior Vice President level, directly below the Board of Management. |
The source is given on p. 71 once without indication that altogether two and a half pages are taken from the source. The replacement "we" --> "they" has not been done consistently in the dissertation: "They already have the experts and the expertise we [sic] need for this in place at those organizations" |
|
| [28.] Msc/Fragment 073 01 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 15:37 Hindemith Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 09:20 (SleepyHollow02) | BauernOpfer, Daimler Sustainability Report 2008, Fragment, Gesichtet, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 73, Zeilen: 1-17 |
Quelle: Daimler Sustainability Report 2008 Seite(n): 11, Zeilen: 18ff |
|---|---|
| [Compliance officer: Daimler has taken a further step toward sustainably reinforcing its self] surveillance with a view to ethically appropriate corporate management and has established in Stuttgart a newly created, promoted position of “Chief Compliance Officer” at Senior Vice President level, directly below the Board of Management.
New plant in Fuzhou (China): In October 2007, Fujian Daimler Automotive Ltd. laid the foundation stone for a new van plant in Fuzhou in the southern Chinese province of Fujian. Construction of this plant is proceeding rapidly, and the facility is scheduled to begin producing Mercedes-Benz vans for China and other Asian markets in 2009. Joint venture between Daimler Trucks and hero Group (India): In the second quarter of 2008, Daimler Trucks and the Indian company Hero Group will finalize the establishment of the Daimler Hero Motors Corporation Ltd. joint venture. HIV/AIDS prevention in South Africa: Mercedes-Benz South Africa has extended its HIV/AIDS job program for its own employees and their families in South Africa to include small and medium-sized supplier companies in the Buffalo City region. Following a pilot phase lasting a year and a half, the so-called Siyakhana Project was fully established in 17 companies by the end of 2007 and now encompasses some 6,700 blue- and white-collar employees of these firms and their families (26,000 people in all). A further 50 companies are to be integrated into the project in 2008/09. |
A new position: Chief Compliance Officer. Daimler has taken a further step toward sustainably reinforcing its self-surveillance with a view to ethically appropriate corporate management and has established a newly created, promoted position of “Chief Compliance Officer” at Senior Vice President level, directly below the Board of Management.
New Sprinter plant in Fuzhou. In October 2007, Fujian Daimler Automotive Ltd. laid the foundation stone for a new van plant in Fuzhou in the southern Chinese province of Fujian. Construction of this plant is proceeding rapidly, and the facility is scheduled to begin producing Mercedes-Benz vans for China and other Asian markets in 2009. HIV/AIDS prevention in South Africa. Mercedes-Benz South Africa has extended its successful HIV/AIDS job program for its own employees and their families in South Africa to include small and medium-sized supplier companies in the Buffalo City region. Following a pilot phase lasting a year and a half, the so-called Siyakhana Project was fully established in 17 companies by the end of 2007 and now encompasses some 6,700 blue- and white-collar employees of these firms and their families (26,000 people in all). A further 50 companies are to be integrated into the project in 2008/09. Joint venture between Daimler Trucks and Hero Group. In the second quarter of 2008, Daimler Trucks and the Indian company Hero Group finalized the establishment of the Daimler Hero Motors Corporation Ltd. joint venture. |
The source is given on p. 71 once without indication that altogether two and a half pages are taken from it. |
|
| [29.] Msc/Fragment 073 19 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 16:37 Hindemith Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 09:14 (Hindemith) | BauernOpfer, Fragment, Gesichtet, IBM 2007, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 73, Zeilen: 19-44 |
Quelle: IBM 2007 Seite(n): 6, Zeilen: 2 ff. |
|---|---|
| Samuel J. Palmisano, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, is emphasizing in the IBM 2007 Corporate Responsibility Report that the 20th century “multinational” is giving way to a new kind of institution, what IBM calls the globally integrated enterprise. This is with IBM a very different organizational architecture and way of operating any business or institution. Most importantly, it may offer hope for a new kind of progressive globalization, one that not only generates new opportunity for innovation and growth, but also extends that opportunity to many more regions and people. However, Palmisano accentuates that they must not be naïve or complacent. These benefits would not be achieved through a disruptive change by operating the way they have in the past. Only aggressive innovation will - with Palmisano - get through innovation that changes the enterprise from top to bottom and that engages it far more intimately with a broad societal ecosystem of businesses, communities and institutions.
Palmisano believes that the answer for the individual is similar to the answer for companies and nations - expertise, skills, knowledge. But simply saying that doesn’t really solve the problem in fact, it just begins the discussion, because the nature of expertise itself is changing. In the past, to become an “expert,” you went to school, you studied a body of knowledge, received a degree or certification and then went to work, usually with the expectation that you would stay in your chosen profession or career track for a lifetime. however, the nature of competition and the forces of innovation are shifting the frontiers of science, business and technology continuously. Expertise today is not static. To be competitive, any individual like any company, community or country has to adapt continuously, learning new fields and new skills. This is true within any given job, and it’s true across the span of an entire career. Well, who is in the best position to shape that learning? At IBM, they believe it’s the individual. No corporate headquarters can possibly adapt as rapidly or as specifically as a global marketplace requires. And they believe that this, in turn, requires nothing less than a new relationship among the company, the individuals who make it up and society at large. |
The 20th century “multinational” is giving way to a new kind of institution, what we at IBM call the globally integrated enterprise. This is a very different organizational architecture and way of operating any business or institution. Most importantly, it offers hope for a new kind of progressive globalization — one that not only generates new opportunity for innovation and growth, but also extends that opportunity to many more regions and people.
However, we must not be naïve or complacent. We will not achieve these benefits or navigate our organizations through this disruptive change by operating the way we have in the past. Only aggressive innovation will get us through — innovation that changes the enterprise from top to bottom and that engages it far more intimately with a broad societal ecosystem of businesses, communities and institutions. [...] I believe that the answer for the individual is similar to the answer for companies and nations — expertise, skills, knowledge. But simply saying that doesn’t really solve the problem — in fact, it just begins the discussion, because the nature of expertise itself is changing. In the past, to become an “expert,” you went to school, you studied a body of knowledge, received a degree or certification and then went to work, usually with the expectation that you would stay in your chosen profession or career track for a lifetime. However, the nature of competition and the forces of innovation are shifting the frontiers of science, business and technology continuously. Expertise today is not static. To be competitive, any individual — like any company, community or country — has to adapt continuously, learning new fields and new skills. This is true within any given job, and it’s true across the span of an entire career. Well, who is in the best position to shape that learning? At IBM, we believe it’s the individual. No corporate headquarters can possibly adapt as rapidly or as specifically as a global marketplace requires. And we believe that this, in turn, requires nothing less than a new relationship among the company, the individuals who make it up and society at large. |
The source is mentioned once in the beginning, but nothing indicates that long passages are taken literally from it. |
|
| [30.] Msc/Fragment 074 01 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 16:37 Hindemith Erstellt: 23. December 2014, 09:26 (Hindemith) | BauernOpfer, Fragment, Gesichtet, IBM 2007, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 74, Zeilen: 1ff (entire page) |
Quelle: IBM 2007 Seite(n): 7, Zeilen: 1 ff. |
|---|---|
| [At IBM, they’ve] begun their own journey toward this new model, toward empowering and enabling employees to make decisions and to act. They call it “lowering the center of gravity” of the company that is, trusting IBM-employees and pushing decision-making authority out and down. This has changed – with Palmisano - everything from how they manage client relationships and to their approach to employee learning. It has also changed how they think about volunteerism. On demand Community, for example, encourages and equips IBM-employees and retirees to be effective and engaged volunteers in their communities. They have contributed more than 6 million hours since the program launched in 2003, and On demand Community marked its 100,000th registrant in 2007. More choice, more control, more responsibility in the hands of the people who are in the best position to call the shots - not headquarters, but the individual employee. They took another step in 2007 with the introduction of something they call the IBM Global Citizen’s Portfolio. This new framework is aimed at enabling current and future IBM-employees to position themselves advantageously as global professionals and global citizens. There are initial programs focused on skills, leadership development and career transitions. They’re convinced this is the right path forward for individuals, communities and organizations, but they know it will require some unconventional approaches innovations that will be every bit as meaningful as the discoveries coming out of the labs. But, then, that’s exactly the kind of challenge their employees were thinking about when we [sic!] came together to shape our core values four years ago, including “Innovation that matters for our company and for the world.” The 2007 report describes how this new model of global citizenship and the values on which it rests are shaping IBM’s point of view on corporate responsibility in the 21st century. | At IBM, we’ve begun our own journey toward this new model, toward empowering and enabling our people to make decisions and to act. We call it “lowering the center of gravity” of the company — that is, trusting IBMers and pushing decision-making authority out and down. This has changed everything from how we manage our client relationships, to our R&D, to our approach to employee learning. It has also changed how we think about volunteerism. On Demand Community, for example, encourages and equips IBMers and retirees to be effective and engaged volunteers in their communities. They have contributed more than 6 million hours since the program launched in 2003, and On Demand Community marked its 100,000th registrant in 2007. More choice, more control, more responsibility in the hands of the people who are in the best position to call the shots — not headquarters, but the individual IBMer.
We took another step in 2007 with the introduction of something we call the IBM Global Citizen’s Portfolio. This new framework is aimed at enabling current and future IBMers to position themselves advantageously as global professionals and global citizens. You can read about its initial programs — focused on skills, leadership development and career transitions — in this report. We’re convinced this is the right path forward for individuals, communities and organizations, but we know it will require some unconventional approaches — innovations that will be every bit as meaningful as the discoveries coming out of our labs. But, then, that’s exactly the kind of challenge IBMers were thinking about when we came together to shape our core values four years ago, including “Innovation that matters — for our company and for the world.” This report describes how this new model of global citizenship and the values on which it rests are shaping IBM’s point of view on corporate responsibility in the 21st century. |
The source is only mentioned on the previous page. Note that the replacement "we" --> "they" has not been done consistently: "But, then, that’s exactly the kind of challenge their employees were thinking about when we [sic!] came together to shape our core values four years ago" |
|
| [31.] Msc/Fragment 077 18 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 09:33 Hindemith Erstellt: 22. December 2014, 20:22 (Hindemith) | Fragment, Gesichtet, KomplettPlagiat, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Steurer et al 2008 |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 77, Zeilen: 18-42 |
Quelle: Steurer et al 2008 Seite(n): 12, 13, Zeilen: 12: last paragraph; 13: 1ff |
|---|---|
| CSR policies in Europe, the role of governments and the EU-Member State interface
Why should governments care about CSR? While several actors oppose the view that governments should take action with regard to CSR by emphasising that the concept is widely regarded as a voluntary business or management approach, there are good reasons suggesting that governments should not leave the field entirely to businesses and civil society actors. Among these reasons are, for example, the following: Since CSR is concerned with managing business relations with a broad variety of stakeholders, the concept obviously reshapes not only management routines, but also the roles and relations of all three societal domains, i.e. businesses, governments and civil society. Consequently, CSR is not only a management approach that can be left to the discretion of managers, but it is also a highly political concept that entails societal conflicts as well as a considerable scope for new government activities. The widely shared view that CSR is voluntary does not contradict the fact that respective activities are often a response to stakeholder pressure; it emphasises that CSR practices are not required by law but go beyond legal standards. Thus, governments inevitably define CSR negatively with regulations, and they want to define it also positively with softer, non-binding policy instruments. These CSR policies coincide with a broader transition of public governance altogether, away from command and control towards more network-like and partnering arrangements. In this respect, CSR policies can be seen as a key component of a broader transition to new governance forms that is observed in several policy fields. In addition, governments care about CSR because respective business activities can help to meet public policy goals of sustainable development without making use of often un-popular (or even politically infeasible) regulations. |
Topic 2 CSR policies, the role of governments and the EU-Member State interface
Why should governments care about CSR? While several actors oppose the view that governments should take action with regard to CSR by emphasising that the concept is widely regarded as a voluntary business or management approach, there are good reasons suggesting that governments should not leave the field entirely to businesses and civil society actors. Among these reasons are, for example, the following: [page 13] Since CSR is concerned with managing business relations with a broad variety of stakeholders, the concept obviously reshapes not only management routines, but also the roles and relations of all three societal domains, i.e. businesses, governments and civil society. Consequently, CSR is not only a management approach that can be left to the discretion of managers, but it is also a highly political concept that entails societal conflicts as well as a considerable scope for new government activities. The widely shared view that CSR is voluntary does not contradict the fact that respective activities are often a response to stakeholder pressure; it emphasises that CSR practices are not required by law but go beyond legal standards. Thus, governments inevitably define CSR negatively with regulations, and they want to define it also positively with softer, non-binding policy instruments. These CSR policies coincide with a broader transition of public governance altogether, away from command and control towards more network-like and partnering arrangements. In this respect, CSR policies can be seen as a key component of a broader transition to new governance forms that is observed in several policy fields. In addition, governments care about CSR because respective business activities can help to meet public policy goals of sustainable development without making use of often un-popular (or even politically infeasible) regulations. |
The source is not mentioned. |
|
| [32.] Msc/Fragment 078 01 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 09:33 Hindemith Erstellt: 22. December 2014, 20:29 (Hindemith) | Fragment, Gesichtet, KomplettPlagiat, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Steurer et al 2008 |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 78, Zeilen: 1ff (entire page) |
Quelle: Steurer et al 2008 Seite(n): 13, 14, Zeilen: 13: 19ff; 14: 1ff |
|---|---|
| In this context, some authors emphasise that CSR and respective public policies can help to compensate for the failure of governments to achieve public policy goals or solve problems with regulations. Some scholars argue that in the contemporary neo-liberal age, relationships between corporations and societal groups are less likely to be the subject of state interventionism than they were in the Keynesian age, which ended in the late 1970s. A decrease of state interventionism might open up the possibilities for more ‗responsible‘ [sic] forms of interaction between stakeholder groupings, devolved to enterprise level.
In recent years, however, opposing views on the roles of governments with regard to CSR have come to the fore vividly at the EU level. After the Lisbon European Council in March 2000, the European Commission stepped up its activities on CSR in various ways. It, for example, formulated its position on CSR in a Green Paper entitled ―Promoting a European framework for Corporate Social Responsibility in which it framed CSR for the first time in the context of sustainable development. In 2002, the European Commission (2002) released a communication on CSR that explored also some ambitious CSR policy options aiming to increase convergence and transparency of CSR practices and tools across Europe. In the same year, the Commission also launched a multi-stakeholder forum on CSR. The key purpose of the forum was to promote the transparency and convergence of CSR practices and instruments across Europe. In June 2004, the stakeholder forum presented its conclusions and recommendations to the European Commission (European Multi Stakeholder Forum on CSR, 2004). With the change of the Commission in 2004, the EU has changed its CSR policy from a pro-active approach of fostering stakeholder pressure to a passive approach that emphasises businesses self-regulation. In March 2006, Commissioner Verheugen declared openly, Originally, the Commission‘s plans looked very different. The department responsible wanted to publish naming-and-shaming lists [of companies] and to create a monitoring system for the implementation of the CSR principles. I had to halt this enthusiasm for new regulations‖ [sic] (Financial Times, 22 March 2006). Richard Howitt, British Labour Member of the European Parliament commented the new course pointedly: The Commission wants Europe to be 'a pole of excellence' in business, but instead has dumped five years of debate and consultation into a black hole. The Commission says that public authorities should create an enabling environment for CSR yet opts out from any proposals for concrete action for itself, simply repeating generalisations which we have all read before. The failure to build on extensive work since 2001 creates the risk that companies, as well as other interests, will walk away from the debate. If this is all the Commission can come up with, Europe risks being sidelined on a critical issue for the future of business, while the UN Global Compact and the Global Reporting Initiative take the lead on CSR. Without being able to follow the history of CSR policies at the EU level here in more detail, or to outline CSR policies at the Member State level, we can draw the following conclusion. Although public policies on CSR have a soft-law character, they are nevertheless subject to considerable political controversies, and there is a considerable scope for pursuing a rather passive or pro-active course. Thus, we propose the following discussion question: In how far can/should national and EU public policies on CSR contribute to Sustainable Development (SD) and Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP)? National coordination of SCP and CSR policies and respective actors Member States take different approaches in coordinating SCP and CSR policies. Regarding SCP, three basic options are, firstly, to pursue SCP with separate action plans or frameworks, or, secondly, to integrate SCP into national SD strategies. |
In this context, some authors emphasise that CSR and respective public policies can help to compensate for the failure of governments to achieve public policy goals or solve problems with regulations. Some scholars argue that in the contemporary neo-liberal age, relationships between corporations and societal groups are less likely to be the subject of state interventionism than they were in the Keynesian age, which ended in the late 1970s. A decrease of state interventionism "might open up the possibilities for more 'responsible' forms of interaction between stakeholder groupings, devolved to enterprise level" (Mellahi & Wood 2003, 190f; see also Rondinelli & Berry 2000, 74; Banerjee 2002, 8).
In recent years, however, opposing views on the roles of governments with regard to CSR have come to the fore vividly at the EU level. After the Lisbon European Council in March 2000, the European Commission stepped up its activities on CSR in various ways. It, for example, formulated its position on CSR in a Green Paper entitled "Promoting a European framework for corporate social responsibility" (European Commission 2001) in which it framed CSR for the first time in the context of sustainable development. In 2002, the European Commission (2002) released a communication on CSR that explored also some ambitious CSR policy options aiming to increase convergence and transparency of CSR practices and tools across Europe. In the same year, the Commission also launched a multi-stakeholder forum on CSR. The key purpose of the forum was to promote the transparency and convergence of CSR practices and instruments across Europe. In June 2004, the stakeholder forum presented its conclusions and recommendations to the European Commission (European Multi Stakeholder Forum on CSR, 2004). With the change of the Commission in 2004, the EU has changed its CSR policy from a pro-active approach of fostering stakeholder pressure to a passive approach that emphasises businesses self-regulation (Steurer 2006). In March 2006, Commissioner Verheugen declared openly, "Originally, the Commission‘s plans looked very different. The department responsible wanted to publish naming-and-shaming lists [of companies] and to create a monitoring system for the implementation of the CSR principles. I had to halt this enthusiasm for new regulations" (Financial Times, 22 March 2006). Richard Howitt, British Labour Member of the European Parliament commented the new course pointedly: "The Commission wants Europe to be 'a pole of excellence' in business, but instead has dumped five years of debate and consultation into a black hole. The Commission says that public authorities should create an enabling environment for [page 14] CSR yet opts out from any proposals for concrete action for itself, simply repeating generalisations which we have all read before. The failure to build on extensive work since 2001 creates the risk that companies, as well as other interests, will walk away from the debate. If this is all the Commission can come up with, Europe risks being sidelined on a critical issue for the future of business, while the UN Global Compact and the Global Reporting Initiative take the lead on CSR".1 Without being able to follow the history of CSR policies at the EU level here in more detail, or to outline CSR policies at the Member State level (for details, see the ESDN Quarterly Report June 2008 by clicking here), we can draw the following conclusion. Although public policies on CSR have a soft-law character, they are nevertheless subject to considerable political controversies, and there is a considerable scope for pursuing a rather passive or pro-active course. Thus, we propose the following discussion question: In how far can/should national and EU public policies on CSR contribute to SD and SCP? Topic 3 National coordination of SCP and CSR policies and respective actors Member States take different approaches in coordinating SCP and CSR policies. Regarding SCP, three basic options are, firstly, to pursue SCP with separate action plans or frameworks, or, secondly, to integrate SCP into national SD strategies (European Commission, 2004b). 1 http://www.euractiv.com/en/socialeurope/ csr-corporate-social-responsibility/article-153515 |
The source is not mentioned. Note that in the thesis in the first documented paragraph one finds "‗responsible‘" [sic]. These unusual signs are created when one copies and then pastes the correct looking signs in the source. This indicates that the text has been copied from the source via copy-paste. Similarly the sign "‖" is created by copying and pasting a quotation mark in the source. Note that some quotation marks and references have been removed in the dissertation as compared to the source. |
|
| [33.] Msc/Fragment 079 01 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 30. December 2014, 10:39 Hindemith Erstellt: 22. December 2014, 21:02 (Hindemith) | Fragment, Gesichtet, KomplettPlagiat, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Steurer et al 2008 |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 79, Zeilen: 1ff (entire page) |
Quelle: Steurer et al 2008 Seite(n): 14, 15, Zeilen: 14: 18ff; 15: 1ff |
|---|---|
| [A third option is to start out with an] SCP action plan or framework, and to merge it with the SD strategy later on. The third option is, for example, recommended by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). As the figure below illustrates, it depicts SCP policy making as a cycle that moves from a national inventory catalogue of ongoing SCP activities via an SCP action plan to the full integration of SCP in a major national strategy process, such as an Environmental Action Plan or a SD strategy (UNEP, 2008). This step-wise approach was taken, for instance, in the Czech Republic, Finland, and the UK.
Figure 12: SCP policy making as a cycle (author’s illustration, embedded image)
If we explore the extent to which the SD strategies of 19 EU Member States refer to SCP in their objectives, the following picture emerges. 18 of the 19 SD strategies refer to SCP in their objectives. Among them, 6 mention SCP between 1-3 times, 8 between 4-6 times and 4 more than 7 times. Member States that have integrated SCP from the outset into their NSDS are, for example, Austria and France. A similarity in the context of CSR is that EU Member States organise and coordinate CSR policies in very different ways. Apart from this, however, we find a different picture than in the context of SCP. While in most countries several actors pursue a variety of initiatives in a decentralized way, some (mostly leading) countries approach CSR policies in a more coordinated way. The United Kingdom, for example, has appointed a Minister for CSR, and the Netherlands and Sweden have established CSR platforms that bundle several government activities. SD strategies, however, pay hardly any attention to CSR. Another look into the same database on SD strategy objectives revealed that 8 out of 19 SD strategies from across Europe do not contain a single objective on CSR, and most of the remaining 11 SD strategies contain only one vague reference to promoting CSR‖ [sic] with unspecified means. Although SD and CSR both aim to better integrate economic, social and environmental issues, joint efforts obviously still face sectoral and institutional barriers. While the SD agenda is often dominated by environmental issues and ministries, expertise on CSR policies is mainly affiliated with Ministries of Labour and Social Security. It can be concluded that, ― [sic] the close conceptual link between SD and CSR given, ignoring CSR policies in SD strategies is a missed chance of bridging the obvious gap between the two closely related policy fields. |
A third option is to start out with an SCP action plan or framework, and to merge it with the SD strategy later on.
The third option is, for example, recommended by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). As figure 4 illustrates, it depicts SCP policy making as a cycle that moves from a national inventory catalogue of ongoing SCP activities via an SCP action plan to the full integration of SCP in a major national strategy process, such as an Environmental Action Plan or a SD strategy (UNEP, 2008). This step-wise approach was taken, for instance, in the Czech Republic, Finland, and the UK (ETC/RWM, 2007).
Figure 4: National SCP Programme Cycle (Source: UNEP, 2008) [page 15] If we explore the extent to which the SD strategies of 19 EU Member States refer to SCP in their objectives, the following picture emerges (for methodological details of the underlying study, click here). 18 of the 19 SD strategies refer to SCP in their objectives. Among them, 6 mention SCP between 1-3 times, 8 between 4-6 times and 4 more than 7 times. Member States that have integrated SCP from the outset into their NSDS are, for example, Austria and France (ETC/RWM, 2007). A similarity in the context of CSR is that EU Member States organise and coordinate CSR policies in very different ways. Apart from this, however, we find a different picture than in the context of SCP. While in most countries several actors pursue a variety of initiatives in a decentralized way, some (mostly leading) countries approach CSR policies in a more coordinated way. The UK, for example, has appointed a Minister for CSR, and the Netherlands and Sweden have established CSR platforms that bundle several government activities. SD strategies, however, pay hardly any attention to CSR. Another look into the same database on SD strategy objectives revealed that 8 out of 19 SD strategies from across Europe do not contain a single objective on CSR, and most of the remaining 11 SD strategies contain only one vague reference to "promoting CSR" with unspecified means (for methodological details of the underlying study, click here). Although SD and CSR both aim to better integrate economic, social and environmental issues, joint efforts obviously still face sectoral and institutional barriers. While the SD agenda is often dominated by environmental issues and ministries, expertise on CSR policies is mainly affiliated with Ministries of Labour and Social Security. In the ESDN Quarterly Report June 2008 we conclude that, "the close conceptual link between SD and CSR given, ignoring CSR policies in SD strategies is a missed chance of bridging the obvious gap between the two closely related policy fields". |
The source is not mentioned. Note that the author claims to have created the graphical illustration in figure 12, which in the original was attributed to "UNEP, 2008". Note that the signs "‖" and "―" in the dissertation are created by copying and pasting quotation marks in the source. |
|
| [34.] Msc/Fragment 097 11 - Diskussion Bearbeitet: 23. December 2014, 16:57 Singulus Erstellt: 22. December 2014, 23:19 (WiseWoman) | Fragment, Gesichtet, KomplettPlagiat, Msc, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop, Wikipedia Adam Smith 2007 |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 97, Zeilen: 11-17 |
Quelle: Wikipedia Adam Smith 2007 Seite(n): Internetquelle, Zeilen: - |
|---|---|
| [33] SMITH, A. (June 16, 1723 - July 17, 1790) was a Scottish moral philosopher and a pioneering political economist. One of the key figures of the intellectual movement known as the Scottish Enlightenment, he is known primarily as the author of two treatises: The theory of moral sentiments (1759) and An Inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations (1776). One of the main points of The wealth of nations is that the free market, while appearing chaotic and unrestrained, is actually guided to produce the right amount and variety of goods by a so-called "invisibile [sic] hand". | Adam Smith (baptised June 5 (OS) / June 16 (NS) 1723 – July 17, 1790) was a Scottish moral philosopher and a pioneering political economist. One of the key figures of the intellectual movement known as the Scottish Enlightenment, he is known primarily as the author of two treatises: The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759), and An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1776). [...]
[...] One of the main points of The Wealth of Nations is that the free market, while appearing chaotic and unrestrained, is actually guided to produce the right amount and variety of goods by a so-called "invisible hand" |
Wikipedia is not mentioned in the thesis. |
|