Synopsis Corporate Social Responsibility In Pakistan

Published Date: 02 Nov 2017

INTRODUCTION

Pakistan came into being in 1947. Pakistan progress record shows its good progress in the last decades. But this progress record could not make it possible to include it into the list of the developed country. Pakistan is still included in the list of the developing country. More than 90% of the population are Muslims, so as a muslim community our values, culture and societal norms are mature from the last more than fourteen hundred years. But as the Pakistan nation we are in the process of nation development process.

Every society or even community should be living under a common law. This is to maintain the status quo, to protect property, vested rights, and established relationships. It is even considered to be the backbone of the society. This shows that the awareness of the society with law is very important. It showing the strength of the society regarding the awareness.

Elements of corporate social responsibility (CSR) are not a new phenomenon nor indeed are the business practices associated with it. Traditions of corporate philanthropy date back to the Victorian era with the activities of Quaker families such as the Cadburys, Rowntrees and Hersheys who sought to improve their employees’ standard of living as well as enhancing the communities in which they lived.

In the world, foundations such as those set up by Rockefeller and Carnegie established a new level in corporate charitable behaviour. During the depression comprehensive public building projects were commissioned in order to provide jobs for those finding themselves newly unemployed. The Rockefeller Foundation went beyond simple charitable giving in establishing research programmes and educational establishments all over the world.

CSR has rapidly grown in the last 20 years, moving up the boardroom agenda of even our most hard-headed companies. At its most passive, there is the ‘hands-off’approach, with charitable giving and patronage of charities decided by the chairman or a board committee. Even where there is a more business-based approach a great deal of what passes as CSR at top companies has been described as merely ‘passive box ticking driven by external pressures rather than a genuine desire to do business in an ethical way’ (Martin Waller, The Times, 8 July 2003). These initiatives are not to be disparaged, as anyone who has worked for charities seeking corporate sponsor-ship will attest. But increasingly there is support for more active CSR involving a range of stakeholders.

Even with flexible working, many people are working longer hours. With consequent restrictions on social time and family life, people want to be reassured that the job to which they devote their energies has wider benefits and status. Staff want to feel aligned with the aims, objectives and behaviour of their employer. Active citizens as well as active companies are those who make more than a solely economic contribution to the community. Active companies can in turn motivate employees to become active in their communities and provide a framework and focus for their efforts.

Many companies now back and organize specific schemes, often in conjunction with the not-for-profit sector, with the belief that this will contribute to both the medium- and long-term success of their business. Early in the 1980s a wide network of major businesses came together to establish Business in the Community (or BITC), which is a respected and influential force within the business community. The business case for CSR provides an important incentive to companies to consider adopting socially and environmentally responsive policies. Research published by the UK’s Institute of Business Ethics, comparing companies in the FTSE 250, provides strong evidence that ‘those clearly committed to ethical behaviour perform better financially over the long term than those lacking such a commitment’ (Alison Maitland, Financial Times, 3 April 2003). It is argued that CSR strategy can help manage the effects of globalization, cut environmental cost, raise productivity and improve staff recruitment and retention rates.

In recent times pressure groups with widespread popular support have success-fully targeted companies that have broken no laws but rather have offended modern norms and standards, particularly with regard to human rights and employment practices, for instance the use of sweatshop labour by Nike and Gap in Indonesia and Cambodia, the campaign against Nestlé’s marketing of powdered milk in developing countries and criticism of Shell’s disposal of the Brent Spar oil platform and conduct in Nigeria. These campaigns marked a sharp increase in expectation about the role of the company in society and declining faith in the power of national governments to tackle social and economic problems that spread across geopolitical borders. The perceived power and reach of multinationals make them appear a better target for pressure group campaigners than domestic politicians.

Furthermore, following the Enron, Andersen and WorldCom scandals, there is a greater recognition by businesses that CSR can help to restore public trust in the corporate world. There is also a shift in investor attitudes taking place. A survey by Business in the Environment published in May 2001 (‘Investing in the future: City attitudes to environ-mental and social issues’) found that over half of analysts and two-thirds of investors believed a company that emphasizes its environmental and social performance is attractive to investors.

Naturally there are critics who question the business case for CSR and who doubt its effectiveness in tackling social and environmental problems. Some even claim it to be nothing more than a management fad designed to ward off the threat of new legislation and a ‘jargon-laden industry all of its own, with no relationship to the real business’ (Patience Wheatcroft, The Times, June 2003). One economic commentator has written: ‘Businesses which pursue CSR goals risk losing sight of the profit motive, at the cost of the long term health of the corporate sector and, by extension, the economy as a whole.’ The biggest challenge that exists is the ability to reconcile the profit motive with fulfilling social obligation.

The Background To Corporate Social Responsibility

The principles of the concept have long been a part of enlightened business strategy. Elements of corporate social responsibility (CSR) are not a new phenomenon nor indeed are the business practices associated with it. Traditions of corporate philanthropy date back to the Victorian era with the activities of Quaker families such as the Cadburys, Rowntrees and Hersheys who sought to improve their employees’ standard of living as well as enhancing the communities in which they lived. In the United States, foundations such as those set up by Rockefeller and Carnegie established a new level in corporate charitable behaviour. During the depression comprehensive public building projects were commissioned in order to provide jobs for those finding themselves newly unemployed. The Rockefeller Foundation went beyond simple charitable giving in establishing research programmes and educational establishments all over the world.

THE CURRENT CLIMATE

The current climate is positive for CSR. A global CEO survey undertaken by PricewaterhouseCoopers/World Economic Forum found that 70 per cent of chief executives globally agree that CSR is vital to profitability (fifth global CEO survey). In Western Europe, 68 per cent of large companies report what has been coined the triple bottom-line performance (economic, social and environmental factors) in addition to financial performance, compared with 41 per cent in the United States (PricewaterhouseCoopers/BSI Global Research Inc, 2002).

In the US, 80 per cent of bosses feel that the CEO’s reputation is a major influence on corporate reputation, though interestingly this figure is just 56 per cent in the UK. According to Business in the Community, more than 70 per cent of business leaders believe that integrating responsible business practices makes companies more competitive and profitable.

According to a Harris survey of 800 CEOs in Europe and North America, three out of four international corporations have a corporate reputation measuring system in place.

FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS IN CSR REPORTING

In recent years there have been strong suggestions that compulsory CSR reporting might come into force. There is a fear from business that a regulatory approach to CSR reporting will reduce it to a defensive compliance issue that involves simply ticking boxes. To date, it has been left to companies, on an ad hoc basis, to show how important CSR policies are to them. The Operating and Financial Review (OFR) is an opportunity for companies to push the boundaries of what is considered material (and therefore must be included in the report). Companies could include areas, policies and issues that competitors may not, such as employee relations, environmental actions, trade policies and ethical sourcing. This, it is argued, can deliver real competitive advantage and place competitors on the back foot, forcing them to act reactively to changes as they occur.

Developments are happening at pace. The Association of Chartered Certified Accountants has called for high-level disclosures of corporate, social and environ-mental performance and policies by companies in the new OFR. It would take only one company in a sector to widen its interpretation of materiality by providing more details in an OFR than is expected for that to become the benchmark for others to follow.

If one company can demonstrate materiality then others will find it difficult to prove otherwise, effectively forcing competitors into greater disclosure. In the long term this will mean convergence of the information contained in OFRs and a ‘best practice’ standard emerging. A quick scan of the CSR reports of just a few PLCs reveal that, at present, com-panies are reporting non-financial information in a myriad of ways. Information in such reports ranges from the strategic level of CSR management principles and policies and company attitudes to specific areas of the business, such as human rights and health and safety. They also often include outlines of particular governance measures, such as internal review panels, through to anecdotal accounts of CSR activity. CSR reporting can also include the communications strategy for the CSR programme, as well as ranking in public benchmarking surveys.

This is of course a danger with CSR reporting. Companies can overemphasize their achievements, overhyping what they have really done and discrediting their good work. John Monks, former General Secretary of the Trade Union Congress, stated, ‘all too often we find companies parading their CSR credentials despite a poor record on relationships, thus reducing CSR to a PR exercise with little substance’.

That there will in time be legislation requiring the compulsory reporting of CSR is doubtful. There exists the will neither from business nor from government. However, such an Act may not be necessary. The current government has not been shy of using enabling pre-existing legislative levers to expand the business case for CSR. For example, the 1999 amendment to the 1995 Pensions Act requires trustees of pension funds to declare their positions on ethical, social and environmentally responsible investment in their statement of investment principles.

Following the recent spate of corporate scandals in the US it is highly likely that rules will be tightened there to ensure better corporate behaviour. The corporate gov-ernance disasters of 2001 saw a shift away from the philanthropic tradition CSR had in the US towards a greater alignment of CSR to business strategy and the greater realization of the potential impact of NGOs. The emphasis is now shifting decidedly towards corporate governance. Integrated CSR is now seen as an important antidote to corporate greed and rebuilding trust among stakeholders. Nevertheless, domestic policies for CSR reporting may be driven from abroad. Five European countries have introduced mandatory reporting requirements: Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and France. The EU has produced a Green Paper on CSR (2001), and in 2004 the European Multi-Stakeholder Forum will report to the European Commission on the merits of voluntary and regulatory approaches.

Statement of the problem

The present research study was conducted to study the situation of the corporate social responsibility in Pakistan.

Objectives

To find out the level of corporate social responsibility in Pakistan

To find out the level of aware of corporate social responsibility in Pakistan

To identify how the people use the social corporate responsibility in their decision making.

To find out the impact of social corporate responsibility factors effect on business.

To identify the application of CSR in various situation.

To identify the needs of corporate social responsibility.

Research Questions

What is the level of corporate social responsibility in Pakistan

What is level of aware of corporate social responsibility in Pakistan

How the people use the social corporate responsibility in their decision making.

What is the impact of social corporate responsibility factors effect on business?

What are the applications of corporate social responsibility in various situations?

What are the needs of corporate social responsibility?

Research Methodology

Research design

This study is designed to find out the awareness, level of awareness of social corporate responsibility in the society in the province of Sindh of Pakistan. The research will be conducted to explore the level of awareness of social corporate responsibility and to find out the applications of corporate social responsibility in the province of Sindh in Pakistan..

Population of the study

All the people working in the different organization situated in the province of Sindh of Pakistan will constitute the population for this study.

Sample of the study

Total sample of 1500 respondents will be selected randomly.

Research Instrument

Researcher will develop the questionnaire for the respondents working in the different organizations. The instrument will contain the items relating to the corporate social responsibility. Research instrument will contain the items relating to the awareness of social corporate responsibility, level of awareness of social corporate responsibility, application of social corporate social responsibility in different situation, effect of social corporate responsibility on the business activity and about the usage of corporate social responsibility.

Data Collection

Researcher will use the self developed instruments to collect the data from the selected sample. One week will be given to the respondents. After one week the researcher will collect the instrument from the respondents.

Data Analysis

After collecting the data, data will be scored. After scoring the data it will ne enter into the computer? Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) will be used to analyse the data. Both types of statistics, descriptive and inferential will be used to analyze the data. Kappa test will also be used to categories the respondents according to their different responses. T-test and the ANOVA test will be used to find the difference between different groups. For the reliability of the research instrument Cronbach Alpha test will be used with the help of the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS). To determine the validity of the research instrument experts’ opinions will be sought.

Analyzed results will be interpreted; findings will be made on the basis of analysis. Then the researcher will draw conclusions and make recommendations on the basis of findings and data analysis.

Limitations of the study

Following are the limitations of the study

Therefore generalization of the findings may be applicable on the target population from which the sample will be selected.

Due to unavailability of the standardized research instruments the researcher will develop the research instrument himself.

Significance of the study

This research study will help the different partner of the society. This study will help the managers, policy makers, businessmen, society members and the lawyers. This study will help to enhance the awareness of the law in the society.

Delimitations of the study

Following will be the delimitations of the research study.

Study will be delimited to the province of the Sindh.

It will also delimit to the specific number of organizations selected randomly from the geographical boundaries of Sindh

Chapter II

Review of Related Literature

This part of thesis is related to the review of the related literature.

What is CSR?

In order to understand the meaning of contemporary CSR, it is useful to go back in time. While CSR is a recent term, preoccupation with In the course of this research, the researcher has interviewed staff from the following multinational oil companies: Shell, BP, Exxon, Chevron, Total, Agip, Statoil, BG Group, Petrobras and PDVSA.

The difficulties in defining precisely what corporate responsibility covers are in part reflective of the way in which this topic has developed. For some, it has grown out of community investment or corporate philanthropy with a clear emphasis on social improvements. For others, corporate responsibility has a much broader definition and is closely related to, if not a surrogate for, the sustainable development agenda launched at the UN’s Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992.

Ultimately, however, corporate responsibility is simply the application of values and principles in the way in which a company undertakes its business. Nevertheless, the confusion in terminology can affect the integration of such issues within a sensible approach to corporate governance and so a few definitions are necessary:

sustainability– a goal for society as a whole where economic development, environmental impact and quality of life are balanced;

sustainable development– the activities across society aimed at achieving sustainability;

corporate responsibility – the contribution a company can make through responsible business practices to sustainable development;

corporate governance – the implementation of policies, procedures and reporting arrangements to ensure a company understands and manages its risks effectively;

corporate social responsibility – those elements of a company’s responsible business practice that enhance the quality of life of society and the working environment of its employees;

corporate community investment– the support, financial or otherwise, provided by companies to projects aimed at improving the quality of life of sections of society. This section looks at the way in which corporate responsibility and a company’s framework for corporate governance interact.

CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY THEMES The board of a company is primarily concerned with ensuring that the company delivers value to its shareholders. Profitability is a key component of this, but to some, such as those involved in the anti-globalization protests, it is seen as indicative of the irresponsibility of business. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Profitability is in fact the cornerstone of an effective corporate governance strategy. Without profits it is less likely a company will make significant capital investments, which by its nature has consequences for employment in supply companies. It may also be tempted to cut corners on environmental management in order to reach profitability, or put employees under pressure to take short cuts as regards safety.

Profitability is an essential feature of corporate responsibility. The role companies’ play in underpinning the economy is also a central feature of corporate responsibility. For some companies this contribution takes the form of essential services, such as secure supplies of electricity. For others it takes the form of increased employment due to the ability to export goods and services. Whatever the form this takes, a responsible business will play a key role in economic development.

Companies sometimes have a reputation for damaging the environment whether it is through pollution, profligate use of natural resources or the unsustainable generation of waste. However, another theme of corporate responsibility is the effort to which responsible companies go to reduce emissions, beyond those permitted by the regulator, and to find alternative sources of raw materials. The governance of environmental performance, whether it be through ISO14001 or through systems put in place by the board, is important in the context of corporate responsibility. Finally, as indicated by the definitions above, there is a strong social element corporate responsibility. These social aspects include the well-being of employees, the training provided to develop their skills, the rewards and recognition provided as part of their packages, and workplace practices such as equal opportunities. There are also broader societal aspects at play. Issues such as human rights and the interaction with minority groups, investment in deprived communities, and the respect shown to stakeholders are relevant here.

Corporate responsibility covers a wider range of facets, many of which vary from company to company. While some companies such as National Grid Transco have sought to identify those that are most relevant to their business, others have adopted models such as ‘Winning with Integrity’, developed by Business in the Community. The identification of the themes is an important step in defining a suitable approach to corporate governance.

Beyond Corporate Social Responsibility business ethics and the social dimensions of business activity has a long history. Business practices based on moral principles and ‘con-trolled greed’ were advocated by pre-Christian Western thinkers such as Cicero in the first century BC and their non-Western equivalents such as the Indian statesman and philosopher Kautilya in the fourth century BC, while Islam and the medieval Christian church publicly condemned certain business practices, notably usury.

The modern precursors of CSR can be traced back to the nineteenth-century boycotts of foodstuffs produced with slave labour, the moral vision of business leaders such as Cadbury and Salt, who promoted the social welfare of their workers, and the Nuremberg war crimes trials after the Second World War, which saw the directors of the German firm I. G. Farben found guilty of mass murder and slavery (Ciulla1991; Pegg 2003;Sekhar 2002). From a historical perspective, CSR is simply the latest manifestationof earlier debates as to the role of business in society. What is new, according to Fabig and Boele, is that ‘today’s debates are conducted at the intersection of development, environment and human rights, and are more global in outlook than earlier in this century or even in the1960s’ (Fabig and Boele1999).

While the role of business in society seems to have been changing for some time, there is no agreement among observers on what CSR stands for or where the boundaries of CSR lie. Different people have interpreted CSR differently. For example, CSR means different things to practitioners seeking to implement CSR inside companies than to researchers trying to establish CSR as a discipline. It can also mean something different to civil society groups than to the private sector.

The responsibilities of companies in developing nations are also defined differently depending on the social–especially national– context (Baskin 2006; Frynas 2006); for instance, CSR among Malaysian firms is partly motivated by religious notions and Islam’s prescriptions of certain business practices (Zulkifli and Amran2006); the specific flavour of CSR in Argentina can be partly attributed to Argentina’s economic crisis in December 2001(Newell and Muro 2006); while companies in South Africa are forced to address racial inequality as a result of the unique legacy of apartheid (Fig 2005).

Companies in Malaysia focus on charitable activities, especially around Muslim and Chinese religious holidays, while companies in South Africa focus on black empowerment schemes. Therefore, CSR or ‘being socially responsible’ clearly means different things to different people in different countries. Although these differences in the understanding of CSR are per-haps inevitable given the wide range of issues that companies need to deal with, they can be frustrating, not least to company managers who might prefer a bounded concept similar to quality control or financial accounting.

Companies are increasingly expected to assist in addressing many of the world’s pressing problems including climate change, poverty and HIV/Aids. According to a2007 survey by the consultancy firm McKinsey carried out among the chief executive officers (CEOs) of companies,95 per cent of those questioned believe that society has greater expectations than it did five years ago that companies will assume public responsibilities. More than half of the CEOs believe that these expectations will further increase significantly during the next five years (Bielaket al.2007).

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) has emerged as a business approach for addressing the social and environmental impact of company activities. With increasing expectations placed on business, one needs to ask if CSR is able to fulfill these larger expectations. Therefore, the aim of this research is to analyse CSR’s potential and limitations for contributing towards wider societal‘challenges’.

The central part of the research investigates the potential of CSR for addressing three challenges in the business–society relationship: the environment, development and governance. The research suggests that CSR has some potential for dealing with environmental issues such as carbon emissions and oil spills. Yet, in general, the current CSR agenda largely fails to deal with the three challenges, and a number of important economic and political issues are not yet addressed. The research explains the existing constraints to CSR and provides some recommendations in the conclusion.

Researchers firmly believe that any discussion of the CSR agenda must have a solid basis in reality. Too many researches on CSR are based on superficial examples and unfounded arguments. Too many researches fail to appreciate the importance of context in the evolution of CSR. That is why this researcher has focused in greater depth on companies from a single industry: the oil and gas sector, which includes two of the world’s leaders in the CSR movement: Shell and BP. Throughout the research we also look at companies from developing nations such as Brazil’s Petrobras and South Africa’s Sasol. Business now operates in a global arena and companies from the so-called emerging markets such as China, India and Brazil are increasingly expected to make social and environmental contributions.

The research is based on more than ten years’ experience in researching the oil and gas industry, and the author has had hundreds of conversations with oil company staff, civil society advocates, government officials, consultants, development specialists, journalists and local people around these issues.

wrestling with issues as diverse as corporate governance, environmental management, corporate philanthropy, human rights, labour rights, health issues and community development. To complicate matters further, new terms have entered the vocabulary of business and civil society– concepts such as corporate accountability, stakeholder engagement and sustainable development, aimed variously at replacing, redefining or complementing the CSR concept. Indeed, some companies now prefer to use terms such as ‘sustainability’ or‘citizenship’ instead of CSR.

Corporate Social Responsibility

In the Asia -Pacific context, it would be wrong to assume that all CSR practices are less developed than in the West. Nevertheless it is clear that many aspects of CSR are less well developed. These would certainly include the internal human resource and employment practices, policies on → diversity, environmental initiatives and local community engagement commonly seen in the West. However, Asia is increasingly the workshop of the world and is central to manufacturing of outsourced products for most of the world’s large brands. Consistent with this, much of the attention for CSR is in examining the operations and activities of → supply chains in the region.

Many large firms have been subjected to accusations of running sweatshops in Asia over the last two decades. Since this is hugely damaging to brands (particularly when they involve allegations about the use of child labor) most have put in place sophisticated → codes of conduct relating to the conduct of factories from which they source and regularly inspect and audit those factories. Thus much of the emphasis for CSR in Asia has been on dealing with labour standards in factories, the accommodation provided for workers, appropriate training, proper wage payments being made to workers, → health and safety practices, the protection of the rights of migrant workers and dispute resolution.

Recently, it has become clear in the region that companies sourcing offshore have started to rationalize their supply chains. In part this is because of a wish to work with fewer, larger and more trusted suppliers to ensure better CSR practices based on shared → values rather than audit and inspection approaches.

For supply chains in Asia the biggest (but not the only) driver of CSR practices tends to be the big buyers who are keen to protect brands and reputations. This has led to one of the most common CSR practices being related to codes of conduct and the implementation and checking of them through → auditing. However, auditing and inspections are increasingly being seen as expensive and ineffective and many factories simply cheat to appear to be abiding by both codes of conduct and the law. There is therefore a new emphasis on moving beyond such approaches and towards building relationships with suppliers based on shared values, trust and the provision of consultancy services instead of inspections.

There are many examples of good CSR practices in the region that may even be absent in more developed economies. Examples include training and capacity building initiatives amongst workers who have received little formal education, empowering women workers, promoting good practice in industry -wide factory initiatives, establishing factory cooperatives, developing multi -stakeholder initiatives, creating worker committees and promoting → human rights.

Whilst international standards linked to CSR practices have a role to play in supply chains, an interesting recent development has been the establishment of home -grown social responsibility standards in Asia. It is perhaps in the debates surrounding discrimination, freedom of association, employment practices, trade unions, collective action, dispute resolution, migrant workers, bonded labour and child labour that we see the most activity.

Nevertheless, some CSR practices in Asia also extend to community investment, the environment, → conservation and broader health initiatives. Stakeholder dialogue, reporting and disclosure, all central to CSR, are being seen as tools to be used by businesses but also by local authorities keen to promote better practices in the private sector. Increasing attention is also being paid to issues of → corporate governance. Many good CSR practices are not achieved by businesses working alone, but with other businesses, civil society organisations and government. A number of tripartite partnerships in the region have been developed to promote good CSR practices in the future.

Despite there being clear benefits, in many countries progress on CSR has been slower than elsewhere. The main problems are associated with a lack of awareness of CSR issues and practices, costs of engagement, a lack of suitably trained and skilled human resources, inefficient management systems, competing codes of conduct, an overemphasis on factory inspections, → corruption and poor procurement practices. There is a need for more training programmes, engagement and awareness raising activities with civil society groups, demonstration projects, industry -wide stakeholder dialogues, good practice guides, and better links with business associations, NGO groups and government.

The Moral Argument for CSR

Often portrayed as an alternative to VBM, CSR is somehow misunder-stood to be a moral movement without a business purpose. Perhaps the following moral argument has become associated with CSR and led to this confusion:

The purpose of a business . . . is not to make a profit, full stop. It is to make a profit so that the business can do something more or better. That "something" becomes the real justification for the business. . . . It is a moral issue. To mistake the means for the end is to be turned in on oneself, which Saint Augustine called one of the greatest sins. . . . It is salutary to ask about any organization, "If it did not exist, would we invent it?" "Only if it could do some-thing better or more useful than anyone else" would have to be the answer, and profit would be the means to that larger end.Charles Handy (2002)

Handy’s argument follows that of CSR proponents, who believe the purpose of business is too narrowly defined as simply "to make money." They believe instead that businesses have an obligation to their custom-ers, employees, the communities in which they are located, and society in general that is far greater than simply creating profits for shareholders.

The Economic Argument for CSR

The economic argument for CSR is, like most economic propositions, based on economic self-interest. However, this argument does not dispute the claim that corporations have an obligation to their customers, employees, and other stakeholders. Far from it. The difference, if one exists, is more a matter of philosophical underpinnings rather than procedure. Handy proposes a moral foundation for CSR, whereas we do not voice an opinion regarding moral considerations. Rather, we believe that it simply makes good business sense to have such a program since CSR is really a holistic approach to running an organization. Jensen (2001, 9) asks, "Can corporate managers succeed by simply holding up value maximization as the goal and ignoring their stakeholders? The answer is an emphatic no. In order to maximize value, corporate managers must not only satisfy, but enlist the support of, all corporate stakeholders customers, employees, managers, suppliers, local communities."

For the following reasons we believe that CSR represents a point of differentiation that can provide a competitive market advantage:

Human resources: CSR can be helpful with regard to recruitment and retention since potential recruits are increasingly asking about CSR policy. It can also help generate an atmosphere of pride within the organization.

Risk management: Reputations often take decades to build up but can be ruined in days by scandals and accidents. These events often draw bad publicity and attention from regulators and the courts. A strong CSR program can help prevent such episodes or can mitigate damages should one occur. Firms with existing reputation problems in their core business can engage in high-profile CSR activities in an effort to divert attention from these difficulties. Examples include British American Tobacco’s health initiatives, British Petroleum’s installation of alternate-energy wind turbines, and Wal-Mart’s decisions to sell organic groceries and build eco-friendly stores. Brand differentiation: Firms are constantly looking for ways to differentiate themselves from competitors in an effort to capture the consumer’s dollars. Examples of organizations that have success-fully used CSR as a brand differentiator include Whole Foods Market, Ben & Jerry’s, and The Body Shop.

Avoidance of government interference: Organizations that make an effort to be good citizens may be better able to avoid excessive regulatory intervention. A counterexample, however, is Wal-Mart, which encounters difficulties when it attempts to enter new markets. Companies such as Target or Costco, with their superior CSR reputations, rarely face the same level of resistance. In 2006 C. W. Goodyear, CEO of BHP Billiton, a leading natural resources company, described this phenomenon: BHP Billiton realized a long time ago that working in partnership with communities is more than about being a good corporate citizen. It’s a powerful competitive differentiator. It has the potential to establish us as the company of choice, giving us better access to markets, natural resources and the best and brightest employees.

By doing so, we can maximize profits for our shareholders while also ensuring we do the right thing by those who are impacted by our business.

Chapter No 3

Research Methodology

This study was aimed to study the corporate social responsibility in Sindh a province of Pakistan. This chapter presents the research design, population, study sample and how it is dispersed according to gender, living area, division of the respondents, academic qualification, professional qualification, monthly income, experience and profession. It also presents the internal consistency reliability of the research instrument. This chapter also contains the procedure of determining the validity of the research instrument, scoring of the items of the research instrument and data analysis techniques.

Research design

This study explores the different elements of corporate social responsibility in Sindh a province of Pakistan. It tries to describe the existing phenomena as it is. On the basis of the nature of the study, therefore, descriptive design has been used.

Population of the study

All the employees working in the different organization private or public in the province of Sindh constituted the population for this study.

The Sample of the Study

Random sampling technique was used for selection of the sample. A sample 0f 1000 respondents was selected including different people working in the province of Sindh. Sampling frame is given below:

Demographic information of respondents

Demographic information of sample obtained through data collection i.e. age, academic qualification, professional qualification, profession, professional experience. Gender, mother tongue, monthly income, marital status, administrative division and living area of the respondents, are presenting in the following tables.

Method of data collection

Researcher used the self made questionnaire to collect the data to measure the corporate social responsibility in Sindh a Province of Pakistan.

The Research Instrument

After review the related literature it was found that 5 point likert scale is most suitable instrument for this research.

Development of research instrument

It was found, With the help of literature, that Likert type scale is more suitable for this study as it has following characteristics; it can be used easily for a large number of respondents, it is convenient to construct and a Likert scale item is an uncomplicated statement so, easy to complete, it is unproblematic to score, it is a bipolar scaling method, measuring either negative or positive response to statement. It is considered the most efficient and effective method of measuring attitude. So, a Likert type five point scale was developed for this research. The research instrumented consisted on two sections. In section I demographic information of the respondents were asked and in section II attitudinal statements were presented. A pool of items was generated with help of literature. After the selection of preliminary items, 06 judges were asked to classify each item as positive, negative, or neutral with regard to the attitudinal object.

Validity of research Instrument

Instrument was distributed among the penal of experts consisted on following. The complete bio data of the experts are given in the appendix (B).

Prof Dr. Nasir Ud Din, Department of Special Education, University of the Punjab, Lahore

Dr. Tariq Mehmood Ch, IER, University of the Punjab, Lahore

Dr. Samina Ashraf, Department of Special education, University of the Punjab, Lahore

Dr. Amjad Waheed, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Management and Technology, Lahore

Dr. Mehmmod Hussain Awan, Dean Faculty of Education, Al-Khair University, Bhimber, Azad Kashmir

Dr. Abdul Ghafoor Ch, Faculty of Education, Minhaj-ul-Quran University, Lahore

The experts thoroughly examined the developed research instrument and provide their opinion about each item. They were of the opinion that item number ….are not suitable. There was consensus among them that instrument was valid for the research study.

Pilot Testing

The research instrument, after validation, was administered to the different people working in the different organization. All the respondents were requested to return the filled research instrument after one week. 143 copies of questionnaire were returned after a week. The instrument for piloting was distributed and collected personally by researcher. Data was entered into the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) and apply different appropriate statistical test. Cronbach Alpha for the reliability of the research instrument, factor analysis and descriptive analysis to check attitudes of teachers and administrators towards inclusive education.

Reliability of research instrument

To determine the reliability of the instrument of Cronbach’s alpha Test (Reliability Analysis) was used and the results are provided below.

Table : Cronbach’s Alpha (Reliability Test)

Cronbach’s Alpha

No of Items

.789

34

Reliability analysis of the questionnaire continuously study variable reveals Cronbach’s alpha value 0.789, this is above 0.7, and it indicates this research instrument‘s continuous variables have internal consistency reliability.

Administration of research instrument

After developing the questionnaire, the questionnaires were personally delivered to different organization with a covering letter stating the purpose of the study and to consolidate a better understanding and cooperation verbal explanation was done in terms of the purpose, the structure of the questionnaire as well as the importance of providing honest opinions. Furthermore agreement was reached that the researcher would personally collect completed questionnaires and this approach resulted in more than 95% return of questionnaires.

Data Analysis

Scoring of items

For the purpose of this study the statement were contextualized to make them relevant to the local context of corporate social responsibility. The respondent had to indicate (√) whether they strongly agree, agree, undecided, disagree and strongly disagree. The scoring was ranging from 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1accordingly. The scores were provided 5 to strongly agree, 4 to agree, 3 to undecided, 2 to disagree and 1 to strongly disagree. The level of significance for this study was chosen at 0.05 probabilities.

Statistical treatment

After collecting the data, the scoring of the data was made. After scoring the data it were entered into computer. Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) software was used to analyze the data. Both type of statistics, descriptive and inferential used to analyze the data i.e. for reliability Cronbach Alpha, to analyze the opinion descriptive statistics, and to find out the difference in the attitudes of the gender and on the basis of other demographic information independent t-test and chi square were used. Analyzed results were interpreted; findings were made on the basis of analysis. Then researcher draws Conclusion and made recommendations on the basis of findings and data analysis.

Limitations of the study

Following were the limitations of the study:

Following are the limitations of the study

Therefore generalization of the findings may be applicable on the target population from which the sample will be selected.

Due to unavailability of the standardized research instruments the researcher will develop the research instrument himself.

Delimitations of the study

Following will be the delimitations of the research study.

Study will be delimited to the province of the Sindh.

It will also delimit to the specific number of organizations selected randomly from the geographical boundaries of Sindh