Standalone Corporate Social Responsibility Reports

Question: Discuss about the Standalone Corporate Social Responsibility Reports. Answer: Introduction Mahoney et al. (2013) depict that in recent times, consumers become more alert, and they do not accept unethical business practices or supports organization, which are liable for unethical business moves. Thus, in order to attain customer retention, employee engagement and high competitive advantage, organization nowadays takes initiatives for CSR activities. However, some critics of CSR claim it is little more than greenwashing. Thus, in this essay that this claim is true that company appear to be more environmentally friendly than it really is. CSR activities not only associated with the initiatives for the betterment of the environment but it also relies on the advancement of the employees and the society. Barone et al. (2013) highlighted that, the Cadbury PLC is considered as one of the most ethical organizations of their times, and they initiated much regulation that provides a better life and happy work environment to their employee. Cadbury had taken over Green Blacks, which is a chocolate manufacturing company that is known for its organic and fair trade labeled product.The arguments rely on in this case, is that this CSR attracts many consumers towards their concern of ethical business approach. However, this approach is taken by them to restore its damaged reputation by using cocoa from slave farms located in West Africa. Additionally, Kruschwitz (2012) states that, it is very important that maintaining a good CSR, results in providing good interpersonal relationships with their employees and offer them better offers and opportunities so that they can serve their best by associating with the organization. It is evident that after getting successful acquisitions over a British leading brand Cadbury, Kraft withdraws from their commitments. Tsagas (2012) highlights that prior to taking over the company, Kraft had committed to keeping the Cadbury Somerdale factory open; however, after completed takeover, they close the respective factory that results in a loss of 400 jobs. This leads to distrust towards the Krafts and poor relationship with Cadburys employees. Moreover, experts also found that not only the closure of the Cadburys Somerdale factory was the reason for their inability, but they also faced problems for not maintaining the high standards of care and accuracy that Cadbury has followed for commu nicating with their customers. Tsagas (2012) highlights that this breaches the Rule 19.1 of the Takeover Code, where an organization has to comply with the business plan of the acquisition company for enjoying complete acquisition. Moreover, Moeller (2012) highlights that Cadbury prior of getting acquisition, supports taking over companies that are highly ethical and can help in securing economic, social and economic sustainability. In addition to that, Cadbury's this believes can be seen from their initiatives for launching a GBP 44 million Cocoa Partnership (Barone et al. 2013). In this partnership, Cadbury had economic supported million cocoa farmers and their communities in the developing countries like Indonesia, India, Caribbean and Ghana. This makes the company a top selling as they are fully committed to CSR activities that make people aware of their approach towards an ethical business approach (Moeller 2012). However, Kraft after acquisition Cadbury did not show the support for the Cocoa Partnership that the latter company was following. Tsagas (2012) argued that initially, Kraft had said that they would follow all the CSR activities followed by Cadbury and align their CSR activitiesin order to satisf y the media, trade unions, and the House of Commons. However, in reality, months after the successful acquisition, Kraft seems to breaches their own commitment to following the ethical approach for doing business on behalf of Cadbury. Tsagas (2012) furthermore depicted that, if an organization is not satisfied with the business approach of their takeovers, they can propose their business approach that is completely functional and controlled by the acquisition group. Green Blacks also presented a proposal, where they were awaiting a management buyout to recover its CSR-friendly business as the concerned organization being a part of Kraft; they were struggling to maintain its fundamental CSR (Justmeans.com 2016). Kraft rejected the proposal and continued to impose their CSR approach on keeping Green Blacks as a part of its group. Cadburys workers also faced the same problem when they did not found any similarity in the offers that Kraft was providing to them and Cadbury had provided. Kruschwitz (2012) emphasize that Cadbury had built a fairyland factory as it offers their employee to enjoy their work and working atmosphere. Leading companies like Quaker also have taken such steps so that they can satisfy their emp loyees first and then about acquiring wealth. They had a space for cricket, a beautiful rose garden, and swings for the ladies and also had created utopian model towns so that employee can enjoy a luxurious life. Besides, Tsagas (2012) also stated that additional benefits also attract many employees for being associated with an organization and keep doing things that ensure the advancement of their company. Quakers approaches like raising the wages of their workforce, initiatives of pensions and Saturdays off along with the unemployment benefits and sickness benefits helped the concerned organization with high employee retention rate (Justmeans.com 2016). They have also provided the benefits of free dentists sittings, free doctors visits and vitamin pills for their staff so that their good health can be maintained. This makes them the worlds largest food company; however, Deborah Cadbury argued that in recent times, this vision of Quaker has disappeared and they no longer provide such fairy tale benefits to their employees (Justmeans.com 2016). The same scenario can be seen on the acquisitions of the Kraft, where they imposed their business rule on the employee rather than valuing their inter est. Thus, Krafts procedure can be considered as greenwashing. Conclusion Thus, from the entire study, it can be found that Kraft is using the concept of greenwashing when it comes to their maintenance of CSR. Thus, it is an agreed argument as Kraft for their global expansion has acquisition leading company like Cadbury but did not follow their high standard of employee and community relations that is one of the most crucial factors for an effective CSR of an organization. Reference List Barone, E., Ranamagar, N. and Solomon, J.F., 2013, September. A Habermasian model of stakeholder (non) engagement and corporate (ir) responsibility reporting. InAccounting Forum(Vol. 37, No. 3, pp. 163-181). Elsevier. Justmeans.com., 2016.Bittersweet: How Kraft's Acquisition of Cadbury Ended the Dynasty of a CSR Luminary | Justmeans. [online] Available at: https://www.justmeans.com/blogs/bittersweet-how-krafts-acquisition-of-cadbury-ended-the-dynasty-of-a-csr-luminary [Accessed 26 Dec. 2016]. Kruschwitz, N., 2012. Why Kraft Foods cares about fair trade chocolate.MIT Sloan Management Review,54(1), p.1. Mahoney, L.S., Thorne, L., Cecil, L. and LaGore, W., 2013. A research note on standalone corporate social responsibility reports: Signaling or greenwashing?.Critical Perspectives on Accounting,24(4), pp.350-359. Moeller, S., 2012. Case study: Kraft's takeover of Cadbury.Financial Times, Jan,10(2012), pp.23-24. Tsagas, G., 2012. Reflecting on the value of socially responsible practices post takeover of Cadburys PLC by Kraft foods inc: implications for the revision of the EU takeover directive.European Company Law, Kluwer Law International, Special Issue on CSR and SRI,9(2), pp.70-80. Spiteri-Cornish, L., 2014. Case Study 10: A Sweet Deal: Cadbury Leads Kraft into Emerging Markets. In Marketing Cases from Emerging Markets (pp. 93-98). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Tsagas, G., 2014. A Long-Term Vision for UK Firms? Revisiting the Target Director's Advisory Role Since the Takeover of Cadbury'S PLC.Journal of Corporate Law Studies,14(1), pp.241-275.