CSR – Fast Food Industry

Since the late 1960s and early 1970s, the call corporate affable responsibility has come into common. The concept of CSR has attracted calculateable watchfulness in recent years. However, CSR may have confused many good deals whether CSR brings benefits to the corporations, whether it is worthwhile to contribute organizational resources to CSR. Different studies have brought contrastive answers to those questions.In the sideline paragraphs, we will briefly discuss whether CSR are want and the effectiveness of CSR. As the competitors have started showing they are socially accountable, it becomes necessary for a degenerate food corporation to consider the postulate and importance of CSR if it wants to stay at an advantaged position in the fast food industry. As consumers have much choices due to globalization and consider to a greater extent today, it may be necessary for a corporation to show it is socially responsible to attract consumers. check to Scalet and Kelly (2 010), people are demanding CSR, the market incentives are following consumer preferences for CSR activities and the market is producing it. In related to the fast food industry, Schroder and McEachern(2005) s research suggests that Most respondents favoured an affaire of global fast-food companies in CSR, whether in the context of providing healthy choices, assuring zoology welfare or the sponsoring of community activities. They also suggest that fast-food retailers for example McDonalds and KFC should emphasize on customer health, food quality and CSR activities in coordinate to maintain and have new customers.On the other hand, some studies struggle CSR may not be helpful in developing corporations instigant and gaining advantages. Nicola (2007) describes awareness of CR policies is low and consumers do not act on their beliefs about CR they will continue to buy brands they know to be irresponsible. Product quality and consumer fairness are more important than CSR in consumer s mind, most consumers agree corporations should have CSR, but totally one-third of them consider CSR when shopping and not more than 4% would really not barter for a product due to the corporations ethical policy (Peter 2007). John (2006) mentions Milton Friedman, the renowned economist, has said few trends could so thoroughly undermine the very foundations of our bump society as the acceptance by corporate officials of a social responsibility other than to make as much money for their stockholders as possible.Corporation should not have conscience like a human being as a corporations nature is to maximize returns to its shareholder without breaching the law. These perspectives supporting the need of CSR show the consumers today choose our products not only depending on the quality of our products and service, but also depending on our contribution to CSR activities. As the whole market is producing it, a corporation has to fulfill the consumer demand of CSR in order to remain competitive.However, it assumes consumers are rational and act like what they ideate about CSR. In fact, consumers are not always rational and their consume behavior may not consist with their thought. At the same time, in that respect are some other perspectives showing the corporation contribution to CSR may be useless in gaining advantages. It fastly states that consumers focus much more on the product quality and consumer fairness, kind of than CSR. Even the consumers know the corporation is irresponsible, they would still buy its products.It makes CSR seems to be less important than what scholars have described. However, CSR not gaining advantages to the corporation doesnt mean not gaining advantages to the society. As a responsible corporation, it should have a conscience to keep on committing itself to CSR activities. These perspectives focus excessively much on what a corporation can gain from a society, but not on what a corporation can hit to the society. Only obey ing to the law is not enough for a responsible corporation.In conclusion, different perspectives may have certain strengths as well as weaknesses in their arguments. These perspectives supporting CSR provide a clear picture of the necessity of CSR by showing the consumers demand for CSR activities and indicating fast food corporations should have more CSR activities to maintain their competitiveness. However, it ignores the fact that consumers are not always rational and they may behave differ from what they think.Those perspectives questioning the effectiveness of CSR place a strong emphasis on that fact that CSR is not consumers priority and the role of a corporation is to maximum profits. However, it focuses too much on the benefits of the corporation rather than the benefits of the society as it puts the role of corporations in a too utile position. On the whole, although we understand much about CSR through the process of analyzing different claims, it is still hard to have a clear conclusion on those perspectives as obvious contradictory findings do exist and it may need a further research.