INTBUS 3501NA - Corporate Responsibility for Global Business III
Ngee Ann Academy - Trimester 3 - 2017
General Course Information
Course Code INTBUS 3501NA Course Corporate Responsibility for Global Business III Coordinating Unit Business School Term Trimester 3 Level Undergraduate Location/s Ngee Ann Academy Units 3 Contact Up to 3 hours per week Available for Study Abroad and Exchange Y Incompatible COMMGMT 3510 Course Description The content of this course covers corporate social responsibility (CSR) and performance (CSP), the shareholder-stakeholder debate, corporate governance in global business, ethical foundations of CSR, strategic CSR, implementation of CSR as part of corporate strategy, challenges at the base of the pyramid (BoP), social entrepreneurship and social business around the world. An integral component of this course is a small group discovery experience (SGDE) project. The primary goals of the SGDE project are (1) to train students in applying their knowledge, analytical and critical thinking skills to a practical problem in the field of CSR/corporate responsibility for global business; (2) to develop an applied research project in the form of a CSR strategy, social entrepreneurship or social business implementation plan; 3) to train students in developing skills in effective and efficient team management.
Course Coordinator: Dr Dirk BoeheAcademic in charge:
A/Prof. Dr. Dirk Boehe
Business School, University of Adelaide
Course Website: www.myuni.adelaide.edu.au
The full timetable of all activities for this course can be accessed from Course Planner.
Course Learning OutcomesOn successful completion of this course, students will be able to:
1 Apply their critical and analytical thinking skills to problems and dilemmas in global corporate responsibility. 2 Develop applied research skills to a practical problem in global corporate responsibility, specifically, problem framing, literature research, data collection, analysis and interpretation, formulation of managerial recommendations. 3 Develop and employ team leadership, management and collaboration skills in small groups. 4 Integrate knowledge and skills from preceding courses of the bachelor of commerce program, particularly, small group research skills with knowledge of international business, foundations in accounting, finance, marketing and management. 5 Develop argumentation skills within contemporary debates in global corporate responsibility, such as the shareholder-stakeholder debate, strategic CSR, environmental and social dumping, social business and social entrepreneurship. 6 Understand the conceptual foundations in the field of corporate responsibility and comprehend the complexity of corporate responsibility for the global business.
University Graduate Attributes
This course will provide students with an opportunity to develop the Graduate Attribute(s) specified below:
University Graduate Attribute Course Learning Outcome(s) Deep discipline knowledge
- informed and infused by cutting edge research, scaffolded throughout their program of studies
- acquired from personal interaction with research active educators, from year 1
- accredited or validated against national or international standards (for relevant programs)
2,6 Critical thinking and problem solving
- steeped in research methods and rigor
- based on empirical evidence and the scientific approach to knowledge development
- demonstrated through appropriate and relevant assessment
1,2 Teamwork and communication skills
- developed from, with, and via the SGDE
- honed through assessment and practice throughout the program of studies
- encouraged and valued in all aspects of learning
2,3,5 Career and leadership readiness
- technology savvy
- professional and, where relevant, fully accredited
- forward thinking and well informed
- tested and validated by work based experiences
2,5 Intercultural and ethical competency
- adept at operating in other cultures
- comfortable with different nationalities and social contexts
- able to determine and contribute to desirable social outcomes
- demonstrated by study abroad or with an understanding of indigenous knowledges
3,4 Self-awareness and emotional intelligence
- a capacity for self-reflection and a willingness to engage in self-appraisal
- open to objective and constructive feedback from supervisors and peers
- able to negotiate difficult social situations, defuse conflict and engage positively in purposeful debate
This course is custom made for you, in line with specifically designed course and program learning objectives. Therefore, we do not use a standard textbook for the entire course, even though some modules may use specific textbook chapters as an input. There is a downside to this: you will likely feel lost if you don’t go to our classroom sessions and to the tutorials, if you don’t read the materials (articles, case studies, specific chapters) and if you do not assume an active, responsible learning attitude.
The upside is that you do not have to spend a cent on course materials (the University has already paid for it) unless you want to print out everything – so better think green and read on the screen! Your course material is probably better than most textbooks that we know and it is certainly unique and innovative as you won’t get the same course anywhere else!
Details on the required readings associated with which lecture/tutorial will be provided on the course outline. The information below is subject to change and may be updated up to about four weeks before the beginning of the course.
1. Articles & Book Chapters
Banerjee, S. B. (2008), "Corporate social responsibility: The good, the bad and the ugly", Critical sociology, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 51-79.
Cao, B. (2015), "Environmental Citizenship Incorporated (Chapter 6)", in Environment and Citizenship. Routledge, London & New York.
Carroll, A. B. (1979), "A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance", Academy of Management Review, Vol. 4 No. 4, pp. 497-505.
Crane, A., Palazzo, G., Spence, L. J. and Matten, D. (2014), "Contesting the value of “creating shared value”", California Management Review, Vol. 56 No. 2, pp. 130-153.
Freeman, R. E. (2001), "A stakeholder theory of the modern corporation", in Hartman, L. P. (Ed.), Perspectives in Business Ethics. McGrawHill, Boston (MA), pp. 38-48.
Friedman, M. (1970), "The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits", The New York Times Magazine No. September 13, pp. 122-124.
Garriga, E. and Melé, D. (2004), "Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory", Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 53 No. 1-2, pp. 51-71.
Lencioni, P. M. (2002), The five dysfunctions of a team: A leadership fable, John Wiley & Sons.
Marconatto, D., Cruz, L. B. and Pedrozo, E. A. (2016), "Going beyond microfinance fuzziness", Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 115, pp. 5-22.
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R. and Wood, D. J. (1997), "Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts", Academy of Management Review, Vol. 22 No. 4, pp. 853–886.
Mulligan, T. (1986), "A critique of Milton Friedman's essay ‘the social responsibility of business is to increase its profits’", Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 265-269.
Paine, L., Deshpande, R., Margolis, J. D. and Bettcher, K. E. (2005), "Up to code - Does your company’s conduct meet world-class standards? ", Harvard Business Review, Vol. 83 No. 12, pp. 122-133.
Palacios, J. J. (2004), "Corporate citizenship and social responsibility in a globalized world", Citizenship Studies, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 383-402.
Porter, M. E. and Kramer, M. (2006), "Strategy and Society: The link between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility", Harvard Business Review, Vol. 84 No. 12, pp. 78–92.
Porter, M. E. and Kramer, M. R. (2011), "Creating shared value", Harvard Business Review, Vol. 89 No. 1/2, pp. 62-77.
Valente, M. and Crane, A. (2010), "Public responsibility and private enterprise in developing countries", California Management Review, Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 52-78.
Wijen, F. and Van Tulder, R. (2011), "Integrating environmental and international strategies in a world of regulatory turbulence", California Management Review, Vol. 53 No. 4, pp. 23-46.
Wilson, F. and Post, J. E. (2013), "Business models for people, planet (& profits): exploring the phenomena of social business, a market-based approach to social value creation", Small Business Economics, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 715-737.
Wood, D. J. (1991), "Corporate social performance revisited", Academy of Management Review, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 691-718.
Yu, J., Coulson, K. R., Zhou, J. X., Wen, H. J. and Zhao, Q. (2011), "Communicating corporate environmental citizenship: an examination of Fortune 500 web sites", Journal of Internet Commerce, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 193-207.
Yunus, M., Moingeon, B. and Lehmann-Ortega, L. (2010), "Building social business models: Lessons from the Grameen experience", Long range planning, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 308-325.
2. Case Studies
Berte, E. and Vujovich, C. (2014). Balancing Stakeholder Interests and Corporate Values: A Cummins Strategic Decision, North American Case Research Association, Inc. (NA0308).
Delios, A., Jimenez, D. and Turner, C. (2012). Australian miners and the resource super profit tax. NUS & Ivey Publishing Case (W12001).
Lee, S.H., Mol, M. and Mellahi, K. (2016). Apple and its suppliers. Ivey Publishing Case (W16146).
Porter, M.E., Kramer, M. and Sud, P. (2015). Walmart: segmenting social impact, Harvard Business School (HBS 9-715-435).
Price, G. (2010). Stakeholder Management and the endangered Wildlife trust, Gordon Institute of Business Science & Ivey Business School (910M66).
Valente, M. (2015). TATA Chemicals Magadi: Confronting poverty in rural Africa, Ivey Publishing (W15034).
Paine, L. and Bruner, C. (2006). Bribery in Business - A Legal Perspective, Harvard Business School (HBS 306012-PDF-ENG).
Ramanna, K., Sucher, S., McKown Cornell, I. (2015). Business & Government, Harvard Business School (HBS 113037-PDF-ENG).
Sucher, S. (2011). A framework for ethical reasoning, Harvard Business School (HBS 9-610-050).
The resources below are not mandatory readings, but can be helpful for the applied research project and to enhance understanding of Corporate Responsibility for Global Businsess.
Bainbridge, S. (2008) The New Corporate Governance in Theory and Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hill, C. W. L., Cronk, T. & Wickramasekera, R. (2008) Global Business Today: An Asia-Pacific Perspective.
Hoekman, B. M. & Kostecki, M. M. (2010) The Political Economy of the World Trading System. (3rd edn.) Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Homann, K., Koslovski, P. & Luetge, C. (2007) Globalisation and Business Ethics. Hampshire, UK: Ashgate Publishing Company.
Litvin, D. (2004) Empires of Profit: Commerce, Conquest and Corporate Responsibility. (2nd edn.) New York: Texere.
Monks, R. A. G. & Minow, N. (2008) Corporate Governance. (4th edn.) Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
Shapiro, A. C. & Sarin, A. (2008) Foundations of Multinational Financial Management. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Sharma, S. & Starik, M. (eds) (2003) Research in Corporate Sustainability: The Evolving Theory and Practice of Organizations in the Natural Environment. Cheltenham UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.
Soros, G. (2009) The Crash of 2008 and What It means: The New Paradigm for Financial Markets. New York, Public Affairs.
Soros, G. (2005) George Soros on Globalization. New York: Public Affairs.
Stiglitz, J. (2007) Making Globalization Work. New York: WW Norton & Co.
Stiglitz, J. (2003) Globalization and Its Discontents. New York: WW Norton & Co.
Tricker, R. I. (2009) Corporate Governance: Principles, Policies and Practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Vagelos, P. R. & Galambos, L. (2006) The Moral Corporation : Merck Experiences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Waddock, S. (2008) Leading Corporate Citizens: Vision, Values, Value-Added. (3rd edn.) New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Berry, H. (2009) ‘Corporate Governance: Beyond Convergence? A Comparative Analysis in the Wake of the Global Credit Crunch’ Global Business and Economics Review, 11(3-4): 234-250.
Brennan, M. N. & Solomon, J. (2008) ‘Corporate governance, accountability and mechanisms of accountability: an overview’ Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 21(7): 885-906.
Borsch, A. (2004) ‘Globalisation, shareholder value, restructuring: the (non)-transformation of Siemens’ New Political Economy, Sep2004, 9(3): 365-387.
Dine, J. & Shields, K. (2008) ‘Fair trade and reflexive democracy’ European Business Organization Law Review, 9(2): 163-186.
Doyle, T. & Doherty, B. (2006) ‘Green public spheres and the green public state: the politics of emancipation and ecological conditionality’ Environmental Politics, Nov2006, 15(5): 881-892.
Driver, C. & Shepherd, D. (2005) ‘Capacity utilisation and corporate restructuring: a comparative study of the US, UK and other EU countries’ Cambridge Journal of Economics, Jan2005, 29(1): 119-140.
Frederiksen, C. S. (2010) ‘The Relation Between Policies Concerning Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Philosophical Moral Theories – An Empirical Investigation’ Journal of Business Ethics, May2010, 93(3): 357-371.
Fritsch, S. (2008) ‘The UN Global Compact and the global governance of corporate social responsibility: complex multilateralism for a more human globalisation?’ Global Society, 22(1): 1-26.
Holmes, L. (2009) ‘Good guys, bad guys: transnational corporations, rational choice theory and power crime’ Crime Law and Social Change, Apr2009, 51(3-4): 383-397.
Kurihara, Y. (2005) ‘The changing corporate governance in Japan: adapting to globalisation’ Global Business & Economics Review, Feb7-2005, 1(1): 82.
Lewis, A. & Juravle, C. (2010) ‘Morals, Markets and Sustainable Investments: A Qualitative Study of “Champions” ‘ Journal of Business Ethics, May2010, 93(3): 483-494.
Moshirian, F. (2008) ‘Globalisation, Growth and Institutions’ Journal of Banking and Finance, 32(4): 472-479.
Newell, P. (2005) ‘Citizenship, accountability and community: the limits of the CSR agenda’ International Affairs, May2005, 81(3): 541-557.
Turner, M. (2007) ‘Society must be protected: Polanyi’s “double movement” and the regulation of conflict goods’ Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 26: 85-100.
Utting, P. & Zammit, A. (2009) ‘United Nations – Business Partnerships: Good Intentions and Contradictory Agendas’ Journal of Business Ethics, Oct2009, Supplement 2, 89: 39-56.
Welford, R. (2003) ‘Beyond systems: a vision for corporate environmental management for the future’ International Journal of Environment and Sustainable Development, Aug 27-2003, 2(2): 162.
Useful Web Sites
Acumen Fund: www.acumenfund.org
Aspen Institute, Colorado (US): www.aspeninstitute.org
Australian Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility: www.accsr.com.au
Australian Institute of Company Directors: www.companydirectors.com.au
Business Ethics - The Magazine of Corporate Responsibility: www.business-ethics.com
Centre for Research on Globalisation and Economic Policy, Nottingham University (UK): www.nottingham.ac.uk/economics/leverhulme
Corporate Watch: www.corpwatch.org
Corporate Responsibility Coalition of NGOs (CORE): www.corporate-responsibility.org
CSR Asia: www.csr-asia.com
International Development Research Centre (Canada): http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-1-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html
Multinational Monitor: www.multinationalmonitor.org
Online LearningLecture slides will be uploaded to MyUni.
In addition, course communication and possible additional readings and links will be provided in MyUni throughout the course.
Learning & Teaching Activities
Learning & Teaching Modes
No information currently available.
No information currently available.
Learning Activities Summary
No information currently available.
The University's policy on Assessment for Coursework Programs is based on the following four principles:
- Assessment must encourage and reinforce learning.
- Assessment must enable robust and fair judgements about student performance.
- Assessment practices must be fair and equitable to students and give them the opportunity to demonstrate what they have learned.
- Assessment must maintain academic standards.
Assessment Task Task Type Weighting Learning Outcome Applied Research Report Group 30% Individual Exercises Individual 30% Final Exam Individual 40% Total 100%
Assignment: Applied Research Report 30%
Group Assignment (up to 4 team members per group)
Formative/summative assessment to evaluate the students’ practical implementation of the main concepts covered.
The continuing development of good written communication skills is widely recognised as important for Business graduates. This course specifically seeks to develop students’ abilities to analyse documentary material, to apply relevant theories and conceptual frameworks.
Individual Exercises 30%
Assessment of the students’ application of relevant concepts and theories.
These exercises will be administered as part of the classroom discussion using electronic media (echo360).
The content of exercises consists of the required readings. As mentioned in the syllabus (course outline), all students have to prepare for classroom discussions (which includes exercises) based on the required readings.
Final Exam 40%
Summative test to assess the students’ basic understanding of the fundamental principles and practices of corporate responsibility for global business, and application of current concepts and theories individually.
Duration: 3 hours.
No information currently available.
No information currently available.
Grades for your performance in this course will be awarded in accordance with the following scheme:
M10 (Coursework Mark Scheme) Grade Mark Description FNS Fail No Submission F 1-49 Fail P 50-64 Pass C 65-74 Credit D 75-84 Distinction HD 85-100 High Distinction CN Continuing NFE No Formal Examination RP Result Pending
Further details of the grades/results can be obtained from Examinations.
Grade Descriptors are available which provide a general guide to the standard of work that is expected at each grade level. More information at Assessment for Coursework Programs.
Final results for this course will be made available through Access Adelaide.
The University places a high priority on approaches to learning and teaching that enhance the student experience. Feedback is sought from students in a variety of ways including on-going engagement with staff, the use of online discussion boards and the use of Student Experience of Learning and Teaching (SELT) surveys as well as GOS surveys and Program reviews.
SELTs are an important source of information to inform individual teaching practice, decisions about teaching duties, and course and program curriculum design. They enable the University to assess how effectively its learning environments and teaching practices facilitate student engagement and learning outcomes. Under the current SELT Policy (http://www.adelaide.edu.au/policies/101/) course SELTs are mandated and must be conducted at the conclusion of each term/semester/trimester for every course offering. Feedback on issues raised through course SELT surveys is made available to enrolled students through various resources (e.g. MyUni). In addition aggregated course SELT data is available.
- Academic Support with Maths
- Academic Support with writing and speaking skills
- Student Life Counselling Support - Personal counselling for issues affecting study
- International Student Support
- AUU Student Care - Advocacy, confidential counselling, welfare support and advice
- Students with a Disability - Alternative academic arrangements
- Reasonable Adjustments to Teaching & Assessment for Students with a Disability Policy
- LinkedIn Learning
Policies & Guidelines
This section contains links to relevant assessment-related policies and guidelines - all university policies.
- Academic Credit Arrangement Policy
- Academic Honesty Policy
- Academic Progress by Coursework Students Policy
- Assessment for Coursework Programs
- Copyright Compliance Policy
- Coursework Academic Programs Policy
- Elder Conservatorium of Music Noise Management Plan
- Intellectual Property Policy
- IT Acceptable Use and Security Policy
- Modified Arrangements for Coursework Assessment
- Student Experience of Learning and Teaching Policy
- Student Grievance Resolution Process
Students are reminded that in order to maintain the academic integrity of all programs and courses, the university has a zero-tolerance approach to students offering money or significant value goods or services to any staff member who is involved in their teaching or assessment. Students offering lecturers or tutors or professional staff anything more than a small token of appreciation is totally unacceptable, in any circumstances. Staff members are obliged to report all such incidents to their supervisor/manager, who will refer them for action under the university's student’s disciplinary procedures.
The University of Adelaide is committed to regular reviews of the courses and programs it offers to students. The University of Adelaide therefore reserves the right to discontinue or vary programs and courses without notice. Please read the important information contained in the disclaimer.