Perceptions of Stakeholders in Corporate Social Responsibility and Irresponsibility in Tanzania

For a corporate to survive in a competitive market environment, it must ensure the needs of its stakeholders are given the first priority. Every corporate is obliged to take a responsible part in a community so as to afford a life time existence of its products and the life of its society in general. This can simply be termed as Corporate Social responsibility. It is an obvious fact however, that while most companies have been practicing corporate social responsibility, other companies have been irresponsible to their societies and to the environment surrounding them. The aim of this study was therefore to understand stakeholders’ perceptions, regarding corporate social responsibility and irresponsibility in their societies. Whereas, using an Explorative Factor Analysis study in beverage industries in Tanzania, we found corporate support and corporate geniality is influencing factors for company’s social responsibility. While, Corporate Environmental Management and Corporate Safety Management were said to influence corporate social irresponsibility. This study later recommended on producing socially desirable products and services as the suggested central goal for every company. And second, because moral and environmental pollutions may sometimes be inevitable to abstain, companies were recommended to take responsible compensations if in any case pollutions occurred. Introduction Background of the Study Businessmen are responsible for the consequences of their actions in a community that covered by their profits and loss. Most corporate and companies have brought lots of problems and hazards that have damaged the community and the environment (Calo, 1974). However, we International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences Vol. 8 , No. 9, Sept. 2018, E-ISSN: 2222-6990 © 2018 HRMARS 990 argue that, corporate assume responsibility for addressing these problems and with which it will increase the chances of survival in the future and reduce problems arising within the society concerning the organization. It is true that, in the business world effective organizations have been striving to survive in a competitive business environment. Through efficient use of factors of production and other facilities from the society, this process of surviving has put companies in a dependent relation with our environment and other stakeholders. As sited by Mullin (2005), the base of this relation is built in a two–way-traffic that is if corporate have to take some from the environment, then stakeholders have to be compensated for what has been taken. It has been noted that, while some companies try harder to cooperate with the society, others have been running away from their responsibilities within the community (Armstrong, 1977). It is possible that, when business forsakes its responsibilities to the community or creates an intentionally overinflated image of the corporate social responsibility, it is most likely to end up with undesired outcomes. This creates misunderstandings between the community and the corporate. Moreover, there are some businesses that are said to be continuously involved in the corporate social irresponsibility in the society. These include the auto mobile companies and big oil companies (Kotchen et al, 2011). Most businesses engage in corporate social irresponsibility as an outcome of adapting business practices that do not associate with moral standards of communities surrounding them. This could be in form of child labour, moral pollution and society discrimination. In this essence also, most companies have been a result of disastrous environmental pollution such as emissions of gas and spilling of oil that endanger the lives of people in our communities (Armstrong, 1977). As noted by William (2010), in his “Stakeholder’s Model”, the most important entity of any corporate is their stakeholders. These are defined as all those with a “critical eye” on corporate actions (Bownmann-Larsen and Wiggen, 2004), and who are also termed by Freeman (1984), as a group of individuals who are affected by the achievements of organization mission. Corporate should understand that, most of the people in the community are not only investors or consumers, but they are also people who are guided by moral standards and who are affected by the corporate in one way or the other (Pamler and Hartley, 2002). It is therefore the responsibility of corporate to ensure that the needs and interests of multiple stakeholders are met. The corporate needs to respond to the social responsibilities for two reasons; one is philosophical, where the corporate is needed by the society to take a responsible part in a community along with the locals and other social institutions. The other one is pragmatical, where by the corporate is needed to value the moral standards of the society, or else, its business life will be jeopardized (Parmer et al, 2010). Corporate Social Responsibility has been a key part of the agenda of many companies that often walk a long way to promote good work (Calo, 1974). It has been a vital strategy for companies to survive in a ruthless market environment, and in enabling them to win the trust and confidence of the people. Recently, the market and customer preferences have become more unpredictable and complex, forcing companies to become directly and constantly involved in the society activities. This includes engaging themselves in programs that have development impact to the International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences Vol. 8 , No. 9, Sept. 2018, E-ISSN: 2222-6990 © 2018 HRMARS 991 community. A good example has been shown by Airtel Tanzania in giving scholarships to students so that they can be able to reach their goals. Although most companies have been trying hard in promoting good moral standards and assisting in community projects, a lot more others have been consequently playing a role of irresponsibility. This has been done through underpaying and overworking company workers, limiting working resources and withdrawing workers incentives such as life and medical insurances. Another one includes spilling of toxic chemicals in the environment as done by most beverage industries which have resulted into spreading of dreadful diseases, birth of disabled children and severe deaths (www.bschool.com). While most firms in Tanzania have been engaging in corporate social responsibility so as to increase acknowledgement within the society, at the same time they have been creating a distressful environment to the people. This is through noise pollution, air pollution and constant accidents. This in turn puts both questions of responsibility and irresponsibility as vital to their stakeholders. The study aimed at firstly, exploring the perceptions of stakeholders on the practice of corporate social responsibility and corporate social irresponsibility in the Tanzania beverage industries in particular. It also intended to examine the accuracy and relevance of the assistances and support given out, if in any case correlate to the needs of the societies by Tanzania beverage companies. Secondly, to explore the perception of stakeholders on corporate social irresponsibility practices by beverage companies in Tanzania. Literature Review Corporate Social Responsibility and Irresponsibility This means commitment to behave ethically and contribute to economic development while improving the quality of life of our workforce and their families as well as the local community at large (Nexen, 2011). It can be also be defined as a duty of businessmen to follow policies and the ability to make the choices or select those chain of action, which are desirable in terms of objective and value of our society (Bowen, 1953). In this study, the concept of corporate social responsibility is defined as the involvement of the corporate in the community activities and assisting where there is a need. It also includes adhering to social values of the society that surround the company, and taking accountability of the various actions that destroy the environment and the community at large. This is a series of actions done by the company that increase extra cost and promote distributional conflict within the community surrounding it (Kotchen et al, 2011). It is a decision to accept other options, which is believed by decision makers to be inferior to the other option when the effects upon all parties are considered (Armstrong, 1977). Armstrong also stated that, the tendency of the top management in the firms to act in their own interest, has often led to social irresponsibility. In this case, Social irresponsibility can be termed as the tendency of the corporate not to abide with the moral standards set by the community, destruction of the environment and treating of the stakeholder by demolishing them. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences Vol. 8 , No. 9, Sept. 2018, E-ISSN: 2222-6990 © 2018 HRMARS 992 Theoretical Percepective There have been a great number of theories explaining the conduct and action of the corporate social responsibility and irresponsibility. Some of these theories include: Garriga and Mele (2004) noted that, political theories emphasize on social power of corporation. That is any interference between the societies and corporate is a result of power. It should be understood that, power does not only come from within, but also from the outside world (stakeholders). In this aspect, the philosophy behind this theory looks at corporate social responsibility as a source of gaining power in the business environment. Thus, it is very necessary for firms to take responsibilities in their societies as it will give them more authority (Garriga and