Issues like climate change, human rights abuses and poverty dominate our media. Often blamed for responsibility for many of the world’s urgent problems, companies are increasingly expected to address them. The term “Corporate Social Responsibility” has therefore become synonymous for initiatives towards sustainable development. This report was established to examine how far corporate social responsibility and sustainable development of multinational corporations has been practiced in recent years, specifically the German Siemens Group and Russia’s Gazprom which are the subjects of this investigation. The paper first highlights some key issues of the stakeholder theory and stakeholder salience model, which is then applied to determine the companies’ key stakeholders. The most important ones are analysed and compared in terms of power, legitimacy and urgency. Section two deals with the evaluation of the companies’ responsible business approaches, pointing out the extent to which these have increased or decreased and the underlying reasons effecting change. The final section seeks to identify the substance of the described approaches by applying the Ponte et.al typology and finally analysing them using the two contrasting perspectives “Good for Business” and “Critical Development”. Findings in section one show that classifying and addressing stakeholders is fundamentally through managerial perception and the variable constitutional contexts in which the companies are enacted. The results also reveal that Siemens has to deal cautiously with a wider group of stakeholders than Gazprom, due to the different constitutional situations in Germany and Russia. Gazprom is most influenced by its main-stakeholder, the Russian Federation, whereas the power of other stakeholder groups is relatively low. The investigation of Siemens’s socially responsible business approaches in section two revealed that the increasing awareness of CSR in Germany and Siemens’s corruption affair were the main drivers intensifying their recent business approaches. CSR in Russia is still immature; consequently Gazprom’s initiatives are limited. However, CSR is expected to increase in Russia and Gazprom as a global player must pursue international standards.
Table of Contents
Introduction
1. Stakeholder Salience
1.1 The Stakeholder Salience Model
1.1.1 Stakeholder Salience Model Siemens/Gazprom
2. Responsible Business Initiatives
2.1 Responsible Business Initiatives of Siemens
2.2 Responsible Business Initiatives of Gazprom
3. Analysis and Classification of Business Aproaches
3.1 “CSR is Good for Business” Perspective
3.2 “Critical Development” Perspective
4. Conclusion
Bibliography
Research Objectives and Themes
This report examines the practice of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and sustainable development within multinational corporations, focusing specifically on the German Siemens Group and the Russian energy firm Gazprom to analyze how different constitutional and economic contexts influence their stakeholder engagement and CSR strategies.
- Application of the Stakeholder Salience Model to identify and evaluate key corporate stakeholders.
- Evaluation of responsible business initiatives and CSR disclosures in Siemens and Gazprom.
- Comparative analysis of CSR approaches using the Ponte et al. typology.
- Critical investigation of the "Good for Business" versus "Critical Development" perspectives in CSR implementation.
- Analysis of the impact of regulatory environments and institutional contexts on corporate transparency and social responsibility.
Excerpt from the Book
1.1.1 Stakeholder salience Siemens/Gazprom
Mitchell et.al (1997) argue stakeholder classification is mainly based on managerial perception. However, the constitutional system in which the companies are enacted should also be considered (Amaeshi, 2007). So for instance, could the German coordinated market economy have a different influence on the power, legitimacy and urgency of stakeholders than the Russian post-communist economy, which is in transition to a market economy?
To discover who and what matters to companies, social or sustainability reports represent a prominent instrument highlighting the company’s commitments in terms of sustainable business practices and their accountability to various stakeholders (Amaeshi, 2007). There have latterly been an increased number of such documents, providing responsible and transparent business practices to stakeholders. According to KPMG, a survey of the Global Fortune Top 250 companies illustrated that more than 80% now report on CSR (KPMG, 2008).
Stakeholder groups providing resources to the company essential for the companies’ survival, are usually addressed more frequently compared to stakeholder groups which do not directly affect the daily business life (van Nimwegen et.al, 2008).
According to Siemens’s sustainability report 2008, they address employees, customers, suppliers, investors, society, scientific community, government and NGOs as their key stakeholders (Siemens, 2008). Figure 2 provides a typology for stakeholder groups of Siemens in Germany. Further detailed discussion of some key stakeholder groups comparing the two companies will follow.
Summary of Chapters
Introduction: Provides the context of CSR in global business and defines the scope of the study regarding Siemens AG and OAO Gazprom.
1. Stakeholder Salience: Introduces the theoretical framework of stakeholder identification and discusses the influence of different constitutional environments on stakeholder classification.
2. Responsible Business Initiatives: Details the specific CSR activities and reporting practices implemented by Siemens and Gazprom within their respective business environments.
3. Analysis and Classification of Business Aproaches: Applies the Ponte et al. typology to evaluate the substance and profile of CSR initiatives at both corporations.
4. Conclusion: Summarizes the findings, highlighting the discrepancies between stated CSR goals and actual substance, while noting the influence of media and institutional pressures.
Keywords
Corporate Social Responsibility, CSR, Stakeholder Salience, Siemens, Gazprom, Sustainable Development, Business Ethics, Corporate Governance, Accountability, Stakeholder Mapping, Transparency, Neo-liberal Market System, Philanthropy, Environmental Protection, Anti-Corruption.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental purpose of this research?
The report investigates how multinational corporations, specifically Siemens and Gazprom, practice corporate social responsibility and how their approaches align with sustainable development goals.
Which theoretical model is used to categorize stakeholders?
The paper utilizes the Stakeholder Salience Model developed by Mitchell et al., which evaluates stakeholders based on their power, legitimacy, and urgency.
What are the central themes discussed in the analysis?
The core themes include the impact of national institutional contexts, the role of CSR reporting, the link between business operations and social initiatives, and the distinction between substantive CSR and performative PR exercises.
How is the effectiveness of CSR initiatives evaluated?
The study applies the Ponte et al. typology, which classifies initiatives based on their engagement with company operations (engaged vs. disengaged) and their proximity (proximate vs. distant).
What is the primary difference in the CSR approach of Siemens compared to Gazprom?
Siemens has integrated CSR more deeply into its core business operations and reporting following internal corruption scandals, whereas Gazprom's initiatives are largely viewed as limited and primarily philanthropic.
Does the author consider CSR to be consistently beneficial?
The author presents a balanced view, acknowledging that while CSR can be "good for business" in terms of reputation, it often lacks the necessary substance to drive genuine sustainable development due to poor planning and regulatory gaps.
How does the Russian constitutional context affect Gazprom's stakeholder management?
The state-owned nature of Gazprom and the political economy of Russia mean that the Russian Federation acts as the dominant stakeholder, often overshadowing the influence of other groups.
Why are Siemens' stakeholders categorized differently than Gazprom's?
Siemens operates in a highly regulated German market that allows for active stakeholder participation, such as labor representation on supervisory boards, whereas Gazprom's environment limits the power of non-governmental stakeholder groups.
- Quote paper
- MBA Steffen Rudigier (Author), 2010, Corporate Social Responsibility. The case of Siemens and Gazprom, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/154133
