Samsung Samsung: Case Study: Corporate Social Responsibility

a. CSR analysis

Based on the key points of the case, we will use Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) concept to develop the analysis of the scandal and see how Samsung has effected with the other stakeholders in this case. As stated in the Commission of European Communities in 2001, “corporate social responsibility is essentially a concept whereby companies decide voluntarily to contribute to a better society and a cleaner environment”. Besides, defined by Geethamani (2017): “ CSR is a business approach that contributes to sustainable development by delivering economic, social and environmental benefits for all stakeholders”. Furthermore, according to Crowther and Aras (2008) there are three basic principles of CSR activities, which

As stated by Carroll (1991) “Ethical responsibilities embody moral standards, norms, or expectations that reflect a concern for what consumers, employees, shareholders and the community regard as fair, just, or in keeping with the respect or protection of stakeholders’moral right.”. After the corruption related to president Park was investigated, the fact was brought out that under the leadership of Mr. Lee, Samsung has intentionally disobeyed and broken laws against corruption and bribery of the country to get the political support from the president and in contrast to their words in sustainability report (2016) that compliance with laws and ethics is the 1st priority of the company. The company ensures that it is practicing in the highest standards of laws and ethics. Besides, reported in Samsung Sustainablity Reports (2016) the corporation usually organizes many corruption prevention training courses for all employees in the corporation around the world at least once a year to build up an “ethical, transparent” working environment. However, Samsung did not follow what it stated and went backword their words. Undeniably, the act of Samsung in this case was wrong and did not meet the requirements of the legal responsibility and ethical responsibility. In conclusion, as we analyzed, Samsung in this case has not satisfied Corporate Social Responsibility activities. Their motivation and performance are not

But first we have to understand: what egoism is theory?. As defined by Klikauer (2012) “the core of moral selfishness is constructed by and around the individual.” Otherwise, according to Hinman (2007) egoism theory “tells us that we should always act in our own self-interest” and “the wrongness or rightnes of acts depends on their consequences.” However, the philosopher Rachels (n.d) stated that the action satisfying ethical egoism theory is right if it is done in legal, moral ways and not harmful to others , if not, that action will be considered to be wrong and those who acted in wrong ways will get shunned or punished by others. Besides, right actions will help to increase self-interests but wrong actions cause the decrease self-interests (Hinman, 2007) In this case, Samsung was motived to pursue their self - interest by using money to exchange for the political support from the president and the national’s pension fund even when the corporation probably understood that their actions were illegal and unethical. In addition, the seed of the scandal is the merger mentioned above. The leaders of Samsung had been blindfolded by its benefits , the merger helped Samsung increase its power, share value on stock and more advantage compared to other competitors. Especially, the actions were supposed to serve mainly for the personal reason of Samsung vice president - Mr. Lee.