Definition of Oxymoron

Oxymoron is a figure of speech in which two opposite ideas are joined to create an effect. The
common oxymoron phrase is a combination of an adjective proceeded by a noun with contrasting
meanings, such as “cruel kindness,” or “living death”.
However, the contrasting words/phrases are not always glued together. The contrasting ideas
may be spaced out in a sentence, such as, “In order to lead, you must walk behind.”

Is Corporate Social Responsibility an Oxymoron?

"The voices calling for corporate reform are getting louder. "Corporate social responsibility is an
oxymoron", according to a recent book and documentary film "the Corporation" by law professor
Joel Bakan. He says corporations are like amoral "psychopaths" - manipulative, incapable of being
empathic or remorseful, and, while causing tremendous damage to the environment and other
elements of the public interest, they refuse to take responsibility for their behavior. Harsh words,
but they resonate with those uttered by critics of corporate power throughout history."
According to Jason Churchill, January 18, 2012
The cynic in me sniggers whenever these ensembles of words follow each other. And as pointed
out in ‘Is corporate responsibility an oxymoron? Corporate duty to the environment, consumer
and society in general usually only extends beyond pleasantries at official levels and nice glossy
brochures extolling how virtuous and empathetic the said company is while the ‘good times roll’.
Meaning as long as profits are not threatened in any way will the company engage with the
community and various interest groups in the pursuit of being a Responsible Corporation.
Of course, there are merits and rewards both intrinsically and extrinsically by volunteering a
mindful and caring corporate image that manifests itself in community projects and sponsorship.
While showing an acute awareness of the environmental impact issues theirs and other
businesses leave.
As examples of corporate negligence abound in recent times such as BP and their performance
in the Gulf of Mexico, the failed finance companies both here and off shore, the apparent lack of
or at times weak adherence to rules and regulations following the Pike River disaster, we can
clearly see that the public and its perception will make or break companies as they are judged on
how they deal with the big issues and events that confront them.
The answer? A balance is required. Nobody advocates that a business go so far in caring for the
environment and/or society in such a way as to become unprofitable or worse be force to shut
down.
As long as the company is operating within the laws of the land and with a fair degree of business
ethics they could look at Social Responsibility as an opportunity that can offer much.
By making Social Responsibility a core part of their corporate strategy. The advantages could be
positive exposure in the public arena, resulting in an increased awareness from consumers that
can gain the company a competitive advantage in the market place. There is a huge a difference
between insincere opportunist grandstanding when and where the need arises, and genuine
social and environmental responsibility.
We live in a connected and tech savvy world where consumers do research and base purchases
on ethical and morally sensitive topics. Even if at the end of the day we just can’t afford to buy
organic everything, micro even subliminal decisions are made every time we go to make a
purchase, be it at the supermarket checkout or whether you’re new washing machine/ flat screen
TV uses more power than the other brand. Choices are all around us and we are being challenged
every day to make them based on our morals and what we ‘perceive’ as the superior ethics of
the brands competing for our custom.
Armed with this desire to portray a genuine and natural Corporate Responsible attitude a modern
business can make advantage of what others look on as a duty rather than opportunity.
It makes perfect business sense to always improve and aspire to do better in areas of community
support, corporate identity and culture.

In line with human interaction if you feel good about your position in life both private and public
your self-esteem will grow fostering confidence and pride. This can transpire into a person’s work
life too for the benefit of all, especially the worker but equally the business should prosper with
high worker morale and lower worker turnover, less work place disagreements maybe even less
work place accidents.
As mentioned earlier consumers are much wiser than previous generations armed with the
mountains of information on just about every product available and not just what materials are
used, but where they came from and how they were produced, shipped, and stored with added
information on environmental impact and worker conditions. Business ignores this consumer
awareness at their peril. Consumers are not fools and can ‘smell a rat’ so to speak when it comes
to corporate greed and ambivalence to some of these issues raised. The old Profit Maximization
rule is slowly being swamped by the ‘green tide’ of change that effects all levels of business and
dictates that businesses adhere to Responsible policies and practices or incur the consumer
backlash.
According to Marcus Troyka, In a sense you could certainly interpret it that way. A corporation is
not a person and therefore is incapable of taking responsibility for anything. In the first place a
corporation is only responsible for its product, profits, and to some extent its employees. While
corporations frequently pretend that they’re taking responsibility for things beyond that it’s
nothing more than propaganda. The truth is that “taking responsibility” for things like the
environment or a company’s own externalities tends to cost money, which hurts competitiveness
so nobody ever really does it unless all their competitors are also forced to do so via laws or
regulations. Since such laws often also harm small businesses they can end up unfairly favoring
big business and must be carefully reasoned about to avoid causing more problems than they
solve, not that corrupt and incompetent politicians ever bother with things like that.
But, according to John Tate, absolutely not. Henry Ford, who I would argue was one of the
greatest capitalists we have yet produced, in his autobiography, My Life and Work, spells out his
philosophy on the true nature of business. This excerpt captures the spirit of his ideas.

“The essence of my idea then is that waste and greed block the delivery of true service. Both
waste and greed are unnecessary. Waste is due largely to not understanding what one does, or
being careless in the doing of it. Greed is merely a species of nearsightedness. I have striven
toward manufacturing with a minimum of waste, both of materials and of human effort, and then
toward distribution at a minimum of profit, depending for the total profit upon the volume of
distribution. In the process of manufacturing I want to distribute the maximum of wage--that is,
the maximum of buying power. Since also this makes for a minimum cost and we sell at a
minimum profit, we can distribute a product in consonance with buying power. Thus everyone
who is connected with us--either as a manager, worker, or purchaser--is the better for our
existence. The institution that we have erected is performing a service. That is the only reason I
have for talking about it. The principles of that service are these:

1. An absence of fear of the future and of veneration for the past. One who fears the future, who
fears failure, limits his activities. Failure is only the opportunity more intelligently to begin again.
There is no disgrace in honest failure; there is disgrace in fearing to fail. What is past is useful
only as it suggests ways and means for progress.

2. A disregard of competition. Whoever does a thing best ought to be the one to do it. It is criminal
to try to get business away from another man--criminal because one is then trying to lower for
personal gain the condition of one's fellow man--to rule by force instead of by intelligence.

3. The putting of service before profit. Without a profit, business cannot extend. There is nothing
inherently wrong about making a profit. Well-conducted business enterprise cannot fail to return
a profit, but profit must and inevitably will come as a reward for good service. It cannot be the
basis--it must be the result of service.

4. Manufacturing is not buying low and selling high. It is the process of buying materials fairly
and, with the smallest possible addition of cost, transforming those materials into a consumable
product and giving it to the consumer. Gambling, speculating, and sharp dealing, tend only to
clog this progression.