Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-d5ftd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-29T11:03:06.621Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Talk Ain’t Cheap: Political CSR and the Challenges of Corporate Deliberation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 March 2017

Cameron Sabadoz  and
Abraham Singer
Cameron Sabadoz
Affiliation:
Carleton University
Abraham Singer
Affiliation:
University of Rochester
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Deliberative democratic theory, commonly used to explore questions of “political” corporate social responsibility (PCSR), has become prominent in the literature. This theory has been challenged previously for being overly sanguine about firm profit imperatives, but left unexamined is whether corporate contexts are appropriate contexts for deliberative theory in the first place. We explore this question using the case of Starbucks’ “Race Together” campaign to show that significant challenges exist to corporate deliberation, even in cases featuring genuinely committed firms. We return to the underlying social theory to show that this is not an isolated case: for-profit firms are predictably hostile contexts for deliberation, and significant normative and strategic problems can be expected should deliberative theory be imported uncritically to corporate contexts. We close with recent advances in deliberative democratic theory that might help update the PCSR project, and accommodate the application of deliberation to the corporate context, albeit with significant alterations.

Keywords

political corporate social responsibilitydeliberationdeliberative democracylegitimacydeliberative systemscritical theory

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Business Ethics Quarterly , Volume 27 , Issue 2 , April 2017 , pp. 183 - 211
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Business Ethics 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Austin, R. 2000. “Bad for business”: Contextual analysis, race discrimination, and fast food. The John Marshall Law Review, 34: 207–243.Google Scholar
Bächtiger, A., Niemeyer, S., Neblo, M., Steenbergen, M. R., & Steiner, J. 2010. Disentangling diversity in deliberative democracy: Competing theories, their blind spots and complementarities. Journal of Political Philosophy, 18(1): 32–63.Google Scholar
Banerjee, S. B. 2010. Governing the global corporation: A critical perspective. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20(2): 265–274.Google Scholar
Baur, D., & Arenas, D. 2014. The value of unregulated business-NGO interaction: A deliberative perspective. Business and Society, 53(2): 157–186.Google Scholar
Baur, D., & Palazzo, G. 2011. The moral legitimacy of NGOs as partners of corporations. Business Ethics Quarterly, 21(4): 579–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berkowitz, J. 2015. This is what happens when you walk into Starbucks and talk to the barista about race. Fast Company, March 18. http://www.fastcocreate.com/3043852/this-is-what-happens-when-you-walk-into-starbucks-and-talk-to-the-barista-about-race.Google Scholar
Bohman, J. 1998. The coming of age of deliberative democracy. Journal of Political Philosophy, 6(4): 400–425.Google Scholar
Carr, A. 2015. The inside story of Starbucks’s Race Together campaign, no foam. Fast Company, June 15. http://www.fastcompany.com/3046890/the-inside-story-of-starbuckss-race-together-campaign-no-foam.Google Scholar
Chambers, S. 2003. Democratic deliberative theory. Annual review of political science, 6: 307–326. Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.Google Scholar
Chambers, S. 2004a. The politics of critical theory. In Rush, F. (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to critical theory: 219–247. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chambers, S. 2004b. Behind closed doors: Publicity, secrecy, and the quality of deliberation. Journal of Political Philosophy, 12(4): 389–410.Google Scholar
Chambers, S. 2009. Rhetoric and the public sphere: Has deliberative democracy abandoned mass democracy? Political Theory, 37(3): 323–350.Google Scholar
Connor, J. 2015. MSNBC panel on race gets painfully uncomfortable: ‘I’m actually black.’ Huffington Post, March 18. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/18/msnbc-panel-race-uncomfortable-im-actually-black_n_6895028.html.Google Scholar
Cooke, M. 2006. Re-presenting the good society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Djelic, M. L., & Etchanchu, H. 2015. Contextualizing corporate political responsibilities: Neoliberal CSR in historical perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, doi: 10.1007/s10551-015-2879-7 Google Scholar
Driver, C., & Thompson, G. 2002. Corporate governance and democracy: The stakeholder debate revisited. Journal of Management and Governance, 6: 111–130.Google Scholar
Dryzek, J. 2002. Deliberative democracy and beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Edward, P., & Willmott, H. 2008. Corporate citizenship: Rise or demise of a myth? Academy of Management Review, 33(3): 771–773.Google Scholar
Ehrnström-Fuentes, M. 2016. Delinking legitimacies: A pluriversal perspective on political CSR. Journal of Management Studies, 53(3): 433–462.Google Scholar
Elster, J. 1986. The market and the forum: Three varieties of political theory. In Elster, J. & Hyland, A. (Eds.), Foundations of social choice theory: 103–132. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fleming, P., & Jones, M. T. 2013. The end of corporate social responsibility: Crisis and critique. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
Forbes, D. P., & Milliken, F. J. 1999. Cognition and corporate governance: Understanding boards of directors as strategic decision-making groups. Academy of Management Review, 24(3): 489–505.Google Scholar
Frynas, J. G., & Stephens, S. 2015. Political corporate social responsibility: Reviewing theories and setting new agendas. International Journal of Management Reviews, 17: 483–509.Google Scholar
Fung, A. 2005. Deliberation before the revolution: Toward an ethics of deliberative democracy in an unjust world. Political Theory, 33: 397–419.Google Scholar
Goodin, R. E. 2005. Sequencing deliberative moments. Acta Politica, 40: 182–196.Google Scholar
Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. 1996. Democracy and disagreement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 1984a. The theory of communicative action volume 1: Reason and the rationalization of society. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 1984b. The theory of communicative action volume 2: Lifeworld and system: A critique of functionalist reason. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 1996. Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Rehg, W. (Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. 2001. The post-national constellation. Pensky, M. (Trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hansmann, H. 1996. The ownership of enterprise. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hansmann, H., & Kraakman, R. 2001. The end of history for corporate law. Georgetown Law Journal, 89(2): 439–468.Google Scholar
HBO. 2015. John Oliver – Starbucks’ Race Together. YouTube, March 23. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eUp5Y6eQew Google Scholar
Hielscher, S., Beckmann, M., & Pies, I. 2014. Participation versus consent: Should corporations be run according to democratic principles? Business Ethics Quarterly, 24(4): 533–563.Google Scholar
Hirschmann, A. 1970. Exit, voice, and loyalty. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hussain, W., & Moriarty, J. 2016. Journal of Business Ethics. doi: 10.1007/s10551-016-3027-8.Google Scholar
Jensen, M. 2002. Value maximization, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function. Business Ethics Quarterly, 12(2): 235–256.Google Scholar
Jutten, T. 2013. Habermas and markets. Constellations, 20(4): 587–603.Google Scholar
Kinderman, D. 2012. ‘Free us up so we can be responsible!’ The co-evolution of Corporate Social Responsibility and neo-liberalism in the UK, 1977–2010. Socio-Economic Review, 10(1): 29–57.Google Scholar
Kleinberg, S. 2015. Starbucks #RaceTogether campaign brews up bitter social media reaction. Chicago Tribune, March 18. http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-starbucks-race-together-social-media-20150318-htmlstory.html.Google Scholar
Knight, J., & Johnson, J. 2011. The priority of democracy: Political consequences of pragmatism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Kobrin, J. 2009. Private political authority and public responsibility: Transnational politics, transnational firms, and human rights. Business Ethics Quarterly, 19(3): 349–374.Google Scholar
Kohn, M. 2002. Language, power, and persuasion: Towards a critique of deliberative democracy. Constellations, 7(3): 408–429.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T., & Deetz, S. 2008. Critical theory and corporate social responsibility: Can/should we get beyond cynical reasoning? In Crane, A., Matten, D., McWilliams, A., Moon, J., & Siegel, D. S. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mäkinen, J., & Kasanen, E. 2016. Boundaries between business and politics: A study on the division of moral labor. Journal of Business Ethics, 134: 103–116.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, J., Bohman, J., Chambers, S., Estlund, D., Follesdal, A., Fung, A., Lafont, C., Manin, B., & Marti, J. L. 2010. The place of self-interest and the role of power in deliberative democracy. Journal of Political Philosophy, 18(1): 64–100.Google Scholar
Mansbridge, J., Bohman, J., Chambers, S., Christiano, T., Fung, A., Parkinson, J., Thompson, D. F., & Warren, M. E. 2013. A systemic approach to deliberative democracy. In Parkinson, J. & Mansbridge, J. (Eds.), Deliberative Systems: 1–10. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Matten, D., & Crane, A. 2005. Corporate citizenship: Towards an extended conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 30: 166–179.Google Scholar
Mena, S., & Palazzo, G. 2012. Input and output legitimacy of multi-stakeholder initiatives. Business Ethics Quarterly, 22(3): 527–556.Google Scholar
Moog, S., Spicer, A., & Böhm, S. 2015. The politics of multi-stakeholder initiatives: The crisis of the Forest Stewardship Council. Journal of Business Ethics, 128: 469–493.Google Scholar
Moon, J., Crane, A., & Matten, D. 2005. Can corporations be citizens? Corporate citizenship as a metaphor for business participation in society. Business Ethics Quarterly, 15(3): 429–453.Google Scholar
Mutz, D. 2008. Is deliberative democracy a falsifiable theory? Annual Review of Political Science, 11: 521–538.Google Scholar
Néron, P. Y. 2013. Toward a political theory of the business firm? A comment on ‘political CSR.’ Business Ethics Journal Review, 1(3). http://businessethicsjournalreview.com/2013/02/18/neron-on-whelan/.Google Scholar
Newman, K. 2000. No shame in my game: The working poor in the inner city. New York: Vintage.Google Scholar
Noland, J. & Phillips, R. 2010. Stakeholder engagement, discourse ethics and strategic management. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1): 39–49.Google Scholar
Öberg, P. 2003. Does administrative corporatism promote trust and deliberation? Governance, 15(4): 455–475.Google Scholar
Oosterhout, J. 2008. Transcending the confines of economic and political organization? Business Ethics Quarterly, 18(1): 35–42.Google Scholar
Palazzo, G., & Scherer, A. 2006. Corporate legitimacy as deliberation: A communicative framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 66: 71–88.Google Scholar
Parker, K. 2015. Dear Starbucks: Can we not talk about race? Washington Post, March 20. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dear-starbucks-can-we-not-talk-about-race/2015/03/20/9b3243b6-cf3c-11e4-8c54-ffb5ba6f2f69_story.html.Google Scholar
Pierce, J. L., Neeley, G., & Budziak, J. 2008. Can deliberative democracy work in hierarchical organizations? Journal of Public Deliberation, 4(1): Article 14. http://www.publicdeliberation.net/jpd/vol4/iss1/art14.Google Scholar
Pincione, G., & Tesón, F. R. 2006. Rational choice and democratic deliberation: A theory of discourse failure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rasche, A., & Esser, D. 2006. From stakeholder management to stakeholder accountability. Journal of Business Ethics, 65: 251–267.Google Scholar
Reuters, . 2015. Starbucks expands college tuition benefit for workers. Fortune, April 6. http://fortune.com/2015/04/06/starbucks-expands-college-tuition-benefit-for-workers/.Google Scholar
Roe, M. 2000. Political preconditions to separating ownership from corporate control. Stanford Law Review, 53(3): 539–606.Google Scholar
Sanders, L. 1997. Against deliberation. Political Theory, 25(3): 347–354.Google Scholar
Santoro, M. A. 2010. Post-Westphalia and its discontents. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20(2): 285–297.Google Scholar
Scherer, A. G., Baumann-Pauly, D., & Schneider, A. 2012. Democratizing corporate governance: Compensating for the democratic deficit of corporate political activity and corporate citizenship. Business and Society, 52(3): 473–514.Google Scholar
Scherer, A., & Palazzo, G. 2007. Toward a political conception of corporate responsibility: Business and society seen from a Habermasian perspective. Academy of Management Review, 32(4): 1096–1120.Google Scholar
Scherer, A., & Palazzo, G. 2011. The new political role of business in a globalized world. Journal of Management Studies, 48(4): 899–931.Google Scholar
Scherer, A., Palazzo, G., & Baumann, D. 2006. Global rules and private actors: Toward a new role of the transnational corporation in global governance. Business Ethics Quarterly, 16(4): 505–532.Google Scholar
Scherer, A. G., Palazzo, G., & Seidl, D. 2013. Managing legitimacy in complex and heterogeneous environments: Sustainable development in a globalized world. Journal of Management Studies, 50(2): 259–284.Google Scholar
Seidman, D. 2015. Dismantling the low-wage economy. Jacobin, September 2. https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/09/mcdonalds-seiu-minimum-wage-strike/.Google Scholar
Shulman, G. 2008. American prophecy: Race and redemption in American political culture. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Somaiya, R. 2015. Starbucks ends conversation starters on race. New York Times, March 22. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/23/business/media/starbucks-ends-tempestuous-initiative-on-race.html.Google Scholar
Stahl, T. 2013. Habermas and the project of immanent critique. Constellations, 20(4): 533–552.Google Scholar
Starbucks . 2015a. Starbucks global responsibility report. March 23. https://news.starbucks.com/news/starbucks-2014-global-responsibility-report.Google Scholar
Starbucks, . 2015b. What ‘Race Together’ means for Starbucks partners and customers. March 16. https://news.starbucks.com/news/what-race-together-means-for-starbucks-partners-and-customers.Google Scholar
Suchman, M. C. 1995. Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20: 571–610.Google Scholar
Sundaram, A. K., & Inkpen, A. 2004. The corporate social objective reconsidered. Organization Science, 15(3): 350–363.Google Scholar
Tolentino, J. 2015. How to talk about race with your Starbucks barista: A guide. Jezebel, March 17. http://jezebel.com/how-to-talk-about-race-with-your-starbucks-barista-a-g-1691891837.Google Scholar
Walters, J. 2015. In one busy coffee shop, Starbucks race conversation gets off to a stuttering start. The Guardian, March 17. http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/mar/17/starbucks-race-together-conversation-stuttering-start-coffee-shop.Google Scholar
Whelan, G. 2012. The political conception of corporate social responsibility. Business Ethics Quarterly, 22(4): 709–737.Google Scholar
Willke, H., & Willke, G. 2008. Corporate moral legitimacy and the legitimacy of morals: A critique of Palazzo/Scherer’s communicative framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 81: 27–38.Google Scholar
Young, I. M. 2000. Inclusion and democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Young, I. M. 2001. Activist challenges to deliberative democracy. Political Theory, 29(5): 670–690.Google Scholar