1. CSR trapped by Functionalism De-functionalizing CSR
Moving CSR beyond Functionalism: Toward a Pluralistic Approach of the Business & Society Interface   
Jean-Pascal Gond
International Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility
University of Nottingham
STRUCTURE
CSR trapped by Functionalism
De-functionalizing CSR
Overview of the Framework
Conclusion and Discussion

2. (1) CSR IN THE FUNCTIONALIST TRAP
Business-centric CSR
Focus on the ‘C’ rather than on the ‘S’ [e.g. Carroll, 1979; Margolis & Walsh, 2003]
This shift of a macro-social to a micro-social perspective has been described as a betrayal of the funding fathers’ ideas [see Marens, 2004 building on Bowen (1953)]
Positivist CSR
Methodological ideal of research of the B&S field is positivist or ‘functionalist’ [see Burrell & Morgan, 1979; Scherer & Palazzo, 2006]
Illustrations: (1) search for a unified and testable concept of CSP; (2) CSP-FP empirical stream of research
Instrumental CSR
Resurgence of the economic justification of CSR as a core argument [see Vogel, 2005]
CSR view as a Strategic and/or a Marketing tool

3. (2) DE-FUNCTIONALIZING CSR
Bridging Society Back in
Lowest common multiple of CSR concepts is their attempt to capture something located at the Business and Society interface
The failure to address this point explains many contemporary theory-building problems
Clarifying Underlying Assumptions
Reversed engineering: Taking stock of the alternative views of the B&S interface and use them to map CSR theories / concepts
Allows moving beyond the status quo
Mobilizing a Heuristic Tool
Principle of minimal required variety
Use of Burrell & Morgan axes as heuristic tools to describe emerging trends toward less or non functionalist perspectives within the CSR field

4. (3) OVERVIEW OF THE FRAMEWORK
Social Change
Social Regulation
CSR as a Socio-cognitive construction
CSR as a Power Relationship
Constructivist view of the Business and Society Interface
Sociopolitical view of the Business and Society Interface
Subjectivity
Objectivity
CSR as a Cultural Product
CSR as a Social Function
Culturalist view of the Business and Society Interface
Functionalist view of the Business and Society Interface

5. (3.1) CSR AS A SOCIAL FUNCTION
Underlying assumptions
B&S Interface = Interpenetrating Systems, Stability, Cohesion
CSR as a way to Regulate (Integrate) the B&S interface
Key question: How business and society can benefit from each other? How B and S can be integrated? E.g. CSR-FP convergence
Conceptualization (established)
Functionalist Legacy of the field (most of the pasts concepts are strongly embedded in functionalism: e.g. CSR-1, CSR-2, CSP…)
Domination of the CSP-FP question in empirical researches
Empirical evidence (established)
Business case discourse of corporations embracing CSR
Perspectives (numerous but bounded)
A dynamic research program: the micro CSR-FP relationship
Macro-perspective on integration lost (Bottom of the pyramid?)

6. (3.2) CSR AS A POWER RELATIONSHIP (CSR AS POLITICS)
Underlying assumptions
B&S Interface = Struggle, Domination, Frictions
CSR expressing the state of forces at the B&S interface
Key question: How business and society can dominate or impose their view to each other? What is the role of CSR in the struggle?
Conceptualization (emerging)
Micro-perspective: Role of power in STK relationships
Macro-perspective: ‘Soft’ Political metaphor of Corporate Citizenship (sharing of political activities between Corporations/ State/Civil Society); ‘Hard’ critical view on CSR (e.g. Banerjee)
Empirical evidence (emerging)
Critical discourses on CSR by activists > windows dressing…
Perspectives (emerging)
Topic: CSR within globalization; North-South relationships & SR
Clear lack of theory-building

7. (3.3) CSR AS A CULTURAL PRODUCT
Underlying assumptions
B&S Interface = Co-influence; Value Exchange and diffusion
CSR as a way to Infuse Business with Societies values
Key question: How can corporations integrated societies’ values? How is CSR influenced by the socio-cultural environment?
Conceptualization (emerging)
Micro-level: CSP models focused on the role of organizational culture and value integration in decision-making processes
Macro-level: emerging frameworks (e.g. Explicit/Implicit)
Empirical evidence (established)
Many empirical researches account for cross-national and cross-cultural differences in CSR definition and perceptions
Perspectives (numerous)
Matching theory-building and empirical investigation
Looking at the reversed perspective: How B influence Ss values

8. (3.4) CSR AS A SOCIO-COGNITIVE CONSTRUCTION
Underlying assumptions
B&S Interface = Co-construction, Overflows & reciprocal framing
CSR as a negotiated order between B&S
Key question: How are corporations defined and constructed by Society (and reciprocally)?
Conceptualization (emerging)
Models and concepts of CSR defined and socially promoted and constructed by corporations and stakeholders (e.g. Rowley & Berman (2000); Mitnick (2000)
Performativity of CSR theory; role of CSR devices in defining CSR
Empirical evidence (to establish)
Practitioners constructing and diffusing devices embedding CSR
Perspectives (numerous)
Role of self-labelled CSR or STK ‘actors’ in the construction and the development of CSR markets; studies of CSR marketization

9. (4) Conclusion and Discussion
Value/use of the Matrix
Sense-making tool, tool for theory-building (Lewis & Grimes, 1999), useful to track concepts history and potential lines of development
Capacity to address the de-functionalizing objective
Problem of its loose link with the original framework of B&M
Addressing Methodological issues
How to integrate methodological aspects within the picture?
Finalizing the paper
Restructuring the content of each box through a micro- / macro- perspective?
Explaining how to use the matrix to de-functionalize a specific concept / theory?
Too many points? How to refocus the paper?