طراحی و تدوین نقشه راه استراتژیک توسعه شهروند شرکتی در واحدهای تولیدی ایران

نوع مقاله : پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران

2 دانشیار، دانشگاه پیام نور، تهران، ایران

چکیده

چکیده
مطالعه حاضر باهدف شناسایی وضعیت موجود شهروند شرکتی در صنایع تولیدی کشور و عوامل مؤثر بر آن جهت تعیین نقشه راهی برای دست‌یابی به وضعیت مطلوب شهروند شرکتی انجام پذیرفته‌شده است. در این مطالعه شهروند شرکتی در چهار بعد شهروند قانونی، شهروند اقتصادی، شهروند اخلاقی و شهروند داوطلبانه و عوامل مؤثر بر آن بر اساس مدل سه‌شاخگی در سه بعد رفتاری، ساختاری و زمینه‌ای موردمطالعه واقع‌شده است. در این مطالعه تعداد 50 شرکت از صنایع مواد غذایی و پتروشیمی در سطح استان تهران و تعداد 200 نفر از اعضای هیئت‌مدیره این شرکت‌ها به شیوه طبقه‌ای تصادفی ساده به‌عنوان نمونه آماری انتخاب‌شده است. مطالعه حاضر برحسب هدف کاربردی و بر اساس شیوه گردآوری داده‌ها توصیفی از نوع همبستگی است و از ابزار پرسشنامه برای گردآوری داده‌های اولیه بهره گرفته‌شده است. روایی ابزار با استفاده از نظرات خبرگان و معادلات ساختاری و پایایی آن با استفاده از ضریب آلفای کرونباخ احراز گردیده است. نتایج حاصل از این مطالعه نشان می‌دهد نزدیک به 70 درصد شرکت‌های موردمطالعه ازنظر شهروندی شرکتی در وضعیت مناسبی قرار ندارند؛ و کلیه عوامل رفتاری، ساختاری و زمینه‌ای بر بروز رفتار شهروند شرکتی واحدهای تولیدی تأثیرگذارند. در بین عوامل رفتاری بعد مسئولیت‌پذیری اجتماعی، در میان ابعاد ساختاری داشتن ساختار ارگانیکی و فرهنگ انسان‌محور، اندازه متوسط و ظرفیت سازمانی بالا و نهایتاً بر اساس عوامل زمینه‌ای وجود نگرش مثبت مشتریان به شرکت‌ها بیشترین تأثیر را بر رفتار شهروندی شرکتی، واحدهای تولیدی موردمطالعه داشته است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Designing and formulation Strategic action plan for development of corporate citizenship in producing unit in Iran

نویسندگان [English]

  • Mohsen Aazami 1
  • Freydon Ahmadi 2
1 Payame Noor University
2 Department of public management, Payame Noor University, I.R. of IRAN
چکیده [English]

Aim and introduction: The corporate citizenship theory focuses on protecting the rights and responsibilities vested for partnering with the company and proposes that business has a responsibility to uplift the local community while improving the livelihoods of the stakeholders partnering with the company. To become a good corporate citizen following over-regulated processes will hinder social benefits to the local community and therefore corporate citizenship projects should be carefully selected and should not be executed as a marketing tool. Establishing an effective communication channel, promoting health and nutrition among the community, effort of proving micro finances, creation of employment opportunities, educating technical and operational aspects of the entity were main corporate citizenship activities.
Today, there are several manufacturing companies in the country, and by offering a wide range of their products to customers, they are only active in the direction of their economic interests. In this regard, paying attention to citizenship rights and observing citizenship duties is not the main priority and desire of companies. Therefore, we see that in the society, many companies are reprimanded and held accountable by support and monitoring organizations. Existence of numerous cases of violations of production units in cases such as the use of rotten raw materials in the production of products, marketing of outdated products, the use of packaging materials that are not easily decomposed in the environment and endanger the health of society , In penitentiary organizations is evidence of this claim. Therefore, requiring production units to observe citizenship rights and strengthen citizenship behaviors as a wise solution using scientific approaches is of particular importance. Accordingly, in the present study, while identifying the current situation of corporate citizenship among production units and comparing the characteristics of these units, we have obtained a roadmap according to which we can institutionalize citizenship among manufacturing companies as a principle and to reassure the community that companies are committed to respecting their rights and will consume products that are safe and reliable in every way.
Methodology: The present study is a descriptive and correlation survey. Both library and field methods have been used to collect information. The field method has been used to collect the initial research data from the statistical sample using a questionnaire. In the present study, the standard questionnaire of Metren et al. (2010) was used. The questionnaire contains 20 questions that measure corporate citizenship in four dimensions: economic citizen, legal citizen, moral citizen and voluntary citizen. In the present study, questionnaires were sent to 200 board members and 169 questionnaires were returned. To determine the content validity of the questionnaire from the point of view of knowledgeable people and to determine the validity of the structure, Bartlett sphericity test was used using structural equations. Cronbach's alpha coefficient was also used to determine the reliability of the instrument.
Finding: The research model was analyzed using Smart PLS software. What is shown in the model is the relationship between the research variables and the degree of correlation between these variables. The validity and reliability of the model have been fully verified based on the available indicators. The results show that all three categories of behavioral, structural and contextual factors affect the corporate citizenship of production units in the country and among them the share of structural factors is more than behavioral and contextual factors.
Discussion and conclusion: The results of this study showed that the average status of economic, legal, moral and voluntary citizenship factors is lower than average. This means that due to the crises in the country, which are mainly caused by economic sanctions, the production units have not been able to achieve their economic goals and earn the expected profit. Accordingly, in order to survive in the market, they sometimes acted in a way that their behavior was not in accordance with the law and they acted against it. In some cases, they have had to ignore and abuse existing laws.
The results of this study showed that behavioral factors affect the degree of corporate citizenship, so that the degree of poor commitment of companies to their social responsibilities to the community has caused their corporate citizenship is not in a good condition. In a way that lack of sense of responsibility to meet the needs of society, inconsistency between the goals of the company and society, lack of responsiveness to meet customer expectations, lack of attention to improving the welfare of society and lack of attention to the values ​​of society have contributed to this.
   The predominance of mechanical structure, the prevailing market-oriented culture and low organizational capacity as the most important structural indicators have made these companies unable to fulfill their citizenship duties in relation to people in the community and have failed in this regard.
 Finally, the results of this study showed that underlying factors such as customers' poor attitude towards companies and the low social capital of companies in the community has caused customers to largely lose confidence in these companies. This attitude has led companies to have a low level of citizenship.
  Therefore, as stated, companies need to make fundamental changes in their goals, strategies and organizational structures in order to achieve corporate citizenship behavior and enjoy the benefits of such behaviors. In a way that institutionalizes social responsibility, social accountability and corporate governance as the most important strategies that the company can perform its citizenship duties with members of the community throughout the company and among its employees and as incentives and sometimes reprimands for adhering its members in departments. By strengthening its expert body and using appropriate equipment and information technology while governing the organic structure to increase organizational capacity by providing the necessary training and also replacing human-centered culture instead of market-oriented culture by emphasizing moral values ​​and respect for human dignity Take care.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Corporate citizenship
  • Behavioral
  • Structural
  • Content Factors
  • producing units
  1. Ahmadi, F., Al-wadari, H., Toureh, N., & Moradi, M. (2016). The relationship between business ethics and corporate citizenship: the mediating role of social responsibility and governance, Ethics in Science and Technology Quarterly, 11(2), 85-94.
  2. Anderson‚ R.‚ & Williams‚ , (2009). Toward global corporate citizenship reframing foreign direct investment law williams. Boyd school of law university of Nevada‚ Lasvegas and Michigan state university journal of International law, Research paper 10- 21.
  3.  
3.       Askar Zadeh, M.J., & Amel Ardestani, H.R. (2020). Identifying and prioritizing mechanisms and strategies for realizing social responsibility in the field of human resources, Quarterly Journal of Strategic Management Studies., 44, 47-64.
  1. Choi, D.Y., & Gray. E. R. (2008). Socially responsibility entrepreneurs: what do they do to create and build their companies? Business Horizons Journal. 50, 341-352.
  2. Cohen, D., & Prusak, L. (2015). In good company: How social capital makes organizations work. Harvard Business Press.
  3. Fombrun, C. J., & van Riel, C. B. M. (1997). The reputational landscape. Corporate Reputation Review, 1(1/2), 5-13.
  4. Holme, R., & Watts, P. (2000). Corporate social responsibility: making good business sense, Geneva: World Business Council for Sustainable Development, 1-32
  5. King,D., & Makinnnon, A. (2000). Corporate citizenship and reputation ship value: the marketing of corporate citizenship, Hawke Institute University of South Australia, http//:www. unisa,edu.au
  6. Latapí Agudelo, M.A., Jóhannsdottir, L., & Davídsdóttir, B. A (2019). Literature review of the history and evolution of corporate social responsibility.  J. Corp. Soc. Responsib.4, 1.
  7. Locke‚ M., & Siteman‚ A. (2010). Note on corporate citizenship in a global economy‚ Sloan school of management and Department of political science MIT. 1-10.
  8. Matten‚ D., & Cranc‚ A.‚ (2010). Corporate citizenship: towards an extended theoretical conceptualization international centre for corporate social responsibility, Research paper series Nottingham university Business school No 04-2003 Iccsr Research paper series- ISSN 1479-5124.
  9. Mc Eachern, M. G. (2015). Corporate citizenship and its impact upon consumer moralization, decision making and choice. Journal of Marketing Management, 31(3/4), 430–452.
  10. Mclntosh M., & Thomas R. (2004). Corporate citizenship and the evolving relationship between non-governmental organizations and corporations, British – North American Committee sir mark moody - Stuart Director and former chair Royal Dutch/ shell Group of companies. 1-26
  11. Parchami Afra A., & Behnamian J. (2020). Designing a strategy for the operation of food industry companies in the face of stagflation, Quarterly Journal of Strategic Management Studies, 41, 39-56.
  12. Soltani, M., & Nejat, S. (2017). Analysis of the concept of corporate citizenship and its role in developing customer loyalty, Organizational Resource Management Research, 7(1), 45-64.
  13. Soltani, M., Esfidani, M.R., & Nejat, S. (2015). The impact of corporate citizenship on customer loyalty and recommended advertising, Management Perspective, 25, 179-196.
  14. Taillard, M., & Mitrović, M., (2020). Evaluation of corporate success using
    synergistic CPA and CPR corporate citizenship. Strategic management, 25(4), 024-032.
  15. Tsai, Y-H., Joe, S-W., Lin, C-P., Chiu, C-K., & Shen, K-T. (2014). Exploring corporate citizenship and purchase intention: mediating effects of brand trust and corporate identification. Business Ethics: A European Review. 24(4), 361-377.
  16. Walters, G., & Chadwick, S. (2009). Corporate citizenship in football: delivering strategic benefits through stakeholder engagement. Management Decision, 47(1), 51–66.
  17. Wang, C-J. (2014). Do ethical and sustainable practices matter?, International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 26(6), 930 – 947.