In order to answer the main question of this study, a literature study was carried out to find out how Corporate Social Responsibility in literature was defined; what the role of stakeholders, specifically employees was in job advertisements. Furthermore, the theory of Person-Organization fit was explained and the different work motivation theories are discussed.
2.1 Corporate Social Responsibility
Last couple of years Corporate Social Responsibility became more important for organization and society. More and more organizations incorporate some kind of Corporate Social Responsibility activities (Collier & Estaban, 2007). However, Corporate Social Responsibility is a very complex and subjective process which organizations go through while incorporating a Corporate Social Responsibility policy. And even in the literature different definitions of Corporate Social Responsibility exist. Some examples of definitions of Corporate Social Responsibility definitions are as followed: Moser (1986) sees Corporate Social Responsibility as a function of four different aspects: law, intent, salient information and efficiency and not as a fixed definition. “Law refers to local, state, and federal regulations concerning an organization’s practices and behaviours. Intent can be defined as fixed or directed purpose. Salient information is defined as prior knowledge. And efficiency primarily refers to the practices and behaviour an organization undertakes to maximize its resource utilization (Moser, 1986, p. 70)”. A more recent definition came from O’Connor and Meister (2008). According to them Corporate Social Responsibility can be interpreted as the involvement in society by an organization. The organization acts in response to public demands, the needs of stakeholders, from a competitor’s point of view and the wish of the organization to perform on an ever-higher level.
Another definition is the definition of Carroll (1991) and although the definition of Carroll exists for several years, the definition remains useful to the contemporary practice, because organizations still incorporate these responsibilities in their policies. Carroll’s definition consists of four responsibilities, namely economic, legal, ethical and philanthropic. The definition of Carroll corresponds with the definition of Moser on law and efficiency, because these aspects match the economic and legal responsibilities of Carroll. And the definition of Carroll corresponds also with the definition of O’Connor and Meister, because they mention aspects in their definition that match the ethical, economic and philanthropic responsibilities. In Carroll’s definition aspects of O’Connor & Meister and the definition of Moser are found, but Carroll gives responsibilities that the organization must meet, rather than a definition that the organization should incorporate. In other words, Carroll’s definition is the most comprehensive and is therefore regarded as the most complete definition. That is...