The following passage summarizes some of the central points in the debate as to the value of corporations to devote significant resources to corporate social responsibility:

Stakeholders Versus Shareholders

Although corporate social responsibility may appear to be an apple-pie virtue, it is quite controversial. Below are some of the chief arguments for and against it:

Proponents will claim that it

• BURNISHES A COMPANYS REPUTATION. In the wake of corporate scandals, corporate social responsibility builds goodwilland can pay off when scandals or regulatory scrutiny inevitably arise.
• ATTRACTS TALENT. Many young professionals expect their employers to be active in social issues. Membership in Netimpact.org, a network of socially-conscious MBA graduates, jumped from 4,000 in 2002 to 10,000 in 2004.

On the other hand, Detractors will argue that it

• COSTS TOO MUCH. Giving by corporate foundations reached an all-time high of $3.6 billion last year. However, it can come at the expense of other priorities, such as research and development, and is rarely valued by Wall Street.
• IS MISGUIDED. Many corporate executives believe, as economist Milton Friedman does, that the role of business is to generate profits for shareholdersnot to spend others money for some perceived social benefit.

1. What is your view on this issue? Would that view be different if you were a stockholder of a firm?
2. Do you know of any companies that have engaged in Socially Responsible behavior? Please explain,