【正文】 生新的需求作出堅(jiān)定反應(yīng) 。在 語(yǔ)言 發(fā)展 上 ，公司 “主動(dòng)”實(shí)施這些挑戰(zhàn) ，給他們 逐步制定更有效和更詳細(xì)的答復(fù)。 運(yùn)動(dòng)沿著單一的發(fā)展道路是不是固定不變的，也不是實(shí)現(xiàn)倒數(shù)第二 的 “最終狀態(tài)”的 一個(gè)合乎邏輯的結(jié)論。因此，“公司有良知”有更廣闊的公民形象和 為 企業(yè)創(chuàng)造一個(gè)良好的市場(chǎng)工程。 戰(zhàn)略意圖：公司公民的目的是什么？通過(guò)實(shí)現(xiàn)公民身份它的企圖是什么 ？史密斯指出，少數(shù)幾家公司擁抱嚴(yán)格的道德承諾的公民意識(shí) 。如何 使最高 領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人關(guān)于公民 充分知情 ，有多少領(lǐng)導(dǎo) 在 做他們的工作 以及在何種程度上 他們 只是 “ 光說(shuō)不做 ”？ 結(jié)構(gòu)：如何管理 公民的責(zé)任 ？三年深入八家公司的研究中心 關(guān)于執(zhí)行 企業(yè)公民 的論壇 發(fā)現(xiàn)，許多 都在發(fā)展， 管理公民權(quán)從功能“島” 到 跨職司委員會(huì) 還有 少數(shù)已 通過(guò)更正規(guī)的組合 結(jié)構(gòu)，流程和系統(tǒng) 開始實(shí)現(xiàn)一體化 。 企業(yè) 公民的階段 3 該模型在圖 1 中 介紹了 企業(yè)公民 在發(fā)展階段中沿著以上 七個(gè)方面的問(wèn)題。例如，兒童的生理，心理，和情感發(fā)展是很少統(tǒng)一。 第 1 階段 ：初級(jí) 在這個(gè)基礎(chǔ)階段， 公司的 公民身份活動(dòng)和其 表現(xiàn)沒有得到發(fā)展 。執(zhí)行這些職能是 的 管理人員 確保公司遵守法律和控制 可能出現(xiàn)的問(wèn)題， 減少對(duì)公司 聲譽(yù) 的損害 。 通用電氣前首席執(zhí)行官杰克韋爾奇是 這種觀點(diǎn) 的 代表人物 。 遇到挑戰(zhàn)時(shí)，韋爾奇是防御性 的 ， 并指出通用電氣公司已完全遵守 當(dāng)時(shí)現(xiàn)有的環(huán)境保護(hù)法律。 伊梅爾特，扭轉(zhuǎn) 了這一過(guò)程 ， 至少接受了 部分財(cái)政責(zé)任清理，并在其后調(diào)整了公民在該公司的議程。 rather, at the times noted, they were illustrative of citizenship at that development stage.) A close inspection of these panies reveals instances where they had a leadingedge practice in some dimensions but were less developed in others. This should e as no surprise. For example, the pace of a child’s physical, mental, and emotional development is seldom uniform. One facet typically develops faster than another. In the same way, the development of group and organizational capabilities is uneven. Firmspecific forces in society, industry dynamics, and other environmental influences feature in how citizenship develops within a firm. Stage 1. Elementary At this base stage, citizenship activity in a pany is episodic and its programs 9 are undeveloped. The reasons are straightforward: scant awareness of what corporate citizenship is all about, uninterested or indifferent top management, and limited or oneway interactions with external stakeholders, particularly in the social and environmental sectors. The mindset in these panies, and associated policies and practices, often centers on simple pliance with laws and industry standards. Responsibilities for handling matters of pliance in these firms are usually assigned to the functional heads of human resources, the legal department, investor relations, public relations, and munity affairs. The job of these functional managers is to make sure that the pany obeys the law and to keep problems that might arise from harming the firm’s reputation. In many cases, they take a defensive stance toward outside pressures—., Nike’s dealings with labor activists in the early 1990s. Some corporate leaders, for example, have espoused economist Milton Friedman’s notion that their pany’s obligations to society are solely to “make a profit, pay taxes, and provide jobs.”20 Others, particularly those heading smaller and midsize businesses, ply willingly with employment and health, safety, and environmental regulations but have neither the resources nor the wherewithal to do much more for their employees, munities, or society. Former General Electric CEO Jack Welch is an exemplar of this principled bigbusiness view. “A CEO’s primary social responsibility is to assure the financial success of the pany,” he says. “Only a healthy, winning pany has the resources and capability to do the right thing.”21 GE’s financial success over the past two decades is unquestioned. However, the pany’s reputation suffered toward the end of Welch’s tenure when it was revealed that that one of its business units had discharged tons of the toxic chemical PCB into the Hudson River. When challenged, Welch was defensive and pointed out that GE had fully plied with then existing environmental protection laws. This illustrates one of the triggers that move a pany forward into a new stage of citizenship. Welch’s stance was plainly out of touch with changing expectations of corporate responsibilities and the contradiction between GE’s success at wealth creation and loss of reputation was palpable. Welch’s successor, Jeffrey Immelt, reversed this course, accepted at least partial financial responsibility for the clean up, and thereafter reprioritized citizenship on the pany’s agenda.