【導讀】全世界的商界領袖都認為企業(yè)公民是他們公司的一個優(yōu)先環(huán)節(jié)。改程序;另一些形成公民督導委員會,測量他們的環(huán)境和社會效益,然后向公眾報告。公司正在努力調整員工的職能使其對公民負責并且將責任和問責制納入到業(yè)務范圍。先進的公司正在努力創(chuàng)造一個更廣闊的公民市場，并提供產品和服務，他們明確目標，既是賺錢也是創(chuàng)造一個更美好的世界。的不同利益和要求。他們主要的挑戰(zhàn)是把公民在企業(yè)議程上堅決執(zhí)行，獲得更好的了。場，他們的董事會充分了解公司的做法。劃，并制定了新的性能標準。類型的系統，包括企業(yè)組織的研究中發(fā)現在不同的發(fā)展階段存在不同的活動模式。他們必須隨著時間的推移，在他們創(chuàng)作啟動階段后找到更多的。不斷變化的商業(yè)概念，通過企業(yè)領導者，各國政府，學術界和各行業(yè)協會。性，企業(yè)發(fā)生危難，公司在其第一階段，產生的混亂和損失的重點，可以攤檔增長。最高層領導在每一個調查中都作為第一因素公民。

　　

【正文】 ongovernmental organizations (NGOs) around the world—has driven major changes in the ways panies municate with and engage their stakeholders. Transparency: How “open” is a pany about its financial, social, and environmental performance? The web sites of upwards of 80% of Fortune 500 panies address social and environmental issues and roughly half of the panies today issue a public report on their activities. Citizenship at Each Stage The model in Figure 1 presents the stages in the development of corporate citizenship along these seven dimensions. We illustrate each stage with selected examples of corporate practice. (Note, however, that we are not implying that these panies currently operate at that stage。 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.