University of Vaasa - Vaasan yliopisto

of public procurement. Here, too, a formal orientation towards labels and certificates
is to be expected.
841
Large companies seem to be prepared. They already manage social and ecological
issues quite explicitly and comprehensive and regard CR as a topic of still increasing
importance. The larger companies monitor trends and realise where they have
catching up to do, e.g. supply chain responsibility (EIU 2008) or the use of CRmanagement
systems und –instruments (Bertelsmann 06). The latter is something
larger companies are familiar with. Also, few of these companies do without the
professional communication of their CR policy and measures. As defensive as their
CR-approach may be, overall larger companies seem to be relatively well prepared
for an increase in stakeholder demands on the markets as well as by politics.
The “protected niche” of medium-sized businesses, far from the pressure of NGOs
and financial markets, however is endangered. The philanthropic activities are only
positively perceived by the employees and the local community and are therefore
hardly effective for companies with super-regional sales markets (e.g. Pleon Kothes
Klewes 2005). Increasing demand for confirmation of CR goes in hand with the
requirement to integrate CR in the core processes and for organisational
implementation. Management systems such as the shortly available ISO 26.000 norm
will promote such proceedings. SMEs seem to be ill-prepared. It remains an open
question whether these systems are suitable for medium-sized businesses (Fassin
2008), but SMEs rightly fear that this question won’t arise in practice.
That CR is a sufficient condition for a company’s success is often asserted but far
from being proved. In addition to the methodical problems mentioned above, one has
to ask for the imitability of success factors. Although internal resources like dynamic
capabilities play an import role, the specific CR-measures, -performance and -
reporting take centre stage. These are relatively easy to imitate. Another question is
whether or not there will be a “race to the top” regarding CR. The market for CR is
characterised by high search costs and inertia. Once a company is considered “good”,
it is hard to displace. Even if there will be a higher willingness on the side of the
customers to pay for superior CR-performances, decisions will be oriented on self-set
or collective standards rather than on the search for the best, aiming at satisficing
instead of optimising.
There are however cases where CR leads to economic success. Often cited positive
effects (e.g. improvement of reputation and image, increases in profits or higher
employee motivation) are observable, but predominantly attained by those
companies that act from an ethical motivation (or at least are perceived as such) and
not because they have identified a success factor (BMVIT 2007). Such an approach
to CR was attributed to SMEs. Additionally SMEs enjoy public confidence much
more than large businesses (e.g. Stiftung Wertvolle Zukunft 2006). But, given the
current market conditions, a general claim of CR as a sufficient condition for
economic success remains impossible, especially because an alleged success factor
can not reasonably be connected with “not doing it for success”.