© 2018 IJRAR January 2019, Volume 06, Issue 1 www.ijrar.org (E-ISSN 2348-1269, P- ISSN 2349-5138) AND CORPORATE Dr. T. Karthikeyan, Assistant Professor, Dept of Administration, Annamalai University, Chidambaram, .

Mrs. S. Sujeetha, Research Scholar, Dept of Business Administration, Annamalai University, Chidambaram, India.

Abstract: The Entrepreneurship and Corporate social responsibility exists to analyse the common needs, economic and social issues to create the solution for the society needs and also to improving the quality of society. The commercial entrepreneurs should pursue both economic and social issues, but primarily to acquire financial independence by investing and creating values for stakeholders. But the corporate social responsibility has an indubitable effect on both society and , but this practice depends on the companies availability to get involved which is at the discretion of the managers and shareholders. The and its strategies based on the competencies of entrepreneurs and is not aimed to maximisation of profits, but to carrying out the goals for benefits of society and creating the brand image. The Corporate social responsibility has well defined brand and conceptual approach and has an undoubtable effect by valorising social opportunities. Keywords: Entrepreneurship, Corporate Social Responsibility

COMMERCIAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP:

Commercial entrepreneurs are acting on capitalist markets which give them the chance to gain a competitive advantage because of the opportunities given by those markets. They can create new combinations through innovation that can destroy the market balance in developing such products, processes, markets, suppliers and new industries. One can say that they act observing socio-economic phenomena and imagining the future and trying to implement their vision. However entrepreneur must pursue both economic and social issues, but their mission could acquire financial independence by investing and creating the value for stakeholders.

Definition of Harvard tends to focus more on achieving economic performance (capital accumulation) and economic welfare, without considerable emphasis on the benefits of entrepreneurship to create jobs, membership, human relations, self-esteem, human skills development, etc. As time passed, the played an increasingly important role in promoting change in society, while the state's role in solving social problems has diminished considerably. While corporate social responsibility has an effect on society and businesses, this practice remains at the stage of voluntary act, is being the preference of the manager or owner and shareholders, being deployed by enterprises on condition that they consider it is necessary.

CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY: Since a state is established, its main role is to build a society where ensure dignified living conditions, i.e. human rights for all from an economic, social and environmental arrangements to ensure the transit of this generational society. It should be a socially responsible state, formulating a policy and regulatory framework, that favours monitoring and supervision of the current government regardless of political orientation. IJRAR19J1440 International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews (IJRAR) www.ijrar.org 992

© 2018 IJRAR January 2019, Volume 06, Issue 1 www.ijrar.org (E-ISSN 2348-1269, P- ISSN 2349-5138) In the entrepreneurial history, corporate social responsibility had its origins in the primary and only interest group that was the shareholder or owner, with an image of predator all their actions and their effects were seen as negative which was countered by the state with increased tax load that sanctioned irresponsible practices. Then over a time it was realized that the objectives of the company and it should includes others who involved directly or indirectly in the activity of the company. It is based on ethical reflection of entrepreneurs about the need for different methods of organization for its relationship with its environment arises the topic of Corporate Social Responsibility and creating social value, see figure 1

Figure 1: Evolution of the corporate social Responsibility

Ethics for the Creation of Social Entreprise control and Social Responsibility decissions value

Essential commitment Ethical codes, Reflection and change Essential to economic activity standards, legislation of behaviour commitment to and parameters future generations

The Stake Holder are individuals or groups of individuals that have claiming, property, rights or interests of an organization and its activities, past, present, or future. These rights claimed or interests are the result of transactions that can be either legal or moral. On the basis of the foregoing there is primary Stake Holder, with a high degree of interdependence, are shareholders and investors, employees, customers and suppliers, government and society-community. Their rights and expectations affect the survival of the company and for this reason, the entrepreneur must strive to create value for those who belongs the primary Stake Holder.

The lack of attention to a primary Stake Holder or its non-recognition may generate the failure of the organization. Though the secondary Stake Holder do not have such an important impact as the primary groups may oppose the policies or programs that an organization takes to comply with their responsibilities, or to meet the needs and expectations of its primary Stake Holder. This differentiation between Stake Holders is vital for the definition of strategies by the directors, to manage or administer of the organization relations.

THE CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (CSR) MODEL:

The best-known CSR model which proposes that the social responsibilities of a company are the economic, legal, ethical and philanthropic expectations formed by society. The main area of responsibility is economic, but at the same time the company must keep the law. Ethical responsibility refers to the obligation to behave fairly and honestly. The fourth area is when the entrepreneur conducts him/herself as a good citizen. The four responsibility layers together make up corporate social responsibility.

There is overlap between the CSR model and the compared model, based on which social responsibility means being responsible to all stakeholders (owners, employees, buyers, local community members). The enterprise must keep a balance between its economic responsibilities (concern for itself) and the legal, ethical, and philanthropic responsibilities (concern for others). The "soul" of the CSR movement is fair and corruption-free company conduct, which respects human rights, labour law, and protection of the natural environment, see figure 2

IJRAR19J1440 International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews (IJRAR) www.ijrar.org 993

© 2018 IJRAR January 2019, Volume 06, Issue 1 www.ijrar.org (E-ISSN 2348-1269, P- ISSN 2349-5138)

Fig 2 The Corporate Social Responsibility pyramid

COMMONALITIES AND DIFFERENCES:

From the meanings of and Corporate Social Responsibility, it is necessary to specify the common points and differences. The concept of social entrepreneurship differs from , corporate social responsibility, sustainable development or the inclusive business. Corporate Philanthropy, for many years remained associated with the morality of the entrepreneur, and today is the result of ethical reflection that reinforces the agenda of the Corporate Social Responsibility and helps to manage the relationships with the community from a redistribution approach, sustainable development, for its part, is closely linked with the analysis of the environmental dimension, from a long-term vision and to generate changes starting to understand that the economic system is based on the resources of a finite planet.

The first tend to build more stable and balanced societies substantially transforming the lives of lower-income sectors and hence it reserved for the pyramid-based communities. Meanwhile, the Benefit certify good practices of corporate social responsibility, are not companies that come with a social purpose. Even though it founds principles undergo rigorous practices to mitigate the results of their interaction with groups interest, their mission purpose is to market positioning. We could say, therefore, that are social enterprises but not Social Entrepreneurships. The common point is the creation of social value in line with financial sustainability, both Social Entrepreneurship, and Corporate Social Responsibility, have migrated from the conventional concept of economic value creation, the two initiatives are aimed at creating social value, not as a derivative but as the centre of their business, with the sole purpose to ensure their survival. However the line between the means as an end, or an end as a mean, in the creation of value is very thin between Social Entrepreneurship and the Corporate Social Responsibility. Therefore a socially responsible company should communicate the results of their interdependence and reciprocity, as part of its commitment to the different Stake Holders and somehow allow the participation in decision making taken into account their expectations.

IJRAR19J1440 International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews (IJRAR) www.ijrar.org 994

© 2018 IJRAR January 2019, Volume 06, Issue 1 www.ijrar.org (E-ISSN 2348-1269, P- ISSN 2349-5138) A hallmark of Social Entrepreneurship is that the potential is unlimited, since overcome social problems obeys to a systemic, cyclical and structural nature, which require more than one initiative, in fact it could be argued that Corporate Social Responsibility and Social Entrepreneurship are concepts complementary to build a healthy and dignified social system. In the changing context, businesses have a key role in the sustainability of the planet, using an analogy, enterprises are to the world what family is for society, the center of economic activity are the companies and for this reason all their actions must be carefully planned and articulated.

In fact, Social Entrepreneurship, or Corporate Social Responsibility, come as a response of an uncontrolled activity which since the industrial revolution has encouraged the development and economic growth but paradoxically have not favoured the creation of social value. Both Social Entrepreneurship as Corporate Social Responsibility are responses to environmental demands, the first one as business initiative that as of the needs of people, which social entrepreneurs become opportunities to improve the quality of life, in a way are remedial action to development and economic growth for its part the Corporate Social Responsibility is a necessary decision to ensure survival based on reputation, Corporate Social Responsibility is an action to mitigate impact derived to entrepreneurial activities previously established. In brief social problems they can be dealt with Social Entrepreneurship for this purpose a new company is created, see figure 4, and Corporate Social Responsibility are actions aligned to a previously established company, clearly an act of Corporate Social Responsibility can support the Startup of Social Entrepreneurship and Social Entrepreneurship, may have some impact on the decisions of businesses when looking to meet their Stake Holder’s needs.

Since Social Entrepreneurship come as a response to the needs and expectations of society its actions with interest groups should get to the bottom of the underlying problems to the whole social system, to ensure that people have access to the capabilities and freedoms to live the lives they value living. The Corporate Social Responsibility and Social Entrepreneurship, can be innovative alternatives, human development, , the first supported by the leadership of their managers and the second from the ability of the social entrepreneur that looks for the and boosts the opportunities of the environment in concrete actions of social management effective, efficient, sustainable.

CONCLUSION

Corporate social responsibility policies are a tool for competitive advantage rather than to acquire one public good. Often companies adopt various methods according to their concern for the environment and society. All these are admirable, but their efforts are indirectly related to social problems. Often the question arises about the boundaries between social enterprise and corporate social responsibility. Many enterprises have a main purpose to obtain value for the benefit of owners adopting different practices both social and environmental, but because the social mission is not only a means for obtaining profit and not vice versa. We cannot talk about social entrepreneurship, but rather corporate social responsibility. It is true that to achieve it, the company must focus particularly on achieving results and social responsibility is a powerful tool for influencing public and stakeholders. Thus, enterprises provide the necessary funding to launch the social organization and at the same time the necessary tool for solving social problems.

REFERENCES

[1] Austin, James, Howard Stevenson, and Jane Wei-Skillern. (2006). “Social and Commercial Entrepreneurship: Same, different and bots? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 31, No.1:1- 22.Retrieved fromProQuest ebrary. Web. 4 May 2015.

[2] Friedman, M. (1962).Chapter VIII Monopoly and the Social Responsibility of Business and Labor. Capitalism and Freedom (pp.112-114) Chicago, USA: The University of Chicago. Retrieved from https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BxgMqtna1BWDdDlnTENYaHNBYnc/edit?pli=1

[3] Freeman, R. (1984). Strategic Management: A approach. Boston, MA: Pitman.

IJRAR19J1440 International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews (IJRAR) www.ijrar.org 995

© 2018 IJRAR January 2019, Volume 06, Issue 1 www.ijrar.org (E-ISSN 2348-1269, P- ISSN 2349-5138) [4] Holme, R., Wats, P. (2002). Responsabilidad Social Corporativa: dandole un sentid empresarial. World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Corporate Social Responsibility. Retrieved From http://www.wbcsd.org/publications-and-tools.aspx

[5] Light, P. (2006). Reshaping social entrepreneurship. Stanford Review, Fall, 46–51.

[6] Light, P. (2008). Search for Social Entrepreneurship. Washington, DC, USA: Brookings Institution Press, Retrieved from ProQuest ebrary. Web. 29 April 2015.

[7] G. Mort, J. Weerawardena, K. Carnegie, “Social entrepreneurship towards conceptualization and measurement,” in American Marketing Association Conference, Proceedings, 13, 5. 2002, p. 34.

[8] A. B. Carroll, K. M. Shabana, “The Business Case for Corporate Social Responsibility: A review of Concepts, Research and Practice,” International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 2010, pp. 85– 105.

[9] C. Szigeti, Á. Csiszárik-Kocsir, “What you can measure – you can improve!,” in Multidisciplinary Academic Conference on Economics, Management and Marketing in Prague 2014, 2014, MAC-EMM, Prague, 2014.

[10]SIG, What is Social Innovation?, (http://www.sigeneration.ca/home/resources/primer/), December 2015

[11]KPMG, Breaking Through – How Corporate Social Innovation Creates Business Opportunity, KPMG LLP, , 2014.

[12]A. B. Carroll, “A Three Dimensional Model of Corporate Performance,” Academy of Management Review, vol. 4 (4), 1979, pp. 497-505.

[13]A. B. Carroll, The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders. Kelley School of Business, Indiana University, 1991.

[14]R. Murray, J. Caulier-Grice, G. Mulgan, The Open Book of Social Innovation, The Young , 2010.

[15]K. Szegedi, “Possibilities of Corporate Social Responsibility,” In: Management Challenges in the 21st Century, Berényi L. (Ed.), LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing, 2014.

IJRAR19J1440 International Journal of Research and Analytical Reviews (IJRAR) www.ijrar.org 996