Corporate Social Responsibility (Glossary)
Employer
Element:
CSR
Employer (WP4):
12 countries with the exception of Romania, Denmark and Norway thought this policy to be was positively associated with the employment decision. Austria, Malta, Slovakia and Slovenia rated it particularly highly. On average, it was the most highly rated of all organisations.
Employer
| Element | TO | AU | DK | FI | FR | DE | IRL | IT | M | NL | NO | PT | RO | SL | SI | UK |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CSR | 1.91 | 2.67 | 1.44 | 1.7 | 2.0 | 2.11 | 1.9 | 1.75 | 2.9 | 2.14 |
1.13 | 1.63 | 0.8 | 3.0 |
2.5 | 1.63 |
N = 10
This element uses a positive/negative scale ranging from –3 (very negative) to +3 (very positive). -/+ 2 means somewhat negative/positive -/+ 1 means a little negative/positive and 0 means neutral. Somewhat positive ratings are highlighted in a “light green” colour. Very positive ratings are highlighted in “dark green”. Countries with a somewhat negative rating are highlighted in “orange” and countries with a very negative rating are highlighted in red.
In relation to corporate social responsibility ratings ranging from –2 to –3 inclusive are given a red colour. Those from –1 to –1.99 inclusive are highlighted in orange. Positive ratings from 1.5 to 2.24 inclusive are highlighted in “light green” and those ranging from 2.25 to 3 inclusive are highlighted in “dark green”.
Corporate Social Responsibility
Research suggests that good corporate social responsibility policy within organisations can have a very beneficial effect on the decision of people with disabilities to look for paid employment. Organisations that adopt good corporate social responsibility policy create enabling environments for disabled people to gain a competitive edge by accessing the skills, talents and support of disabled people. In turn the experiences of staff with impairments can help identify the needs of other disability stakeholders. Positive social corporate responsibility contributes to a diverse working environment, boosts staff morale and enhances the public image of the organisation all of which encourage a person with a disability to seek employment.
Related Articles
- Schur, Lisa et al; (2005) “Corporate Culture and the Employment of Persons with Disabilities” “Behavioural Sciences & The Law” Vol. 23 Issue 1 pp 3-20.
[link] - Sandler, L. & Peter Blanck (2005) “The Quest to Make Accessibility a Corporate Article of Faith at Microsoft: Case Study of Corporate Culture and Human Resource Dimensions” Behavioural Sciences and the Law Vol. 23 Issue 1 pp 39-64.
[link] - Schwartz, K. et al; (2002) “Employment of Persons with Disabilities in Information Technology Jobs: Literature Review for “IT works” Behavioural Sciences and the Law Vol. 20 Issue 6 pp 637-57
[link] - Dibben, Pauline, et al; (2002) “Employers and Employees with Disabilities in the UK: an Economically Beneficial Relationship?” International Journal of Social Economics Vol. 29 Issue 6 pp 453-65
[link] - Rosdahl, Anders (2001) “The Policy to Promote Social Responsibility of Enterprises in Denmark” Danish National Institute of Social Research, Copenhagen
[pdf] - Rosdahl, A. (2000) “The Social Responsibility of Enterprises: Employment of the Long-term Unemployed, the Disabled and Persons with a Reduced Capacity for Work” The Danish National Institute of Social Research.
[pdf] - Secker, J. & Membrey H. (2003) “Promoting Mental Health through Employment and Developing Healthy Workplaces: the Potential of Natural Supports at Work” Health Education Research Vol. 18 Issue 2 pp 207-15
[link] - Ward, a.C. & Baker P.M. (2005) “Disabilities & Impairments: Strategies for Workplace Integration” Behavioural Sciences & The Law Vol. 23 No. 1 pp 143-60
[link] - Levy, J.M. et al; (1991) “Employment of Persons with Severe Disabilities in Large Businesses in the United States” International Journal of Rehabilitative Research Vol. 14 No. 4 pp 323-32
[link] - Matt, S.B. & Butterfield, P. (2006) “Changing the Diversity Climate: Promoting Tolerance in the Workplace” AAOHN Journal Vol. 54 No. 3 pp 129-33
[link] - Butterworth, J. et al; (2000) “Workplace Culture, Social Interactions and Supports for Transition-Age young Adults” Mental Retardation Vol. 38 No. 4 pp 342-53
[link] - McMahon, B.T. et al; (2005) “Workplace Discrimination and Diabetics: the EEOC Americans with Disabilities Act Research Project” Work Vol. 25 No. 1 pp 9-18
[link] - Westmorland, M.G. & Williams, R. (2002) “Employers and Policymakers Can Make a Difference to the employment of Persons with Disabilities” Disability Rehabilitation Vol. 24 No. 15 pp 802-9
[link] -
Klein, D. et al; (2005) “Emerging technologies & Corporate Culture at Microsoft: A Methodological Note” Behavioural Sciences & the Law Vol. 23 No. 1 pp 65-96
[link] - Spataro, S.E. (2005) “Diversity in Context: How Organisational Culture Shapes Reactions to Workers with Disabilities and Others who are Demographically Different.” Behavioural Sciences & The Law Vol. 23 No. 1 pp 21-38
[link] - Thomas, S.A. (2004) “Diversity as Strategy” Harvard Business Review Vol. 81 No. 9 pp 88-108
[link] -
Baklke, S. (2001) “Severely Disabled Employees & their Experiences with Corporate Policies Concerning Job Retention: Selected Results of an Empirical Study” Rehabilitation Vol. 40 No. 4 pp 226-34
[link] - Steeves, L. & Smithies, R. (1998) “Disability Management in Canada: Rights and Responsibilities” Employee Benefits Journal Vol. 23 No. 1 pp 37-9
[link]