INTRODUCTION
The Industrial Revolution 4.0 is the digital revolution that has been occurring since the middle of the last century. It is defined by a convergence of technology that blurs the distinctions between the physical, digital, and biological realms. The corporate responsibility has expanded several folds as a result of technological advancements. The Corporate Social Responsibility which has been recognised very recent in the Indian context was inherently there in the corporate culture and being practised by the corporate world, however, without any legal sanction. Moreovser with the technological progress especially with Industrial Revolution 3.0 & 4.0, the responsibility of the corporate has acquired another dimension i.e. the digital responsibility along with the social responsibility. Organisations must determine how to operate responsibly in the digital age, while also complying with legal requirements and considering economic impacts on the organization (Schwartz & Carroll, 2003)1.
In this paper we will try to focus on the key aspects of the Corporate Social Responsibility along with its implementations. Additionally we will try to check the technological advancements of the corporate in its accomplishment. The focus will then shift to digital transformation of the Corporate Social Responsibility. Further we will try to delve into the managerial contributions of the corporate for making them technologically accountable.
Digital transformation is revolutionizing all industries, changing not only business processes and models, but also the work environment and the way of communication. Therefore, it should be a central element of the strategy not only of leaders but of every company and organization willing to stay on the market. The key issue in this transformation is not solving individual business problems but the integration of digital technologies and business processes using digital technologies.2 Consequently the paper will make an attempt to synthesize the concept of Corporate Digital Responsibility which enables the technological soundness and strength of the corporate towards the society.
CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY- CONCEPT, HISTORY AND LAW
Since the middle of the nineteenth century, philanthropy has been prominent in India, owing to a long tradition of communal influence and paternalism among traders-turned-entrepreneurs. At the same time, the state’s greater economic governance framework affected company policies toward labour and society on occasion.
The Indian government’s socialistic policy agenda, which aimed at a more equitable distribution of resources, restricted the concentration of wealth to the hands of a few industrialists through strategies of import substitution, foreign exchange control, reservations for and protection of small-scale enterprises, industrial license, and quota systems for raw material and production. This influenced business practices of the times. However, business was often reluctant to abide by such principles. As a result, interest in corporate philanthropy decreased, leading to an increase in corporate malpractice, and manoeuvring for survival and profits. However, certain self-enlightened businessmen practiced and advocated ethical and responsible business behaviour, and issues of the social responsibility of business and stakeholder engagement were debated in India as early as the 1960s. In fact, there is evidence available of businesses going far beyond compliance and setting best-practice standards in labour relations and community development even before India’s independence in 1947. Some such best practices later became the basis for drafting related legislation after independence.3 It is more than vital to get a sneak peek at the history of this notion in order to better comprehend the new CSR features. It is also necessary to understand the roots of the corporate responsibility idea in order to predict how it will grow.
The notion of corporate social responsibility (CSR) is relatively new. The concept’s inception and implementation were impacted by two major aspects. The first was linked to the technical breakthrough that occurred at the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth century. The second is associated with World War II. People sought to increase their fortune as civilization progressed at the end of the nineteenth century. That is how private firms arose, which evolved over time into international organisations that are still running well today.
The design and notion of corporate social responsibility were substantially affected by World War II. The post war crisis was exploited by the United States, which had suffered fewer losses than the rest of the world. Because of the economic slump, American firms began to adopt monopolistic methods on a wide scale, whereas Europe, which had suffered losses, had to adjust to new conditions. As a result, popular criticism of monopolistic behaviours began, leading to the formation of CSR.
Andrew Carnegie was the first who described CSR problem on a large scale in relation to the monopolistic practices of corporations and methods to protect the society against increasing exploitation. His definition was based on two principles. The first is the principle of charity – it orders the rich to help the poor. This solution, however, has not been adopted on a large scale. The second one is the stewardship principle. According to its assumptions, the richest should manage good on behalf of other people, so wealth should be managed in a socially accepted way. On the basis of such an approach, inter alia, banks or insurance companies were created to manage the property of other social groups to their explicit consent.4
To present the comprehensive evolution of CSR one must see all its 5 sides:5
• The fundamental (economic and social) impact of the business environment on the company;
• Transformation of the social, political and economic environment/context in which companies “live”;
• Evolution of the concept and its definition;
• Development of CSR management practices and strategies within companies;
• The nature of subjects under discussion today on CSR.
Stutz presents the history of CSR thought and practice from three distinct meta-theoretical orientations towards CSR (viz., economic, critical, and politico-ethical lens). Stutz argues that prominent histories of CSR—written by scholars committed to the politico-ethical lens—tend to portray an “overly glossy” view that may neglect problematic aspects of CSR.6
An analysis of the Indian law viz. The Companies Act, 2013 which provides for the law regarding the Corporate Social Responsibility enumerates and mandates the following points:
1. Every company with a net worth of Rs. 500 crores or more, or a turnover of Rs. 1000 crores or more, or a net profit of Rs. 5 crores or more in immediately preceding financial year, must form a Corporate Social Responsibility Committee of the Board of Directors, consisting of three or more directors, one of whom must be an independent director. However, where a corporation is not obliged to nominate an independent director under sub-section (4) of section 149, it must have two or more directors on its Corporate Social Responsibility Committee. The composition of the Corporate Social Responsibility Committee must be disclosed in the Board’s report under section 134, sub-section (3).
2. The Corporate Social Responsibility Committee is responsible for:
(a) formulating and recommending to the Board a Corporate Social Responsibility Policy that specifies the activities to be undertaken by the company [in areas or subjects specified in Schedule VII];
(b) recommending the amount of expenditure to be incurred on the activities referred to in clause (a);
(c) periodically monitoring the company’s Corporate Social Responsibility Policy. The Board of Directors of each company referred to in sub-section (1) of section 135 shall:
approve the company’s Corporate Social Responsibility Policy, taking into account the recommendations of the Corporate Social Responsibility Committee, and disclose the contents of such Policy in its report, as well as place it on the company’s website, if any, in the manner prescribed; and (b) ensure that the company’s Corporate Social Responsibility Policy is followed;
3. The board of every company referred to in sub-section (1) of section 135 shall ensure that it spends at least 2% of its average net profits made during the three immediately preceding financial years or, if the company has not completed the period of three financial years since its incorporation, during such immediately preceding financial years, in accordance with its Corporate Social Responsibility Policy. However, that the corporation spends the money set up for Corporate Social Responsibility initiatives in the local region and places around it where it operates.
4. Any amount remaining unspent under sub-section (5) of section 135 in connection with any ongoing project undertaken by a company in pursuance of its Corporate Social Responsibility Policy, subject to such conditions as may be prescribed, shall be transferred by the company within thirty days of the end of the financial year to a special account to be opened by the company in that behalf for that financial year in any scheduled bank to be called the Unspent Corporate Social Responsibility Account, and such amount shall be spent by the company in pursuance of its obligation towards the Corporate Social Responsibility Policy within a period of three financial years from the date of such transfer. Otherwise, within thirty days after the end of the third financial year, the corporation must transfer the funds to one of the funds listed in Schedule VII.
5. If a company fails to comply with the provisions of sub-section (5) or (6) of section 135, the company will be fined twice the amount required to be transferred to the Fund specified in Schedule VII or the Unspent Corporate Social Responsibility Account, as the case may be, or one crore rupees, whichever is less, and every officer of the company who is in default will be fined one-tenth of the amount required to be transferred to the Fund specified in Schedule VII or the Unspent Corporate Social Responsibility Account, as the case may be, or two lakh rupees, whichever is less.
6. The requirement under sub-section (1) of section 135 for the formation of a Corporate Social Responsibility Committee shall not apply where the amount to be spent by a company under sub-section (5) of section 135 does not exceed fifty lakh rupees, and the functions of such Committee provided under this section shall be discharged by the company’s Board of Directors in such cases.
The legal sanctions and requirements have been strengthened by the various amendments to The Companies Act 2013 by The Companies (Amendment) Act, 20177 and The Companies (Amendment) Act, 20198.
IMPLEMENTATION, ASSESSMENT AND PROSPECTS
According to the results of a global survey in 2009 by Ernst & Young, 94 per cent of companies believe that the development of a Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) strategy can deliver real business benefits, however only 11 per cent have made significant progress in implementing the strategy in their organization. CSR programs influence 70 per cent of all consumer purchasing decisions, with many investors and employees also being swayed in their choice of companies.9 A developing country like India needs a strong institutional framework for putting into practice and achieving the multiple objectives of economic growth and development. The implementation of the developed framework will not be achieved unless there is strong commitment and support from top-management and the Government. A number of firms identify CSR practices with the core strategy and policy of the company based on the importance given to
a) defining a plan for social action,
b) intensity of investment in social programs,
c) commitment of employees,
d) Perceived impact of social action on competitive position, and
e) measuring outcomes of programs (Husted et al., 2007)10
STAKES FOR IMPLEMENTATION AND ITS ASSESSMENT
• Government: Various agglomerates, agreements, recommendations, policies and other documents that lay out what they consider to be appropriate business practises behaviour have been formed by governments and international organisations such as the United Nations, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), and the International Labour Organization (ILO). CSR tools frequently reflect globally agreedupon aims and rules. Human rights, the environment, and anti-corruption are all issues that need to be addressed.
• Communications: Advancement in the information and communication technology facilitated the companies in tracking their internal activities. Further the external bodies like NGOs, media, shareholders, government etc. keep an eye over the implementation of the CSR compliance.
• Edification and Public Conscience: The function of corporate stakeholders is to band together and exert pressure on companies that are transforming. Shareholders and investors apply pressure on firms to perform ethically through socially responsible investing. Non-governmental groups are also playing a bigger role, harnessing the media’s and the Internet’s capacity to raise scrutiny and collective activity around corporate behaviour. The development of communities in holding corporations accountable for their activities is rising thanks to education and conversation.
• Business: Consumers and investors are becoming increasingly interested in supporting ethical business practices, and they are seeking more transparency on how firms are dealing with significant environmental impacts and possibilities. A solid CSR strategy may assist increase market share, minimise capital costs, and improve market flexibility.
• Ethical concerns: The rise of CSR can be connected to the increase of ethical consumption during the past two decades. As the world’s population grows, so does the need for scarce natural resources to fulfil expanding consumer demand. As a result of both technology and globalisation, industrialization is flourishing in many emerging nations. Additionally, consumers are becoming more conscious of the environmental and social consequences of their daily purchases, and are beginning to make purchasing decisions based on their ethical and environmental concerns.
Planning and implementation of CSR practices require a strategic framework or institutional structure. To integrate all the different perspectives of CSR design, planning, and implementation into a single strategic framework needs the development of a preliminary model that helps in testing of all the practices, suggests the desired changes, and has the support of multiple case studies. The organization must align its CSR goals and decision making with its overall goals and strategies so that taking corporate social responsibility becomes as natural as taking a customer perspective.11
Data Assessment
Since its beginning in FY 2014-15, an in-depth study of available data has been conducted by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs. An attempt has been made to examine the effect of Section 135 of the Act and its provisions in terms of numerous factors and their impact on the behaviour of various parties. The law’s goal is to make corporate social responsibility (CSR) more mainstream and socially, economically, and ecologically responsible. In the last four years, there has been a shift toward initiatives that are sustainable and have a long-term influence on the recipients.12
Table 2.1 Profile of companies liable13 for CSR based on their reporting14 status (figures as per the filings received as on 31st March, 2019):
| Company profile based on reporting status | FY 2014- 15 | FY 2015- 16 | FY 2016- 17 | FY 2017- 18 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liable and reporting on CSR | 9418 | 11671 | 12407 | 10868 |
| Liable Companies on whom Schedule III15 of CA, 2013 is not applicable but reporting on CSR | 1000 | 1284 | 775 | 716 |
| Liable but not reporting on CSR | 6130 | 5335 | 6350 | 9753 |
| Total Number of Companies liable for CSR | 16548 | 18290 | 19532 | 21337 |
Note: Figures in the Table indicate number of companies in each profile and year.16
In the Table above:
(i) Total number of liable companies includes those which are mandated to fulfil CSR obligation and can be bifurcated into companies reporting on CSR and not reporting on CSR.
(ii) The companies on whom Schedule III of the Act is not applicable are companies which include insurance or banking company or any company engaged in the generation of electricity or to any other class of company for which a form of financial statement has been specified in or under the Act governing such class of company and are not mandated to file their financial statements as prescribed in Schedule III of the Companies Act, 2013 (reference section 129 of the Act) CSR expenditure for a company, for the purposes of this chapter, is the sum of the amount spent by the company in all its projects related to areas or subjects mentioned in Schedule VII for that particular year.17
THE REPORT OF THE HIGH-LEVEL COMMITTEE ON CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY 2018 recommended many things among which few of the important aspects are as follow18:
• The scope of CSR applicability be extended to Limited Liability Partnerships (LLPs) which are within the purview of the MCA. The applicability of CSR may also be extended to Banks registered under the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. The applicability of CSR provisions may also be extended to similarly placed entities not covered under Companies Act through necessary amendments in Companies Act and, if necessary, in their respective statutes.
• A clarification may be issued that for newly incorporated companies the obligation under Section 135 shall lie only after they have been in existence for three years.
• Companies having prescribed CSR amount below Rs. 50 lakhs be exempt from forming a separate CSR Committee. The Board itself would carry out the functions of the CSR Committee.
• The Committee is of the view that the unspent CSR amount for a particular year be transferred to a separate designated account created for the purpose. Such unspent amount, and the interest earned thereon, be spent within a period of three to five years, failing which the same be transferred to a fund to be specified by the Central Government which may be used for innovative, high-impact projects related to activities listed in Schedule VII. Adequate provisions be provided to ensure compliance. A penalty, 2-3 times the default amount, may be imposed subject to a maximum of Rs. 1 (one) Crore upon the default being made good, but there be no imprisonment.
• Regulatory oversight be exercised through enhanced and granular reporting wherever CSR funds are used for creation of capital assets. Companies be encouraged to forge partnerships when creating assets for public purpose. The ownership shall rest with the public and the company may act as a custodian to operate it and make it self-sustaining.
• Schedule VII be mapped and aligned largely with SDGs and some important items such as promoting sports, senior citizens’ welfare, welfare of differently abled persons, disaster management, and heritage be additionally included to develop an SDG+ framework. The Central Government may, if required, identify a few areas from Schedule VII as priority areas and issue specific directions in this regard.
• A CSR Exchange Portal be developed for creating an interactive platform for all stakeholders, including contributors, beneficiaries, IAs, etc. by leveraging the benefits of technology to maximize the potential and outcomes of CSR.
• All activities listed under Schedule VII to enjoy uniform tax benefit. CSR expenditure to be made deductible from the income earned for the purpose of taxation. The mode of implementation to be tax neutral. Implementing agencies be treated as partners and not service providers/vendors for CSR activities, so as to address the variable incidence of indirect taxes on them.
• A clarification be issued that mere disbursal of funds to implementing agencies is not construed as CSR spending. The Board of a company to ensure that CSR funds are duly spent on CSR activities as specified under Schedule VII and report on the modalities of utilization of funds.
According to the CSR Journal19 after three years as the top company, Tata Chemicals has fallen to third place. Infosys has gained first position followed by Mahindra & Mahindra at the second. Tata Chemicals has retained the third spot. This year, ITC has moved from No. 5 to No. 4 in the rankings. The Vedanta Group has risen to the top five in terms of corporate citizenship, up from eighth place previously. Grasim Industries is a newcomer to the ranking. Grasim, which is a subsidiary of the Aditya Birla Group, has received multiple honours for its flagship programmes.
DIGITAL TRANSMIGRATION AND CORPORATE DIGITAL RESPONSIBILITY
The Indian Law does not specify or inculcates the term ‘Corporate Digital Responsibility’. The term has been however implemented through various means like:
1) The Information and Communication Technology (ICT) revolution has revolutionised company processes substantially, making physical locations unimportant. e-marketplaces, such as Flipkart and Amazon; aggregation models, such as Ola, Uber, and Zomato; and process outsourcing, such as BPOs, KPOs, and LPOs, are now the exclusive sources of revenue for businesses.
2) Companies in the services industry are unable to identify a geographic area. As a result, it is clear that the first proviso to Section 135 (5) is advisory rather than required.
3) Ministry of Corporate Affairs introduced the National CSR Data Portal in January 2018, which makes publicly available data that organisations have submitted.
4) Technology might be expanded to serve a greater purpose than just data consolidation. A technology-enabled platform is required to bring the demand- and supply-side participants in CSR together.
However, organizations must have a better grasp of how to manage ethical dilemmas and be digitally responsible in the face of ethical difficulties resulting from the development and deployment of technology and data. We turn to the idea of business ethics for this purpose, which is roughly described as the norms and standards that regulate judgement and decision making in company-related problems.
Based on the broad idea of business ethics, we define Corporate Digital Responsibility as the set of values and specific norms that govern an organization’s judgments and choices in matters that relate specifically to digital issues. Such CDR-related values and norms share some principles and goals with CSR, or an organization’s commitment (and accountability) toward social and ecological causes in general. Accordingly, CSR encompasses the economic, legal, and ethical expectations that society has of organizations at a given point in time.20
Corporate Digital Responsibility is the digital version of CSR where the companies have to comply with the digital responsibility what they possess. It is technology which is making them accountable and sharing its goals and issues with CSR. However, unlike CSR, CDR encompasses a wider arena and includes the virtual responsibility of the corporate as well.
Digital transformation “is reshaping the relationship between labor and technology, raising concerns over the future of employment relations, patterns as well as the ethical use of new technologies. Corporate Digital Responsibility (CDR) is standing out as the new direction, fusing ethical considerations at the company, individual and societal level, ensuring socially responsible transitions for an increasingly digitalized workforce.”21
Another very important thing which the CDR inculcates is the ethical concerns. These concerns formalize ethical reasoning to enable technology supported ethical decision making. Additionally, it proposes approaches and models to ethical or accountable digital transformation design. The autonomous system requires specific ethical norms for its conduct o that privacy policies get analysed and there must be transparent and fair data practices as well as cultural values and norms.
Christopher Joynson, exploring the 2017 Global Digital Inclusion Survey, suggests important CDR factors that should be taken into account by any company as the basic principles. There is a necessity to find balance among time and value, trust, society and individuals as well as health and privacy. This includes such questions as data ownership, sustainable automation, digital inclusion, digital accessibility, unbiased artificial intelligence and digital convenience.22
The major objectives of corporate digital responsibility are to provide a complete data security framework, implement staff training programmes that provide knowledge on how to handle tough circumstances involving digital data, and correctly address customer and employee issues. Changes in the workplace, such as a rise in teleporting or the deployment of virtual teams, necessitate the training of personnel in digital skills. New technology, particularly data, should be used intelligently and productively. This is obviously linked to the company’s image and serves as a differentiating feature. Additionally, it also seeks to provide the customers and the society at large, well judged and unbiased information which will be implemented for the common good.
Good CDR procedures may be costly, which forces service managers to make difficult trade-offs between profit and customer satisfaction.
MANAGERIAL CONTRIBUTIONS OF CORPORATE TO MAKE THEM TECHNOLOGICALLY ACCOUNTABLE
• Senior management must promote a good CDR culture, unite the organisation behind it, and exhibit the required actions.
• Establish particular norms as a reflection of the higher-level culture. To put it another way, certain rules are required to make common CDR values concrete and explicit.
• Train all staff at all levels on digital literacy and CDR
• Empower employees to tackle ethical breaches and build norms of criticizing own decisions
• CDR habits and results should be linked to incentives and recognition, and CDR measures should be included in KPIs and performance reporting.
• Develop and implement CDR rules and processes that are plain and open (robust codes of conduct, enforcement of codes and transparency of consequences for breaches)
• Create and implement a CDR ethical code with responsible practise principles.
• Conduct CDR-related data privacy, algorithm, technological, and ethical audits
• Examine algorithm design and integration with non-profit auditing businesses on the outside.
• To lessen the probability of algorithmic biases, ensure that data science teams have a diverse workforce.
• Through industry associations and consumer groups, ‘best practise’ information and insights are shared.
EPILOGUE
The Corporate Social Responsibility which has been recognised very recent in the Indian context was inherently there in the corporate culture and being practised by the corporate world, however without any legal sanction. Moreover, with the technological progress especially with Industrial Revolution 3.0 & 4.0, the responsibility of the corporate has acquired another dimension i.e. the digital responsibility along with the social responsibility.
Digital transformation is revolutionizing all industries, changing not only business processes and models, but also the work environment and the way of communication. Therefore, it should be a central element of the strategy not only of leaders but of every company and organization willing to stay on the market.
Certain self-enlightened businessmen practiced and advocated ethical and responsible business behaviour, and issues of the social responsibility of business and stakeholder engagement were debated in India as early as the 1960s. In fact, there is evidence available of businesses going far beyond compliance and setting best-practice standards in labour relations and community development even before India’s independence in 1947. The fundamental (economic and social) impact of the business environment on the company; transformation of the social, political and economic environment/context in which companies “live”; evolution of the concept and its definition; development of CSR management practices and strategies within companies; and the nature of subjects under discussion today on CSR are few of the guidelines which have affected the CSR.
Government, business, public conscience, ethics are the stakes which holds a corporate liable while holding the CSR accountable. The CII’s recommendations focused primarily on the CSR regulatory framework, monitoring, assessment, and analysis of CSR expenditure results. It suggested that small boards be exempt from forming a CSR Committee; that the clause on ‘Local Area Preference’ be removed to reduce regional and social disparities; that the cap on capacity building and administrative overheads be increased to 5%; that unspent CSR amounts be carried forward with a time limit; that the scope of activities under Schedule VII be broadened; and that CSR be carried out in kind be permitted. They also asked that the articulation of CSR legislation be revised to make it clearer, and that MCA issue instructions on how to carry out CSR. “Effective digital strategies are not about implementing technologies for the sake of becoming more digital, but they involve identifying the opportunity for greatest business impact”23
Harmonizing the legal norms around data generation, use, assessment, and refinement is therefore difficult, especially globally, with significant consequences for the formation of a CDR culture inside an organisation. Significant legal distance between nations in which an international organisation works, for example, may cause it to acquire local artifacts and CDR related behaviours while preserving general shared values and CDR-specific norms.
*****
Footnotes
1. Schwartz MS and Carroll AB, “Corporate Social Responsibility: A Three-Domain Approach” (2003) 13 Business Ethics Quarterly 503
2. Orbik, Zbigniew and Zozuľaková, Viera. “Corporate Social and Digital Responsibility” Management Systems in Production Engineering, vol.27, no.2, 2019, pp.79-83.
3. Sood, Atul; Arora, Bimal./ The Political Economy of Corporate Responsibility in India. 2006. 82 p. (Technology, Business and Society Programme; 18)
4. Andrew Carnegie. The Gospel of Wealth. New York: Carnegie Corporation of New York, 2017 (first published in 1889)
5. Kenneth Goodpaster, David Rodbourne et al (Corporate Social Responsibility – The Shape of a History, 1945-2004, 2005)
6. Stutz, C. . History in corporate social responsibility: Reviewing and setting an agenda. Business History. 2018
7. https://www.nfcg.in/UserFiles/THE-COMPANIES-AMENDMENT-ACT-2017.pdf
8. https://cdnbbsr.s3waas.gov.in/s3e2ad76f2326fbc6b56a45a56c59fafdb/uploads/2018/05/2023010354.pdf
9. Dr. Revathy, B. “Corporate Social Responsibility – An Implementation Guide For Business,” 2012 Far East Journal of Psychology and Business, Far East Research Centre, vol. 6(2), pages 15-31, February
10. Husted et al. Corporate social strategy in multinational enterprises: antecedents and value creation. 2007 Journal of Business Ethics, 74, 345-361
11. Maon, F., Lindgreen, & Swaen, V. Designing and implementing corporate social responsibility: An integrative framework grounded in theory and practice.(2009) Journal of Business Ethics, 87(1), 71-89
12. https://resource.cdn.icai.org/58475csr47656.pdf
13. Companies which are attracting section 135 of the Act have been termed as liable companies for the purpose of this chapter
14. Companies which are filing returns on Segment III of the AoC-4 (e-form) of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs which basically deals with CSR and its details thereof.
15. Schedule III of the Act provides general instructions and format for the preparation of balance sheet and statement of profit and loss of a company
16. https://resource.cdn.icai.org/58475csr47656.pdf
17. https://resource.cdn.icai.org/58475csr47656.pdf
18. https://resource.cdn.icai.org/58475csr47656.pdf
19. https://thecsrjournal.in/top-indian-companies-for-csr-in-2020/
20. Schwartz, M., & Carroll, A. B. Corporate social responsibility: A three domain approach. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(4), 503–530.2003
21. CSR Europe. Future of Work Working Group: Investigating »Corporate Digital Responsibility«“Jul. 4, 2017. [Dec. 7, 2018]
22. Ch. Joynson. ‘Corporate Digital Responsibility: Principles to guide progress’.
23. G.C. Kane, D. Palmer, A.N. Philips, D. Kiron and N. Buckley. „Achieving Digital Maturity. Adapting Your Company to a Changing World”.