The aim of this essay is to collate the approach towards corporate social responsibility of two public limited companies, Apple and Samsung, which are both rivals and partners. In present, Apple is suing Samsung for patent breaches, however, at the same time Samsung is a supplier of some key components for Apple's products. First of all, a basic definition of corporate social responsibility (CSR) will be presented and followed by comparison of the most important CSR initiatives divided according to the stakeholders, groups having a stake in an organization, that are most affected by the particular activities. These activities will then be discussed from the employees' and management's point of view. The essay will finish by outlining whether CSR initiatives are meant seriously. Corporate responsibility can be described as accepting, managing and being aware of the consequences of corporate decisions, and as stressing public good instead of private gain (Boddy, 2008: 689, 156). Social responsibility is based on the mutual dependence of society, environment and organisations (Mullins, 2007: 803). Several authors (Boddy, 2008: 149; Buchanan and Huczynski, 2010: 52) agree that corporate social responsibility belongs to the domain of ethics, which is between the domain of codified law and the domain of free choice. FTSE4Good Index Series have been created as an objective measurement of companies' performance concerning CSR (FTSE, n. d.). First, in order to keep shareholders informed, both companies hold general meetings where investors are briefed about the development of the company and discuss various issues. Moreover, they are continuously working on providing both their customers and shareholders with the best possible value for money. (Apple Inc., n. d. a; Samsung Electronics, 2012: 18) Second, with customer satisfaction in mind, both companies develop environmentally and user-friendly products that are innovative and of high quality (Apple Inc., 2012b: 4; Samsung, n. d.). Third, Apple and Samsung cooperate with government and non-governmental organizations to make improvements in the areas regarding environment and employee welfare and safety (Apple Inc., 2012a: 16; Samsung Electronics, 2012: 20). Fourth, both companies audit how their supplying partners behave towards employees. Some of the inspected areas are workers' health and safety, fair treatment, excessive working hours, child labour and discrimination (Apple Inc., 2012a: 3-4, 12; Samsung Electronics, 2012: 19). Also, Samsung has created a flexible work schedule named 'Work Smart', which helps employees to maximize their work performance. Furthermore, Samsung supports creative ideas that have the potential of becoming new businesses by allowing the author to work on this project for up to one year (Samsung Electronics, 2012: 22-3). On the other hand, Apple's Supplier Employee Education and Development programme allows workers to improve their knowledge in a variety of subjects. Furthermore, this company has recently joined the Fair Labour Association whose motto is "Improving workers' lives worldwide" (Apple Inc., 2012a: 4). Fifth, Apple and Samsung not only help communities (and society in general) by offering working positions, but they also try to help people that are somehow disadvantaged. Samsung uses a specially designed recruitment programme for the disabled (Samsung Electronics, 2012: 25). It is also concerned with the good health and education of children and youth. Therefore, it has established 'Samsung Hope for Children' programme (Samsung Electronics, 2012: 31). Apple has designed the 'Supplier Diversity Program' in order to promote a diversity of suppliers, and to support disadvantaged companies (Apple Inc, n. d. a). Sixth, Apple and Samsung are continuously working on lowering the impact of their growth on the environment. Since 2009, they have been using a system for reducing carbon footprint and greenhouse gas emissions in as many areas as possible, including manufacturing, logistics, global partners, and travelling. They have also been working on reducing the electricity consumption of their products, increasing of the use of recyclable materials, and eliminating the usage of toxic substances and chemicals. (Apple Inc., n. d. b; Samsung Electronics, 2012: 36-8, 76) Seventh, Mullins (2007: 544-5) mentions a group affected by corporate social responsibility activities which is often neglected – competitors. Both Samsung and Apple pledge to respect other companies' intellectual property, for example patents, copyrights, and trademarks (Apple Inc., 2012b: 4; Samsung Electronics, 2011: 12). Eighth, suppliers for both Apple and Samsung have to pass annual audits, which check whether they comply with regulations regarding, for example workers' health and safety, labour and human rights, child labour, handling hazardous substances, and environment (Apple Inc., 2012a; Samsung Electronics, 2012). Because of the audits, it was revealed that Apple's supplier Foxconn Technology Group was violating workers' right. Therefore, Apple asked Fair Labour Association to do an independent audit (Apple Inc., 2012c). Also, Samsung's supplier HEG Electronics has, according to China Labor Watch (2012), been employing child workers. It is difficult to decide who benefits most/least from the given CSR activities. Since both companies have CSR agenda, some of the shareholders' earnings are dedicated to CSR initiatives, which somewhat decreases profit. Customers are provided with a variety of innovative products and services, but improved research is usually reflected in price. Governments and society in general, benefit from the fact that factories and/or offices of these companies offer new job vacancies for everyone, including the disabled, and therefore unemployment decreases. Employees are guaranteed good working conditions, protection of their health and they have the opportunity of personal growth. Environment is protected by reducing energy consumption and harmful emissions, and by using recyclable materials. Both companies promise not to steal any intellectual property of their competitors; however this area is rather complicated since there might be disputes over the borders of each patent. Suppliers are limited by binding documents which set rules. Nonetheless, it may be argued that employees gain most, whereas suppliers benefit least because they only have to obey set rules. All employees are affected by many CSR activities. They benefit from the possibility to adjust working time, from the activities designed to help them with their personal growth, as well as from the audits which ensure that they are not exploited. Nevertheless, it seems that from the employee's point of view, the most useful CSR activities could be Samsung's initiative to promote creative ideas and Apple's educational programme. Prospective employees that are somehow disadvantaged can substantially gain from special recruitment process. It is clear that many of the activities mentioned above are expensive. The protection of the environment is arguably the most expensive CSR activity. A big amount of money has to be invested in further research of environmentally-friendly methods of producing. Also, some substances are dangerous to the environment and using substitutes can be very expensive. However, in the long run, CSR activities might earn valuable recognition. Both external and internal issues shape companies' ethical stances. Unfortunately, the majority of decisions are still dominantly made with regard to short-term financial profit which causes environment and society to be left behind (Hannagan, Bennett et al, 2005: 552-4). However, being ethical does not necessarily mean not earning any profit, although the time span plays a very important role as well as the fact that the bigger company, the bigger impact (Hannagan, Bennett et al, 2005: 561-2). Companies that are aware of multiple stakeholder obligations need to offset shareholders' profit maximization and benefits of other stakeholders. Financial terms are not sufficient in determining organizational performance (Buchanan and Huczynski, 2010: 56). Trusting relationship with all stakeholders, derived from fulfilling socially responsible pledges, could be advantageous for companies since satisfied people are more likely to come back. What is more, society's opinion on corporate social responsibility has gradually shifted from apathy or ignorance towards high demand of more ethical conduct (Hannagan, Bennett et al, 2005: 560). Apple and Samsung commit themselves and, where relevant and appropriate, their business partners to compliance with a variety of ethical activities that are codified in codes of conduct. However, a very important question is whether it is merely an effect of pressure groups and customer demands or whether it is meant seriously as a proof of commitment to ethical behaviour (Hannagan, Bennett et al, 2005: 557-8). Hannagan, Bennett et al (2005: 564-5) claim that in order to achieve a genuine willingness for increasing ethical behaviour, it is important that the employees have the right attitude and are committed to improvement. Also, Hannagan, Bennett et al (2005, 563-4) suggest that senior management might be indirectly responsible for unethical practices by enforcing unattainable goals and by severe punishment in case of failure. Therefore, subordinates sometimes have to resort to unethical behaviour, for example deceptive advertising or negligence towards environmental standards. The suggested alternative is based on encouraging subordinate workers to participate on deciding what approach should be adopted, which should eliminate assigning impossible tasks. Public pressure might sometimes force companies to corporate philanthropy without the company's true interest in helping others. In order to prove a grave concern with society and environment, the principles written in these codes must be enforced and delivered (Hannagan, Bennett et al, 2005: 557-8). What is more, companies have to comply with a great amount of regulations and are under a strict public scrutiny (Hannagan, Bennett et al, 2005: 554); therefore all their actions are monitored by the media. It is the media that should alert the public if firms do not act as they promised, and all companies need to realize that false claims about their ethical activities could harm their reputation. To summarise, this essay has shown that both Apple and Samsung are aware of and engaged in various CSR activities. It has also outlined the most important CSR policies and matched them with main beneficiaries. Both companies balance the interests of all their stakeholders and sometimes sacrifice a part of their profit in favour of the contribution to the welfare of society or environment. Although there have been certain flaws in their actions, they continue to develop CSR strategies and are on their way to become the 'shapers of society' (Buchanan and Huczynski, 2010: 56). References Apple Inc. (2012a) Apple Supplier Responsibility: 2012 Progress Report, [Online], Available: http://images.apple.com/supplierresponsibility/pdf/Apple_SR_2012_Progress_Report.pdf [24 Oct 2012]. Apple Inc. (2012b) Business Conduct: The way we do business worldwide, [Online], Available: http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/AAPL/2128254520x0x443008/5f38b1e6-2f9c-4518-b691-13a29ac90501/business_conduct_policy.pdf [24 Oct 2012]. Apple Inc. (2012c) Apple Press Info: Fair Labour Association Begins Inspections of Foxconn, [Online], Available: http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2012/02/13Fair-Labor-Association-Begins-Inspections-of-Foxconn.html [29 Oct 2012]. Apple Inc. (n. d. a) Apple and Procurement, [Online], Available: http://www.apple.com/procurement/ [26 Oct 2012]. Apple Inc. (n. d. b) Apple and the Environment: The story behind Apple's environmental footprint., [Online], Available: http://www.apple.com/environment/ [26 Oct 2012]. Boddy, D. (2008) Management: An Introduction, 4th edition, Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. Buchanan, D. A. and Huczynski, A. A. (2010) Organizational Behaviour, 7th edition, Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. China Labor Watch. (2012) Samsung's Supplier Factory Squeezing Child Labor—Investigation Report on HEG Electronics (Huizhou) Co., Ltd. Samsung Supplier, [Online], Available: http://chinalaborwatch.wordpress.com/2012/08/06/samsungs-supplier-factory-squeezing-child-labor-investigation-report-on-heg-electronics-huizhou-co-ltd-samsung-supplier/ [29 Oct 2012]. FTSE. (n. d.) FTSE4Good Index Series, [Online], Available: http://www.ftse.com/Indices/FTSE4Good_Index_Series/index.jsp [25 Oct 2012]. Hannagan, T., Bennett, R. et al (2005) Management: Concepts & Practices, 4th edition, Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. Mullins, L. J. (2007) Management and Organizational Behaviour, 8th edition, Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. Samsung Electronics (2011) Global Code of Conduct, [Online], Available: http://www.samsung.com/us/aboutsamsung/ir/corporategovernance/globalcodeofconduct/downloads/SEC_Global_Code_of_Conduct_ENG__NEW.pdf [26 Oct 2012]. Samsung Electronics. (2012) Samsung Electronics Sustainability Report 2012, [Online], Available: http://www.samsung.com/us/aboutsamsung/sustainability/sustainabilityreports/download/2012/2012_sustainability_rpt.pdf [23 Oct 2012]. Samsung. (n. d.) Our Sustainability Reports, [Online], Available: http://www.samsung.com/uk/aboutsamsung/citizenship/oursustainabilityreports.html [23 Oct 2012].