Corporate Social Responsibility of 2 companies compared: Shell Malaysia - vs - McDonald's Singapore - Iloka Benneth Chiemelie, Kueh Yi Kia, Teng King Wee

XECUTIVE SUMMARY

Corporate social responsibility has been viewed as the way forward in maintaining a sustainable environment. This statement can be further supported by the definition of corporate social responsibility as a way of providing the needs of the present generation without compromising the chances of the future generation to meet their needs. Therefore, in this review, we will analyse the efforts of two companies in the area of corporate social responsibility and sustainable development.

The first company reviewed is Shell Malaysia Refineries. Shell in an oil producing industry that transform crude oil into usable oil products. In this review, the background information of the company in both their current position and past histories was provided. Outlined information on their corporate social responsibility programs, followed by their past changes in relations to corporate social responsibility and sustainable development was further analysed. The project went on to answer the question of “whether Shell Malaysia have done enough” in terms of corporate social responsibility and ensuring a sustained development for the future generation. The final section is the conclusion that where recommendations on the way forward for the company was provided.

The second company reviewed is McDonald’s Singapore. A global food giant, McDonald is a leader in restaurant business global with their trademark MacHanbuger. This project also provides background information of the company in Singapore. It went on to describe their corporate social responsibility activities and their recent changes on such activities. The following pages after their recent changes in Singapore answered the question of “whether McDonald’s Singapore have implemented enough corporate social responsibility programs in Singapore to ensure a sustainable future that wont comprise the chances of the next generation providing their needs. The final section provides recommendation on the way forward for the company.

After the analysis, this review paper went on to provide relevant pictures of the companies analysed and their corporate social responsibility efforts in the appendix section. The referencing was done using Harvard format. All adapted information and graphics where also referenced in the contents.

0.1 INTRODUCTION

For many decades, corporate social responsibility has resulted in some intense debates between scholars and practitioners (Carroll, 1999; Pearce and Doh, 2005). Most of these discussions have focused more on the role of business in the society and the nature of firm’s social responsibility behaviours. Recent arguments have progressed towards development of theories as well as empirical tests of the relationship between corporate social responsibility and organisation’s performance (Orlitzky et al, 2003; Aguilera et al., 2007). Nevertheless, on the practical level they have always been confusions on how to build and integrate corporate social responsibility into a firm’s overall objectives and strategy.

By the way of example, while CEO’s acknowledge that taking societal expectations into consideration is essential for building competitive success, they appear to be confused with how to build CSR into organisation’s strategy (Hirschland, 2005; McKinsey and Company, 2006). In fact, updated reports have revealed that six out of ten organisations have no CSR strategy, while many companies are not clear on how to adequately implement corporate social responsibility into their strategy (Work Foundation, 2002; McKinsey and Company, 2006). Even when efforts are made with respect to corporate social responsibility, many of the approaches appear to be weak in the sense that they fail to capture the fundamental purpose of strategy.

Typical approaches in corporate social responsibility include developing corporate codes of ethics, preparing triple bottom line reports and launching public relation campaigns to highlight any given socially responsible act by an organisation (Vyakarnam, 1992; Weaver et al., 1999). Besides these, companies can also develop their own programs as long as it is done with the intention of contribution positively to the society they operate in.

This group project is developed to examine the corporate social responsibility activities implemented by Shell refining company Berhad in Malaysia and McDonald’s Singapore. This research paper is basically divided into three parts. The first part examines the company’s background and highlights their corporate social responsibility and sustainable development programs. The second part evaluates whether these companies have done enough in terms of corporate social responsibility and sustainable development, while the final section offers some recommendations on the way forward for the companies discussed in this research paper.

1.0 COMPANY 1: SHELL REFINING COMPANY (FEDERATION OF MALAYA) BERHAD

1.1 BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION

Shell Malaysia is one of the over 300 shell companies in more than 145 countries across the globe. Shell Malaysia is an integrated mining company made up of wholly owned, joint ventures and public-listed companies and has a 117 years history in Malaysia. Shell Malaysia have three core business sectors, and they include Exploration, Production, Downstream and Gas and Power; with both global and specialised service4 hubs within Malaysia. Shell currently employee over 5,000 staffs within Malaysia and have invested over RM70 billion (seventy billion Malaysian ringgit) in Malaysia over the past two decades (Shell Malaysia, 2011).

Shell Malaysia is a public limited company currently listed in Bursa Malaysia. Shell Malaysia was listed in 1960 as a public listed company and has 49% of public participation as of recent. The company has an oil refinery at Port Dickson where comprehensive ranges of petroleum products are produced and 80% of these products are consumed within Malaysia. In 1999, your company completed the transformation of Malaysia’s first Long Residue Catalytic Cracking Unit (LRCCU) into a modern and world class refinery with a net worth investment of RM1.4 billion.

The LRCCU, which represents an important achievement in the Company’s present and future, has quadrupled the refinery’s liquid petroleum and gas (LPG) production and more than doubled the production of motor gasoline. The Company aspires to be one of the most admired refining company in Asia, and this they tend to achieve through operating an efficient, responsible and profitable business. With the aim for high standard performance, the company also aims to establish long-term relationship among the communities and stakeholders, with the main objectives of improving the quality of life whilst contributing to Malaysia’s 2020 goals.

Shell Malaysia also strives to maintain a healthy, safe and environmental performance it can be proud; to earn stakeholders confidence and trust in their products; to be a great neighbour and support sustainable development (Shell Malaysia, 2011).   

2.0 CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES IMPLEMENTED BY SHELL IN MALAYSIA

Shell Malaysia institutionalizes the principle of sustainable development that meets the needs of today’s generation without compromising the chances of the future’s generations to meet their own needs. Being part of shell Malaysia, Your Company also dispatches their business operation under the same principles. Shell Malaysia is governed with the aim of making business decisions that presents a credible economic sense, social and environmental responsibilities by which their stakeholders and society they operate in can hold them accountable for.

As Shell Malaysia continues to journey towards achieving their goals, the ways they implement corporate social responsibility and sustainable development will always play an integral role into their success. Their current stances in terms of corporate governance and social responsibility can be seen in the following practices:

Shell Malaysia provides their stakeholders with the solutions and a variety of energy products, materials and services, which meets the economic requirements of their customers and does not cause any environmental hazard (Shell Malaysia, 2011). They work to convince them that their activities and societal support to them does not result in any unsustainable environment rather is meant to boost the economy and benefit the society in general. They also create a clear part in their industry towards developing a better future for the present and next generations (Shell Malaysia, 2011).

Other activities includes building and maintaining a culture of learning and innovation through which employees can fulfil their potentials and meet the most challenging of targets – while felling easy at the same time. They have also developed a leadership culture that Shell leaders use to encourage others through exemplary life of valuing honesty, integrity, respect for people and environment, trust, openness, teamwork and professionalism to proper a sustainable work ethics that other companies in Malaysia can imitate.

Shell Malaysia has drawn upon the company’s strengths to meet the present challenges with a view of building a better society. Thus, they have vowed to continue investing in projects and researches that will exploit and develop new technologies, research and development to ensure the highest health, safety, security and environmental (HSSE) standards within the Malaysian society and the world at large.

3.0 IMPACT OF THESE ACTIVITIES BY SHELL MALAYSIA

There is no doubt that these activities have had impacts on shell Malaysia, both internally and externally and some of these impacts will be analysed below.

3.1 INTERNAL IMPACT

3.1.1 BUSINESS SAFETY

Shell Malaysia strongly believes that a high safety culture is essential for business. And as such, they have continued to inculcate a culture of ownership and personal responsibility throughout their working environment. The culture has had an outstanding positive impact in the company and some of these impacts can be seen in their concerted efforts to reduce all incidence of fire, First Aid Cases (FAC) and Medical Treatment Cases (MTC). By May 2007, Shell Malaysia has successfully achieved six years without any Lost of Time Incident (LT) and another nine million exposure hours (including both employees and contractors) without any lose of time incidence as of August 2007 (Shell Malaysia, 2011).

Figure 1 Lost of operation Time Frequency Chart in Shell Malaysia.

Source: Adapted from Shell Malaysia (2008).

From figure (1) above, the positive impact of corporate governance can clearly be visualised. By ensuring employee safety and reducing lose of time, Shell Malaysia has continuously improved their productive rate and established stakeholders trust on their services through persuasive formulae that tends to ensure worker’s safety.

3.1.2 PROTECTING WORKER’S HEALTH

The year 2006 was a challenging year for Shell Malaysia in terms of staff’s health. The company recorded an increased number of absenteeism compared to previous years and most these absenteeism were due to high incidence of long term ailments such as heart problems, stiffness of shoulder and knee problem due to aging factors.  The figure (2) below, illustrates the causes of these injuries according to the percentage issued by Shell Malaysia.

Figure 2 Causes of injuries in shell Malaysia

Source: Adapted from Shell Malaysia (2008).

Haven taken into awareness the causes of these injuries, Shell Malaysia assembled doctors and third parties to carry out health promotions and increase employees and contractors awareness. This campaign has ensured that employees and contractors are more aware of the dangers within their working environment, take a precautionary approach towards taking good care of their own health and help prevent the reoccurrence of such ailment in the future. The new recorded audited in 2008 saw a positive impact on the employees and contractors health as such ailments where reduced to an outstanding 50 per cent as of September 2008. 

3.2 EXTERNAL IMPACT

3.2.1 PROTECTING THE ENVIRONMENT

Through deploying high challenging improvement targets to progressively reduce emission and discharges, Shell Malaysia has been able to minimise the impact of their operations on the environment. Sources of these emissions have been understood to include fuel burning or combustion during operations; flaring and venting; evaporations from tanks and equipments during transport and storage of oil products; and fugitive releases which occur as a result of leak.

Figure 3 Rate of Flaring in Shell Malaysia

Source: Adapted from Shell Malaysia (2008).

As illustrated in figure (3) above, the rate of flaring has increased steadily since 2004. This is mainly because of their advanced refinery that now turns out more than double their previous production rate. This is a potential threat to the environment as this has consistently increased the rate of emission of carbon dioxide (C0₂). Carbon dioxide threatens the environment in many forms such as health – it causes health diseases like cancer, heart failure and lungs related diseases, and it is also known to cause global warming and green house effect. Thus, it is of no doubt that Shell Malaysia is neglecting the impact of their operation on the environment and this puts the question as to whether they are a corporately responsible organisation or just a profit minded institutions.

4.0 CHANGES MADE IN THE PAST BY SHELL MALAYSIA

In recognition of their weaknesses, Shell Malaysia has made noticeable changes to increase sustainable development and protect the environment from hazards. An overview of these changes is discussed below.

4.1 GLOBAL WARMING POTENTIALS: SOCIAL CHANGES

As part of their sustainable development drive, Shell Malaysia has devised a method to relatively compress the effect of greenhouse gasses (GHG) on the environment. This they have down by devising a factor known as global warming potential (GWP) to provide relative measurement of the warming influence of gas and carbon dioxide over a 100-year time horizon.

This change has resulted in the removal of Halon and Chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) from their waste products. As of April 2000, Shell confirmed that their refinery is totally free of Halon and CFC, however the refinery still have Hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFC) in its inventory and these gases are scheduled for elimination between 2015 and 2020 in accordance with the Montreal Protocol. Throughout 2006, Shell’s effort with regards to oil spillage must be acknowledge as they did not have any reported spill incident throughout the year and this is also as a result of their modernized precautionary methods (Shell Malaysia, 2011).

4.2 REPORT AND CONSULTING: POLITICAL

Shell Malaysia communicates its openness, accountability and transparency through different forms, one of which is via their annual Shell Malaysia Sustainable Development (SD) report, which includes details of Your Company’s progress across wide range of indicators -  from greenhouse effects to road safety statistics. Copies of these reports are distributed to government agencies, business partners, academicians, NGOs, contractors, employees and opinion leaders.

The annual report is in compliance with and adheres strictly to disclosure requirements for all Malaysian public listed company and in line with Shell’s state of business operation principles across the globe. This has seen the report take home several accolades in the couple of years. For instance, in 2006 Your Company was the recipient of two awards from the National Annual Corporate Report Awards (NACRA) for the best annual report in environmental report for the fifth consecutive year in a role.

4.3 WASTE MANAGEMENT: ECONOMIC CHANGE

The most recent economic change undertaken by Shell Malaysia is in the area of waste control and recycling. The main source of solid wastes arising from Shell’s operations are, Sludge from oil storage and refining, spent catalysts and non-hazardous wastes. The company has continuously produced sludge from its operations, and have applied proven and department of sludge control (DoE) approved sludge reduction technologies to reduce the rate of sludge wastes by recovering as much remaining hydrocarbons from the sludge as possible.

Shell Malaysia has also seen a success in recycling a large portion of the wastes originating from refinery operations. A total of 2,661 MT of spent Fluid Catalytic Cracking (FCC) catalysts was re-used as raw feedstock at cement plants in Perlis and Negeri Sembilan. This recycling process is an economic boost in a double form because it reduces the cost of production as well as overhead and also protects the environment from hazardous waste, thus eliminating the cost of protecting or rebuilding an unhealthy society.

5.0 EVALUATION OF THE CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES IMPLEMENTED BY SHELL MALAYSIA

Shell Malaysia have implemented many outstanding activities geared towards the development of a sustainable environment through strict corporate governance polices.  Some of these include their efforts to ensure staffs safety, and protect the environment from waster hazards. They have won varieties of awards due to their contributions to the environment and efficient management in general.

Nevertheless, the question as to whether Shell Malaysia has implemented enough corporate governance activities to ensure sustainable environment would be answered on a negative note. This is because the emission of Carbon dioxide gasses has increased tremendously since the refinery was re-structured to produce more petroleum products. This is a serious issue in today’s environment considering the increasing rate of global warming and greenhouse effect. This definitely if not controlled will compromise the chances of the future generation to meet their needs, and it could be argued that all their efforts is worthless if the rate of carbon dioxide emission is not put under control.  

6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE WAY FORWARD FOR SHELL MALAYSIA

Shell Malaysia presents a negative image to a sizeable number of Malaysians. Such images are due to more of the harms they contribute to the society than good. Corporate identity deals with the impression, personality and picture an organisation is represented as, in the face of its stakeholders (Schmitt and Pan, 1994), as a means of differentiating itself and creating a unique position within the environment it operates (Simoes and Dibb, 2008). Main objective of managing corporate identity is to maintain a favourable reputation with an organisation’s stakeholders; this will attract the investors to invest in the organisation (Balmer, 1995; Van Riel, 1995).

Some clear activities organised by Shell Malaysia was pointed out with respect to corporate social responsibility and sustainable development, it must be noted that all these activities are geared towards benefiting the organisation. An activity such as workers and business security does not impact sustainable development in the society. On the other hand, they are the highest producer of carbon dioxide (CO₂) gases in the society and this threatens air purity. It must also be noted that Shell’s oil per water rate is 7.9pltr just merely below the required standard set by the government at 9.0pltr. This raises the question as to what extent of good is Shell Malaysia really offering to the society?

Thus, it will recommended that Shell Malaysia must understand that they have done less activities in trying to ensure that the needs of the future is not compromised in the present. Thus, they must implement significant and reliable measure to ensure that the future generations have a sustained environment to rely on. Some of the activities would range from reducing their gas emission to a minimal extent to ensure that the quality of area around Malaysia and part of the world is not over contaminated with poisonous gases. These gasses have been known to cause serious diseases such as kidney failure in kids (lead acid gases) and cancer (carbon dioxide gases).

Shell Malaysia must also implement other social responsibility programs designed to benefit the society not just their workers and internal management. Such of these programs would be to reduce the rate of oil per water Port Dickson to ensure sustainable environment for the aquatic lives within this areas and parts of Malaysian. Shell Malaysia should also implement other sincere corporate social responsibility programs such as health and education funding in the society. These activities will do a great deal in improving their corporate image both in Malaysia and across the world.

7.0 COMPANY 2: MCDONALD’S RESTAURANT PTE LTD SINGAPORE

7.1 BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION

In the late 1940’s, Dick and Mac McDonald were looking for new ways to improve their little driven-in restaurant business based in San Bernadino, California. They invented an entirely new concept of speedy service, big volume and low price to attract the post-war American society. When their business re-opened in 1948, it took a while to build. But by mid-1950’s it almost doubled their revenue in the same location and this gave way for expansion as the tiny drive-in restaurant was not enough to accommodate the number of customers trooping in.

A joint venture partnership between Mr. Robert Kwan and McDonald’s Corporation (headquartered in Oaks Brook, Illinois, USA), lead to the establishment of McDonald’s Restaurant Pte Ltd Singapore. McDonald’s Singapore has 125 restaurants and employs 6,000 staffs across Singapore. Their first outlet in Singapore was opened on 27^th of October 1979 at Liat Towers. This outlet sold the world’s highest volume of hamburgers on the opening day. McDonald’s Singapore offers a wide variety of menus (both beverages and foods) that customers can choose from. But the trade mark of McDonald does still remain their hamburger (Singapore Management University, 2009). 

Since its establishment, McDonald’s Singapore had contributed enormously towards the development of the community. Their contributions are mainly stemmed towards children-related activities. Some of these contributions include the KK Women and Children’s Hospital, Ronald McDonald Children Charities, McCare and the NUH/Ronald Child Dialysis Program launched in 1997 and 1988 respectively (Singapore Management University, 2009).

All of these social philanthropic activities implemented by McDonald’s have been recognized by the society and the overall perception of McDonald’s in Singapore can be described as great. McDonald’s is largely perceived in Singapore as a socially responsible company, an educational advocator for the young, an international food icon and a fun place for kids. This makes McDonald’s one of the most popular company in Singapore.

8.0 CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND ACTIVITIES IMPLEMENTED BY MCDONALD’S IN SINGAPORE

McDonald’s Singapore focuses on three areas in their corporate social responsibility towards developing a sustainable future. Education is one of these areas. McDonald’s provides financial support to schools and less privileged children.  One of such programs is “When i grow up” programme which also gains the support from the Ministry of Education with the objectives of motivating children to follow their dreams and helping them to make good career choices (Singapore Management University, 2009).

Another example of such educational program is “Career-in-industry” which was launched specifically for children at the age of 12 to 13 in order to inspire a career in the McDonald’s is very rewarding but also challenging. McDonald’s Singapore also conducts Ronald McDonald shows in schools to teach primary school pupils different social aspects such as how to be environmental friendly, and aspects of road safety.

The second area is in environment and conservation. Their efforts in this area is focused on developing recycling programs and sponsoring campaigns that aid in protecting animal and plant ecology. Some of these efforts can be seen in their adopted style of using paper containers in place of formacel which contains chlorofluorocarbons (CFC) that are harmful to the ozone layer. Through the “Go-Green” program, McDonald’s sponsors annual cleanup efforts at the east coast part.

Health is the final area of focus by McDonald’s on corporate social responsibility and sustainable development. McDonald’s Singapore has been able to provide both their staffs and the society with certain extent of free Medicare and health supports especially for the less privileged. In Singapore, the cornerstone of McDonald’s corporate social responsibility is the Ronald and Macdonald Children Charity (RMCC). It was launched in 1989 to support the National Council of Social Service (NCSS), and have dished out helps to over 200 children across Singapore with a grant totalling over US$1 million in areas of medical, rehabilitation and surgical treatment (Singapore Management University, 2009).   

Another aspect of such health programs are their involvement with the National University Hospital (NUH) and Kandang Kerbau Hospital (KKH). In this area, McDonald’s specifically helps kids with kidney failure. And on their 20^th anniversary in Singapore in 1999, McDonald’s Singapore pledge US$1 million to KKH as of its efforts to help children.

9.0 IMPACT OF THESE ACTIVITIES BY MCDONALD’S SINGAPORE

They are no doubt that these activities implemented by McDonald’s Singapore have had some certain degree of impact on both the company and the society as a whole. Some of these impacts would be analysed below.  

9.1 INTERNAL IMPACT

9.1.1 COMPANY IMAGE

This is the area where these programs have had the highest level of impact. McDonald’s Singapore has since its establishment stamped their authority as a socially responsible company in Singapore through their many corporate social responsibility programs to make the future worth living in. They have helped the society by proving free education and health care for their children, helping build a solid foundation that young pupils can rely on for their future and supported the environmental preservation by ensuring that their products are dished out on paper instead of containers that cause environmental hazards. These have lead to the conception of the company as a social and environmental friendly organisation and they have waived out competitions from KFC and other outlets to maintain their position as the best in Singapore. This have thus, increased their image to a great extent both in the eyes of the future generations (children), the current generation (adults) and their competitors.

9.2 EXTERNAL IMPACT

9.2.1 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN THE SOCIETY

McDonald’s Singapore also supports the society in various forms. Some of these ways includes their help in equipping hospitals, providing career trainings and encouraging ecological preservations through their “Go-Green” campaign. All these efforts must be acknowledge and appraised to a great deal of extent because they have offered over 200 people a second chance in terms of health issues and many more in terms of career, while serving the world from global warming by making all their containers free of chlorofluorocarbons (CFC), which are dangerous to the ozone layer.

These activities have thus, helped the society in various ways by creating a number of new businesses through the set of individuals who develop and work with the ideas they have learnt from McDonald’s. Another way they have helped the society is by preserving a sustainable future through their eco-friendly programs and responsible behaviours.

10.0 CHANGES MADE IN THE PAST BY MCDONALD’S SINGAPORE

10.1 PARTNERSHIP WITH SINGAPORE MINISTRY OF EDUCATION: POLITICAL CHANGE

McDonald’s Singapore have partnered with the education ministry of Singapore in some of their philanthropic activities, such as “When I grow up” programme designed to motivate children to have a positive attitude towards their career choices (Singapore Management University, 2009). It is clear that the idea of partnering with the government is not just a corporate social responsibility and pure sustainable development, but also a political means of ensuring that the company gains certain level of relationship with the government of Singapore. This change is essential for maintaining the image of the company because other stakeholders (for instance customers, and investors) would view them as a very responsible organisation based on the idea that they have a strong relationship with the government of Singapore.

10.2 RONALD AND MCDONALD CHILDREN CHARITY (RMCC) FUND RAISING: ECONOMIC CHANGE.

Haven understood the financial requirements of supporting and sponsoring all the corporate social responsibility activities they have implemented, McDonald’s Singapore had to design a way to provide all the necessary funds needed to run those activities. Supporting all these activities from the company’s wallet will most certainly lead to losses and could eventually result in bankruptcy. Thus, they made the economic change of raising some of those funds if not all from other sources such as personal donations from suppliers, customers and the sale of McDonald’s Happy Meal (5 cents are deducted from sale of each meal). This economic change ensures that they not just support the community but also return shareholder’s interests;  rise in share price and return on investment (profit and dividends).

10.3 THE USE OF PAPER CONTAINERS: ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE

McDonald’s Singapore uses paper containers in place of the famous formacel containers. This ensures that none of their wastes contains chlorofluorocarbons (CFC) which are very hazardous to the environment (ozone layer). This is a positive change because it helps in reducing global warming which if one of the problems faced by humans currently. By reducing global warming, they are helping in sustaining a healthy environment for the future generation.

11.0 HAVE MCDONALD’S SINGAPORE IMPLEMENTED ENOUGH CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY PROGRAM OR IS ALL THESE JUST A MARKETING STRATEGY?

The picture of what McDonald’s have done to benefit the Singaporean society is clear for anyone to view, but the reality behind this picture is yet unclear. McDonald’s have donated immensely over the couple of year with a total over US$ 5 million, this donation have been used to help over 200 children with health related issues, equipping schools and hospital and encouraging green living in the city. Such an investment by a company such as McDonald’s is something other companies should imitate, but it raises the question as to whether all these philanthropies are pure corporate social responsibility or done with marketing intentions.

McDonald’s Singapore primarily focuses their contribution to the society on the kids. This can be seen from their various programs designed to carter for children with certain needs, and those specifically targeting children between the age of 12 to 13 teaching them that working with McDonald’s Singapore is profitable yet challenging. Issues like this raise the question as whether all these efforts are just to create a future profiting marketing because children are easily influenced, create a future work force by enticing them with the idea that working at McDonald’s is profiting but challenging.

The above analysis also revealed that some of these programs were initiated when McDonald’s where having crisis with their stakeholders. For instance Ronald and McDonald Children Charity (RMCC) was set up in 1989, the same year McDonald’s was facing countless anti- McDonald’s campaigns in Europe. Another of such case is in 1996 when the McLibel case was labelled as “The biggest corporate public relations disaster in history”, McDonald’s Singapore in line with their worldwide efforts contributed generously to fund the refurbishing of the National University Hospital (NUH) in Singapore (Singapore Management University, 2009).

From the argument above, it can be pointed out that profit at the end of the day is the main reason driving McDonald’s corporate social responsibility for sustainable development. Although these efforts must be appreciated, on the other hand, it must be understood that McDonald’s Singapore has not done enough to ensure a sustainable future. The Singaporean society will not depend whole on disasters for the organisation to contribute to the society, and the lack of financial backing on the way these funds are generate poses a threat to sustainable contribution from McDonald’s in the near future.

12.0 RECOMMENDATION ON THE WAY FORWARD FOR MCDONALD’S SINGAPORE

Many corporate social responsibility scholars have suggested that undertaking strategic corporate social CSR helps a firm to achieve cost leadership or differentiation (Miles and Covin, 2000; Porter and Kramer, 2006). This highlights more on the arguments presented above as to whether McDonald’s Singapore is really doing a sincere philanthropic activity or just a marketing strategy to increase their market value. But, no matter the case, it can be seen that corporate social responsibility can help a firm gain competitive advantage and increase its market value, thus their efforts must be gladly appreciated.

McDonald’s Singapore has implanted a great deal of efforts into the society in health care, education and environmental preservation. Nevertheless, it must be noted that all these efforts are highly directed towards minor and this was the reason why their efforts are seen as more as a marketing strategy than a sincere philanthropic activity. Thus, McDonald’s Singapore must apply more efforts into seeing that the target is not just children but any member of the society whom they could possibly help or support in any form. This will reduce the biased view on their social efforts.

Environmental preservation does not only entail good education and health, and it must be understood that the best health comes from what you consume. From this perspective, McDonald’s Singapore can also implement a greater deal of effort to see that all their menu undergo critical set procedures that is aimed at reducing the cholesterol level in their menu and ensuring that they serve a healthy meal in general. Although this might be considered a tedious task by many restaurants, it would ensure that organisations such as McDonald’s Singapore are not only preserving the environment, but also preserving the people who will leave in these environments in the near future as well as maintaining a healthy society.

This argument is justifiable because if a society has lesser ill people, the lesser its need and dependent on medical infrastructure would be, and some of the food contents in McDonald’s Singapore has been classified as reach in cholesterol which causes obesity and breathing problems in both young and old. Thus reducing the level of cholesterol in their menu could potentially mean reducing the number of obesity and breathe related illness within the society. 

13.0 REFERENCES (HARVARD METHOD)

Aguilera, R.V., Rupp, D.E., Williams, C.A. and Ganapathi, J. (2007), “Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: a multi-level theory of social change in organizations”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 836-63. 

Balmer, J.M.T. (1995), “Corporate branding and connoisseurship”, Journal of GeneralManagement, Vol. 21, pp. 24-46.

Carroll, A.B. (1999), “Corporate social responsibility: evolution of a definitional construct”,Business and Society, Vol. 38 No. 3, pp. 268-95.

Hirschland, M. (2005), Taking the Temperature of CSR Leaders, Business for Social Responsibility, San Francisco, CA. 

McKinsey and Company (2006), The McKinsey Global Survey of Business Executives: Business and Society, McKinsey & Company, New York, NY. 

Miles, M.P. and Covin, J.G. (2000), “Environmental marketing: a source of reputational, competitive, and financial advantage”, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 299-311. 

Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F.L. and Rynes, S.L. (2003), “Corporate social and financial performance: a meta-analysis”, Organization Studies, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 403-41. 

Pearce, J.A. II and Doh, J.P. (2005), “The high impact of collaborative social initiatives”,MIT Sloan Management Review, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 30-9.

Porter, M.E. and Kramer, M.R. (2006), “Strategy & society: the link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 84 No. 12, pp. 56-68. 

Schmitt, B.H. and Pan, Y. (1994), “Managing corporate and brand identities in the Asia-Pacific region”, California Management Review, Vol. 36, pp. 32-48.

Shell Malaysia (2011), “shell in Malaysia; past and present’. Available from:http://wwwstatic.shell.com/static/src/downloads/annual_reports/2005/ar_2005shell_in_msia.pdf[accessed on 20-2-2011]

Simoes, C., Dibb, S. and Fisk, R. (2005), “Managing corporate identity: an internal perspective”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 33, pp. 153-68. 

Singapore Management University (2008,) “corporate philanthropy or marketing strategy?” Accessed from:http://links.smu.edu.sg/works/modules/BGS/McDonalds/McDonalds%20grp.pdf[accessed on 23-2-2011]

Vyakarnam, S. (1992), “Social responsibility: what leading companies do”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 59-67. 

Weaver, G.R., Trevin˜ o, L.K. and Cochran, P.L. (1999), “Integrated and decoupled corporate social performance: management commitments, external pressures, and corporate ethics practices”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 42 No. 5, pp. 539-52. 

(The) Work Foundation (2002), Managing Best Practice: Corporate Social Responsibility, the Work Foundation, London.