Introduction

Social components in the corporate world go way back to the early Roman Laws when traders used to donate and participate in building institutions like homes for orphans and the elderly, shelters, and hospices to give back to the community. The concept of organizations as a community enterprise has been there ever since the Middle Age, and the English Law carried it on. The English Crown saw organizations as a tool for community development, and it was carried on even in the sixteenth and the seventeenth century (Chafee, 2017). In recent years, organizations have adopted corporate social responsibility, and it has gained prominence in the academic literature.

Definitions of CSR

According to Carroll, CSR was known as social responsibility before the age of social responsibility started (Carroll, 1999). There are close to 37 definitions of corporate social responsibility, different scholars have given different definitions of CSR, but Bendell argues that there is no definite definition (Bendell, 2005). Howard Bowen is one of the earliest scholars to define CSR as "the obligations of businessmen to pursue those policies, to make those decisions, or to follow those lines of action which are desirable in terms of objectives and values of our society" (Sarkar & Searcy, 2016). In the 1960s, a few more authors came up with different definitions after Bowen's. In this research paper, the definitions are classified into two perceptions. The first is the stakeholder perspective, and according to Freeman, organizations have responsibilities to groups and people who have an impact or can be affected by the organization's operation (Freeman, 1984). According to Khoury and Rostami, CSR encompasses a relationship between an organization and its stakeholders. They argue that the primary responsibility of an organization is service to the community (Su & Jie, 2015). Davis and Blomstrom define CSR from a social perspective as actions taken by an organization to improve and protect corporates interests and social well-being (Guven, 2011).

According to Kotler, CSR means running the firm in a manner that positively influences social well-being (Galbreath, 2009).

The connection between CSR and organization's accomplishments varies from one research to another and from one scholar to another. Researchers have studied the relationship between corporate financial performance (CFP) and CSR, and the results are diverse. According to Simpson and Kohers, the connection between CFP and CSR is positive (Simpson & Kohers, 2002). McWilliams and Siegel, however, argue that CSR exerts a neutral impact on an organization's financial performance (McWilliams & Siegel, 2000). After a deep analysis of Chinese firms, Chu-Yu, Wen and Fang argue that corporate social responsibility has a negative influence on corporate financial performance in the near future but a positive impact in the long run (Chu-yu et al., 2008). Jin’s argument is a little mixture of all of the above since they explain that the success of CSR in the past years results in a positive effect in the future years (Jin et al., 2006).

The relationship between CSR and consumer response has been looked into by some scholars, and according to Murray and Vogel, CSR has a positive impact on customer response. The study confirms that customers would be more willing to buy from companies that participate in social development (Murray & Vogel, 1997). Brown and Darcin’s research shows that CRS can indirectly influence customer’s valuation of services and goods offered by an organization by assessing the organization (Brown & Darvin, 1997). Morh and Webb agree with Murray and Vogel; they argue that people behave in a socially responsible manner. Thus, they consider a firm's social contribution before making a purchase, and other studies have shown that consumers like to reward companies that contribute to the growth of society.

Human Resource Management and Corporate Social Responsibility

Human resource management plays a significant role in every organization. It is a bridge between the employers and the employees. The term 'Human Resource' was created in 1954 by a scholar called Peter Drucker, and he focused on its use as a function in managing managers and operations and guiding people in their line of work. Pigor and Myers defined HRM as a way of increasing the potentials of workers for them to experience maximum satisfaction of their jobs and do their level best for the company (Pigor & Myers, 1952). According to Byars and Rue, HRM is defined as activities intended to provide for and manage the employees in a company (Cheruiyot, 2010). During the 20th century, human resource was a functional department in a company, and human resource managers used to manage and supervise the employees and ensure a smooth operation in the organization.

There is no definite definition for CSR and HRM, but the concepts have developed over time. Both HRM and CSR have boomed in the last few decades, the two terms have interacted over time, but they are described and analyzed from different perspectives. There has been an increase in research linking HRM and CSR over the past years. The common point of HRM and CSR in an organization is sustainability. The role of HRM in the sustainability of an organization is still underdeveloped. Gond and other scholars indicate how HR managers in organizations undermine CSR and sustainability issues to other employees (Gond et al., 2017). They analyze three configurations of how HRM and CSR interact, with different degrees of balance between them with respect to sustainability. HRM has a major part in determining how people understand CSR, how it's established and endorsed, equally, organizations' understanding of CSR affects how they treat their workers. In a HRM professional course, there is compulsory training in CSR (Ragmoun & Alwehabie, 2020). A revolution towards the study of internal stakeholders is seen in CSR literature, and CSR-HRM can now fully improve the concept of employees as stakeholders.

The link between CSR on HRM

Research has proved that there is an existing link between HRM and CSR. CSR influences HRM practices and vice versa. CSR influences the process of employees recruitment which is the major role of HRM. A socially responsible organization has to consider societal ethics as they hire people. They have to consider some factors like age since they can't hire children that are below the legal age since it is against society's ethics. They should also ensure responsible shares of recruitment, and they shouldn't discriminate against people from the minority group. Merging both HRM and CSR establishes a socially responsible HRM habit in a company, and it affects the workers in terms of human capital investment, safety, and health. In return, the organization attracts and retains qualified employees. According to some researchers, few studies link between HRM and CSR. These researches perceive corporate social responsibility as a tool to emphasize the social rationality of an organization, and this method helps to develop the organization's reputation and employee loyalty (Dupot et al., 2014).

According to Fraisse and Guerfel-Handa, HRM has the power to encourage the employees to implement green practices. In return, they help conserve the environment; they can also raise a CSR culture among its employees. They also argue that CSR impacts HRM strategies by bringing to light questions on diversity, equality, and employees' safety (Nair, 2015). Some authors argue that the link between HRM and CSR is on some particular topics like safety in the workplace, health and well-being of the workers, and fair treatment of the employees.

Conclusion

Researches have proved a link between HRM and CSR, and the relationship between these two concepts goes way back. CSR influences HRM in decision making since a socially responsible company has to consider corporate social responsibility before making decisions such as recruiting employees and employees' working environment. On the other hand, HRM plays a significant role in ensuring that an organization adopts CSR programs. Both HRM and CSR are essential in understanding the relationship between the employer and the workers and the organization's performance.

Bendell, J. (2005). In whose name? The accountability of corporate social responsibility.

Development in Practice, 15(3-4), 362-374.

Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct.

Business & society, 38(3), 268-295.

Chaffee, E. C. (2017). The origins of corporate social responsibility. U. Cin. L. Rev., 85, 353.

Cheruiyot, F. K. (2010). The relationship between corporate social responsibility and financial performance of companies listed at the Nairobi Stock Exchange (Doctoral dissertation, University of Nairobi, Kenya).

Chu-Yu, L., Fang, W., Er-Dong, W., Sheng-Wen, Q., Jian-Kui, H., Xiang-Yang, L., ... & Kui, Z. (2008). Impact on the magnetic compressor due to CSR. Chinese Physics C, 32(8), 665.

Dupont, C., Ferauge, P., & Giuliano, R. (2013). The impact of corporate social responsibility on human resource management: GDF SUEZ's case. International business research, 6(12), 145.

Freeman, R. E. (2010). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Cambridge university press.

Galbreath, J. (2009). Building corporate social responsibility into strategy. European business review.

Gond, J. P., El Akremi, A., Swaen, V., & Babu, N. (2017). The psychological microfoundations of corporate social responsibility: A person‐centric systematic review. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38(2), 225-246.

Güven, B. A. (2011). Toplumsal sorunların çözümüne yönelik hazırlanan reklam kampanyaları: Anlatısal ve tematik ileti çözümleme örnekleri (Doctoral dissertation, İstanbul Kültür Üniversitesi/Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü/İletişim Tasarımı Anabilim Dalı).