Organization communication regarding ISO 26000 practices in South Korea: focusing on the enlarged scope
2
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
ISO 26000, issued on November 1, 2010, has enlarged the scope of socialresponsibility (SR) from corporations to all types of organizations. This article examineshow organizations that traditionally have not been concerned with this term, such as publicor governmental institutions and nonprofit organizations, interpret this new standard andthe notion of SR, especially in the South Korean context. For this research, we observed theSR-related reports and media activity of seven Korean organizations: Korean StandardsAssociation (KSA), the Ministry of Knowledge Economy (MKE), Gangdong-gu Office(GDG), Christian Ethics Movement of Korea (CEMK), LG Electronics Union (LGEU),Collective Action (CA), and Working Together Corporation (WTCO). We also carried outinterviews with experts in these organizations, who largely work on the subject. Using theorganizing theory frame (enactment–selection–retention) of Karl E. Weick, we analyzedthree elements of the organizational communication of these institutions: strategy, ISO26000 messaging, and receivers of the information. ISO 26000 was first actively used inpublic organizations (e.g., KSA, MKE, and GDG) as a policy tool to expand the concept toall aspects of Korean society, and was later used in certain nonprofit organizations (e.g.,LGEU and CEMK) as a new paradigm, creating new concepts such as union SR andchurches’ SR that partially accept the international standard in different contexts. Somecivil societies, such as CA and WTCO, observe the phenomenon in a passive way to see ifit could promote the social values of their organizations. Lastly, in spite of the scopeenlargement, we note that SR is still in the range of corporate SR, and the applicationprocess in South Korea shows that the social aspect is more easily ignored than theeconomic and environmental aspects.
Abstract
ISO 26000, issued on November 1, 2010, has enlarged the scope of socialresponsibility (SR) from corporations to all types of organizations. This article examineshow organizations that traditionally have not been concerned with this term, such as publicor governmental institutions and nonprofit organizations, interpret this new standard andthe notion of SR, especially in the South Korean context. For this research, we observed theSR-related reports and media activity of seven Korean organizations: Korean StandardsAssociation (KSA), the Ministry of Knowledge Economy (MKE), Gangdong-gu Office(GDG), Christian Ethics Movement of Korea (CEMK), LG Electronics Union (LGEU),Collective Action (CA), and Working Together Corporation (WTCO). We also carried outinterviews with experts in these organizations, who largely work on the subject. Using theorganizing theory frame (enactment–selection–retention) of Karl E. Weick, we analyzedthree elements of the organizational communication of these institutions: strategy, ISO26000 messaging, and receivers of the information. ISO 26000 was first actively used inpublic organizations (e.g., KSA, MKE, and GDG) as a policy tool to expand the concept toall aspects of Korean society, and was later used in certain nonprofit organizations (e.g.,LGEU and CEMK) as a new paradigm, creating new concepts such as union SR andchurches’ SR that partially accept the international standard in different contexts. Somecivil societies, such as CA and WTCO, observe the phenomenon in a passive way to see ifit could promote the social values of their organizations. Lastly, in spite of the scopeenlargement, we note that SR is still in the range of corporate SR, and the applicationprocess in South Korea shows that the social aspect is more easily ignored than theeconomic and environmental aspects.
참고문헌 (75)
- Ablander, M. S., "Corporate social responsibility as subsidiary co-responsibility : A macroeconomic perspective", Journal of Business Ethics, 99, pp.115~128 (2011)
- APEC Sub-Committee on Standards and Conformance, "Standardization : Fundamentals, impact, and business strategy", Education Guideline, 3 (2010)
- Bateson, G. W., "Steps to an ecology of mind" (1972), Ballantine
- Bowie, N. E., "Management Ethics", Journal of Academic Ethics, 2(3), pp.287~291 (2005)
- Busch, L., "Standards : Recipes for reality" (2011), MIT Press
- History of 10-year-old collective action: First sustainability report (1999–2008), "CA", ~ (2009)
- Status of Korean CSR reports, "CA.", ~ (2011)
- Cadet, I., "La norme ISO 26000 relative a` la responsabilite´ socie´tale : Une nouvelle source d’usages internationaux", Revue Internationale de Droit Economique, 24(4), pp.401~439 (2010)
- Carroll, A. B., "Business and society: Ethics and stakeholder management" (2006), Thomson South-Western
- Fruit of trust: Sustainability report 2009, "CEMK.", ~ (2010)
- CEMK, "ISO 26000 guidance for churches", ~ (2010)
- 조윤희, "대학도서관의 사회적 책임에 관한 연구", 한국문헌정보학회지, 41(1), pp.289~305 (2007), 한국문헌정보학회
- Daft, R. L., "Toward a model of organizations as interpretation systems", Academy of Management Review, 9(2), pp.284~295 (1984)
- Egyedi, T. M., "Standardising social responsibility: Analyzing ISO representation issues from an SME perspective", In Presentation of 13th EURAS Workshop, in Skoevde, pp.1~15 (2008)
- Elkington, J., "The triple bottom line: Does it all add up?", pp.1~16 (2004), Earthscan
- Fomin, V., "Standardization: Bridging the gap between economic and social theory", Proceedings of the Twenty-First International Conference on Information Systems of ICIS, pp.206~217 (2000)
- Frontard, R., "Histoire de la norme", Culture Technique, 29, pp.19~27 (1994)
- Sustainability report 2010, "GDG", ~ (2010)
- Sustainability report: A happy world 2011, "GDG.", ~ (2012)
- Goh, D. -S., "CSR issues and countermeasures : Focusing on the ISO 26000" (2011), Korean Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade(KIET)
- Graz, J. -C., "Standardisation and the rise of a global service economy", Paper presented at the 25th EGOS Colloquium (2009)
- Hahn, R., "Transnational governance, deliberative democracy, and the legitimacy of ISO 26000: Analyzing the case of a global multi-stakeholder process", Business and Society, 51(4) (2012)
- Helfrich, V., "Peut-on normaliser e´fficacement la RSE et ses pratiques ?", Revue de l’Organisation Responsable, 5(1), pp.51~60 (2010)
- Hooghiemstra, R., "Corporate communication and impression management: New perspectives why companies engage in corporate social reporting", Journal of Business Ethics, 27, pp.55~68 (2000)
- IBEC., "Corporate social responsibility" (2004), European and Social Policy Division
- ICFTU., "Resolution on ISO and social responsibility", ~ (2005)
- Report to the first meeting of the ISO SAG on CSR, "IISD", ~ (2003)
- IISD, "Issue briefing note: Small and medium-sized enterprises" (2004)
- The desirability and feasibility of ISO corporate social responsibility standards, "ISO COPOLCO.", ISO COPOLCO, ~ (2002)
- ISO COPOLCO., "Corporate social responsibility, concepts and solutions", COPOLCO Workshop. Port of Spain, Trinidad & Tobago (2002)
- ISO weighs up work on social responsibility of organizations, "ISO.", ISO Management System, ~ (2003)
- Brazil–Sweden ‘‘dream team’’ to lead development of ISO’s SR standard, "ISO.", ISO Management System, ~ (2004)
- ISO., "Participating in the future International Standard ISO 26000 on social responsibility", ~ (2006)
- ISO., "Guidance on social responsibility", ISO 26000 : 2010(E), ~ (2010)
- Working report on social responsibility for submission to the ISO technical management board, "ISO SAG on SR", ~ (2004)
- 정병기, "사회적 책임(SR) 국제표준이 노동계에 미치는 영향 및 한국 노동조합의 인식과 대응", 산업노동연구, 18(1), pp.181~206 (2012), 한국산업노동학회[DOI]
- Kang, B. -G., "Standards dominate markets: Five strategies to win the standards war" (2009), SERI
- Kim, J. -S., "How to increase the social responsibility of social enterprises: Policy analyses", Health and Welfare Policy Forum, pp.87~98 (2011)
- Kim, K. -C., "Current status of sustainability management of small and medium business in our country and future challenges", Proceedings of KITA conference, 2011(1), pp.113~125 (2011)
- Kolk, A., "A decade of sustainability reporting : Developments and significance", International Journal of Environment and Sustainable Development, 3(1), pp.51~64 (2004)
- KSA., "Future society and standards", ~ (2008)
- KSA sustainability report 2009, "KSA.", ~ (2009)
- KSA sustainability report 2011, "KSA.", ~ (2011)
- La, Y. -J, "Social responsibility of public organizations", Monthly Public Finance Forum, pp.8~28 (2012), Korea Institute of Public Finance
- Lawrence, A. T., "Business and society: Stakeholder relations, ethics and public policy" (2008), McGraw-Hill
- Lee, J. -R., "Process Communicationnel de la Normalisation en matie`re de TIC en Core´e du Sud et en France", 박사, pp.2009
- 이종서, "유럽연합과 기업의 사회적 책임(CSR): 현황과 전망", 국제지역연구, 14(1), pp.209~236 (2010), 국제지역연구센터
- 이동원, "SR 표준화의 적용범위에 관한 고찰-중소기업의 툭수성을 중심으로", 기업법연구, 25(2), pp.347~380 (2011), 한국기업법학회
- 이진랑, "ISO 26000 선정 과정의 의사소통적 타당성 분석: 국제 커뮤니케이션 관찰을 통하여", 커뮤니케이션학 연구, 20(2), pp.47~71 (2012), 한국커뮤니케이션학회[DOI]
- Lee, H. -J., "A standard war waged by a developing country : Understanding international standard setting from the actor-network perspective", Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 15, pp.177~195 (2006)
- LG Electronics sustainability report, "LGE", ~ (2011)
- LGEU., "LGE USR Convention. A new history of LGEU, our DNA USR" (2009), USR activities
- LGEU., "LGE USR Convention. A new history of LGEU, our DNA USR" (2011), USR activities
- Luhmann, N., "Social Systems" (1995), Stanford University Press
- Maily, J., "La normalisation" (1946), Dunod
- MKE sustainability report 2006, "MKE", ~ (2007)
- MKE sustainability report 2010, "MKE", ~ (2011)
- Mucchielli, A., "The´orie syste´mique des communications" (1999), Armand Colin
- Phillips, R., "Stakeholder theory and organizational ethics" (2003), Berrett-Koehler
- Rada, R., "Information technology standards and standardization", pp.19~34 (2000), IDEA Group
- Roh, H. -K., "Examining SR by ISO 26000 : Understanding and practicing the new international standards" (2011), Pakyoungsa
- Ruwet, C., "Faut-il supprimer le « E » de RSE? Enjeux politiques d’un de´bat terminologique", Reflets Et Perspectives De La Vie E´ conomique, 48(4), pp.109~118 (2009)
- Ruwet, C., "Que repre´sentent les stakeholders? Le cas de l’e´laboration d’ISO 26000", Revue Franc¸aise de Science Politique, 60, pp.1115~1135 (2010)
- Ruwet, C., "How are the multi-stakeholder standards shaped?", Paper submitted to the 23rd EGOS colloquium, sub-theme 40, Organizing the shape and create markets (2007)
- Schmidt, S. K., "Co-ordinating technology : Studies in the international standardization of telecommunications" (1998), MIT Press
- Schwartz, B., "ISO-lating corporate social responsibility in the organizational context : A dissenting interpretation of ISO 26000", Corporate Social Responsibility and Environment Management, 16, pp.289~299 (2009)
- 손영우, "노동조합에게도 사회적 책임이 있는가?: 사회적 책임의 대상 확대와 노조 적용에 관한 연구", 기억과 전망, (27), pp.214~247 (2012), 한국민주주의연구소
- Tamm Hallstrom, K., "ISO enters the field of social responsibility: Growing importance of non-state actors in global governance", Paper to be Presented at the WZB, 2004, ~
- Ward, H., "ISO 26000 and global governance for sustainable development" (2012), IIED
- Weick, K. E., "The social psychology of organizing" (1979), Addison-Wesley
- Weick, K. E., "Making sense of the organization", pp.462~463 (2001), Blackwell
- Weick, K. E., "Making sense of the organization(Vol. 2)" (2009), Wiley
- Wood, S., "Four varieties of social responsibility: Making sense of the ‘‘sphere of influence’’ and ‘‘leverage’’ debate via the case of ISO 26000", Osgoode CLPE Research Paper, 7(4) (2011)
- Workplace where humans are more beautiful than flowers, "WTCO.", Working Together Foundation, Reporting Manual of Social Responsibility for Social Enterprises, 40~91 (2010)
- Youn, T. -B., "Social responsibility of public organizations and ISO 26000", Proceedings of the Winter Conference of Seoul Public Administration Studies Association, pp.93~116 (2011)