Paradigma Baru dalam Pelaksanaan Tanggungjawab Sosial Syarikat Milik Kerajaan (New Paradigms of Corporate Social Responsibilities for Government)

SURAIYA ISHAK (Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, suraiya@ukm.my), AHMAD RAFLIS CHE OMAR (Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, raflis@ukm.my)

Abstract


The involvement of government-linked companies (GLCs) in social responsibilities is difficult to discern. Profit objectives have restricted business entities from undertaking socially responsible actions particularly those that would increase costs. However, GLCs are nonetheless expected to give due attention to non-profitable motives and actions. Thus, this article seeks to identify a new perspective to social responsibility for GLCs within the context of a pluralistic society with multiple roles. It aims to propose an alternative model that could align behaviors of GLCs with profit objectives without neglecting their capacity to contribute to socio-political missions. This conceptual discussion highlights a new paradigm of social responsibilities for GLCs that differs from its previous understanding and practices. Further, it illustrates an operational paradigm through the example of Perbadanan Johor's intrapreneur venture program. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) involvement need not necessarily occur in unproductive ways; for example, the intrapreneur venture program has enabled GLCs to participate in the high-value CSR without sacrificing their profit and efficiency motive. Thus, participation in a high value CSR could create a win-win benefit to both company and society.

Keywords: Government-linked companies, entrepreneurship, intrapreneur, corporate social responsibility, government- linked companies performance

ABSTRAK

Pembabitan syarikat berkaitan kerajaan (SBK) dalam tanggungjawab sosial adalah satu isu yang sukar dipastikan sempadannya. Matlamat untung tidak membenarkan perlakuan-perlakuan yang meningkatkan kos dan tidak menghasilkan nilai di kalangan entiti perniagaan. Walau bagaimanapun, syarikat milik kerajaan turut dikaitkan dengan keperluan untuk memberi tumpuan kepada motif-motif bukan-untung. Objektif artikel ini adalah untuk mengenal pasti perspektif baru tanggungjawab sosial bagi entiti bisnes yang dimiliki oleh pihak kerajaan (SBK) dalam kerangka masyarakat pluralistik yang berbilang peranan. Pemikiran ini bertujuan mengemukakan satu model alternatif yang dapat menjajarkan perlakuan SBK kepada matlamat untung tanpa menjejaskan keperluan menyumbang kepada matlamat sosiopolitik. Perbincangan konseptual ini mahu menonjolkan pemikiran baru tentang tanggungjawab sosial bagi entiti SBK secara berbeza daripada kebiasaan yang difahami dan diamalkan. Di samping itu, satu contoh operasi paradigm turut dibincangkan dengan menghurai program intrapreneur yang diamalkan Perbadanan Johor. Pembabitan korporat dalam tanggungjawab sosial korporat (CSR) tidak semestinya bermaksud berlaku dalam bentuk tidak produktif dan tidak komersil, sebaliknya konsep seperti `intrapreneur venture ́ telah membolehkan SBK terlibat dalam model CSR bernilai tinggi dengan tidak mengabaikan motif untung dan kecekapan entiti. Sehubungan itu, pembabitan CSR bernilai tinggi dapat memberi faedah secara menang-menang kepada syarikat dan masyarakat.

Kata kunci: Syarikat berkaitan kerajaan, keusahawanan, intrapreneur, tanggungjawab sosial korporat, prestasi syarikat kerajaan


Full Text:

PDF

References


Abdul Aziz b. Ibrahim. 1990. Perusahaan awam: Peranan, sumbangan dan aspirasi selepas 1990. Seminar Masa Depan Perusahaan Awam. Gemaputera, Kuala Lumpur: 17-18 Mac.

Ahmah Atory Hussain. 2001. Pengantar Pentadbiran Awam Paradigma Baru. Seri Kembangan: Utusan Publications & Distributors Sdn. Bhd.

Basir Ismail. 1987. Falsafah dan kemahiran pengurusan dalam mengendalikan sektor korporat awam. Seminar Kebangsaan Dasar Ekonomi Baru Selepas 1990 Peranan Sektor Awam. Kuala Lumpur 24-26 Mac: 55-60.

Friedman, M. 2002. The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. Dlm. Ethical Issues in Business: A Philosophical Approach, disunting oleh Donaldson, T., Werhane, P.H. & Cording, M. 33-38. Upper Saddle River New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Gale, B. 1981. Politics and Public Enterprises in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: Eastern Universities Press.

Gomez, E.T. 1990. Politik dalam Perniagaan: Pelaburan Korporat UMNO. Kuala Lumpur: Forum Enterprise.

Goosen, C.J., de Coning, T.J. & Smit, E.v.d.M. 2002. Corporate entrepreneurship and financial performance: the role of management. South Africa Journal of Business Management 33(4): 21-27.

Ip, P.K. 2003. Business ethics and a state-owned enterprise in China. Business Ethics: A European Review 12(1): 64-77.

Jaafar Abu Bakar. 1990. Pengukuran prestasi dan prinsip pengurusan untuk kecemerlangan perusahaan awam. Seminar Masa Depan Perusahaan Awam. Gemaputera, Kuala Lumpur: 17-18 Mac.

Johan Jaafar. 2006. Memperkasa GLC, perkukuh amanah. Berita Minggu, 9 Julai.

Kaldor, N. 1980. Public or private enterprise-the issues to be considered. Dlm. Public and Private Enterprise in a Mixed Economy 1-12. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

King, A. 1975. Overload: problems of governing in the 1970’s. Political Studies 23: 284-296.

Labra, A. 1980. Public enterprise in an underdeveloped and dependent economy. Dlm. Public and Private Enterprise in a Mixed Economy, disunting oleh Baumol, 36-43. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Lin, J.Y., Cai, F. & Li. Z. 1998. China’s economic reforms: some unfinished business. Competition, policy burdens, and state-owned enterprise reform. American Economic Review 88(2): 422-427.

Majumdar, S.K. 1998. Slack in the state-owned enterprise: an evaluation of the impact of soft-budget constraints. International Journal of Industrial Organization 16: 377-394.

McAdam, R. & Leonard, D. 2003. Corporate social responsibility in a total quality management context: opportunities for sustainable growth. Corporate Governance 3(4): 36-45.

Mohd Ali Hj. Hashim. 1987. Sektor korporat awam sebagai teras pencapaian matlamat dasar ekonomi baru Selepas 1990. Seminar Kebangsaan Dasar Ekonomi Baru Selepas 1990. Gemaputera. Kuala Lumpur 24-26 Mac: 129-140.

Moir, L. 2001. What do we mean by corporate social responsibility. Corporate Governance 1(2): 16-22.

Perbadanan Johor. 2004. Laporan Perbadanan Johor. Johor Bharu: Perbadanan Johor.

Riggs, F.W. 1972. The context of development administration. Dlm. Frontiers of Development Administration, disunting oleh Riggs, F.W. 73-108. United States: Duke University Press.Rudner, M. 1975. Nationalism, planning and economic modernization in Malaysia: the politics of beginning development. Sage Research Paper 3. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

Shaharuddin Haji Haron. 1990. Challenges facing public enterprises in the year ahead. Seminar Masa Depan Agensi Perusahaan Awam. Gemaputera, Kuala Lumpur 17-18 Mac: 1-16.

Sherwood, F.P. 1971. The problem of the public enterprise. Dlm. Frontiers of Development Administration, disunting oleh Riggs, F.W. 348-372. United States: Duke University Press.

Suraiya Ishak & Ahmad Raflis Che Omar. 2009. Penggerak tanggungjawab sosial korporat: teori pemaksimuman untung atau teori pemegang kepentingan. Manusia dan Masyarakat 18: 64-74.

Theodore, L. 1958. The dangers of social responsibility. Harvard Business Review Sept-Oct 1958: 41-50.

Thillainathan, R. 1976. Dlm. The Role of Public Enterprise in National Development in Southeast Asia: Problems and Prospects, disunting oleh Nguyen Truong 1-149. Singapore: Regional Institute of Higher Education and Development.

United Nations. 1973. Measures for Improving Performance of Public Enterprise in Developing Countries. New York: United Nation.

Walters, K.D. & Monsen, R.J. 1977. The nationalized firm: the politician free lunch. Columbia Journal of World Business 12(1).

Zahra, S.A & Covin, J.G. 1995. Contextual influences on the corporate entrepreneurship-performance relationship: a longitudinal analysis. Journal of Business Venturing 10: 43-58.

Zahra, S.A. 1995. Corporate entrepreneurship and financial performance: the case of management leveraged buyouts. Journal of Business Venturing 10: 225-247.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


ISSN: 0126-5008

eISSN: 0126-8694