SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.36 issue66Characterization and determinants of organizational satisfaction in mexican workers of SMESCoordinating sustainability, globalization and urban intelligence with the Habitat III and 2030-SDG agendas: the challenge of sustainable urban development in cities author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Journal

Article

Indicators

Related links

  • On index processCited by Google
  • Have no similar articlesSimilars in SciELO
  • On index processSimilars in Google

Share


Cuadernos de Administración (Universidad del Valle)

Print version ISSN 0120-4645On-line version ISSN 2256-5078

cuad.adm. vol.36 no.66 Cali Jan./Apr. 2020

https://doi.org/10.25100/cdea.v36i66.8444 

Artículo de investigación científica y tecnológica

Corporate Social Responsibility Management in Project Management: A Theoretical Approach

Gestión de la Responsabilidad Social Empresarial en la gerencia de proyectos: aproximación teórica

Mario Enrique Uribe Macías1 
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1517-1403

1 Business Administrator of the Universidad del Tolima, Ibagué, Colombia, Doctor in Project Management, Universidad EAN, Bogotá, Colombia. Full Professor, Department of Administration and Marketing, School of Economics and Administrative Sciences Universidad del Tolima, Ibagué, Colombia. ORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1517-1403. e-mail: meuribem@ut.edu.co.


Abstract

The aim of this paper is to present a theoretical approach in order to propose a social responsibility management model for project management. This theoretical support is based on the topics of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Project Management (PM). In recent times, CSR has been widely applied in permanent organizations, but there is insufficient evidence to indicate that CSR has been systematically incorporated into projects, which are temporary organizations, specifically in PM practices. The method employed began by setting the topics that should be consulted. Then, the documentary research was carried out using renowned databases and books in the two topics, based on the definition of keywords in each of them. Thereafter, the results of the research were classified by topic, and, finally, the theoretical framework was drawn up. The result revolves around items such as social responsibility, CSR, and stakeholders, as regards CSR; and revolves around the items of project and PM, as concerns PM. There is also discussion conducted based on the relationship between CSR and PM, according to the background research. The conclusions relate to the different theoretical approaches found for the concepts of CSR, project, and PM, which frame the development of research.

Keywords: Corporate social responsibility; Social responsibility; Stakeholders; Project; Project management

Resumen

El objetivo del artículo es presentar una aproximación teórica con el fin de proponer posteriormente un modelo de gestión de la responsabilidad social para la gerencia de proyectos. Este sustento teórico se basa en los temas de Responsabilidad Social Empresarial (RSE) y Gerencia de Proyectos (GP). En los últimos tiempos se ha encontrado una amplia aplicación de la RSE en las organizaciones permanentes, pero no existe suficiente evidencia que indique que esta haya sido incorporada sistemáticamente en los proyectos, que son organizaciones temporales, específicamente en las prácticas de GP. El método desarrollado inició con la definición de los temas que deberían consultarse; a continuación, se realizó la pesquisa documental utilizando bases de datos y libros de reconocido prestigio en los dos temas, con base en la definición de palabras clave en cada uno de ellos; los resultados de la indagación fueron clasificados por temas; y, finalmente, se escribió el marco teórico. El resultado se presenta alrededor de los ítems responsabilidad social, RSE, y stakeholders, en el tema de RSE; y de los ítems proyecto y GP, en el tema de GP; y se realiza la discusión con base en la relación entre RSE y GP, de acuerdo con los antecedentes indagados. Las conclusiones se relacionan con los diferentes enfoques teóricos encontrados para los conceptos RSE, proyecto, y GP, que enmarcan el desarrollo de la investigación.

Palabras clave: Responsabilidad social empresarial; Responsabilidad social; Stakeholders, Proyecto; Gerencia de proyectos

1. Introduction

Corporate Social Responsibility -CSR- has become a differentiating element for organizations inasmuch as the strategic incorporation of its practices significantly contributes to satisfy a set of groups that have particular interests in it (known in the literature as stakeholders), while allowing organizations to achieve results in the economic, social and environmental fields.

To contribute to the development of these practices and to the global unification of CSR behaviors, there are standards and models, which organizations can accept voluntarily. Similarly, progress in literature, based on the experience and implementation of CSR in the real sector of the economy, has generated proposals related or not to such models or standards, which allow organizations guidelines for when they decide to implement it (Uribe, 2018).

On the other hand, projects have become a powerful tool for the advancement and progress of humankind, since they constitute the means for to execute resources at the public and private levels, which are geared towards achieving specific goals in economic and social areas.

Throughout the past fifty years, the leading role of projects has brought about the development of the Project Management -PM- discipline in order to ensure that the resources invested do achieve the expected results, and in the indicated times and with the expected level of quality. In this vein, PM has incorporated into its activities several techniques and tools from the administrative sciences and other sciences; and it also has standards and models, as well as conceptual developments in the same way as what was previously proposed for CSR.

Well, sufficient evidence has not been found so as to allow interpreting that CSR has been systematically incorporated into project management, which is why it is interesting to propose a CSR management model for PM, so that it will be incorporated into the strategy, structure, processes and practice of the latter. To do so on a scientific basis, it is necessary to turn to existing literature in order to build the theoretical framework that allows walking, as some have put it, “on the shoulders of giants” and rigorously shield the products of the study (Uribe, 2016).

In this sense, it is worth asking: what are the theoretical foundations for the proposal of a CSR management model for PM? Thus, this paper aims to present a theoretical approach, specifically on CSR and PM topics, that contributes to the proposal of a management model, such as the one mentioned above. Consequently, this work offers several contributions: 1. Systematization of CSR concepts, elements, approaches and standards. 2. Orderly presentation of concepts, techniques and standards for projects and PM. 3. Information for researchers, academic communities, universities, and the community at large interested in these topics.

Below, the reader will find the method used to develop the paper, the results in terms of the theoretical approach undertaken with regards to the topics of CSR and PM, the relationship found in the literature between CSR and PM and with respect to similar studies in the manner of a discussion; and, finally, the conclusions and recommendations attendant thereon.

2. Method

The development of the theoretical research perspective comprises two stages, according to Hernández, Fernández, and Baptista (2014) , the analytical review of the literature and the construction of the theoretical framework. Consequently, the first stage above-mentioned was used for this paper, which “involves detecting, consulting and obtaining bibliography and other materials that are useful for the purposes of the study” (Hernández et al., 2014, p. 61). In its development, the first step was to set the theoretical support topics to be developed, while the second step was to consult renowned databases and books from the definition of the keywords, and the third step was the acceptance and classification of the document (literature analytical review stage); finally, the writing of the theoretical framework (theoretical framework construction stage).

To advance the first step and in accordance with what Hernández et al. (2014) stated “so that they useful for the purposes of the study” (p. 61), it was necessary to address three constituent elements of the research proposal (aimed at formulating a management model): its title, its research question and its general objective. The definitions set out in Table 1 are provided for this regard.

Table 1 Basis elements to define topics in the theoretical framework 

Title Research question General objective
Corporate social responsibility management model for project management. What is the corporate social responsibility management model that should be incorporated into project management? Designing a corporate social responsibility management model for project management.

Source: Author own elaboration.

As highlighted in the table above, the key components of the theoretical framework are corporate social responsibility and project management. However, it was necessary to establish subdivisions within these two themes in order to provide the reader greater clarity and better gear the development of research. This division was adjusted as the literature review progressed. In this sense, the topic of CSR contemplated the analysis of social responsibility, CSR, and stakeholders, while the topic of GP addressed the concepts of project and PM.

To undertake the second step, we mainly consulted databases such as Ebsco, e-books, e-book, ProQuest, ScienceDirect, Jstor, Springer, Emerald, Doaj, latindex, among others. Furthermore, it was deemed appropriate to cite some topics in books that have resulted from research and prestigious textbooks across the different disciplines contained in the theoretical framework. Finally, it was necessary to understand the definition of some specific concepts, for which purpose a web version of the dictionary of the Real Academia Española (Spanish Royal Academy) was used. Below is an overview of the sources reviewed (Table 2).

Table 2 Type of sources consulted 

Type Amount
Scientific papers 69
Books resulting from research 28
Web documents 37
Doctoral theses 07
Textbooks 36

Source: Author own elaboration.

The queries, which were conducted in English and Spanish, included keywords such as the following, as set out in Table 3.

Table 3 Keywords by topic for the queries 

Corporate social responsibility Project management
Responsabilidad social Project
Responsabilidad social corporativa Dirección de proyectos
Responsabilidad social empresarial RSE en Colombia Project management Gestión de proyectos
Sostenibilidad Modelos GP
Stakeholder Metodologías GP
Estándares de RSE Sistemas de gestión GP
Corporate social responsibility Project
Social responsibility Project management
Sustainability PM models
CSR standards PM methodologies
PM management systems
Note: To have a broad overview of the topics related to the research, the keywords in Spanish and English were consulted, as evidenced in this table.

Source: Author own elaboration.

Regarding the third step and with respect to each document consulted, their abstracts were read at first in order to identify their relevance towards the theoretical framework. In some cases, the abstract was sufficed to pick it or discard it, while other cases required a quick reading to make this decision. Once picked, the document was read in depth and classified into the specific topic. At the same time, the theoretical framework was written and the corresponding citations were made, some textually and others contextually; and the bibliographic reference was written forthwith thereafter, following the APA1 standard. A similar procedure was performed on the books that have resulted from research and textbooks, but instead of using the abstract as a first step, the table of contents was read to decide whether to accept or reject, and the move on to the classification, utilization and referencing phases.

A detailed reading was carried out to make the appropriate adjustments and corrections once each topic in the theoretical framework had been written. After this self-review, and according to the literature used, we proceeded to establish the theory or concept that would be used as the final roadmap to prepare the research products.

3. Results

Some functions of the theoretical framework, within the approach made by Hernández et al. (2014) constitute reasons to design the one appertaining to this particular work. In the first instance, this theoretical framework guides the study, insofar as the background consulted establishes the way in which the different topics have been dealt with at both the theoretical and practical levels. Likewise, it broadens the scope of the study because it has allowed the researcher to focus the research problem in order to avoid deviations. In addition, it attests to the need to carry out the study since it highlights an interesting gap with which the research will deal and on which the specific products will be made.

CSR and PM topics will be developed henceforth. In the first case, it is addressed from a historical perspective, disaggregated in its definition, approaches, responsibilities, levels, sustainability and sustainable development, shared value, and stakeholders. In the second case, the topic is developed through the items projects and project management. As such, it is approached in an inductive way, for which the first item is analyzed from the perspective of formulation, at first, and from management at the end.

3.1. Corporate social responsibility

Traditionally, companies sought to generate profitability for their shareholders in order to pay back the investment they made in it. Subsequently and with the development of the markets, they also included the satisfaction of their needs and other additional requirements expressed by their customers into their priorities, on the understanding that this would ultimately translate into profitability for their shareholders.

However, over time different groups, directly or indirectly related to companies (later known as stakeholders), began to express in different ways their interest in the actions that companies carry out, in the consequences that their activities entail for them, and therefore required those organizations to meet their interests. Later on, in the process of customer sophistication, customers incorporated the answers that companies were able to provide to meet the needs of all interested parties into their purchasing decisions.

Thusly, the CSR concept and practices emerged as a way for the company to be able to provide satisfaction to all parties interested in it, i.e., customers, shareholders, collaborators, suppliers, families, State, community, environment, among others.

The Real Academia Española (Spanish Royal Academy) (2013) defines the term responsibility as the “existing capacity in every active subject of law to recognize and accept the consequences of a freely performed act”; while Araque, Rubio and Uribe (2015) establish that the social responsibility is the commitment “to the social and natural environment, the response to the impact that all the actions that an individual, an organization or a country have on them” (p. 43).

Regarding CSR, its concept has evolved over time and gained importance day by day in different areas (Atehortúa, 2008), since “many authors have tried to describe what it means to be a socially responsible company, leading to that it is the responsibility of companies for the social and environmental impacts they cause in their activity” (Rosero, 2015, p. 255).

Bower (1995) argues that CSR initially had a purely economic approach, recalling that Friedman claimed that the company’s sole social responsibility was to generate profits for its shareholders. Subsequently, Carroll (1979) complements the economic approach by incorporating into the concept society’s expectations in the legal, ethical and discretionary fields. Freeman (1984) also argues that the company has commitments, in addition to its shareholders, to all individuals who affect or are affected by corporate actions.

The Asociación Española de Contabilidad y Administración de Empresas (Spanish Association of Accounting and Business Administration - AECA per its acronym in Spanish) (2004) proposes that CSR is the voluntary commitment of the company to the development of society and the preservation of the environment from its social conception and responsible behavior towards individuals, and the groups with which it interacts. In this sense, Carrol (1991) argues that entrepreneurs are subject to four types of responsibilities, as shown in Table 4.

Table 4 Types of responsibilities of entrepreneurs 

Type of responsibilities Synthesis
Philanthropic Being a good corporate citizen, contributing resources to the community, improving the quality of life.
Ethical Being ethical: obligation to do what is right, just and equitable. To avoid causing damage.
Legal Obeying the law: this how society understands good and evil. Play by the rules of the game.
Economical Being profitable: the basis on which all the others rest.

Source: Author own elaboration, based onCarroll (1991).

For his part, Cadbury (2006) defines three levels of CSR as follows:

Primary level: where the company undertakes to fulfil its basic responsibilities such as repaying its employees, paying its suppliers and repaying the loans received, remunerating its shareholders, etc. Non-compliance of these responsibilities is relatively easy to determine and results in sanctions provided for in the law.

At the secondary level: companies should be concerned about the impacts of their activities on their environment and prevent environmental damage. Not only must the minimum set be met, for something beyond must be achieved.

Finally, at the tertiary level, the company must wonder how it can positively influence the society in which it operates (p. 12).

With regard to these levels, Uribe (2018) believes that “the primary level proposed by Cadbury is not social responsibility wholly and in itself, since it essentially addresses the fulfillment of legal obligations such as remuneration to employees, paying suppliers and financial institutions, among others” (p. 71).

From another perspective, Lozano and Díaz (2010) assure that CSR strengthens the sustainability of the company in the medium and long term, provided that it achieves its economic, environmental and social sustainability, as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Sustainability, strengthening durability 

In line with this approach, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) (2010) states that “the objective of social responsibility is to contribute to sustainable development” (p. vii), a stand shared by Guerrero and Sandoval (2011) when they argue that CSR is an ethical management model that contributes to sustainable development and value creation in the business system.

Furthermore, Porter and Kramer (2011) claim that companies have lost social legitimacy, so they must modify their conception of value creation and the social value that arises when the company focuses on the needs and challenges of society add to their economic value. Based on the argument posited by Díaz and Castaño (2013) : “the competitiveness of a company and the health of the communities where it operates are strongly intertwined (p. 93).

Thus, this idea of shared value can be understood in the light of the words of Díaz (2013) :

The idea of shared value is focused on the connection between economic and social progress, and has the potential to drive a new way of understanding global growth where each company must evaluate its decisions and opportunities from the logic of value creation, which will result in a new way of understanding global growth and shall translate into innovation and growth clusters for companies, as well as greater benefits for society (p. 159)

To pinpoint the concept of CSR, it would be relevant to remember that ISO (2010) defines it as “the responsibility of an organization towards the impacts that its decisions and activities have on society and the environment, through an ethical and transparent behavior” (p. 4); while Acuña, Araque, Rosero, Rubio and Uribe (2014) propose that CSR is the set of activities that a company undertakes to respond to its stakeholders and, in turn, present results in economic, social and environmental matters.

Thus, the concept of stakeholders emerges as “those groups without whose support an organization would cease to exist” (Friedman and Miles, 2006, p. 4), who hold specific interests in the organization and exercise their power to satisfy them (Johnson, Scholes, and Whittington, 2014). This is, according to Freeman (1984) , “an individual or group that may affect or be affected by the achievement of the objectives of a firm” (p. 24) that together “are vital to the survival and success of the organization” (Freeman, 2004, p. 82). For this reason, the company should focus its best efforts on satisfying them because “all companies have stakeholders” (Kerzner, 2013a, p. 1108).

The Instituto de Estudios Superiores de la Empresa (Business Higher Studies Institute - IESE per its acronym in Spanish) (2002) classifies stakeholders as consubstantial, without whom the existence of the organization is impossible; as contractual, meaning those with whom the company has entered any kind of formal contract; and contextual, whose role helps the organization gain credibility and the acceptance for its activities.

Kerzner (2001) classifies them into three categories: financial (shareholders, financial institutions or capital suppliers, and creditors), product/market (primary customers, primary suppliers, competitors, trade unions, government agencies, and local government committees), and organizational (official executives, board of directors, employees in general, and administrators).

In addition, Navarro (2008) classifies them into internal and external; the former directly linked to the organization and the latter not linked to it. On the other hand, Díaz (2013) classifies them into primary: those that are directly related to the course of business, and secondary: these are not directly related to the company, but they affect and see themselves affected.

3.2. Project management

In the project formulation and evaluation approach, several authors have defined the concept of project. Sapag, Sapag, and Sapag (2014) argue that “a project is, no more nor less, the search for an intelligent solution to the outlining of a problem aimed at solving, among many, a human need” (p. 1), and they coincide with Baca (2013) because formulating and evaluating uses a “technique that seeks to collect, create and analyze, in a systematic way, a set of economic background that allows to judge qualitatively and quantitatively the advantages and disadvantages of allocating resources to a given initiative” (Sapag et al., 2014, p. 1).

For the Instituto Latinoamericano de Planificación Económica y Social (Latin American Institute of Economic and Social Planning - ILPES per its acronym in Spanish) (1991), a project is:

a document or monograph that raises and analyses the problems involved in mobilizing factors to achieve specific objectives according to a given production function, justifying the use of these factors against other potential use options (pp. 15-16).

Appropriate project preparation and evaluation will be the fundamental basis for subsequent implementation: “its technique, correctly applied, and the fair arrangement of the investments, inputs and activities designed become a document that reflects a reality and guides the manager of the project to put it in a position to operate” (Uribe, 2018, p. 96).

Mokate (2004) , proposes the project cycle concept around three stages that connect the preparation and evaluation approach with that of project management. These stages are presented in Figure 2.

Figure 2 The project cycle, perspective of the preparation  

From the management approach, the Project Management Institute (PMI) (2013) argues that a project is “a temporary effort undertaken to create a single product, service or result” (p. 3), which is complemented by the position of Gido and Clements (2012) : it is “an effort to achieve a specific goal through a set of interrelated tasks and efficient use of resources” (p. 4), which bears very particular characteristics derived from the definition of Gray and Larson (2009) : it is “a complex, non-routine effort, limited by time, budget, resources and performance specifications and designed to meet customer needs” (p. 5).

In addition to the PMI, other international PM standards put forth their opinion in relation to the term. For example, the Great Britain Office of Government Commerce (OGC) (2005), through the PRINCE2 standard, states that a project is a temporary organization created for the purpose of delivering products according to an given business scenario; while the International Project Management Association (IPMA) (2015), through the Competence Baseline ICB standard, asserts that a project “is a unique, temporary, multidisciplinary and organized effort to deliver agreed deliverables within predefined requirements and restrictions” (p. 36); and finally, the Instituto Colombiano de Normas Técnicas y Certificación (Colombian Institute of Technical Standards and Certification - ICONTEC per its acronym in Spanish) (2014) through the ISO 21500 standard proposes projects as a unique set of processes made up of coordinated and controlled activities, with start and end dates, which are developed to achieve an objective.

Given the importance of projects to further innovation processes in organizations, their survival and the generation of value, their development needs to be carried out systematically, a matter that project management addresses, for it is a discipline that “recognizes in the scope, cost and time of a project three great opportunities to gain an advantage for project success” (Torres and Torres, 2014, p. 9).

Scope refers to deliverables that are required by the client or the project owner, which largely account for their satisfaction, and their fulfillment “entails meeting the required cost and time” (Torres and Torres, 2014, p. 9); these correspond to those budget and duration commitments that have been agreed with the client or the project owner.

To meet this challenge is necessary a project manager that “performs the same tasks as other managers” (Gray and Larson, 2009, p. 8): planning, scheduling, coordinating, organizing and controlling, but within the special features derived from the peculiarities of projects such as non-repetitive tasks, temporary in nature, and the teams (usually multidisciplinary) that are created to meet the project requirements.

Arboleda (2013) , in the same sense as Gray and Larson, associates project management with the different stages of the administrative process, so he states that “it is the application of techniques, tools and procedures in planning, directing, coordinating and controlling pre-established goals with scope, cost, time and quality for the project in question” (p. 13), in which he agrees with Gido and Clements (2012) who argue that “project management is the planning, organizing, coordinating, leading and controlling of resources to achieve the objectives of the project” (p. 14).

It is important to take into account the essence of project management as proposed by Morris (2013) by stating that it is “socially built, projects and project management are invented, not found. It is us, all of us, who, by reflecting on the practice, are inventing the discipline” (p. 15).

In terms of the PMI (2013), “project management is the application of knowledge, skills, tools and techniques to project activities to meet project requirements” (p. 5), which is consistent with the ISO 21500 guideline (ICONTEC, 2014) as it states that project management is the application of methods, tools, techniques and competences to a project, and includes applying several phases of the project lifecycle that are carried out through processes.

Gido and Clements (2012) incorporate the concept of process into project management by indicating that it has two main stages: “first to establish a plan and then carrying it out to achieve the project’s objective” (p. 15), which has been integrated into the project lifecycle from the project management perspective (Figure 3).

Figure 3 The project cycle, a managerial perspective  

From the following figure can be established the existence of different activities and effort levels:

The specifications and objectives are set in the first stage, and the tasks to be performed and those responsible thereof are established; while the second stage increases efforts and develops the plans related to the different variables of the process; in the third stage the effort reaches its maximum level, both mentally and physically as the product is prepared, measurements and adjustments are made; and in the fourth stage, effort levels decrease for the product of the project is delivered to the client and the resources of the project deployed (Uribe, 2018).

In this regard, it should be recalled that the lifecycle is “a collection of generally sequential project phases whose names and numbers are determined by the control needs of the organization involved in the project” (Holbrook, 2005, p. 23); and therefore, it can be said that incorporating methodologies, good practices or management models into project management should be done within the phases set out in the project lifecycle.

On the other hand, project management requires an executive and organizational model designed and articulated based on the following considerations:

Due to the magnitude of the investments, the multiple and diverse interests it moves, the number of contractors and subcontractors involved in it, which account for frequent and confusing conflicts; the expectations created to potential users or consumers and the need to satisfy owners (Miranda, 2012, p. 15).

As such, it is necessary to incorporate therein issues such as roles and responsibilities, organizational structures, delegate decision-making, and corporate profitability (Kerzner, 2013a), as well as legal matters, personal skills, software, and specific technical knowledge.

Because of the above, and because of the specificities of projects, human resources management in connection to projects is especially important as the research has found that those who choose to pursue a career in this discipline possess high self-efficacy levels to effectively cope with the uncertainty inherent to projects and project management (Lloyd-Walker, French, and Crawford, 2016), and such uncertainty is often the product of the fact that those working in project teams, especially in matrix structures, have a functional area they can return to once the project is finished (Kerzner, 2013b). This creates a challenge for organizations, i.e., to provide an appropriate environment to encourage people to accept the uncertainty of the project.

It should be borne in mind that organizations are increasingly incorporating project management into their managerial activities as they regard it as a necessity, not an option, tied to their ability to survive (Kerzner, 2013a). Such survival is related to the following forces: efficiency and effectiveness, new product development, executive understanding, competitiveness, consumer expectations, and capital projects (Kerzner, 1998).

4. As a discussion: PM and CSR

As stated in the introduction, there are few studies found in relation to CSR in PM. Some exploratory studies have been developed in construction engineering, focusing especially on contractor CSR in the construction phase of engineering projects lifecycle (Zeng, Ma, Lin, Zeng, and Tam, 2015). In this regard, Zeng, Tam, Deng, and Tam (2003) state that corporate policy, market circumstances and relationships with the subcontractor influence the contractor’s environmental performance and strategic management. Qi, Shen, Zeng, and Ochoa (2010) and Tam, Tam, and Tsui (2004) argue that government regulations are also related to the environmental performance of engineering, as well as social pressure, according to Gluch (2009) .

As noted in these cases, the concept of CSR is simplified as it focuses only on environmental aspects, an important topic in CSR, but not the only one. Zeng et al (2015) corroborate the above by stating:

Previous studies on sustainability are relatively dispersed since most of them just focus on one aspect of social responsibility, such as economic impacts and environmental risks, or only some specific infrastructure projects are analyzed and their conclusions are not universally applicable. In other words, existing studies on the social responsibility of large infrastructures are fragmented and not yet systematic (p. 539).

Consequently, CSR activities need to be managed through projects, as stated by Salazar, Husted, and Biehl (2012) , especially carried out throughout their lifecycle. Zeng et al. (2015), then, put forth a proposal to incorporate social responsibility into large infrastructure projects (MIP-SR), based on the following statement:

Social responsibility in major infrastructure projects requires the policies and practices of the stakeholders involved throughout the entire project lifecycle to reflect the responsibilities for the well-being of society in general (Zeng et al., 2015, p. 540).

The key topics of this proposal are immigrant settlement, pollution control, ecological protection, occupational health and safety, anti-corruption, disaster prevention and mitigation, and poverty eradication (Zeng et al., 2015). As a framework for systematic implementation, based on their research methodology, the authors propose a dimension of the lifecycle of the project, a stakeholders dimension, a social responsibility dimension (which includes responsibility in economic, legal, ethical and social matters); that is, and a three-dimensional model for MIP-SR. This requires a coupling based on instrumental, relational and moral motives that interact with individuals, organizations and at the national level (Aguilera, Rupp, Williams, and Ganapathi, 2007).

Based on another point of view, Schieg (2009) analyses CSR incorporation into project companies and states that different systems operating in the project environment influence CSR (Figure 4), because they can generate changes in the behavior of groups working in the project. The proper functioning of these systems affects three essential factors that attest to the need for ethical and environmental actions in projects: “Reputation gain for the project; reduction of financial risks related to legal disputes; creation of a competitive advantage by aligning early to regulations pending implementation” (Schieg, 2009, p. 318).

Figure 4 Systems in the environment of project organization 

Bassem, Jastram, and Meyer (2005) conclude that CSR should generally lead to assets such as integrity, credibility, or reputation for the company, a concept on which Schieg (2009) argues that in the case of project organizations these are reflected in gaining reputation, risk mitigation, cost savings, confidence building, employee motivation, and growing social competence.

It is important to note that the literature review, whose main results have been put forth in this chapter, weakly mentions experiences of applying CSR to PM and no evidence of proposals aimed at proposing a CSR management model for PM was found.

5. Conclusions and recommendations

Over time, the concept of CSR has transformed and forced companies to adjust and make their managerial activities more flexible. These changes range from the approach to generating profits for shareholders, in Friedman’s proposal, to that of shared value, promoted by Porter and Kramer, which advises to understand that business competitiveness is tied to the health of communities.

In this sense, several authors have proposed approaches (economic, legal, ethical, discretionary), responsibilities (philanthropic, ethical, legal, economic), levels (primary, secondary, tertiary) that contribute to understanding how companies should assume and implement CRS.

Thence, CSR is the set of activities or actions that a company carries out to respond to its stakeholders and, in turn, to present results not only in the economic or financial field, but also in social and environmental matters. Concept presented in Figure 5 below.

Figure 5 CSR Concept  

On the other hand, the importance of the stakeholder arises, who are placed at the center of CSR actions and can be understood as a group that affects or is affected by the actions of the organization, and that becomes vital for its existence. These are classified in various ways, among which stands out IESE (consubstantial, contractual, contextual), Kerzner (financial, product/market, organizational), Navarro (internal, external), and Díaz (primary, secondary).

Regarding the project concept, the literature offers two main approaches: preparation (which includes prior evaluation) and management. In this way, these two perspectives propose the project cycle as a set of sequential phases: Mokate proposes the preparation, management and ex post stages, while Gray and Larson posit the stages of definition, planning, execution and delivery.

For research purposes, projects are assumed as a complex effort by a temporary organization, which is developed to achieve a previously established objective through an interrelated activities and the efficient use of resources aggregate, framed within a set of constraints and interests to create a unique product, service or result that meets the required quality standards. This concept can be seen graphically in Figure 6.

Figure 6 Project concept 

However, the PM requires an organizational and executive model designed and articulated to include roles, organizational structures, delegation, decision-making, corporate profitability, legal aspects, personal skills, software, and specific technical knowledge, among others.

Thus, PM is the application of knowledge, skills, techniques, tools and procedures to project activities, and the planning, organizing, coordinating, leading and controlling of project resources to achieve objectives and meet requirements, generally in terms of scope, cost and time. Figure 7 outlines this idea.

Figure 7 Project management concept 

According to the literature review, regarding the relationship between CSR and PM, it is possible to assert that, despite some experiences in the application of CSR to PM, proposals aimed at designing and generating a specific CSR management model for PM are still lacking.

It would be advisable to incorporate into this frame of reference the analysis of international CSR standards, such as the Global Compact, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the ISO 26000 Guidelines, the Global Reporting Iniatiative -GRI- among others.

Likewise, it is advisable to analyze international PM standards such as Project Management Body of Knowledge PMBOK, Project In Controlled Environment PRINCE2, Competence Baseline ICB, ISO 21500 Standard, among others.

8. References

Acuña, L., Araque, J., Rosero, O., Rubio, G., & Uribe, M. (2014). Responsabilidad social empresarial: una mirada desde la teoría y la praxis empresarial. Ibagué, Colombia: Universidad del Tolima. [ Links ]

Aguilera, R., Rupp, D., Williams, C., & Ganapathi, J. (2007). Putting the S back in CSR: a multi-level theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 836-863. https://doi.org/10.2307/20159338Links ]

Araque, J., Rubio, G., & Uribe, M. (2015). Responsabilidad social universitaria: teoría y aplicación. Caso de análisis: Universidad del Tolima. Ibagué, Colombia: Universidad del Tolima. [ Links ]

Arboleda, G. (2013). Proyectos: identificación, formulación, evaluación y gerencia (2ª ed.). Bogotá, Colombia: Alfaomega. [ Links ]

Asociación Española de Contabilidad y Administración de Empresas (AECA). (2004). Marco conceptual de la responsabilidad social corporativa. Madrid, España: AECA. [ Links ]

Atehortúa, F. (2008). Responsabilidad social empresarial: Entre la ética discursiva y la racionalidad técnica. Revista EAN, (62), 125-139. Recuperado de https://journal.universidadean.edu.co/index.php/Revista/article/view/433/428Links ]

Baca, G. (2013). Evaluación de proyectos (7ª ed.). Ciudad de México, México: McGraw-Hill. [ Links ]

Bassem, A., Jastram, S., & Meyer, K. (2005). Corporate social responsibility. Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts- und Unternehmensethik (zfwu), 6(2), 231-236. Retrieved from https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-358871Links ]

Bower, J. (1995). Oficio y arte de la gerencia (Vol. II). Bogotá, Colombia: Norma. [ Links ]

Cadbury, A. (2006). Corporate social responsibility. Twenty-First Century Society: Journal of the Academic of Social Sciences, 1(1), 5-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450140600679883Links ]

Carroll, A. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497-505. doi: 10.2307/257850 [ Links ]

Carroll, A. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39-48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0007-6813(91)90005-G Links ]

Díaz, N. (2013). De la sostenibilidad al valor compartido: gerencia estratégica de los grupos de interés. Daena: International Journal of Good Conscience, 8(1), 159-176. Recuperado de http://spentamexico.org/v8-n1/A13.8(1)159-176.pdfLinks ]

Díaz, N., y Castaño, C. (2013). El valor compartido como nueva estrategia de desarrollo empresarial. Daena: International Journal of Good Conscience, 8(2), 82-100. Recuperado de https://bibliotecadigital.ccb.org.co/handle/11520/21028Links ]

Freeman, E. (1984). Strategic management: a stakeholder approach. Boston, USA: Pitman. [ Links ]

Freeman, R. (2004). Ethical leadership and creating value for stakeholders. In R. Peterson, & O. Farrel (Eds.), Business ethics (pp. 82-97). New York and London, USA: M.E. Sharpe, Armonk. [ Links ]

Friedman, A., & Miles, S. (2006). Stakeholders. New York, USA: Oxford. [ Links ]

Gido, J., & Clements, J. (2012). Administración exitosa de proyectos (5ª ed.). Ciudad de México, México: Cengage Learning. [ Links ]

Gluch, P. (2009). Unfolding roles and identities of professionals in construction projects: exploring the informality of practices. Construction Management and Economics, 27 (19), 959-968. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/01446190903179728.Links ]

Gray, C., & Larson, E. (2009). Administración de proyectos. (4ª ed.). Ciudad de México, México: McGraw-Hill. [ Links ]

Great Britain Office of Government Commerce (OGC). (2005). Managing successful projects with Prince 2. London, UK: OGC. [ Links ]

Guerrero, D., y Sandoval, J. (2011). La responsabilidad social como generadora de valor empresarial: hacia la construcción de un modelo de balance social para las mipymes. Revista UDCA, 14(2), 177-186. Recuperado de http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?pid=S0123-42262011000200019&script=sci_abstract&tlng=esLinks ]

Hernández, R., Fernández, C., y Baptista, M. (2014). Metodología de la investigación (6a ed.). Ciudad de México, México: McGraw-Hill. [ Links ]

Holbrook, J. (2005). Project management manual - Glossary. Retrieved from https://billionbooksbaby.org/view.php?res=http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/3DDE6D10-C5FB-4D45-8386-4180CE905BD0/0/WSDOTPMGlossary.pdf&keyword=Project+Management+Manual. [ Links ]

Instituto Colombiano de Normas Técnicas y Certificación (ICONTEC). (2014). Guía Técnica Colombiana ISO 21500. Directrices para la dirección y gestión de proyectos. Bogotá, Colombia: ICONTEC. [ Links ]

Instituto de Estudios Superiores de la Empresa (IESE). (2002). Código de gobierno para la empresa sostenible. Barcelona, España: Universidad de Navarra. [ Links ]

Instituto Latinoamericano de Planificación Económica y Social (ILPES). (1991). Guía para la presentación de proyectos. Ciudad de México, México: Siglo XXI Editores. [ Links ]

International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2010). Norma Internacional ISO 26000. Ginebra, Suiza: ISO. [ Links ]

International Project Management Association (IPMA). (2015). Individual competence baseline for project, programme & portfolio management. Zurich, Switzerland: IPMA. [ Links ]

Johnson, G., Scholes, K., & Whittington, R. (2014). Dirección estratégica (7ª ed.). Madrid, España: Prentice Hall. [ Links ]

Kerzner, H. (1998). In search of excellence in project management. New York, USA: John Wiley & Sons. [ Links ]

Kerzner, H. (2001). Strategic planning for project management using a project manage maturity model. New York, USA: John Wiley & Sons. [ Links ]

Kerzner, H. (2013a). Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling (11th edi.). New York, USA: John Wiley & Sons. [ Links ]

Kerzner, H. (2013b). Eleven common mistakes made by new or inexperienced project managers. PM World Journal, 2(11), 1-5. Retrieved from http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/91904590/eleven-common-mistakes-made-by-new-inexperienced-project-managersLinks ]

Lozano, L., & Díaz, N. (2010). Ética y responsabilidad social. En C. Martínez (Ed.), Aproximaciones a la gerencia humanista (pp. 69-92). Bogotá, Colombia: Universidad EAN. [ Links ]

Lloyd-Walker, B., French, E., & Crawford, L. (2016). Rethinking researching project management. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 9(4), 903-930. Retrieved from https://www.emerald.com/insight/publication/issn/1753-8378/vol/9/iss/4Links ]

Miranda, J. (2012). El desafío de la gerencia de proyectos (3ª ed.). Bogotá, Colombia: MM Editores. [ Links ]

Mokate, K. (2004). Evaluación financiera de proyectos de inversión (2ª ed.). Bogotá, Colombia: Uniandes y Alfaomega. [ Links ]

Morris, P. (2013). Reconstructing project management reprised: a knowledge perspective. Project Management Journal, 44(5), 6-23. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmj.21369Links ]

Navarro, F. (2008). Responsabilidad social corporativa: Teoría y práctica. Madrid, España: ESIC. [ Links ]

Porter, M., & Kramer, M. (2011). The creation of shared value. Harvard Business Review, 89(1), 62-77. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2011/01/the-big-idea-creating-shared-valueLinks ]

Project Management Institute (PMI). (2013). Guía de los fundamentos para la dirección de proyectos (Guía del PMBOK) (5ª ed.). Pensilvania, Estados Unidos: PMI. [ Links ]

Qi, G., Shen, L., Zeng, S., & Ochoa, J. (2010). The drivers for contractors´ green innovation: an industry perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(14), 1358-1365. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2010.01.017. [ Links ]

Real Academia Española(2013). Diccionario de la lengua española (Vigésima segunda edición). Recuperado de http://lema.rae.es/drae/?val=responsabilidad. [ Links ]

Rosero, O. (2015). Relación entre desempeño financiero y responsabilidad social empresarial: un análisis en la banca europea (Tesis doctoral). Universidad de Valladolid, Valladolid, España. [ Links ]

Sapag, N., Sapag, R., & Sapag, J. (2014). Preparación y evaluación de proyectos (6ª ed.). Ciudad de México, México: McGraw-Hill. [ Links ]

Salazar, J., Husted, B., & Biehl, M. (2012). Thoughts on the evaluation of corporate social performance through projects. Journal of Business Ethics, 105(2), 175-186. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/41413253?seq=1Links ]

Schieg, M. (2009). The model of corporate social responsibility in project management. Business, theory and practice, 10(4), 315-321. doi: https://doi.org/10.3846/1648-0627.2009.10.315-321 Links ]

Tam, C., Tam, V., & Tsui, W. (2004). Green construction assessment for environment in the construction industry of Hong Kong. International Journal of Project Management, 22(7), 563-571. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2004.03.001Links ]

Torres, Z., & Torres, H. (2014). Administración de proyectos. Ciudad de México, México: Grupo Editorial Patria. [ Links ]

Uribe, M. (2016). Modelo de gestión de la responsabilidad social empresarial en la gerencia de proyectos, enfocado al sector construcción (Anteproyecto de tesis). Bogotá, Colombia: Universidad EAN. Recuperado de https://repository.ean.edu.co/bitstream/handle/10882/9063/UribeMario2018_%201D39338ACAB0905A26FFD0AA0?sequence=2Links ]

Uribe, M. (2018). Modelo de gestión de la responsabilidad social empresarial en el ámbito de los proyectos, enfocado al sector construcción (Tesis doctoral). Universidad EAN, Bogotá, Colombia. Recuperado de https://repository.ean.edu.co/handle/10882/9063Links ]

Zeng, S., Tam, C., Deng, Z., & Tam, V. (2003). ISO 14000 and the construction industry: survey in China. Journal of Managing Engineering, 19(3), 107-115. Retrieved from https://ascelibrary.org/doi/10.1061/%28ASCE%290742-597X%282003%2919%3A3%28107%29Links ]

Zeng, S., Ma, H., Lin, H., Zeng, R., & Tam, V. (2015). Social responsibility of major infrastructure projects in China. International Journal of Project Management, 33(3), 537-548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2014.07.007Links ]

7. Source of Financing The paper is a partial result of the author’s doctoral dissertation, whose study was funded by the Universidad del Tolima.

1A set of standards or rules that help when coding various components of scientific writing in order to facilitate the understanding of the reading, created by the American Psychological Association. Currently, the sixth version of the standard is used (American Psychological Association (APA), 2015).

Received: August 25, 2019; Revised: December 02, 2019; Accepted: March 04, 2020

6. Conflict of interest

The author declares there are no conflicts of interest

Creative Commons License This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License