ggests that the economic functions must be exercised with a sensitive awareness of changing social values and priorities and the outer circle outlines newly emerging and still vague responsibilities that corporations should assume to become more actively involved in improving the social environment in which they operate (Shalhoub, 1999, p. 13).
Theorists have identified four broad areas of strategic corporate responsibility that a MNC adopts, economic, legal, moral, and social. The main premise of the four areas is found in the basic nature of the corporation, which is a privately based, economic entity whose members are expected to make decisions that possesses a significant impact on a number of constituents (Brummer, 1991). Later MNCs realize that a corporation has not always all four responsibilities.
When it came to the adoption of SCSR, global MNCs failed to respond effectively to the significant issues of their countries (Logsdon & Wood, 2005). It would not be wrong to say that multinational companies (MNCs) while responding to concerns like downsizing and environmental degradation took initiatives to demonstrate their social responsibility (Edwards et al, Feb 2007). This way the MNCs actually adopted SCSR to reduce their workforce through either voluntary or involuntary means or a combination of both. In other words, MNCs in order to defend themselves tend to adopt SCSR but with some concerns of which the most significant is the corporate downsizing in privately and publicly owned firms in recent years.
The notion that MNCs have failed to adopt SCSR is depicted from some well-known examples. MNCs failure could be analysed by those protests and consumer boycotts that Nestle has experienced recently in selling its various products in Africa (Husted & Allen, 2006). Same is the case Nike has experienced as a result of child labour abuse in outsourcing in Asia. The global MNCs are unable to consider the cause of their failure which refers to those corporate