Analyzing CSR Activities of Angel Sea Food Holding Ltd

This report provides a comprehensive analysis of Angel Sea Food Holding Ltd's corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities, examining the company's response to stakeholder expectations and its ethical performance. It considers internal and external factors affecting the company's CSR initiatives, utilizing Carroll's Pyramid and Wartick and Cochrane's Typology to evaluate its corporate responsibility and ethical conduct. The report identifies gaps between stakeholder expectations and the company's actual performance, highlighting areas where improvements are needed. Findings from the company's sustainability report are analyzed, comparing its targets and achievements against stakeholder expectations. Recommendations are made to enhance the company's CSR practices, focusing on human rights, ethical compliance, and long-term sustainability. The report concludes that a well-planned and implemented CSR program is crucial for Angel Sea Food Holding Ltd's long-term success and sustainability.

Angel Sea Food Holding Ltd
Corporate Social Responsibilities
ANGEL SEA FOOD HOLDING LTD CSR
Name of Author
University Name

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
With the ramified economic changes, each and every corporation needs to take proper
corporate social responsibilities program to strengthen the proper work function. In this
report, CSR activities of the Angel Sea Food Holding Ltd have been taken into consideration.
There are several internal and external factors which have been affecting the CSR activities
of the Angle Sea Food Holding Ltd. This is the way or source to serve for the society by the
companies or the process to give back the favour of the society. Whatever the company takes
from the society while running its business, provide them back via ethical work programs. In
this report we will discuss about the company’s response towards the expectations of its
stakeholders. We will also consider the gaps between the expectations of the stakeholders and
the real performance towards their expectations. The theories used is analysing the corporate
responsibility and ethical performance consist of Carroll’s Pyramid and Wartick and
Cochrane’s Typology.

Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY...................................................................................................................1
INTRODUTION...................................................................................................................................1
OBJECTIVE..........................................................................................................................................2
METHODOLOGIES.............................................................................................................................2
Carroll’s Pyramid..............................................................................................................................2
Wartick and Cochrane’s Typology....................................................................................................3
INFORMATION ANALYSIS...............................................................................................................3
FINDINGS............................................................................................................................................4
RECOMMENDATIONS.......................................................................................................................5
Conclusion.............................................................................................................................................6
References.............................................................................................................................................7

INTRODUTION
In this report we will analysis the Angle Sea Food Holding Ltd. The company having
its registered office in Melbourne, Australia, is one of the top 100 listed companies of
Australia. The company engaged in works of processing food and beverage products. It is a
world famous resource company. Being a part of the society, the company voluntarily opted
for the corporate social responsibility. The operation of company’s business in a sustainable
manner towards the social, economic and environmental factors are considered under the
corporate social responsibilities. A company cannot run its business effectively for long run if
it has an objective to earn profits only and is not concerned with effect of the business on the
society. For welfare and to provide security to the society from the harms of the business
activities, various regulations and rules has been applied on the company, which bound the
company to provide the best possible benefits to the society. To respond the rapid economic
growth, every organization needs to engage in ethical work programs and corporate social
responsibilities for effective run of business (Blowfield, Karam, and Jamali, 2017).
OBJECTIVE
The report focuses on the methods to evaluate the response of the company towards
the expectations of stakeholders. Also the report is about the analytical framework of
corporate responsibility and ethics that include Carroll’s Pyramid and Wartick and
Cochrane’s Typology to identify the areas in which the company lack in responsibilities
fulfilment. The suggestions which can be followed by Angle Sea Food Holding Ltd to fulfil
the expectations of stakeholders are also being made (Tai, and Chuang, 2014). The major
purpose served by Angle Sea Food Holding Ltd into the corporate social responsibility is to
mitigate the adverse effect of company’s business on society. The company works on
corporate social responsibility to provide best possible outcomes for the wellness of the
society (Saenz, 2018).

METHODOLOGIES
Carroll’s Pyramid
Carrol’s pyramid tries to explain the way, in which organisations can meet their social
responsibility requirements, using the shape of a pyramid (Mayes, 2015).
According to this approach, the organisation works with the main objective to earn
profit. All other requirements such as ethical (moral behaviour), legal (compliance of rules
and regulations) and philanthropic (discretionary will to give back to society) come after that.
While following this theory, organisation avoids the philanthropic requirements and focuses
on the profit factor only (Bice, 2017). This methodology reflects the company should give
back to society which it has taken for running the business.
Wartick and Cochrane’s Typology
This theory was introduced as the first economic element in the series and based on
Carrol’s pyramid model. The model includes all the responsibilities under the corporate
social responsibilities such as legal, ethical and discretionary. The model works on the
assumption that the rules under corporate social responsibility, process of corporate social
responsiveness and the management of social issues have distinctions among them (McGuire,
Sundgren, and Schneeweis, 2008). The model provides corporate sustainability to Angle Sea
Food Holding Ltd and also strengthens its activity system in the best of the interest of
ECONOMIC
LEGAL
ETHICAL
PHILANTHROPIC

society. However apart from the goodness of this model, this is not possible to apply this
model for the best of the society due to the lack of some element meanings (Charles O.H.,
Schmidheiny, and Watts, 2017).
INFORMATION ANALYSIS
The legitimacy theory of corporate social responsibility states that it is mandatory for
every organisation to perform in a manner that does not hurt the righteousness of people in
society (Carroll., 2015). Each and every company should perform the actions that are
acceptable to the society. The parties considered as stakeholders for Angle Sea Food Holding
Ltd for social activities, are the employees, contractors, government, community-based
communities, media, society partners and non-government organisation etc. They expect the
following things from the company (Saeidi, et al. 2015).
 Completion and achievement of targets set earlier when there was ethical work practice
failure that included, drastic negative impact on the people rescue and care programme, and
three communities namely Bento Rodrigues (236 families), Paracatu (142 families) and
Gesteira (eight families).
 Disclosure of reasons of failure of the ethical compliance practice.
 To enable sustainable processes even at other non-operated joint ventures
 Managing safe workplace environment and pilot preparation of emergency situations
 Maintaining diversity and inclusion in employment section, and framing policies for retention
of talented and skilled employees (Bolman, and Deal, 2017).
 Providing the employees with such working conditions that maintain their physical and
mental health (Bhattacharya, et al. 2017).
 Keeping the company’s operations well and safe when it comes to health impacts
 Keeping disaster management done at hand that focuses on responses related to the physical
impacts of change in climate
 To protect the ozone layer and to prevent increase in greenhouse effect, managing the
emission of greenhouse gases (Angle Sea Food Holding Ltd, 2017).
 Investments to support and improve local and native communities
 Proper weightage given to human rights (Brammer, and Pavelin, 2016).

FINDINGS
The recently issued sustainability report of the company contains entire information about the
actions taken by the company to maintain the sustainability and also mentioned the futuristic
statements made by its management. The company says that an increment has been made in
its targets for over the 20 years. It also claims to set and met the targets for the same. The
outcomes of targets of Angle Sea Food Holding Ltd measured below as compared to the
expectations of the stakeholders (Epstein, and Buhovac, 2014).
 To enhance the safety for the workers at workplace, various measures have been opted by the
company and it resulted in zero- work related fatalities except one that happened at
Escondida asset in Financial year 2017
 There is seen a reduction of 76% in carcinogens and airborne contaminants exposure, which
is an advanced step in safeguarding of workforce (Cheng, Ioannou, and Serafeim, 2014).
 Over US$ 79.2 million being around one per cent of pre-tax profits are invested in
community programmes that benefitted the local and native communities (Andriof, and
McIntosh, 2017).
 For alignment of Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights, annual reviews are
being conducted and gaps are identified. Improvement plans are being made.
 Setting financial year 2006 as base, it was aimed to total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In
this line, 21% reduction is seen in emissions of greenhouse gases (Ngai, et al, 2018).
 In order to improve the quality and volume of products offered in market, Angle Sea Food
Holding Ltd implemented a minimum of one project, at all their assets that improve the
management of water resources.
 Placing land and biodiversity plans in place to reduce, rehabilitate and balance impacts to
biodiversity (Ali, Frynas, and Mahmood, 2017).
 With regards the ethical work compliance failure, a number of employees of Angle Sea Food
Holding Ltd have been deployed for products improvement and earlier are being recreated
and reassembled after considering their views. Vegetation is grown, and tailings are re-
contoured in order to reduce soil erosion. To investigate and find the real reason behind the
ethical and legal compliance failure, Angle Sea Food Holding Ltd engaged itself with the
other organization to strengthen its reporting and sustainability business practice.

 For a long term sustainable approach, company has framed its targets for the upcoming five
years. This five-year plan also focuses on the above guidelines (Lanis, and Richardson,
2015).
 These finding have shown that since last five years, Angle Sea Food Holding Ltd has
increased the investment of its business in its CSR activities (Waller, and Lanis, 2009).
RECOMMENDATIONS
However the company has achieved success in fulfilment of consumer expectations.
But the ethical and reporting framework failure has attached as an adverse point to the
company’s goodwill that cannot be ignored unless the company proves out to be an effective
entity which functions to promote the social welfare instead to earn profit (Grayson, and Jane,
2017).
The company has performed to achieve all for which it promised, however various
works are not covered under the area of human rights. The Code of Business Ethics set for
the Angle Sea Food Holding Ltd should be the source, as per which the company should
perform its activities. The anti-corruption policies should be fulfilled by the company as a
major compliance. There should not be the gender discrimination in the company when it
comes to the diversity and inclusion at workplace. Employees of the company should share
the feeling of mutual respect among the colleagues at the workplace, which help them to
work effectively towards the goals of the company (Boons, and Lüdeke-Freund, 2013).
The company has made the policies to encounter the mental health issues of the
employees, in which the employer is assigned to analyse the mental wellness of the working
groups of employees. The success of the implementation of policies is to observe by
evaluating the outcomes (Ruggie, 2017). To find out the deficiencies and improvements of
results in comparison to the past years, the results of the community incident analysis,
research and benchmarking, analysis of complaints and grievances, audit reports and
findings, consistent monitoring and evaluation should be monitored. While making the
growth plans and investment decisions the company should always keep in mind the interest
of the society and the long term support from them (Teece, 2010).

Conclusion
To conclude the case study of Angle Sea Food Holding Ltd, we can state that in the
success of an organisation the corporate social responsibility plays a major role. Although,
the rapid economic growth and complex business policies effects the society adversely.
Hence it has become impracticable for Angle Sea Food Holding Ltd to avoid the negative
impact of its business on the society. Angle Sea Food Holding Ltd has made efforts to
provide the best possible benefits to the society from its business by adopting the corporate
social responsibility. There are various improvement policies and ecosystem has introduced
to make the CSR program better. Alignment of voluntary principles on security and human
rights and Annual reviews are being conducted to identify the differences. These
improvement policies and plans strengthen the corporate social responsibility. Now in the
end, it could be inferred that proper CSR planning and implemented program of the Angle
Sea Food Holding Ltd will increase the overall sustainability of the company in long run.

References
Bhattacharya, C.B., Korschun, D., Sen, S. and Routledge, H., 2017. Corporate social
responsibility. Journal of International Law, 26(2).
Bice, S., 2017. Corporate social responsibility as institution: A social mechanisms
framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 143(1), pp.17-34.
Blowfield, M., Karam, C. and Jamali, D., 2017. Introduction. Corporate social responsibility
in developing countries: a development-oriented approach. In Development-Oriented
Corporate Social Responsibility: Volume 2 (pp. 15-26). Routledge.
Boons, F. and Lüdeke-Freund, F., 2013. Business models for sustainable innovation: state-of-
the-art and steps towards a research agenda. Journal of Cleaner Production, 45, pp.9-19.
Carroll, A.B., 2015. Corporate social responsibility. Organizational dynamics, 44(2), pp.87-
96.
Charles Jr, O.H., Schmidheiny, S. and Watts, P., 2017. Walking the talk: The business case
for sustainable development. Routledge.
Cheng, B., Ioannou, I. and Serafeim, G., 2014. Corporate social responsibility and access to
finance. Strategic Management Journal, 35(1), pp.1-23.
Epstein, M.J. and Buhovac, A.R., 2014. Making sustainability work: Best practices in
managing and measuring corporate social, environmental, and economic impacts. Berrett-
Koehler Publishers.
Grayson, D. and Jane, N., 2017. Corporate responsibility coalitions: The past, present, and
future of alliances for sustainable capitalism. Routledge.
Mayes, R., 2015. A social licence to operate: corporate social responsibility, local
communities and the constitution of global production networks. Global Networks, 15(s1).
McGuire, J.B., Sundgren, A. and Schneeweis, T., 2008. Corporate social responsibility and
firm financial performance. Academy of management Journal, 31(4), pp.854-872.
Ngai, E.W.T., Law, C.C., Lo, C.W., Poon, J.K.L. and Peng, S., 2018. Business sustainability
and corporate social responsibility: case studies of three gas operators in China. International
Journal of Production Research, 56(1-2), pp.660-676.
Ruggie, J.G., 2017. The theory and practice of learning networks: Corporate social
responsibility and the Global Compact. In Learning To Talk (pp. 32-42). Routledge.
Saeidi, S.P., Sofian, S., Saeidi, P., Saeidi, S.P. and Saaeidi, S.A., 2015. How does corporate
social responsibility contribute to firm financial performance? The mediating role of
competitive advantage, reputation, and customer satisfaction. Journal of Business
Research, 68(2), pp.341-350.
Saenz, C., 2018. The Context in Mining Projects Influences the Corporate Social
Responsibility Strategy to Earn a Social Licence to Operate: A Case Study in
Peru. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management.

Tai, F.M. and Chuang, S.H., 2014. Corporate social responsibility. Ibusiness, 6(03), p.117.
Teece, D.J., 2010. Business models, business strategy and innovation. Long range
planning, 43(2-3), pp.172-194.