Corporate Fight against the COVID-19 Risks Based on Technologies of Industry 4.0 as a New Direction of Social Responsibility
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
2.1. Corporate Social Responsibility and the Specific Features of Its Exercise Amid the COVID-19 Risks
2.2. The Case Experience and Modern Forms of the Corporate Fight against the Viral Threat in the Conditions of the COVID-19 Risks
2.3. Gap Analysis of the Corporate Social Responsibility Management Amid the COVID-19 Risks
- Could corporate social responsibility (its new direction) contribute to the fight against the viral threat, and to what extent is this contribution important amid the COVID-19 risks?
- Which direction of corporate social responsibility (employers’ responsibility and green initiatives)—traditional or new (corporate COVID-19 risks management)—is more important for sustainable development?
- What is the importance of the role of the Industry 4.0 technologies (each of them) in implementing the new direction of corporate social responsibility (corporate fight against the viral threat) amid the COVID-19 risks?
3. Research Design and Method
4. Findings
4.1. Evaluation of the Importance of the Industry 4.0 Technologies for Implementing the New Direction of Corporate Social Responsibility Amid the COVID-19 Risks
- Reduces by 29.47 if the level of world robots distribution (d2) grows by 1 position;
- Reduces by 20.8 if the use of big data and AI (d3) grows by 1 position.
- Increase of the use of big data and AI (d1) by 1 position leads to an increase of the sanitary level by 0.20 points;
- Increase of the level of Internet retailing (d2) by 1 position leads to an increase of the sanitary level by 0.16 points;
- Increase of the level of world robots distribution (d3) by 1 position leads to an increase of the sanitary level by 0.49 points.
4.2. Analysis of the Contribution of the New Direction of Corporate Social Responsibility to the COVID-19 Risk Management and the Ratio of Its Contribution to the Traditional Direction in Sustainable Development
- Internet retailing, world robots distribution, and use of big data and AI up to 1st position.
- Reduction of the number of new cases per 1 million people down to 1572.34 (by 45.34%);
- An increase in the level of sanitation up to 103.84 points (by 34.07%).
5. Discussion
- Sustainable development in a pandemic needs revision—its key criterion in the current COVID-19 crisis is no longer the standard indicator—the Sustainable Development Index, but a new indicator—the Healthcare Index;
- The traditional direction of corporate social responsibility determines sustainable development but does not provide a contribution to the Healthcare Index as a key criterion for the sustainability of economic systems in a pandemic;
- Not only government regulation measures, but also corporate governance measures can make a significant contribution to achieving the stability of economic systems in a pandemic. For example, the Industry 4.0 technologies (Internet retailing, world robots distribution, use of big data and AI) allow businesses to contribute to improving the Healthcare Index by reducing the number of COVID-19 infections and improving sanitation.
6. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Abate, Guido, Ignazio Basile, and Pierpaolo Ferrari. 2021. The level of sustainability and mutual fund performance in Europe: An empirical analysis using ESG ratings. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 28: 1446–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abramova, Marina, Svetlana Dubova, and Svetlana Krivoruchko. 2019. Marxism and digital money as a new reality of the social and economic system. In Marx and Modernity: A Political and Economic Analysis of Social Systems Management. Edited by Marina Alpidovskaya and Elena Popkova. A Volume in the Series; Advances in Research on Russian Business and Management. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing, pp. 411–22. [Google Scholar]
- Akopova, Elena, Natalia Przhedetskaya, Yuri Przhedetsky, and Ksenia Borzenko, eds. 2020. Marketing of Nonprofit Organizations in Business—Oriented Economy: New Challenges and Priorities. Marketing of Healthcare Organizations: Technologies of Public-Private Partnership. A Volume in the Series; Advances in Research on Russian Business and Management. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing, Available online: https://www.infoagepub.com/products/Marketing-of-Healthcare-Organizations (accessed on 8 August 2021).
- Bhattacharyya, Som Sekhar. 2020. Explicating firm international corporate social responsibility initiatives. Review of International Business and Strategy 30: 515–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bhattacharyya, Som Sekhar, and Sumi Jha. 2020. Explicating micro-foundations of corporate social responsibility: A moderated-mediation study of customer, investor and employee roles. International Journal of Ethics and Systems 36: 619–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Capelli, Paolo, Federica Ielasi, and Angeloantonio Russo. 2021. Forecasting volatility by integrating financial risk with environmental, social, and governance risk. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 28: 1483–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chaldaeva, Larisa. 2019. Digital Economy: A Marxist View of the Present and Future. In Marx and Modernity: A Political and Economic Analysis of Social Systems Management. Edited by Mrina Alpidovskaya and Elena Popkova. A Volume in the Series; Advances in Research on Russian Business and Management. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing, pp. 395–400. [Google Scholar]
- Chou, Shih Yung, Charles Ramser, Tree Chang, and Bo Han. 2020. The emergence of interpersonal helping in times of crises: A theoretical model of prosperity and eradication of interpersonal helping in organizations. Management Decision 58: 2257–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Clément, Mary-Lieta, and Christophe Roux-Dufort. 2020. Too late to act: When crises become tragic. Management Decision 58: 2139–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Engle, Robert, Marina Brogi, Nicola Cucari, and Valentina Lagasio. 2021. Environmental, Social, Governance: Implications for businesses and effects for stakeholders. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 28: 1423–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Espasandín-Bustelo, Francisco, Juan Ganaza-Vargas, and Rosalia Diaz-Carrion. 2021. Employee happiness and corporate social responsibility: The role of organizational culture. Employee Relations 43: 609–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fokina, Olga. 2020. Marketing Management of Projects for the Introduction of “Smart” Learning Technologies as a Method of de Monopolization of Digital Economy Markets. Website “Scientific Narratives of Russia”. Available online: https://iscconf.ru/мapкeтингoвoe-yпpaвлeниe-пpoeктaми/ (accessed on 8 August 2021).
- Fox, Corey, Phillip Davis, and Melissa Baucus. 2020. Corporate social responsibility during unprecedented crises: The role of authentic leadership and business model flexibility. Management Decision 58: 2213–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gębski, Łukasz. 2021. The impact of the crisis triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic and the actions of regulators on the consumer finance market in Poland and other European Union countries. Risks 9: 102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guseva, Irina, Elena Kulikova, and Boris Rubtsov. 2019. Dialectics of the financial market category in the Russian economic science: From the Marx era to the digital economy. In Marx and Modernity: A Political and Economic Analysis of Social Systems Management. Edited by Marina Alpidovskaya and Elena Popkova. A Volume in the Series; Advances in Research on Russian Business and Management. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing, pp. 401–10. [Google Scholar]
- Hinojosa, Amanda, Megan J. Doughty Shaine, and Kelly Davis McCauley. 2020. A strange situation indeed: Fostering leader-follower attachment security during the unprecedented crisis. Management Decision 58: 2099–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ignatowski, Grzegorz, Łukasz Sułkowski, and Bartolomiej Stopczyński. 2021. Risk of increased acceptance for organizational nepotism and cronyism during the COVID-19 pandemic. Risks 9: 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- IMD. 2021. World Digital Competitiveness Ranking 2020. Available online: https://www.imd.org/wcc/world-competitiveness-center-rankings/world-digital-competitiveness-rankings-2020/ (accessed on 8 August 2021).
- Inshakova, Agnessa, and Nikita Litvinov. 2020. Digital Institutions in the Fight against the Shadow Economy in Russia. Website “Scientific Narratives of Russia”. Available online: https://iscconf.ru/циφpoвыe-инcтитyты-в-бopьбe-c-тeнeвoй/ (accessed on 8 August 2021).
- Inshakova, Agnessa, Alexander Goncharov, Elena Inshakova, and Yuri Tymchuk. 2020. Digital Technologies for Alternative Methods of Resolving Conflicts: The Prospects of Application in Russia and Other BRICS Countries. In Alternative Methods of Judging Economic Conflicts in the National Positive and Soft Law. Edited by Agnessa Inshakova and Aleksei Bogoviz. A Volume in the Series; Advances in Research on Russian Business and Management. Charlotte: Information Age Publishing, Available online: https://www.infoagepub.com/products/Alternative-Methods-of-Judging-Economic-Conflicts-in-the-National-Positive-and-Soft-Law (accessed on 8 August 2021).
- Institute of Scientific Communications. 2021a. Dataset “COVID-19 and the 2020 Crisis: Possibilities of Healthcare and Consequences for Economy and Business Around the world”. Available online: https://iscvolga.ru/dataset-crisis-2020 (accessed on 8 August 2021).
- Institute of Scientific Communications. 2021b. Dataset “Social entrepreneurship in the world economy: From virtual scores to big data 2020”: Ranking of Social Entrepreneurship”. Available online: https://iscvolga.ru/dataset-social-predprinim (accessed on 8 August 2021).
- Issa, Usama H., Ashraf Balabel, Mohammed Abdelhakeem, and Medhat M. A. Osman. 2021. Developing a risk model for assessment and control of the spread of COVID-19. Risks 9: 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Litvinova, Tatyana. 2020. Management of the Development of Infrastructural Support for Entrepreneurial Activity in the Russian Agricultural Machinery Market Based on “Smart” Technologies of Antimonopoly Regulation. Website “Scientific Narratives of Russia”. Available online: https://iscconf.ru/yпpaвлeниe-paзвитиeм-инφpacтpyктypн/ (accessed on 8 August 2021).
- Milwood, Pauline. 2020. Social responsibility and the SDGs: Vignettes of Caribbean tour operators. Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes 12: 275–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Muneeb, Farhan Muhammad, Amir Karbassi Yazdi, Peter Wanke, Cao Yiyin, and Muhammad Chughtai. 2020. Critical success factors for sustainable entrepreneurship in the Pakistani Telecommunications industry: A hybrid grey systems theory/best-worst method approach. Management Decision 58: 2565–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- National Research University “Higher School of Economics” (NRU HSE). 2021. Digital Economy 2021: A Short Statistical Collection. Available online: https://issek.hse.ru/mirror/pubs/share/434007067.pdf (accessed on 8 August 2021).
- Norris, J. Ian, Mario Prinzing Casa de Calvo, and Robert D. Mather. 2020. Managing an existential threat: How a global crisis contaminates organizational decision-making. Management Decision 58: 2117–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Numbeo. 2021. Quality of Life Index by Country 2021. Available online: https://www.numbeo.com/quality-of-life/rankings_by_country.jsp?title=2021&displayColumn=3 (accessed on 8 August 2021).
- Popkova, Elena, Aleksei Bogoviz, and Bruno Sergi. 2021. Towards digital society management and ‘Capitalism 4.0′ in contemporary Russia. Humanities and Social Science Communication 8: 77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Popkova, Elena, and Bruno Sergi. 2020a. Human capital and AI in industry 4.0. Convergence and divergence in social entrepreneurship in Russia. Journal of Intellectual Capital 2: 565–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Popkova, Elena, and Bruno Sergi. 2020b. Digital public health: Automation based on new datasets and the Internet of Things. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 2021: 101039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Popkova, Elena, Piper DeLo, and Bruno Sergi. 2020. Corporate Social Responsibility amid Social Distancing During the COVID-19 Crisis: BRICS vs. OECD Countries. Research in International Business and Finance 55: 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VCIOM) and Social Business Group LLC (SBG). 2021. Digital Literacy and Remote Work Amid the Pandemic. 2020. Available online: https://wciom.ru/index.php?id=236&uid=10280 (accessed on 8 August 2021).
- Smetanina, Anastasia. 2020. Russian Entrepreneurship on the Path of De-Shadowing: New Opportunities in the Digital Economy and Prospects. Website “Scientific Narratives of Russia”. Available online: https://iscconf.ru/poccийcкoe-пpeдпpинимaтeльcтвo-нa-п/ (accessed on 8 August 2021).
- Sofiina, Elena. 2020. Economic Return from Land Use as a Factor in the “Smart” Antitrust Regulation of the Agricultural Market. Website “Scientific Narratives of Russia”. Available online: https://iscconf.ru/экoнoмичecкaя-oтдaчa-oт-зeмлeпoльзo/ (accessed on 8 August 2021).
- Sun, Huaping, Bless Kofi Edziah, Anthony Kwaku Kporsu, Samuel Asumadu Sarkodie, and Farad Taghizadeh-Hesary. 2021. Energy efficiency: The role of technological innovation and knowledge spillover. Technological Forecasting & Social Change 167: 120659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tabesh, Pooya, and Dusya M. Vera. 2020. Top managers’ improvisational decision-making in crisis: A paradox perspective. Management Decision 58: 2235–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tarigan, Josua, Amelia Rika Sanchia Susanto, Saarce Elsye Hatane, Ferry Jie, and Foedjiawati Foedjiawati. 2021. Corporate social responsibility, job pursuit intention, quality of work-life and employee performance: A case study from Indonesia controversial industry. Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Administration 13: 141–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- UN. 2021. Sustainable Development Index 2020. Available online: https://dashboards.sdgindex.org/rankings (accessed on 8 August 2021).
- Vasenska, Ivanka, Preslav Dimitrov, Blagovesta Koyundzhiyska-Davidkova, Pavol Durana, and Ioulia Poulaki. 2021. Financial transactions using fintech during the COVID-19 crisis in Bulgaria. Risks 9: 48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zainee, Intan Azurin, and Fadilah Puteh. 2020. Corporate social responsibility impact on talent retention among Generation Y. Revista de Gestão 27: 369–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Category of Countries by Income Level | Countries | Aspects of the New Direction of CSR * | Traditional Directions of CSR * | Results for Sustainable Development | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Share of Population with Household Expenditures for Healthcare above 25% of Total Expenditures or Incomes, % | Number of New Cases per 1 Million People | Sanitary Level, Points 1–100 | Social Entrepreneurship Index, Points 1–100 | Sustainable Development Index, Points 1–100 | Healthcare Index, Points 1–100 | ||
n1 | n2 | n3 | t | SD1 | SD2 | ||
Developed countries | Germany | 0.1 | 2364 | 88 | 61.140 | 80.77 | 73.77 |
France | 0.2 | 2579 | 82 | 55.341 | 81.13 | 80.99 | |
USA | 0.8 | 9187 | 92 | 73.238 | 76.43 | 69.03 | |
UK | 0.5 | 4209 | 93 | 70.496 | 79.79 | 74.93 | |
Canada | 0.5 | 2806 | 99 | 70.452 | 78.19 | 71.80 | |
Japan | 0.6 | 156 | 95 | 57.793 | 79.17 | 80.68 | |
Italy | 1.1 | 4000 | n/a | 57.568 | 77.01 | 66.77 | |
South Korea | 3.9 | 257 | 97 | 59.327 | n/a | 82.34 | |
Developing countries | Brazil | n/a | 7649 | 87 | 49.027 | 72.67 | 57.33 |
South Africa | 0.1 | 3468 | 70 | 46.878 | 63.41 | 63.89 | |
Russia | 0.6 | 4757 | 99 | 61.147 | 71.92 | 58.44 | |
Mexico | 0.2 | 2030 | 83 | 40.597 | 70.44 | 72.51 | |
China | 5.4 | 58 | 93 | 46.685 | 73.89 | 66.38 | |
Colombia | 2.2 | 2364 | 69 | 37.395 | 70.91 | 66.72 | |
India | 3.9 | 523 | 78 | 54.086 | 61.92 | 66.25 | |
Argentina | n/a | 1780 | 61 | 34.607 | 73.17 | 68.58 | |
Thailand | 0.4 | 46 | 85 | 47.193 | 74.54 | 78.08 | |
Indonesia | 0.5 | 242 | 73 | 45.161 | 65.30 | 60.49 | |
Kazakhstan | 0.1 | 2646 | 82 | 38.420 | 71.06 | 60.09 | |
Peru | 1.3 | 9270 | 48 | 35.881 | 71.76 | 56.38 | |
Philippines | 1.4 | 437 | 53 | 46.773 | 65.50 | 67.09 | |
Turkey | 0.4 | 2452 | 77 | 41.272 | 70.30 | 70.71 |
Category of Countries by Income Level | Countries | Internet Retailing, Position 1–63 | World Robots Distribution, Position 1–63 | Use of Big Data and AI (Use of Big Data and Analytics), Position 1–63 |
---|---|---|---|---|
d1 | d2 | d3 | ||
Developed countries | Germany | 12 | 5 | 46 |
France | 13 | 8 | 47 | |
USA | 2 | 4 | 9 | |
UK | 3 | 14 | 23 | |
Canada | 6 | 13 | 4 | |
Japan | 16 | 2 | 63 | |
Italy | 27 | 6 | 59 | |
South Korea | 1 | 3 | 15 | |
Developing countries | Brazil | 43 | 17 | 58 |
South Africa | 59 | 34 | 44 | |
Russia | 37 | 32 | 33 | |
Mexico | 46 | 10 | 51 | |
China | 19 | 1 | 8 | |
Colombia | 55 | 49 | 41 | |
India | 56 | 12 | 32 | |
Argentina | 44 | 38 | 49 | |
Thailand | 49 | 11 | 35 | |
Indonesia | 50 | 25 | 17 | |
Kazakhstan | 53 | n/a | 13 | |
Peru | 57 | 54 | 54 | |
Philippines | 58 | 40 | 34 | |
Turkey | 41 | 20 | 42 |
Correlation, % | n1 | n2 | n3 |
---|---|---|---|
d1 | −10.46 | −6.34 | −40.19 |
d2 | −22.46 | 20.07 | −27.97 |
d3 | −37.31 | 14.43 | −45.69 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Inshakova, A.O.; Sozinova, A.A.; Litvinova, T.N. Corporate Fight against the COVID-19 Risks Based on Technologies of Industry 4.0 as a New Direction of Social Responsibility. Risks 2021, 9, 212. https://doi.org/10.3390/risks9120212
Inshakova AO, Sozinova AA, Litvinova TN. Corporate Fight against the COVID-19 Risks Based on Technologies of Industry 4.0 as a New Direction of Social Responsibility. Risks. 2021; 9(12):212. https://doi.org/10.3390/risks9120212
Chicago/Turabian StyleInshakova, Agnessa O., Anastasia A. Sozinova, and Tatiana N. Litvinova. 2021. "Corporate Fight against the COVID-19 Risks Based on Technologies of Industry 4.0 as a New Direction of Social Responsibility" Risks 9, no. 12: 212. https://doi.org/10.3390/risks9120212
APA StyleInshakova, A. O., Sozinova, A. A., & Litvinova, T. N. (2021). Corporate Fight against the COVID-19 Risks Based on Technologies of Industry 4.0 as a New Direction of Social Responsibility. Risks, 9(12), 212. https://doi.org/10.3390/risks9120212