According to Bert van de Ven, a firm should not brag about corporate social initiatives, but there is an important difference between touting one’s philanthropic activities and keeping stakeholders informed. Kotler and Lee also acknowledge this problem from a strategic perspective and offer an old solution: do good and let others talk about it (for example the non-profit partner). Make sure you get an award from others or that they thank you on their website. The justification that Kotler and Lee give for their strategic approach to corporate social initiatives is essentially, although implicitly, consequentialist in nature. Everyone benefits from a strategic approach. This win-win perspective on the relationship between CSR and long-term profitability is convincing. It seems that the more a firm can benefit from its social initiatives the more it will be inclined to integrate CSR on a strategic decision-making.

Drucker argues that regardless of the triggering factors or the decision makers’ motivations, corporate social responsibility actions have long-range strategic implications that influence the successful operation of the firm. On the one hand, social responsibility actions could preclude or minimize restrictive government action; social programs likewise might decrease adverse public reaction and opinion toward business.

Social responsibility actions of the firm hold the potential for promoting positive acceptance of the organization, thus increasing its competitive position in relationship to its industry rivals. As consumers tend to personalize the relationship with a corporate brand, it should come as no surprise that they judge the ‘personality’ of the corporation as if one is actually dealing with a moral person. Bert van de Ven emphasizes that one might believe that given the skepticism of the consumer it is best not to communicate at all about the CSR initiatives. However, if companies do not inform consumers properly about the CSR initiatives they take, they will not, or to a lesser extent, reap the benefits of their investments in CSR.

In developed countries like U.S. and U.K., models of corporate social responsibility (CSR) are relatively well defined. As the phenomenon of CSR establishes itself more globally, the question arises as to the nature of CSR in other countries. Hamann suggests that the need for focused CSR in developing economies is critical particularly with the concern that current approaches to CSR, with their origin in developed countries, “may not sufficiently relate or respond to the context and circumstances encountered in developing economies”. According to Blowfield and Frynas, developing countries do not share the same cultural and social values, norms and priorities that underpin CSR in ‘western’. Thus, the consumers also likely to respond differently for marketing of corporate social responsibility

In his master thesis conducted on 2018, Solomon states that “due to the lack of clear policy on what constitutes CSR in Ethiopia, businesses are using the opportunity negatively. But some believe that even if other business competitors are not contributing, they should at least refrain from their negative impact.” Moreover, Deyassa emphasizes that the notion of CSR is still at an infant stage in Ethiopia and the application of CSR concept is viewed as corporate charity to solve socio-economic challenges temporarily.