Directors’ Duties: From Fiduciary Obligations to Broader Social Responsibility

Authors

  • Nizomiddin Kozimov Lecturer of the Department of Cyber Law at Tashkent State University of Law

Abstract

This article explores the evolving responsibilities of corporate directors, specifically examining the shift from traditional fiduciary duties to integrative social accountability within decision-making processes. It addresses the critical question of how and to what extent directors are incorporating social responsibility into their strategic frameworks, particularly in the healthcare sector. Utilizing a mixed-methods approach, the research combines qualitative data through interviews and case studies of corporate practices with quantitative metrics assessing the social impact of these decisions on corporate performance. Key findings reveal a significant correlation between the adoption of social responsibility initiatives and enhanced organizational outcomes, highlighting that directors who prioritize social accountability not only fulfill their fiduciary duties but also drive sustainable growth and stakeholder trust. The significance of these findings lies in their potential to reshape governance practices in healthcare, suggesting that as directors embrace broader social responsibilities, they contribute not only to improved patient care but also to stronger organizational ethics. The implications of this study extend beyond healthcare, encouraging a broader reevaluation of director responsibilities across various sectors, thereby promoting a shift in corporate governance that aligns profit motives with public good. Ultimately, this work advocates for a more holistic understanding of director responsibilities, positioning social accountability as a fundamental component of effective leadership in contemporary corporate environments.

References

1. M. Peterson (2018) In the Shadow of Politics: The Pathways of Research Evidence to Health Policy Making. Volume(43), 341-376. Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law. doi: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/2c8312810626ec846cad9d1fcc29b1863ef591bc

2. M. Dhuri, Mrunal Joshi, Ritu Sinha (2025) Econometric analysis of cement companies in an emerging market: A sustainability outlook. Corporate Governance and Sustainability Review. doi: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/471593967fe8af93bd1eb32ba1e7e5353181ebcc

3. O. Hlushko, O. Karyy (2025) PROJECT MANAGEMENT & CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY IN THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SECTOR: CORE CATEGORIES, OBJECTIVES, AND SCOPE. Journal of Lviv Polytechnic National University. Series of Economics and Management Issues. doi: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/d79ece38d225b2f8a4dc1e70fad7a445dd48715d

4. Чжунчень Юй (2025) REFRAMING ESG AND CSR: CONCEPTUAL FOUNDATIONS, OVERLAPPING DOMAINS, AND INTEGRATED STRATEGIES. Via Economica. doi: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/9f77a20237824b2bfcf7380c20cf0ab531bd033f

5. Prof. T. Velnampy (2024) Corporate Social Responsibility and Stakeholder Engagement: Impact on Organizational Performance. Journal of Advanced Management Studies. doi: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/068218919f47a82aa7339394332add88c8131a9e

6. Ignatia Valentine (2024) Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Practices and Financial Performance of Firms. American Journal of Finance. doi: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0e47b3d928489d0db5a8c3324691fe164e6a0faf

7. Philipp Krueger, Zacharias Sautner, Laura T. Starks (2019) The Importance of Climate Risks for Institutional Investors. Volume(33), 1067-1111. Review of Financial Studies. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhz137

8. Oliver Hart, Luigi Zingales (2017) Companies Should Maximize Shareholder Welfare Not Market Value. Volume(2), 247-275. Journal of Law Finance and Accounting. doi: https://doi.org/10.1561/108.00000022

9. L. Sacconi (2012) Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Governance. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118524015.ch16

10. Charl de Villiers, Vic Naiker, Chris van Staden (2011) The Effect of Board Characteristics on Firm Environmental Performance. Volume(37), 1636-1663. Journal of Management. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311411506

11. Rafael La Porta, Florencio López‐de‐Silanes, Andrei Shleifer (2008) The Economic Consequences of Legal Origins. Volume(46), 285-332. Journal of Economic Literature. doi: https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.46.2.285

12. Luciano Floridi, Josh Cowls, Monica Beltrametti, Raja Chatila, Patrice Chazerand, Virginia Dignum, Christoph Luetge, et al. (2018) AI4People—An Ethical Framework for a Good AI Society: Opportunities, Risks, Principles, and Recommendations. Volume(28), 689-707. Minds and Machines. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11023-018-9482-5

13. Karl V. Lins, Henri Servaes, Ane Tamayo (2017) Social Capital, Trust, and Firm Performance: The Value of Corporate Social Responsibility during the Financial Crisis. Volume(72), 1785-1824. The Journal of Finance. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/jofi.12505

14. Edward L. Deci, Anja H. Olafsen, Richard M. Ryan (2017) Self-Determination Theory in Work Organizations: The State of a Science. Volume(4), 19-43. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior. doi: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113108

15. Beiting Cheng, Ioannis Ioannou, George Serafeim (2013) Corporate social responsibility and access to finance. Volume(35), 1-23. Strategic Management Journal. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2131

16. A.-W. Chan, Jennifer Tetzlaff, Peter C Gøtzsche, Douglas G. Altman, H Mann, Jesse A. Berlin, Kay Dickersin, et al. (2013) SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials. Volume(346), e7586-e7586. BMJ. doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e7586

17. Yogesh K. Dwivedi, Nir Kshetri, Laurie Hughes, Emma Slade, Anand Jeyaraj, Arpan Kumar Kar, Abdullah M. Baabdullah, et al. (2023) Opinion Paper: “So what if ChatGPT wrote it?” Multidisciplinary perspectives on opportunities, challenges and implications of generative conversational AI for research, practice and policy. Volume(71), 102642-102642. International Journal of Information Management. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2023.102642

18. (2021) International Journal of Design. International Journal of Design. doi: https://doi.org/10.34010/injudes

19. Dorothy E. Leidner, Kayworth (2006) Review: A Review of Culture in Information Systems Research: Toward a Theory of Information Technology Culture Conflict. Volume(30), 357-357. MIS Quarterly. doi: https://doi.org/10.2307/25148735

20. Daniel Kaufmann, Aart Kraay, Massimo Mastruzzi (2005) Governance Matters IV : Governance Indicators For 1996-2004. . World Bank policy research working paper. doi: https://doi.org/10.1596/1813-9450-3630

Downloads

Published

2025-08-29

How to Cite

Kozimov, N. (2025). Directors’ Duties: From Fiduciary Obligations to Broader Social Responsibility. American Journal of Corporate Management, 2(7), 28–45. Retrieved from https://semantjournals.org/index.php/AJCM/article/view/2390