According to Friedman (1970) generally belief that only people can have responsibilities, not business. Friedman stated that "the social responsibility of business is to increase its profits" only, he does not agree social responsibility is part of the responsibilities of Business, he stated that "Only people can have responsibilities" instead of a corporate, a business itself. "The corporate executive is an employee of the owners of the business, which generally will be to make as much money as possible while conforming to the basic rules of the society". In other words, the only reason to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is to maximize the profit of the business. "Only individuals who are to be responsible are businessmen, the owners of the business, has the direct responsibility to his employers and to conduct the business in accordance with their desires". So it comes to an individual can perceive responsibilities but not business itself. Business as a whole cannot be said to have responsibilities.

While according to Freeman (2006) does not agree to Milton Friedman's argument that only social responsibility is to increase profit; in the moral sense, giving money doesn't make up at all in doing CSR. Freeman has reassigned a new interpretation of CSR. "A conceptual scheme that separates the social responsibilities of a corporate from its business responsibilities has long outlived its usefulness." To replace Corporate Social Responsibility, Company Stakeholder Responsibility has formed. He also introduces different approaches to CSR which includes, the "Four Levels of Commitment to the Stakeholder approach" and the "Ten Principles of Company Stakeholder Responsibility". These approaches are more focus on the viewpoint from a stakeholder perspective to explain how CSR works. He mentioned “We need to focus on how value is created in the