I. IntroductionThis essay aimed to evaluate and criticize the article written by Geoffrey Williams and John Zinkin. It was divided into seven parts. First of all, I would like to briefly introduce what the essay is about, followed by the description of the document being evaluated. Then, the theory and literature will be evaluated, highlighting the theoretical frameworks used by the authors in developing the article. The research design and approach would come to the fourth part, where I would explore the research design and methods and discuss its advantages and limitations. Subsequently, the advantages and limitations of the research design and approach will be illustrated and finally suggestions on alternative research strategies/methods and the conclusion will be provided.II. Brief description of the document being evaluatedThe authors first provided an introduction and purpose of the document which explores the relationship between attitudes towards corporate social responsibility (CSR) and the cultural dimensions of Hofstede & Hofstede's business activity. The authors found the limitations of current studies that analyzed CSR only within one country or within one cultural group, so they attempted to do some research in this field by considering the issues in more than one country. Thus, the CSR volume has been classified into four distinct models: the instrumental and private wealth creation models, the political and social models, the models of integration of social demands and the ethical models. And these approaches were mapped into Hofstede dimensions respectively. Subsequently, five propositions based on Hofstede's dimensions were developed and the authors discussed the impact on the propensity to punish companies with irresponsible behavior. Below...... half of the document ......Successful projects for economic and social research. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.Coutrot, T. (1998). "How do institutional frameworks affect industrial relations outcomes? A microstatistical comparison between France and Britain", European Journal of Industrial Relations, 4(2): 177-205.Hofstede, G and Hofstede, J. -G. 2005. Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. New York: McGraw-Hill. Lowe, K. B., & Gardner, W. L. (2000). “Ten Years of Leadership Quarterly: Contributions and Challenges for the Future,” The Leadership Quarterly, 11(4): 459-514.McCall, M.J., (1984). “Field Observation of Structure,” Annual Review of Sociology, 10:263-82. Parasuraman, A., Grewal, D., & Krishnan, R. 2004. Marketing research. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. 2007. Research methods for business students. 4th ed. London: Prentice Hall.