This paper explores the issue of corporate accountability for social injustice. We divide our discussion into three major parts. First, we discuss the current understanding of large organizations manifested in the prevailing legal and cultural climate. We argue that organizations are often treated as a type of juristic person. As such, they have not only certain rights, but also certain responsibilities to the larger society. For this reason, accountability for corporate actions is of major importance. In the second section, we review the psychological processes by which individuals come to attribute responsibility. In accordance with Fairness Theory, we suggest that there are three central issues to consider when attributing responsibility to organizations for unjust acts. Organizations are held accountable when an alternative state would have been better than a current situation, when the firm could have feasibly avoided creating the negative conditions, and when the harm should never have taken place (i.e., it violated ethical and moral standards). Finally, in the third section of the paper, we elaborate and discuss several organizational tactics for addressing an accusation of accountability. These include both short-term, single-loop tactics, as well as long-term, double-loop tactics.