Tuesday, September 30, 2008

How Responsible is Corporate Social Responsibility?

For a while now I've been suspect of some Corporate Social Responsibility initiatives by large companies. I believe that behind these well-meaning gestures, there is a another reason for them to exist..... its actually good business for the company.
  • Reducing your carbon footprint = reducing fuel bills

  • Using more recycled materials = making obvious use of lower quality materials

  • Allowing staff to participate in public service activities = good PR

  • Ethical employment = good PR and a reduced legal bills (or avoided restrictive regulation)

(Note: Someone please remind me that one day I should write a posting about corporate 'Greenwashing'!)

There's also the opinion that during these more economically-challenged times, companies may tend to push their social responsibility agendas down the pecking order (as job survival and a stable balance sheet moves up that order). This isn't entirely true though and some ethics can be recession-proof. Proof is reassuringly provided by Ethical Corporation magazine:

Consumers who already pay a premium for ethical goods such as Fairtrade and
organic produce are unlikely to be put off by an economic slowdown

I've now spent some time recently reading the CSR strategies and approaches of several companies (e.g. Coke's). I've found Tesco's probably the easiest to break up and digest (note: I'll purposely not make any reference to their food), this can be found at: http://www.tescoreports.com/crreview08/managecr.html

Their 6 CSR projects listed for 2008 are:

  1. tackling climate change

  2. waste recycling and packaging

  3. carrier bag use

  4. Community Champions

  5. making our Community Plan live in store

  6. trading fairly (labour standards in our supply chain).
Its suprising how quite a few of these map to my points made earlier. However I applaud the 'carrier bag use' project listed. Figures on numbers vary, but Uk shoppers definately use billions of them in a year. Obviosuly encouraging customers to use less of these will reduce their plastic bill. But Tesco's chief executive, Sir Terry Leahy, has said that the project will actually cost Tesco money, as they will be over-generous with their green reward points (1p earnt when you re-use you own bag). But just to be clear, we're talking about plastic bags here, which are made from oil, which readers may have noticed has significantly increased in price quite recently.

BTW: Can someone please tell Tesco that their biodegradable carrier bags are most frequently sent to landfill and buried. The only sticking point with this is that these carrier bags degrade naturally.... through expose to sunlight.


On the positive side, its also worth mentioning that through sites such as http://www.actics.com/, it is possible to influence the ethical actions of some (partnered and usually wholey responsible) companies. Hopefully this transparency leads to company advocacy, which then affects the bottom line.

But for me, perhaps the most striking fact is that most customers aren't prepared to pay more for a Socially Responsible product or at best only want to pay a fraction more, despite claiming publically that they would. In additon, MIT research has found out that companies don't need to be entirely socially responsible to gain the rewards brought about from being 100%. Which does then beg the question.. "how ethical do you need to be?".

Perhaps you only need to be ethical until it becomes uneconomical?

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Does it matter that some decisions which promote corporate social responsibility are also good for business? As long as they actually 'doing some good' in environmental/development terms as well, I'd have thought that any added incentive for businesses to follow this path can only be a good thing...

Anonymous said...

hello hayden

Social responsibility of businesses SHOULD be good for business. It's not just about contributing to society (philanthropy) or protecting the environment (regulatory). Its about intertwining social and environmental considerations into the business strategy. The business should aim to benefit. As a minimum, csr is a kind of insurance policy, a risk management approach. At best, its a way to identify new business opportunities. That way, the business continues to be sustainable and contributes to a sustainable world. Of course, CSR often rests on a bed of values (doing well by doing good)which are important in their own right.

When CSr reports contain a list of "good" things that companies are doing, then they do tend to be PR blurb. csr reports must disclose a company's performance on the core issues which impact stakeholders as a result of its business activities, good or bad.

CSr is voluntary though now kinda maintsteam voluntary. Some businesses are more slick at it (Vodafone and Marks and Spencer are two of my best examples) .

Finally, you cant measure csr on a % scale. Its a continuum ... you cant say that businesses are totally 100% ethical, just as individuals are never 100% law-abiding or ethical - never tell a white lie ? never break a traffic rule ? never insulted anyone ?

The important thing is to gauge a business's foundation of principles and values and the integrity it displays in meeting its commitments to generating positive impacts. Even in an economic downturn, if businesses contribute a little less to charitable causes, this does not make them less ethical. Those who maintain their social programs however, may be the ones who have learnt to be more sustainable.

elaine
(i am a csr consultant, just for the record!)

Hayden Sutherland said...

Elaine

A great response, thanks for taking the time to give us your thoughts on this.

I agree that any CSR initiatives should take the company values as their foundation, indeed this is what Tesco’s does by including theirs within the Community element of their ‘Steering Wheel’ of values. Its also really relevant that you mention Vodafone, who in their 2008 CR ‘One Strategy’ report, state how its responsibility and business objectives are *inseparable*. Here, like most things they do, they go into significant detail of why they believe they are doing what they can, whilst being fully transparent about their policies:

http://www.vodafone.com/start/responsibility/our_approach/policies.html

However, whilst I agree that no person or company can always be 100% ethical, there is a significant difference between those companies that try to do just enough to give the perception that they are responsible and those ethically-driven companies who occasionally slip-up.

Anonymous said...

Hayden,

You make an interesting point about shoppers not being willing to pay more for ethical products.

About three months ago, I did a considerable amount of research on the relationship between corporate ethics and consumer purchasing behavior for a blog post.

Publicly available evidence relating to actual purchasing behavior is difficult to find. However, the evidence I was able to find did suggest that indeed, ethical considerations do not appear to have a large impact on actual consumer purchasing behavior.

In England, for example, the Co-Operative Bank estimates purchases of 'ethical products' account for just five per cent of total household expenditure.

Furthermore, researchers such as David Vogel and Timothy Devinney believe that the relationship between ethical considerations and consumer purchasing is not strong. According to the latter, "Fair Trade" products rarely account for more than two per cent of market share in markets in which they operate.