Archive for the ‘ Corporate Responsibility ’ Category

The CSR debate: what are you saying?

I had the pleasure this morning of taking in the spirited webcast, “CSR and the Role of Business Today”, hosted by public interest communications firm, Fenton, and featuring a group of A-list CSR advocates and detractors.  The list and biographies of panelists, and a link to a video of the debate, are available here.

Throughout the debate, there were many fine points eloquently made by the panelists, and I encourage you to view the video of the debate, if you were not able to watch it live.  (Even if you did see it, you might get more out of it watching a second time, as I did.)  In particular, if you are a CSR practitioner or advocate looking to strengthen your understanding or articulation of the context of and business case for CSR, you’ll find some good material here.

I won’t reiterate all the debate highlights (you can check the Twitter feed, using the hashtag #CSRdebate, for the play-by-play), but I would like to consider the anti-CSR case in more detail.  Specifically, I found the arguments made by Professor Aneel Karnani and Chrystia Freeland disingenuous; let me explain why. Read on!

2010
09/17
CATEGORY
Corporate Responsibility
Social Media
Stakeholder Engagement
TAGS


















6 comments

A new “standard” is needed for claims

Twice in recent months, I’ve read about companies getting into hot water over their handling of damage claims in the wake of accidental events.

First, BP was taken to task for using waivers and spill settlement agreements that limited the right of volunteer oil-spill responders and coastal residents to sue the company (BP told to stop distributing oil spill settlement agreements, CBS News, May 3 2010).  Then, in August, similar complaints were leveled against Enbridge, following its pipeline spill in Michigan, alleging residents who were filing for damages were required to sign a “full and final settlement release form” that discharged liability against the company (Enbridge denies allegations of coercion, Globe and Mail, September 1 2010).

In both cases, the companies argued the forms they were using were “standard” forms (BP admits “misstep” over oil spill claims waivers, Reuters, May 3 2010).

I understand the need for the companies to establish a robust claims process and to protect themselves from illegitimate and unreasonable claims.  However, in these cases, the “standard” of care was inappropriate and unfair. Continue reading →

2010
09/14
CATEGORY
Corporate Responsibility
TAGS









1 comment

The failure of externalities

Professor Aneel Karnani’s article, The Case Against Corporate Social Responsibility (Wall Street Journal, August 23rd, 2010), stirred up a lot of discussion in the CSR community, to which Professor Karnani responded in an email posted on Elaine Cohen’s excellent blog, csr-reporting.blogspot.com.

I thought it was most revealing that Professor Karnani refers to “externalities” such as pollution as a market failure.  The real failure is that our “capitalistic” market economy does not include the direct environmental cost (or social cost, for that matter) of industry in its accounting, thus allowing the conflict between private profit interests and public interests to arise.

All of the direct costs of business and industry, whether it’s a labour or materials cost, an emissions control cost, or other, should be internalized; this is the ‘responsibility’ part of CSR.  A company should not be able to generate profit by transferring a cost burden to a third party.  Through licencing and other regulatory mechanisms, companies acquire the privilege of exploiting a public natural resource.  Over time, our society has allowed industry to act as if such permissions also grant an implicit right to pollute (or otherwise transfer costs out of their profit equation).  Corporate responsibility is necessary, in part, to remind all stakeholders that the onus is and should be on the polluter to pay.

The private interest profit motive will be aligned with public interests of environmental and social health when such “externalities” are seen for what they are: internal costs of doing business.

2010
09/05
CATEGORY
Corporate Responsibility
TAGS



Leave a comment

The convergence of social media and corporate responsibility

In the early 1400s, Johannes Gutenberg invented a mechanical movable-type printing process that enabled the first mass production of books.  Within decades, the technology had spread across Europe, and the growing availability and affordability of the printed word revolutionized society.  The flow of information and ideas fuelled the Reformation and the French Revolution, broke down strongholds of power, whether political or religious, and contributed to the democratization not only of societies but of knowledge itself.

Over time, we’ve witnessed the emergence of mass media, designed and used to broadcast information from and by a small group to a large one.  This communications audience is, essentially, a mass society of undifferentiated individuals.  It receives information.

However, social media turns a receptive mass society into a creative public.  Information doesn’t just flow from a small group to a large one, and information creation isn’t just the purview of the powerful elite anymore.  The trickling democratization of knowledge that began with the Gutenberg press, social media is making a flood.

Now, humans have always been social creatures.  It’s not social networking that’s new.  Rather, it’s the development of new technologies at a time of rapid globalization and increasing awareness of humanity’s impact on the Earth that have converged to create the perfect storm of new social media. Read the whole post here

2010
09/05
CATEGORY
Corporate Responsibility
Social Media
Stakeholder Engagement
TAGS





2 comments

Good Things

Follow some of the links recommended below... Some are specifically relevant to Canadians, but many are of general interest. I'll update from time to time.