Posts Tagged ‘ Corporate Responsibility ’

Tailoring a Bespoke CR Strategy: Why You Should Engage Employees

If you had a chance to take part in or review the #CSRchat on Twitter this week, you will have gleaned some key points about employee engagement in the context of corporate responsibility:  what it means; some examples of who’s doing it well; what might be required to undertake employee engagement; how it might be measured; who might be involved.  But, surprisingly, not too much was said about the benefits of undertaking employee engagement – perhaps there just wasn’t enough time!

Some of the benefits that I heard from other participants included “a heightened emotional and intellectual connection that an employee has for his/her job/organization” (@TCBCCS), “sparks positive feedback” (@gchesman), and “ideas from many sources, action from many sources, creativity and interest in the company beyond the job duties” (@EXAIR_KE).

I thought I would use this post to describe some of the benefits that I have found after conducting the kind of employee engagement I described in my post last week [Advice for the Shoestring Practitioner: Sustainability Mapping, January 31, 2011], in the context of developing corporate responsibility (CR) strategies. Read on!

Advice for the Shoestring Practitioner: Sustainability Mapping

Are you a Shoestring Practitioner?  A Shoestring Practitioner is someone with a passion for doing good, for doing the right thing, for doing things better, but who is working on a shoestring:  constrained in his or her efforts by a lack of resources, such as staff, time, money, or organizational support.  This post is intended for the Shoestring Practitioner, especially one who is at or near the beginning of a sustainability journey in their organization, but may also be helpful to others trying to advance a corporate responsibility (CR) strategy.  I prepared this post in response to questions received through my network about how to engage employees in CR planning.

In an earlier post [Should sustainability have a seat in the C-suite? December 1, 2010], I talked about the need to develop a fulsome understanding of the sustainability landscape in order to guide decisions about corporate responsibility (CR) strategy.  A comprehensive and well-founded CR strategy will be informed by current and future business drivers pertinent to sustainability, including evolving regulatory frameworks, changing stakeholder expectations (including, but by no means limited to customers), emerging standards and best practice, pressing risks and opportunities, and the organization’s own capacities and competitive positioning.  It must also consider, especially in a complex, diverse organization, the range of perspectives and opinions, the differences in awareness and understanding about CR and sustainability issues that may exist among the employees who will eventually be responsible for implementing a CR strategy, as well as among other key stakeholder groups.

A key component of sustainability mapping is stakeholder engagement, particularly internal employee engagement.  Employees can provide unique insight into current and emerging challenges and opportunities, shed light on existing organizational strengths and weaknesses, and highlight areas where CR and sustainability programming could advance strategic business goals.  Moreover, early employee engagement around CR and sustainability issues increases the relevance of strategies developed in response to their input and the likelihood of later buy-in and support.

While sustainability mapping can be a significant undertaking, especially in a large organization, employee engagement is something the Shoestring Practitioner often can tackle on their own, with limited resources.  Click here to learn how…

The Evolution of a Corporate Responsibility Policy

Today, Cenovus Energy Inc. released its new Corporate Responsibility Policy.  [Read the press release here.]

For any company, that’s a significant milestone.  For me, it’s an opportunity to look back at the evolution of a corporate responsibility policy through a decade of corporate change.

Back in about 2000, my then-client, PanCanadian Energy, a company to which I had been providing environmental and regulatory affairs advice for several years, asked if I could help them to develop a Sustainable Business Strategy. Naturally, like any self-respecting consultant, I said yes.  Thus we embarked on a complex and challenging effort to map the sustainability landscape relevant to the company’s business, to inform the development of an appropriate policy framework. Then what happened? Click here for the whole story…

Should sustainability have a seat in the C-Suite?

Some of you may recall the case study published on-line by the Harvard Business Review back in October, which posed the question of whether or not fictional company Narinex should hire a Chief Sustainability Officer.  The full Case Study is now available in the December 2010 edition of HBR (subscription required; text pages 133-137) (or try this version at Scribd, e-pages 135-139).

If you’re not familiar with the HBR Case Study feature, it generally involves a fictional scenario depicting some current business challenge and features the advice of two business leaders with subject-matter experience.  A few readers’ comments, distilled from the on-line commentary compiled previously, are included to illustrate additional perspectives.

Well, golly; the editors at HBR thought my comment “offers a valuable perspective,” and included an edited version of it in the December issue (text page 137 or Scribd e-page 139).

A few of my contacts have asked to see my comments, so I reproduce my full comments below (with the HBR-selected paragraph highlighted).  My comments will make more sense if you read the Case Study first!  Thanks for your interest!

Read my full comments on the HBR Case Study here…

Investor Relations: where capital meets corporate accountability

For some 250 years, responsible investing has been a key means of aligning our influence with our values.  The Investor Relations function is squarely at the nexus between the strategies and performance of the company and the primary leverage point for stakeholder expression of sustainability goals.  What does this mean for the Investor Relations professional?

Perhaps the very earliest occurrence of socially responsible investing took place in 1758 when the Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends, better known as the Quakers, issued the first of a series of denunciations of the slave trade, advising its members to “avoid being any way concerned, in reaping the unrighteous Profits arising from that iniquitous Practice of dealing in Negroes and other Slaves” and “endeavour to keep their Hands clear of this unrighteous Gain of Oppression.”

John Wesley, founder of Methodism

Around the same time (between 1744 and 1760), John Wesley, an English preacher and founder of the Methodist Church, delivered his sermon entitled The Use of Money.  You may have heard the saying, “Make all you can, save all you can, give all you can.”  That is John Wesley, paraphrased.  What it doesn’t capture, however, are the boundaries he drew around the first of his three rules: “gain all you can.”  Wesley advised his followers to gain but without hurt to body, mind, or soul, of either ourselves or our neighbours.  He spoke of unhealthy work environments, cheating, lying, anti-competitive behaviour, the sale of anything that may impair health, and what he called “sinful trade”.  He advocated honest industry, diligence, continuous improvement, and best practice.  Religious institutions have been at the forefront of socially responsible investing, or SRI, ever since.

In the last five decades, we have seen a steady rise in interest in SRI.  [For a brief history of SRI, see these entries on Wikipedia and About.com.]  We know environmental, social, and governance (or ESG) issues are not new to investors.  So what has changed? Read on!

Collaboration as Competitive Advantage

As I discussed in an earlier post, social media have enabled a shift in information and communications flow from a traditional mass-media “push” model, in which a company may craft and deliver a message to its stakeholders (often a different message for different stakeholders), to a “pull” model, in which company and stakeholders are on a more even footing, and what is being said by one may be heard by all.  In this “pull” model, stakeholders themselves define their own information requirements and actively seek out the sources, connections, and networks that will meet them.

While this might seem scary to some, it also represents one of the great opportunities that social media offers:  collaboration.  If you view each one of these voices not as a threat but as an opportunity to engage and to learn, you can leverage social media to add value to your business.
How? Read on!

How not to legislate Corporate Social Responsibility

Today in Canada’s House of Commons, Bill C-571, a Private Member’s Bill (that is, a Bill proposed by a Member of Parliament, rather than the government), had its first reading.  Bill C-571, referred to as the Trade in Conflict Minerals Act, is intended to deal with corporate practices relating to the purchase of minerals from the Great Lakes Region of Africa (which includes Burundi, Rwanda, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Uganda, Kenya, and Tanzania).

While the trade in so-called conflict minerals is an issue worth action, this Bill is not the answer. Here’s why…

%d bloggers like this: