WHAT IS CSR?
Starbucks emphatically makes a point to educate consumers about their free trade coffee offerings; IKEA monitors and prohibits suppliers in India from enacting child labor practices and offers financial incentives to provide the children of employees with education opportunities; and PepsiCo disbanded operations in countries displaying gross human rights violations as they did in Burma (Vogel). These are all examples of corporate social responsibility, a postmodern revolution in how companies conduct business. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is, "the intelligent and objective concern for the welfare of society which restrains corporate behavior from ultimate destructive activities, no matter how immediately profitable and which leads in the direction of positive contributions to human betterment" (Nwachukwu). CSR involves practices that go beyond the basic legal obligations required of a company towards its employees or the communities in which it operates and instead facilitates corporate decision makers to take action that simultaneously protects and improves the welfare of society as a whole along with their own interests (Wulfson). Essentially, CSR is a framework for an organization taking responsibility for the impact of its activities upon its employees, customers, community and the environment.
WHY CSR IS IMPORANT
Several factors contribute to the importance of CSR. Most importantly, CSR should not just be another department in a large corporation or a policy it chooses to pursue some of the time. Companies cannot only employ CSR strategies when they have the economic means to do so or when business is good and disband CSR policies when business is slow, but rather; CSR must be engrained as a central value of a company no matter what the economic times are like.
The most important reason CSR is taking prominence in the corporate world is because evidence suggests that companies that pursue CSR strategies are more profitable than those who do not. Moreover, CSR has gained prominence because the Internet and mass media, empowered by globalization, make it difficult for companies to bury or hide detrimental social practices. Preserving and maintaining a healthy company image is one reason for the prevalence of CSR.
Lastly, the awareness of a duty to the communities in which companies operate is emerging. Corporations understand their roles as global citizens and CSR allows them to positively facilitate relationships with the communities in which they operate. Current World Wild Life CEO Carter Roberts epitomizes this point, “Companies still thinking about the environment and the community as social responsibilities rather than business imperatives are living in the dark ages.”
Starbucks emphatically makes a point to educate consumers about their free trade coffee offerings; IKEA monitors and prohibits suppliers in India from enacting child labor practices and offers financial incentives to provide the children of employees with education opportunities; and PepsiCo disbanded operations in countries displaying gross human rights violations as they did in Burma (Vogel). These are all examples of corporate social responsibility, a postmodern revolution in how companies conduct business. Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is, "the intelligent and objective concern for the welfare of society which restrains corporate behavior from ultimate destructive activities, no matter how immediately profitable and which leads in the direction of positive contributions to human betterment" (Nwachukwu). CSR involves practices that go beyond the basic legal obligations required of a company towards its employees or the communities in which it operates and instead facilitates corporate decision makers to take action that simultaneously protects and improves the welfare of society as a whole along with their own interests (Wulfson). Essentially, CSR is a framework for an organization taking responsibility for the impact of its activities upon its employees, customers, community and the environment.
WHY CSR IS IMPORANT
Several factors contribute to the importance of CSR. Most importantly, CSR should not just be another department in a large corporation or a policy it chooses to pursue some of the time. Companies cannot only employ CSR strategies when they have the economic means to do so or when business is good and disband CSR policies when business is slow, but rather; CSR must be engrained as a central value of a company no matter what the economic times are like.
The most important reason CSR is taking prominence in the corporate world is because evidence suggests that companies that pursue CSR strategies are more profitable than those who do not. Moreover, CSR has gained prominence because the Internet and mass media, empowered by globalization, make it difficult for companies to bury or hide detrimental social practices. Preserving and maintaining a healthy company image is one reason for the prevalence of CSR.
Lastly, the awareness of a duty to the communities in which companies operate is emerging. Corporations understand their roles as global citizens and CSR allows them to positively facilitate relationships with the communities in which they operate. Current World Wild Life CEO Carter Roberts epitomizes this point, “Companies still thinking about the environment and the community as social responsibilities rather than business imperatives are living in the dark ages.”
An example of CSR in practice: The Olympic Games
Since the early 1990’s when sustainable practices and corporate social responsibility models got pushed into the forefront in many national and international organizations, the Olympic movement began openly acknowledging the role of community members as stakeholders in the organizing and hosting of the Games. In 1999, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) adopted a modified version of United Nations Environment Programme’s (UNEP) Agenda 21. Agenda 21: Sport for Sustainable Development is described as a bid to “encourage members of the Movement to play an active part in the sustainable development of our planet” and emphasizes 3 main objectives of “improving socio-economic conditions, conservation and management of resources for sustainable development and strengthening the role of major groups” (Agenda 21, p. 23). The concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR) has also gained importance amongst sporting organizations (Babiak & Wolfe, 2006), CSR is the perspective that corporations hold a responsibility to work towards meeting the needs and interests of all stakeholders, where stakeholders are considered to be any individual or group that can affect or is affected by the focal organization’s actions. Misener (2008, NASSM abstract) points out that the strategic plans and initiatives developed by both organizing committees (VANOC & LOCOG) for the upcoming Vancouver and London Olympic Games in 2010 and 2012 respectively, represent a CSR approach – where steps have been taken to outline a commitment to various social and environmental interests - rather than just the bottom line of corporate interests.
Unfortunately, it seems that a commitment to CSR does not automatically accrue to actual CSR practices. Giving a brief overview of her preliminary results, Misener (2008, NASSM conference) revealed that the CSR adopted by VANOC and LOCOG are most likely being used as part of social marketing for the event - to decrease criticisms and enhance reputations – in support of elite stakeholders rather than in support of the involvement of other community members. Gruneau (2002) argues a similar point when writing about mega event organizing in general, suggesting that “local politicians and media often focus on the interests and enthusiasms of the developers, property owners and middle class consumers as ‘synonymous with the well-being of the city” (P. 84). Researchers have described the manner in which the Olympic Games are organized and managed as being somewhat problematic and incompatible with a community engagement approach (Roche, 2002). Olympic scholars have clearly highlighted concerns about the level of stakeholder involvement in Games organizing, as Whitson and Horne (2006) suggest “Olympic hosting should be the subject of a full and inclusive public debate, in which citizens in every social location have opportunities to participate” (p. 77). They have also recognised the factors that are potentially limiting this involvement; sighting the use of Olympism rhetoric to promote the Games, lack of accountability and transparency in the organization of the Olympic Movement among some of the issues that are currently creating a Games which are not inclusive of CSR and sustainable practices. It perhaps because of these limited opportunities for community input, in addition to the undeniable social, environmental and economic impacts of the Games that CSR practices are somewhat limited despite their stated commitments to that ideal.
Since the early 1990’s when sustainable practices and corporate social responsibility models got pushed into the forefront in many national and international organizations, the Olympic movement began openly acknowledging the role of community members as stakeholders in the organizing and hosting of the Games. In 1999, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) adopted a modified version of United Nations Environment Programme’s (UNEP) Agenda 21. Agenda 21: Sport for Sustainable Development is described as a bid to “encourage members of the Movement to play an active part in the sustainable development of our planet” and emphasizes 3 main objectives of “improving socio-economic conditions, conservation and management of resources for sustainable development and strengthening the role of major groups” (Agenda 21, p. 23). The concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR) has also gained importance amongst sporting organizations (Babiak & Wolfe, 2006), CSR is the perspective that corporations hold a responsibility to work towards meeting the needs and interests of all stakeholders, where stakeholders are considered to be any individual or group that can affect or is affected by the focal organization’s actions. Misener (2008, NASSM abstract) points out that the strategic plans and initiatives developed by both organizing committees (VANOC & LOCOG) for the upcoming Vancouver and London Olympic Games in 2010 and 2012 respectively, represent a CSR approach – where steps have been taken to outline a commitment to various social and environmental interests - rather than just the bottom line of corporate interests.
Unfortunately, it seems that a commitment to CSR does not automatically accrue to actual CSR practices. Giving a brief overview of her preliminary results, Misener (2008, NASSM conference) revealed that the CSR adopted by VANOC and LOCOG are most likely being used as part of social marketing for the event - to decrease criticisms and enhance reputations – in support of elite stakeholders rather than in support of the involvement of other community members. Gruneau (2002) argues a similar point when writing about mega event organizing in general, suggesting that “local politicians and media often focus on the interests and enthusiasms of the developers, property owners and middle class consumers as ‘synonymous with the well-being of the city” (P. 84). Researchers have described the manner in which the Olympic Games are organized and managed as being somewhat problematic and incompatible with a community engagement approach (Roche, 2002). Olympic scholars have clearly highlighted concerns about the level of stakeholder involvement in Games organizing, as Whitson and Horne (2006) suggest “Olympic hosting should be the subject of a full and inclusive public debate, in which citizens in every social location have opportunities to participate” (p. 77). They have also recognised the factors that are potentially limiting this involvement; sighting the use of Olympism rhetoric to promote the Games, lack of accountability and transparency in the organization of the Olympic Movement among some of the issues that are currently creating a Games which are not inclusive of CSR and sustainable practices. It perhaps because of these limited opportunities for community input, in addition to the undeniable social, environmental and economic impacts of the Games that CSR practices are somewhat limited despite their stated commitments to that ideal.
No comments:
Post a Comment