I would like to include the followign words in the Development Dictionary.
Community Development Artists - Community development is the attainment of responsible well-being. It is an interaction of various factors such as equity, capacities, livelihood security and management, and sustainability, among other things. The achievement of this has no definite structure or formula, and will rely largely on the context and actions of people. It is an art work. If community development is an art work, facilitators may then be referred to as community development artists. S/he will combine different social colors and behavioral shades, with the use of several contextual canvasses and organizing strokes, as inspired by a participatory landscape. Every piece of art work is unique and relevant as it mirrors the real situational needs and directions. I am a Community Development Artist.
Paradigm-shift Facilitators - The challenge in doing participatory processes is in enjoyning the community to adopt such an approach. The buy-in process becomes even more tedious especially when community leaders are used to top-down approaches. In these instances, the task of facilitators is geared towards changing paradigms. To effectively accomplish this, there may be a need to down-shift the role of CD facilitators, with the community taking the helm of community developement work. So in participatory approaches, we need paradigm-shift facilitators.
Participatory Journey - This is the journey or the processes that a community or individual may undergo to fully grasp and understand the concept and dynamism of participation. The processes may involve the following stages: unlearning, experiencing, appreciating, understanding, learning and doing.
Saturday, August 11, 2007
Responsible Well-Being - A Personal Agenda for Development... A Reflection
Alexey Rola Cajilig (alexey.cajilig@gmail.com)
My reflection will focus on Robert Chambers' concept of responsible well-being and Corporate Social Responsibility.
I have a special interest on Corporate Social Responsibility or CSR. In fact I used to manage the national CSR campaigns of a multi-national pesticides company a few years back.
In the course of CSR implementation, I began to question our company's intentions when I realized that it was mostly public relations and sales-driven. The programs we painstakingly developed with communities (and "whole-heartedly" supported by top company executives) were abruptly put to a halt whenever shifts in buying patterns occur, and as public opinions improve. I feared that the unsustainable nature of such interventions, not to mention the co-opted strategies applied in hurried fashion, will have a negative impact on people especially i terms of genuine participation and commitment. At that time, I felt ill-equipped to face higher company personalities in debate over the issue. So I left the company in search for the real R in CSR.
CSR should adhere to the concept of responsible well-being. The value of giving more because you have more should be highlighted. More than that, CSR programs should ensure sustainable community livelihoods through participatory development and management.
CSR campaigns should not be geared primarily to gain customer loyalty and bottom-line sales. Instead, it must move towards the build-up of appropriate social services, complimentary with those provided by other organizations and the government.
After four years of searching, I am ready to answer the question - What is the R in CSR? The missing R in CSR is responsible well-being. With responsible well-being, grassroots programs will not result i the furtherance of a pervasive culture of dependence. Instead, it will eventaully result to real empowerment and considerable degree of economic independence. As a start, corporations may have to embrace the fact that they need to train CSR personnel in responsible well-being, and re-align programs towards this direction. In similar manner, community development institutions may have to unlearn certain biases towards business, and likewise embrace the role of paradigm-shift facilitators, consciously influencing corporate behaviours to help achieve a CSR with a real R.
My reflection will focus on Robert Chambers' concept of responsible well-being and Corporate Social Responsibility.
I have a special interest on Corporate Social Responsibility or CSR. In fact I used to manage the national CSR campaigns of a multi-national pesticides company a few years back.
In the course of CSR implementation, I began to question our company's intentions when I realized that it was mostly public relations and sales-driven. The programs we painstakingly developed with communities (and "whole-heartedly" supported by top company executives) were abruptly put to a halt whenever shifts in buying patterns occur, and as public opinions improve. I feared that the unsustainable nature of such interventions, not to mention the co-opted strategies applied in hurried fashion, will have a negative impact on people especially i terms of genuine participation and commitment. At that time, I felt ill-equipped to face higher company personalities in debate over the issue. So I left the company in search for the real R in CSR.
CSR should adhere to the concept of responsible well-being. The value of giving more because you have more should be highlighted. More than that, CSR programs should ensure sustainable community livelihoods through participatory development and management.
CSR campaigns should not be geared primarily to gain customer loyalty and bottom-line sales. Instead, it must move towards the build-up of appropriate social services, complimentary with those provided by other organizations and the government.
After four years of searching, I am ready to answer the question - What is the R in CSR? The missing R in CSR is responsible well-being. With responsible well-being, grassroots programs will not result i the furtherance of a pervasive culture of dependence. Instead, it will eventaully result to real empowerment and considerable degree of economic independence. As a start, corporations may have to embrace the fact that they need to train CSR personnel in responsible well-being, and re-align programs towards this direction. In similar manner, community development institutions may have to unlearn certain biases towards business, and likewise embrace the role of paradigm-shift facilitators, consciously influencing corporate behaviours to help achieve a CSR with a real R.
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
Reflection on Corporate Social Responsibility and Community Development
By Rosel A Isidro (roselski@yahoo.com)
I believe that there is a thin line that separates Public Relations from Corporate Social Responsibility. While PR deals with internal and external publics of an organization, CSR mainly looks at the external public. PR and CSR projects are both conceived to create a good public image of a business organization, which, in the first place, was created to make profit.
In a presentation of the CSR Institute during the CSR Expo last month, they identified the benefits of CSR on the profit side, which includes: brand loyalty/brand recall; improved shareholder relations; improved stakeholder relations; sharper anticipation and management of risk; learning and innovation; a good CSR reputation reflects on the values and principles inherent in the company; and CSR influences products and services in the minds of customers and consumers.
Thus, competitive advantage and CSR was linked by Porter and Kramer (2006: also cited by CSR Institute in their presentation).
“If corporations were to analyze their prospects for social responsibility using the same frameworks that guide their core business choices, they would discover that CSR ca be much more than a cost, constraint or a charitable deed—it can be s source of opportunity, innovation and competitive advantage.”
This is to say that a CSR project is always conceived with the intention to create a good public image of the company, which in the long-term could spell opportunity to make more profit. This is where a tension area between CSR and CD comes in. In the project identification process, what weighs heavier? the need of the community, or the prospects of a better profit in return?
A more basic tension area, however, is the question of who participates in the project identification and conceptualization of a CSR program?
There is no doubt, however, that people benefit from the CSR projects being done by several companies in the Philippines today. The likes of Mirant Philippines, Andres Soriano Foundation, Ayala Foundation, Shell Philippines Foundation, Holcim, to name a few. These corporate foundations have registered a number of program beneficiaries. The very good publications reflect this. From a community development point of view, however, their first hand account is worth digging. What are the impacts of these projects on their lives? What are their stories? How do they look at the future now? I just wish to look beyond the numbers.
The concept and practice of CSR from the 60’s to the present has evolved from the stage of philanthropy to integration of CSR into the business practice. Looking at this evolution, I am sure that it still in the process of defining its direction. The fact that practitioners from several disciplines are looking at it very closely using their own lenses—such as business management, psychology, human ecology, etc., --the community development practitioners are in a better position to seek direction and maximize the potential of CSR in making positive changes in the lives of the people. A good grasp of community development theories and principles could very well be a firm foundation for people empowering CSR projects.
The next tension area arises in the above mentioned proposition. Are community development workers ready to embrace the concept of CSR, considering that it is a business strategy towards social investment?
How can the business side and the societal aspect be harmonized through CSR? In a sense, the framework below applies:
I believe that there is a thin line that separates Public Relations from Corporate Social Responsibility. While PR deals with internal and external publics of an organization, CSR mainly looks at the external public. PR and CSR projects are both conceived to create a good public image of a business organization, which, in the first place, was created to make profit.
In a presentation of the CSR Institute during the CSR Expo last month, they identified the benefits of CSR on the profit side, which includes: brand loyalty/brand recall; improved shareholder relations; improved stakeholder relations; sharper anticipation and management of risk; learning and innovation; a good CSR reputation reflects on the values and principles inherent in the company; and CSR influences products and services in the minds of customers and consumers.
Thus, competitive advantage and CSR was linked by Porter and Kramer (2006: also cited by CSR Institute in their presentation).
“If corporations were to analyze their prospects for social responsibility using the same frameworks that guide their core business choices, they would discover that CSR ca be much more than a cost, constraint or a charitable deed—it can be s source of opportunity, innovation and competitive advantage.”
This is to say that a CSR project is always conceived with the intention to create a good public image of the company, which in the long-term could spell opportunity to make more profit. This is where a tension area between CSR and CD comes in. In the project identification process, what weighs heavier? the need of the community, or the prospects of a better profit in return?
A more basic tension area, however, is the question of who participates in the project identification and conceptualization of a CSR program?
There is no doubt, however, that people benefit from the CSR projects being done by several companies in the Philippines today. The likes of Mirant Philippines, Andres Soriano Foundation, Ayala Foundation, Shell Philippines Foundation, Holcim, to name a few. These corporate foundations have registered a number of program beneficiaries. The very good publications reflect this. From a community development point of view, however, their first hand account is worth digging. What are the impacts of these projects on their lives? What are their stories? How do they look at the future now? I just wish to look beyond the numbers.
The concept and practice of CSR from the 60’s to the present has evolved from the stage of philanthropy to integration of CSR into the business practice. Looking at this evolution, I am sure that it still in the process of defining its direction. The fact that practitioners from several disciplines are looking at it very closely using their own lenses—such as business management, psychology, human ecology, etc., --the community development practitioners are in a better position to seek direction and maximize the potential of CSR in making positive changes in the lives of the people. A good grasp of community development theories and principles could very well be a firm foundation for people empowering CSR projects.
The next tension area arises in the above mentioned proposition. Are community development workers ready to embrace the concept of CSR, considering that it is a business strategy towards social investment?
How can the business side and the societal aspect be harmonized through CSR? In a sense, the framework below applies:
The framework above depicts the societal case vs. business case for CSR, part of the CSR Institute Presentation.
Community development workers have a standing bias towards the poor and the disempowered. Could CSR projects prioritize them? To what extent? This could be a challenge to CD practitioners, and also to the business community as well. How far can we go in terms of responding to the less fortunate communities? What if there is no promise of returns even in the long-term basis? How can the business side and the societal aspect be harmonized through CSR?
This could very well be the reason why it seems easier or less complex for companies to conceptualize CSR programs or projects responding to macro-issues such as the Millenium Development Goals. Like in the case of the League of Corporate Foundations, they launched the 57-75 Reverse the Education Crisis Program and Sustaining the Environment Program, in response to poverty reduction.
Rosel A. Isidro
roselski@yahoo.com
Corporate Social Responsibility VS Community Development??
Corporate Social Responsibility and Community Development... is there any conflict?
In a quick scanning, the answer to this question may be reflected on how some development activists (my purposes of BLOG discussions, we will refer to them as DevActs) view these two concepts: like water and oil - you can put them together yet you cannot form it into a mixture. I encountered a lot of DevActs in my journey towards CSR advocacy. It is quite easy to recognize them for they usually dwell on the following arguments:
In a quick scanning, the answer to this question may be reflected on how some development activists (my purposes of BLOG discussions, we will refer to them as DevActs) view these two concepts: like water and oil - you can put them together yet you cannot form it into a mixture. I encountered a lot of DevActs in my journey towards CSR advocacy. It is quite easy to recognize them for they usually dwell on the following arguments:
- "CSR is both a tool and strategy employed by transnational corporations in order to mask their destructive impacts."
- "These programs are designed to increase their share in their customer's share of heart, which will eventually lead to an increase in their share of wallet."
Based on these points, the DevActs will usually advocate non-support for CSR initiatives, and instead look into genuine community development strategies as the real and lasting solution for poverty, gender-related issues, environmental degradation, and other social issues and concerns. DevActs are usually from the fields of social and natural sciences.
On the other hand, active CSR practitioners (we will refer to them as Corporate Activists or CorpActs) tend to co-opt social/community development concepts for their PR projects, and marketing programs. Through popular media, the CorpActs seem to pay great amounts of lip service to advocate for a new type of community development - the CSR. Based on western-influenced literatures on development, the CorpActs implement grassroots programs (sometimes integrated with "innovative" ideas and proven marketing strategies) with lots of fanfare and media attention. However, in a collective sense, these activities will help fight poverty, preserve the environment, and find solutions to all other emerging social issues and concerns.
But development is not a contest between DevActs and CorpActs!
The real issue is sustainability, patronage politics and cultural hegemony of dole-out mentality. The current trend for most CSR programs are geared towards short-term actions, and dependent on a company's capability to spend for "extra-curricular" activities. The financial allocation for projects are determined by the organization's sales performance. Hence a well-funded project this year may end up without any funding next year. In such a scenario, projects may discontinue. In a company's perspective, this is simply a change in direction.
Short-term efforts, may reflect as great accomplishments for corporations especially when scaled up in numbers. Scanning the impacts of these sporadic programs on the surface may also evoke positive reviews. However, looking deeply into the dynamics of community organizing and grassroots interactions, one may realize that these sporadic projects actually instills patronage politics and a cultural hegemony of dole-out mentality.
This MUST be corrected. The DevActs must begin to realize that attaining development also needs cooperation and acceptance. The fact that the business community is actively moving towards community development through CSR is for real. Accept this and move forward. Without compromising your critical thinking, extend a helping hand and show the way towards an effective participatory development process.
On the other hand, CorpActs must begin to realize that community development through CSR needs to follow a process of participation, acceptance and community action in order to achieve real sustainable development.
There is no conflict between CSR and Community Development. An effective interface will bring synergy that will have lasting positive changes in people's lives.
Alexey Rola Cajilig (alexey.cajilig@gmail.com)
A Brief History on CSR
This is a brief history on CSR...
The United Nations, through the UN General Assembly's Millennium Declaration in September 2000, embarked on an initiative to "halve, by the year 2015, the proportion of the world's people whose income is less than one dollar a day and the proportion of people who suffer from hunger and, by the same date, to halve the proportion of people who are unable to reach or afford safe drinking water." While the community of nations agreed on this, the United Nations still acknowledged the role of private sector and civil society organizations in attaining the millenium objective. This call for strong partnerships with the private sector evolved to what is now commonly referred to as corporate citizenship.
Although largely encouraged, the involvements of multinational corporations (MNC) in development initiatives were not triggered by the U.N. Millennium Declaration. Various programs were already implemented and geared towards poverty alleviation, education and health immediately following the Second World War until the late 1990s. However, these initiatives usually came in the form of philanthropic aid and did not actively involve local communities in the planning and implementation processes (Ciba-Geigy Public Relations, 1985: 19; Madeley, 2002: 35; Paul et. al., 2003: 1; World Business Council for Sustainable Development, 2004: 13).
The introduction of CSR created a new approach in management where doing business with the poor was done "in ways that benefit the poor and benefit the company' (WBCSD, 2004: 14). As a result, major MNCs and Small & Medium Enterprises (SMEs) are now into the CSR arena to gain leverage over competition, and to provide services to communities within their sphere of corporate operations and employee competencies (Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainable Competitiveness, 2004: 1-3).
The United Nations, through the UN General Assembly's Millennium Declaration in September 2000, embarked on an initiative to "halve, by the year 2015, the proportion of the world's people whose income is less than one dollar a day and the proportion of people who suffer from hunger and, by the same date, to halve the proportion of people who are unable to reach or afford safe drinking water." While the community of nations agreed on this, the United Nations still acknowledged the role of private sector and civil society organizations in attaining the millenium objective. This call for strong partnerships with the private sector evolved to what is now commonly referred to as corporate citizenship.
Although largely encouraged, the involvements of multinational corporations (MNC) in development initiatives were not triggered by the U.N. Millennium Declaration. Various programs were already implemented and geared towards poverty alleviation, education and health immediately following the Second World War until the late 1990s. However, these initiatives usually came in the form of philanthropic aid and did not actively involve local communities in the planning and implementation processes (Ciba-Geigy Public Relations, 1985: 19; Madeley, 2002: 35; Paul et. al., 2003: 1; World Business Council for Sustainable Development, 2004: 13).
The introduction of CSR created a new approach in management where doing business with the poor was done "in ways that benefit the poor and benefit the company' (WBCSD, 2004: 14). As a result, major MNCs and Small & Medium Enterprises (SMEs) are now into the CSR arena to gain leverage over competition, and to provide services to communities within their sphere of corporate operations and employee competencies (Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainable Competitiveness, 2004: 1-3).
CSR Discussions
CSR Discussions... a free-wheeling take on community development through corporate citizenship
This Blog site is dedicated to all CSR enthusiasts who would like to update and get updated on the latest news about CSR. We would like to promote a venue for free-wheeling discussions on CSR in order to celebrate success stories, and challenge current practices that may still need improvement.
Share your CSR experiences! Post questions and share your views. Let's discuss how we can achieve community development through corporate citizenship.
CenTRe8 (thecentre8@gmail.com)
This Blog site is dedicated to all CSR enthusiasts who would like to update and get updated on the latest news about CSR. We would like to promote a venue for free-wheeling discussions on CSR in order to celebrate success stories, and challenge current practices that may still need improvement.
Share your CSR experiences! Post questions and share your views. Let's discuss how we can achieve community development through corporate citizenship.
CenTRe8 (thecentre8@gmail.com)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
