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
No comments:
Post a Comment