1/25/2008

Corporate responsibility: good or just fahionable?


















The Economist published an article this week about the state of Corporate Social Responsibility, suggesting that it's not worth a company's time unless it's an integral part of their business.

95% of CEOs surveyed last year by McKinsey said society now has higher expectations of businesses. Business schools are quickly adding courses and specialized departments about CSR. The boom can be attributed to a few drivers:

1. Reputation: companies have to work hard to protect a good reputation because they are more transparent than ever. Nike comes in near the bottom in the Ethical Consumer Index right next to Shell and McDonalds.
2. Climate change: this is the most pressing environmental issue. An Inconvenient Truth grossed $48 million last year.
3. Investors: companies like Goldman Sachs have started to integrate environmental issues into their equity research.
4. Employees: employees are more inclined to work at companies that share similar values and ethos about the environment.

Many people are skeptical about CSR, asking if there is a competitive advantage to green strategy and believing that despite the huge surge of interest, it's still just rhetoric. According to Michael Porter's paper in the 2006 Harvard Review, "CSR, in most cases, is too unfocused, too shotgun, too many supporting someone's pet project with no real connection to business."

Sounds like there's a very large opportunity for a company to do it right and to do it well.

No comments: