Another look at CSR

For many corporations, corporate social responsibility  is about giving back to society or acts of philanthropy. Others think of it as submission to the prescriptions of law with respect to their impact to the community, to their human capital, and to the environment where they do business.  Wikipedia has it, “Is a form of corporate self-regulation integrated into a business model… whereby a business monitors and ensures its active compliance with the spirit of the law, ethical standards, and international norms.”  

Another definition put forward by the Pachamama Alliance is that “Social responsibility is an ethical theory, in which individuals are accountable for fulfilling their civic duty; the actions of an individual must benefit the whole of society. In this way, there must be a balance between economic growth and the welfare of society and the environment. If this equilibrium is maintained, then social responsibility is accomplished.” 

While CSR plays a significant part in building awareness and in changing and expanding our definition of responsibility (not just satisfying the interest of stakeholders but also of the society and environment as a whole), I believe CSR is best appreciated when viewed beyond just the acquiescence of standards and the impact of our business activities to persons or to nature. In fact, CSR is not even necessary if the corporation is run by people who genuinely care about the world around them. 

I find it dishonorable for companies that advertise heavily their CSR efforts as if to say that they are among the few good men around. There are also those that publish their CSR lengthily in their corporate profiles as if they’re running for public office. It’s such a pity that a lot of people have used CSR for the wrong reasons – for pa pogi points (to solicit admiration). And that’s partly because many of its promoters emphasize more on how it elicits company differentiation than to make a difference to the society.

Many companies are motivated to embark on a CSR in order to save or improve their reputation, thus, diluting the ideals of how a corporation should and ought to behave in relation to improving the human condition and in relation to the prudent and conscientious use of our resources and the preservation of the same. Many companies also integrate CSR in their business activities not because they want to be responsible but because this is the only means for them to be responsible. In other words, their conduct as a good corporate citizen can be measured by meeting the minimum requirements of being responsible – more of a legal obligation than a concrete act of doing what is proper and fair.  

To do what is right is the simplest way a company can easily meet up to any ethical standards expected of a corporation. Doing what is right is not only meeting the rudiments of law and standards but doing what is best for others. For example, if you think that you’re doing the right thing because you have met the minimum wage, think again. Minimum wage is merely a “living wage” and does not improve the condition of a worker in terms of satisfying his need for a decent home, education for his children and the health needs of his family.    

***

In observance of the Holy Week, I have no column for next Saturday. Allow me to nevertheless, say my best wishes and that may the message of Easter brings new hope for all of us in uplifting the lives of others and in actively becoming a good example to our families and to the people around us.

Happy Easter everyone!

***

Send emails to [email protected]