CSR 2.0: Reinventing Corporate Social Responsibility for the 21st Century Part 1 of 3 by @WayneVisser - Director at CSR International
Why has CSR failed so spectacularly to address the very issues it claims to be most concerned about? This comes down to three factors – the Triple Curse of Modern CSR:
One of the great revolutions of the 1970s was total quality management, conceived by American statistician W. Edwards Deming, perfected by the Japanese and exported around the world as ISO 9001. At the very core of Deming’s TQM model and the ISO standard is continual improvement, a principle that has now become ubiquitous in all management system approaches to performance. The most popular environmental management standard, ISO 14001, is also build on the same principle.
There is nothing wrong with continuous improvement per se. On the contrary, it has brought safety and reliability to the very products and services that we associate with modern quality of life. But when we use it as the primary approach to tackling our social, environmental and ethical challenges, it fails on two critical counts: speed and scale. The incremental approach of CSR, while replete with evidence of micro-scale, gradual improvements, has completely and utterly failed to make any impact on the massive sustainability crises that we face, many of which are getting worse at a pace that far outstrips any futile CSR-led attempts at amelioration.
Ask any CSR manager what their greatest frustration is and they will tell you: lack of top management commitment. This is ‘code-speak’ for saying that CSR is, at best, a peripheral function in most companies. There may be a CSR manager, a CSR department even, a CSR report and a public commitment to any number of CSR codes and standards. But these do little to mask the underlying truth that shareholder-driven capitalism is rampant and its obsession with short-term financial measures of progress is contradictory in almost every way to the long-term, stakeholder approach needed for high-impact CSR.
The reason Enron collapsed, and, indeed, the reason that our current financial crisis spiraled out of control, was not rogue executives or creative accounting practices, but rather a culture of greed embedded in the DNA of the company and the financial markets. It is difficult to find many substantive examples in which the financial markets reward responsible behavior.
If there was ever a monotonously repetitive, stuck record in CSR debates, it is the need for the so-called ‘business case’ for CSR. CSR managers and consultants (even the occasional saintly CEO) are desperate for compelling evidence that ‘doing good is good for business’ (i.e. CSR pays). Indeed, the lack of sympathetic research is no impediment for these desperados endlessly incanting the motto of the business case, as if it were an entirely self-evident fact.
The more ‘inconvenient truth’ is that CSR sometimes pays, in specific circumstances, but more often does not. There is low-hanging fruit – like eco-efficiencies around waste and energy – but these only go so far. The hard-core CSR changes that are needed to reverse the misery of poverty and the sixth mass extinction of species require strategic change and massive investment. These may be lucrative in the long term, economically rational over a generation or two, but we have already established that the financial markets don’t work like that; at least, not yet.
Article by Wayne Visser http://www.waynevisser.com/biography
