![]() Without being strategic about your CSR, the aforementioned benefits for business, society and the employees are going to be limited. However, many companies still focus on “random acts of charity”, being driven by the personal preferences of the CEO, board or employees, instead of being strategic about it. Some companies become more responsible for the business benefits (financial performance, public relations and brand promotion) some do it for moral reasons (it is the right thing to do) and others do it for relational reasons (employee engagement and consumer relationship). In the years I have worked with and observed many companies that strive to be good for the world, giving money and time to charities, I have seen some that do it really well and can teach others how to become an agent for a world benefit while others are still focusing on “traditional CSR” and corporate philanthropy. Most no longer agree with Milton Friedman (whose article in the New York Times from 1970 stated that the only social responsibility of a business is to maximise profit) and therefore increase the levels of their corporate social responsibility (CSR), but not enough companies are strategic about it. Nowadays businesses are also expected to be best for the world: to be socially and environmentally responsible, sustainable and ethical. ![]() ![]() ![]() With the changing expectations of consumers, employees and regulators, being best in the world is no longer enough. Few have figured out how to do it well” (Porter & Kramer, 2002). “Most companies feel compelled to give to charity.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |