csr
for csr
by shadab
fariduddin
for
tbl
Businesses are increasingly
expected to solve social problems with the efficiency technically
inherent in business processes. This expectation, coupled with
the downsides of a short-term, profit maximizing motive, gave
birth to the concept of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).
CSR has caught the fancy of
business leaders across the world. In order to live or (show)
responsible citizenry and meet customer expectations, business
leaders are increasingly adopting a CSR strategy. Some equate
'charity' with CSR, some copy or blindly follow other companies,
many want to genuinely address social issues but don't know how
to. Some go for the cut-and-paste approach: cut from companies
that seem to the public to responsible citizens and paste for
their own.
Any strategy is as good as
its execution. Execution hinges on how well the idea has diffused
into the operation. Diffusion requires conscious efforts by management
to put in place systems and skills, and then make them run. And
finally, measure their effectiveness. Only then will a CSR programme
come to life - assuming that there is a strategy at all - which
seemingly, there often isn't.
Presented here is a conceptual
framework for CSR activation in any company. It should provide
an answer to the vital "how to" question many organizations
face. The proposed CSR activation framework has three vital components:
C, S, R - Capacity Structure, Relevance. Not necessarily in this
order, but it sounds catchier this way.
C
is for Capacity
Does your organization have the capacity to handle the additional
workload or intellectual input that comes with CSR implementation?
Organizations perform as good as the people they have. In other
words, organizational performance hinges on the knowledge, skills
and motivation of its people. The bandwidth of people to execute
related tasks must be increased in order for a CSR strategy to
be implemented. CSR strategies bring about change and it is a
known management reality that people resist change. Effective
change management requires capacity building. Candid communications
between top management and all employees coupled with a solid
commitment to human resource development are crucial to strategy
implementation.
So, when contemplating CSR, organizations must be committed to
the effective capacity building of their employees. There are
two categories of people organisations must focus on: those who
actually carry out the implementation of the CSR strategy and
those who will provide support for the implementation.
While conceptual orientation
may suffice for support function staff, CSR implementers require
more intensive capacity building. They would need to learn tools,
frameworks, and best practices of effective CSR implementation.
The company's human resource development manager should devise
the appropriate needs assessment mechanism and separate capacity
building interventions for these two groups.
Once skills have been built,
organisations must address the next series of vital questions
related to systems capacity: How do CSR processes interact with
other organizational procedures? What are the key performance
indicators for the CSR function and CSR implementers? How and
when do you measure effectiveness of the CSR strategy? Answers
to these questions should help organisations identify process
interfaces and system design requirements for effective CSR strategy
implementation.
S
is for Structure
A CSR strategy will be as effective as the organizational structure
that supports it. The importance the CEO attaches to CSR will
be determined and communicated by the places the CSR function
occupies in the organogram. The hierarchal position assigned to
the CSR function will limit its authority and mandate.
In many oil exploration companies
for instance, the CSR function merely exists to comply with regulatory
requirements. CSR in the form of community development is a necessary
cost of doing business. CSR is a low-profile function with no
or little career prospects, except perhaps for the treehugger
or NGO types meandering in corporate careers in search of meaning.
One large and reputable local
food company was faced with this difficult question. Top management
placed high priority on CSR. Various options were floated for
"placing" the CSR function - this revealed inter-functional
tensions and desires to control or subdue the upcoming proposed
CSR position. You may face similar dilemmas:
Should CSR be a part of Research and Development because of their
common proclivity towards
innovative solutions?
An organisation can create
relevance by owning a social cause or need. The cause itself is
also an unmet social need, a business opportunity for the organisation
to gain an unassailable 'positioning' as it would be seen as 'doing
good' for a higher cause.
The question of establishing
'relevance', must be answered at the outset of the CSR strategy
formulation. The issues of capacity development and organizational
structure are thus subordinate to CSR strategy relevance.
It should also be relevant
to the personal values of employees. When they believe, and can
relate to the reason behind the organisation's CSR strategy, they
will be motivated in investing their time and efforts, even voluntarily.
They will see their efforts to be contributing not just to 'profits'
but also to the 'people' around them -the community-, and the
planet they live on; hence, they will be committed to integration
of the organisation's sustainable objectives with a true 'triple
bottom-line' approach.
In a nutshell, CSR activation
rests on three pillars: R for strategy Relevance, S for Structure
and C for capacity.
about the
writer
Shadab
Fariduddin is a management consultant and a partner in the Four
Corners Group..
