CSR ambitions

I am not sure who first said something like "what gets measured gets done" but it was a very wise statement. It is particularly true when we think about corporate social responsibility. Until recently the "CSR" section of a company's annual report was a hastily gathered together series of reports about initiatives with some nice pictures of people doing green and responsible things in the community. These days leading companies take a much more rigorous approach and are coming close to making CSR commitments mainstream. A good example of this would be the recent report from Marks and Spencer. 

Whilst we still have some way to go before CSR commitments receive the same level of attention as financial performance, productivity, new business pipeline etc. significant progress has been made.

There are few rules to CSR and companies tend to set their own ambitions based on their perception of the market and their stakeholders. You can think of them in 4 groups based on the amount of research done to consider objectives and the level of ambition set: 

• Conservative - these companies do not see a compelling reason to be leaders and tend to be followers, they will look at trends in the market, what their competitors and peers are doing and set objectives accordingly. These objectives tend to be conservative and achievable.
• Informed leaders - these companies research well and set achievable targets. These tend to be companies for whom the risk of failure is high and public trust is important. Utility companies and others managing public infrastructure would be a good example of this.
• Pioneers - these companies research well and then set very stretching targets. These tend to be businesses that perceive significant competitive advantage in being more sustainable, sometimes a long way into the future.
• Charlatans - companies setting ambitious targets based on little or no research, usually to make a fast buck or to score expedient political points. Statements like "visionary", "carbon neutral" or some words starting with "eco" appear in such mission statements.

There is no right or wrong approach. The approach must be in the context of your business.

• Pioneers tend to have a good reason to take this approach, this may be driven by a perceived strong competitive advantage, like Marks & Spencer, extreme risk, such as the reputation risk in the sportswear sector, or investment in long term growth, like the GE Eco-magination programme.
• Informed leaders often have a long term investment to protect, often in public infrastructure or services, they have a responsibility to be sustainable but there is a high risk or limited return from a more ambitious approach. United Utilities, recently awarded Business in the Community Company of the Year, are a good example of this.
• Conservative target setters will often differentiate themselves around something other than sustainability (price, speed to market, quality etc.) and need sustainability as a supporting strategy
• I do not necessarily recommend a Charlatan approach but it is legitimate provided it is legal and does not mislead people

The context of your business is set by your stakeholders, these may be customers or employees (now or in the future), shareholders, competitors, government bodies, non-government organisations and many others. Each company will have a unique set of drivers to dictate their approach.

Your Feedback

Related News

• Marks and Spencer - How we Do Business Report 2009
• United Utilities recognised for sustainable procurement success