1 commentSpeakers’ Corner: CSR: Being a fish in the sea
On Mondays, http://www.global-changemakers.net turns into Speakers’ Corner: members of the network and community have their say on their work and the issues that concern them.
CSR: Being a fish in the sea
CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) cannot be an optional topping on the corporate pizza; it must be more like the yeast in a loaf of bread. CSR must be a critical component, part of what defines the corporation, not something that is added on and can be done without to save money.
That was the main point Prof. Emil Salim wanted to get across when we sat down to discuss the current state of CSR and corporate sustainability in Indonesia.
Emil is almost a legend in Indonesia. An intensely patriotic Indonesian who developed a taste for Japanese food while living under the harsh conditions of the occupation of WW II, he was educated at University of Indonesia, and went to Berkeley on a scholarship; he came home with a PhD and since then has held various Indonesian ministerial posts, including 10 years as minister for population and the environment.
He is a professor on the Faculty of Economics at his alma mater, University of Indonesia, a member of countless boards, associations and foundations, most doing work on social and environmental sustainability. He is also a member of the Presidential Council of Advisors, where his guidance on issues related to sustainability helps form public policy. Emil is a committed environmentalist, often speaking on the relationship between economics and sustainability; being 80 years old hasn’t slowed him down or eroded his commitment.
That CSR needs to be an inherent part of any corporate culture was the main message he wanted to deliver. For sustainability itself to be sustainable, Emil argues that the sense of social responsibility must be embedded in the corporation’s DNA; sustainability must be an inherent component of every corporate activity.
Hugh Collett, a teacher at the Jakarta International School, is another committed environmentalist. He is in the process of developing a “sustainability village” that will be a model of sustainable living; it is to be an educational resource as well as a practical example of how life can be carried on while leaving a minimal footprint. Emil is on the board of directors of the foundation created to manage the village.
Collett argues that if sustainability is not inherent in a corporate culture, bureaucracy and other structural issues can be a hurdle. How important is corporate commitment? “That…depends on how willing such corporations are prepared to ‘walk the talk’. In my experience, promoting my own environmental initiative of an educational eco village, talking is easier than walking (and less expensive!),” he says.
As to the practical implementation of the concepts, CSR consultant and university lecturer Patrick Guntensperger, another member of the board of Collett’s village, insists that sustainability decision-making must be at the highest possible level of the corporate structure. “At the very minimum, there should be an executive vice president with the word ‘sustainability’ featuring prominently in the job description. Of course, a committed board of directors is vital too.”
What he is getting at is that for sustainability to be a prime criterion for corporate decision-making to become habitual, the process must be overseen by someone with the highest possible authority and sustainability as a core value. Emil also adds to this point. “The technology is there. What we need is the will to make it happen, and that is the decision of the board of directors.”
A perfect example of this is Body Shop. Dame Anita Roddick, its founder, was known for championing the unconventional way of doing business by promoting its ethical aspects. She famously summarized the company’s way of doing business: “The business of business should not just be about money, it should be about responsibility. It should be about public good, not private greed.”
Indeed, Body Shop took part in numerous campaigns that embrace sustainability, “Our Incredible Planet” being one of them, since the establishment of its first store in 1976. The company’s mission statement also strongly emphasizes sustainability; the corporation strives to “courageously ensure that our business is ecologically sustainable, meeting the needs of the present without compromising the future.” As for its products, without promoting sustainability and protection of the planet, Body Shop is just simply not Body Shop.
Collett also points out that the main roadblock to sustainability issues is actually a moral issue. “In essence, I believe that human selfishness and prevailing attitudes based on greed, self-interest, and ignorance are the root of the difficulties”. Nevertheless, with more and more corporations including CSR as a fundamental aspect of their style of business, things seem to be changing.
The key to implement CSR effectively, therefore, Emil argues, is that corporations must build a symbiotic relationship with the society of which the corporation is part. “You must be the fish in a sea, in which the fish and the sea are interlinked; not as an island, detached from the sea. The role of CSR is building that relationship of being the fish in a sea.”
Ghian Tjandaputra, 20, is a Global Changemaker from Indonesia. He is a youth advisor to the Indonesian delegation in COP15. Reach him at ghian.tjandaputra@hotmail.com or on Twitter: @ghiankr
This article was first published by The Jakarta Post.
Are you a member of the http://www.global-changemakers.net community? Do you have something to say? Send your blog entries to me! The best entries will be published on Mondays’ Speakers’ Corner. (Blog entries should be submitted as Word documents. Please attach any pictures you have separately.)
One Response to Speakers’ Corner: CSR: Being a fish in the sea
Thanks for sharing this, Ghian!! I think CSR is one of the hot topics in business ethics right now, so it’s necessary to keep it in mind at this point when working on projects that may need corporate support, haha.
My two cents: it always feels like something isn’t quite right when companies are used to exemplify the CSR model. I mean, it’s the point of the exercise, right? To change the way companies work. But maybe I can explain what I mean with, yes, a corporate example:
You spoke about (maybe it’s the example Emil gave?) The Body Shop, a store where I personally would endebt myself to death if I lost all my restraint, as a great example of adoption of CSR standards.
On the other hand, in terms of marketing, they basically use the same rules everybody else uses, socially responsible or not. They do try and sell the idea that physical beauty is desirable, and that you need their products to be beautiful. “We believe there is only one way to be beautiful, nature’s way” (sic), says bodyshop.com. They highlight their strong aspects (‘We believe in CSR’ is all over their online and offline presence) and hide their flaws (despite them saying they promote ‘well-being’, their products do pretty badly on Skin Deep, a cosmetic safety database; they don’t say the scientific community is against the ‘detox’ idea that they sell).
So the question is: how socially responsible do you have to be to put the CSR seal on your goods? Maybe the publication of ISO 26000 later this year will satisfactorily answer that question, but I think so far the CSR model is being used by companies as a tactic to become stronger in the dirty game of marketing (talk about people’s morality and you’ll get some desperate reactions), above anything else.