There is an ongoing interesting debate regarding the place of philantropy in the CSR arena, which I'd like to share some hightlights and ask your opinion. First, Wayne Wisser talked about the way Philantrocapitalism endangers CSR:
... the idea that social justice, environmental sustainability, human rights and ethical transparency should be left to the whims of a few super-rich individuals is not only irresponsible, it is dangerous.In another post, Wayne reflects on the actual role of charity.
Since charity will always be an important part of CSR, the real challenge is how to make sure that it "does what it says on the tin".Leon Olsen joins the discussion with this important question: "When, for example, {CSR} is related to innovation to deliver services for people in need as a business, it gets more blurred - is it CSR, or is it just smart business?" and concludes
...philanthropy/charity has a role in CSR, but the main concern is how business is conducted, not what you do with the money once you've earned it on doing business. You must earn the money in a responsible way too, and that should be a lot more important and impactful than philanthropy.Elain Cohen of BeyondBusiness thinks this debate is all about context and the ability to see the wider picture. Thus,
...the CSR elements are delivered when the company develops its business strategy in a socially responsible way. {For instance}, even drug companies should maintain responsible workplaces and environmentally positive practices. The businesses are not giving up the fact they need to make a profit but they are creating a blend of business which provides accesss to medicine to a wider range of people than their strategy would dictate if based on purely economic positioning.The debate continues with this Washington Post article
an important distinction in measuring CSR was whether to include philanthropy as a criterion. {...} philanthropy can be difficult to measure consistently across companies and, unlike measuring how companies behave in their day-to-day operations, philanthropy can sometimes serve to "greenwash" bad behavior while diverting profits that shareholders could otherwise choose to donate to their own preferred causes.What is your opinion on this? Do you think philantropy still deserves a part in CSR? Photo credit: CC Vanessa Pike-Russell
Posts
1 comments:
I think that the critical point that people are missing here is that of image. Philanthropy, in simplest terms, is the expression of a love for people. It is--or at least should be--something that is generated from a desire to help others. In theory, the the principal reward for this act is self-satisfaction. CSR, on the other hand, is invariably tied back to business; if it were not, the first word in CSR would simply be eliminated, leaving us with SR. That said, the principal reward for carrying out CSR is that the society as a whole trusts the initiator more, which is simply good business. To answer the question, then, yes, philanthropy is part of CSR by definition, but the aims are the not the same in the end. They are not synonymous but they are, indeed, related.