CSR Asia Summit 2011 Themed “Asian Growth: Global Responsibility” To Be Launched In Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

The ninth CSR Asia Summit, the annual flagship event of CSR Asia, will be launched at the Hotel Istana, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia on 27 Sep 2011. Themed “Asian Growth: Global Responsibility”, the two-day Summit will take place from 27-28 Sep 2011. The CSR Asia Summit aims to be the most innovative and thought-provoking on corporate social responsibility (CSR) in Asia. More than 400 delegates from multi-disciplinary backgrounds around the world are expected to attend the Summit to discuss key CSR issues and strategies, as well as provide new insights for businesses, governments, CSR practitioners and non-governmental organisations (NGOs). Delegates of CSR Asia Summit 2011 will understand the latest CSR issues, address challenges and opportunities, learn from leading sustainability practitioners, and acquire crucial tools and resources to build sustainable business strategies in Asia. The CSR Asia Summit 2011 is designed to address findings from “CSR in 10”, a research project by CSR Asia that provides insights into emerging trends and issues for CSR over the next decade. The research revealed that according to 80 interviewees, who are CSR experts in the Asia-Pacific region, the top CSR concern from companies in Asia is Climate Change and Water Issues, while others are Corporate Governance, Disclosure and Reporting, as well as Supply Chains. Based on these findings, renowned speakers from local and international corporations as well as NGOs will focus on four themes at the CSR Asia Summit this year. They are: Asian CSR Strategies Environmental Issues Community Investment Sustainable Supply Chains and Food Security An annual highlight of the CSR Asia Summit is the announcement of the results from the 3rd “Asian Sustainability Rating™” (ASR™). Since its launch in 2009, the ASR™ has built a strong track record in becoming an ESG (Environment, Social and Governance) benchmarking tool for use by Asian companies, investors and other stakeholders. It is an essential reference that has helped to add value and enable companies to integrate a sustainability dimension to their business models through the years. Richard Welford, Co-Founder and Chairman of CSR Asia said, “With the robust economic growth of Asian countries such as China and India, the spotlight is cast on the region to start taking the lead on CSR efforts. We believe the CSR Asia Summit will provide insights as to where the CSR opportunities lie in Asia, especially for growth markets, to enable companies to model their businesses to take on CSR responsibility on a global level. The CSR Asia Summit is also tailored to empower companies to meet industry experts to exchange CSR ideas, innovative solutions and experiences. It is CSR Asia’s goal to ensure each CSR Asia Summit is an effective platform that thought leaders can benefit from to develop long-term CSR solutions or initiatives, which would help them meet the growing expectations of their stakeholders.” In Malaysia, Bursa Malaysia will launch an Environment, Social and Governance (ESG) Index in late 2012. While in Hong Kong, the Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited will draft an ESG Reporting Guide which outline recommended best practices for listed companies in Hong Kong. Singapore Exchange Limited (SGX) also launched its Sustainability Reporting Guide on 27th June1. All initiatives demonstrate how governments and corporations in Asia are stepping up to take on greater responsibility to build a more sustainable world. Both have roles to play in their contributions as they build regulatory and business policies around CSR. To enable governments and corporations to make more informed decisions on sustainability, the CSR Asia Summit 2011 will cover topical issues across four different themes. Some of the topics at the Summit are “Reporting and issues management”, “Adapting to climate change – addressing the real challenges”, “Should companies invest in schools?” and “Food Safety and Stakeholder Trust”. More than 30 speakers from a wide range of industries are already confirmed for the CSR Asia Summit 2011. Darrel Webber, Secretary General, Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil, and Paul Hoff, Director of Business Development, Asia, FTSE Group will be the keynote speakers at the Summit. Other opinion leaders from local and global corporations as well as NGOs have also confirmed their speaking participation at the Summit. Other than networking opportunities and speaking sessions, delegates of the CSR Asia Summit 2011 will get to view exhibits of CSR projects and initiatives. Delegates also have access to the Summit’s unique “CSR Bazaar” session on the second day, where a selection of eight CSR presentations and case studies will be presented concurrently in different plenary rooms. On the final day, delegates will be brought together in roundtables at “The World Café”, which is yet another special feature of CSR Asia Summit and a highly commended session since its inception in 2009. A table host will facilitate group discussion on the key outcomes of the Summit so delegates can enjoy a valuable session where they are able to consolidate and discuss their learning from the Summit.

The ninth CSR Asia Summit, the annual flagship event of CSR Asia, will be launched at the Hotel Istana, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia on 27 Sep 2011. Themed “Asian Growth: Global Responsibility”, the two-day Summit will take place from 27-28 Sep 2011. The CSR Asia Summit aims to be the most innovative and thought-provoking on corporate social responsibility (CSR) in Asia. Read more

Social responsibility must be integral to business strategy to succeed

Walmart unveiled its global sustainable agriculture goals recently, with which the company seeks to help buy more from small and mid-sized farmers around the world; reduce food waste and sustainably source key agricultural products. According to Scott Price, CEO of Walmart Asia: Corporate social responsibility must be an integral part of the business strategy to be successful and sustainable. By stepping up to the right social responsibilities, a company is honoring its commitment to its owners and shareholders. By focusing on social commitments related to the business, the company can have a greater impact economically, socially and environmentally and at the same time prosper. Mr. Price made the comments during the annual Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) CEO Summit held in Yokohama, Japan 11-14 Nov 2010. He said: Walmart’s CSR activities have become so entwined in our business strategy that you rarely hear the term “CSR” at Walmart. To highlight his point Price cited an example of how Walmart will help small farmers around the world by selling $ I billion in food sourced from one million small and medium farmers by end of 2015. Walmart, which celebrates its 50th anniversary next year, has a legacy of giving back to the communities in which it does business. To be effective, Price said he believes social responsibility efforts must be focused, impact the most people, be long-term, address causes (not symptoms) and relate to the business. He said: There’s an abundance of legitimate opportunity to give back, to do right, and you want to be able to help anyone and everyone who calls. But over the last several years, we've built a model for making a big difference on big issues. At Walmart, we’ve narrowed our focus to a few global platforms: education, sustainability, economic development and empowerment, and health and nutrition. Around the world, we want our operations to align around our global business/CSR platforms, and they are. Tackling big issues and establishing global platforms does not mean taking a “one size fits all” approach to CSR, Price explained. He commented: There’s plenty of latitude to act locally within those global platforms. It's a matter of meeting the unique needs of your local country, business and communities. Each country has its own culture, its own needs, its own challenges, and within each there are dramatic differences in how the social safety net is managed, Price said. The challenge is to develop a global platform that is flexible enough to be relevant locally. Price cited Walmart’s recently announced sustainable agriculture program as an example of innovation, global focus and flexibility. It’s long-term and it ties directly into the business, he said. It also tackles a huge social issue. Price explained: More than one billion people around the world rely on farming and hundreds of millions of them live on less than $2 a day. Globally, with a booming population, food production must increase roughly 70 percent to feed 9 billion people by 2050. Through sustainable agriculture, Walmart, as the world’s largest grocer is uniquely positioned to make a big difference in food production -- for local communities, local economies and families everywhere. Price observed that this bid was was an opportunity to lead. Walmart’s sustainable agriculture strategy is divided into three broad areas each containing specific supporting goals to help the company track and report its progress as part of our overall business goals: In emerging markets, Walmart will help many small- and mid-sized farmers through training, by gaining access to markets and by increasing their income through sourcing. Walmart has one of the world’s largest food supply chains, but almost nothing is known about the resources required to produce that food, Price said. In order to produce food with fewer resources and less waste, the global strategy will drive transparency into the supply chain Farming practices are having unintended side effects, from deforestation of the world’s rainforests to increasing greenhouse gas emissions. Walmart will focus on two of the major contributors: palm oil and beef production. Price said: We’re truly excited about our sustainable agriculture platform. We believe we can make a huge difference, that we can feed more people, healthier food, that we can empower farmers, build local economies, protect the environment, while at the same time strengthen our business. He concluded: We want to be a part of the solution to a better, more sustainable future for our customers, our children, our stakeholders. We want to be part of the much needed social innovation. We believe that irrespective of East or West what is most important is that corporations working in close collaboration with governments attempt to make life better for the communities in which they operate. And we believe that this is fundamental to doing business. Given the challenging times we face it is not just common sense. It is also good business sense.

Walmart unveiled its global sustainable agriculture goals recently, with which the company seeks to help buy more from small and mid-sized farmers around the world; reduce food waste and sustainably source key agricultural products. Read more

Pandemic: Examining the Limits of Corporate Social Responsibility

by Robert Goldsmith (courtesy of INSEAD Knowledge) How much responsibility does a company owe society and at what point does that responsibility end? That’s the question examined in a timely INSEAD case study about corporate social responsibility called “Fighting the Flu: Tamiflu Stockpiling: A Pandemic Preparedness Policy.” The case study examines the measures Swiss pharmaceutical company Roche has taken to ensure there would be sufficient quantities of its influenza drug Tamiflu available worldwide to meet the next flu pandemic. Tamiflu is one of few antiviral drugs effective against the swine flu, which was first detected in Mexico and identified on April 24. Within a few days the virus had spread to Spain, the US, New Zealand, Israel, and is suspected in many other countries as well. The World Health Organisation (WHO) has upgraded its pandemic alert  to Phase 5, which means it can be spread from human to human. “The Roche case study is a particularly interesting one because it was a very peculiar situation for a company to be in,” says Luk Van Wassenhove, INSEAD Professor of Operations Management and co-author of the 2008 Roche case study with Ramina Samii, visiting Research Associate at INSEAD. “To be pretty much the only company that has this drug puts them in a very difficult situation.” How difficult? Suppose Roche could have made Tamiflu available but didn’t. Now suppose there is a flu pandemic and 50 million people die as a result of not having access to the drug. That would spell the end for the pharmaceutical firm. Fortunately Roche has taken action to make sure supplies are available. This includes setting up a worldwide manufacturing network at its own cost to ensure it can meet what used to be just a hypothetical demand. Luk Van Wassenhove “The question is: how much more does the company have to do to meet its social responsibility?” asks Van Wassenhove, Henry Ford Chaired Professor of Manufacturing and Academic Director of the INSEAD Social Innovation Centre. “Companies are not philanthropic entities.” Beginning in the late 1990s, Roche tried to get various governments interested in preparing for a flu pandemic. But their efforts fell on deaf ears. Meanwhile, Tamiflu was launched globally in 1999 as a seasonal influenza drug. Roche could produce 20 million doses of the drug annually. This was just prior to the avian influenza, which began appearing shortly afterwards in Asia. Despite the lack of interest by governments, Roche decided to increase its capacity to 55 million doses from 20. Then in 2005 the US government asked Roche about its ability to supply 200 million doses of Tamiflu. As a result, the company decided to ramp up its production capacity to 400 million doses by the end of 2006. Roche didn’t have the internal capability to do this so it had to use external suppliers. It identified suppliers from across the globe and in the end a core group of 18 partner companies in ten countries became part of the Roche network. Roche paid all set-up costs for the network, including capital investments, technical transfer activities, qualification registration work, regulatory filings, and so on. It didn’t stop there. Roche also added an extra supplier in each area of the supply chain and granted sub-licenses to three companies in China and India. It also shared technical know-how with a company in South Africa. In addition, because the flu is not patent-protected, underdeveloped countries could manufacture generic versions of Tamiflu without violating Roche patents. In August 2005, Roche agreed to donate a stockpile of three million doses of the drug to be stored in the US and Switzerland. Studies have shown that such a stockpile could stop a pandemic at the source. In January 2006, Roche agreed to donate a further two million doses to be stockpiled in specific regions. Government apathy to preparedness disappeared after the deaths and panic caused by the avian flu. By early 2007, Roche had received orders from almost 80 countries for 200 million doses of Tamiflu. Roche also decided to develop a way to prolong the drug’s shelf life beyond five years. “Now that whole investment basically was made by Roche as part of their corporate social responsibility,” Van Wassenhove says. “Roche did what they had to do, it was necessary for the reputation of the company because there was a high reputational risk of not being proactive. But now do they have to continue to pay to maintain that capacity? Or should the international community and governments pay for it?” There are many questions about how far Roche’s responsibility extends that must be answered before the world can say it is prepared for a flu pandemic. For example, there are countries that can afford to pay for the drug and countries that cannot. Is Roche responsible for making the drug available to poor populations at a lower price or for free? And who gets the drug first? In the case of a major outbreak, doctors, nurses and hospitals will be needed and so are obvious priorities to get the treatment early on. How about the police and army? They might be needed to maintain public security. Remember the events following Hurricane Katrina? “Are we ready for a big pandemic?” Van Wassenhove asks. “The answer is no. Not that much has happened since the previous warnings. We are not ready in terms of having systems in place so that all the different parts of the world can react and take the right measures without getting into a panic. “At some point in time, governments have to take responsibility, local communities have to take responsibility, individuals have to take responsibility. If we all collectively take responsibility and think about preparedness we can design systems to make us more resilient when one of these things happens.” That assessment was echoed by health and industry experts speaking at a conference held last month in Geneva that was hosted by the INSEAD Alumni Association Switzerland. Speakers at the event included Guenael Rodier, Director of International Health Regulations Coordination at the WHO, David Reddy, Global Influenza Pandemic Task Force Leader, Roche Pharma, and Prashant Yadav, Professor of Supply Chain Management at MIT-Zaragoza International Logistics Programme. “Given there is no effective supply chain for delivery of drugs or vaccines in low- and middle-income countries, and the nature of the next crisis will be such that each country will be impacted due to increased travel and trade, it will not be possible to distribute or deliver drugs or vaccines in a rapid response fashion,” says Yadav, who is also a Visiting Professor at INSEAD’s Social Innovation Center. “Hence, radically new ways of distribution would have to be used, especially in developing countries.”◊

by Robert Goldsmith (courtesy of INSEAD Knowledge)

How much responsibility does a company owe society and at what point does that responsibility end? That’s the question examined in a timely INSEAD case study about corporate social responsibility called “Fighting the Flu: Tamiflu Stockpiling: A Pandemic Preparedness Policy.”

The case study examines the measures Swiss pharmaceutical company Roche has taken to ensure there would be sufficient quantities of its influenza drug Tamiflu available worldwide to meet the next flu pandemic. Read more

Innovating the Green Supply Chain: Where Cold Becomes the New ‘Hot’

by Grace Segran, Brussels (courtesy of INSEAD Knowledge) Proctor & Gamble’s Ariel detergent “Turn to 30” campaign, launched in 2006, was aimed at bringing about long-term change in behaviour by getting people to wash their clothes at 30°C for the good of the environment, saving up to 40 per cent of energy used. Recently P&G came out with a detergent that washes at only 15°C, which is essentially cold water. Gianni Ciserani “Innovating to marry better performance and better sustainability is what we are good at - that’s what we’ll continue to do,” said Gianni Ciserani, president (West Europe) for P&G, during a panel discussion at the European Business Summit held recently. The consumer often has to choose between sustainability and performance, and companies win some consumers and lose some others. “All our data indicate that this is the right strategy when there is a trade-off -- innovation that is able to eliminate the trade-off between sustainability and better performance,” says Ciserani. Another panellist, Dominique Reiniche, president of Coca-Cola Europe, says her company recently released details of the carbon footprint of some of its most popular drinks. Dominique Reiniche “It is the first time that the carbon footprint of any brand of sparkling drinks has been certified by the Carbon Trust,” she says. “This will help to bring home to consumers that carbon is everywhere – and in all that we consume.” Coca-Cola is working with the Carbon Trust to measure greenhouse gas emissions across the full life cycle of selected drinks in a variety of packaging formats, “giving a more reliable and relevant picture to consumers,” says Reiniche. Sustainable consumption patterns Individual households consume more than one third of all energy used in the European Union and produce around two-thirds of municipal waste. Food and drink, housing, and private transport account for almost 80 per cent of environmental pressures. These are also major areas of consumer spending. “Against this backdrop, the need to foster more sustainable consumption and production is abundantly clear,” says Jivka Staneva, deputy head of the cabinet of the European Commissioner for consumer affairs. “We need an overall policy that will help consumers to act in a more sustainable way, while at the same time, promote energy efficiency and the competitiveness of European businesses. In times of economic and financial crises, both producers and retailers play a crucial role in helping to create sustainable consumption patterns in society.” Staneva emphasised the importance of communicating the environmental benefits of products, taking responsibility for the products at the end of their life, and designing products with aspects such as durability in mind, in order to create sustainable consumption patterns. “This is the production and consumption cycle that can help consumers, producers and retailers alike, because all actors are looking to cut costs to be able to survive.” Monique Goyens While some companies are genuinely trying to clean up their act in terms of their environmental impact, others are paying little more than lip-service and may even be putting out misleading statements. Greenwash advertising confuses consumers and causes them “to deviate from sustainable behaviour, as they do not have confidence in the messages anymore,” Monique Goyens, director general of the European Consumers’ organisation BEUC told INSEAD Knowledge on the sidelines of the summit. “We need to stop it by more active enforcement of provisions related to misleading advertising and unfair commercial practices, more deterrent sanctions, and a code of conduct on ethics in green advertising.” Shared responsibility The general consensus of the panel is that responsibility must be shared by all, a partnership in which all stakeholders are working towards the same goal, each through their own means. “While public authorities can provide incentives and a favourable framework for innovative actions, other stakeholders have an impact at different stages of the life-cycle of products,” says Staneva. Reiniche adds she is “convinced that nothing can happen with one partner only. All stakeholders need to reinvent and tackle the immense challenges of rescuing the planet.” For Goyens, the economic downturn should not be an excuse for not setting high goals. “Companies are innovative and creative, and they should use these assets to tackle sustainability.” A long process Jean-François van Boxmeer Sustainability is a long process, says Jean-François van Boxmeer, chairman and CEO of Heineken. There is trial and error, and it requires a lot of humility to recognise and be able to admit to making mistakes. One also has to be open to partnerships. Stakeholders who are more knowledgeable need to bring their points of view to the table and from that dialogue will emerge solutions, he says. “At the end of the day we are competing – we are competing in the sector, we are competing for consumer preference. When sustainability becomes part of the business agenda of companies, we also compete on that. Whatever Coca-Cola, P&G and Heineken are doing, that’s competing on who’s going to be the best in class, while making sense of our business,” says Boxmeer. “Competition is emulation and that is the best guarantee that sustainability will be serious and that it will be part of the business. It is not a fad but here to stay.”◊

by Grace Segran, Brussels (courtesy of INSEAD Knowledge)

Proctor & Gamble’s Ariel detergent “Turn to 30” campaign, launched in 2006, was aimed at bringing about long-term change in behaviour by getting people to wash their clothes at 30°C for the good of the environment, saving up to 40 per cent of energy used. Recently P&G came out with a detergent that washes at only 15°C, which is essentially cold water.

Gianni Ciserani

“Innovating to marry better performance and better sustainability is what we are good at – that’s what we’ll continue to do,” said Gianni Ciserani, president (West Europe) for P&G, during a panel discussion at the European Business Summit held recently.

The consumer often has to choose between sustainability and performance, and companies win some consumers and lose some others.

“All our data indicate that this is the right strategy when there is a trade-off — innovation that is able to eliminate the trade-off between sustainability and better performance,” says Ciserani.

Another panellist, Dominique Reiniche, president of Coca-Cola Europe, says her company recently released details of the carbon footprint of some of its most popular drinks.

Dominique Reiniche

“It is the first time that the carbon footprint of any brand of sparkling drinks has been certified by the Carbon Trust,” she says. “This will help to bring home to consumers that carbon is everywhere – and in all that we consume.”

Coca-Cola is working with the Carbon Trust to measure greenhouse gas emissions across the full life cycle of selected drinks in a variety of packaging formats, “giving a more reliable and relevant picture to consumers,” says Reiniche.

Sustainable consumption patterns

Individual households consume more than one third of all energy used in the European Union and produce around two-thirds of municipal waste. Food and drink, housing, and private transport account for almost 80 per cent of environmental pressures. These are also major areas of consumer spending.

“Against this backdrop, the need to foster more sustainable consumption and production is abundantly clear,” says Jivka Staneva, deputy head of the cabinet of the European Commissioner for consumer affairs. “We need an overall policy that will help consumers to act in a more sustainable way, while at the same time, promote energy efficiency and the competitiveness of European businesses. In times of economic and financial crises, both producers and retailers play a crucial role in helping to create sustainable consumption patterns in society.”

Staneva emphasised the importance of communicating the environmental benefits of products, taking responsibility for the products at the end of their life, and designing products with aspects such as durability in mind, in order to create sustainable consumption patterns. “This is the production and consumption cycle that can help consumers, producers and retailers alike, because all actors are looking to cut costs to be able to survive.”

Monique Goyens

While some companies are genuinely trying to clean up their act in terms of their environmental impact, others are paying little more than lip-service and may even be putting out misleading statements. Greenwash advertising confuses consumers and causes them “to deviate from sustainable behaviour, as they do not have confidence in the messages anymore,” Monique Goyens, director general of the European Consumers’ organisation BEUC told INSEAD Knowledge on the sidelines of the summit. “We need to stop it by more active enforcement of provisions related to misleading advertising and unfair commercial practices, more deterrent sanctions, and a code of conduct on ethics in green advertising.”

Shared responsibility

The general consensus of the panel is that responsibility must be shared by all, a partnership in which all stakeholders are working towards the same goal, each through their own means. “While public authorities can provide incentives and a favourable framework for innovative actions, other stakeholders have an impact at different stages of the life-cycle of products,” says Staneva.

Reiniche adds she is “convinced that nothing can happen with one partner only. All stakeholders need to reinvent and tackle the immense challenges of rescuing the planet.”

For Goyens, the economic downturn should not be an excuse for not setting high goals. “Companies are innovative and creative, and they should use these assets to tackle sustainability.”

A long process

Jean-François van Boxmeer

Sustainability is a long process, says Jean-François van Boxmeer, chairman and CEO of Heineken. There is trial and error, and it requires a lot of humility to recognise and be able to admit to making mistakes.

One also has to be open to partnerships. Stakeholders who are more knowledgeable need to bring their points of view to the table and from that dialogue will emerge solutions, he says.

“At the end of the day we are competing – we are competing in the sector, we are competing for consumer preference. When sustainability becomes part of the business agenda of companies, we also compete on that. Whatever Coca-Cola, P&G and Heineken are doing, that’s competing on who’s going to be the best in class, while making sense of our business,” says Boxmeer. “Competition is emulation and that is the best guarantee that sustainability will be serious and that it will be part of the business. It is not a fad but here to stay.”◊

CSR in an Economic Dip

The theme for the CSR Digest in the first quarter of 2009 is whether or not businesses should maintain or be more vigorous with their CSR efforts in an economic dip. It wouldn't be hard to imagine many businesses de-prioritizing their corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives on the basis that their focus needs to be on the bottom line due to the global economic crumble. This might be a wrong move... As Thomas L. Friedman pointed out in his New York Times column: This financial meltdown involved a broad national breakdown in personal responsibility, government regulation and financial ethics. The world knows this and some countries are watching their regulators with a magnifying glass. It won't be long for the scrutiny will be focused on businesses as well, if it isn't already. So to put aside its focus on its social responsibility might end up being costly. Money by QuietRevolution But first, let us understand that CSR is not just philanthropy or sacrificing profits in the social interest. CSR, as Michael Hopkins states in his short article, is how profits are made. Senior brand and engagement consultant, Dan Gray, wrote on his blog that more harm can arise from pulling out in the current economic climate that maintaining CSR efforts. He states, "... companies that pull back from CR are liable to label their activities as opportunistic, rather than an integral part of a considered, long-term strategy." According to Ethical Corporation, "smart companies will know that well-thought-out programmes can be worth the investment, given that, let's be honest, CSR is cheap compared to advertising spend, or paying staff more money." The Ethical Corporation goes on to list ten reasons why CSR should remain the focus of business while the economy takes a dip (click here to read the full list). A few of the reasons Ethical Corporation cites for maintaining CSR efforts are: Some CSR initiatives do not cost that much,  sometimes even saving money Reputation, transparency - and integrity - are still important. Communities feel vulnerable. Customers are worried and need reassurance. Think about the short term future (recessions don't last forever). Furthermore, Business for Social Responsibility (BSR) pinpointed five key CSR trends that provide great rewards for corporations. These trends are said to be good business strategy, namely: Better Return on Investment (ROI), from cost savings, enhanced reputation to indirect benefits like employee satisfaction Increasing rewards for communities and workers New media and customers' increasing knowledge of CSR Carbon footprinting reaches supply chains New opportunities in environmental markets It must be added that CSR, in South East Asia at least, is relatively new. In Malaysia, where reporting compliance for CSR is just two years old, to opt out of CSR initiatives would cause the public to view all previous CSR less than seriously.◊

The theme for the CSR Digest in the first quarter of 2009 is whether or not businesses should maintain or be more vigorous with their CSR efforts in an economic dip. It wouldn’t be hard to imagine many businesses de-prioritizing their corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives on the basis that their focus needs to be on the bottom line due to the global economic crumble. This might be a wrong move…

As Thomas L. Friedman pointed out in his New York Times column:

This financial meltdown involved a broad national breakdown in personal responsibility, government regulation and financial ethics.

The world knows this and some countries are watching their regulators with a magnifying glass. It won’t be long for the scrutiny will be focused on businesses as well, if it isn’t already. So to put aside its focus on its social responsibility might end up being costly. Read more