These two chapters took on a more critical analysis than in
previous chapters. Cornelissen’s case studies of British Airways’ leadership
changes (234-7), and Kraft’s takeover of Cadbury (252-4) involved the kind of contentious
situations that are part of corporate reality, including layoffs and strikes. I
was pleased to read Cornelissen point out that simply giving lip service to corporate
social responsibility (CSR) wasn’t effective. As he points out, most
organizations’ non-profit-driven commitments come in the form of “glossy social
and environmental reports that are often more about style than substance”
(245). I think genuine CSR takes commitment to organizational change and strong
leadership, and not just public relations.
I suspect most organizations treat CSR as an additive
change. A food company may set up scholarships for nutrition science majors, or
a utilities company may commit to an initiative making “green jobs.” These
actions may making positive differences, but they may also just be a way to
offset an otherwise-negative reputation on social responsibility. To qualify
for Cornelissen’s definition of a true corporate “citizen,” I think changes
need to be substitutive, and that takes both transformational leadership to
drive, and transactional leadership to implement. How likely is it that
companies will truly commit to the triple bottom line, when just meeting
financial needs can be difficult?
Cornelissen mentions the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI),
which sets reporting standards on many CSR metrics for organizations. While a
noble initiative, this is a non-governmental organization whose standards
organizations are not obligated to adhere to. I perused GRI’s website, and the
output largely looks like the glossy reports that are so easy to put out and
overlook. I think the best that can be said is that these reports provide documented
commitments that organizations can be judged against. But again, this is an
NGO. Any commitments are voluntary. Our commitments as actual citizens are not
subject to our whims. Without strong leadership commitment to organizational change
that drives CSR, corporate
citizenship is just an idea.
Cornelissen, J. (2014). Corporate Communication: A
Guide to Theory & Practice (4th ed.). London: SAGE.
I love the terminology of "offset" to describe CSR initiatives. I might also add distract. The ideas you raise have me wondering whether the effective type of CSR you describe that requires transformational and transactional leadership is possible once an organization reaches a certain size. Successful companies that are founded by individuals with convictions to be socially responsible (like the Body Shop in a previous case study in the text) all too often lose touch with those convictions once they achieve a significant share of the market.
ReplyDelete