RSC 2.0 A tool for the future competitiveness An interesting article by Alberto Andreu Pinillos in that reviews the major milestones in the history of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and takes stock of the state of English companies in the field. The need to address a qualitative change and start a new phase, the some authors call CSR 2.0, which provoked by notifying the CSR management and linking CSR to account results. RSC 2.0 a competitive tool for the future.
Alb Erto Andreu Pinillos.
From that Spain officially declared the crisis, we deal with this thing that is Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) or Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) or Corporate Responsibility (CR)-or whatever it is called, we have been facing the same catch phrase: "In times of crisis, policies RSC pass into the background because the companies will focus on their core business and leave social projects. "
think that the crisis does not affect CSR policies is foolish. If GDP falls, if the consumer suffers, if unemployment increases, if the default rate is multiplied, if the credit is tight ... it is not reasonable to think that there are areas or functions within firms (eg, CSR) not be affected by the new context. Well
. This is the context. And in it I would frame the following anecdote: a few days ago I had the opportunity to participate in a business academic debate on the impact of CSR in the crisis. I surprised to hear arguments again seven years ago: "The company [said a contertulio] is not responsible but rather compliance with the law, and also that responsibility is solely to their shareholders." Again, I thought the lawyers appear to walk the Civil Code Article 1902 (1), rather than understanding the meaning of the word 'responsible' as the dictionary of the English Royal Academy (2).
In this racket, I took to launch a deliberately provocative statement: "What if the RSC was part of the solution?" I asked. The comments did not wait: Would not it best companies to tighten their belts, were more concerned with providing good service, with cessation of 'other stories', such as donations and sponsorships? How companies now charge more costs?, If there are difficulties in keeping track of results, how can demand more spending on social projects? Do not edited thick RSC memories these investment banks that have been drawn by the 'toxic' and the lack of transparency?, What can be provided to me as a customer?, "And as an employee or shareholder?
The new era of responsibility These questions led me to think that CSR is at a crossroads (or by the debate raised by Telos!). It seems obvious that those who are dedicated to this we have not laid a RSC on bases strong enough to turn it into something strategically linked to business. Or, if we did, we were not able to communicate to stakeholders.
a recession, when companies cut costs, staffing, etc., Places the CSR in a delicate position, especially when the crisis itself refers to the lack of ethics and transparency. So I think we now have the unique opportunity to uppercase. Never in his wildest dreams, the drivers of CSR dreamed that the crisis lifted a current of opinion in favor of a model of society able to find limits to the excesses committed. And, if this crisis is characterized by something, by the excesses, excesses in every way.
That is good news that the new president of the United States, Barack Obama, devoted his inaugural speech to 'The new age of responsibility' (3). Furthermore, there is more to do the priorities of its public agenda to see that many of them are issues that in recent years have been the road map of the RSC: civil rights, ethics, disability, poverty, climate change and efficiency Energy, Family, Women, education, elderly, health, etc. (4).
This "new age of responsibility 'has summed Robert Zoellick (2009) in five main pillars: responsible globalization, where the inclusion and sustainability will prevail on the enrichment of a few, the responsible management of the global environment, the financial responsibility, both personal and systemic level, the era of responsible multilateralism that countries and institutions seeking practical solutions to interrelated problems, and finally, the era of responsible actors, in which participation in the global economy entails responsibilities as well as benefits.
is also good news that the European public agenda for the year 2010 (5) provides that the policy out of the crisis is to build a consensus European and global level on the growth model based on economic and social issues such as financial system, trade, climate change and energy, employment and social cohesion, and finally, the fight against poverty.
So much so, that has been proposed that 2010 be the year of the fight against poverty. And what is that, globally, the United Nations secretary general, Ban Ki-Moon (6), inviting companies to implement CSR policies during his speech at World Economic Forum (meeting in the Swiss city of Davos.)
However, we must not forget that Milton Friedman in 1970 revealed long before the "Obamania" that the RSC is not an issue exclsuivamente of large corporations, but also intimately related to the behavior of managers , unions and consumers.
Challenges and opportunities for CSR therefore believe that, as in every crisis, there are also opportunities, and a great opportunity for the RSC is to encourage new growth engines of the company's business . Beyond big words (values, ethics, integrity ...)-which, although vital, are not always universal concepts and unambiguous, "I think it's time to change the discourse and be able to establish a cause-effect relationship between CSR and income statement. And this is the thesis: to what extent CSR can generate more revenue? What lower costs or minimize risks? "And may impact margins and customer satisfaction? What about improving the work environment?
If we can establish that relationship because (RSC)-effect (more revenue, lower costs, increased customer satisfaction, better work environment), the debate on CSR is cattle.
But this approach requires two basic premises. First, a change of language professionals in the RSC. To begin we must abandon what some called the 'goodism' and that translates into the phrase of "we must give back to society what society has given us'. This concept, based especially on philanthropy, it is difficult to maintain in times of crisis, and even, if I may, it seems that the company has to be justified to make money ... or is it perhaps has to apologize for it?
Second, and beyond the concept, change the management framework of CSR. Investment in social projects should done in the same way it invests in R & D, ie, we investigated new applications to open new business niche in the medium term should become new engines of growth for companies.
And the great challenge today is to make this process of dialogue form, that is, along with others (business, civil society, government, ...). Make no mistake: where there is demand, there are services, where there are customers (regardless of its type), there are companies, where there are businesses, there are productive social fabric, and where there is productive social fabric, there is wealth.
this new focus, we are naming some and as the RSC 2.0. In this article, my goal is to explain what this new framework. To do this, try first to understand CSR: its scope, its origin. Later, try to describe the initial stage of CSR, we can call 1.0. Then I will focus on RSC.2.0 strictly. And finish with some conclusions.
Understanding CSR I will not be put to invent a definition of CSR (7), many authors have tried and do not know if they have ever agreed. Failing to understand the CSR I would put an example, a hypothetical manufacturer computer, using a metaphor the image of an iceberg.
Imagine that computer company has a global commitment to CSR. The visible part of a hypothetical social iceberg would be a project to donate computers, for example, a group that can not afford them and that is at risk of exclusion (children, youth, battered women, migrants, elderly ...). But beneath the water we could see something more: we could see that the company has implemented several internal management processes that ensure, for example, that during the production have been respected labor rights and environmental impacts. And furthermore, that these processes have been extended not only its own production facilities but also to other companies operating in sweatshop or suppliers in remote areas of the world. And they have done so voluntarily, because, regardless of what the law of this or that country of manufacture, the fact is that in the end, the computer carries the company logo. They do so by conviction, not by mandate of anybody, because they are aware that, for better or for worse, the success or failure of the computer that you take home an impact on the reputation of your company and its value market.
I wanted to put this example to try to understand the RSC. Is not it true that many companies have paid dearly for the absence of internal processes and controls? Is not it true that the excesses of the system have led many companies including his disappearance? From this point of view, the RSC has a lot to do with making things right, to make things being careful what you do and what is decided (8) and excellent management, sometimes beyond what imposed on us by law, to minimize risks and maximize the reliability with its customers.
Consequently, the great debate of CSR is not whether to donate a lot or a little money to this or that cause, the debate on CSR has to do mainly with the internal processes that ensure that things go well .
The process of globalization as the cause of CSR To understand the role of CSR, such as in this hypothetical example of the computer company, we must first understand the globalization process itself, which places to the majors on a 'theater' global (9). This implies that multinationals generally act with different game rules: firstly, maintain the value-added activities (R & D, design, talent management, etc.) At its western neighboring countries (which have legislative standards high level in social, occupational and environmental); second, relocate in developing countries-with more lax laws in these areas, lower value-added activities (assembly, manufacturing, etc.). Thus, multinationals operate with legislative standards, cultural, social and institutional differ in each part of the globe. And I think that's where comes the RSC, as a call for global companies to act voluntarily, with a more or memos homogeneous social, labor and environmental issues in the exercise of their activities (Cuesta, 2004 .)
The globalization process accelerated the final takeoff of NGOs (10), who have done the scrutiny of multinationals working a flag. Today, that pressure has borne fruit, and there are many multinationals that have established codes of ethics or principles of action in which, on a voluntary basis, assume certain commitments on transparency, social and labor rights, environmental impacts, etc. More beyond the local laws. So, in practice, when we read that this or that company has launched a code of ethics, we talk about CSR.
But the salvo to this request for a full and consistent performance they gave the United Nations Global Compact (11). This initiative, launched in 1999 by the then general secretary United Nations, Koffi Annan, sought to voluntarily engage in CSR firms through the implementation of ten principles based on human rights, labor, environmental and anti-corruption. These principles indicate what 'should' do business in these areas with a comprehensive approach (see Table 1).
Once output track setting the need to conduct full uniform, the next step was measured. What good sign a paper if you do not measure the degree of implementation? To measure things and make comparisons between companies, came into the international standard Global Reporting Reporting Initiative (GRI) (12), which includes indicators that organizations must report to report on their economic performance, environmental and social.
The socially responsible investment indices such as engines RSC But perhaps the great explosion of CSR among the majors have come from the hand of the socially responsible investment indices, ie, those indices formed by a group of listed companies, after spend analysis, show that in its global operations maintain a full performance in three aspects: social, economic and environmental.
Among these indices, the most prominent is the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI) (13), which has become in some ways, in a responsible management lever for four reasons:
- First, because it is expressly states that a company will be sustainable in the future if it is able to match the 'triple bottom line ": economic, social and environmental.
- Secondly, because it weighs the relative importance of each of these 'accounts'. For example, if we analyze the telecommunications sector, we see that in 2008 the economic weighed 41.6 percent of the total, the 40.6 percent Social and 17.8 percent environmental.
- Thirdly, and most important for me is to see what's included in the DJSI Chapter Social aspects.
If you look at Figure 1 in detail, we see that 'social' includes such things as labor, human capital development, talent attraction and retention, knowledge management, quality assurance chain suppliers, dialogue with interest groups, social reporting, social impact of products and services and inclusion. Interestingly, 'the social' also includes the concept of philanthropy, which in the case the field of Information Technology and Communication (ICT) weighs ... 3 percent of the total of responsible behavior! Note the reader that we are talking about 3 percent, which means that 97 percent by the responsible behavior of a company for the DJSI has nothing to do with social projects of those who historically were designed to 'give back to society what society has given us' (see Figures 1 and 2).
- Finally, because the importance of each 'dimension' DJSI is updated year to year depending on the priorities of the public agenda. Thus we see how in 2002 the economic dimension weighed about 52 percent, while in 2008 its importance was reduced to 41.6 percent. By contrast, the social dimension has increased from 24 (in 2002) to 40.6 percent in 2008. My guess is that this crisis will vary, as can not be otherwise, the relative importance of each weight.
However, even when the DJSI provides clear criteria on how to measure responsible behavior, there are authors who see no utility in the idea of \u200b\u200btriple bottom line. In particular, Wayne Norman and Chris MacDonald (2004) state that this idea is not new and that also is not good because it can be used as a smokescreen behind which companies can mask an effective presentation of actual results.
RSC 1.0, a communicative response this morass
Above all, what business has been the response? In my opinion, multinationals in general and the English company in particular have done reasonably well their duties. Today, Spain and their companies are at the forefront of many global CSR initiatives, heads the list of countries that signed the United Nations Global Compact, we have a remarkable number firms in the socially responsible investment indices in the world, we have some reports of high quality CSR as GRI criteria, etc. Moreover, Spain has become the first European Union country to create a State Board of RSC.
Not a bad balance for 6 or 7 years of CSR in Spain. But why do we still think that CSR is a luxury available to few in times of economic boom? Why, despite everything, we still think that now 'no touch' to talk about this?
The reason why the RSC is now facing business protection is to be found in the simple fact that in Most companies in the IBEX 35 this function is framed in an organizational or corporate foundations or under the directions of communication, marketing and institutional relations. In one case (foundations) and another (communication), the unspoken message being passed is clear: In the best case, this is an action to improve the image, at worst, this is a cost center - We, the money being spent without any return, "and that's where it had been cut in bad times. As an intermediate situation, we have something to do when things go well and that, if done, we apply the theory of lesser evil.
This situation has made the RSC has so far run up and down (top down), with special emphasis on areas very related to communication, institutional relations and image. Almost all large companies have worked on five fronts: a) reporting through reports or sustainability reports, following more or less acceptable standards internationally (GRI), b) international presence in the leading sustainability indexes, such as Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI) and FTSE4Good, c) active in associations, forums, discussions and working groups established to strengthen the RSC, d) social action, ie the implementation of projects social sponsorship and philanthropy e) the development of ethical codes as a way to implement a culture of transparency and accountability; f) multi-stakeholders dialogue groups, often focused on the value of the reports or sustainability reports.
companies have developed all this with varying degrees of success, so long and quite often we read news about the launch of a code of practice on the publication of a new CSR report or a study comparing reports on the investment in this or that charity initiative, etc.
However, this model-the we could call the 1.0-RSC will not allow, in my opinion, a qualitative leap. And not going to allow it because it still remains in a surface layer of the organizational culture, linked more to marketing activities and image.
The challenge therefore is to move beyond the communication of CSR CSR management. That is, packing everything the company does-and-tell is good, make social projects is good, and produce ethical codes to incorporate the 'right policy' of the company is good. The problem is that being good is not enough. And it is not because sometimes these things just fall into the layer visible (or cosmetic) of the organizations and hardly beyond the companies' internal procedures, as stated Frank Dixon (2007).
this step does not mean that the RSC can not be incorporated into the agenda of the income of companies (to maximize revenue, reduce costs and increase customer satisfaction). Do not take this step simply means that CSR is seen as a cost and, therefore, is likely to be brought down in times of crisis.
2.0 CSR as a new growth engine 1.0
CSR has enabled significant progress, but I fear that the battle has not yet been won ... yet. Has been won, we would not have views like those recounted earlier in this article.
The challenge, as I said, is to move from communicating to manage. Manage means to answer these questions: to what extent CSR can generate more revenue? What lower costs or minimize risks? "And may impact margins and customer satisfaction? What about improving the work environment? This change of pace some have begun calling the RSC 2.0.
For example, the consultant Salterbaxter (14) means that the RSC 2.0 allows businesses to go beyond the care of 'home' (housekeeping) and address complex issues related to core business. In its new study, the consultant suggested the 50 largest companies in Europe the following questions: Does the sign company to integrate into your CSR strategy which adds value to the business? "Dialogue with interest groups? Do you work in a materiality process to define the issues relevant to society and the business? What issues are you considering? Do you think that is evolving from the RSC RSC 1.0 to 2.0? For this firm, companies such as BASF, Nestle, Shell, Telefónica, Vodafone and Volkswagen, among others, have already taken this step.
Another relevant example is the statements of UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, who urged the Global Compact lead to a new phase. "Global Compact 2.0 could call it," he said during his speech at the World Economic Forum took stock of the ten years of the Global Compact, the UN says 6,000 companies already involved more than 130 countries.
Past studies and declarations, can we find some areas of work to help understand what is behind the RSC 2.0? I think that there are parameters, and are these:
- The processes of verification and improvement resulting from corporate responsibility report. The goal is to make the report in a management tool, not a single piece of communication. How? Making the most improvement recommendations offered by the verifiers and, above all, making this report a true dashboard or scorecard on the evolution of economic behavior, social and environmental.
- Networking with national and multinational co-funding of projects that promote inclusion and social cohesion. Many of these projects are not profitable in themselves in the early stages, however, work with funding from multilateral institutions to help business units to implement projects that otherwise would never leave forward and can be a source of new revenue.
- A new internal culture based on the maximization of ethical codes or principles of action. This means, in practice, develop internal policies to make living the principles of ethical code. For example, if a generic statement on equality, it is desirable to develop internal policies that define what is meant by equality, at what level, what action plans are carried out with employees, customers and suppliers, what are the indicators measure and, finally, what is the instrument used to monitor compliance and establish improvement plans.
- A new way to manage dialogue with stakeholders, based not so much to give and receive information or suggestions as to seek ways of co-creation to launch joint ventures. For example, it would consider launching products and services for groups of people at risk of exclusion (elderly, people with disabilities, immigrants) and do so alongside legitimate associations representing these groups. Working this way means to establish 'partnerships' that financially benefit all parties.
- And, above all, the RSC 2.0 requires new sources of income positive impact on social development, new ways of reducing costs and understand how it impacts responsible behavior at the margin and customer satisfaction.
As this latter aspect is perhaps the most important of all those who make the RSC 2.0, I will try to identify where new sources of revenue, potential cost savings or risk management and potential impacts on the margin and in customer satisfaction.
New sources of revenue with a positive impact in society While each sector of activity will have to do your own inventory, Telefónica (And for the telecommunications industry) we believe that there may be new engines of growth with positive social impact in these areas:
- Productivity: It is shown that where there are solutions and ICT developments GDP increases . Studies Piatkowski (2002) and Pohjola (2001) show that in most developed countries ICT (USA, Finland, Canada and UK) GDP growth was greater than 10 percent. This finding suggests that self formulas based on ICT can be a force to productivity.
- Health: the global market for e-health is estimated to have a potential value of 60,000 million euros, of which third correspond to Europe. With these numbers, e-health can be considered as the third largest medical industry in Europe, after the drug (205,000 million euros) and medical equipment (64,000 million euros). The business potential is enormous social impact (Reding, 2008).
- Energy efficiency and climate change. The intensive use of ICT solutions in practices such as videoconferencing and teleworking will provide energy savings in 2020 equivalent to 0.8 percent of electricity consumption in the EU, equivalent to 0.6 per cent reduction in emissions CO ₂ for the same year (Commission Europe, 2008a). The ICT sector has the potential to reduce 15 percent of global emissions of CO ₂ expected for 2020. This energy is transformed into economic savings could reach 600,000 million euros (15).
- The largest, by 2050 it is expected that the world has 2,000 million people over 60 years, with the greatest growth in developed countries (Telefónica, 2005). In Europe, in 2008 more than 16 percent of Europe's population was already over 65 years and more than 59 percent of these people had some kind of dependency (Aguareles, 2008). By 2020 that percentage is expected to rise 25 percent of the population of the EU and the market for providing services to this population group can reach up to 3.000 billion euros (European Union, June 2008).
- Education: the opportunities to develop business models for education and, consequently, the social impact it brings, is clear. Just keep four data:
penetration of broadband. In the Nordic countries, 90 percent of schools have a broadband connection to the Internet. By contrast, Greece, Poland, Cyprus and Lithuania have the lowest raid EU25 (less than half the 70 percent of the EU25 average) (Look for Martin-Sanz, 2008).
Number of computers per 100 students. The EU average is 1 computer for every 9 students. While in leading countries such as Denmark, Netherlands, United Kingdom and Luxembourg share a computer only about 4 or 5 students, the availability of computers is reduced to half the EU average in countries like Latvia, Lithuania, Poland , Portugal and Greece, where a computer is shared by 17 students (Martin-Sanz, 2008).
Use of ICT in the classroom by teachers in the past 12 months. 74 percent of 4,475,000 reports that European teachers have used ICT in the classroom in the past year. There are, however, huge variations between countries, Latvia and Greece are around 35 percent of teachers, while the UK has a use of 96 percent and Denmark 95 percent. 24 percent of teachers said that their course is not suitable for the use of ICT (Martin-Sanz, 2008).
Between 2009 and 2010 there will be an investment of 69,000 million euros in digital libraries in the EU (European Union, November 2008).
- Disability: There are about 650 million people with disabilities in the world, including their families, about 2,000 million people, almost one third of the world's population have some relation to disability (UNESCO , mayo 2008). Sólo en España, cerca de 3,8 millones de personas sufren algún tipo de discapacidad (16). Pues bien, en Europa, sólo el 3 por ciento de las webs del sector público cumple con los estándares de accesibilidad (Comisión Europea, 2008b). Este dato nos abre las vías a un nuevo nicho de mercado no explotado hasta hoy.
Posible impacto en costes o en minimización de riesgos Reducir costes y aplicar recetas de RSC pudiera parecer algo opuesto. Sin embargo, no siempre es así. Para empezar, todas las medidas de ahorro de energía y eficiencia energética son, además de económicas, perfectamente alineadas con liability policy. Among others, the following measures may include: acquisition of efficient equipment, efficient use of equipment (on and off, rationalization of stand by), off of buildings at a certain time, temperature and adequate air conditioning in offices and halls, and small print both sides, no use of color, replacing paper correspondence by e-mail, rational use of water, etc. Although these measures seem small, the fact is that they can help reduce costs by up to 10 percent.
Another chapter highlight is the management of risks. In this sense it is not uncommon for companies to have a map defined risk, which includes, in general, business risks (environment, market, regulatory, competition ...), financial (exchange rate, interest rate, liquidity, ...), credit (default ...), risks operational (with customers, suppliers, systems, revenue assurance, human resources, fraud ...), etc. What is new is incorporated into the hazard map of the company with a chapter on global risks including risks of reputation and CSR, with topics as demanding as the risk of image or sound in financial reporting.
In the telecommunications sector, for example, Telefónica has identified the following projects to manage global risks: protection of minors and the responsible use of ICT, data privacy policy, environmental management system, climate change and energy efficiency, digital inclusion for disadvantaged groups, diversity, responsibility in the chain supply, human rights, dialogue with stakeholders and international social dialogue, social and environmental reporting.
Possible Impact on customer satisfaction the outset will make this statement, customer satisfaction is affected not only by the quality of the offer product and service (in this variable include elements such as value for money, service, or management of complaints and claims), but also other variables that are sometimes beyond the simple business relationship.
What are those other variables? The answer I want to be strong. Here there is no black box or any magic potion. What you need is to understand and manage, as well as product-service offering, other 6 major variables that have to do with what is called corporate reputation. The model is called the measures Rep Track and includes 7 dimensions and 26 attributes (see Figure 3).
may sound blunt, this model is not opinion-based. After almost 2 million interviews with people from Spain, Argentina, Chile, Peru, Mexico, Brazil, Germany, England, Norway, Finland, Sweden, USA and South Africa can ARIMA model is scientific. Today we can say that the pieces that make a company's reputation in the minds of consumers is the total of the perceptions of these 7 variables: its range of products and services, be a good place to work, integrity, innovative capacity , social engagement, its financial results and vision of its management team. After that number interviews, we can say some more stuff:
- That dimension determines supply-products more than a third of a company's reputation in the minds of consumers and that becomes the third Anglo-Saxons call a must have , ie a necessary condition for good reputation.
- That the offer of products, although necessary as a builder of reputation is not enough: around 65-70 percent of the company's reputation, by country, derived from the other 6 dimensions identified by the Rep Track. And those other 6 dimensions are quite specific, some speculative and can and should be managed in detail.
- Que la reputación (en la que se incluye un comportamiento responsable) también tiene un impacto directo en algunas de las métricas financieras comúnmente aceptadas. Por ejemplo, Telefónica en 2008 realizó un estudio interno para establecer la correlación entre las métricas de percepción de cliente (satisfacción del cliente, lealtad del cliente, salud de la marca y reputación de la empresa) y cinco indicadores financieros de primera magnitud: ARPU (ingresos medios por cliente), Churn (tasa de bajas), Margen (beneficio por cliente), Ganancia Neta (altas de líneas) y SAC (coste de adquisición de cliente). En este estudio se pudo comprobar que, a nivel de grupo, durante 2006 and 2007 financial performance of these metrics is explained by 11 percent by reason of changes in reputation, ie, changes that occur on the reputation earned by customers impact the financial performance of Telefónica. More specifically, the reputation of Telefónica affect financial metrics by 7 percent positive (increasing the perception of reputation from our customers improve our financial indicators). By contrast, the best reputation of competitors has a negative impact on our indicators 4 percent (if it improves the perception of the competitors reputation on our customers, our indicators worsen financial). In addition, it was found that in Latin America, the impact of the reputation and CSR is, on average, five times the impact in Spain, which corresponds to the fact that a multinational company.
Find a cause and effect liability and loss account is like searching for the Holy Grail. Sandra Waddock and Samuel Graves (17), a temporary studio around ten years between finance companies with good results and also present in socially responsible investment indices, came to prove that, more responsibility, more profit. Michael Porter and Mark R. Kramer (2006) have gone even away, making a mapping of social impacts in the value chain of the company.
Some conclusions times we are not easy. So I think it is necessary to link more than ever, the RSC to the income statement. The questions are clear: to what extent CSR can generate more revenue? What lower costs or minimize risks? "And may impact margins and customer satisfaction? What about improving the work environment? However, the answers are not always obvious.
To address this new time, which we call CSR 2.0, we have to make efforts. For starters, change language, leaving the 'goodism' and forget about it by 'giving back to society what society has given us. " To continue, we must invest in social projects in the same way it invests in R & D, looking for new engines of economic growth.
Thus understood, the RSC 2.0 has two clear features. First, it provides all the elements of CSR 1.0. Does not mean abandoning what has been done (reports, socially responsible investment indices, ethical codes, presence in multilateral institutions ...), but: a) on the basis of that, and b) ensuring that the goal is to zero, because risks are well managed, can make real engines of economic growth based on the major issues on the public agenda.
In this way, and if I may use the example football, I think the new map of action of large global companies can have two speeds:
- Globally, it is critical that multinationals are firm in their strategy defense. The objective of this strategy is to ensure that their goal is to zero, ensuring that some behaviors are met in full in the entire theater of operations. Ultimately, this defense strategy is aimed at reducing costs, both to achieve economies of scale in projects global as to minimize negative impacts of the value chain (risks).
- The RSC 2.0, or strategy of attack on this premise: economies of scale on growth projects, each country, niche to niche, sector by sector, identifying new business opportunities based on new issues public agenda. For example, in the telecommunications sector, we have identified as key to productivity, education, energy efficiency, health solutions and products for seniors and people with disabilities.
Actually, it is difficult to determine where the RSC 2.0 starts and ends the RSC 1.0. What I can say is that since and starts a new 'momentum' of the RSC. Who still thinks like yesterday is already out of the market.
Notes [1] "Whoever by act or omission causes damage to another, intervening fault or negligence, is obliged to repair the damage." [2] "He who puts care or care what he does or decides." [3] See http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/President_Barack_Obamas_Inaugural_Address/ [4] See http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/ [ 5] Draft English contribution to the Programme of the three presidential candidates (Spain, Belgium and Hungary). (2008, November). Version 21. [6] See http://www.un.org/sg [7] I will take as a reference to the definition adopted by the Forum of Experts established by the English Government in July 2005: 'Responsibility Social Enterprise is also strict compliance with existing legal obligations, the voluntary integration in its governance and management, strategy, policies and procedures, social concerns, labor, environment and respect for human rights arising relationship and transparent dialogue with its stakeholders, taking responsibility and the consequences and impacts arising from their actions "(Expert Forum on Corporate Social Responsibility, 2005). [8] See the definition of liability contained in the Dictionary of the English Royal Academy. [9] See the article Getting CSR righ (The Economist, January 17, 2008). [10] The most active NGOs in this area have been Oxfam, Amnesty International, Greenpeace and the Red Cross. [11] See http://www.unglobalcompact.org [12] See http://www.globalreporting.org/ [13] See http://www.sustainability-index.com/ Launched in 1999, the Dow Jones Sustainability Index was the first global indexes tracking the financial performance of major companies based on sustainability. Based on the cooperation of the DJSI STOXX Limited and SAM are reliable benchmarks and targets to manage sustainability portfolios. [14] Salterbaxter.com. The Full Report Directions 2008. Trends in Corporate Responsibility 2007/08. [15] The Climate Group, 2008, SMART 2020 Report [16] Source: National Statistics Institute (2008). [17] The authors are extending their sample base for a future article. Bibliography - Aguareles, S. (2008, July 3). ICTs are at the service of people with dependence [online]. Noticias.com. Available in http://www.noticias.com/noticia/tic-se-ponen-al-servicio-personas-dependencia-263.html - European Commission (2008a). Impacts of Information and Communication Technologies on Energy Efficiency EU [online]. Available at: http://www.theclimategroup.org/assets/resources/publications/Smart2020Report.pdf --- (2008b). Towards an information society accessible. Background note [online]. Available in http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/einclusion/docs/access/comm_2008/background.doc - Cuesta, M. (2004). Why corporate social responsibility. ICE Economic Bulletin, No. 281 358, 2 August to 5 September. - Dixon, F. (2007, March). Sustainable Systems Implementation: Building a Sustainable Economy and Society [online]. Available in http://www.globalsystemchange.com/ The Economist (2008, January 17). Getting CSR right. The Economist. - Friedman, M. (1970, September 13). The Social responsibiliy of Business is to Increase Profits STI. The New York Times Magazine. - Martín-Sanz, C. (2008). Impact of ICTs in education [online]. N-Economics. Available in http://www.n-economia.com/notas_alerta/pdf/ALERTA_NE_02-2008.PDF . - Norman W. & MacDonald, Ch (2004, April). Getting to the Bottom of 'Triple Bottom Line'. Business Ethics Quarterly. - Pohjola (2001). IPTS report [online]. Available in http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu/home/report/spanish/articles/vol77/ICT3S776.htm - Porter, M. & Kramer, M. (2006). Strategy & Society. The Link Between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility. Harvard Business Review, December, 78-92. - Reding, V. (2008). World of Health IT: Accelerating the Development of the eHealth market [online]. EU. Speech. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/health/docs/events/whit2008/whit2008-reding-speech.pdf - Salterbaxter (2008). Directions: the full report 2008. Trends in Corporate Responsibility 2007-2008 [online]. Available in http://www.salterbaxter.com/pdfDownloads/dir/dir_08.pdf - Telefonica (2005, December). Telecommunications and Sustainable Development: Information Technologies and old age [online]. Available at: http://www.etno.be/Portals/34/ETNO% 20Documents/Sustainability/Telefonica_ageing.pdf - UNESCO (2008, May 14). UN Secretary-General calls for research to Develop Universally accessible technology [online]. . Unesco. Available in http://portal.unesco.org/ci/en/ev.php-URL_ID=26751&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html - European Union (June 2008). "Ageing well": European Commission allocates 600 million euros for the creation of new digital solutions for the elderly in Europe [online]. Available in http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/08/994&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN ---------- (2008, November). Now Online: "Europeana", the digital library in Europe [online]. Available in http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/08/1747&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en - VV.AA. (2008). Corporate Social Responsibility. Madrid: Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, Centre Publications. - Waddock, S. & Graves, S. (1997). The Corporate Social Performance-Financial Performance Link. Strategic Management Journal, 18 (4), 303-319. - Zoellick, R. (2009, February 8). The era of responsibility. El País.
