Tag Archives: leadership

People Get Sustainability, Business (and Marketers) Don’t: 20 Minutes with the CEO of Unilever

11 Friday Jul 2014

Posted by in Capitalism 2.0, CSR, CSRwire

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Last month, Unilever CEO Paul Polman was in town – New York – to receive the Lifetime Achievement award from the Rainforest Alliance. As Rainforest Alliance President Tensie Whelan put it, “Paul has made several lifetimes of difference by leading Unilever to become a game changer.”

The company’s work with the Rainforest Alliance is well-known – by setting targets like sourcing 100 percent of its palm oil sustainably, Unilever has made it easier for other companies to follow suit and helped complex supply chains become comfortable with change and collaboration.

And, the company hasn’t stopped at palm oil.

Today, roughly 50 percent of the company’s tea originates on Rainforest Alliance Certified farms as it works toward sourcing 100 percent of its raw agricultural materials from sustainable origins (that figure currently stands at 48 percent).

Having recently interviewed Unilever’s Marketing Chief Keith Weed on the company’s refreshed goals and commitments, the opportunity to discuss sustainable development from the vantage point of the outspoken CEO was tempting. We caught up over a quick phone call:

The Unilever Sustainable Living Plan:

“When we launched it we said we don’t have all the answers. One of the reasons why we are working so wellUnilever CEO Paul Polman with Rainforest Alliance is because we share common goals. Take tea for example: Standards are driving up fast in an industry that’s not easy to standardize. [This is where the] scale of Rainforest Alliance is significant – and essential for the USLP to come alive.

“[Its] only been a year since the Rana Plaza fire happened. Those 1,050 women worked in conditions that were little more than modern-day slavery. We’re determined not to let that happen in our supply chain. So we’ve put some goals to match our resolve. We’re going to help more women gain access to training and land rights. The transformation can be substantial.”

Pushing forward in the absence of political will/action:

“In the absence of politicians, we need to move faster. Climate change is a great opportunity for business. Report from the White House is an encouraging sign. Needle is starting to move in the U.S. The tornadoes and hurricanes are starting to drive the message home for people.

“Besides, this is probably the only opportunity we’ll have. The Millennium Development Goals, for instance, are due to be completed next year – the urgency cannot be watered down.”

The most critical challenge for business:

“The biggest challenge is [that] we cannot scale our ambitious goals alone. It’s a major challenge to create the right partnerships and increasingly difficult to get the political sector to participate. How do you create size and scale in a vacuum?”

The changing role of marketers:

“I always say, don’t blame the consumers. There are many examples where consumers are leading business, especially the young ones. They’re changing our lives and systems.

“Consumers are speaking out everyday but we don’t want to see it. Then we say the consumer doesn’t want to change. If we can tap into the enormous movements, we can create change much faster. That’s the job of the modern-day marketers. Their job has changed. It doesn’t work any more to push consumption. We need a new model and get companies to adjust their marketing strategies as well as their job roles.”

People get it, business doesn’t:

“I spend a lot of time on how to develop leaders who can lead us through partnerships, with purpose, can think long-term and beyond 2020. On my way back from Abu Dhabi last month, I was reading an article that reported university students rebelling against the way economics [is being taught]. If teachers are teaching Milton Freidman’s theories, who is going to change the economy? For my kids, sustainability is the new normal. They don’t want to watch TV or buy the newest gas-guzzling car. Their generation is already thinking differently. Yet, marketers keep saying consumers don’t want it.

“Our understanding of consumers [and consumption] is too narrow. We need to get much closer to consumers. If we go to any of the emerging markets – 81 percent of the world’s population lives outside the U.S. and Europe – most of the growth is occurring in climate stretched areas today. They might not understand Rio+20 or climate change language but they know that weather patterns are changing, water is decreasing, etc.”

From mindless to mindful consumption:

“Marketers should switch from asking whether consumers are willing to pay for something to which consumer doesn’t want less poverty, more education, a healthier world with cleaner air and better nutrition.

“We just need to be astute about solutions. Look at the Edelman survey – consumers expect more and more from business, and if business understands this, it is a wonderful time. Children die from diseases which we can solve with hand washing – new market – marketers should be very excited by this. But that connection is not there.”

Three actions to change the world:

“We must get out of short termism because lots of solutions are long-term [climate change, access to education, water shortage, etc.] – and we can only solve them if we invest over longer periods and evaluate the social and economic capital. Then business people can optimize these. For example, 40 of the top 100 companies are already pricing carbon internally. They’ve committed to stay within these limits. Business is leading because they see the cost of action vs. inaction. We have now 40 countries that are pricing carbon including China. We have 20 other countries that are putting a tax on carbon. The system is starting to move.

“We need to give politicians Unilever Sustainable Livingconfidence that this [focus on sustainable development and long termism] will not kill jobs or stifle growth. The exact opposite is in fact true but we need to provide the proof points.

“We need to get companies to adopt integrated reporting quickly as well as become comfortable with transparency. It’s going to take much more than a nine-to-five job to bring all of this together. We need leaders and we’re short on them.”

If this was his last interview as the CEO of Unilever:

“We can use our scale to transform systems and change. We need to create a better place than the one we were born in. Ninety-nine percent of people are not in a position to make a difference. We can. We need to force change – it’s our duty to leave the place in a better place. I hope this drives Unilever and everyone else.”

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary section Talkback on June 2, 2014.

Advertisements

Campbell Becomes America’s First Public Company to Acquire a Public Benefit Corporation: In Conversation with Plum Organics’ Cofounder

09 Wednesday Jul 2014

Posted by in CSR, CSRwire

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Redefining corporate law. Targeting the node of enterprise to shift capitalism.

Those were some of the thoughts running through Neil Grimmer’s mind as he joined eight other businesses to welcome Benefit Corporations in Delaware in July, 2013.

As cofounder and President of Plum Organics – along with a small group of parents – Grimmer’s philosophy has been pretty straightforward: Every kid deserves the best nutrition and no child deserves to go hungry.

The result: an organic food line that prioritizes nutrition, environmental conservation, reduced packaging [a supply chain assessment of the traditional glass jar vs. the Plum pouch was undertaken that showed energy consumption for the latter was much less, fossil fuel consumption for their transportation was a ninth, and they’re 14 times less likely to end up in landfills even with aggressive recycling of the glass jars] and an accompanied mission to target child hunger.

Sound like a lot to take on?

Grimmer’s conviction came from experience. As the former VP of strategy and innovation with Clif Bar, he knew a thing or two about product development that infuses innovation with sustainable practices. “At Clif, I looked at sustainability as a journey, not a method. We’ve adopted that here at Plum,” he says.

Plum Organics went from recording $800,000 in sales in its first year [2008] to $93 million in 2012.

Consider these statistics:

  • 60 percent of retailers in the U.S. carried Plum in the latest quarter
  • The No. 3 baby food brand in the U.S. after Gerber and Beechnut
  • The top growing brand in the baby food category by actual dollars and percent growth this year, with 135% growth vs. a year ago

While the numbers tell their own story, here’s the kicker.

A Public Benefit Corporation: The Implications

Plum Organics is a certified Benefit Corporation. And now with Delaware’s recognition of the legal status, parent company Campbell Soup Company – who announced plans to acquire Plum in May Plum_Organics2013 – becomes the only company in the U.S. with a fully owned subsidiary that is also a Public  Benefit Corporation.

“Our business success at Plum has been based on creating a great product in a way that respects the highest levels of corporate citizenship. It is actually good business to be a good corporate citizen – and our success speaks to that belief,” says Grimmer.

Grimmer is excited – about the notoriety as well as joining hands with an iconic American brand, well-known for its altruistic actions and social causes.

“We have a mission centric core: nutrition and solving hunger with our benefit corporation status our secret sauce and innovation driving the entire process. Campbell has a dual mandate: strengthen the core Campbell business while driving new consumers and innovation. It’s a perfect marriage,” he explains.

With global aspirations [“Hunger and health are global issues.”] and a lofty ambition [“Make sure our products get into every high chair and lunch box globally.”], Grimmer “wanted a partner who would drive both [our goals] with us and help us pave the way to address a more global need that kids have. We have innovation driving our core – we launched over 150 products in the last six years specifically addressing nutritional needs of young families.”

Aligning Ambition With Impact

After spending some time with Campbell Soup Company CEO Denise Morrison, Grimmer’s search Plum Organics Super Smoothiecame to an end.

“As our company grew, so did our ability to impact the world,” says Grimmer. And being a benefit corporation meant the added leverage of a model that places impact and profits in the same sentence. Like The Full Effect program, which was launched this year to target 16 million kids who go without daily meals every day.

“We now had the scale and capability built into the business to make an impact. So we designed a Super Smoothie jam-packed with nutrients,” he says.

So far, Plum has committed to producing and distributing half a million Super Smoothies in 2013. Sound familiar? In 2012, Campbell led a similar one-of-a-kind campaign to produce more than 40,000 jars of “Just Peachy” salsa exclusively for the Food Bank of South Jersey, using fresh, local New Jersey peaches that were not able to be sold because of blemishes but were fine to eat. The initial run from last year’s harvest generated $100,000 for the Food Bank of South Jersey through retail sales.

“Collaborating with Plum made sense for us on several levels. They’re a mission-based organization and their focus on eradicating childhood hunger is strongly aligned with our work nationally and in Camden, N.J. – where Campbell is headquartered. That helps build the collective impact we can have.”

“Plum and Campbell are both consumer-centric companies, and we share a focus on innovation, a critical component of success as we continue to marry our citizenship commitments with the Campbell business model,” responded Dave Stangis, Campbell’s Vice President, Public Affairs and Corporate Responsibility.

Side Effects of An Acquisition

Clearly, the stars align for the two companies but at the end of the day, Campbell is a public company with shareholders and the pressures of satisfying quarterly balance sheets. Will the acquisition bring along with it the familiar headaches of layoffs, change in management and perhaps even a shift in models?

“Plum is a standalone business and will remain so. I will continue to lead Plum Organics and our team is staying intact,” says Grimmer, who plans on remaining an active member of the recently established Plum board of directors. The company will also continue to headquarter in California.

Stangis who has been leading the iconic company’s CSR efforts since 2008 was also quick to cut to the chase about the two organizations’ merged path going forward. “We’re in the process of structuring the Board for Plum. We’re proud to say one of our subsidiaries is a founding member of  the Public Benefit Corporation league.”

“We have already begun working with Neil and the Plum team. We are connecting on joint priorities and sharing Campbell’s CSR and sustainability resources,” he added.

“We’re looking forward to leveraging Campbell’s capabilities and skills to grow the Plum brand. As we dig into these opportunities, we will also be looking to focus on aligning our public benefit corporation with Campbell’s mission, model and culture. They have such a strong CSR program that the opportunities to target hunger are endless,” Grimmer explained.

And this is where Grimmer believes the conversation needs to shift.

“There is a new economy emerging of consumers who are looking to purchase from companies with a mission. They’re building a virtuous circle. When consumers support a business, you end up growing quickly with more exposure and higher impact,” he says.

Of course, being a public benefit corporation is but one element of Plum Organics’ success. It’s an exciting business story.

But the bigger story here is about being able to make an impact by combining a good product with sustainable attributes and an associated social and environmental cause. And that is where Grimmer wants to push his colleagues across corporate America further.

“The business community needs to look at how they are creating values alignment with their core consumers in a marketplace where loyalty is getting scarce. Let’s create many more of those virtuous circles.”

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary section Talkback on May 1, 2013.

The Social & Environmental Case for Carbon Offsetting: In Conversation with Barclays

09 Wednesday Jul 2014

Posted by in CSRwire

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


This is Part 1 of a series examining how leading companies are leveraging carbon offsetting and REDD+  to sustain their environmental footprint and target climate change.

“Our vision is about having a proportionate social impact on society.”

That’s how Jillian Fransen, Barclays’ director of Citizenship describes the bank’s elevated – and recently refreshed – sustainability agenda. Among the new elements: a three-year CSR strategy released last year, new stretch environmental targets, supporting growth among the SME sector, and a new Balance Scorecard, which benchmarks remuneration for the bank’s top 125 executives according to four Cs – one of which is Citizenship.

Fransen’s team is also on the cusp of launching an industry-leading Code of Conduct, besides managing and maintaining a 60 million-pound Community Investment Fund and a 20 million-pound Social Innovation Fund, created specifically to seed projects and partnerships that really push the needle on sustainability.

But, of all the things Barclays is doing, what piqued my interest was a core concentration on reducing its unavoidable emissions through carbon offsetting in the company’s climate program.

Carbon Offsetting: Need vs. Efficacy

Now while carbon offsetting has suffered from its share of misconceptions – and remains a relatively new idea in the U.S. – there is a critical need today to get past the debate and begin addressing unavoidable emissions.

Because despite the most robust plans in place that curb air travel and other activities, commerce requires both energy and fuel. And with the growth, availability – not to mention supporting infrastructure – of renewables relatively slow, it becomes a question of operating with what’s available. That is the reality for businesses. And Barclays is no exception.

Calling them “unavoidable emissions,” Fransen explained:

“We buy offsets for the footprint we incur outside our minimization program. We are doing everything we can to minimize emissions but there are those unavoidable emissions that we just cannot remove – like air travel. So to minimize their impact, offsetting fits quite well in our Climate Program.”

The Program focuses on three areas: climate change, developing products for low carbon economies and risk management services for clients with low carbon opportunities.

The firm, which wants to minimize its environmental footprint by 10 percent by 2015, works with Wildlife Works and Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation [REDD+] projects for its offsets strategy. According to the United Nations website, REDD+ “is an effort to create a financial value for the carbon stored in forests, offering incentives for developing countries to reduce emissions from forested lands and invest in low-carbon paths to sustainable development.”

As Sibilia decoded in his article, the intended impact of the offsetting (emission reductions) leads to not only forest conservation but also a parallel movement to create self-sustaining social enterprises that recuperate the local economies and build social independence. Therein lies the true impact of UN REDD Programmeoffsetting, he concluded.

For Fransen, similarly, the appeal of working with REDD+ lay in Wildlife Works’ expertise and experience in protecting threatened forests  – and its track record with local communities. “Twenty percent of emissions come from deforestation so it made sense for us to partner with organizations that could help us find areas where forests were being destroyed. That way we can have direct impact where it is most needed,” she said.

Then there is the added advantage of targeting local communities in key markets where Barclays operates. “We wanted to take accountability for our footprint. Additionally, Wildlife Works operates in Kenya, which is a key market for us. We are in 13 African countries – the oldest bank across eastern Africa — so having an on-the-ground partner there was key for us. ”

The real impact of implementing a carbon offsetting strategy then for Barclays?

“Create accountability for a footprint that the firm is otherwise unable to get rid of. That wakes people up. When we can have localized impact, it’s a win for us,” she responded.

Climate Change: Decoding the Impact of a Bank

Besides what seems to be the main area – air travel – what is Barclays most challenging source of carbon emissions?

“We have a network of hundreds of small branches. Our biggest challenge is availability and collection of relevant data about our water and paper use as well as waste. Not all our operations have the same level of management and facility support. Especially in Africa, it is very hard to ensure commitment to some of the improvements that are required in this year,” she said.

Another challenging area is the bank’s indirect impacts through its lending practices. “Where we choose to lend and what impact that has on the environment is critical. We need to hit this on a macro level. When you go to lend to an oil and gas company, we need to stand up to our commitment. They work with a minimum of 16 banks – we’re one piece of a large network,” she explained.

The Need For “Some Serious Leadership”

While our conversation mostly focused on Barclays’ carbon reduction strategy, it was hard to contextualize that without questioning what role Fransen’s contemporaries in the financial sector needed to play to sensibly address climate change.

Could Barclays continue to make progress without reciprocation from a sector busy repairing tarnished reputations from the financial crisis?

“There is a major shift going on toward a realistic understanding of what we need to do to adapt to climate change. In my opinion, none of this is happening quickly enough though. We need some serious leadership within our industry in the next five years to change gears on climate change,” she emphasized.

“Our biggest challenge is making it real for everyone in the organization. We have 142,000 employees that manage a matrix of clients and customers. The [impact they can have] is profound. I’d like to see us capitalize on this matrix much more. There’s a feeling, not limited to banking, that we’re doing our bit and everyone else will do theirs – and we’ll be okay.”

“Fact is, the issues are way more pressing for us to rest on that assumption.”

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary section Talkback on August  28, 2013.

Examining The Sustainability of the Royal Bank of Scotland: Facing Your Demons

09 Wednesday Jul 2014

Posted by in CSR, CSR reporting, CSRwire

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


The finance sector continues to ride on the coattails of what started as a severe decline in trust, market performance and profits in 2008. And Royal Bank of Scotland [RBS] was no exception, facing its own share of customer distrust and instability as well as a government bailout.

However, in its most recent CSR Report, the bank – as compared to its contemporaries – makes a marked effort to address these concerns and makes a public promise to examine its “financial stability, our customers, the way we use the resources around and the practices that we have.”

What really piqued my interest was the press release issued by the bank, which right from the headline – Royal Bank of Scotland Extends Meetings with Biggest Critics – told me change was afoot.

I caught up with Duncan Young, Deputy Head of Sustainability who is also in charge of producing the bank’s annual CSR Report. We began with an obvious question – I couldn’t hesitate – about a specific statement in CEO Stephen Hester’s quote that highlighted the Report’s very first page: What will it take to “build a really good bank”?

Aspirational Goals: “Building a Really Good Bank”

“There’s been debate about how aspirational that statement is…and a recognition that the sector has had a difficult time in recent years. We want to regain the trust of our customers and wider stakeholders – and we’re not going to become a really good bank till we do that,” he explained, adding: “We’ve spent the last few years working to make the bank secure and stable again. And made fairly significant progress. But as we go through the process of regaining trust with wider society, we think we need to deliver the kind of solutions that equate with us being a good bank.”

Fair enough. But what does an overarching statement of “becoming good” involve for an organization that serves a cross sector of business and consumer populations?

“We have significantly enhanced the remit of our Group Sustainability Committee this year. They will now cover wider reputational issues, impact on customers as well as U.K. industry practices, where too often, in the past customers were taken for granted. Today, we want to put customers at the heart of what we do to make sure we don’t make those mistakes again,” he said.

As for the committee’s expanded remit, “The committee will operate at the board level with full  RBS_Report_Cover_Alternativesupport from our leadership. Members will meet six times a year to review its larger mandate, which now includes conduct, culture and reputation, a very current issue for the industry.”

Underlining this is of course a sense of loss. As Young put it, “We are well aware that we have suffered heavily since the financial crisis and need to rethink how we work with our customers.”

“After the crisis, we were bailed out by the taxpayer. Our fundamental goal since has been to make the bank safe and secure. We’re getting there. Our loan to deposit ratio – traditionally held as a good measure of a bank – was at 140 percent at one point. Now we’re down to 100 percent, which is deemed to be a measurable sign of a stable bank,” he said.

“We’ve also repaid key aspects of government support. But it’s important that we focus on maintaining a culture now that ensures past mistakes do not recur. We have a much stronger focus on conduct risk and our engagement efforts are making sure the bank’s leadership are much better placed to pick up on issues of market behavior, reputation risk and have an understanding of what customers’ expectations are from us. That’s another reason why we have significantly increased our disclosures,” Young emphasized.

Transparent Leadership: Engaging With Critics

So how does the company plan to address and interact with its critics?

“We have had a program where the sustainability committee meets with our biggest external critics where they can make the case about their interests in how we operate directly to the executive team. Last year, we held three engagement sessions with 14-15 separate groups attending. This year, we transparency at RBSwill have six more. In fact, even as we talk, committee members are meeting with a few organizations to discuss cyber security and its impact on the bank and our customers,” offered Young.

The leverage and stature of the committee has proven an important approach in increasing the bank’s stakeholder engagement, according to Young, because of the members’ ability to represent critical points of view and risks directly to the leadership. “This ensures that our top leadership does not lose sight of our key stakeholders and the dialogue informs their decision-making and specific business-related outcomes,” he added.

The CEO Speaks

Another first for the bank: Publishing a Q&A with its CEO that makes a mighty honest effort at addressing issues like trust, stability, its lending practices as well as the 2012 LIBOR rate-fixing scandal. Highlights:

On sustainability:

“Our long-term success will be determined by how well we understand our customers and communities, and how well we can service their needs in a responsible way. 2012 was a very challenging year for the sector, but it certainly served to underline that point.”

Lending to small businesses:

“It’s a difficult environment at the moment. Ongoing economic uncertainty has unsurprisingly driven down demand from businesses. SME loan applications were down 19% from 2011. Nonetheless, we continue to provide significant support to customers. RBS advanced more than £74 billion to UK businesses and homeowners in 2012. We’re approving a higher proportion of loan applications than ever – 93% in the last quarter of 2012.”

Royal Bank of Scotland CSR Report

The impact of the LIBOR rate-fixing scandal:

“There is no place at RBS for such behavior. That’s why we’re determined to correct the control and risk management failures that originated in RBS during the financial boom years, of which attempted LIBOR manipulation is an example. This is a painstaking task, that’s been undertaken over several years and we can’t detect and solve every problem as fast as we would like. The aim is to create a safe and secure RBS that serves customers well and that, in the right way, creates value for those who rely on us.”

On customer trust:

“Staff don’t set out to serve customers poorly, but banks too often had other priorities before the crisis. They saw customers as a means of making money.”

On executive pay:

“The investment banking bonus pool has gone down by 20% on last year, despite operating profits in the markets division being up by nearly 70%. In fact, since 2009 our investment banking bonus pool has shrunk by more than 70%. We’ve also increased transparency around pay. But there’s a balance – we need high quality people if we are to achieve the goals we set out in 2008. So we must deliver reform, while not making the business unmanageable.”

Regaining Trust with External Stakeholders…

The report’s materiality map, worth a look by anyone interested in disclosure and how it can increase shareholder value and business performance, shows customer trust as the bank’s number one material risk. I asked Young how his team was planning to address this:

“Stakeholder engagement is one piece. We make our senior leaders available to the media, release quarterly disclosure and take advantage of public forums to explain where we’re taking the company, how we’re working on renewing customer trust and engaging with enterprise,” he said.

Other efforts include programs like “Working with You” where relationship managers spend a minimum of two days a year working with their clients to get a real understanding of those businesses, an accreditation scheme to ensure our bankers are suitably skilled and qualified, and simplifying our product range to make life easier for our High Street customers.

“It’s not just about the products but also how we offer them. We have to acknowledge that we’re operating against the backdrop of a tough regulatory landscape and immense pressure. The repercussions of offering the wrong products in the past continue to be felt across the organization and we have to get this right,” he added.

…And Employees

What about the bank’s internal culture? With massive layoffs having made headlines not too long ago, Employee retention at RBSwhat is Young’s team doing to retain and attract top talent? “Despite all the changes and the restructuring, our employee engagement measurements stack up very well. We’re quite pleased, for example, with our ongoing commitment to demo gender diversity at the executive level. We’re not at the optimum point but we’re getting much better at employing more women,” said Young.

Take a look at the report and you see Young’s sentiments reflected right from Page 1. It is commendable that the bank, despite its difficult regulatory environment and consumer marketplace, is facing up to its critics, shifting its cultural rotunda and putting programs in place that can ensure 2008 does not repeat itself. As Young put it, the report manages to “strike a realistic tone and successfully acknowledges that we did have a difficult year.”

After all, we’ve gone hoarse advocating to reporters that they mustn’t view CSR/sustainability Reports as yet another marketing document but as a piece of disclosure that is tied to materiality, engagement and business performance.

Final words? “If people read nothing more than the first 15 pages, they would get a good oversight of our challenges and how we’re responding. That’s mission accomplished for us,” offered Young.

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary section Talkback on May 15, 2013.

SAP’s 1st Integrated Report: From Sustainability to Integrated Thinking

09 Wednesday Jul 2014

Posted by in CSR, CSR reporting, CSRwire

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Using Integrated Reporting as a catalyst for integrated thinking.

That’s how Peter Graf, SAP’s Chief Sustainability Officer expressed the firm’s decision to replace two reports – the annual report mandated by the law and submitted to the SEC indicating the company’s financial performance and the sustainability report , voluntary in nature and showing its non-financial performance– by one Integrated Report for 2012.

While Integrated Reporting is a fairly new trend – The International Integrated Reporting Committee [IIRC] website hosts a total of 41 Integrated Reports since 2011 – it’s not surprising.

As the trend of CSR and sustainability reporting grows – due to multiple factors including a recessionary economy, dwindling resources, emerging conflicts in supply chains and a better connected world – logically, Integrated Reporting is the next step for any organization truly attempting to be as transparent as possible about its financial and non-financial challenges and performance.

Shift in Engagement: From Sustainability to Integrated

At SAP, the impetus for the shift was the realization that “we needed to engage within our organization on a different level” according to Graf. “We have been reporting on our sustainability performance since 2008. The report has grown in sophistication over the years and we even won several awards in the last two years for our report’s interactive nature, etc. So technically, we could have continued on that road,” he added.

Last year, CSRwire collaborated with Graf and his team on a webinar to launch SAP’s new interactive report. Complete with social media buttons, comment sections and multimedia options, the report could be customized and perused in multiple ways depending on your agenda. The report was well received – and in a span of an hour SAP_Integrated_Reportwe received over 30 questions from a very engaged audience.  [Join us for a webinar with Peter Graf, IIRC CEO Paul Druckman and others today at 11am ET]

SAP set a trend last year, so why the shift again?

 

Connecting the Dots: The Bigger Picture

“We have been measuring key performance indicators [KPI] on the financial and non-financial side for quite a while. But one day, we started to put them all on a white board trying to draw connection lines between them. Before we knew it, the chart was pretty full. We started to do research both internally and externally , to better understand and compute those relationships. Suddenly it became clear, just how interconnected non-financial and financial performance indicators really are,” he explained.

“When I heard about Integrated Reporting for the first time, I got excited. But then I thought: It’s going to be a very long process to achieve the integrated thinking that must be portrayed in the report. I viewed the Integrated Report as an outcome. However, over time our team reached the conclusion that instead of waiting for the right engagement at SAP to happen, we should use the process of producing an integrated report as the forcing function to drive the necessary engagement,” Graf added.

“In its integrated report, SAP lays out the interdependencies between financial and non-financial indicators,” said Graf. Proof points like: an increase or decrease of one percentage of SAP’s retention employee retention at SAPrate saves/costs the company 62 million euros. And since 2007, a peak year for energy consumption at the company, SAP has avoided 220 million euros ($285 million) through energy conservation efforts.

“When these kinds of relations appear between financial and non-financial indicators, they do more than make the business case for sustainability. They serve as the catalysts for an integrated corporate strategy.” said Graf.

While the entire report is available online, a parsed version – “we kept out customer stories but retained all other ESG data and metrics” – is submitted to the Securities & Exchange Commission.

SAP’s 2012 Performance: Key Highlights

So what will you find in the integrated Report this year?

For one, retention was up [94 percent in 2012] as was diversity, i.e., the number of women in management [an increase of one percent from 2011 to 19.4 percent].

The goal: to reach 25 percent by 2017.

Total energy consumed stayed stable at 2011 numbers while revenue increased by 17 percent and emissions per Euro in revenue and per employee were reduced for the sixth year in a row. Overall emissions were slightly reduced, in spite of the company  adding 9,000 new employees in 2012. Finally, the use of renewable energy increased from 47 percent in 2011 to 60 percent in 2012.

Also intriguing to me was a section, which detailed SAP’s People Strategy.

I asked Graf what the strategy involved – and how did they measure the outcomes besides retention and diversity?

“Having a sound strategy around people is essential in a company that solely relies on its employees to create value. Thus our ability to compete is highly dependent on our human resources and it’s impossible to separate that from our financial performance,” he said.

“First, we want to hire more diverse people. We believe more diverse groups innovate better. Second, we want to nurture our talent through clear development plans, challenging assignments, social media, e-learnings, etc. And finally, we want to leverage employee engagement as a decisive factor. So we measure retention and diversity but also engagement, which is a core and central KPI in driving our overall performance in the future,” Graf added.

Measuring Employee Engagement: Critical to Business Performance

So what contributed to a drop in employee engagement in 2006-2009?

“I believe there are various reasons that led to a decrease in engagement during that time. Most important, however, is how we made it back to the high engagement scores of today: When economic growth came back after the recession, the leadership of the company changed, a compelling innovation strategy for growth was established, the company was given the purpose of helping the  world run better to improve people’s lives and Energy_consumption_SAP_2012overall we enjoyed strong and continuous revenue growth as a result. So, a combination of issues got us into low engagement scores and a combination of things got us back on track.”

SAP also measures a Business Health Culture Index. Does that measure the company’s engagement quotient and connect it with business performance?

“We use this index to measure the health of our employees. There are four times as many stress-related illnesses in the intellectual property industry as compared to other industries. So we use data from eight questions [purpose, leadership, recognition, empowerment, rewards, stress levels, compared to people my age I feel more/less healthy] to understand where we stand and what we need to do to take care of our employees.”

In 2012, SAP’s Health Index stood at 66 percent, a one percent increase since 2011 and significant growth since 2008-2009.

Integrated Reporting: Check. What’s Next for SAP?

With all the data and metrics dancing around in my brain, the only question left to ask was, what’s next?

“On the one side, we recognize that integrated reporting is an early trend and that we certainly have to continue to improve and learn. On the other side, we have the ambition to lead, even if this means that we may make a mistake that followers might be able to avoid,” said Graf.

“The next steps clearly are to continue to move away from just having a sustainability strategy to making our corporate strategy more sustainable. This requires an engagement with leaders across SAP that we have not achieved before moving to integrated reporting,” he added.

His recommendations for companies who might be complacent with limited voluntary disclosure or perhaps hesitant to mix the voluntary with the mandatory?

“As soon as people recognize that  integrated reporting helps companies understand and grow the way how they create value at their core, , it will pick up. More and more people know this intuitively today but when someone connects all the financial and non-financial numbers with each other, then the big picture emerges,” he said.

SAP’s Integrated Report 2012 is available at www.SAPIntegratedReport.com.

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary section Talkback on March 25, 2013.

Weaving Ethics & Accountability into Free Enterprise: Leadership in Crisis

03 Thursday Jul 2014

Posted by in Capitalism 2.0, CSRwire

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


“An entrepreneur is the engine of change. The dilemma: The glue that connects entrepreneurs, capital and the legal system.”

The real problem with companies today?

“A lack of purpose, intent and transparency.”

That’s how Erik Trojian, director of policy for nonprofit B Lab, opened his presentation at the recent seminar held jointly by Georgetown University, the Caux Round Table and the Sustainable Business Network of Washington (SBNOW).

The theme of the two-day seminar was weighty: Ethics, Leadership and Sustainability – to explore how the capitalist spirit of free enterprise and social entrepreneurship can help transform economic systems and promote social justice, basic rights, and human freedom around the world.

Common among the presentations of the day was a repeated emphasis on corporate governance, beginning with Trojian.

Modern Capitalism & Benefit Corporations

Trojian and his team are on a mission: To get all 50 states of the United States of America to sign the benefit corporation legislation into law. So far, they have succeeded in seven states.

He explained their goal:

“Modern capitalism began at a particular point of time in a certain type of culture. Somewhere in the 1960s, values began to shift and outcomes began to change. We want corporations to have an alternative form of operation that predicates protecting a business’ social and environmental communities.”

After a powerful presentation on the what, how and why(s) of the benefit corporation – a subject that has been covered quite comprehensively by CSRwire in recent weeks – Roderick M. Hills, Sr., former chair of the SEC and cofounder and chair of the Hills Program on Governance at the Center for Strategic and International Studies took the podium.

“Fixing” Bad Corporate Governance

“The Securities Exchange Commission [SEC] was set up to have more finite control of corporations’ governance. Auditors were expected to act on all suspicions. We convinced the New York Stock Exchange to address disclosure and transparency,” he started.

The next antidote according to Hill: The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

“The Act’s real problem was its uncertainty. They don’t want to deal with figuring out what is a crime and what isn’t resulting in people doing whatever they want to do. Plus the Act was not valid outside the geographic boundaries of the U.S. The rest of the world has no incentive to use this,” he said.

Aligning Board Service with Governance: A Conversation with Lucy Marcus

What’s really wrong with most corporation’ boards set up and governance standards according to him? His concerns were multifold so I turned to Lucy Marcus, renowned corporate governance expert, CEO of Marcus Consulting Ventures and Reuters columnist for some answers:

1. Too Much Agreement in the Boardroom

“There are too many directors today who would rather quit than disagree.”

Lucy: Asking the hard questions in the board room is essential, and also being willing to be persistent in the pursuit of the best outcome for the company and stakeholders is essential. Those are the kind of independent directors we want in the boardroom.

Anyone who is not willing to operate in this new reality doesn’t belong in the boardroom, and as we develop & educate new directors they need to know that this is what shall be expected of them.

2. The Fiduciary Responsibility of Directors

“There is a paradox in the country. Independent director doesn’t equal independence today. Every director has a preset job description regardless of who he represents/brings to the board.”

As directors it is vital that we understand going into the post what our job is inside and outside of the boardroom, what skills and knowledge we bring to the table, and also that we also operate beyond those strict skills we bring to also be able to synthesize data quickly and to make decisions in a well-informed and responsible manner.

3. Mandatory Retirement

“The mandatory rotational retirement is a terrible idea. There is no auditory protocol built-in and it gives directors too short a time to compel change, set standards, make a difference.”

I believe strongly in term limits. Best practice, as set out in the U.K., is several terms that add up to 9 years, and I think this is correct.

There is no way that someone can maintain their independence for much longer than that, and if the board room is to remain a place for dynamic discussion, it is incumbent upon boards to continually refresh themselves so that the people around the table bring a balance of continuity and change and the company is able to keep its finger on the pulse of changing agenda items, be it corporate social responsibility, technology, or anything else that is relevant to continued strength, growth and wellbeing of the organization.

If Capitalism Isn’t Bad, Are Capitalists?

Despite the somber notes, Bob Edgar, president and CEO of Common Cause, perhaps encapsulated the day – and our present crises – most succinctly with one question:

“Is it appropriate for [a form of] capitalism to exist that leads to unemployment, slavery and excess profits above all else?”

Readers: It’s your turn to participate in this dialogue and become the change makers you seek from our leaders. How are you solving ethical dilemmas between personal values and professional responsibilities?

As Chairman of the Hershey Company James Nevels put it recently at the BCCCC conference, “CSR above all begins and ends with personal responsibility.”

How do you define personal responsibility – and extend that to corporate responsibility?

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary sectionTalkback on April 4, 2012.

The Power of Hiring Right: A Value Proposition that Most Recruiters Continue to Ignore

03 Thursday Jul 2014

Posted by in CSR, HR

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,


Sustainability isn’t the most favorable of topics with recruiters. But ask them about the sustainability of their hires and you’ll instantly hear a litany of complaints and frustrations.

Yesterday, Vault kicked off a series of seminars on this very important, if not the most popular, topic for the recruitment sector: The increasing role of CSR and sustainability in recruitment.

Sponsored by Madrid’s IE Business School, these seminars have been planned exclusively for recruiters and HR managers and align well with the School’s overarching commitment to sustainability (they have a master’s program dedicated to environmental change), social entrepreneurship, and CSR.

But what makes sense on college campuses doesn’t necessarily align with recruiters whose objective is much more linear: To hire the best talent based on a specific list of behavioral and technical skills, with the hope that they will stick around for at least a few years.

Retention? That’s an HR function.

This disconnect became the focus of my planning when I was approached by Vault to design the seminars. I came up with three distinct objectives:

  • Demonstrate how a growing consciousness about corporate social responsibility is changing expectations among prospective job candidates and employees;
  • Question whether recruitment teams are responding to this change in CSR awareness by modifying their outreach and strategy; and
  • Offer examples – and best practices – of how recruiters can best illustrate their company’s corporate citizenship before the candidate comes aboard.

In all my years at Vault (I left in July to start Singh Solutions, a research and advisory firm offering CSR communications and social media strategy services – and continue to write for CSRwire and Forbes), I have always put a premium on the efficacy of a responsible and innovative culture in attracting candidates. But when you bring in terms like CSR, sustainability, inclusion, things begin to get murky.

While no one can argue that a business’ corporate and social behavior is a POWERFUL tool in attracting talent, especially in the current recession, how do you convey as much in a job interview?

This is where the real disconnect then emerges, indicated amply by a series of interviews I conducted last year with four MBA candidates committed to pursuing work that aligned with their sense of corporate social responsibility: Boston University MBA Candidate Ashley Jablow, Geet Singh, Whit Tice and Larry Furman.

Jablow told me then:

“I have chosen to go to business school so that I can create change and be an ethical and responsible contributor to business.”

But who’s responding? Not a lot of companies, I found. As Tice put it:

“Without awareness, there is no sense of urgency.”

This lack of urgency became the underlying theme of session number one on Tuesday. Joined by PwC’s HR and Administrative Leader for Florida Kimberly Jones and Guillermo Montes, Managing Director for South US, Puerto Rico and the Caribbean region for IE Business School, I offered the audience an alternative view: A reality where recruiters are not only responsible for hiring the most skilled talent but also the best fit based on their values.

“Retention after all is half the battle. Getting the candidate in is hard but retention becomes equally challenging if we don’t invest in aligning the candidate’s personality to the company’s core values,” said Jones. For PwC, this has meant organizing initiatives like Project Belize and Project New Orleans, where summer interns get to participate in community building exercises, and the team hopes, get a real close look at the firm’s culture.

“The average age of a PwC employee is 26 years old. So demands and expectations are quite different from older generations,” she emphasized, adding that a brand that not only commits to CSR but also makes it a priority becomes an increasingly valuable ally in attracting candidates.

In a globalized economy where work can be outsourced at a click of a button and entrepreneurship is emerging as a serious alternative for many graduates, organizations have it tough, even if they don’t recognize it just yet. While recruiters might erroneously believe that the market is to their advantage, the fight for top talent remains fierce. This is where your organization’s culture, values, and social and environmental commitments can emerge as key differentiators for a generation that is demanding fairness, ethical behavior and responsibility from business.

While the debate was spirited and the conversation heated at times, it was clear that the panel had been well received. We ran over time with questions pouring in. Examples include the impact of globalization on recruitment, how companies are dealing with an increasingly age diverse candidate pool, and whether we should expect reformulation of job profiles and descriptions in coming years.

Suffice it to say, we together – the panel and the audience – shared something powerful this Tuesday: We experienced a crowd-sourced change in mentality. We made a commitment. Together. To bring back some of the equilibrium lost in recent years between business, society and the environment by focusing on a company’s most powerful assets: It’s human resources.

Are you ready to have a real conversation?

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary section Talkback on September 29, 2011.

REI CEO: Sustainability is a Team Sport…and a Business Enabler

02 Wednesday Nov 2011

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


My latest post on CSRwire’s Talkback: Sustainability is a Team Sport.

Occupy Wall Street: The Average Joe Interprets Corporate Social Responsibility

19 Wednesday Oct 2011

Posted by in CSR

≈ 17 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Earlier this week I was at the annual PRSA conference in humid and beautiful Orlando, Florida. Before you think that I have switched tracks from journalism to PR, stop right there! I was on site to speak on an interestingly personal topic: Sustainability: Walking the Walk.

Sustainability: Walking the Walk with CSRWire & Ethical Markets

Joining me on the panel were CEO of CSRwire Joe Sibilia and Executive Director of Ethical Markets Rosalinda Sanquiche. Sibilia started off the panel by talking about Occupy Wall Street. Not because he wanted a room full of dissent but because for Sibilia, as he emphasized on a recent Fox Business show, OWS goes to the heart of corporate social responsibility: A responsible capitalist system that takes into account a business’ social, economic and environmental stakeholders.

From a room of roughly 45 attendees, almost everyone raised their hands. However, when he followed up by asking how many understood what the protestors are demanding, the hands fell to a single digits. So, before I go any further, here’s a two-part question for you:

And:

Here’s the thing: Because so many continued to disagree with the holier-than-thou voice of CSR, claiming it is another cost business doesn’t need, a burden, not a business priority, so on and so forth, Michael Porter gave us an easier concept to embrace: Creating Shared Value.

You Don’t Get CSR? How About “Shared Value”?

Many more understood the economical efficacy offered by shared value than the tardy, accusatory and undefined acronym of CSR. But CSR as well as creating shared value are concepts spearheaded by economists, business leaders, researchers and activists.

Now we are all being forced to recognize and acknowledge a movement created by the average Joe (no pun intended!) demanding business to be more responsible, equal and just.

They want to be able to work, to have a home, a family. They want the right to live comfortably.

In other words, corporate social responsibility.

Yes, it’s one and the same thing, except now it’s not the activists or the bloggers taking up the case but an undefined mass of people who come from different backgrounds, experiences and age but are commonly united on one front: Fairness.

Regardless of whether you physically join the Occupy Wall Street protestors, it is far more important that you understand their message and recognize that this is your one chance to make things right.

Yes, You the Average Employee Can Make a Difference

So, go ahead: Nudge your boss to offer job sharing opportunities to candidates.

As a job candidate, question the recruiter on the company’s mission, values, priorities. As a student, ask your faculty to discuss business cases in context of economic recessions, environmental degradation and social upheaval.

Ask the tough questions, the right questions. As Michigan’s Ross School of Business Professor Aneel Karnani recently said, “You get the kind of government you vote for.” We as professionals and students get the kind of corporation we choose to work for.

This is your chance to influence business as an employee, a manager, and as a prospective candidate. For the longest time we have been told to vote with our dollars. Now it is time to vote with our expertise and professional skills.

Question is, are you up for it?

The Story of a Successful Social Entrepreneur: What Is It That You Are Meant To Do?

04 Tuesday Oct 2011

Posted by in CSR

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


How is a social enterprise born? Is it born out of a recognition that some thing needs to change or is it much more complex than that?

For Sameer Hajee, the decision to give up a lucrative career as a micro-process engineer in Silicon Valley was a simple one. “After working for four years, I needed a change in geography,” he tells me over a recent Skype call. A few months later, he was working for a telecom operator in Afghanistan.

From Silicon Valley to Afghanistan

Six months in the war-torn country offered Hajee a unique perspective on the impact of energy in one of the most impoverished regions of the world. “Afghanistan opened my eyes to how impactful appropriate energy use can be. I decided right then that this is what I would focus on after business school,” he recalls.

Nuru Light: A Winning Solution

Sameer Hajee, Founder and CEO, Nuru LightHajee is the founder and CEO of Nuru Light, one of five winners of this year’s Powering Economic Opportunity: Create a World That Works competition co-hosted by the eBay Foundation and Ashoka Changemakers. Nuru Light is a social enterprise based in East Africa, built on the simple premise of hyper-local economic communities.

But Hajee’s story isn’t as intuitive or linear as it might seem in hindsight. After completing his MBA at INSEAD, Hajee went to work in Kenya as a member of the United Nations Develop Programme (UNDP). Then, in 2005, the social enterprise trend was growing and market-based solutions were becoming the latest tactic for the socially conscious.

In Kenya, my role was of a convener.  A small group based out of the United Nations was trying to work with multinational companies to create pro-poor for-profit businesses and it was my job to see where the opportunities were and to connect the folks.

This not only meant a lot of nuts and bolts groundwork in one of the world’s poorest nations but also skillfully lobbying for regulations, increasing capacity, ensuring quality of local products and much more. “These private public partnerships exposed me to a lot of different business models and industries. I was able to see firsthand what was working and what wasn’t.”

Africa: A Broken Value Chain

Next stop: Free Play Energy. “I was starting to get frustrated with the bureaucracy within the UN. When Free Play approached me to help them market crank radios and other products to the camping market in rural Africa, I decided to jump ship,” he says. Hajee worked for Free Play Energy for two memorable years.

The experience was incredible.

We found out, for example, that these off grid products would be very valuable to the poor but the delivery model was completely ineffective. It was taking $20 to produce something and by the time you got to the consumer, the price had jumped to $50. The value chain is so convoluted in Africa that the end customer is always given a very expensive product.

His team’s solution: A donor model with help from the UNDP. “Free Play became a viable business but we didn’t have control of our products now,” he says.

And he was itching for something new. Again. So in 2008, along with two colleagues, Hajee left Free Play to start Nuru Light.

The Big Idea: Using Energy to Solve Social Problems

“Human power as a hand crank wasn’t going to work for very long. We knew that then, it gets old very quickly.  But the immense power of human energy has been untapped and compared to solar or other alternatives is much more appropriate,” he says.

With initial funding from the World Bank, Hajee spent two months living in Rwanda to understand specifically what “they need energy for what they were currently using.”  “Remember that these are the poorest of the poor populations. Their needs are basic. My research identified four specific needs: Cooking, lighting, mobile phone charging and radio,” he says.

Essentially, what Hajee realized then was that most of us use energy for specific tasks, especially those that don’t have a continual power source. We learn to adapt and make the most of our resources.

“The fact is that the power required to power these things wasn’t a lot. It all came down to tasks: the entire room did not need to be lit up. They just needed enough task light, as long as it was multi-use and multifunctional,” he emphasizes.

What also emerged was a need to pool resources and share. “Some of them said they would like to have room lighting for visitors. So why not have multi-use lights that can be connected for such occasions?”

The Economy of A Sachet

The hyper-local model Hajee discovered has been successful for a long time in India. With a significant percentage of the Indian population still living well below the poverty line, these sachets have gone a long way in helping those with limited disposable income afford basic necessities.

For the African poor, Nuru Light, a basic, rechargeable light, has similar potential and meaning.

But how do you take it to market?

First, you need seed investment. For Nuru Light, this meant a complete initial dependence on grant money to get through the first two-and-a-half years of research and testing. “We were completely funded by grants. It took every penny of the $500,000 we raised to make this work in Africa.”

Africa’s “Green Jobs”

“One of the ways to eradicate poverty is to offer economic opportunity. So we thought, why not put this into the hands of micro entrepreneurs who could set up recharging stations for these single, handheld lights?”

So, a lot like the successful domestic business models like Netflix and Zip Car, the Nuru Light micro entrepreneurship model was born. What made the idea instantly sellable were two factors: Setting up the business required minimal funds and the profits would be significantly steep than what the community was making.

The following months began to show concrete results with most of the micro entrepreneurs paying off their initial setup loans within six months. “They were making $1.50 for 20 minutes of charging. That’s what they made earlier by working the whole day,” he explains.

As for customers, the value proposition presented by Nuru Light was equally attractive. According to Hajee, a recharge costs 30 cents, which typically provides for with about 10 days of lighting.

A whole month’s supply? No more than one dollar for most.

Dissecting a Social Enterprise’s Business Model

While the product was an instant success with customers who really felt that their needs had been understood and the solution affordable, things were not as smooth running internally.

Our revenue model really evolved through those initial months. From low margin and a high volume approach we went to carbon credits. In fact, we are the third registered carbon credit company in Africa.

They also needed to figure out how to ensure that Nuru Light was sustainable for and with their team of micro entrepreneurs. “The fee from the recharging stations was a significant third stream of revenue that we had anticipated early on. But turned out, we were spending much more on fielders doing the rounds to collect the money than was worth it,” he says.

Nuru Light is a social enterprise that sought to invent an affordable and clean off-grid lighting system for the world’s poor.

Nuru Light

Next challenge: Automating the process.  The answer, Hajee realized lay in mobile money. A lot like the rechargeable pay-as-you-go mobile phone system, the micro entrepreneurs were set up with prepaid energy credits that could be refilled, by purchasing 20-digit pin numbers. Now, the flow was corrected, in place, much more easily manageable and yet simple.

Scaling a Social Enterprise

The social inequities and empowerment that Nuru Light has been able to demonstrably address aren’t lost on Hajee.

In fact, what caught my eye on the Nuru Light website is the “Impact” section. I asked Hajee to discuss how he believes Nuru Light is helping the African community besides fixing a basic need for light.

Our product helps reduce the use of kerosene, a significant cause for respiratory diseases. We’re helping the local environment by removing the fumes and toxicity of kerosene from the air. We are creating job opportunities for the community. Plus, for the first time the kids in the community now have the ability to complete schoolwork at their leisure, freeing up for time for play and extracurricular!

As a technology, Nuru Light, of course, presents a win for Hajee who recognized a severe need coupled with crippling factors of few resources and economic underdevelopment.

Next Stop: India

Now with new support – financially and otherwise – from the eBay Foundation, Hajee is ready to work on his next venture: The rural population in India.

In fact, Nuru Light has had ground troops in Mumbai and Delhi doing initial research since 200, he told me.

“It took all of the $500,000 we raised for Nuru Light to work in Africa. We now have the same amount to invest in our model in India. And eBay has shown a real commitment to help us scale our business by offering us their resources way beyond the financial support. Their approach has been starkly different from other donors and we’re lucky to have that,” he says.

If Africa took a few months, why was the Indian market proving such a hard nut to crack? “The reason it is taking us so much longer is that no one is working on provided microfinance opportunities in India. So off grid products like ours end up remaining largely, off grid,” he admits.

But the roadblocks in India are more convoluted and will require a whole new round of rethinking and perhaps, even a regurgitating of Nuru Light.

We have learned a lot in the last two years and now know what can work.

The research is complete and the funding is in. That success story is yet to be written for Hajee and Nuru Light, but his recent accomplishments leave me with little doubt.

Passion, a clear sense of business responsibility and market-based solutions drive Sameer Hajee. What will it take to motivate you?

Connect with me @AmanSinghCSR or leave a comment.