• ABOUT THE AUTHOR
  • Sustainability
  • CSR
  • CSR reporting

In Good Company: Singh on CSR

~ Connecting the dots between Business, Society & the Environment

Tag Archives: Social Impact

Brewing a Better Future [#BaBF] with Heineken: Examining the Many Flavors of Local Sourcing

18 Monday Aug 2014

Posted by Aman Singh in CSR, ESG, Stakeholder Engagement, Sustainability

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

#babf, aman singh, brand management, corporate social responsibility, CSR, CSR communications, Disclosure & Transparency, heineken, nick aster, Social Impact, Social Media, Stakeholder Engagement, supply chain, supply chain management, Sustainability, triplepundit, Twitter, Twitter chat


Earlier this year, TriplePundit‘s Nick Aster and I chatted with the Heineken team to discuss what “Brewing a Better Future” meant for the company. It coincided with the Heineken's sustainability teamrelease of its latest CSR Report and the chat, which began with a selfie of the Heineken team, was both engaging and active.

It also revealed an area that deserved more digging than we could get to in the allotted hour: the company’s sourcing practices.

So we decided to team up with the experts for Round 2! This time we’ll chat with Heineken’s sustainability leadership team including:

  • Michael Dickstein (MD) – Director, Global Sustainable Development
  • Paul Stanger (PS) – Local Sourcing Director, Africa & Middle East Region
  • Edwin Zuidema (EZ) – Global Category Director, Raw Materials

Here’s what you need to know:

Date: August 27, 2014

Time: 11am ET

Hashtag: #BaBF

Speakers: @HEINEKENCorp

Moderators: @AmanSinghCSR @NickAster @TriplePundit

To RSVP, send out the following tweet:

I will join @HEINEKENCorp @AmanSinghCSR @NickAster & @TriplePundit to discuss local #sourcing on 08/27 http://bit.ly/BaBFchat #BaBF

Got a question? Include it in the comments section below or send it to contact@triplepundit.com. Talk soon!

Advertisement

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Insurance Giant Allianz Targets Climate Change Risk: Expending “Unavoidable Emissions”

09 Wednesday Jul 2014

Posted by Aman Singh in CSRwire, ESG

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

allianz, barclays, biodiversity, carbon offsetting, climate change, CSRwire, deforestation, energy, Environment, ESG, greenhouse gas emissions, impact investing, insurance, Nonprofits, Philanthropy, redd, regulation, renewable energy, social enterprise, Social Enterprise, Social Entrepreneurship, Social Impact, Sustainability, sustainability, wildlife works


Picture_Martin_EwaldAfter chatting with Barclays’ Director of Citizenship Jillian Fransen on the financial institution’s allegiance to carbon offsetting and how she is leveraging the increasingly popular mechanism to not only offset its unavoidable carbon footprint, I turned to insurance giant Allianz who has also chosen to use carbon offsetting to target deforestation and reduce its environmental footprint.

Excerpts from my conversation with Martin Ewald, Head of Investment Strategy and Renewable Energy/Infrastructure Equity with Allianz Global Investors.

—————-

Describe your emissions reduction program and goals.

Allianz has set itself the target of avoiding, substituting and reducing its own CO2 emissions and is 100 percent climate-neutral since 2012. This means that all remaining emissions are being neutralized – in particular through direct investments in climate protection projects.

By 2015, Allianz aims to reduce its carbon footprint per employee by 35 percent compared to 2006.

What are “unavoidable emissions”?

Unavoidable emissions are CO2 emissions that are intrinsically linked to our business activity, like business travel, that we cannot always avoid or only avoid at very high expense. These emissions are still harmful to the climate. Corporates can take a leadership role in offsetting emissions related to their business activity by investing in responsible sustainability projects – this is not required by regulation in our sector.

But it is responsible behavior and makes good business sense. In fact, we have identified climate change as one of the three most critical sustainability challenges for Allianz (alongside demographic change and access to finance).

Where does offsetting fit into your sustainability strategy?

In addition to our carbon reduction target, being a carbon neutral business is the second pillar of our commitment and contribution to achieving a low-carbon economy.

In 2012, 175,000 credits, each accounting for one metric ton of carbon avoided, were sourced and retired from projects we support – retiring credits means that CO2 certificates, each representing one ton of avoided emissions, are taken off the market. Our remaining carbon footprint was neutralized by credits bought from the carbon market, which underwent a stringent sustainability screening to ensure they met the same high standards as the credits from projects we invest in.

The quality of the underlying projects determines the value of each and every credit in the voluntary sector, and REDD+ rate amongst the highest valued carbon credits.

Why did you choose REDD+ as one of the preferred offsets?

Our investment in REDD+ is consistent with our strategy of supporting effective climate projects in emerging and developing countries. We have invested in forest protection in Kenya with Wildlife Works, one of the leading developers of REDD+ projects. These projects don’t simply protect threatened forests; they also involve the local population and provide them with a source of livelihood.

REDD+ will also raise awareness of how to deal with resources in a responsible manner, besides helping preserve the habitat of the local population. Due to the considerable impact generated, we plan to continue investing in the REDD+ sector.

How has supporting REDD+ benefitted your company – and its stakeholders?

For the CO2 stored by the forests we receive certificates, which we can then use to offset business-related CO2 emissions. This way we ensure our climate neutrality and at the same time make a worthwhile investment. For us the yield also includes enhancing climate protection and biodiversity. We may also benefit from positive branding, but it is too early to tell since 2012 was the first year that we were carbon neutral.

As a financial institution, what is Allianz’s most challenging source of carbon emissions?

Ninety eight percent of our emissions stem from energy, travel and paper. So, the focus is on reducing CO2 emissions in these three areas.

In times of growing business, this is a challenge but we managed to reduce emissions across all three key areas in 2012, i.e. by sourcing lower-carbon energy or by making better use of video conferencing rather than traveling to business meetings.

How are these programs hallmarks of “responsible corporations”?

Since our business activity is not very carbon intensive, investing in REDD+ and similar projects today allow us to lock-in emission reductions over many years. We consider this to be responsible corporate practice: leveraging our capital base to build up the low-carbon infrastructure of tomorrow – be it forest protection or renewable energy, railways or electricity grids. This strategy also pays off, which is important to meet the expectations of our clients and shareholders. And this is a good basis to expand on our sustainable leadership agenda.

What role do you prescribe to Allianz in addressing climate change globally and locally?

We have introduced a group-wide strategy, which commits us to play a lead role in addressing climate change. For us it is about addressing the risks, e.g., the uptake in insurance loss from natural catastrophes, and making use of the opportunities. We have invested about EUR 1.7 billion in renewable energy projects, for instance, and set up a renewable energy fund, which has already attracted significant financial interest from our clients.

Moreover, we offer around 130 green products and services to our customers, including renewable energy home insurance, advisory services related to renewable energy and insurance premium discounts for drivers of electric/hybrid cars. The aim is to integrate climate change into our business  model, step by step building the business case for a climate friendly economy.

How can the private sector play an important role in reversing/addressing climate change? 

By understanding the climate issue as an investment case. Protecting forests is the cheapest way of saving carbon. To speak bluntly: if we first cut down the forest and then try to reduce the same amount of carbon we emitted, it would be much more expensive than just avoiding deforestation.

But as stated before, the most distinguishing factor about REDD+ is the opportunity to carry out investments that help improve social livelihoods and support local communities as well. Therefore supporting projects like the pioneering activities of Wildlife Works are appropriate activities that corporations need to support.

As long as there is no internationally binding climate protection agreement and as long as national regulation lacks teeth, the REDD+ market allows us to participate in voluntary projects around the world to address climate change. Consequently we have just carried out an additional REDD+ transaction in Indonesia.

What do you expect from policy makers to help expand your clean investments?

We stand at a critical juncture. We can continue business as usual with a small but dynamic niche of renewable energy projects and a reliance on fossil fuels for the big chunk of our economy. But this will not prevent dangerous levels of global warming.

Or we embark on a trend change, as we hopefully are seeing right now in Germany.

For this, we need a clear and reliable regulatory framework that gives investors appropriate incentives and the necessary regulatory certainty to finance clean technologies rather than coal or oil.

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary section Talkback on September 5, 2013.

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Access to Medicine, Transparency & Ethical Governance: GlaxoSmithKline’s 2012 CSR Report

09 Wednesday Jul 2014

Posted by Aman Singh in CSR, CSR reporting, CSRwire, ESG

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

avandia, carbon, clinical trials, community development, compliance, CSR, CSR report, CSR reporting, CSRwire, Disclosure & Transparency, Environment, ESG, Ethics, ethics, glaxosmithkline, governance, health care, paxil, Social Impact, Supply chain management, Sustainability, sustainability, Sustainability Report, transparency, vaccines, work culture


When a company is manufacturing critical need medicines and popular consumer products, how does it address increasing access to innovative products while managing its energy use?

On the launch of the GlaxoSmithKline’s 2012 Corporate Responsibility Report – a comprehensive read at 75 pages – I caught up with Director for Global Corporate Responsibility Clare Griffin for some updates.

Looking Ahead: GSK Switches Focus

For the first time the report, while focusing on the company’s 2012 performance, also includes a set of 23 forward-looking commitments across GSK’s business. The first thing that caught my eye in the report was the framework used to connect the firm’s vision with its business mission, assets, purpose and bottom line [see below]. How did the team use this chart to define CR’s focus at GSK?

“Lots of companies say they don’t have separate CR strategies; that they are completely embedded, etc. But how can you demonstrate that integration? This chart, for us, is a good way of explaining how CR is interwoven into our business. We have our business assets, our people, our priorities, our values, which leads us to create innovative products and drive access where people need it the most,” she explained.

“That’s the vision we want to create. We believe that if responsibility is absolutely integral to how we do business, we will deliver sustainable business growth for shareholders and benefits for our other stakeholders,” she added.

It’s all interrelated.

glaxosmithkline csr report

“For example, in the world’s poorest countries, our Developing Countries and Market Access (DCMA) operating unit has a clear objective to increase access to medicines and vaccines, while expanding our market presence and ensuring our business is sustainable for the long-term. This model is increasing our volume sales while increasing access to essential medicines and vaccines.”

Transparency, Pricing & Carbon: Challenges Ahead

“We will see through the implementation of our commitments on transparency of clinical trials data, continue with our commitments on pricing, and look to further harness manufacturing technologies to improve our carbon footprint,” writes GSK CEO Andrew Witty in the report.

Lots of promises in that one statement, I asked. How will these be implemented?

“We have a pretty diverse product line. Although pharmaceuticals are the majority, we also produce vaccines and consumer healthcare products. To improve our carbon emissions, we first invested in mapping our carbon footprint. For example, we found out that Amoxicillin, a very popular antibiotic, is Horlicksthe third-largest contributor to our carbon emissions due to the manufacturing process,” she said. “Our green chemistry team in Singapore has found a different way to produce Amoxicillin through using an enzyme instead which will cut carbon emissions from this process by 36,000 tonnes and reduce waste by 2,400 tonnes as well.”

Similarly with Horlicks, a popular malted milk drink: “We are working to further enhance an Indian government program aimed at modernizing milk production, and looking at introducing alternative energy generation, for example low-carbon biomass energy generation using waste wood to replace coal. Essentially, we are focusing on where we believe we can have the biggest impact,” she added.

Creating Access: Sharing Data From Clinical Trials

As for the transparency piece, while GSK has shared the summary results of all of its clinical trials – whether positive or negative – on a website accessible to all since 2004, the firm has committed to going further and now making anonymized patient-level data available to researchers.

“We’re setting up an independent panel which will review each request to make sure it is appropriate and will be using the data for valid scientific reasons. We also want the researchers to share their results back with the scientific community. We hope this initiative will be of value in developing and catalyzing a wider approach in the industry,” she explained.

Ethical Standards: Reinstating a Culture of Responsibility

Our discussion would not have been complete without taking into account, GSK’s rough tidings last year with the U.S. government. With the firm having to pay $3 billion to the U.S. government to settle allegations of unethical misconduct – failure to include information, etc. – in its sales and marketing practices around drugs Paxil and Avandia, several questions arose about the company’s corporate governance, accountability and sales practices – how do you move forward, I asked.

The company has taken significant steps to move beyond that, responded Griffin. “We have implemented a new incentive compensation system (Patient First) for our professional sales representatives who work directly with healthcare professionals in the U.S. The new system eliminates individual sales targets for these representatives as a basis for bonuses, and instead bases compensation primarily on sales competency, customer evaluations and the overall performance of their business unit,” she said.

glaxosmithkline csr report

The company has also brought together different Codes of Practices across regions and business units to create one Global Code and introduced standards that reinforce clear distinction between scientific dialogue and promotional activities. “These new standards govern the way we engage in scientific activities, such as advisory boards, publications, scientific congresses and medical education,” she said.

Other steps: A Corporate Ethics and Compliance Program for all employees, strengthened training programs, setting up an anti-bribery and corruption initiative and setting in motion disciplinary actions when needed.

“The 23 forward-looking commitments cut across the four areas of GSK’s responsibility: Health for all, Our behavior, Our People and Our Planet. It was important that we picked a time frame that is close enough that the current cadre of employees will be the people delivering the commitments while giving us enough time to create sustained change,” Griffin emphasized, alluding to the firm’s 2015 and 2020 goals.

Goals & Commitments: Highlights from 2012

So what were some of the year’s highlights for GSK?

  • The potential to bring around 15 new medicines and vaccines to patients over the next three years
  • 3.5 million pounds invested in R&D
  • 5 million pounds invested in the Tres Cantos Open Lab Foundation in Spain to fund research on solutions for diseases in the developed world
  • A concentrated focus on creating access, including monitoring the influential Access to Medicine Index, that measures what pharmaceuticals are doing to bring more medicines to more people [GSK won the top spot for the third time in 2012 although Griffin was quick to point out that “the index is a measure of what we’re doing, not the reason why we’re doing it.”]
  • A number of commitments around transparency established in 2012 including participating in the All-Trials Initiative, marking the next level of details on releasing results of GSK’s clinical trials.

What’s next?

“In 2013 we will continue to focus on innovation, access, and operating with transparency across the business. Specifically we will work to see through the implementation of our commitments on transparency of clinical trials data, continue with our commitments on pricing, and look to further harness manufacturing technologies to improve our carbon footprint,” finished Griffin.

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary section Talkback onApril 16, 2013.

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Social Responsibility, Beer & Aliens: Journey to Becoming the Best Beer Company in a Better World

07 Monday Jul 2014

Posted by Aman Singh in CSR, CSRwire

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

ab inbev, Anheuser Busch, Brand Management, Business, carlos brio, carol clark, community, community development, CSR, CSR report, CSRwire, environment, ESG, executive compensation, Social Impact, Social Responsibility, Stakeholder Engagement, supply chain, Sustainability, sustainability, water conservation


I caught up with Carol Clark, Global VP for Beer and Better World, to drill deeper into Anheuser-Busch InBev’s latest CSR report. Key highlights:

The report is titled Connecting for a Better World. AB InBev makes beer. What’s the connection?

At AB InBev, our dream is to be the Best Beer Company in a Better World. We believe that taking consistent, active measures in our core areas of social responsibility means constantly connecting our business with our stakeholders, especially in the communities where we live and work.

It takes a team effort to address these issues. Through our work to promote responsible drinking, reduce our impact on the environment and support our communities, we work with others who share our collective goal of making a difference.

There’s a quote in the report from Carlos Brito saying “We’re not aliens.” Can you offer some context?

Carol_Clark_AB_InBevWhen Carlos Brito said, “We are not aliens …” he was responding to a question at the Business for Social Responsibility Conference last fall about why AB InBev actively promotes responsible drinking.

AB InBev today has over 116,000 employees operating globally. We live on this planet and share the same concerns as our friends and neighbors. Many of us are parents and understand how important it is to talk with our children to help prevent underage drinking.

Similarly, we don’t want to be on the road with drunk drivers, and we’re committed to supporting prevention efforts such as encouraging the use of designated drivers. We’re committed to addressing these issues not only from a business perspective, but also from a personal perspective.

What is the ROI in producing a comprehensive CSR report such as this one? Media mentions? Retention? Rankings? Anheuser-Busch_CSR_Report

Publishing our CSR report keeps us focused and accountable to our stakeholders and ourselves. The scrutiny that this annual process brings gives us an updated perspective to help us further drive our performance, engage our employees and very importantly, thank them for their great work over the past year.

From an external perspective, we’re satisfying the requests from varied stakeholders for transparency on our social responsibility efforts.

The report is over 80 pages. Who is your primary target audience? And, who would you want to target?

We have a lot of good things to talk about! We use the report to share our progress with diverse audiences – from community stakeholders to investors, to media, to government officials – around the world.

Alex Prud’homme author of The Ripple Effect recently said that “Water is the headlining story of our century.” Are you focusing on sustaining your business by reducing water use, R&D on water replenishment or identifying alternative products altogether?

Water is our primary environmental focus and we aim to reach a water usage rate of 3.5 hectoliters of water for each hectoliter of production by the end of 2012.

We tackle the issue of responsible water use by doing more to conserve both in our operations and in the communities where our breweries are located. Progress requires operational changes and continually applying the most updated technical innovations. It means going further with supply chain and community partners to help conserve water outside our walls. But it also requires reinforcing a mindset that doesn’t take water for granted.

[Anheuser-Busch InBev’s 2011 Global Citizenship Report]

It can be argued that 8.2% reduction in water usage since 2010 is not a lot. Primary challenges in reaching double-digit reduction?

Actually, if you look at the beverage industry, this is a significant achievement. And it’s important to keep in mind that we’ve focused on water and energy efficiency for some time now, so there is very strong year-on-year progress. And we’re also making these reductions while continuing to grow our business. That means that each year, our brewing operations teams find innovative ways to do more with less when it comes to water.

To date, we’ve achieved an average water use of 3.71 hectoliters per hectoliter of production across our global business, which represents a 13.7% reduction against our 2009 baseline.

Our target, which we’ve stated publicly, is to reach 3.5 hectoliters of water per hectoliter of production by end-2012, which will put us on the leading edge of water usage for the brewing industry.

Your report mentions the billions paid in wages and income taxes. Not a lot of reports make these metrics a part of their community development results. Why the emphasis on wages? 

As the leading global brewer, we have operations in 23 countries. We have a significant economic impact on the local communities where we do business through the jobs we create, the wages we pay and the taxes we pay governments at all levels. We feel that it’s important to report on and recognize the value and impact we are bringing to communities where we live and work.

Can you talk to the “ownership culture” of the company?

One of our 10 AB InBev Principles is about ownership: “We are a company of owners. Owners take results personally.”

[Sustainable Beer: Anheuser-Busch InBev’s 2012 Environmental Goals]

We strive to create a culture that encourages responsibility and accountability, and that applies to our work on social responsibility as well. Creating this culture of ownership helps us build those connections and team approach, both internally and externally, to helping make a difference in our communities as we strive to be the Best Beer Company in a Better World.

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary sectionTalkback on April 26, 2012.

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

PwC Canada Releases 3rd Annual CSR Report: Staying the Course

03 Thursday Jul 2014

Posted by Aman Singh in CSR, CSR reporting, CSRwire, ESG

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

CSR, CSR report, CSR reporting, CSRwire, ESG, GRI, james temple, non-financial reporting, philanthropy, Philanthropy, pwc, Social Impact, Stakeholder Engagement, Sustainability, volunteerism, Work culture


PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) Canada released their third annual corporate responsibility report today. It’s nothing groundbreaking. But nor is it pages and pages of images and quotes from top leadership interspersed with hard-to-evaluate statistics.PwC_CR_Report_2011

In true PwC fashion, the report details commitments and achievements in 2011 only to quickly move on to highlighting challenges and the firm’s key plans for 2012 followed by an affirmation of the firm’s social and environmental strategy.

The pressure on firms big and small to report on their non-financial activities is significant. With the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) officially launching in North America last year, CSR and sustainability reports are set to multiply in coming years. What always challenges me are the motivations behind the reporting: Is it simply peer pressure or do firms learn something from the process? Moreover, is the act of reporting an exercise in external communication or more of an introspective activity to improve processes and strategies?

I caught up with James Temple, PwC Canada’s Director of Corporate Responsibility for some insights:

What was the most important lesson learned from the often stressful exercise of putting this report together?

Every time we work on our Corporate Responsibility Report, we’re reminded that this is an evolving journey and one that requires us to be open to adapting to changing ideas, personalities and approaches to developing the most transparent narrative possible.

When you involve such a large number of stakeholders in such a rigorous process, all of whom are passionate about their work and the cause, it can prove to be a balancing act that requires a balance of leadership, managing expectations, and the ability to communicate with empathy and effectiveness.

Most importantly, the process has helped us finesse a blended approach that respects standard reporting frameworks and our unique firm culture and structure to develop a narrative that is representative of the success (and the challenges) we face along the way.”

The report mentions plans for a new three-year strategic plan to guide the next phase of PwC Canada’s CSR program. Any insights you can provide into that?

Over the next few months, we will be completing our environmental scan and a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis to ensure that we are being thoughtful about our dynamic marketplace conditions along with gaining valuable input from our Global Network of Firms.

Philanthropy plays a crucial role in targeting social and environmental challenges through nonprofit partnerships but it’s often the strategy behind these donations that helps make them effective. Any insights on what works well for PwC’s B2B industry?

From the 2011 CR Report: “In 2011, PwC contributed a total of $2,533,000 in charitable donations and sponsorships to community organizations across Canada.”

At PwC Canada, we have adopted a strategy that focuses on educating employees and other stakeholders about the most effective ways to give back to their communities.

We encourage people to utilize our PwC Canada Volunteer Continuum that spells out how a person or organization can deepen their engagement with the charitable sector while developing their skills and experiences.

This could include the ways people use their skills to volunteer, how they look at sharing their community experiences, calling on their business networks for support, or how to allocate their personal or organizational resources in the most effective way possible.  Our approach is rooted in the regular feedback we receive from the not-for-profit sector and considers impact (not just dollars and cents).

What are some points of achievements from the report that you feel especially proud of?

In the fall of 2010, PwC hosted a series of roundtable discussions with representatives from the not-for-profit sector, public and private foundations and major corporations called the Capacity Building Roundtable Project.

The purpose of the project was to raise awareness about how corporate funders could better allocate their resources to help the not-for-profit sector become more sustainable and deliver lasting results within their communities.

The report concluded with a step-by-step process that addressed critical needs identified by the community that could have the most immediate and scalable impacts.

One of the critical findings was the need to encourage other corporations to provide not-for-profits support for core operational expenditures, and ensure they build time for grant recipients to reflect, take risks and test new innovations into grant proposals.

How do you define success in CSR reporting? Metrics? Media mentions? Or a set of internal goals?

We encourage our employees and other stakeholders to integrate a CR mind-set into their day-to-day business operations.  We want to inspire and empower people to look for ways to embed good CR practices into their decision-making frameworks.

A great example of how we’ve engaged our stakeholders in a CR dialogue was through the Citizen’s Reference Panel. PwC Canada brought together people from across Ontario to discuss their views on how to build a more sustainable and cost-effective healthcare system across the province.   We published a piece of thought leadership outlining the results, and it’s something that will help our business, the public and governments have better insights into the development of new healthcare strategies.

Our firm can play in helping to shape the debate on sustainability issues impacting businesses today.

Success means knowing you’ve done everything you can to help develop the CR conversation.

Originally written for and published on CSRwire’s Commentary sectionTalkback on February 27, 2012..

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Link

Translating Business Responsibility: An interview with Warner Bros. CEO & Chairman Barry Meyer: Now LIVE on CSRwire!

24 Tuesday Jan 2012

Posted by Aman Singh in CSR, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

aman singh, Barry Meyer, Brand Management, Business, cause marketing, CEO Network, corporate social responsibility, CSR, CSRwire, Ethics, Events, Justice League, Leadership, Management, Nonprofits, Social Enterprise, Social Impact, Social Media, Social Responsibility, Uncategorized, We Can Be Heroes


Translating Business Responsibility: An interview with Warner Bros. CEO & Chairman Barry Meyer: Now LIVE on CSRwire!

When the Justice League comes together to fight evil, evil stands little chance. In a world of economic uncertainty and social unrest, superheroes provide children with mentors, entrepreneurs with lessons in responsibility, and the rest of us with inspiration. Now, DC Entertainment has joined hands with Time Warner and Warner Bros. to launch We Can Be Heroes.

Their target: The hunger crisis in the Horn of Africa.

Their spokescharacters: The Justice League

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

KPMG’s Citizenship Director: Occupy Wall Street Protests Must Drive [Business] Transformation

31 Monday Oct 2011

Posted by Aman Singh in CSR

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Accountability, aman singh, aman singh das, BBC, brand management, Brand Management, Business, Business Ethics, business strategy, corporate citizenship, corporate social responsibility, CSR, Director of Citizenship, diversity, diversity and inclusion, Ethics, Events, inclusion, KPMG, Leadership, Lord Michael Hastings, Management, Net Impact, Occupy Wall Street, Social Impact, social responsibility, Social Responsibility, transparency, war on terror, Work culture


“The greatest way to change the world is _________.”

That’s how KPMG’s Director of Citizenship and Diversity Lord Michael Hastings started the opening keynote at this year’s Net Impact Conference in Portland, Oregon.

In the next half an hour that followed, the former — and the first ever — CSR director of BBC offered observations that felt alternatively poignant, realistic and perhaps unattainable.

On America’s prison system:

We must recognize that social dysfunction is a critical part of our reality and is perilously expensive.

On 9/11:

I say this with the utmost respect in my heart for the victims of 9/11: It has cost us one trillion dollars and over 6,700 deaths to avenge one event. Within hours, what was supposed to be the war on illiteracy – remember the picture from that day of President Bush reading to a classroom of kids? – became the war on terror.

Today, we are facing the repercussions of that decision. Now, we must switch on our acutest sense: Our intuition and listening power.

On Occupy Wall Street:

[We have to figure out] how do we respond? Because we have to. These protests must drive transformation, which can only come through sacrifice, only by accepting responsibility.

On the answer to changing corporate culture and mindsets:

The answer is cynicism. This is an understanding that I am responsible for the conflicts around me, that I absorb the duty, steel my back and face society to do the unexpected.

On reputation:

We cannot build a reputation on what we are ‘going to do.’ Our moral fiber, clarity of values, past record and leadership contribute to our ultimate reputation.

On the role of people in business growth:

A change in reporting is occurring that will correctly calculate the real assets of a business. Integrated reporting offers this framework for the future. We’re in a time when the idea of responsible capitalism is becoming a part of business strategy. We must continue with it.

And his answer to the earlier question?

“Overcoming cynicism”

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Occupy Wall Street: The Average Joe Interprets Corporate Social Responsibility

19 Wednesday Oct 2011

Posted by Aman Singh in CSR

≈ 17 Comments

Tags

Accountability, aman singh, aman singh das, Aneel Karnani, Brand Management, Business, Career advice, corporate citizenship, corporate social responsibility, creating shared value, CSR, CSRwire, diversity, ethical markets, Ethics, Events, fair compensation, human rights, Job search, Jobs in CSR, jobs in CSR, joe sibilia, leadership, Management, Occupy Wall Street, OWS, rosalinda sanquiche, shared value, Social Enterprise, Social Impact, social justice, social responsibility, Social Responsibility, Stakeholder Engagement, supply chain, Sustainability, sustainable business practices, transparency, Wall Street, what is CSR?, Work culture


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?

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

Does Expending Resources on CSR and Sustainability Destroy Economic Value?

13 Tuesday Sep 2011

Posted by Aman Singh in CSR

≈ 11 Comments

Tags

aman singh, aman singh das, Aneel Karnani, BP, brand management, Brand Management, Business, business strategy, Campbell Soup, CEO Network, Commitforum, corporate citizenship, corporate social responsibility, CSR, CSR reporting, CSR strategy, Dave Stangis, Ethics, ethics and compliance, Events, Fenton, Gerry Sullivan, Green, green jobs, Leadership, Management, Paul Herman, risk management, shared value, social enterprise, Social Impact, social responsibility, Social Responsibility, Starbucks, Sustainability, sustainability, sustainable business


Corporate Social Responsibility isn’t about giving money away and adopting the latest cause of activists. CSR and sustainability are approaches to business operation and execution that build employee engagement, improve environmental performance, create positive social impact, enable operational efficiency, reduce cost, foster innovation, strengthen relationships with customers and consumers and ultimately…create business advantage.

That was Dave Stangis, VP for Corporate Responsibility with Campbell Soup Company responding to University of Michigan Professor Aneel Karnani’s infamous editorial in The Wall Street Journal, “The Case Against Corporate Social Responsibility.”

Then, the argument was “capitalism versus corporate social responsibility, CSR versus profits, and where an idea like CSR fits into a business’ main objective, which is to make profits for its shareholders.”

Despite numerous debates [Fenton’s BIG CSR debate] and as many editorials and reports [Why There Is a Case for Corporate Social Responsibility], the inequity of the idea — or the perception that being responsible will cost a company money and therefore is an expense business doesn’t need — prevails.

But the actual essence of this debate no one can seem to pinpoint. Are we fighting over semantics or strategy?

Is it the misperception that CSR is a cost, a tagged on responsibility, and therefore, unnecessary for companies? Or that CSR is completely estranged from the notions of capitalism as Professor Karnani believes — and is, in fact, the wrong argument?

Since his controversial editorial, Karnani of course has continued to incite criticism for what many call an “extremely shortsighted and narrow view.”

Now, the associate professor of management and strategy for Michigan’s Ross School of Business is headed to New York City to debate his argument in real-time on the occasion of the CR COMMIT! Forum 2011, organized by Corporate Responsibility Magazine and NYSE Euronext [Details below].

Fashioned as an Oxford-style debate [DEBATE: RESOLVED that when companies expend resources on corporate responsibility and sustainability they destroy economic value], Karnani will be joined by Gerry Sullivan, president of the VICE fund, on the pro-markets side.

On the pro-sustainability side will be Paul Herman, CEO of HIP Investor and Dr. Vinay Nair, founding partner of Ada Investments and adjunct associate professor of finance and economics at Columbia Business School.

In a sneak peek, I talked to three of the debaters [Dr. Nair couldn’t make it] on the essence of their arguments as well as: How does each of them define CSR?

Take a read:

Thriving on the Value of Vice

Gerry Sullivan from VICE funds believes in the power of capitalism. His funds select well performing stocks of tobacco, alcohol, gaming and weapons companies because they believe that, “Vice industries tend to thrive regardless of the economy as a whole.” Anyone reminded of the root of the financial collapse?

“I believe in capitalism because it ensures that products and services coming out are tested on the profit mandate and ultimately are good processes because they come through the interaction and the ability to gain profit,” he said.

Fair enough. Historically, companies who do well tend to share more.

Making Too Much of CSR?

“My biggest fear of CSR is that people want to make more of it than it really is. A company’s ability to employ better people and deploy profits is the real goal. Everything else is settled by the market,” he continued.

But clearly there is a differentiator between companies that invest in their community and immediate environment over the long-term and those that focus on short-term yields?

Affirmative, says Paul Herman.

Citing the ever quotable example of BP, he said, “When you look at their track record, BP was not a good corporate citizen and lost 40% of shareholder value in just a few months post the oil spill. Companies are not prepared for the volatility of climate change and its effect on cash flows and natural resources.”

Further, “Research from Wharton School and other academics has shown measurably that companies that help solve social and environmental problems can enjoy a higher shareholder and portfolio value,” he said.

“This decreases risk for business and increases value,” he added.

CSR Cannot Dictate Social Enterprise, But Profits Can

Because it had begun to sound like a battle between two followers of capitalism with opposite operational ideologies, I asked Karnani to step in.

“Companies can maximize profits and social enterprise at the same time, which is why capitalism works well. This is where Paul makes a good argument. Of course companies should do all this,” he said.

“But we don’t need CSR to make this argument. It’s as simple as ‘make the money, help employees.’” he added.

Here is where the caveat comes in however, he said. “This isn’t always true. When markets fail, we cannot appeal to companies to sacrifice profits for CSR and it is naive of anyone to think that all the stakeholders are always aligned in their interests. If this were true, we wouldn’t need the study of economics,” he argued.

His solution? Going back to what he had argued in the WSJ editorial last year: Government regulation.

And this is where my problem with the debate starts: How can government regulate behavioral change, cultural perceptions, and a deteriorating environment? Or are we now talking of CSR as a program, an initiative, a fundraising for charity opportunity?

If so, was Karnani suggesting the route the Indian government took recently by “mandating 2.5% of net operating profits must be spent on CSR” by all publicly traded companies?

Perhaps, although we won’t know till the live debate at the COMMIT! Forum.

Back to Square One: What the heck is CSR?

Clearly, the next question: How are these men defining corporate social responsibility? Intentionally or not, I had hit the nail on its head.

VICE Funds: “CSR is Green, And It Isn’t Generating Green”

According to Sullivan, “CSR is embedded into green and green hasn’t generated green for most companies.” Also blaming the government for supporting “and pumping a ton of money into green jobs,” which many say has been a failed effort at reviving the economy, Sullivan continued:

The internet bubble taught us that having pool tables and kegs doesn’t make the companies money. If the jury is still out on whether good companies will do good things, I say they’re smart enough to treat their employees well. You don’t need CSR for that.”

“I would like the companies I invest in to not be socially responsible but responsible to their shareholders and producing products that the government can use to generate revenue. I certainly hope that these companies think highly of their employees but I’m less inclined to think that they would give up profits over socially responsible activities.

HIP Investor: “CSR is Generating Top Line Growth”

For Paul, the question isn’t about green or management. “You start by asking yourself what social or environmental problem you are solving. Companies who are doing well have a core mission of improving the world in some way and making money while doing so.”

Citing the example of banks, he explained, “Banks were started to help people grow their income and wealth and became more integrated in their communities.”

“Starbucks in the U.S. spends more on the health care of its employees than the coffee beans because they support a better quality of life for employees and a higher labor standard.”

The argument, at least for Herman, isn’t about the validity of CSR anymore. “It’s about generating top-line growth and bottom-line profits. That’s why employees and investor relations teams are key in solving this paradigm,” he concluded.

Karnani: “If CSR is Beyond Making Money, Then It’s Not Making Money”

“CSR is a very confused notion. If you just mean businesses doing good for society, then capitalism is actually good [for society]. If CSR goes beyond ‘making money,’ then it’s not about ‘making money.’ When a company does something socially useful and loses money over it, that’s CSR. And definitionally, CSR loses money,” he concluded.

Confused? Irate? Redeemed?

Want to attend the COMMIT!Forum? Register here or connect with me on Twitter @AmanSinghCSR for a special discount code. The Forum begins on September 26, 2011, at the Javits Center in New York City and offers a full two-day agenda complete with a CSR careers symposium, keynotes and workshops.

And if you cannot make it, stay tuned here for more coverage.

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...

For Most, Day 1 of College = Excitement, Opportunity. Not for This Teen in Foster Care

30 Tuesday Aug 2011

Posted by Aman Singh in Uncategorized

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

aman singh, aman singh das, division of youth and family services, human rights, mentoring, Social Impact, social impact, social responsibility, Social Responsibility


This is unusual for me.

Writing and reporting on CSR and sustainability issues, I have always preferred to keep personal stories out of my writing. However, this once I’d like to talk about an incident that has me rattled. And like everything else I write, I’d like to share it with you and hopefully together, help make someone’s life a bit easier.

There is a girl who recently started working at this store I frequent in my neighborhood. Yesterday, as I stood in her checkout line, she seemed flustered, stressed, worn out.

Was it the recent storm? No, she said. “It’s my life.”

The girl, 19 years old, was clearly upset and I asked her manager to give her a 10 minute break so we could chat.

She is one of thousands of abandoned children in New Jersey. Her father is in prison. Her mother, who remarried, abandoned her and she was placed in one of the state’s foster homes.

Then, she was in school.

Yesterday, however, was her first day of college thanks to New Jersey’s Foster and Adoptive Family Services (FAFS) program. Instead of the usual excitement, however, she was scared. Here’s why:

Her foster home parents, from the Division of Youth and Family Services agency (DYFS), have encouraged her to study and work at the same time. What makes it harder for her is that unlike the other kids in the house, she doesn’t have a car.

So she ends up spending hours everyday taking the NJ Transit bus from home to school, school to home, and then home to work, and back home. The problem: NJ Transit buses run every hour or so with limited runs after 10pm. Her shift at work doesn’t end till 10pm so she has to wait for the next bus, which doesn’t run till 11:58pm.

Here’s how her day goes, she explained:

5:00am: Wake up, rush for college

6:30am-1:00pm: Classes

1:00pm-2:30pm: Bus, lunch at home

3:00pm: Back on the road heading to work (shift starts at 4pm). She only lives 15 minutes away but is dependent on the bus schedule

4:00pm-10:00pm: Work

10:00pm-11:58pm: Wait for the bus

12:30am-2:00am: Finish homework and complete weekly assigned house chore

2:00am-5:00am: Sleep

She doesn’t have a case officer anymore, she says, because her father got sentenced and that’s when the case closed. Her mother doesn’t support her and the DYFS workers receive half of her bi-weekly paycheck, which doesn’t leave much for her to save between food and textbooks.

She also told me that those funds are “supposed to be used toward weekend trips and expenses like a bus pass for the kids,” but that in reality, none of those trips take place.

Can she report this to someone? She doesn’t think so. After all, they are helping finance her college education. And she doesn’t have an assigned case officer.

She is also thankful for “having a roof on her head and health insurance.” She realizes that leaving the home would mean financial instability and she certainly cannot afford independent health insurance.

But why work that exact shift at work? Perhaps an earlier shift can help get her home sooner, giving her more time for homework and sleep?

The DYFS staff insist she work in the evening to support her expenses.

Clearly, she has a complex mix of logistical and puritanical policies to deal with. How does she want to move forward?

Take a year off of school to save enough money to buy a car and afford rent so she can get out of foster care.

The hitch? She says, the DYFS folks insist that she go to college; that it is part of the arrangement of living in foster care.

All through her narration, I’m thinking, there has to be two sides to the coin. DYFS after all is a social services agency built to protect such children. Surely, she is biased and simply stressed with trying to balance work with studies? Most adults have a hard time juggling work and home, she’s just a teen at her first job.

But at the same time I was also thinking more on lines of how I could help.

Regardless of whether she is biased, simply venting or stating the honest truth, can I help improve her life in any way? What can I do to help her cope with life and believe in herself?

Mobility is clearly her biggest obstacle. Would a car be the solution?

Or financial help?

Or something else?

Living in the country of “everyone’s dreams,” makes it easier for us to forget people who are worse off. Growing up in India, poverty, destitution and neglect were visible, right there for everyone to see. The jhuggis (straw huts) coexisted with the brick and granite mansions on the streets of Delhi. The Mumbai slums–now that everyone is familiar with them thanks to Slumdog Millionaire–are in your face, there everyday, alive and naked.

Here though, in one of the most expensive states of the country, girls like her are invisible — and stories like these so much more shocking.

So, what should I do? What would you do?

Connect with me @AmanSinghCSR or leave a comment.

Share this:

  • Tweet
  • Email
  • Print

Like this:

Like Loading...
← Older posts

Let's Talk!

Virtual
732-322-7797
amansinghdas@gmail.com

Connect with me on Twitter

My Tweets

Blogs I Follow

  • Nonprofit Chronicles
  • Learned On by Andrea Learned
  • Angry African on the Loose™
  • csr-reporting
  • The CSR Blog
  • In Good Company: Singh on CSR

My Cloud

Capitalism 2.0 CSR CSR reporting CSRwire ESG Guest Author HR Stakeholder Engagement Sustainability Uncategorized

Recently written…

  • Rationality is Ruining Us: Mayors, presidents and governors join major businesses in charting way forward on climate change
  • 2015: the year businesses recognize that climate change is real – and 4 other themes
  • Hardcore lessons of sustainability – ’10 Words or Less’
  • Brewing a Better Future [#BaBF] with Heineken: Examining the Many Flavors of Local Sourcing
  • From Conflict to Collaboration: Kimberly-Clark and Greenpeace Participate in LIVE Twitter Chat

What others are reading

aman singh aman singh das Brand Management Business corporate social responsibility CSR CSR reporting CSRwire ESG Leadership Stakeholder Engagement supply chain Sustainability sustainability Work culture

Categories

Most Read

  • None

Blog at WordPress.com.

Nonprofit Chronicles

Journalism about foundations, nonprofits and their impact

Learned On by Andrea Learned

Angry African on the Loose™

I have opinions. I am from Africa. I live here now. I blog.

csr-reporting

Connecting the dots between Business, Society & the Environment

The CSR Blog

Connecting the dots between Business, Society & the Environment

In Good Company: Singh on CSR

Connecting the dots between Business, Society & the Environment

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Follow Following
    • In Good Company: Singh on CSR
    • Join 119 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • In Good Company: Singh on CSR
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...
 

    %d bloggers like this: