Validity of CSR [part II]
Fresh on the heels of my post last night, Seventh Generation issued a press release via CSRwire that follows up the discussion perfectly: Haas School of Business Posts Pod Cast Featuring CR Experts Jeffrey Hollender and David Vogel
“Renowned Corporate Responsibility experts debated the business case for Corporate Responsibility in a pod cast posted on www.netimpact.org today, sponsored by Seventh Generation and hosted by the Haas School of Business at UC Berkeley. Entitled ‘Corporate Responsibility: Myth or Reality?’ the event featured authors Jeffrey Hollender and Dr.David Vogel.”
Vogel was one of the two authors interviewed for the CFO article (the article appeared in the Dec. 2005 issue of CFO Magazine) in which he makes some interesting points. Contrary to how he was presented in the CFO article, today’s press release states that he, “took neither a pro-CSR nor an anti-CSR stance, but rather advanced a clear-eyed perspective on CSR, exposing its attractions as well as its warts” during the podcast debate. I have yet to listen to the debate but expect it to be very interesting. Here are a few other worthwhile clips from the release:
“During the debate, Hollender referenced his research, defending the need for both small businesses and large corporations to practice social responsibility and offers practical ways to reach this goal.
“Hollender stressed that sustainability must become a foundation of business strategy and not just an afterthought of corporate actions. ‘As responsible companies begin to think about relationships with customers in a very different way, they will create value way beyond the products and services they’re selling.’
“Hollender acknowledged companies that are taking CR to new levels, and criticized those whose efforts are focused on merely reducing what they have done wrong. ‘I envision a world where business can improve, not just make things less bad,’ he said. ‘I am captivated by the idea of taking what many people perceive to be the most evil business on the planet and harnessing them to make change.’”
And then Vogel is cited, in a rather similar manner as the CFO article:
“While acknowledging the movement’s achievements, David Vogel argued that CR’s potential to bring about a significant change in corporate behavior is exaggerated. ‘It really makes sense for companies to do what they need to do to keep people from vilifying them, but beyond that the business case for CR is weak.’”
I also completely agree with the first part of this next statement by Vogel, but take issue with the second:
“‘The pressures on the financial market are relentless and overwhelming and not concerned with Corporate Responsibility. There is space for CR companies, but it’s not going to dominate the American economy.’”
As I hopefully effectively touched on in my last post (Jack Yan also had some great comments that addressed this as well), I think Vogel makes a good point, but is ignoring the power of today’s actions (regardless of whether or not they are widely followed or accepted) to create significant positive forward movement in the future. In Vogel’s defense, I have yet to read his book, The Market For Virtue: The Potential and Limits of Corporate Social Responsibility, and wonder if I would have the same criticisms were I to have read it already.
[Update] On the drive down to Santa Barbara this afternoon I had a chance to listen to the podcast and would highly recommend it. Both Hollender and Vogel make a number of excellent points and the debate was both informative and inspiring. I found myself continually agreeing with Hollender but also found many of Vogel’s points to be highly valid, however, I still maintain that a bit of optimism might go a long way for Vogel.
TAGS: This entry was posted on Friday, March 17th, 2006 at 1:05 pm and is filed under Business Ethics, CalPoly MBA, Corporate Social Responsibility, Interesting News, Social Enterprise. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.