(Image from www.bffj.org)
Anyway, it's the buzzword CSR - Corporate Social Responsibility, which has spawned at remarkable speed of PR thoughts, fellow buzzwords like "sustainability,"beneficiation (yes, brothers and sisters, rather suspicious-sounding, right?)," "stakeholders," and what-have-you. Whether it's purely window dressing an otherwise profit-driven world, or raising the bar when it comes to business ethics, we cannot tell for sure. One thing is only certain, as far as your Ms. Independent Consumer is concerned: There is something unsettling about CSR's universal triple bottom line: : People, Planet, Profit.
However, the Polyanna in me still won over, and I'd like to believe it is all for the sake of humanity's greater good that we are moving towards this way.
The Manila Forum
May 28, 2009
Ascot Makati
Though the event was primarily for businesses, (in the Philippine setting, the challenge for CSR heads or the management officers to integrate Corporate Social Responsibility into their business philosophy and management or leadership decisions), there are several important points that I have drawn from an NGO perspective:
Foremost of this is the role of NGOs as one of the stakeholders of these businesses. Now that CSR is in its stage where it is going to be part of the “DNA” of a business, the emphasis is not merely for companies to help the communities, but how the communities are helped in the BEST way, and how that benefits the company in return.
The other thing is the redefining of the corporate giving aspect of businesses as how it is related to the real concept of CSR, and how it may affect NGOs.
During the Opening Remarks, ADB’s Ambassador Curtis Chin (topic: Global Perspective on CSR) mentioned of a “trend” in Europe and in the US whereby companies with developed CSR programs are moving beyond “corporate philanthropy” with an understanding that CSR is not philanthropic giving.
The emphasis of CSR in the 21st century is “corporate behavior” in relation to business areas and issues that are identified, from which the company invests in, the amount of which is dictated by what they will be getting from it so that they will be perceived as a “responsible company” – which is what CSR is simply all about. Chin mentioned that the quality of products and services and how these businesses treat their own employees are the top two areas of concern and attention when it comes to CSR.
He mentioned that companies who give money to charity or do charity or volunteer acts do not get the desired impact in terms of being perceived as a responsible company, especially if these deeds are not directly related to the company’s business, and may be adverse to them since consumers nowadays are very critical and suspicious of these acts.
Chin said that the “public affairs’ side of businesses are now looking at issues for the long-term as against one-time “photo ops.” Environment is now a top CSR issue and with this, he was quick to explain that it does not mean holding an environmental clean-up, a pageant tied with environmental issue or giving to an environmental NGO, but rather, coming up with strong and clear-cut policies about the business’s interaction with the environment itself, the community stakeholders affected by its operation and a more active participation in environmental laws where, even if the business may be affected, it will still uphold environmental protection and human well-being, for it to be perceived as a truly sincere and responsible company.
Along these lines, it is clear why philanthropic giving is not the priority of progressive businesses.
This line of CSR education was also parallel to the plenary talk given by CSR Asia Chairman Richard Welford (topic: CSR Regional Perspective), when he presented the top 10 strategies that successful Asia-Pacific corporations do and why they are perceived as responsible and good corporations by their stakeholders. Environmental concern and human resource management (treatment of employees) are again the leading areas. Adhering to international standards, investing in communities, transparency and accountability, etc. are the other indicators. Philanthropy is last on the priority list.
Though these are enlightening information on the part of CSR heads and business leaders present, it is quite an emerging challenge for non-profit organizations for reasons pointed out by these CSR professionals. As Mr. Welford added, philanthropy, as perceived by the respondent companies who took part in the 2008 CSR survey he cited, philanthropy is not going to get them noticed, at least as far as public trust is concerned.
This prompted me to pose a question during the Q and A portion after the plenary session, whereby I gave a brief introduction about SOS Children’s Villages (quite happy that Ms. Pacita Juan, businesswoman, co-chair of the Philippine Coffee Board and one of the speakers, informed everyone that she knows the organization), and having stated that Philippine NGOs in general have taken a backseat when it comes to Grants, are now facing a challenge in diversifying their fund sources, and with the trend of “moving away from corporate giving” by businesses whom we depend on one way or another to support us, where does that leave us, if businesses do not think of us as an “issue” worthy enough to be included in their CSR programs?
I also took that Q and A opportunity to make an open appeal to the CSR heads presents, on behalf of the NGOS, to not totally shut us (NGOs) out in their aim of being perceived as a “responsible business” since we are also their stakeholders (which the CSR heads and participants have welcomed positively).
It was inspiring to note that the three speakers were very enthusiastic and interested in responding to the question I pose, and gave their professional advises not only on the NGO perspective as a whole, but also particularly to SOS Children’s Villages. They offered quite a lot of insights, but the three of them both emphasized one thing: the need for the SUSTAINABILITY of NGO programs.
Ambassador Curtis Chin:
• He was very direct in his advices: First, NGOs should do their market research first before approaching a company with the intention of being a beneficiary of their corporate philanthropy (or what was left of it) or being a partner in a tie-up.
• The most important thing is to know WHO ARE WE APPROACHING? What are their giving criteria, what are the programs they are supporting (if children are one of their causes, explore. If they specifically cited environment and livelihood, then seek elsewhere).
• NGOS should be clear about what they want from the company. Present a COMPELLING CASE. Do not waste their time with poor market research.
• He also emphasized that not all companies have the same approach when it comes to corporate giving or dealing with NGOs. Some are very particular about the NGO brand (since this is a reality) and this is among their criteria, while others are biased towards helping start-ups.
• He also shared some practices of some high-end corporations where their NGO or institutional partnership and sponsorship are now only coursed through online. The giving criteria are answered online so that their management is able to eliminate in their database requests that do not meet their corporate giving or partnership criteria. This is also the idea behind online applications of most grant funding institutions nowadays. NGOs should pay attention to these so as not to waste their time and resources as well. As such, market research is of utmost importance.
• Lastly, Mr. Chin emphasized the need to venture into SOCIAL ENTERPRISING for NGOs, to create a steady, permanent stream of income so that ‘investors’ can participate, and to start to re-think of its perception of an NGO from “out for a dole-out” to an entity that do sustainable programs.
Ms. Pacita Juan:
• Make it a good brand, and sustain that brand.
• For NGOs in general, she said that CSR’s changing approach to corporate philanthropy is the reality, and with that, NGOs should rethink its strategy from ‘asking’ (donations, grants, etc.) to venturing into ‘SOCIAL ENTERPRISE’ which showcases the sustainability of the NGO’s programs that companies nowadays look for in a partnership.
• Ms. Juan also advised that it is high time for NGOs to give a “fresh twist” to their image. Re-invent themselves, give a fresher, more up-to-date twist on who you are and what you do. Refresh your packaging. (This advice was also one of the things that Ms. Gianna Montinola, founder of Hands-on Manila, gave during the Communications workshop, where she emphasized the case of FEU needing an image repackaging to that of being “cool” and “in with the times” to make it more appealing to students and parents, which include investments in areas that reach out to their ‘clients’ using modern ways (doing away with the “institutional” image).
Mr. Richard Welford:
• The Chairman of CSR Asia acknowledged that the scenarios I presented in my question were all true, and that there is really a tough job for NGOs.
• He again emphasized the need for NGOs to come up with SUSTAINABLE programs. He said that companies, especially nowadays, do not want a “dole out” role forever. They are not going to partner with NGOs forever and ever. As such, there should be a definite timeline on how long the partnership is intended, and then offer something beyond the usual.
• Collaborate with the company, present “exciting ways” to be involved (not just turn-over photos after a project) like opportunities for team-building. (As there is a donor fatigue, there is also the reality of corporate partner fatigue.) Tap into internal stories of how the partnership matters in terms of setting up something and making the NGO or the beneficiary independent and self-reliant after it.
Mr. Junie del Mundo
• He emphasized that despite the so-called trends in funding interest and prioritizations that companies now have, an NGO that has an effective communications plan will not find itself at a loss.
• Good and effective communications is very crucial especially when relaying the message of your program’s relevance to the company you are approaching. Communicate your importance as a stakeholder, the importance of your programs, and especially how you are important to the companies you are approaching. (What are their needs that you are satisfying? For companies, why are we giving money or support in this area, what are we getting from it?)
• Consistency in the branding, from institutional what-have-you up to the smallest events, these should all be branded consistently.
• The good news is that while the Asia-Pacific region reported a general downtrend in trust for businesses, government and media, trust in NGO emerged on top and is growing. (From the 2009 Global Opinion Leaders Survey conducted by Edelman Trust Barometer.) This means that NGOs still have it when it comes to public perception and support. (For me, this explains why funding strategies directed at individuals is still a dependable strategy despite the changing times.)
To sum it up:
• CSR is not just an emerging concept in the world of business, it is a global reality that in the future, every business no matter what the size would have to adopt one way or the other, as it will spell their success or failure.
• CSR is the very proof of the shift in the commercial world as dictated by the times – products are not anymore the center, but the consumers.
• And with this reality, NGOs like us have our own challenge to meet – how to make our organization at par with what CSR requires so that we can be relevant to their programs without compromising our policies or ethics.
• I personally believe that the trends in CSR offer a win-win environment for both the company and the NGO. On our side, it will professionalize some of the standards we employ in partnering with only the best and well-meaning companies that share our values as an institution, as workers and as individuals.
