|
|
 |
|
|
Keynote reflection on the COSORE toolkit
By Nikolay A. Dentchev
Ghent University, Belgium
Introduction
My name is Nikolay Dentchev and my work is concerned with the topic of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). More specifically, my current research interests are the integration of the normative social responsibility principles in business models and the development of a strategic perspective on CSR.
I whish to thank Kathleen Tavernier (Vitamine W, Belgium), partner in the COSORE Project, and Brigitte Zeier (Siemens AG, Germany), coordinator of the Project, for inviting me to participate in this conference. Their kind invitation welcomed a personal, academic reflection on the COSORE toolkit. It is a pleasure and an honor for me to participate in this wonderful conference and share with you ideas on CSR.
This short address will be organized in three parts:
- First, I will briefly mention what the COSORE toolkit is about;
- Second, I will share with you my personal reflection on the COSORE toolkit;
- And then I will conclude with raising some issues and challenges for CSR.
| 1. The content of the COSORE toolkit |
The morning presentations have extensively focused on the content of the COSORE toolkit. It would be therefore superfluous if we discussed now in details what the toolkit is about. Conversely, a brief summary on this instrument is necessary to develop the arguments of my personal reflection. Hence, here are, in my opinion the three pillars of the COSORE toolkit:
- The toolkit proposes an integration of social responsibility and business strategy. It adapts the Balanced Scorecard methodology in realizing such an integration of CSR and corporate strategy;
- The toolkit is an instrument used by consultants, whose advisory expertise is CSR;
- The toolkit is meant to facilitate those consultants in advising interested small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs).
These three pillars of the toolkit provide the perspective of my comments in the next section.
| 2. My personal reflection on the COSORE toolkit |
I am truly impressed by the sound methodology the partners have followed to develop the toolkit. The toolkit not only captures the experience of the partners, but also integrates successfully the theory on corporate social responsibility. And as if this would not have required serious efforts, the partners have tested their idea in several countries, embracing the perceptions of a large variety of companies on the toolkit. Such a test allows the partners to adapt their ideas on CSR to the concrete needs of companies.
Consequently, the COSORE toolkit constitutes a very pragmatic method to be used by consultants. It focuses on the essence of CSR and not on the package. I refer here to the many definitions of corporate social responsibility. And if the many definitions are not enough complicated for practitioners, there are also related concepts to CSR - business ethics, stakeholder management, corporate social responsiveness, corporate sustainability - to mention only a few (for a general overview see: Carroll, 1999; Windsor, 2001). Even scholars working in this field of research cannot reach consensus on what CSR means, due to the broad scope of issues this problem is covering. Besides, the meaning of social responsibility is cognitively determined, dependent on the specific period of time, the situational context, and the person that gives opinion on corporate responsibility. Having this complexity in mind, I am convinced that it is only in advantage of the COSORE toolkit to leave the meaning of corporate social responsibility to the understanding of consultants and companies. After all, both individuals and organizations are responsible for the consequences of their actions. Hence, both individuals and organizations need to develop their own understanding of what social responsibility implies.
In its pragmatic approach, the toolkit focuses on the rationale of integrating CSR in business models. This is advancement in both theory and practice, as we need to move forward form the catholic argumentation that companies are socially responsible. Businesses interested in the CSR are not longer concerned "whether" to perform according to the responsibility principles with respect to various issues and constituents, but "how" to integrate the normative notions of responsibility in their business models (Epstein & Roy, 2001). In this context, more pragmatic and instrumental approaches to CSR are needed (Gioia, 1999; Wood, 2000), and the COSORE toolkit is an example that this is possible.
Yet an integration of responsibility notions in business models requires a systematic approach. In other words, the integration of CSR in management thinking requires practitioners to go trough all traditional phases of strategy development. The COSORE toolkit is helpful in facilitating such systematic approach, as it guides managers from the very definition of CSR, through the development of a CSR strategy for their business, to the evaluation and control of that strategy. Such close-loop approach to CSR
Finally, I feel that this instrument will provide the necessary inspiration to companies and consultants. And the only thing we could do is inspire others to generate ideas, to keep being innovative, and to operate in harmony with the dynamics in the business environment. The COSORE toolkit is in my eyes really a step forward, as Maria Rauch said this morning. Yet it remains "a continuous journey".
| 3. Issues and challenges to corporate social responsibility |
At the end of my address I would like to put forward few issues, which in my view are important for the CSR debate. Please, note that those are general remarks and not remarks on the COSORE toolkit. The purpose of this is to stimulate the discussion on several topics.
I am glad that dr. Bernhard von Mutius volunteered to play the Devil's Advocate this morning, so I don't have to do this now. I refer here to the possible negative effects of integrating CSR in business models. Talking about interested companies in CSR implies at least three possibilities. First of all, it is possible that some practitioners are convinced and interested in the positive effects of CSR for the corporate operations. Secondly, it is possible that some practitioners have hidden agendas behind their interest in CSR or, put differently, some mangers are not convinced in the CSR idea, but whish to use it as window dressing. Thirdly, it is also possible that some practitioners are interested in the CSR debate in order solve moral dilemmas that can be the result from integrating responsibility notions in business models. CSR is complex and requires sincere managerial understanding on the problem. The challenge is to stimulate understanding of the overall process of integrating social responsibility in business models and to advise companies how to solve moral dilemmas. CSR is an indication of doing good business, but some responsible actions might have no effect on the overall business results.
Another topic of discussion is the challenge of specific information. What I mean is that consultants on CSR will be confronted with very specific cases on social responsibility that reach matters beyond their understanding. If, for example, a chemical company asked me for assessing the social responsibility of using a specific chemical in a specific product, my degree in Applied Economics would be insufficient to give rigorous assessment. Therefore, it is necessary to cooperate in networks in order to bridge the lack of expertise in specific matters.
And finally, I would like to address the problem of "stakeholder responsibility". There is no discussion about the social responsibility of organizations. However, it would be inappropriate to expect only business to contribute to the social prosperity. All stakeholders are responsible for the sustainable development of society. Significant advancements on sustainable development can be expected only when companies and all their stakeholders operate according to the principle of social responsibility. In other words, multiplication effects can be expected when consumers, scientists, governments - to mention only few - make a joint effort to advance the sustainability of society.
In conclusion, I appreciate the integration of social responsibility and strategic management, realized in the COSORE toolkit. I believe that this sound methodology will contribute to both consultants and companies in making a step forward. The ambition of continuous improvement is necessary in a CSR context, however, the journey continues in this complex matter.
References:
Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct. Business & Society, 38(3), 268-295.
Epstein, M. J., & Roy, M.-J. (2001). Sustainability in action: Identigying and measuring the key performance drivers. Long Range Planning, 34, 585-604.
Gioia, D. A. (1999). Practicability, paradigms, and problems in stakeholder theorizing. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 228-232.
Windsor, D. (2001). The future of corporate social responsibility. The International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 9(3), 225-256.
Wood, D. (2000). Theory and integrity in business and society. Business & Society, 39(4), 359-378.
|
|
