The marketing guru Seth Godin has some useful advice for you communicators out there today.
He offers 20 reasons why people will spread ideas to others.
Here's the first five below, the full list is here, and worth a read.
Corporate communicators can pick up some good tips on how sustainability messages can be spread around consumer groups from this list, I would imagine.
1. I spread your idea because it makes me feel generous.
2. ...because I feel smart alerting others to what I discovered.
3. ...because I care about the outcome and want you (the creator of the idea) to succeed.
4. ...because I have no choice. Every time I use your product, I spread the idea (Hotmail, iPad, a tattoo).
5. ...because there's a financial benefit directly to me (Amazon affiliates, mlm).
Another fifteen reasons are listed here.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
US elections, corporate money and "astroturfing"
As we reported back in March this year, after a Supreme Court ruling, it is now open house for corporate campaign finance in the US.
And with the November elections almost at hand, much of the media is reporting on corporate involvement in the political process.
Recently, the New Yorker magazine published a lengthy piece looking at the involvement of the Koch brothers in the rise of the Tea Party.
One Koch-funded group, Americans for Prosperity, is alleged to be a spin off "fake grass roots" group, among many others, who protest against almost any major Democrat initiative of any weight, using corporate cash to buy banners, BBQ's and buses.
Whilst I would agree it appears Koch funding has played a major role, a study of the movement does show that it's roots are perhaps a little wider than just the Koch's direct sphere of influence.
Nevertheless, a new documentary, and some associated YouTube footage shows just how organised the Democrat opposition group Americans for Prosperity is, and how the Koch's have got themselves in a muddle when claiming not to fund their widespread and co-ordinated protests.
You can watch the documentary for $2 online. It's a flawed film, but very interesting.
Koch Industries aside for a moment, the New York Times published a piece yesterday that looked at the nearly notorious US Chamber of Commerce and corporate donations around political/business campaigns. It's fascinating, and shows just how corrupted the US political and public campaigning process has become.
The NY Times writes:
"...while the chamber boasts of representing more than three million businesses, and having approximately 300,000 members, nearly half of its $140 million in contributions in 2008 came from just 45 donors. Many of those large donations coincided with lobbying or political campaigns that potentially affected the donors."
And notes that:
"More recently, the News Corporation gave $1 million to support the chamber’s political efforts this fall; Chairman Rupert Murdoch said it was in best interests of his company and the country “that there be a fair amount of change in Washington.”"
To put all this in context, the Times points out that:
"...it is spending $200 million this year, and the chamber and its affiliates allocated $144 million last year just for lobbying, making it the biggest lobbyist in the United States."
And yesterday the Guardian reported that:
"BP and several other big European companies are funding the midterm election campaigns of Tea Party favourites who deny the existence of global warming or oppose Barack Obama's energy agenda, the Guardian has learned.
An analysis of campaign finance by Climate Action Network Europe (Cane) found nearly 80% of campaign donations from a number of major European firms were directed towards senators who blocked action on climate change."
So if you believe the "liberal media", the political opposition process is in many ways corporate funded, and it's now not just US companies ponying up the cash.
Of course, much of this is not new, as we know. Corporate lobbying dates back at least 150 odd years in the US political process. (to the foyer of the Willard Hotel and Ulysses S. Grant)
The military-industrial complex that spawned the "what's good for GM is good for America" line in the 1950's has been well documented by the likes of Robert Reich.
What may be new here is the extent to which corporate cash reaches Congressmen and women, Senators, and those who vocally lobby them.
After all, there is not a single Republican senator that accepts man-made modern climate science.
That, and the fact that what has been dubbed "The Kochtopus" has become so powerful, is what really should worry us.
That's not to say all lobbying is bad, as Mallen Baker points out.
But corporate responsibility will not make much credible progress until big companies sort out their position on the topic, and show some consistency in how they approach political influence.
That day may be a very long way off indeed on today's evidence.
Meanwhile a new battlefront on fuel standards may be opening up. Expect some vociferous 2011 lobbying against energy efficiency from some groups.
Further reading:
More on how the banks have reacted recently around lobbying is everywhere in the media, and also in this article we published earlier this year: Regulation and reform - Resistance to rules
And CorpWatch has a long article detailing who funds whom, which is worth a look.
And with the November elections almost at hand, much of the media is reporting on corporate involvement in the political process.
Recently, the New Yorker magazine published a lengthy piece looking at the involvement of the Koch brothers in the rise of the Tea Party.
One Koch-funded group, Americans for Prosperity, is alleged to be a spin off "fake grass roots" group, among many others, who protest against almost any major Democrat initiative of any weight, using corporate cash to buy banners, BBQ's and buses.
Whilst I would agree it appears Koch funding has played a major role, a study of the movement does show that it's roots are perhaps a little wider than just the Koch's direct sphere of influence.
Nevertheless, a new documentary, and some associated YouTube footage shows just how organised the Democrat opposition group Americans for Prosperity is, and how the Koch's have got themselves in a muddle when claiming not to fund their widespread and co-ordinated protests.
You can watch the documentary for $2 online. It's a flawed film, but very interesting.
Koch Industries aside for a moment, the New York Times published a piece yesterday that looked at the nearly notorious US Chamber of Commerce and corporate donations around political/business campaigns. It's fascinating, and shows just how corrupted the US political and public campaigning process has become.
The NY Times writes:
"...while the chamber boasts of representing more than three million businesses, and having approximately 300,000 members, nearly half of its $140 million in contributions in 2008 came from just 45 donors. Many of those large donations coincided with lobbying or political campaigns that potentially affected the donors."
And notes that:
"More recently, the News Corporation gave $1 million to support the chamber’s political efforts this fall; Chairman Rupert Murdoch said it was in best interests of his company and the country “that there be a fair amount of change in Washington.”"
To put all this in context, the Times points out that:
"...it is spending $200 million this year, and the chamber and its affiliates allocated $144 million last year just for lobbying, making it the biggest lobbyist in the United States."
And yesterday the Guardian reported that:
"BP and several other big European companies are funding the midterm election campaigns of Tea Party favourites who deny the existence of global warming or oppose Barack Obama's energy agenda, the Guardian has learned.
An analysis of campaign finance by Climate Action Network Europe (Cane) found nearly 80% of campaign donations from a number of major European firms were directed towards senators who blocked action on climate change."
So if you believe the "liberal media", the political opposition process is in many ways corporate funded, and it's now not just US companies ponying up the cash.
Of course, much of this is not new, as we know. Corporate lobbying dates back at least 150 odd years in the US political process. (to the foyer of the Willard Hotel and Ulysses S. Grant)
The military-industrial complex that spawned the "what's good for GM is good for America" line in the 1950's has been well documented by the likes of Robert Reich.
What may be new here is the extent to which corporate cash reaches Congressmen and women, Senators, and those who vocally lobby them.
After all, there is not a single Republican senator that accepts man-made modern climate science.
That, and the fact that what has been dubbed "The Kochtopus" has become so powerful, is what really should worry us.
That's not to say all lobbying is bad, as Mallen Baker points out.
But corporate responsibility will not make much credible progress until big companies sort out their position on the topic, and show some consistency in how they approach political influence.
That day may be a very long way off indeed on today's evidence.
Meanwhile a new battlefront on fuel standards may be opening up. Expect some vociferous 2011 lobbying against energy efficiency from some groups.
Further reading:
More on how the banks have reacted recently around lobbying is everywhere in the media, and also in this article we published earlier this year: Regulation and reform - Resistance to rules
And CorpWatch has a long article detailing who funds whom, which is worth a look.
Monday, October 25, 2010
Ethical Corporation Awards 2011 - The Draft Categories for comment
Dear readers, here's the draft list of the awards categories we are considering for next year's 2011 Ethical Corporation awards.
I'd love to hear from as to whether an important category is missing, in your view.
Toby
1. High performance
The high performance category is our overall award winner. The company that wins will have shown our judging panel how they have created sustainable value throughout their business and in wider society, by seeking to manage their impact holistically and positively.
2. Innovative reporting
This award rewards the organization, large or small, which has done the most to demonstrate new ideas, creativity and innovation in reporting on sustainability and corporate responsibility. The award is for either print or online reporting, or a combination of both. The winner will have demonstrated that stakeholder engagement and perceptions have improved.
3. Authentic communications
This award is for an example or campaign by an organization which demonstrates convincing communications beyond simply reporting. The winner will show an ad or campaign has been received by its audience as trustworthy, convincing and genuine.
4. Individual leader
Our individual leader of the year award is for the manager or CEO who has done most to drive sustainability in to their organization over the last year. The Leader Award will go to someone who has made a clear difference to their organization either by developing a new strategy or overseeing implementation to an exceptional degree and made a clear, obvious difference.
5. Effective Campaigner
The Campaigner of the Year award will go to the NGO who our judges feel have made the biggest difference in 2009-10. The winner will have demonstrated, by a campaign or series of campaigns, that their actions have had a major impact on business and environmental/social gains. Innovation, good communications and clarity of goals will all be considered.
6. Best Collaboration
This award will go to the partnership between organisations that in the view of the judges, has done most, publicly, and behind the scenes to deliver an improved sustainability-based outcome on a particular issue or strategy. A typical entry will be a partnership between an NGO and a company to raise awareness of a particular issue and set targets for improved performance by a company or industry on a corporate responsibility area.
7. Sustainability Commercialised
This award is for the company which has shown how a sustainability-based innovation has been clearly commercialised by the company and is becoming a mainstream part of its business. To be shortlisted for the award, the company will need to demonstrate that corporate responsibility has played a key role in the development of the product or service being put forward for shortlisting.
1. Best Private Company
This award will be given to the non-listed company our judges feel is responding most substantively to the sustainability agenda in 2011. The shortlisted companies will be made up any firms, large or small, who have shown they are taking the corporate responsibility agenda most seriously, by highlighting overall generally accepted metrics and specific projects that have delivered both business and societal/environmental value.
The 2011 awards will be held on the evening of May 3 2011. More at: http://www.ethicalcorp.com/rbs/
I'd love to hear from as to whether an important category is missing, in your view.
Toby
1. High performance
The high performance category is our overall award winner. The company that wins will have shown our judging panel how they have created sustainable value throughout their business and in wider society, by seeking to manage their impact holistically and positively.
2. Innovative reporting
This award rewards the organization, large or small, which has done the most to demonstrate new ideas, creativity and innovation in reporting on sustainability and corporate responsibility. The award is for either print or online reporting, or a combination of both. The winner will have demonstrated that stakeholder engagement and perceptions have improved.
3. Authentic communications
This award is for an example or campaign by an organization which demonstrates convincing communications beyond simply reporting. The winner will show an ad or campaign has been received by its audience as trustworthy, convincing and genuine.
4. Individual leader
Our individual leader of the year award is for the manager or CEO who has done most to drive sustainability in to their organization over the last year. The Leader Award will go to someone who has made a clear difference to their organization either by developing a new strategy or overseeing implementation to an exceptional degree and made a clear, obvious difference.
5. Effective Campaigner
The Campaigner of the Year award will go to the NGO who our judges feel have made the biggest difference in 2009-10. The winner will have demonstrated, by a campaign or series of campaigns, that their actions have had a major impact on business and environmental/social gains. Innovation, good communications and clarity of goals will all be considered.
6. Best Collaboration
This award will go to the partnership between organisations that in the view of the judges, has done most, publicly, and behind the scenes to deliver an improved sustainability-based outcome on a particular issue or strategy. A typical entry will be a partnership between an NGO and a company to raise awareness of a particular issue and set targets for improved performance by a company or industry on a corporate responsibility area.
7. Sustainability Commercialised
This award is for the company which has shown how a sustainability-based innovation has been clearly commercialised by the company and is becoming a mainstream part of its business. To be shortlisted for the award, the company will need to demonstrate that corporate responsibility has played a key role in the development of the product or service being put forward for shortlisting.
1. Best Private Company
This award will be given to the non-listed company our judges feel is responding most substantively to the sustainability agenda in 2011. The shortlisted companies will be made up any firms, large or small, who have shown they are taking the corporate responsibility agenda most seriously, by highlighting overall generally accepted metrics and specific projects that have delivered both business and societal/environmental value.
The 2011 awards will be held on the evening of May 3 2011. More at: http://www.ethicalcorp.com/rbs/
Free research findings on how big companies manage CSR issues
As someone interested in the corporate sustainability space, you might like some of the complimentary selected findings from our research work over the last couple of years.
As you may know, alongside our magazine, website and conferences, Ethical Corporation produces highly commended independent research on how big companies manage complex corporate responsibility issues. We've been doing this since 2007.
Here's a list of the case-study driven reports we have available.
There's also some links below so you can download selected findings.
I hope you’ll find some of them useful.
As a regular reader of our analysis on corporate sustainability, if you would like one or more of these reports, just let us know.
Happy to give blog readers a discount on any of these below.
Here’s the list of reports you can download some findings from:
MANAGEMENT:
Social and economic impact: measurement, evaluation and reporting (2010)
A must-have guide for companies operating in emerging markets and vulnerable communities
Download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/impact
How to embed corporate responsibility across different parts of your company (2009)
This 100-page report covers winning methods for encouraging and monitoring corporate social responsibility in operational departments.
Download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/csr
Best practices for designing effective ethics programmes (2009)
How to fortify your ethics codes and training methods
You can download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/ectraining
The Guide to Industry Initiatives in CSR (2009)
Get the inside track from some of the world's key sector initiatives
You can download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/voluntaryinitiatives
Business Ethics and Compliance in Russia (2009)
Practical information to develop local compliance strategies & overcome corruption challenges
You can download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/russia
Counter corruption in your supply chains in China (2009)
The risks, laws, methods and best practices for managing ethical and efficient supply chains in China
You can download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/china
Anti-corruption, Ethics and Compliance in China (2009)
Find out about how current and emerging regulations in China will affect businesses expanding into the Chinese market.
You can download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/china
ENVIRONMENTAL:
Unlocking the profit in Water savings (2nd edition - June 2010)
How big companies manage water risk – and the business opportunities in doing so
You can download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/water/
Corporate greenhouse gas emissions reporting (2008)
Learn how your competitors are calculating and verifying their GHG emissions
You can download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/ghgreporting
Corporate perspectives on the ‘CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme’ - Brand new 2010 second edition
A hands on management briefing on real life ways big UK companies cut carbon, and their costs.
You can download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/crc/
Essential strategies for effective emissions trading and offsetting (2008)
Practical information from leading companies
You can download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/emissionstrading
Ethical Corporation also produces 8-10 page Country Briefings on corporate responsibility.
Briefings are available for: Germany, USA, Netherlands, India, Brazil, China, South Africa, Sweden, Japan and Canada
More information on these is available at: http://www.ethicalcorp.com/briefing/index.asp
More information on our reports can be found at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports
As you may know, alongside our magazine, website and conferences, Ethical Corporation produces highly commended independent research on how big companies manage complex corporate responsibility issues. We've been doing this since 2007.
Here's a list of the case-study driven reports we have available.
There's also some links below so you can download selected findings.
I hope you’ll find some of them useful.
As a regular reader of our analysis on corporate sustainability, if you would like one or more of these reports, just let us know.
Happy to give blog readers a discount on any of these below.
Here’s the list of reports you can download some findings from:
MANAGEMENT:
Social and economic impact: measurement, evaluation and reporting (2010)
A must-have guide for companies operating in emerging markets and vulnerable communities
Download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/impact
How to embed corporate responsibility across different parts of your company (2009)
This 100-page report covers winning methods for encouraging and monitoring corporate social responsibility in operational departments.
Download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/csr
Best practices for designing effective ethics programmes (2009)
How to fortify your ethics codes and training methods
You can download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/ectraining
The Guide to Industry Initiatives in CSR (2009)
Get the inside track from some of the world's key sector initiatives
You can download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/voluntaryinitiatives
Business Ethics and Compliance in Russia (2009)
Practical information to develop local compliance strategies & overcome corruption challenges
You can download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/russia
Counter corruption in your supply chains in China (2009)
The risks, laws, methods and best practices for managing ethical and efficient supply chains in China
You can download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/china
Anti-corruption, Ethics and Compliance in China (2009)
Find out about how current and emerging regulations in China will affect businesses expanding into the Chinese market.
You can download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/china
ENVIRONMENTAL:
Unlocking the profit in Water savings (2nd edition - June 2010)
How big companies manage water risk – and the business opportunities in doing so
You can download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/water/
Corporate greenhouse gas emissions reporting (2008)
Learn how your competitors are calculating and verifying their GHG emissions
You can download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/ghgreporting
Corporate perspectives on the ‘CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme’ - Brand new 2010 second edition
A hands on management briefing on real life ways big UK companies cut carbon, and their costs.
You can download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/crc/
Essential strategies for effective emissions trading and offsetting (2008)
Practical information from leading companies
You can download selected findings at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports/emissionstrading
Ethical Corporation also produces 8-10 page Country Briefings on corporate responsibility.
Briefings are available for: Germany, USA, Netherlands, India, Brazil, China, South Africa, Sweden, Japan and Canada
More information on these is available at: http://www.ethicalcorp.com/briefing/index.asp
More information on our reports can be found at: http://www.ethicalcorporationinstitute.com/reports
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Supply chain communications, media and crisis workshop 8/11/10
If any blog readers would like to join us at this workshop in London on November 8th, I'd be very happy to give you a big discount (say, a total cost of £350 to you as a reader) to come along.
That's a hefty amount of money off the official price.
Let me know if that's of interest, by emailing me at toby.webb@ethicalcorp.com.
There will be around 20 large companies taking part. We've got five places left as of today.
Hope you can join us! Toby
That's a hefty amount of money off the official price.
Let me know if that's of interest, by emailing me at toby.webb@ethicalcorp.com.
There will be around 20 large companies taking part. We've got five places left as of today.
Hope you can join us! Toby
Sustainable farming in the UK, a podcast and some thoughts
Here's a podcast with David Wilkinson, head of European agriculture for PepsiCo, on the challenges and opportunities for sustainability in UK agriculture.
Yesterday we held a round table debate sponsored by PepsiCo with around 25 leading figures in the area, including Charles Secrett and Peter Melchett. For a post roundtable podcast with Charles, click here.
The full audio of the roundtable discussion is available here.
PepsiCo's UK sustainable farming targets are both hugely ambitious and impressive. In short they aim to reduce both carbon and water use by 50% in just five years.
At the end of the round table we took a vote on whether these aims could be achieved.
Our attendees, from farmers, to NGOs and companies, were overwhelmingly positive that it could be done.
If you listen to the podcast you'll hear from David Wilkinson how they came up with the aims.
What impresses me about large companies on sustainability, time and again among the leaders in the field, is how fast they take decisions once they have done their research.
Imagine if government could act like this a little more. We'd be a lot closer to overall human sustainability if they could.
If David Cameron's government wants to devolve action to companies, NGOs and others, as part of the Big Society plan, that's a key lesson to learn for the others in the mix.
Yesterday we held a round table debate sponsored by PepsiCo with around 25 leading figures in the area, including Charles Secrett and Peter Melchett. For a post roundtable podcast with Charles, click here.
The full audio of the roundtable discussion is available here.
PepsiCo's UK sustainable farming targets are both hugely ambitious and impressive. In short they aim to reduce both carbon and water use by 50% in just five years.
At the end of the round table we took a vote on whether these aims could be achieved.
Our attendees, from farmers, to NGOs and companies, were overwhelmingly positive that it could be done.
If you listen to the podcast you'll hear from David Wilkinson how they came up with the aims.
What impresses me about large companies on sustainability, time and again among the leaders in the field, is how fast they take decisions once they have done their research.
Imagine if government could act like this a little more. We'd be a lot closer to overall human sustainability if they could.
If David Cameron's government wants to devolve action to companies, NGOs and others, as part of the Big Society plan, that's a key lesson to learn for the others in the mix.
The absurdity of fake green rankings
As many readers will know, I believe rankings on corporate responsibility that are not issue based in a very focused way are, at best, utterly nonsensical.
There are many reasons for this. It's not just that I dislike them for being of no value. There are other reasons too.
Some earlier posts as to why are here, and here.
Here's another "let's flog some ads/sponsorship to companies ranked" approach ranking from those sustainability experts at Newsweek.
They call it "Green Rankings".
In their esteemed view, and I love this, Total, the recalcitrant French oil company, scores higher than Unilever, probably the most engaged company of its size on the planet when it comes to sustainability.
Brilliant, you couldn't make it up.
Do you notice how in their top 20 there is not a single firm with serious direct environmental liabilities?
So, what does this tell us? That pharma companies are 'naturally greener' than oil firms? Hold the front page!
Does anyone, I mean anyone out there, take these seriously? Do tell...
There are many reasons for this. It's not just that I dislike them for being of no value. There are other reasons too.
Some earlier posts as to why are here, and here.
Here's another "let's flog some ads/sponsorship to companies ranked" approach ranking from those sustainability experts at Newsweek.
They call it "Green Rankings".
In their esteemed view, and I love this, Total, the recalcitrant French oil company, scores higher than Unilever, probably the most engaged company of its size on the planet when it comes to sustainability.
Brilliant, you couldn't make it up.
Do you notice how in their top 20 there is not a single firm with serious direct environmental liabilities?
So, what does this tell us? That pharma companies are 'naturally greener' than oil firms? Hold the front page!
Does anyone, I mean anyone out there, take these seriously? Do tell...
Who are the leading companies in sustainability?
According to some members of Ethical Corporation's editorial advisory board, whom we recently polled, the large companies taking corporate responsibility most seriously, in their view, are:
(In no particular order, since ordering them would be impossible! Please note this is not a ranking, but a mere list:)
1. Marks & Spencer
2. Unilever
3. Novo Nordisk
4. Vodafone
5. Innocent
6. Patagonia
7. Timberland
8. National Grid
9. IBM
10. Innocent Drinks
11. PepsiCo
12. Kimberly Clark
13. Kingfisher
14. Mars
15. Inditex
16. Stoneyfield Farm
17. Danone
18. Standard Chartered Bank
19. SAS
20. Royal Mail
21. BHP Billiton
22. Rio Tinto
23. GlaxoSmithKline
24. HSBC
25. Earth Capital Partners
26. Interface
27. SC Johnson
28. Walmart
29. Dupont
30. GE
31. IKEA
Most mentioned were Marks & Spencer, then Unilever, Novo Nordisk, Vodafone, Patagonia and Timberland.
Please note this is NOT a ranking of any kind, just a list of engaged companies compiled in a very subjective way, but from real experts in the field.
We had responses from around eight of our board to pull this list together.
The full list of advisory board members can be found here.
This article looks at who won what at our recent awards in May, and why.
You can meet lots of companies on this list at our big annual shindig in London. If you'd like more information on it, just sign up for updates on the site.
(In no particular order, since ordering them would be impossible! Please note this is not a ranking, but a mere list:)
1. Marks & Spencer
2. Unilever
3. Novo Nordisk
4. Vodafone
5. Innocent
6. Patagonia
7. Timberland
8. National Grid
9. IBM
10. Innocent Drinks
11. PepsiCo
12. Kimberly Clark
13. Kingfisher
14. Mars
15. Inditex
16. Stoneyfield Farm
17. Danone
18. Standard Chartered Bank
19. SAS
20. Royal Mail
21. BHP Billiton
22. Rio Tinto
23. GlaxoSmithKline
24. HSBC
25. Earth Capital Partners
26. Interface
27. SC Johnson
28. Walmart
29. Dupont
30. GE
31. IKEA
Most mentioned were Marks & Spencer, then Unilever, Novo Nordisk, Vodafone, Patagonia and Timberland.
Please note this is NOT a ranking of any kind, just a list of engaged companies compiled in a very subjective way, but from real experts in the field.
We had responses from around eight of our board to pull this list together.
The full list of advisory board members can be found here.
This article looks at who won what at our recent awards in May, and why.
You can meet lots of companies on this list at our big annual shindig in London. If you'd like more information on it, just sign up for updates on the site.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
What Europe's top companies say matters in corporate responsibility
As I mentioned in a previous post, called "The eight biggest issues in European CSR" we've been researching the key management issues for the heads of corporate responsibility and sustainability in Europe's major companies.
Since that initial research, we've broken down our eight issues a little and expanded upon them with further analysis. The results are below and might be useful for you.
From those 30 plus one on one interviews, and our 35,000 words a month of publishing analysis on CR, plus our research reports work, we've now planned our draft agenda for our Responsible Business Summit 2011, our annual meeting now in its tenth year.
Our 'big theme' in 2011 is "Bridging the gap between performance and policy", and we've split the agenda into three areas after the plenaries.
These are "Stakeholders", "Performance case studies" and "Communications".
And the 18 or so issues that matter, according to our research, now boiled down into a draft agenda, are: (in no particular order)
1. Responsible leadership / convincing the board it matters
2. Measuring socio economic impact
3. Corporate responsibility and the Media: what makes a good story?
4. Embedding CR across the company
5. NGOs: what is missing from companies to make CR work?
6. How to maintain and deepen your employees’ commitment to CR
7. How to achieve credibility with investors
8. Emerging markets: overcoming the challenges
9. Reporting – why it’s crucial you stay on top of your game
10. Engaging suppliers on CR
11. Cutting carbon and reaping the benefits
12. Responsible marketing & branding
13. Managing partnerships and collaboration
14. Responding to media and customer pressure on your supply chain
15. Measuring trust and results
16. Customer engagement and social media
17. Water stewardship: why it’s a big deal and what do about it
18. Supply chain management traceability
Speakers so far include Stefano Pessina, executive chairman of Alliance Boots (and 50% owner of the company), Zein Abdalla, CEO of PepsiCo Europe, Jeffrey Hollender, founder of Seventh Generation, and execs from companies including Diageo, Nestle, Standard Chartered, Jaguar Landrover etc. Reporters from the Times and Guardian newspapers will also be speaking.
We're hoping to meet some of you there.
And as a blog reader, I'm happy to offer you a discount to come along.
For more, go here, or email my colleague emmeline.rajasingam@ethicalcorp.com to get involved.
Since that initial research, we've broken down our eight issues a little and expanded upon them with further analysis. The results are below and might be useful for you.
From those 30 plus one on one interviews, and our 35,000 words a month of publishing analysis on CR, plus our research reports work, we've now planned our draft agenda for our Responsible Business Summit 2011, our annual meeting now in its tenth year.
Our 'big theme' in 2011 is "Bridging the gap between performance and policy", and we've split the agenda into three areas after the plenaries.
These are "Stakeholders", "Performance case studies" and "Communications".
And the 18 or so issues that matter, according to our research, now boiled down into a draft agenda, are: (in no particular order)
1. Responsible leadership / convincing the board it matters
2. Measuring socio economic impact
3. Corporate responsibility and the Media: what makes a good story?
4. Embedding CR across the company
5. NGOs: what is missing from companies to make CR work?
6. How to maintain and deepen your employees’ commitment to CR
7. How to achieve credibility with investors
8. Emerging markets: overcoming the challenges
9. Reporting – why it’s crucial you stay on top of your game
10. Engaging suppliers on CR
11. Cutting carbon and reaping the benefits
12. Responsible marketing & branding
13. Managing partnerships and collaboration
14. Responding to media and customer pressure on your supply chain
15. Measuring trust and results
16. Customer engagement and social media
17. Water stewardship: why it’s a big deal and what do about it
18. Supply chain management traceability
Speakers so far include Stefano Pessina, executive chairman of Alliance Boots (and 50% owner of the company), Zein Abdalla, CEO of PepsiCo Europe, Jeffrey Hollender, founder of Seventh Generation, and execs from companies including Diageo, Nestle, Standard Chartered, Jaguar Landrover etc. Reporters from the Times and Guardian newspapers will also be speaking.
We're hoping to meet some of you there.
And as a blog reader, I'm happy to offer you a discount to come along.
For more, go here, or email my colleague emmeline.rajasingam@ethicalcorp.com to get involved.
Monday, October 18, 2010
Amazon's green choice may help, but it's not the answer
According to the Financial Times today:
"Amazon, the world’s largest online retailer, has patented a system that would allow its customers to choose slower shipping methods or recyclable packaging to reduce the environmental impact of their online purchases."
The FT says that
"...the system as described would give shoppers an unprecedented level of transparency concerning the environmental impact of their ordering decisions. It would also give each customer a reading on the cumulative environmental impact of shopping decisions and the option to purchase carbon offset credits."
My bet is that Amazon won't find this as easy to roll out as many people might think.
Tesco has long slowly backed away from its all singing all dancing carbon labels plan, as it was announced some time ago. A good thing too in some ways, since there are much smarter ways to invest money in sustainability than labelling eggs.
Meanwhile Wal-Mart's much heralded move to rate suppliers on greenery has proven rather more complex than the company probably first thought.
So whilst the chattering classes of social media CSR commentators will no doubt herald this as a revolution, we should be sceptical about what it will mean in practice.
No doubt it will be a very useful way to engage consumers in the issues, depending on how it's done.
If you make sustainability easy to buy, and cost-neutral vs. competing products, consumers will buy more of the greener products than they do today. Maybe a lot more.
But it's best not to give them that choice, just make it all sustainable, or failing that, a whole lot greener. Then compete on price, brand and everything else.
As we all know, ethical consumption is not the panacea it is sometimes hyped up to be. Regulation, (where appropriate!) standards raising and B2B procurement expectations are the real key.
As the FT points out in another article today:
"However, in spite of the overall growth, global SRI assets totalled just €7,000bn, only 6.3 per cent of the $111,000bn global assets under management in 2009, according to Boston Consulting Group."
(Tony Juniper hits the nail on the head in an excellent article in yesterday's Observer newspaper)
"Amazon, the world’s largest online retailer, has patented a system that would allow its customers to choose slower shipping methods or recyclable packaging to reduce the environmental impact of their online purchases."
The FT says that
"...the system as described would give shoppers an unprecedented level of transparency concerning the environmental impact of their ordering decisions. It would also give each customer a reading on the cumulative environmental impact of shopping decisions and the option to purchase carbon offset credits."
My bet is that Amazon won't find this as easy to roll out as many people might think.
Tesco has long slowly backed away from its all singing all dancing carbon labels plan, as it was announced some time ago. A good thing too in some ways, since there are much smarter ways to invest money in sustainability than labelling eggs.
Meanwhile Wal-Mart's much heralded move to rate suppliers on greenery has proven rather more complex than the company probably first thought.
So whilst the chattering classes of social media CSR commentators will no doubt herald this as a revolution, we should be sceptical about what it will mean in practice.
No doubt it will be a very useful way to engage consumers in the issues, depending on how it's done.
If you make sustainability easy to buy, and cost-neutral vs. competing products, consumers will buy more of the greener products than they do today. Maybe a lot more.
But it's best not to give them that choice, just make it all sustainable, or failing that, a whole lot greener. Then compete on price, brand and everything else.
As we all know, ethical consumption is not the panacea it is sometimes hyped up to be. Regulation, (where appropriate!) standards raising and B2B procurement expectations are the real key.
As the FT points out in another article today:
"However, in spite of the overall growth, global SRI assets totalled just €7,000bn, only 6.3 per cent of the $111,000bn global assets under management in 2009, according to Boston Consulting Group."
(Tony Juniper hits the nail on the head in an excellent article in yesterday's Observer newspaper)
Ethical Corporation's 2011 editorial calendar...
Below is our draft editorial calendar for 2011 for Ethical Corporation's magazine.
We'd really like your comments on the hot issues we ought to be covering next year.
What's below is not everything we will cover. We publish about 35,000 words a month so this is not all of it by any means, but some of the bigger briefings and features.
Our briefings and country briefings are 8-10 pages each, whilst the other articles are anywhere from 1500-2500 words in length.
Here's the plan so far. Appreciate any comments:
Ethical Corporation Editorial calendar 2011
February:
Briefing: Mining and sustainable business
Country Briefing: Australia
Strategy & Management focus: Selling to the board: What are the best ways to engage, and keep your bosses up to date?
Feature: Climate talks in Mexico
March:
Briefing: Sustainable Agriculture
Country briefing: United Kingdom
Strategy & Management focus: When a new CEO comes in, what’s the best way to educate them?
Feature: Certification of commodities: where next for eco-labels?
April:
Briefing: Rankings and ratings – where are they headed and what can they deliver?
Country briefing: Gulf States
Strategy & Management focus: Which boards have Chief Sustainability Officers?
Feature: Behavioural change: Translating company policy into action
May:
Briefing: Private companies and corporate responsibility
Country briefing: France
Strategy & Management focus: How do you engage business unit heads in sustainability?
Feature: Which governments are most active on CR and why
June:
Briefing: HR and responsible business. How strategic is corporate talent management?
Country briefing: South Korea
Strategy & Management focus: What happens, when a company is bought out, to sustainability strategy?
Feature: Who won what at the Ethical Corporation 2011 awards
July-August:
Briefing: Reporting
Country briefing: Turkey
Strategy & Management focus: Sustainability and marketing. How is sustainability/CR impacting the marketing community?
Feature: Two-way dialogue: Who are the real listening corporations?
September:
Briefing: Green corporate transport
Country briefing: Spain
Strategy & Management focus: The future of big international NGOs
Feature: How the media covers sustainability
October:
Briefing: Engaging suppliers
Country briefing: Italy
Strategy & Management focus:
Feature: Emerging economy NGOs: who are the leaders and what are they doing?
November:
Briefing: Tourism and corporate responsibility
Country briefing: Mexico
Strategy & Management focus: Global supermarkets and sustainability
Feature: Philanthrocapitalism: Giving away cash in a business style
December:
Briefing: Greener buildings and construction
Country briefing: Russia
Strategy & Management focus:
Feature: The future of public relations and sustainability
To see some of our past briefings, go here.
And the rest of the 2010 calendar is here.
We'd really like your comments on the hot issues we ought to be covering next year.
What's below is not everything we will cover. We publish about 35,000 words a month so this is not all of it by any means, but some of the bigger briefings and features.
Our briefings and country briefings are 8-10 pages each, whilst the other articles are anywhere from 1500-2500 words in length.
Here's the plan so far. Appreciate any comments:
Ethical Corporation Editorial calendar 2011
February:
Briefing: Mining and sustainable business
Country Briefing: Australia
Strategy & Management focus: Selling to the board: What are the best ways to engage, and keep your bosses up to date?
Feature: Climate talks in Mexico
March:
Briefing: Sustainable Agriculture
Country briefing: United Kingdom
Strategy & Management focus: When a new CEO comes in, what’s the best way to educate them?
Feature: Certification of commodities: where next for eco-labels?
April:
Briefing: Rankings and ratings – where are they headed and what can they deliver?
Country briefing: Gulf States
Strategy & Management focus: Which boards have Chief Sustainability Officers?
Feature: Behavioural change: Translating company policy into action
May:
Briefing: Private companies and corporate responsibility
Country briefing: France
Strategy & Management focus: How do you engage business unit heads in sustainability?
Feature: Which governments are most active on CR and why
June:
Briefing: HR and responsible business. How strategic is corporate talent management?
Country briefing: South Korea
Strategy & Management focus: What happens, when a company is bought out, to sustainability strategy?
Feature: Who won what at the Ethical Corporation 2011 awards
July-August:
Briefing: Reporting
Country briefing: Turkey
Strategy & Management focus: Sustainability and marketing. How is sustainability/CR impacting the marketing community?
Feature: Two-way dialogue: Who are the real listening corporations?
September:
Briefing: Green corporate transport
Country briefing: Spain
Strategy & Management focus: The future of big international NGOs
Feature: How the media covers sustainability
October:
Briefing: Engaging suppliers
Country briefing: Italy
Strategy & Management focus:
Feature: Emerging economy NGOs: who are the leaders and what are they doing?
November:
Briefing: Tourism and corporate responsibility
Country briefing: Mexico
Strategy & Management focus: Global supermarkets and sustainability
Feature: Philanthrocapitalism: Giving away cash in a business style
December:
Briefing: Greener buildings and construction
Country briefing: Russia
Strategy & Management focus:
Feature: The future of public relations and sustainability
To see some of our past briefings, go here.
And the rest of the 2010 calendar is here.
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Reporting trends, some predictions, part three of four
Here's the first post, where I talked about creating an evidence base for engaging in public debate about your company's role in society.
This second posting is about real-time,web based reporting, and engagement.
http://ethicalcorp.blogspot.com/2010/09/reporting-trends-some-predictions-part.html
http://ethicalcorp.blogspot.com/2010/09/reporting-trends-some-predictions-part_28.html
engaging in segmented communication to bring people into parts of these sites, or others, and encouraging very specific conversations.
Integration into more mainstream marketing and communications.
This second posting is about real-time,web based reporting, and engagement.
http://ethicalcorp.blogspot.com/2010/09/reporting-trends-some-predictions-part.html
http://ethicalcorp.blogspot.com/2010/09/reporting-trends-some-predictions-part_28.html
engaging in segmented communication to bring people into parts of these sites, or others, and encouraging very specific conversations.
Integration into more mainstream marketing and communications.
Friday, October 15, 2010
Supply chain and crisis communications workshop 8/11/10
If any readers would like to join our supply chain and crisis communications workshop in London on 8/11/10, just let me know and I'll give you a discount as a blog reader.
Here's the marketing bumpf about it:
"Corporate responsibility: Linking supply chain and communications
This intensive, one day training and experiential learning workshop will be held on 8th November, the day before our two day engaging suppliers conference.
The aims of the workshop are for participants to:
- Learn about the changing communications landscape in corporate responsibility
- Find out how improve inter-departmental communications and external outputs
- Discover how journalists and their editors think about how companies communicate on CSR
- Find out how other participants and leading companies manage supply chain communications issues
Places are strictly limited to 25 participants. There are 14 places remaining.
The workshop format is extremely interactive, with much of the day spent working in groups and solving real-life dilemmas that companies face on a regular basis.
The workshop proceedings and discussions are all held completely off the record."
More at: http://www.ethicalcorp.com/supplychain/workshop.asp
Here's the marketing bumpf about it:
"Corporate responsibility: Linking supply chain and communications
This intensive, one day training and experiential learning workshop will be held on 8th November, the day before our two day engaging suppliers conference.
The aims of the workshop are for participants to:
- Learn about the changing communications landscape in corporate responsibility
- Find out how improve inter-departmental communications and external outputs
- Discover how journalists and their editors think about how companies communicate on CSR
- Find out how other participants and leading companies manage supply chain communications issues
Places are strictly limited to 25 participants. There are 14 places remaining.
The workshop format is extremely interactive, with much of the day spent working in groups and solving real-life dilemmas that companies face on a regular basis.
The workshop proceedings and discussions are all held completely off the record."
More at: http://www.ethicalcorp.com/supplychain/workshop.asp
"Put employees before customers"
Here's a podcast from the BBC with Vineet Nayar of Indian IT firm HCL Technologies. He believes employees must come before the customer. Interesting thoughts.
Listen to the file at this link. You need to scroll about half way through to hear him.
His view is a simple one: Look after the employees well, and they will look after the customer. Can't beat that for simplicity. His company seems to be doing very well as a result.
His own staff appraisal is open to all 70,000 employees and is available on the company's website to employees. 3500 other senior managers operate under the same system.
The interview is worth taking a few minutes to listen to, I would suggest.
More on employee engagement, here.
Listen to the file at this link. You need to scroll about half way through to hear him.
His view is a simple one: Look after the employees well, and they will look after the customer. Can't beat that for simplicity. His company seems to be doing very well as a result.
His own staff appraisal is open to all 70,000 employees and is available on the company's website to employees. 3500 other senior managers operate under the same system.
The interview is worth taking a few minutes to listen to, I would suggest.
More on employee engagement, here.
Bribery investigations, and costs, scale
The Wall Street Journal shows today why tackling bribery is, and should be, increasingly on the corporate agenda, at least in the most vulnerable sectors.
The article "Settlements Near In Bribery Case" concerns Panalpina, an oil services firm, Shell and others.
There's also a useful graphic that shows, with a slight dip in the recession, how FCPA prosecutions are rising dramatically in the US, and the big jump in corporate settlement costs, boosted hugely by Siemens in 2008.
The WSJ notes that:
"Panalpina has set aside around $133 million, according to securities filings, to resolve legal problems with the U.S. that have dogged it for several years and, it says, cost it business. On Sept. 30, it pleaded guilty to criminal price-fixing charges with five other freight forwarders and paid nearly $12 million to resolve the U.S. charges.
The foreign-bribery investigation has been by far the most damaging for the company, dragging its clients into the legal spotlight and resulting in a shareholder suit. Panalpina shuttered its operations in Nigeria and took a $42 million hit as a result, according to company filings."
So the costs to date for the company look to be some $175 million. And that does not even begin to take into account the cost to the company of good people leaving as a result. Panalpina is now owned by Transocean, which has its own reputation problems of course.
We're holding a meeting with some of the leading figures in the field of global anti-corruption in a couple of weeks here in London. More on that at this link.
Some useful reading from Ethical Corporation:
Ethics training: Protect more than reputation
Companies that train employees how to implement ethics codes outperform their peers, argues Simon Webley, research director at the UK Institute of Business Ethics
The article "Settlements Near In Bribery Case" concerns Panalpina, an oil services firm, Shell and others.
There's also a useful graphic that shows, with a slight dip in the recession, how FCPA prosecutions are rising dramatically in the US, and the big jump in corporate settlement costs, boosted hugely by Siemens in 2008.
The WSJ notes that:
"Panalpina has set aside around $133 million, according to securities filings, to resolve legal problems with the U.S. that have dogged it for several years and, it says, cost it business. On Sept. 30, it pleaded guilty to criminal price-fixing charges with five other freight forwarders and paid nearly $12 million to resolve the U.S. charges.
The foreign-bribery investigation has been by far the most damaging for the company, dragging its clients into the legal spotlight and resulting in a shareholder suit. Panalpina shuttered its operations in Nigeria and took a $42 million hit as a result, according to company filings."
So the costs to date for the company look to be some $175 million. And that does not even begin to take into account the cost to the company of good people leaving as a result. Panalpina is now owned by Transocean, which has its own reputation problems of course.
We're holding a meeting with some of the leading figures in the field of global anti-corruption in a couple of weeks here in London. More on that at this link.
Some useful reading from Ethical Corporation:
Ethics training: Protect more than reputation
Companies that train employees how to implement ethics codes outperform their peers, argues Simon Webley, research director at the UK Institute of Business Ethics
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
What more than 16,000 people are reading on Ethicalcorp.com
I've been scrolling through the readership stats on our website, www.ethicalcorp.com today.
Just under 17,000 people have read the below articles recently.
So clearly there's something about them that appeals to many of our readers. Hope you find them of some use:
Business and environmental impacts: Why ‘full product transparency’ is the future
Company leaders - Sustainability has the ear of the boss
Three ways to understand the myth of the ethical consumer
Trust will lead to business success
Just under 17,000 people have read the below articles recently.
So clearly there's something about them that appeals to many of our readers. Hope you find them of some use:
Business and environmental impacts: Why ‘full product transparency’ is the future
Company leaders - Sustainability has the ear of the boss
Three ways to understand the myth of the ethical consumer
Trust will lead to business success
Seth Godin on the meaning of "pro-business"
Seth Godin is a prolific marketing and strategy blogger. His work is worth following.
One of his biggest contributions has been the creation of the concept of "permission marketing", a decade or so ago, along with many others. He's not far off being the Malcolm Gladwell of business, albeit a little more focused.
One of his latest blog posts, "What does 'pro-business' mean?" really caught my eye.
Godin argues the old style of being pro-business, ie campaigning for deregulation and less oversight, is utterly outmoded.
Instead, he argues that:
"Perhaps we could see pro-business strategies looking more like this:
- Investing in training the workforce to solve interesting problems, so they can work at just about any job.
- Maintaining infrastructure, safety and civil rights so we can create a community where talented people and the entrepreneurs who hire them (two groups that can live wherever they choose) would choose to live there.
- Reward and celebrate the scientific process that leads to scalable breakthroughs, productivity and a stable path to the future.
- Spend community (our) money on services and infrastructure that help successful organizations and families thrive.
Once you’ve seen how difficult it is to start a thriving business in a place without clean water, fast internet connections and a stable government of rational laws, it’s a lot harder to take what we’ve built for granted."
Hard to argue with that.
One of his biggest contributions has been the creation of the concept of "permission marketing", a decade or so ago, along with many others. He's not far off being the Malcolm Gladwell of business, albeit a little more focused.
One of his latest blog posts, "What does 'pro-business' mean?" really caught my eye.
Godin argues the old style of being pro-business, ie campaigning for deregulation and less oversight, is utterly outmoded.
Instead, he argues that:
"Perhaps we could see pro-business strategies looking more like this:
- Investing in training the workforce to solve interesting problems, so they can work at just about any job.
- Maintaining infrastructure, safety and civil rights so we can create a community where talented people and the entrepreneurs who hire them (two groups that can live wherever they choose) would choose to live there.
- Reward and celebrate the scientific process that leads to scalable breakthroughs, productivity and a stable path to the future.
- Spend community (our) money on services and infrastructure that help successful organizations and families thrive.
Once you’ve seen how difficult it is to start a thriving business in a place without clean water, fast internet connections and a stable government of rational laws, it’s a lot harder to take what we’ve built for granted."
Hard to argue with that.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Some good carbon reading
For those readers interested in the carbon markets and where they are heading, here's some useful reading below.
The articles are from the non-profit news/analysis service Daily Climate, which produces what must be the most comprehensive daily newsletter on climate matters.
Here's the headline for each, with some relevant quotes that might pique your interest.
Making a market for pollution
"Worldwide, emissions trading was a $144 billion market in 2009, according to the World Bank, and 2010 figures to be even higher. Regional markets are spreading, notably on the West and East coasts of the United States"
Selling the blue sky
"In the end, the only thing that matters is whether any carbon market actually reduces emissions of greenhouse gases. The answer so far: Not yet. The European emissions trading scheme, the largest in the world, "has reduced emissions by just 2 percent compared to the projected levels without ETS," according to a 2010 report from the U.S. Climate Task Force."
Carbon trade or carbon con?
"Outright fraud has plagued emissions markets, whether it's Anne Sholtz building a Ponzi scheme out of smog allowances in Los Angeles or European cheats charging extra for carbon allowances under the guise of collecting a tax and then disappearing with the proceeds. So far only voluntary commitments and a code of ethics drawn up by the Energy Brokers Association keep players honest - though the new financial reform regulations may change that."
Overall the pieces show a mixed outlook for commercial carbon. It seems that despite the lack of political action, regional initiatives will continue to take hold. The lack of technical qualifications in some auditors is clearly a concern, but one imagines this will improve over time, as will monitoring. Despite the challenges, the carbon markets seem set to grow, just not quite in the way many would like them to.
Here's some further relevant useful reading from Ethical Corporation and others:
Climate change: The future of carbon offsetting
Clean Technology Briefing Part 1: Overview - Can cleantech save the world?
Innovative technology to harvest reliable wind power has the potential to really take off (free PDF of recent EC article on wind tech)
How the REDD+ Partnership unravelled in Tianjin
The articles are from the non-profit news/analysis service Daily Climate, which produces what must be the most comprehensive daily newsletter on climate matters.
Here's the headline for each, with some relevant quotes that might pique your interest.
Making a market for pollution
"Worldwide, emissions trading was a $144 billion market in 2009, according to the World Bank, and 2010 figures to be even higher. Regional markets are spreading, notably on the West and East coasts of the United States"
Selling the blue sky
"In the end, the only thing that matters is whether any carbon market actually reduces emissions of greenhouse gases. The answer so far: Not yet. The European emissions trading scheme, the largest in the world, "has reduced emissions by just 2 percent compared to the projected levels without ETS," according to a 2010 report from the U.S. Climate Task Force."
Carbon trade or carbon con?
"Outright fraud has plagued emissions markets, whether it's Anne Sholtz building a Ponzi scheme out of smog allowances in Los Angeles or European cheats charging extra for carbon allowances under the guise of collecting a tax and then disappearing with the proceeds. So far only voluntary commitments and a code of ethics drawn up by the Energy Brokers Association keep players honest - though the new financial reform regulations may change that."
Overall the pieces show a mixed outlook for commercial carbon. It seems that despite the lack of political action, regional initiatives will continue to take hold. The lack of technical qualifications in some auditors is clearly a concern, but one imagines this will improve over time, as will monitoring. Despite the challenges, the carbon markets seem set to grow, just not quite in the way many would like them to.
Here's some further relevant useful reading from Ethical Corporation and others:
Climate change: The future of carbon offsetting
Clean Technology Briefing Part 1: Overview - Can cleantech save the world?
Innovative technology to harvest reliable wind power has the potential to really take off (free PDF of recent EC article on wind tech)
How the REDD+ Partnership unravelled in Tianjin
Monday, October 11, 2010
More evidence for a 'values' audit: European companies in the USA
Human Rights Watch recently published a report looking at the anti-union tactics of European companies in the USA.
It's an interesting development. I've not seen such scrutiny on companies between two such developed markets before.
The companies named have all responded, of course, and offered their points of view.
The point of this post is not to name them and the allegations.
What's interesting about this report is that it shows (if just say 10% of it is right) that it's not just emerging markets you have to watch yourself in.
Just as Microsoft was recently caught out in Russia, European companies who develop US businesses have probably learned from this report that culture is everything. And that when you expand abroad you need to look west as well as east.
That's what's new here. We haven't seen so comprehensive a report on European companies in the US in the past, at least not to my knowledge.
It demonstrates that point I made about the potential for a values audit in countries where you operate.
After all, if you hire locals, they will act as other locals do, in the main.
So your average manager in certain sectors in specific parts of the USA is going to be virulently anti-union.
I recall one head of corporate responsibility, on the subject of collective bargaining, turning to me and simply saying, "we don't do unions", not so long ago.
But if you are a company originally from Germany, for example, the culture of co-determination is so embedded (largely) that expectations are higher when it comes to unions.
Interestingly, a search on Google News for this report doesn't generate that many headlines when you search for its title.
It may well be due to the search parameter, but the report has not generated as much coverage as you'd expect, from what I can see.
Perhaps the media has bigger fish to fry. It's not that sexy a story after all.
And with all the other issues in CR, it's all very complicated, particularly by national boundaries and cultures.
I'm not particularly pro-union. In certain places they are extremely important, in others, less so.
I've seen their successes in parts of history and the world.
But I've also, when running big events in the US, been asked for bribes by union members.
Once, together with colleagues, I was locked in a room by Teamsters demanding major additions to a final bill for an exhibition. (It was resolved when we called the police).
But this report at least shows us that European companies need to look both ways when expanding abroad. Not just to Asia, but to North and South America too.
Union policy at home or not, if you have 'higher' (or different?) standards where you come from, you'll be called out on them as globalisation accelerates at its breakneck pace.
One more thing to put on the "to look out for" list if you are a European firm expanding or operating in the US.
It's an interesting development. I've not seen such scrutiny on companies between two such developed markets before.
The companies named have all responded, of course, and offered their points of view.
The point of this post is not to name them and the allegations.
What's interesting about this report is that it shows (if just say 10% of it is right) that it's not just emerging markets you have to watch yourself in.
Just as Microsoft was recently caught out in Russia, European companies who develop US businesses have probably learned from this report that culture is everything. And that when you expand abroad you need to look west as well as east.
That's what's new here. We haven't seen so comprehensive a report on European companies in the US in the past, at least not to my knowledge.
It demonstrates that point I made about the potential for a values audit in countries where you operate.
After all, if you hire locals, they will act as other locals do, in the main.
So your average manager in certain sectors in specific parts of the USA is going to be virulently anti-union.
I recall one head of corporate responsibility, on the subject of collective bargaining, turning to me and simply saying, "we don't do unions", not so long ago.
But if you are a company originally from Germany, for example, the culture of co-determination is so embedded (largely) that expectations are higher when it comes to unions.
Interestingly, a search on Google News for this report doesn't generate that many headlines when you search for its title.
It may well be due to the search parameter, but the report has not generated as much coverage as you'd expect, from what I can see.
Perhaps the media has bigger fish to fry. It's not that sexy a story after all.
And with all the other issues in CR, it's all very complicated, particularly by national boundaries and cultures.
I'm not particularly pro-union. In certain places they are extremely important, in others, less so.
I've seen their successes in parts of history and the world.
But I've also, when running big events in the US, been asked for bribes by union members.
Once, together with colleagues, I was locked in a room by Teamsters demanding major additions to a final bill for an exhibition. (It was resolved when we called the police).
But this report at least shows us that European companies need to look both ways when expanding abroad. Not just to Asia, but to North and South America too.
Union policy at home or not, if you have 'higher' (or different?) standards where you come from, you'll be called out on them as globalisation accelerates at its breakneck pace.
One more thing to put on the "to look out for" list if you are a European firm expanding or operating in the US.
Wednesday, October 06, 2010
The eight biggest issues in European CSR
We've been on the phone recently, talking to customers to work out what to cover at the Responsible Business Summit 2011, on May 3-4 in London.
The second annual Ethical Corporation awards will be on the evening of May 3. Some dates for your diary there.
From our research, which involves around thirty in-depth calls with customers, these are the top issues for heads of CR and responsible business managers right now:
1. Supply chain management
2. Reporting
3. Embedding CR
4. Measurement
5. Making the business case
6. Socio-economic impact
7. Climate change + environment
8. Communications
No great surprises. There's an element of "plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose" here. But I thought I'd share the findings with you.
Already confirmed to speak are Zein Abdalla, Chief Executive Officer of PepsiCo Europe and Stefano Pessina, the billionare half-owner and Executive Chairman of Alliance Boots. Not a bad start.
More heavyweight CEO speakers and others will soon be revealed on the conference website.
2011's focus will be on maximising the opportunities of sustainability, managing better performance, and engaging with key stakeholders, including NGOs and the media.
The second annual Ethical Corporation awards will be on the evening of May 3. Some dates for your diary there.
From our research, which involves around thirty in-depth calls with customers, these are the top issues for heads of CR and responsible business managers right now:
1. Supply chain management
2. Reporting
3. Embedding CR
4. Measurement
5. Making the business case
6. Socio-economic impact
7. Climate change + environment
8. Communications
No great surprises. There's an element of "plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose" here. But I thought I'd share the findings with you.
Already confirmed to speak are Zein Abdalla, Chief Executive Officer of PepsiCo Europe and Stefano Pessina, the billionare half-owner and Executive Chairman of Alliance Boots. Not a bad start.
More heavyweight CEO speakers and others will soon be revealed on the conference website.
2011's focus will be on maximising the opportunities of sustainability, managing better performance, and engaging with key stakeholders, including NGOs and the media.
Corporate responsibility, Jeremy Bentham and Eminem
There's a blog post title you probably never thought you would read.
So what has corporate responsibility got to do with one of the most famous utilitarian philosophers and a fading rap star?
To Bentham first. He came up with the concept of the Panopticon. Here's an image.
The Panopticon is a design for a prison. In it, the prisoners, due to the design, are not sure when they are being observed and when not, the effects theoretically being beneficial. As Bentham himself put it:
"As the watchmen cannot be seen, they need not be on duty at all times, effectively leaving the watching to the watched".
The concept has influenced prison design ever since.
Reading Bentham's quote above, you can see his relevance to corporate responsibility.
As the modern conference cliche goes: "real corporate responsibility is what takes place when you are not under scrutiny".
In today's world of 24/7 media. Companies are increasingly being watched all the time.
This makes Bentham's Panopticon ever more relevant. It's a useful metaphor.
Now, you may ask, how is Eminem relevant to the world of responsible business?
His link to responsible business is transparency.
In the movie 8 mile, and in his music, like him or otherwise, Eminem tells his audience everything negative about himself in advance.
He then parodies it to comic effect whilst making a point.
It's what PR people might call "getting out in front of the issue", in an extreme way.
I wouldn't suggest companies parody themselves much, if at all. You have to be really quite cool and confident as a brand, to get that right.
But the admittance of flaws up front can be very disarming. If its done well and matched with confidence, it's a great way of being both authentic and humble.
Demonstrating humility with assurance is the communications holy grail for large companies. You can no longer pretend to know all the answers.
Politicians are adopting this tactic too. It's what David Cameron's "Big Society" is all about.
Whatever you think about the notion, it's clear message is "we don't have all the answers, but we can do some things to contribute to solutions, and so can you".
That's an increasingly compelling message and one that companies would do well to heed.
The smart ones, the leaders, have been doing this for years.
So what has corporate responsibility got to do with one of the most famous utilitarian philosophers and a fading rap star?
To Bentham first. He came up with the concept of the Panopticon. Here's an image.
The Panopticon is a design for a prison. In it, the prisoners, due to the design, are not sure when they are being observed and when not, the effects theoretically being beneficial. As Bentham himself put it:
"As the watchmen cannot be seen, they need not be on duty at all times, effectively leaving the watching to the watched".
The concept has influenced prison design ever since.
Reading Bentham's quote above, you can see his relevance to corporate responsibility.
As the modern conference cliche goes: "real corporate responsibility is what takes place when you are not under scrutiny".
In today's world of 24/7 media. Companies are increasingly being watched all the time.
This makes Bentham's Panopticon ever more relevant. It's a useful metaphor.
Now, you may ask, how is Eminem relevant to the world of responsible business?
His link to responsible business is transparency.
In the movie 8 mile, and in his music, like him or otherwise, Eminem tells his audience everything negative about himself in advance.
He then parodies it to comic effect whilst making a point.
It's what PR people might call "getting out in front of the issue", in an extreme way.
I wouldn't suggest companies parody themselves much, if at all. You have to be really quite cool and confident as a brand, to get that right.
But the admittance of flaws up front can be very disarming. If its done well and matched with confidence, it's a great way of being both authentic and humble.
Demonstrating humility with assurance is the communications holy grail for large companies. You can no longer pretend to know all the answers.
Politicians are adopting this tactic too. It's what David Cameron's "Big Society" is all about.
Whatever you think about the notion, it's clear message is "we don't have all the answers, but we can do some things to contribute to solutions, and so can you".
That's an increasingly compelling message and one that companies would do well to heed.
The smart ones, the leaders, have been doing this for years.
Purpose and performance
Is purpose a new way to sell the business case for corporate responsibility?
Yes and no.
A study by the PR firm Burson-Marsteller and the more credible business school IMD, has apparently found that:
"A strong, coherent and well-communicated corporate purpose can boost financial performance by up to 17% and build trust with stakeholders."
You'll have to take their word for it though, since the study does not appear to be available publicly. Surely a key error.
Using purpose is a good way to move away from discredited terms such as corporate social responsibility if your board is sceptical about CSR.
It provides a chance to take a more fundamental look at why your company is in business.
But the danger is that the immediate response will be: "Our purpose is to make money for shareholders", and that's the end of the discussion.
If your board is sceptical about CSR, will using the term "purpose", help?
The answer to that depends on the terms senior executives will respond to.
My view is it's worth a try. I've seen it work on at least one company chairman.
UPDATE 11/10/10. Here's a link to the report, now provided by Burson-Marstellar.
Here's a previous post on the topic, with a great video on purpose.
Some listening and reading:
Podcast interview with Nikos Mourkogiannis, author of a new book on corporate purpose and values
Podcast interview with Nikos Mourkogiannism, chairman of the board of Panthea Ltd.
(This is free to all)
Public purpose – Corporate history’s lesson for companies now
While there is much about the history of corporate legislation that remains murky, companies should revive the requirement for a stated public purpose, says Peter Kinder (Subscriber-only article but you can take a free trial by clicking on the link)
The purpose of the corporation
Mark Goyder delves once more into what companies are for
(Subscriber-only article but you can take a free trial by clicking on the link)
Yes and no.
A study by the PR firm Burson-Marsteller and the more credible business school IMD, has apparently found that:
"A strong, coherent and well-communicated corporate purpose can boost financial performance by up to 17% and build trust with stakeholders."
You'll have to take their word for it though, since the study does not appear to be available publicly. Surely a key error.
Using purpose is a good way to move away from discredited terms such as corporate social responsibility if your board is sceptical about CSR.
It provides a chance to take a more fundamental look at why your company is in business.
But the danger is that the immediate response will be: "Our purpose is to make money for shareholders", and that's the end of the discussion.
If your board is sceptical about CSR, will using the term "purpose", help?
The answer to that depends on the terms senior executives will respond to.
My view is it's worth a try. I've seen it work on at least one company chairman.
UPDATE 11/10/10. Here's a link to the report, now provided by Burson-Marstellar.
Here's a previous post on the topic, with a great video on purpose.
Some listening and reading:
Podcast interview with Nikos Mourkogiannis, author of a new book on corporate purpose and values
Podcast interview with Nikos Mourkogiannism, chairman of the board of Panthea Ltd.
(This is free to all)
Public purpose – Corporate history’s lesson for companies now
While there is much about the history of corporate legislation that remains murky, companies should revive the requirement for a stated public purpose, says Peter Kinder (Subscriber-only article but you can take a free trial by clicking on the link)
The purpose of the corporation
Mark Goyder delves once more into what companies are for
(Subscriber-only article but you can take a free trial by clicking on the link)
Body shop story and supply chain communications
This article, evidently written in something of a hurry by Guardian journalists, shows how the media ought not to report complex issues.
The article says that: "The Body Shop is breaking commercial links with a major palm oil supplier in the wake of disclosures by the Observer that the company had pushed for the eviction of hundreds of peasants in Colombia to develop a new plantation."
The Guardian has reporters on the ground in Colombia, yet fails to tease out any of the complexities of this difficult situation the Body Shop has found itself in, via a supplier.
The paper also fails to note whether the Body Shop did not respond to inquiries, or whether the journalists simply failed to ask them for comment.
It's odd that papers like the Guardian, which are still strong in print yet increasingly wayward on the web, sometimes forget the rules of reporting on difficult and complicated issues.
It shows how hard it is to maintain a good reputation in the modern media environment.
No doubt the real back story to the Body Shop in Colombia is worthy of in-depth reporting, but the follow up piece linked above really fails to do that.
A shame, and a good reason for companies to have clear communications prepared on these kinds of supply chain issues for when the media calls.
The media has never been good at reporting fairly on supply chain issues.
For companies, the need to communicate pro-actively, clearly and quickly, is only going to grow.
If you don't have a supply chain communications plan, now's the time to be putting one together.
Here's a link to some slides I put together on the topic, for some retailer training sessions I ran over the summer for 50 member companies of the BSCI with Brendan May, founder of the Robertsbridge Group. (ignore the wrong date on the first slide!). If you are interested in discussing these further, email me at tobiaswebb@gmail.com
(Some of the leading companies are getting together in a few weeks to talk about how to engage suppliers in ethical issues. More about the meeting is here.)
The article says that: "The Body Shop is breaking commercial links with a major palm oil supplier in the wake of disclosures by the Observer that the company had pushed for the eviction of hundreds of peasants in Colombia to develop a new plantation."
The Guardian has reporters on the ground in Colombia, yet fails to tease out any of the complexities of this difficult situation the Body Shop has found itself in, via a supplier.
The paper also fails to note whether the Body Shop did not respond to inquiries, or whether the journalists simply failed to ask them for comment.
It's odd that papers like the Guardian, which are still strong in print yet increasingly wayward on the web, sometimes forget the rules of reporting on difficult and complicated issues.
It shows how hard it is to maintain a good reputation in the modern media environment.
No doubt the real back story to the Body Shop in Colombia is worthy of in-depth reporting, but the follow up piece linked above really fails to do that.
A shame, and a good reason for companies to have clear communications prepared on these kinds of supply chain issues for when the media calls.
The media has never been good at reporting fairly on supply chain issues.
For companies, the need to communicate pro-actively, clearly and quickly, is only going to grow.
If you don't have a supply chain communications plan, now's the time to be putting one together.
Here's a link to some slides I put together on the topic, for some retailer training sessions I ran over the summer for 50 member companies of the BSCI with Brendan May, founder of the Robertsbridge Group. (ignore the wrong date on the first slide!). If you are interested in discussing these further, email me at tobiaswebb@gmail.com
(Some of the leading companies are getting together in a few weeks to talk about how to engage suppliers in ethical issues. More about the meeting is here.)
Body shop story and supply chain communications
This article, evidently written in something of a hurry by Guardian journalists, shows how the media ought not to report complex issues.
The article says that: "The Body Shop is breaking commercial links with a major palm oil supplier in the wake of disclosures by the Observer that the company had pushed for the eviction of hundreds of peasants in Colombia to develop a new plantation."
The Guardian has reporters on the ground in Colombia, yet fails to tease out any of the complexities of this difficult situation the Body Shop has found itself in, via a supplier.
The paper also fails to note whether the Body Shop did not respond to inquiries, or whether the journalists simply failed to ask them for comment.
It's odd that papers like the Guardian, which are still strong in print yet increasingly wayward on the web, sometimes forget the rules of reporting on difficult and complicated issues.
It shows how hard it is to maintain a good reputation in the modern media environment.
No doubt the real back story to the Body Shop in Colombia is worthy of in-depth reporting, but the follow up piece linked above really fails to do that.
A shame, and a good reason for companies to have clear communications prepared on these kinds of supply chain issues for when the media calls.
The media has never been good at reporting fairly on supply chain issues, but for companies, the need to communicate pro-actively is only going to grow.
If you don't have a supply chain communications plan, now's the time to be putting one together.
Here's a link to some slides I put together on the topic, for some retailer training sessions I ran over the summer for 50 member companies of the BSCI with Brendan May, founder of the Robertsbridge Group. (ignore the wrong date on the first slide!). If you are interested in discussing
(Some of the leading companies are getting together in a few weeks to talk about how to engage suppliers in ethical issues. More about the meeting is here.)
The article says that: "The Body Shop is breaking commercial links with a major palm oil supplier in the wake of disclosures by the Observer that the company had pushed for the eviction of hundreds of peasants in Colombia to develop a new plantation."
The Guardian has reporters on the ground in Colombia, yet fails to tease out any of the complexities of this difficult situation the Body Shop has found itself in, via a supplier.
The paper also fails to note whether the Body Shop did not respond to inquiries, or whether the journalists simply failed to ask them for comment.
It's odd that papers like the Guardian, which are still strong in print yet increasingly wayward on the web, sometimes forget the rules of reporting on difficult and complicated issues.
It shows how hard it is to maintain a good reputation in the modern media environment.
No doubt the real back story to the Body Shop in Colombia is worthy of in-depth reporting, but the follow up piece linked above really fails to do that.
A shame, and a good reason for companies to have clear communications prepared on these kinds of supply chain issues for when the media calls.
The media has never been good at reporting fairly on supply chain issues, but for companies, the need to communicate pro-actively is only going to grow.
If you don't have a supply chain communications plan, now's the time to be putting one together.
Here's a link to some slides I put together on the topic, for some retailer training sessions I ran over the summer for 50 member companies of the BSCI with Brendan May, founder of the Robertsbridge Group. (ignore the wrong date on the first slide!). If you are interested in discussing
(Some of the leading companies are getting together in a few weeks to talk about how to engage suppliers in ethical issues. More about the meeting is here.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Sign up to my feed here
Posts
All Comments
