The responsibility of business is like an iceberg. Not because it is cold, but it is only a small part. Only "see" what they themselves report, which is usually only good.
This comes up as the recent case sounded like BP. Many people wonder cone is possible for a company like that were described as responsible and even was on the various indices of sustainability. And he had won many awards. And after the accident in the Gulf of Mexico is discovered that it was not so
Most practices were submerged, as in the iceberg (or as a platform for BP).
was not so responsible before or is so irresponsible now. As stated by many football teams after a tough loss, not before we were so good, and now we're so bad.
If the accident had not occurred, would still rates BP in sustainability? Probably. What this demonstrates that the rates, the analysts and the general public know little about the real activities of firms, only what they choose to reveal or special investigations failed to reveal. Still rely mostly on companies in terms of information.
We have written several articles, that the total liability does not exist, the CSR is partial. BP event confirms this.
All companies have some responsible and irresponsible practices. Some more, some less. The question is where is located the net balance. Not many practices make the company responsible is qualified as responsible or irresponsible practice makes a company is irresponsible. And if some practice is irresponsible, what do we do? Do we draw from all lists of all the indexes? There would be no. Which is free of sin cast the first stone.
BP do not mean to excuse, on the contrary, as case has been confirmed that your balance is negative, not only because of the impact of this accident, but by the sequence of accidents in other countries attributable to negligence, among other irresponsible.
But if we discard all have committed some sin we do not have anyone. We must find redemption, working with those eager to improve, increasing the number and intensity of responsible practices in those vocations. But not to evict them is a problem. On the contrary, are those that need more help.
But neither say that they are responsible, as some insist awards. What's right is said to have responsible practices and companies to disclose what they are. So we work with companies to improve and not mislead or deceive naive ideas.
And as we said in the previous article, the prizes, awards and certificates are for specific practices, not general.
If we adopt these criteria do not demonize companies for some irresponsible practice responsible and appreciate the best would be more honest in the information they give us, not like now that we only show the tip of the iceberg and still is, in many cases, is pretty makeup.
With corporate responsibility can not generalize. As the writer and humorist Mark Twain: "All generalizations are false, ... ... ... .. including this one. "
0 comments:
Post a Comment