Can you answer a question like this?
Some think so. In the book: "The English multinational and 'business responsibility' in Latin America", published by Peace with Dignity and the Observatory Multinational in Latin America, OMA, in 2009, says, on page 184 "... on average have only English transnational social responsibility for 1.2% of its profits" And this is expressed in the context of alleged this investment is made to mask the deteriorating quality of employment and violations of fundamental rights. When I first read gave no importance, I assumed that everyone who read it would realize that there was a contradiction in the statement can not be quantified or investment or spending on CSR, properly understood. This quote was widely reproduced by the media, including recently, but with the added difficulty of changing the word "intended" to "invest". It's a quote sexy. But I think it is time to clarify the confusion. Unfortunately
have the bad habit of repeating without analyzing what lies behind the "news." There is nothing more attractive to repeat positions a company in a ranking, to say that this or that won this award, this or that was expelled from the index. There is nothing more attractive than a good gossip, I said in the article "In that resemble the CSR Rankings and gossip about infidelity? (May 2009 www.cumpetere.blogspot.com).
If you look a little information accompanying statement will realize that what companies report is the "spending on social action, or what companies have invested or spent on activities of philanthropy and community support. It's what companies can bring in money. Is this CSR? Is it just part of CSR? Can companies account for their investments in CSR?
do not mean to defend corporations that are part of that statistic, but there is no way to know their investments in CSR do not know how big or little, do not know the authors and I believe that neither neither do companies themselves. How much would a reasonable figure "investment CSR? I have no idea. I know what they are responsible and irresponsible practice, and that companies should have many of the first and few or none of the latter.
I apologize to those who already know, because I just have to repeat what you hear in any meeting dealing with CSR, the more fundamental concept: CSR is a way of managing, the responsibility must permeate all the actions of the company, part of everyday activities, not just some special activities. Some activities have measurable costs and benefits that can be posted and therefore reporting in dollars, euros or the currency that is. Some have measurable costs, such as action social impacts or benefits but the company is not measurable. But the vast majority of responsible actions have costs and benefits are not measurable, or at least not with current accounting systems.
When through training or a better work environment increases the value of human capital, accounting not collect it. Human capital is the Balance Sheet. Maybe they counted the cost of training, but the benefits are not counted. Maybe it increases productivity and someday the profit and loss is whole, but there will be no attribution of benefit expenditure. Companies "accounted for the costs of the days of volunteering as an investment CSR? Maybe some do, but most are business expenses, not investment. Is it a countable cost to have independent directors? And have a code of ethics? Perhaps the functioning of the Ethics Committee itself is countable, but not the effect that its operation is the responsibility of the company.
Separate accounting "between the protection of the environment is being done to comply with the law and that is going further? What about the payment of "business facilitation" companies are making investments or expenses attributable to the anti-CSR?
Some will say that a good company should measure responsible practices. Totally agree, measure and report the results of their responsible practices. From there to be able to say how much it cost or how much was spent is a long way. We expect companies to report their carbon emissions, the environmental impact of waste, recycling of paper or ethnic and gender diversity. But do not confuse CSR indicators of investment and expenditure accounts in CSR.
This is not to say that there is to be measured. On the contrary, we must make every possible effort. If you measure is easier to promote and manage, but "Not everything that can be measured account, and not everything that counts can be measured" is the title the next article. But to pretend that everything is measurable or measurable only must do is myopic.
Can you answer the question: How much companies invest in CSR? There is an inherent contradiction in the question. Or not talking about investment (but some costs) or are not talking about CSR
0 comments:
Post a Comment