once again seems to disagree with Alberto Andreu and myself, but I think it is in substance but in form ( Is sustainability, stupid, Manager Journal, March 21). countered Like when my article on Porter and Kramer ( If it is not broke do not fix it: Porter and Kramer CSR, January 26, 2011 www.cumpetere.blogspot.com ) insists you have to change the name of CSR because according to him has failed: " programs" Social Action and Philanthropy " have won the battle at the RSC. " Now again recommends that you change the name to Sustainability.
Can changing the name of something, change its nature?
It is possible that a name influence the perceptions you have. In fact for people who do not look beyond the headline or the name, this happens frequently. But do not think this is the case for CSR.
If the problem is that companies are not responsible and dedicated to the manipulation of perceptions do not think calling them "Sustainability" is fix the broken. Both have the same problem of perception. Perhaps "sustainability" is worse, because it is descriptive.
is true that CSR is a marvel of description, but it has made great progress in their understanding. some time ago said that he would emerge many names responsible practices ( Anyone want to put a new name to CSR?, September 17, 2009), but this is not by necessity, because people get tired of name and seems to be innovative if it gets a different name.
I have no doubt that eventually the name of sustainability will be the favorite before the preemption by another name. This was expressed in an article in my blog for almost three years ( Who Killed CSR? , April 8, 2008).
Alberto two years ago to call CSR 2.0 advocated in an article (in a special issue of the journal Telos, No. 79, Corporate Social Responsibility at the crossroads published by Telefónica, April-June 2009), when his position was Director of Reputation, Corporate Identity and Environment in Telefónica (now his position is Director of Corporate Reputation and Sustainability, much better, really!). At that time I was in disagreement, considering CSR as something that evolving, adapting to circumstances, which has no discrete changes as the software, but is continually changing.
But the point of discussion is if you simply change your name or we have to do something different. The "solution" proposed is: " definitely CSR as a concept has been spent. You have to make it larger. And to be bigger you have to think from now on Sustainability. Is sustainability, stupid! "
In what we agree is that the problem is not semantic, and if the problem is not semantic, then the solution is not a name change.
The problem is the attitude of employers, who do not see or can not see that a strategy of CSR or sustainability can improve their competitiveness, if not now, later . can fool many people for some time, but not everyone all the time. Early afternoon to be exposed. Unfortunately reputation is maintained over a base of relationships based public responsible practices. The solution is because these executives feel the right incentives, either through regulation (please careful), through market pressures (please SI), through responsible practices bonuses (please SI , etc.). Will we change his attitude if we call it sustainable?
The problem is that consumers are not aware of what companies or products are responsible, although they wanted to. Did you hear if we call it sustainable?
From what I know is learn philanthropy and social action because they are part of the information strategy of the companies in their "management" of reputation. It's easier than having to resort to responsible practices. The problem is business and ignorance or confusion for consumers.
and civil society and the media do not help much. The problem is that the media is on tenterhooks, do not cooperate or can not ignorance (as well says José Alias \u200b\u200bManager in the Journal of March 21, Stupidity sustainability). According to a survey only 15% of journalists interviewed believe that the working environment for CSR news is good or properly and 74% related to altruism CSR (Servimedia and Study Communication, July 2009 servimedia.es / PeriodismoSocialMedios.pdf ) . we change his attitude if we call it sustainable?
We could go on listing the problems and their solutions.
Ah, but someday ... ... ... ... ....!
Confused SI and much, stupid NO.
0 comments:
Post a Comment