Strategic CSR - Ikea

The article in the url below reports on Ikea’s recent announcement that it intends its operations to be “forest positive” by 2020. This means that:

 

“… despite its continuing high demand for timber, it intends its business to have an overall positive effect on the world's forests. Integral to this approach is the commitment that it will be growing at least as many trees as it uses to make products by 2020.”

 

This commitment is part of a broader strategy, titled People and Planet Positive, that the firm announced in 2012:

 

“Not content with becoming one of our most ubiquitous brands, the company has announced its intention to become one of the world's most sustainable businesses as well. [In 2012] the company announced an ambitious new strategy … ; effectively a global sustainability roadmap, it sets out how the company will conduct its future business using a wide range of targets concerning renewable energy, recycling, waste management and ‘green’ product sourcing.”

 

This is important for no other reason than Ikea is now a very large, global company:

 

“Launched in 1943, the Swedish business has grown to become the world's biggest furniture company. In the last financial year, 655 million people flocked to its stores, of which it currently owns 298 in 26 countries.”

 

As the article’s headline indicates, however, there are a number of challenges that lay ahead and suggest that Ikea’s claim is aspirational as much as it is realistic. These challenges revolve around two key issues. The first issue is how the firm intends to become forest positive. The scale of this challenge is indicated by the amount of wood Ikea uses in a given year and the gap between this amount and the amount of certified wood currently available for any firm to use:

 

“Ikea is deeply indebted to wood. This year it used 13.56 million cubic metres of solid wood and wood-based board materials, not including paper and packaging, meaning Ikea alone uses almost 1% of all wood used commercially around the world. … However the company actually failed to meet is 2012 targets of 35% of all solid wood to be sourced from "preferred sources". Ikea says this was because of a significant shortage of [Forest Stewardship Council, FSC]-certified wood on the global markets.”

 

The second issue relates to the rest of the People and Planet Positive slogan. Although wood is a huge part of their business, even if they are able to meet their ambitious goals in this respect, there are many other aspects to becoming a socially responsible (positive impact) company than sourcing key raw materials sustainably. And, given the criticism the firm is facing for its operations in the Karelia forest in Russia by the activist group Protect the Forest, it is not clear that the little it is doing today reflects industry best-practices:

 

“Ikea has received public endorsements by groups such as WWF for its scaling up of its commitments to sustainable forestry practices. However, it has also been receiving less welcome attention from other environmental groups who are claiming that Ikea is willfully deceiving its customers and hiding behind a "flawed" certification system. … The company's claims that it is operating a responsible forestry management programme in Karelia are denied by Protect the Forest, who have launched a campaign to stop Ikea's operations in this part of north-western Russia.”

 

Given the controversy Ikea generated last Fall with its Saudi Arabia catalog, it needs to be careful that it isn’t accused of greenwashing instead of being heralded for the ambitious and progressive goals to which it is now committed.

 

Take care

David

 

Bill Werther & David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Stakeholders in a Global Environment (2e)

© Sage Publications, 2011

http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr2e/

 

Instructor Teaching Site: http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: http://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

 

 

Ikea to go ‘forest positive’ – but serious challenges lie ahead

By Annie Kelly

December 14, 2012

The Guardian

Late Edition – Final

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sustainable-business/ikea-sustainability-forest-positive-karelia

 

Strategic CSR - Barclays

I am unsure how seriously to take the article in the url below. It covers a recent announcement by Barclays Bank, which is trying to repair its reputation in the aftermath of the LIBOR interest rate fixing scandal last year:

 

“Barclays PLC's Chief Executive Antony Jenkins Thursday told staff they should uphold the company's new values or leave. … In a memorandum to employees, Mr. Jenkins said bonuses will now be based in part on how employees and business units uphold five values, rather than ‘just on what we deliver.’ ‘We must never again be in a position of rewarding people for making the bank money in a way which is unethical or inconsistent with our values,’ Mr. Jenkins said. … ‘There might be some who don't feel they can fully buy in to an approach which so squarely links performance to the upholding of our values,’ Mr. Jenkins said. ‘My message to those people is simple: Barclays is not the place for you. The rules have changed. You won't feel comfortable at Barclays and, to be frank, we won't feel comfortable with you as colleagues.’”

 

Of course, the extent to which the company is serious about this will only be revealed over time. But, as an indication of genuine intent, it would be interesting to know how the bank intends to measure adherence to these values and how that will translate into each individual’s specific salary and/or bonus amount:

 

“The values are: respect, integrity, service, excellence and stewardship.”

 

Have a good weekend

David

 

Bill Werther & David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Stakeholders in a Global Environment (2e)

© Sage Publications, 2011

http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr2e/

 

Instructor Teaching Site: http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: http://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

 

 

Barclays Tells Staff to Uphold New Values of Leave

By Margot Patrick

January 17, 2013

The Wall Street Journal

Late Edition – Final

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323468604578247461697635932.html

 

Strategic CSR - GMOs

The article in the url below details an ironic situation. In last November’s election in the U.S., there was a ballot initiative in California (Proposition 37) that was designed to force food companies to disclose any GMO ingredients in a product on the product’s label. Food companies are not currently required to do this anywhere in the U.S.—unfortunately, the issue is a low priority for many consumers, and that was not promising to change any time soon in a country where it is estimated that “75 percent of grocery products contain a genetically modified ingredient.”

 

In an effort to defeat Prop 37, corporations spent “more than $40 million” on lobbying and advertising during the election campaign and, as a result, the proposition failed to win a majority of votes. Another victory for the corporate lobby, right? Except that it did not work out that way:

 

“Instead of quelling the demand for labeling, the defeat of the California measure has spawned a ballot initiative in Washington State and legislative proposals in Connecticut, Vermont, New Mexico and Missouri, and a swelling consumer boycott of some organic or ‘natural’ brands owned by major food companies. … [today, there are] roughly 20 states considering labeling requirements.”

 

Ultimately, the actions taken by the food companies converted a local issue that no one was paying attention to into a national issue that is being hotly-debated:

 

“‘They spent a lot of money, got a lot of bad press that propelled the issue into the national debate and alienated some of their customer base, as well as raising issues with some trading partners,’ said Mr. Benbrook, who does work on sustainable agriculture.”

 

Now, forced to backtrack, the companies have joined the discussion with a wide-range of stakeholders to work out a more effective solution:

 

“Executives from PepsiCo, ConAgra and about 20 other major food companies, as well as Wal-Mart and advocacy groups that favor labeling, attended a meeting in January in Washington convened by the Meridian Institute, which organizes discussions of major issues.”

 

A strategic CSR perspective would have got them to this place a lot sooner and saved them $40 million in the process.

 

Take care

David

 

Bill Werther & David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Stakeholders in a Global Environment (2e)

© Sage Publications, 2011

http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr2e/

 

Instructor Teaching Site: http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: http://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

 

 

Companies Weigh Federal Labels for Gene-Engineered Ingredients

By Stephanie Strom

February 1, 2013

The New York Times

Late Edition – Final

B1

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/01/business/food-companies-meet-to-weigh-federal-label-for-gene-engineered-ingredients.html

 

Strategic CSR - Citizenship

In relation to the Presidential election last November here in the U.S., I found the article in the url below to be instructive. It reflects on the responsibility to vote from an ethical perspective and makes the argument that, while an individual vote may not matter, the act of voting is an essential part of what it means to be a citizen:

 

“Voting is more than simply my way of making my preference known. When I vote, I am expressing not only a preference; by my vote I am making a decision intended to be binding on my fellow citizens. This is at the core of democracy. Our choices matter not because we might get a certain outcome, but because it is where we express our sense of where we believe the nation ought to be headed. Seen this way, the act of voting is a profoundly moral one. Simply expressing a preference is the act of a consumer. Paying taxes could be the act of a subject in any nation. But voting — that is the act of a citizen.”

 

I want to extend this metaphor to the CSR context and the relationship between the consumer and for-profit firm. I have made the analogy before, but while we get the politicians we deserve (because we vote for them), we also get the companies we deserve (because we buy from them). In relation to the specific act of voting/buying, however, just as we have the option to reject all the negative political campaigning that we say annoys us (but really works in terms of changing votes), we also have the option to educate ourselves about the actions of specific companies and support those that generate the most socially optimal outcomes. More than simply a choice that we make, engaging in the process in this way and actively supporting specific types of companies signals a profound engagement with the rest of society. In contrast, blindly shopping without the accompanying thought process elevates the needs of the individual over those of the group.

 

Just as the author in this article argues that voting is “the act of a citizen,” I want to argue that using a framework of values and ethics to make our purchase decisions is also “the act of a citizen.” And, given that we shop much more often than we vote, it might be the more important civic duty.

 

Take care

David

 

Bill Werther & David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Stakeholders in a Global Environment (2e)

© Sage Publications, 2011

http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr2e/

 

Instructor Teaching Site: http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: http://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

 

 

The Grand Canyon & The Ethics of Citizenship

By Brad Rourke

September 10, 2012

Ethics Newsline

http://www.globalethics.org/newsline/2012/09/10/ethics-of-citizenship/

 

Strategic CSR - Tesco

I am not in charge of the largest supermarket company in the UK, but if I was, I don’t think I would treat my employees like Tesco does:

“There’s a fine line between micromanaging and house arrest, and British grocery store chain Tesco seems determined to cross it. According to the Irish Independent, employees at the company’s Dublin distribution center are forced to wear armbands that measure their productivity so closely that the company even knows when they take a bathroom break.”

I understand the attractions of monitoring and measuring employee performance in order to maximize productivity, but I find it hard to believe that at least one Tesco executive didn’t stop to consider whether constant vigilance would do more to demotivate employees (reducing productivity) in ways that offset any incremental performance benefits gained by collecting these data:

“The armbands … keep track of how quickly and competently employees unload and scan goods in the warehouse and gives them a grade. It also sets benchmarks for loading and unloading speed, which workers are expected to meet. The monitors can be turned off during workers’ lunch breaks, but anything else—bathroom trips, visits to a water fountain—reportedly lowers their productivity score.”

I am not sure what is worse—that Tesco is experimenting with this technology or that it might even work:

“In recent years, Tesco has ramped up its productivity. From 2007 to 2012, the average number of full-time employees in a standard 40,000-square-foot Tesco superstore reportedly fell nearly 18 percent.”

Of course, as the article notes, speed and efficiency is not necessarily the same as quality:

“Tesco is one of the major retailers currently embroiled in Europe’s ever-widening horse meat scandal. When it turns out that the box frozen spaghetti Bolognese contains 60 percent horse meat, it doesn’t really matter how quickly it was unloaded from the delivery truck.”

I am sure that Frederick Taylor would be flattered at the extent to which his ideas have been pursued. As the great man himself said:

“Hardly a competent workman can be found who does not devote a considerable amount of time to studying just how slowly he can work and still convince his employer that he is going at a good pace.”

Have a great weekend

David

Bill Werther & David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Stakeholders in a Global Environment (2e)

© Sage Publications, 2011

http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr2e/

Instructor Teaching Site: http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: http://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

Tesco Monitors Employees With Motorola Armbands

By Claire Suddath

February 13, 2013

Bloomberg Businessweek

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-02-13/tesco-monitors-employees-with-motorola-arm-bands

Strategic CSR - Amazon II

In contrast to Monday’s positive Newsletter about Jeff Bezos, I have also seen Amazon lambasted for essentially being absent in the CSR/sustainability debate (e.g., http://www.guardian.co.uk/sustainable-business/amazon):

“When Greenpeace examined data centres run by big technology companies in a report called How Clean Is Your Cloud?, Amazon was given an F in three of four categories, ranking behind Yahoo!, Dell, Google and Facebook. On electronics recycling, Amazon is also a laggard. Best Buy takes back electronic waste, at no charge; Amazon does not take-back of its own.”

Another example:

“Amazon’s shipping operation consumes large amounts of energy and the company has been criticized in the past for a lack of transparency on environmental issues. The Carbon Disclosure Project released a report [in September 2011] naming Amazon as the largest company in the Global 500, by market capitalization, not to disclose its carbon performance.”

With this in mind, I am unsure how to process the article in the url below:

“Amazon launched Vine.com, a shopping site that sells only green products, including organic food, apparel, accessories and cleaning supplies made by  companies such as Seventh Generation, Method, Brita and Burt’s Bees.”

Is it greenwashing, merely an attempt to capture a growing market segment, or a genuine commitment to further the sustainability debate? There is some indication that the move is serious:

“Vine reviews claims of vendors to verify products are either organic, natural, energy- or water-efficient, run on their own renewable energy, made from sustainable materials or contribute to a healthier home, according to the company. Vine also reviews ingredient lists to make sure they don’t contain banned substances.”

As with most massive organizations, of course, the reality is no doubt a mix of good and bad. Another indication the launch might be serious, however, is that Vine.com (http://www.vine.com/) was acquired by Amazon in 2010. Although another example of a CSR-oriented, small independent firm being bought by a large multi-national, the acquisition suggests that the people running Vine.com are likely to be sincere. As such, in contrast to an organic Amazon initiative, there is the potential for Vine.com to extend its founding values across Amazon’s broad range of operations:

“Amazon plans to triple the number of items shipped under its ‘Frustration-Free Packaging’ initiative this year, a program which pushes suppliers to cut out excessive and hard-to-open packaging. Amazon has said it hopes the program, which grew to 80,000 products last year, will not only alleviate ‘wrap rage,’ but reduce waste and lower shipping costs.”

Take care

David

Bill Werther & David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Stakeholders in a Global Environment (2e)

© Sage Publications, 2011

http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr2e/

Instructor Teaching Site: http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: http://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

Amazon Launches Shopping Site for Green Products

September 27, 2012

Environmental Leader

http://www.environmentalleader.com/2012/09/27/amazon-launches-shopping-site-for-green-products/

Strategic CSR - Amazon

The article in the url below is an interview with Jeff Bezos of Amazon to complement his ‘appointment’ by Harvard Business Review as “the greatest living CEO.” The quotes below focus on his views on the importance of long-term thinking in his position:

“If you’re long-term oriented, customer interests and shareholder interests are aligned. … We take it as an article of faith that if we put customers first, other stakeholders will also benefit, as long as they’re willing to take the long-term view. And a long-term approach is essential for invention, because you’re going to have a lot of failures along the way.”

“… if we had always needed to see significant financial results in two or three years, then some of the most meaningful things we’ve done would never have been started—like Kindle, Amazon Web Services, Amazon Prime.”

“I do not follow the stock on a daily basis, because I don’t think there’s any information in it. The economist Benjamin Graham once said, ‘In the short term, the stock market is a voting machine. In the long term, it’s a weighing machine.’ We try to build a company that wants to be weighed, not voted on.”

Two thoughts—First, I love the Benjamin Graham quote; second, I thought the qualifier in the first quote, “as long as they’re willing to take the long-term view,” is revealing. It reinforces the view that corporate stakeholder responsibility is as important as corporate social responsibility (see Strategic CSR – Corporate Stakeholder Responsibility).

Take care

David

Bill Werther & David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Stakeholders in a Global Environment (2e)

© Sage Publications, 2011

http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr2e/

Instructor Teaching Site: http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: http://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

The Best-Performing CEOs in the World

By Morten T. Hansen, Herminia Ibarra & Urs Peyer

January – February, 2013

Harvard Business Review

pp.84-85 (article is pp.81-95)

http://hbr.org/2013/01/the-best-performing-ceos-in-the-world/

Strategic CSR - Foxconn

The article in the url below is interesting because it challenges a Western-centric view of CSR in developing economies:

“Hon Hai in March said it would change its workplace practices after an audit by a U.S.-based nonprofit worker-safety group found widespread breaches of Chinese law and Apple policies at three plants, including the excessive use of overtime. Hon Hai responded by pledging that it would bring its overtime policies into alignment with Chinese law by next year, allowing workers to work no more than nine hours of overtime a week. The Taiwan-based company, also known as Foxconn, pledged to improve health and safety conditions at its campuses across China as well.”

In particular, the article raises the question of why we seek to impose our values on foreign cultures, especially when it is not clear that the imposition is welcome:

“But more than 15 workers on the Shenzhen campus said in interviews that they work more than the legal limit of nine overtime hours a week. A majority said they work 10 to 15 overtime hours and would prefer more, having left their distant homes to make money in this southern Chinese boomtown on the border of Hong Kong.”

More than not liking the reduced hours, however, these workers are positively angry at the thought:

“‘I think a lot of the more experienced people from the technology production lines will leave’ if the policy to limit overtime goes into effect, said a worker who asked to be identified only by his surname, Ma.”

This all puts Foxconn in a bind—caught between the rock of public opinion in the West (and the pressure it brings from  firms like Apple) and the hard place of pleasing its ambitious employees:

“‘We look at [overtime] very seriously, we look at how we can be in compliance, but at the same time [we are] working with our employees to strike a balance,’ said Hon Hai spokesman Louis Woo. He said the company has ‘heard the grumbles’ from employees about decreased overtime.”

Not only are the impositions increasing unrest among workers, but they have resulted in gradually rising wages across the board. As such, they are cutting into Foxconn’s already tight profit margin:

“The company's labor costs will rise by roughly $1.4 billion when the new labor policies roll out next year, according to a Bernstein Research estimate. Hon Hai's operating profit margin had declined since the second quarter of 2010 because of rising wages.”

And so we close the loop on the consequences of the imposition of our values overseas. If we are going to insist that firms like Foxconn treat their employees as they are treated in the West, then costs will rise and so will the prices of our beloved consumer electronics. Values are not cheap and we will see if Western consumers are willing to put their money where their mouths most often are.

Take care

David

Bill Werther & David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Stakeholders in a Global Environment (2e)

© Sage Publications, 2011

http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr2e/

Instructor Teaching Site: http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: http://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

Foxconn Workers: Keep Our Overtime

By Paul Mozur

December 18, 2012

The Wall Street Journal

Late Edition – Final

B1

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324296604578175040576532024.html

Strategic CSR - Dodd-Frank

When whole industries overstep the bounds of socially-determined acceptable behavior, the government steps into legislate. This intervention produced Sarbanes-Oxley in 2002, in response to the corporate scandals that occurred in the early years of this century (in particular, the collapse of Enron); as a result of the more recent Financial Crisis, it generated the Dodd-Frank Act in 2010:

“Wall Street has found a common enemy: the Dodd-Frank Act. After the industry’s aggressive risk-taking nearly toppled the financial system and the broader economy, Congress ushered in Dodd-Frank, the most significant regulatory overhaul since the Great Depression.”

This process is the basis of the Rational Argument for CSR (Chapter 1, p16). From this perspective, firms have an incentive to adopt a CSR perspective proactively because the alternative (i.e., government intervention) is usually not an efficient solution to whatever problem is being tackled:

“CSR is a rational argument for businesses seeking to maximize their performance by minimizing restrictions on operations. In today’s globalizing world, where individuals and activist organizations feel empowered to enact change, CSR represents a means of anticipating and reflecting societal concerns to minimize operational and financial constraints on business.”

Although they have no-one to blame but themselves, rather than self-reflection and altered behavior, the general response from many firms within the finance industry is resistance:

“Since the law was passed in 2010, banks and other financial institutions have sought to tone down the most onerous aspects of the law, fearful of the threat to their businesses and their bottom line.”

The potential for amendments is presented by the extensive nature of the law—it is large and, at the time of passing, undefined:

“The law takes up some 2,300 pages and touches nearly every corner of the banking industry. … As regulators have devised the myriad rules, Wall Street has embarked on an all-out lobbying blitz. The industry has doled out hundreds of millions of dollars, held regular meetings with regulators and bombarded federal agencies with public letters.”

As a result, and due to the excessive influence of money in modern politics, the industry’s efforts are beginning to bear fruit:

“The industry’s efforts have proved effective. Despite facing tight deadlines, regulators have completed only a third of the regulations mandated under Dodd-Frank. Another third of the rules are in the proposal phase, and the rest are in limbo.”

There are some good graphics that accompany the article and make aspects of the law a little more accessible:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/12/11/business/Deconstructing-Dodd-Frank.html

Take care

David

Bill Werther & David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Stakeholders in a Global Environment (2e)

© Sage Publications, 2011

http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr2e/

Instructor Teaching Site: http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: http://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

Deconstructing Dodd-Frank

By Ben Protess

December 12, 2012

The New York Times

Late Edition – Final

F12

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/12/11/deconstructing-dodd-frank/

Strategic CSR - Waste

The National Public Radio story in the url below demonstrates how a regional airport (Charlotte Douglas International in North Carolina) is dealing with a persistent problem—the “half a pound of garbage” that the average traveler leaves after every visit:

“But instead of just sending all that trash to the landfill, Charlotte has taken a different approach. It's the first airport to put worms to work dealing with trash.”

In short, the airport is trying to process internally all the twenty-five tons of daily waste generated by operations, rather than paying others to take it away for them:

“A dozen employees pluck out recyclables and sort through aluminum, plastic and more, so passengers don't have to do the sorting in the terminal. … Recyclables are crushed, baled and sold for cash. There are shirts sorted and laundered and donated, and plastic cups collected. (The shirts come from people who toss clothing when they suddenly discover their suitcases are too heavy.) The organic stuff — waste from airport restaurants, food scraps off planes, and the half-eaten Cinnabon that a traveler has tossed out — mixes in a big tank for a few days to start the composting process. Then it's time for the stars of this show to take over.”

The “stars” are 1.9 million worms that “eat half their weight a day” and process the organic material into compost that is then used to fertilize the flower beds on the airport’s grounds. Overall, the results are impressive:

“In the four months since this operation got under way, trash going from the Charlotte airport to the landfill is down an impressive 70 percent.”

The worms are central players:

“Worm poop. Go ahead and giggle. Charlotte officials sure did as they debated the $1.2 million it cost to launch the program. But they're not laughing now: The airport expects to be making money off its trash in five years.”

Have a good weekend

David

Bill Werther & David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Stakeholders in a Global Environment (2e)

© Sage Publications, 2011

http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr2e/

Instructor Teaching Site: http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: http://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

One Airport's Trash Is 2 Million Worms' Treasure

By Julie Rose

December 18, 2012

National Public Radio

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/12/18/167529920/one-airports-trash-is-2-million-worms-treasure

Strategic CSR - Walgreens

The article in the url below is intended to focus on a new regulation being drafted by the Department of Labor that is designed to increase the number of disabled employees firms employ:

“… only about 20% of Americans with a physical or cognitive disability participate in the traditional workforce, and of that group 14% are unemployed--roughly twice the nondisabled rate. A regulation being pushed by the Department of Labor would try to improve those numbers by requiring any company with a federal contract worth $10,000 or more to give 7% of its jobs to people with disabilities. If passed, roughly 200,000 companies would be affected.”

In contrast to the debate surrounding this proposed regulation (and there are substantive reasons to believe the change will not produce the desired outcomes), what stayed with me after reading the article was the amazing metrics generated by disabled employees:

“As companies such as AMC Theatres, Home Depot, and Microsoft can attest, disabled workers can be a great asset. … New research from Walgreens suggests that this group makes for a particularly stable workforce. A study of its distribution centers by the American Society of Safety Engineers found that workers with disabilities had a turnover rate 48% lower than that of the nondisabled population, with medical costs 67% lower and time-off expenses 73% lower.”

Disabled employees are dependable and, in certain positions, much more efficient than non-disabled employees. Walgreens, more than many employers, has recognized this value and is willing to invest in these people in order to secure it:

“Doing this right takes time. The Walgreens disability outreach dates back to 2002, when Randy Lewis, then the company's senior vice president of supply chain and logistics, suggested making a new warehouse in Anderson, South Carolina, disability-friendly by switching from text-based to image-based equipment. The program launched in 2007 and was such a success that Walgreens next built the Windsor center, where roughly half of the staff has some manner of physical or cognitive disability. Windsor is the company's safest, most productive warehouse. Across Walgreens's 21 distribution centers, 10% of its employees are disabled; the company would like to increase that slice to 20%.”

Take care

David

Bill Werther & David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Stakeholders in a Global Environment (2e)

© Sage Publications, 2011

http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr2e/

Instructor Teaching Site: http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: http://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

Disability Assurance

By Sara Cann

December 2012/January 2013

Fast Company Magazine

35-38

http://www.fastcompany.com/3002957/disabled-employee-amendment

Strategic CSR - Guns

There isn’t much that can be said about the mass shooting at the Connecticut elementary school in December that hasn’t already been said. I thought the article in the url below, however, is an indication of the ripple effects of both the extreme nature of the tragedy, as well as the public debate it produced. Soon after the shootings, and after an apparent shift in the political debate about limiting gun ownership in the U.S.:

“An official at the California teachers’ pension fund, which has $750 million invested with the private equity firm, Cerberus Capital Management, was on the line, raising questions about the firm’s ownership of the Freedom Group, the gun maker that made the rifle used in the Connecticut school shootings. Hours later, at 1 a.m. on Tuesday, Cerberus said that it was putting the Freedom Group up for sale.”

This is not necessarily a good example of a firm making a decision based on any sense of social responsibility, but it does demonstrate a sensitivity to the concerns of a key stakeholder in a way that is notable, simply because it is uncommon:

“The move by Cerberus is a rare instance of a Wall Street firm bending to concerns about an investment’s societal impact rather than a profit-at-all-costs ethos.”

What makes the decision even more striking is that the financial impact of the decision is not at all clear:

“Yet in a sign of how deep the shooting rampage in Newtown, Conn., has resonated throughout the country, Cerberus signaled that it wanted to remove itself from the uproar over the nation’s gun laws in seeking to sell Freedom, which makes the Bushmaster rifle used in the massacre.”

This may simply be a ‘moment in time’ and, after a suitable period, things return to ‘normal.’ Even as an exception, however, the decision demonstrates the essential nature of corporate stakeholder responsibility—stakeholders holding firms to account for their actions in ways that better reflect the values theys eek to encourage and preserve.

Additional reporting on this story is available at:

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-12-18/newtown-fallout-cerberus-retreats-from-guns

Take care

David

Bill Werther & David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Stakeholders in a Global Environment (2e)

© Sage Publications, 2011

http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr2e/

Instructor Teaching Site: http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: http://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

Dropping Its Guns

By Peter Lattman

December 19, 2012

The New York Times

Late Edition – Final

B1

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/cerberus-to-sell-gunmaker-freedom-group/

Strategic CSR - Justin Bieber

Just when you think we have reached rock-bottom as a society in terms of socially responsible behavior, Justin Bieber is there to remind us that there are depths we have yet to explore:

“Pop star Justin Bieber is promoting a new prepaid debit card. The card, aimed at teens, has a monthly fee of $3.95 and assorted other charges, including ATM fees of 50 cents per balance inquiry and $1.50 per withdrawal. Prepaid debit cards are safer than credit cards, but can carry high fees.”

Have a good weekend

David

Bill Werther & David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Stakeholders in a Global Environment (2e)

© Sage Publications, 2011

http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr2e/

Instructor Teaching Site: http://www.sagepub.com/strategiccsr/

The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: http://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

This Week: The Biebs Gets Carded

January 5-6, 2013

The Wall Street Journal

Late Edition – Final

B8

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323874204578217622397979186.html