The CSR Newsletters are a freely-available resource generated as a dynamic complement to the textbook, Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation.

To sign-up to receive the CSR Newsletters regularly during the fall and spring academic semesters, e-mail author David Chandler at david.chandler@ucdenver.edu.

Thursday, April 28, 2022

Strategic CSR - 6e

I am happy to announce that, over the winter break, I wrote the sixth edition of Strategic CSR (the new cover is below, and the new ToC is at the bottom of this email). The book is due to be published by Sage this summer (the launch date is mid-August). These editions don't get any easier – lots of details to update! :-)

Although the 6e will not be available until August, Sage is now accepting requests for review copies and orders on the book's new website:


As the website, explains:

NEW TO THIS EDITION:
  • Updated examples around COVID-19, BLM, the supply chain crunch, and the great resignation have been added.
  • A significantly revised case study on Media has been re-written to reflect the latest updates in social media, including the Facebook/Meta rebrand.
  • New chapter learning objectives appear at the beginning of each chapter. 

In addition, there was a thorough re-write of all chapters – bringing each up-to-date and continuing to refine my arguments. There are also 22 new Figures/Tables added and 11 Figures/Tables redesigned (with 10 that were deleted). I will also work on the instructor materials again over the summer.

Of course if you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at any time. Thank you, as always, for your support.

Take care
David

David Chandler
© Sage Publications, 2020

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler5e 
Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/
The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/

6e Table of Contents

Part I:  Corporate Social Responsibility

Chapter 1:  What is CSR?
Chapter 2:  The Driving Forces of CSR
Case:  Religion / Islamic Finance

Part II:  A Stakeholder Perspective

Chapter 3:  Stakeholder Theory
Chapter 4:  Corporate Stakeholder Responsibility
Case:  Capitalism / COVID-19

Part III:  A Legal Perspective

Chapter 5:  Corporate Rights and Responsibilities
Chapter 6:  Who Owns the Firm?
Case:  Media / Meta

Part IV:  A Behavioral Perspective

Chapter 7:  Markets and Profit
Chapter 8:  Compliance and Accountability
Case:  Investing / Impact Investing

Part V:  A Strategic Perspective

Chapter 9:  Strategy + CSR
Chapter 10:  Strategic CSR
Case:  Supply Chain / Starbucks

Part VI:  A Sustainable Perspective

Chapter 11:  Sustainability
Chapter 12:  Sustainable Value Creation
Final Thoughts

Appendix:  Implementing CSR
 
Posted by David Chandler at 5:31 PM

Tuesday, April 26, 2022

Strategic CSR - Discrimination

The article in the url below tells a story that has been apparent for a while, but something that seems non-obvious to most businesses:

"While businesses across the U.S. struggle to find enough employees, Bitty & Beau's coffee shops say their attrition rate is near zero and they're inundated with applications every time a location opens. That's because the chain primarily hires workers from a demographic advocates say has an unemployment rate above 80%: people with intellectual and developmental disabilities."

As noted by one of the co-founders of the company:

"'There's an untapped labor force of people with disabilities in every community,' says Amy Wright, who co-founded the company with her husband, Ben, six years ago. 'Most of our employees have never had a job before.'"

And, these employees dominate the business:

"Almost 90% of the 350-plus employees at Bitty & Beau's 11 locations have a disability, doing everything from working as baristas to helping plan strategy in the corporate office."

What is even more uplifting is that there appears to be strong demand for this business model:

"In 2020, Bitty & Beau's shifted to a franchise model. On their own the Wrights could open only about one location each year, and they were fielding requests from people across the U.S. who wanted a shop in their town. The company says it's on track to expand to 27 locations in more than a dozen states in the next year or so, and within a decade the Wrights aim to have at least one shop in all 50 states."

And the business is both competitive and successful:

"The cost of opening a location ranges from $350,000 to more than $700,000, including a $40,000 franchise fee (roughly in line with what big fast-food chains charge). In exchange, franchisees are given the right to use the name, along with training and detailed guidelines for furnishing and operating the shop. The Wrights say that given the number of requests they get, a big part of their job now is vetting potential franchisees to ensure they're going into the business with the right intentions and will abide by their rules for running a shop. 'We say no to people more than we say yes,' Amy says."

 

Everything about this is good:

 

"At the recently opened outlet in Bethlehem, Pa., one wall is packed with clothing, beach towels, mugs, and other merchandise bearing awareness-raising messages like 'radically inclusive' and 'not broken.' Even the Wi-Fi password—'abletowork'—underscores the chain's mission of providing jobs to people with disabilities. Every cup of coffee, pastry, and product sold comes with a handwritten note of gratitude."


The only thing I would do differently is not include the "note of gratitude." This is not a charity, it is a fully functioning business with an effective business model characterized by low employee turnover, and is differentiating itself in a very creative and successful way. In short, it creates value for all of its stakeholders. When I read this story, it reminded me of Dave's Killer Bread (see Strategic CSR – Dave's Killer Bread) that also deals with a population that is discriminated against in terms of job opportunities – felony convictions:


"One in three of our employee partners has a criminal background. At Dave's Killer Bread, we believe everyone is capable of greatness and that a second chance can lead to positive lasting change. In 2015 we introduced our non-profit, the Dave's Killer Bread Foundation, with the mission to inspire other businesses to become Second Chance Employers and affect positive societal change."


Take care

David


David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (5e)

© Sage Publications, 2020


Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler5e 

Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/

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



Building a Future for the Disabled, One Cup of Coffee at a Time

By Anna-Louise Jackson

April 11, 2022

Bloomberg Businessweek

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-04-11/bitty-beau-coffee-shops-put-disabilities-front-and-center

 

Posted by David Chandler at 10:26 PM

Thursday, April 21, 2022

Strategic CSR - Science + social media

In celebration/commiseration of Earth Day on Friday, the article in the url below appeared in the daily Bloomberg Green newsletter that I enjoy receiving (you can sign-up here). This particular post argues that a big part of the problem with conveying the urgency around climate change is not the science behind it so much as the way in which the consensus findings are advertised:

"More than 5 billion mobile subscriptions and 3.6 billion social-media accounts globally are adding up to a massive disruption in human communities' evolutionary context. … Increasing the scale of human interactions by eight orders of magnitude in less than two decades makes even run-of-the-mill misinformation easier to disseminate, more influential, and—a crucial driver—more lucrative than ever."

In other words, simple, dramatic lies spread faster and easier over social media than the complicated, nuanced truth. What does this mean for the science community, in practice, and in particular in relation to the facts of climate change?

"This new global digital landscape is hostile to antiquated 20th-century science communication approaches, up to and including the upcoming United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports, which comprise multiple volumes, each hundreds or thousands of pages long. 'This is why some people have argued the IPCC should have been dissolved,' said Jennifer Jacquet, [an] associate professor of environmental studies at New York University. Physical science is central to the fight against climate change, but 'it's not really giving us new tools to make a social difference.'"

There is growing evidence that social media has significant negative side effects in terms of enabling communication globally, and this article correlates that harm with the inability of scientists to effectively communicate the implications of their work:

"Amid emergency heat, flooding, and famine, it's even more critical that people recognize and agree at least on the big picture. And yet, as recent history has shown us time and again, they don't. Much of that can be blamed on the pandemic of misinformation—concerning climate change, Covid-19, vaccines, and so much more— now running rampant on social media."

Specifically, while social media is supposed to connect us; in fact, it loosens the quality or strength of those ties:

"The development of digital communications has eroded or vaporized community protections developed over millennia to ensure at least a minimally healthy flow of information, which leads to healthy decision-making. … Think of it like this. If you wanted to make the most obvious statement in the world, you could do worse than: 'Technology now allows people to communicate instantaneously and across great distances.' Yet if you wanted to elicit the most tortured answer in the world, you might ask something incredibly similar: 'What happens when people can communicate instantaneously and across great distances?'"

 

As a result, some scientists have proposed "a new academic discipline" to describe this phenomenon:

 

"As physiology has medicine and climate science has emissions-mitigation and adaptation–planning, they argue, the digital-misinformation pandemic requires an applied science—or as they call it, a 'crisis discipline.'" 

 

A specific label suggested for this new discipline is "agnotology, the study of the creation of ignorance," and it is "a useful and much-needed new lens for understanding the modern world:" 

 

"It also has much more to explore. The authors focus on channels of communication—digital media—but the complexity and diversity of modern audiences and messengers also require study."


Take care

David


David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (5e)

© Sage Publications, 2020


Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler5e 

Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/

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



As Climate Change Fries the World, Social Media Is Frying Our Brains

By Eric Roston

June 29, 2021

Bloomberg Green Daily Newsletter

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-29/as-climate-change-fries-the-world-social-media-is-frying-our-brains

 

Posted by David Chandler at 11:31 PM

Tuesday, April 19, 2022

Strategic CSR - Ford F-150

As noted in the article in the url below, we have made great progress in introducing EVs, and sales are increasing. The article also notes, however, that the overall effect will remain limited until we can ensure mainstream adoption of this technology. And that is only going to happen if the biggest selling makes and models are available as EVs. In the U.S., at least, this means a truck and, in particular, the Ford F-150 truck:

"As the top-selling model line in the U.S. for 40 years, Ford Motor Co.'s F-Series pickups hold special weight in the auto ecosystem. The lineup, led by the F-150, generates more than $40 billion in annual revenue. Only one other U.S. product—Apple Inc.'s iPhone—tops F-Series sales."

Thus, the strategic imperative of Ford offering an electric version of the F-150 and the estimated impact this launch is expected to have:

"Given this, Ford's decision to electrify the F-150 stands as one of the boldest strategic decisions in 21st century business. An electric F-150, more than any other vehicle, will persuade rural America to go green, leading the way for almost every automaker that finds itself challenged by the electric transition."

If nothing else, an electric F-150 will force all the other car manufacturers to compete in the EV space. In short, the U.S. needs an electric F-150 in order to achieve its environmental goals, which the article presents in a timeline:

  • 2022 First deliveries of the F-150 Lightning are expected in April or May. Ford has 200,000 reservations.
  • 2026 Date Ford set to reach annual EV production of 2 million.
  • 2030 Goal leading automakers set for 40%-50% of new-vehicle sales to be electric. President Joe Biden's target is half.
  • 2040 Sales of new gas-powered vehicles are set to end as Ford, GM, Mercedes, and others will sell only zero-emission cars.
  • 2050 The U.S. government's goal for economy-wide net-zero emissions.

Take care
David

David Chandler
© Sage Publications, 2020

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler5e 
Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/
The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/


How Ford's Electric F-150 Pickup Truck Will Cut Carbon Pollution
By Keith Naughton and Kyle Stock
April 9, 2022
Bloomberg Businessweek
 
Posted by David Chandler at 3:18 PM

Thursday, April 14, 2022

Strategic CSR - Fossil fuels

Announcing calls and setting targets to get rid of fossil fuels are easy; actually getting rid of them is incredibly complex and challenging, as the article in the url below reports:

"Oil and natural gas aren't needed to only generate energy. They're also critical for an array of products including face masks, diapers and vegan leather."

The article contains many examples, but here is only one – fertilizer. Making fertilizer is not possible without fossil fuels and the implications of the constraints currently being imposed on oil and gas (together with events like the war in Ukraine) ripple throughout the food supply chain:

"Consider fertilizer, which is produced using hydrogen from natural gas (the molecule CH4). Natural gas accounts for about 75% to 90% of fertilizer production costs. Russia and Belarus are large producers, and uncertainty about sanctions has reduced their exports. But skyrocketing natural-gas prices in Europe have also pushed fertilizer producers such as Norway's Yara and Hungary's Nitrogenmuvek to curtail production. Some suspended operations last fall when Russia slowed natural-gas deliveries. As a result, fertilizer prices last month hit a record. Many farmers are scaling back land in cultivation. Some say they plan to use less fertilizer, which could reduce crop yields. Others are switching from planting corn and wheat to soybeans, which require less fertilizer. The fertilizer shortage couldn't have come at a worse time. The war is disrupting grain shipments from Russia and Ukraine, which account for a quarter of global wheat exports. Wheat prices last month hit a record. While Americans will have to pay more for cereal and pasta, Africans could experience severe food shortages. At the same time, food manufacturers report that the cost of plastics for containers and packaging is soaring. Plastics are made from oil and natural gas, which are in short supply globally."

In short, while the article is not exactly sympathetic to the cause, it is making the extremely valid point that we are in no way prepared to phase out fossil fuels from our economy. The problem, of course, is that we needed to have phased them out many years ago:

"The inconvenient truth for progressives is that petrochemicals are ubiquitous and indispensable. … As much as progressives loathe fossil fuels, they can't live without them. Drive an electric car or ride a bike? Streets are paved with asphalt, which is made from petroleum bitumen. The cost of asphalt, by the way, is also soaring in tandem with oil prices."

Take care
David

David Chandler
© Sage Publications, 2020

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler5e 
Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/
The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/


You'll Miss Fossil Fuels When They're Gone
By Allysia Finley
April 5, 2022
The Wall Street Journal
Late Edition – Final
A15
 
Posted by David Chandler at 10:04 AM

Tuesday, April 12, 2022

Strategic CSR - Decarbonization

The article in the url below examines the economics of decarbonization. In particular, it makes two arguments that are enlightening. The first is that any barriers to decarbonization do not include the amounts of money involved:

"If the world economy fails to decarbonise, it will not be because of the cost. The gross investment needed to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 can seem enormous: a cumulative $275trn, according to the McKinsey Global Institute, a think-tank attached to the consultancy. But over a period of decades the world would have had to replace its cars, gas boilers and power plants anyway. So the additional spending needed to go green is in fact much smaller: $25trn. Spread that over many years and compare it to global GDP, and it looks significant but manageable, peaking at 1.4% between 2026 and 2035. And that is without counting the returns on the investment. British officials reckon that three-quarters of the total cost of the transition to net zero will be offset by benefits such as more efficient transport, and that the state may need to spend only 0.4% of GDP a year over three decades."

The second argument is that a carbon tax can only be effective if reasonable alternatives are already on offer. If they are not on offer or they are too expensive, then taxes do not have the same effect on behavior:

"Carbon prices do not alter people's choices much when there are too few substitutes for dirty goods, or when those substitutes are too expensive. High fuel taxes, for example, tend to provoke political backlash against environmentalism … but do not much alter transport emissions. Britain has had one of the highest levels of fuel duty in the rich world in recent decades, … but drivers' take-up of electric vehicles has been unremarkable."

The reasons economists favor a carbon tax, the article suggests, is because they have wrongly focused on externalities ("the damage done to society when carbon is emitted") when they should have also considered the elasticity of demand ("the extent to which prices change behavior"). As a result, rather than a carbon tax, the solution offered by the book that is being reviewed in the article to bring about decarbonization is "extreme positive incentives for change," or EPICS:

"[The book's authors] laud Norway for exempting electric vehicles from road tax, cutting their parking charges in half and giving them access to bus lanes. (More than 90% of cars sold in the country are now electric.) They propose big mortgage discounts for homeowners who retrofit their properties. And they want the state to generously subsidise lending to green projects while exempting them from a range of taxes."

Take care
David

David Chandler
© Sage Publications, 2020

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler5e 
Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/
The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/


An EPIC challenge
By Free exchange
March 26, 2022
The Eonomist
Late Edition – Final
73
 
Posted by David Chandler at 11:20 AM

Thursday, April 7, 2022

Strategic CSR - ESG + Russia

It has been revealing to follow the conversation around ESG funds in light of the current devastation occurring in Ukraine. The article in the first url below sums up things nicely and is reasonably representative of an emerging critical line of argument:

"According to Bloomberg data, ESG funds had at least $8.3 billion invested in Russia before Putin attacked Ukraine on Feb. 24. Today, the precise value of these holdings isn't known because the market in Moscow remains shut and sanctions have made Russian securities virtually untradeable. And to be sure, it's a tiny fraction of the estimated $2.7 trillion invested in sustainable funds."

Nevertheless, quite damning when we consider questions around right and wrong, and what stocks should be included in an ESG fund. Further, it is not as if these funds were shining examples before the invasion occurred, as the article in the second url below suggests:

"In fact, the largest ESG-focused exchange-traded fund—the $22.9 billion iShares ESG Aware MSCI USA ETF (ESGU)—has almost 3.1 percent of its assets invested in the oil and gas sector, the industry most responsible for the accelerating destruction of the planet's atmosphere."

The article in the third url below captures the moral complexity perfectly by noting that what is considered right/wrong or helpful/unhelpful is not something that we can easily agree on at any given moment, let alone over time as circumstances change:

"The first approach to ESG is to try to do good with your money, and almost every ESG fund tries to imply it does this, at a minimum excluding producers of controversial weapons and the most-polluting forms of coal. Marketing materials are filled with pictures of sunflowers and green fields. But what counts as acceptable behavior changes rapidly. Russia's invasion of Ukraine has shown ESG investors what should have been obvious, that a country can't defend itself without weapons, and that means funding weapon manufacturers. … Soaring oil and natural-gas prices as a result of Russia's invasion and sanctions have prompted about-turns from Western governments, too. Just five months after hosting the Glasgow climate summit at which world leaders agreed to phase out fossil-fuel subsidies, the U.K. is cutting taxes on road fuel and trying to shield households from energy costs, while encouraging Gulf states to drill more oil. The U.S. is calling on frackers to pump more, and some European countries want price controls."

The conclusion I take away from all this is that we are simply not serious about the task at hand. To achieve the level of reductions in greenhouse gas emissions that we need to stabilize the environment in ways that give us hope for a future livable planet is not something we have yet come to terms with. This is particularly evident because, not only are we not making sufficient effort, but it is abundantly clear that we do not have a plan, either. The scale of change that is required is massive, and we are simply tweaking the edges. The metaphor of rearranging deckchairs on the Titanic comes to mind.

Take care
David

David Chandler
© Sage Publications, 2020

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler5e 
Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/
The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/


Russia's War Casts Huge Shadow Over Future of ESG
By Tim Quinson
March 9, 2022
Bloomberg Businessweek

Greenwashing Is Increasingly Making ESG Moot
By Tim Quinson
March 16, 2022
Bloomberg Businessweek

Do-Good Investing is Under Pressure
By James Mackintosh
March 28, 2022
The Wall Street Journal
Late Edition – Final
B1, B8
 
Posted by David Chandler at 10:21 PM

Monday, April 4, 2022

Strategic CSR - DE&I

When I first saw the article in the url below from the FT, I was puzzled:

"Back in November Expensify, a $1.5bn company that helps businesses to manage their expense reporting, IPO'd on the Nasdaq. With the stock down some 55 per cent since, you might think — true to form — we'd now follow up with a snarky comment, particularly after it announced disappointing quarterly numbers on Tuesday. Tempting, sure. But not this time. Instead, we'd like to draw your attention to this paragraph regarding its charity — Expensify.org — from its S-1 filing."

Specifically, the article highlighted a commitment Expensify had made that was intended to promote diversity in the firm's hiring practices (emphasis in original article):

"Through Expensify.org, we seek to empower individuals and communities to eliminate injustice around the world by making giving and volunteering more convenient, accountable, meaningful and collaborative. … In the first year of Expensify.org, our Food Security fund helped feed over 4,500 families in need. When we introduced the Expensify Card, in addition to making it easy for individuals and customers using the card to donate, we committed to donate 10% of our interchange amount from the card to Expensify.org. Beginning in 2021, we made an additional commitment to donate 25 cents for every dollar we pay to white, male Expensify employees to Expensify.org to fund social justice and equity efforts."

As the article comments:

"We've heard of carbon offsetting, but we're pretty sure this is the first time a company has decided to, in effect, offset its white male exposure. So the question now must be: how long until we see a market develop for credits to help manage work force diversity?"

No doubt designed with good intentions, I saw two main problems with Expensify's commitment that are related to underlying flaws in carbon offsets. First, in the same way that carbon offsets are essentially an admission of the amount of pollution being emitted, these offsets are an admission of the extent of discrimination currently in the firm's workplace.

Second, again similar to carbon offsets, behavioral economics teaches us that, when you introduce a fine for a problem, some take it as a moral license to continue the bad practice, which can mean that nothing essentially changes (as with our collective carbon emissions).

Ultimately, as with carbon emissions, if we really want to reduce the problematic behavior, we just need to do less of it – not introduce compensation for the harm being done.

Then, of course, I noticed the date on which the article was published online — March 31, just in time to appear in print the next day, April 1. Unfortunately for us, however, carbon offsets are no joke.

Take care
David

David Chandler
© Sage Publications, 2020

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler5e 
Strategic CSR Simulation: http://www.strategiccsrsim.com/
The library of CSR Newsletters are archived at: https://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/


Expensify's unusual diversity drive
By Jamie Powell
March 31, 2022
Financial Times
 
Posted by David Chandler at 10:25 PM
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)