Strategic CSR - Self-esteem

The article in the url below discusses a video launched over the summer as part of the "Dove Self-esteem Project," called Toxic Influence. The video focuses on the effects social media can have on young girls and, in particular, highlights the extent to which neither they, nor their mothers, have any idea about the content to which they are being exposed:

https://youtu.be/sF3iRZtkyAQ

The article explains what happens in the video:

"In the video, one mom says she thinks social media can be good or bad, while another says it can be confidence-building; one girl says she thinks it has had a mostly positive impact on her life. The girls are then told to start scrolling on their phones. Images appear on the big screen, quick clips of TikTok-ish influencers touting weird beauty hacks. 'Most parents underestimate how harmful toxic beauty advice can be on social media,' the text says. Then, out of left field: 'Using face-mapping technology, we put highly toxic advice into the mouths of their moms.' Now the five mothers appear on the movie screen, digitally morphed into the people doling out grotesque recommendations: how you are never too young for 'baby Botox'; how at-home lip-injection kits are so amazing; how there are powders you can ingest to skip meals; how to straighten your teeth with a nail file. 'Skinny,' the last toxic influencer/deepfake mom tells us, 'is never finished.' 'You wouldn't say that to your daughter,' the text announces. 'But she still hears it online, every day.' The mothers are shocked, the daughters contrite."

The point of the article (and video) is not necessarily to highlight the big picture extent to which social media affects young girls' self-esteem, but the extent to which it does that subtly so that, for the most part, people are not aware of the changes that are happening. The author in the article writes this in her concluding paragraph:

"Yesterday I picked up my 10-year-old's old turquoise iPod Touch to see what was on it. I found a few selfies she took — as unsmiling as Morticia Addams, as the kids like it these days. I also found some chatty videos she made of herself painting seashells, copying the style of her favorite arts-and-crafts YouTuber. Every so often, she would bat her tangled hair back with splayed hands, the way people with long nails do. My daughter does not have long nails. Her favorite YouTuber does. The amount of ingested culture in this tiny gesture stopped me short. This was nothing a feed 'detoxed' of teeth-filers would address. It was bigger: everything she sees, all the time, everywhere, an open fire hydrant of messages — including, no matter how much they would prefer to seem above it, Dove's."

Take care

David

David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (6e)

© Sage Publications, 2023

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler6e 

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

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

Soft Soap

By Mireille Silcoff

July 24, 2022

The New York Times Sunday Magazine

Late Edition – Final

7-10

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/20/magazine/dove-advertising-beauty.html

 

Strategic CSR - Trade unions

The article in the url below focuses on the recent increase in unionization in the U.S. It also explains why, this time, it is different than in previous eras of stronger labor rights:

"Christian Smalls and Jaz Brisack have lived very different lives. Mr Smalls started out as a rapper and worked in a series of jobs in retail before joining Amazon as a warehouse picker in 2015. He was fired in 2020 for leading a staff walkout, and he went on to found the Amazon Labour Union (ALU). Ms Brisack won a Rhodes scholarship to the University of Oxford, then moved to Buffalo, New York, to work on a union campaign, but soon took a job at Starbucks. Eight months later she helped to found Starbucks Workers United (SBWU). Despite their different routes, Mr Smalls and Ms Brisack are the faces of America's changing labour movement."

Specifically, the unions these advocates are creating are specific to a single company, rather than being industry-wide. That is, the union for Amazon workers is called the "Amazon Labour Union," while the union for Starbucks workers is called "Starbucks Workers United." Both are making headway, although the ALU less so than SBWU, which is also now facing a coordinated backlash from Howard Schultz in his return to the company:

"Their names tell the story. Older unions have often had long names that describe their sectors – sometimes a mouthful (such as the Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers International Union). This reflected their ambition. They wanted to win collective agreements covering all workers in an industry, to drive up wages and improve conditions across the board. But new unions are shunning complex monikers and using company names instead, such as Target Workers Unite (founded in 2018)."

This seems like a good approach on the part of these latent organizations. Having grown up in Britain in the 1980s with Margaret Thatcher as the Prime Minister, I have the idea of 'corrupt' labor unions running an industry into the ground (specifically the coal miners, but also other industries, such as steel or ship-building – all industries that used to be central to the UK economy). Similar patterns emerged in the automobile industry here in the U.S. In spite of this, since I also believe that a firm's employees are its most important stakeholder, the idea of an avenue of communication between management and workforce is essential. My instinct is that such 'worker councils' would be location based (i.e., a specific factory or workplace), but for firms with many locations, this emerging trend seems like a reasonable compromise:

"However it is not plain sailing. On May 2nd Amazon workers at LDJ5 warehouse, in New York, voted against forming a union. And the SWBU may have unionized 80 cafes but there are some 15,500 Starbucks outlets in America."

None of this is to say I support the unionization efforts, and Schultz's response at Starbucks suggests their efforts may win advances for their non-unionized co-workers, while not receiving those gains themselves. Ideally, in a world where management values employees, and employees appreciate the gains they are granted (perhaps, the way that Starbucks used to be), a union should be unnecessary. In those companies where employees are taken-for-granted (Amazon and perhaps the Starbucks of recent years), such unionization efforts are a good example of employees acting to hold management to account. In short, if management wants to avoid unions, they need to demonstrate that employees are the firm's most important stakeholders, and back it up with meaningful action.

Take care

David

David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (6e)

© Sage Publications, 2023

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler6e 

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

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

The name game

May 28, 2022

The Economist

Late Edition – Final

22

https://www.economist.com/united-states/2022/05/26/new-trade-unions-in-america-are-successfully-using-company-brands

 

Strategic CSR - 6e IMs

Today's newsletter is to let you know that the sixth edition of Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation is now published. Review copies are available on the book's website: https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/strategic-corporate-social-responsibility/book278406

In addition to all the new and updated content, Sage has released updated instructor resources to accompany this edition. These support resources are available online (https://study.sagepub.com/chandler6e) and include materials for both instructors (password protected) and students:

Instructors

• Answers to in-text questions
• PowerPoint slides
• Test bank
• Lecture notes (including suggested answers to chapter discussion questions and Strategic CSR debate motions)
• Sample syllabi

Students

• eFlashcards
• Discussion questions
• Blog archive of the CSR Newsletter (http://strategiccsr-sage.blogspot.com/)

In addition:

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.
• 22 new figures have been added to help visual learners understand complex concepts.

KEY FEATURES:

• Unique perspective analyzes CSR from a legal, behavioral, strategic, and sustainable perspectives.
• Redefines CSR as central to the value-creating purpose of the firm and unpacks how firms get improve the implantation of strategic CSR practices.
• Case studies illustrate how CSR affects all aspects of a firm's operations and include examples from corporations such as Facebook and Starbucks.
• Each of the book's 12 chapters and five cases include a Strategic CSR Debate Motion, as well as five Questions for Discussion and Review, that bring the scope and complexity of CSR to life in the classroom.
• An international perspective, supported by multiple examples, emphasizes the multi-cultural challenges of CSR and conducting business in a global context.    

Of course, if you have any questions about the 6e, please feel free to contact me at any time.

Take care

David

David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (6e)

© Sage Publications, 2023

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler6e 

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

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

Strategic CSR - Rights + responsibilities

Over the years, I have read many articles arguing that legal rights should be granted to animals and other natural entities, like rivers (e.g., see Strategic CSR – Personhood and Strategic CSR – Cats and dogs). The article in the url below is merely the most recent of those articles but, very usefully, it references the original source for such arguments (in the U.S., at least):

"The notion that 'natural objects' like woods and streams should have rights was first put forward half a century ago, by Christopher Stone, a law professor at the University of Southern California."

The logic advocates use to support their claims vary to some degree, but almost all, at some point, make this point:

"In April, 1972, the Supreme Court upheld the appellate court's decision against the Sierra Club, by a vote of four to three. (Two seats on the Court were vacant.) Douglas, drawing heavily on Stone's article, penned a dissenting opinion. 'A ship has a legal personality, a fiction found useful for maritime purposes,' he wrote. A corporation, too, 'is a person for purposes of the adjudicatory processes. . . . So it should be as respects valleys, alpine meadows, rivers, lakes, estuaries, beaches, ridges, groves of trees, swampland, or even air that feels the destructive pressures of modern technology and modern life.'"

In essence, 'if corporations can be persons and they are unable to talk (and do other people-like things), then other things that are unable to talk should also be persons.' In other words:

"The objection that streams and forests cannot have standing because streams and forests cannot speak was, in Stone's view, easily addressed. 'Corporations cannot speak either,' he observed. 'Nor can states, estates, infants, incompetents, municipalities or universities.' And yet these entities were amply represented—some might say overrepresented—in the courts."

But, as many CSR advocates also like to argue, with rights come responsibilities. And, one of the many advantages of granting personhood to corporations (and it really is the foundational pillar of our economic system, post industrial revolution, primarily because it permits limited liability) is that, although corporations can sue others, as persons they can also be sued themselves.

To me, this seems like a major argument against granting legal rights to animals and elements of the natural environment. If I am currently out walking my dog and it bites someone else, the victim does not sue the dog, they sue me. There would not be much point suing the dog, since the dog does not own any assets from which compensation could be paid. Equally, if I go swimming in a river and drown due to the strong currents (which would be the river's fault, now that we are assigning rights to it), then it is not much use to me (or my estate) to sue the river. The enforcement of contracts is not everything in our economic/legal/societal system, but it is a hell of a lot.

So, while there are increasing numbers of cases where advocates act on behalf of animals and the natural environment to sue for legal standing (most recently here in the U.S., Happy the elephant), I think this would create more problems than it solves. Again, pursuing the argument that responsibilities are the flipside of rights, I think we need to solve how we are going to assign responsibilities to these actors before we rush to grant them rights (especially because, in general, they have no discernible interests that we can understand or meet).

Take care

David

David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (6e)

© Sage Publications, 2023

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler6e 

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

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

A Lake in Florida is Suing to Protect Itself

By Elizabeth Kolbert

April 11, 2022

The New Yorker

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/04/18/a-lake-in-florida-suing-to-protect-itself

 

Strategic CSR - MBAs

The article in the url below reports on recent research examining the effects on firms in the U.S. and Denmark following the appointment of a CEO with an MBA. The results are not encouraging. While the researchers find that profits (specifically, return on assets) increase over the subsequent five years, it is not because the CEOs are necessarily making their organization either more profitable, or more effective:

"The authors look at newly appointed CEOs in America and Denmark. They find those with MBAs increase returns on assets in the five years after their appointment—by a total of three percentage points on average in America and 1.5 points in Denmark. But that is not because they boost sales, ratchet up investments or raise productivity. Rather, the higher returns are the result of suppressing workers' wages, which fall by 6% in America and 3% in Denmark over the five years after an MBA takes charge. In short, ushering MBAs into corner offices seems to boost shareholder value by slicing the pie in certain ways, not by making the pie bigger."

The researchers place the blame for this effect squarely on business schools:

"The researchers put this phenomenon down to change in business-school syllabuses. MBA programmes, [say the researchers], have over the years grown less focused on technical aspects of finance and management, and more obsessed with maximising shareholder value and corporate leanness. The result [they] contend, is that workers have increasingly been seen as 'costs to be reduced' rather than an investment in human capital."

This fits with my sense of a drift in the purpose of business schools over the last 50 years, or so. There was a time in the U.S. when the role of manager was being talked about in terms of becoming a profession, like a doctor or an architect (see Strategic CSR – A professional). This was when business schools were spreading throughout universities (post WWII) and were being designed to play a central role as gatekeeper in determining who could call themselves a manager (and the MBA degree was going to be the required certification – a license, if you will).

Clearly, that didn't happen, although there is still value for business schools in claiming to be a professional school in the university (as demonstrated by the insistence on marketing "Professional MBA" programs – a great example of deceptive advertising). Instead, we lost that broader educational purpose and, instead, seemingly have dissolved into training as many business students as possible. This is no doubt partly because it is easier to train (than to educate), but also partly because revenue generation has become the primary driver of activity – it turns out that business school faculty enjoy their (relatively) higher salaries.

In short, we have shifted from an emphasis on quality to an emphasis on quantity, and the consequences for the business world (and broader society) have been immense (e.g., see here). In terms of business schools, the result is a loss of the essence of what it means to be a manager/leader. I have recently taken over as director of the Executive MBA program at our school and would like to use the position to try and get back to this core, where what it means fundamentally to be a manager (what it means to manage) is central to a business student's degree.

Here is another relevant article on this topic: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/05/opinion/business-schools-capitalism-mba.html

The research cited in this newsletter was also covered in depth recently on the Freakonomics podcast: https://freakonomics.com/podcast/are-m-b-a-s-to-blame-for-wage-stagnation/

Take care

David

David Chandler

Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation (6e)

© Sage Publications, 2023

Instructor Teaching and Student Study Site: https://study.sagepub.com/chandler6e

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

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

Degrees of unconcern

April 9, 2022

The Economist

Late Edition – Final

51

https://www.economist.com/business/2022/04/09/how-mba-wielding-bosses-boost-profits

Strategic CSR - EVs

The article in the url below makes the argument that, due to subsidies being offered by the U.S. government, finding an EV to buy is challenging, at present:

"The landmark US climate bill passed [over the summer] … includes a $7,500 point-of-sale tax credit for any purchase of a qualifying new EV, and $4,000 off the purchase of a used one. But the bill doesn't solve for one of the biggest challenges facing interested buyers: inventory. It's terribly difficult to get a new electric car these days. In a recent survey of thousands of EV owners for Bloomberg Green's Electric Car Ratings, respondents said they waited almost seven months, on average, for their battery-powered vehicle."

This constrained market is presenting opportunities for innovation. In particular, companies are beginning to explore the market potential for car subscriptions (rather than purchases):

"What if you could simply subscribe to a car like a 5,000-pound magazine? That's the future being sold by Autonomy, a California-based startup that since January has been targeting a narrow niche on the EV ownership spectrum, somewhere between the Hertz rental counter and a three-year lease. 'We exist to expand the adoption of electric vehicles," reads Autonomy's pitch, 'and we don't think you should be forced to accept expensive, long-term debt to drive one.' Autonomy is now stocking up on EVs from pretty much every company that makes them: This week, it announced plans to order nearly 23,000 cars from 17 automakers, including Ford, Polestar and Tesla. There are even 200 vehicles reserved from Canoo and Fisker, two companies on the not-quite-there side of actually making a drivable electric car."

One argument to suggest there is a market for this business model is that consumers increasingly think of cars as IT goods (where software and hardware updates are more frequent), rather than manufactured machines:

"The subscription model has some logic for consumers. In part because of fast-evolving technology, EVs have traditionally shed value much quicker than gas-powered cars. On a depreciation scale, consumers typically lump them in with cell phones. And while Autonomy's offering sure looks like a lease — costs include a $5,900 'start fee,' then $490 to $690 a month for up to 1,000 miles of driving — customers can end the subscription any time after three months, and don't have to pay maintenance, registration fees or interest."

The key difference from the leasing schemes that already exist, therefore, is the payment periods – much smaller amounts on a more frequent basis. And, presumably, the company thinks it can make sufficient money on the initial start fee that would offset any rapid turnover. Perhaps it is more similar to a Costco business model, where the products are sold at cost and the annual membership is the margin. But, make no mistake, this is an experiment with no guarantees:

"A contemporary car is nothing if not a dense stack of software, which means subscriptions on wheels are not entirely bonkers. But a car is also an appliance, and consumers aren't accustomed to renting a refrigerator, let alone paying a monthly fee to use the ice-maker. Luckily for Autonomy, the simplest pitch may be the best one. If it can bigfoot individual EV orders by jumping to the head of the queue, the startup could find scads of subscribers — simply because it will have available cars."

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/

A California Startup Is Selling Electric Vehicle 'Subscriptions'

By Kyle Stock

August 13, 2022

Bloomberg Green

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-08-13/can-t-find-an-electric-car-one-startup-is-selling-subscriptions

 

Strategic CSR - Exercise

The idea, detailed in the article in the url below (and something that I found on LinkedIn), is brilliant:

"The Romanian city of Cluj-Napoca has reintroduced its smart sports bus station, which gives city residents the ability to ride the bus for free if they complete 20 squats in two minutes. … Dubbed the 'health ticket', the ticket is valid for a one-way trip across the city, which usually costs around 2.50 RON (0.80c AUD)."

One of the best ideas I have seen in a long time – simple, yet effective. An excellent nudge that is not so intrusive that it is likely to discourage participation, and technology that is making implementation of such an idea possible:

"Squats are counted by a device at the bus stop that measures the kneeling of a person squatting. Once completed, the ticket is then printed and the person is able to ride the bus. Tickets are able to be accessed between the hours of 8:00am-8:00pm, with the price of the ticket covered by digital marketing company SYKES Romania."

The idea became permanent after a successful trial, the year before:

"The 'health ticket' scheme was a huge success last year, with reports indicating nearly 1 million squats were completed, resulting in 55,000 bus tickets and approximately 1,900 hours of exercise."

The comments on LinkedIn tell me that something similar is happening in Mexico for train tickets, but my German is not what it once was: 

https://www.spiegel.de/gesundheit/ernaehrung/abnehmen-in-mexiko-zehn-kniebeugen-fuer-ein-u-bahn-ticket-a-1015136.html

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/

Exercise equals a free ride in this city

By Jarrod Reedie

May 10, 2021

Architecture & Design

https://www.architectureanddesign.com.au/news/exercise-equals-a-free-ride-in-this-romanian-city

 

Strategic CSR - Supply chains

The article in the url below demonstrates the challenges associated with legislation that is passed with good intention, but not much forethought:

"The law, which went into effect on Tuesday, bars products from entering the United States if they have any links to Xinjiang, the far-western region where the Chinese authorities have carried out an extensive crackdown on Uyghur Muslims and other ethnic minorities."

The impact will be broad:

"That could affect a wide range of products, including those using any raw materials from Xinjiang or with a connection to the type of Chinese labor and poverty alleviation programs the U.S. government has deemed coercive — even if the finished product used just a tiny amount of material from Xinjiang somewhere along its journey."

The main trouble is that the burden has been placed on companies to demonstrate a negative:

"The law, called the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act, presumes that all of these goods are made with forced labor, and stops them at the U.S. border, until importers can produce evidence that their supply chains do not touch on Xinjiang, or involve slavery or coercive practices."

The consequences, as a result, are dramatic:

"Evan Smith, the chief executive at the supply chain technology company Altana AI, said his company calculated that roughly a million companies globally would be subject to enforcement action under the full letter of the law, out of about 10 million businesses worldwide that are buying, selling or manufacturing physical things. 'This is not like a 'picking needles out of a haystack' problem,' he said. 'This is touching a meaningful percentage of all of the world's everyday goods.'"

Of course, impactful legislation is not the concern; the issue is whether the disruption is worth it. The forced reorientation of the global supply chain is not only expensive, but will have unintended consequences, both good and bad (e.g., on employment, prices, etc.). The government is an important stakeholder of the firm, but it is not the only stakeholder. The danger is, if not all stakeholders are onboard with this action, the disruption will occur to no discernable end or improved outcome:

"'The public is not prepared for what's going to happen,' said Alan Bersin, a former commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection who is now the executive chairman at Altana AI. 'The impact of this on the global economy, and on the U.S. economy, is measured in the many billions of dollars, not in the millions of dollars.'"

The complexity of the global supply chain is immense – something it seems that politicians reacting to emotional issues appear not to comprehend:

"At the heart of the problem is the complexity and opacity of the supply chains that run through China, the world's largest manufacturing hub. Goods often pass through many layers of companies as they make their way from fields, mines and factories to a warehouse or a store shelf. … Take carmakers, who may need to procure thousands of components, like semiconductors, aluminum, glass, engines and seat fabric. The average carmaker has about 250 tier-one suppliers but exposure to 18,000 other companies across its full supply chain, according to research by McKinsey & Company, the consultancy firm."

Whether we get involved in such issues, attempting to shape outcomes, is not the issue. What is at issue is the extent to which such decisions are informed, both by the facts at hand and the support of the stakeholders who are affected. Decisions taken in the abstract, or intended only to add value to a minority of stakeholders, usually result in sub-optimal outcomes.

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/

Law Fighting Forced Labor to Hit Trade

By Ana Swanson

June 22, 2022

The New York Times

Late Edition – Final

B1, B5

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/22/us/politics/xinjiang-uyghur-forced-labor-law.html