By Sonia CSE
Definition
A duty or obligation to
satisfactorily perform or complete a task (assigned by someone, or created by
one's own promise or circumstances) that one must fulfill, and which has a
consequent penalty for failure.
Responsibility may
refer to:
• Collective responsibility
• Corporate social responsibility
• Diffusion of responsibility
• Diminished responsibility
• Duty
• Human responsibilities
• Legal liability
• Legal responsibility
• Media responsibility
• Moral responsibility
• Obligation
• Professional responsibility
• Responsibility assumption in
spirituality and personal-growth contexts
• Single responsibility principle
• Social responsibility
• Responsibility (song), a song by the
Christian punk band
• Individual ministerial responsibility
Collective
responsibility
Collective
responsibility is a concept or doctrine, according to which individuals are to
be held responsible for other people's actions by tolerating, ignoring, or
harboring them, without actively collaborating in these actions
In religion
This concept is found
in the Old Testament (or Tanakh), some examples include the account of the
Flood, the Tower of Babel, Sodom and Gomorrah and in some interpretations, the
Book of Joshua's Achan. In those records entire communities were punished on
the act of the vast majority of their members, however it is impossible to
state that there were no innocent people, or children too young to be
responsible for their deeds.
The practice of blaming
"the Jews" for Jesus' death is the longest example of collective
responsibility. In this case, the blame was cast not only on the Jews of the
time but upon successive generations. However, the Second Vatican Council
essentially absolved the Jewish people from the charge of deicide in Nostra
Aetate, the Declaration on the Relation of the Church with Non-Christian
Religions.
Collective punishment
Collective
responsibility in the form of collective punishment is often used as a
disciplinary measure in closed institutions, e.g. boarding schools (punishing a
whole class for the actions of a single unknown pupil), military units, prisons
(juvenile and adult), psychiatric facilities, etc. The effectiveness and
severeity of this measure may vary greatly, but it often breeds distrust and
isolation among their members, and is almost always a sign of authoritarian
tendencies in the institution or its home society. For example, in the Soviet
Gulags, all members of a brigada (work unit) were punished for bad performance
of any of its members.
Collective punishment
is also practiced in situation of war, economic sanctions, etc., presupposing
the existence of collective guilt. Collective guilt, or guilt by association,
is the controversial collectivist idea that groups of humans can bear guilt
above and beyond the guilt of individual members, and hence an individual holds
responsibility for what other members of their group have done, even if they
themselves didn't do this. Contemporary systems of criminal law accept the
principle that guilt shall only be personal. Others view groups as being entities
in themselves (an entitative group), capable of holding guilt or responsibility
independent of any of the group's members.
The mass shootings of
Nicholas II's family in 1918 may be regarded as an example of such an approach.
Another example is when ethnic Germans in Central and Eastern Europe were held
collectively responsible for Nazi crimes, resulting in numerous atrocities
against the German population, including killings (see Expulsion of Germans
after World War II and Beneš decrees).
In business
As the business
practices known as Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and sustainability
mature and converge with the responsibilities of governments and citizens, the
term "collective responsibility" is beginning to be more widely used.
Collective
responsibility is widely applied in corporations, where the entire workforce is
held responsible for failure to achieve corporate targets (for example, profit
targets), irrespective of the performance of individuals or teams which may
have achieved or overachieved within their area. Collective punishment, even
including measures that actually further harm the prospect of achieving
targets, is applied as a measure to 'teach' the workforce. Where corporate
targets are achieved, however, rewards are carefully targeted to those
perceived by management to have contributed, often disproportionately
concentrated at senior management levels. The impact on morale of this practice
is commonly ignored as it is not measurable on balance sheets.
In culture
The concept of
collective responsibility is present in literature, most notably in Samuel
Taylor Coleridge's "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner", a poem telling
the tale of a ship's crew who died of thirst because they approved of one crew
member's killing of an albatross. 1959's Ben-Hur and 1983's prison drama Bad
Boys depict collective responsibility and punishment.
Corporate social responsibility
Corporate social
responsibility (CSR, also called corporate conscience, corporate citizenship,
social performance, or sustainable responsible business/ Responsible
Business)[1] is a form of corporate self-regulation integrated into a business
model. CSR policy functions as a built-in, self-regulating mechanism whereby a
business monitors and ensures its active compliance with the spirit of the law,
ethical standards, and international norms. The goal of CSR is to embrace
responsibility for the company's actions and encourage a positive impact
through its activities on the environment, consumers, employees, communities, stakeholders
and all other members of the public sphere who may also be considered as
stakeholders.
The term
"corporate social responsibility" came into common use in the late
1960s and early 1970s after many multinational corporations formed the term
stakeholder, meaning those on whom an organization's activities have an impact.
It was used to describe corporate owners beyond shareholders as a result of an
influential book by R. Edward Freeman, Strategic management: a stakeholder
approach in 1984.[2] Proponents argue that corporations make more long term
profits by operating with a perspective, while critics argue that CSR distracts
from the economic role of businesses. Others argue CSR is merely
window-dressing, or an attempt to pre-empt the role of governments as a
watchdog over powerful multinational corporations.
CSR is titled to aid an
organization's mission as well as a guide to what the company stands for and
will uphold to its consumers. Development business ethics is one of the forms
of applied ethics that examines ethical principles and moral or ethical
problems that can arise in a business environment. ISO 26000 is the recognized
international standard for CSR. Public sector organizations (the United Nations
for example) adhere to the triple bottom line (TBL). It is widely accepted that
CSR adheres to similar principles but with no formal act of legislation. The UN
has developed the Principles for Responsible Investment as guidelines for
investing entities.
Approaches
Some commentators have
identified a difference between the Canadian (Montreal school of CSR), the
Continental European and the Anglo-Saxon approaches to CSR.[3] And even within
Europe the discussion about CSR is very heterogeneous.[4]
A more common approach
of CSR is philanthropy. This includes monetary donations and aid given to local
organizations and impoverished communities in developing countries. Some
organizations[who?] do not like this approach as it does not help build on the
skills of the local people, whereas community-based development generally leads
to more sustainable development.[clarification needed Difference between local
org& community-dev? Cite]
Another approach to CSR
is to incorporate the CSR strategy directly into the business strategy of an
organization. For instance, procurement of Fair Trade tea and coffee has been
adopted by various businesses including KPMG. Its CSR manager commented,
"Fairtrade fits very strongly into our commitment to our
communities."[5]
Another approach is garnering
increasing corporate responsibility interest. This is called Creating Shared
Value, or CSV. The shared value model is based on the idea that corporate
success and social welfare are interdependent. A business needs a healthy,
educated workforce, sustainable resources and adept government to compete
effectively. For society to thrive, profitable and competitive businesses must
be developed and supported to create income, wealth, tax revenues, and
opportunities for philanthropy. CSV received global attention in the Harvard
Business Review article Strategy & Society: The Link between Competitive
Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility [1] by Michael E. Porter, a
leading authority on competitive strategy and head of the Institute for
Strategy and Competitiveness at Harvard Business School; and Mark R. Kramer,
Senior Fellow at the Kennedy School at Harvard University and co-founder of FSG
Social Impact Advisors. The article provides insights and relevant examples of
companies that have developed deep linkages between their business strategies
and corporate social responsibility. Many approaches to CSR pit businesses
against society, emphasizing the costs and limitations of compliance with
externally imposed social and environmental standards. CSV acknowledges
trade-offs between short-term profitability and social or environmental goals,
but focuses more on the opportunities for competitive advantage from building a
social value proposition into corporate strategy.
Many companies use the
strategy of benchmarking to compete within their respective industries in CSR
policy, implementation, and effectiveness. Benchmarking involves reviewing
competitor CSR initiatives, as well as measuring and evaluating the impact that
those policies have on society and the environment, and how customers perceive
competitor CSR strategy. After a comprehensive study of competitor strategy and
an internal policy review performed, a comparison can be drawn and a strategy
developed for competition with CSR initiatives.
Social accounting,
auditing, and reporting
Main article: Social
accounting
For a business to take
responsibility for its actions, that business must be fully accountable. Social
accounting, a concept describing the communication of social and environmental
effects of a company's economic actions to particular interest groups within
society and to society at large, is thus an important element of CSR.[6]
Social accounting
emphasizes the notion of corporate accountability. D. Crowther defines social
accounting in this sense as "an approach to reporting a firm’s activities
which stresses the need for the identification of socially relevant behavior,
the determination of those to whom the company is accountable for its social
performance and the development of appropriate measures and reporting
techniques."[7] An example of social accounting, to a limited extent, is
found in an annual Director's Report, under the requirements of UK company
law.[8]
A number of reporting
guidelines or standards have been developed to serve as frameworks for social
accounting, auditing and reporting including:
• AccountAbility's AA1000 standard,
based on John Elkington's triple bottom line (3BL) reporting
• The Prince's Accounting for
Sustainability Project's Connected Reporting Framework
• The Fair Labor Association conducts
audits based on its Workplace Code of Conduct and posts audit results on the
FLA website.
• The Fair Wear Foundation takes a
unique approach to verifying labour conditions in companies' supply chains,
using interdisciplinary auditing teams.
• Global Reporting Initiative's
Sustainability Reporting Guidelines
• GoodCorporation's Standard developed
in association with the Institute of Business Ethics
• Earthcheck www.earthcheck.org
Certification / Standard
• Social Accountability International's
SA8000 standard
• Standard Ethics Aei guidelines
• The ISO 14000 environmental
management standard
• The United Nations Global Compact
requires companies to communicate on their progress (or to produce a
Communication on Progress, COP), and to describe the company's implementation
of the Compact's ten universal principles. This information should be fully
integrated in the participant’s main medium of stakeholder communications, for
example a corporate responsibility or sustainability report and/or an
integrated financial and sustainability report. If a company does not publish
formal reports, a COP can be created as a stand-alone document.[9]
• The United Nations Intergovernmental
Working Group of Experts on International Standards of Accounting and Reporting
(ISAR) provides voluntary technical guidance on eco-efficiency indicators,
corporate responsibility reporting, and corporate governance disclosure.
The FTSE Group
publishes the FTSE4Good Index, an evaluation of CSR performance of companies.
In some nations, legal
requirements for social accounting, auditing and reporting exist (e.g. in the
French bilan social), though international or national agreement on meaningful
measurements of social and environmental performance is difficult. Many
companies now produce externally audited annual reports that cover Sustainable
Development and CSR issues ("Triple Bottom Line Reports"), but the
reports vary widely in format, style, and evaluation methodology (even within
the same industry). Critics dismiss these reports as lip service, citing
examples such as Enron's yearly "Corporate Responsibility Annual
Report" and tobacco corporations' social reports.
In South Africa, as of
June 2010, all companies listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) were
required to produce an integrated report in place of an annual financial report
and sustainability report.[10] An integrated report includes environmental,
social and economic performance alongside financial performance information and
is expected to provide users with a more holistic overview of a company.
However, this requirement was implemented in the absence of any formal or legal
standards for an integrated report. An Integrated Reporting Committee (IRC) was
established to issue guidelines for good practice in this field.
Potential business
benefits
The scale and nature of
the benefits of CSR for an organization can vary depending on the nature of the
enterprise, and are difficult to quantify, though there is a large body of
literature exhorting business to adopt measures beyond financial ones (e.g.,
Deming's Fourteen Points, balanced scorecards). Orlitzky, Schmidt, and
Rynes[11] found a correlation between social/environmental performance and
financial performance. However, businesses may not be looking at short-run
financial returns when developing their CSR strategy.
The definition of CSR
used within an organization can vary from the strict "stakeholder
impacts" definition used by many CSR advocates and will often include
charitable efforts and volunteering. CSR may be based within the human
resources, business development or public relations departments of an
organisation,[12] or may be given a separate unit reporting to the CEO or in
some cases directly to the board. Some companies may implement CSR-type values
without a clearly defined team or programme.
The business case for
CSR[13] within a company will likely rest on one or more of these arguments:
Human resources
A CSR program can be an
aid to recruitment and retention,[14] particularly within the competitive
graduate student market. Potential recruits often ask about a firm's CSR policy
during an interview, and having a comprehensive policy can give an advantage.
CSR can also help improve the perception of a company among its staff,
particularly when staff can become involved through payroll giving, fundraising
activities or community volunteering. CSR has been found to encourage customer
orientation among frontline employees.
Risk management
Managing risk is a
central part of many corporate strategies. Reputations that take decades to
build up can be ruined in hours through incidents such as corruption scandals
or environmental accidents. These can also draw unwanted attention from
regulators, courts, governments and media. Building a genuine culture of 'doing
the right thing' Brand differentiation
In crowded marketplaces,
companies strive for a unique selling proposition that can separate them from
the competition in the minds of consumers. CSR can play a role in building
customer loyalty based on distinctive ethical values. Several major brands,
such as The Co-operative Group, The Body Shop and American Apparel are built on
ethical values. Business service organizations can benefit too from building a
reputation for integrity and best practice.
license to operate
Corporations are keen
to avoid interference in their business through taxation or regulations. By
taking substantive voluntary steps, they can persuade governments and the wider
public that they are taking issues such as health and safety, diversity, or the
environment seriously as good corporate citizens with respect to labour
standards and impacts on the environment.
Criticisms and concerns
Critics of CSR as well
as proponents debate a number of concerns related to it. These include CSR's
relationship to the fundamental purpose and nature of business and questionable
motives for engaging in CSR, including concerns about insincerity and
hypocrisy.
Nature of business
Milton Friedman and
others have argued that a corporation's purpose is to maximize returns to its
shareholders, and that since only people can have social responsibilities,
corporations are only responsible to their shareholders and not to society as a
whole. Although they accept that corporations should obey the laws of the
countries within which they work, they assert that corporations have no other
obligation to society. Some people perceive CSR as in-congruent with the very
nature and purpose of business, and indeed a hindrance to free trade. Those who
assert that CSR is contrasting with capitalism and are in favor of the free
market argue that improvements in health, longevity and/or infant mortality
have been created by economic growth attributed to free enterprise
Critics of this
argument perceive the free market as opposed to the well-being of society and a
hindrance to human freedom. They claim that the type of capitalism practiced in
many developing countries is a form of economic and cultural imperialism,
noting that these countries usually have fewer labour protections, and thus
their citizens are at a higher risk of exploitation by multinational
corporations
A wide variety of
individuals and organizations operate in between these poles. For example, the
REALeadership Alliance asserts that the business of leadership (be it corporate
or otherwise) is to change the world for the better. Many religious and
cultural traditions hold that the economy exists to serve human beings, so all
economic entities have an obligation to society (see for example Economic
Justice for All). Moreover, as discussed above, many CSR proponents point out
that CSR can significantly improve long-term corporate profitability because it
reduces risks and inefficiencies while offering a host of potential benefits
such as enhanced brand reputation and employee engagement.
Motives
Some critics believe
that CSR programs are undertaken by companies such as British American Tobacco
(BAT the petroleum giant BP (well known for its high-profile advertising
campaigns on environmental aspects of its operations), and McDonald's (see
below) to distract the public from ethical questions posed by their core
operations. They argue that some corporations start CSR programs for the
commercial benefit they enjoy through raising their reputation with the public
or with government. They suggest that corporations which exist solely to maximize
profits are unable to advance the interests of society as a whole
Another concern is that
sometimes companies claim to promote CSR and be committed to sustainable
development but simultaneously engage in harmful business practices. For
example, since the 1970s, the McDonald's Corporation's association with Ronald
McDonald House has been viewed as CSR and relationship marketing. More
recently, as CSR has become mainstream, the company has beefed up its CSR
programs related to its labor, environmental and other practicesAll the same,
in McDonald's Restaurants v Morris & Steel, Lord Justices Pill, May and
Keane ruled that it was fair comment to say that McDonald's employees worldwide
'do badly in terms of pay and conditions'] and true that 'if one eats enough
McDonald's food, one's diet may well become high in fat etc., with the very
real risk of heart disease
Royal Dutch Shell has a
much-publicized CSR policy and was a pioneer in triple bottom line reporting,
but this did not prevent the 2004 scandal concerning its misreporting of oil
reserves, which seriously damaged its reputation and led to charges of
hypocrisy. Since then, the Shell Foundation has become involved in many
projects across the world, including a partnership with Marks and Spencer (UK)
in three flower and fruit growing communities across Africa.
Critics concerned with
corporate hypocrisy and insincerity generally suggest that better governmental
and international regulation and enforcement, rather than voluntary measures,
are necessary to ensure that companies behave in a socially responsible manner.
A major area of necessary international regulation is the reduction of the
capacity of corporations to sue states under investor state dispute settlement
provisions in trade or investment treaties if otherwise necessary public health
or environment protection legislation has impeded corporate investments.
Others, such as Patricia Werhane, argue that CSR should be considered more as a
corporate moral responsibility, and limit the reach of CSR by focusing more on
direct impacts of the organization as viewed through a systems perspective to
identify stakeholders. For a commonly overlooked motive for CSR, see also
Corporate Social Entrepreneurship, whereby CSR can also be driven by employees'
personal values, in addition to the more obvious economic and governmental
drivers.
Ethical consumerism
The rise in popularity
of ethical consumerism over the last two decades can be linked to the rise of
CSR. As global population increases, so does the pressure on limited natural
resources required to meet rising consumer demand (Grace and Cohen 2005, 147).
Industrialization, in many developing countries, is booming as a result of both
technology and globalization. Consumers are becoming more aware of the
environmental and social implications of their day-to-day consumer decisions
and are therefore beginning to make purchasing decisions related to their
environmental and ethical concerns. However, this practice is far from
consistent or universal.
[Globalization and market
forces
As corporations pursue
growth through globalization, they have encountered new challenges that impose
limits to their growth and potential profits. Government regulations, tariffs,
environmental restrictions and varying standards of what constitutes
"labor exploitation" are problems that can cost organizations
millions of dollars. Some view ethical issues as simply a costly hindrance,
while some companies use CSR methodologies as a strategic tactic to gain public
support for their presence in global markets, helping them sustain a
competitive advantage by using their social contributions to provide a
subconscious level of advertising. (Fry, Keim, Meiners 1986, 105) Global
competition places a particular pressure on multinational corporations to examine
not only their own labor practices, but those of their entire supply chain,
from a CSR perspective.
Social awareness and
education
The role among
corporate stakeholders is to work collectively to pressure corporations that
are changing. Shareholders and investors themselves, through socially
responsible investing are exerting pressure on corporations to behave
responsibly. Non-governmental organizations are also taking an increasing role,
leveraging the power of the media and the Internet to increase their scrutiny
and collective activism around corporate behavior. Through education and
dialogue, the development of community awareness in holding businesses
responsible for their actions is growing In recent years, the traditional
conception of CSR is being challenged by the more community-conscious Creating
Shared Value concept (CSV), and several companies are refining their
collaboration with stakeholders accordingly.
Ethics training
The rise of ethics
training inside corporations, some of it required by government regulation, is
another driver credited with changing the behavior and culture of corporations.
The aim of such training is to help employees make ethical decisions when the
answers are unclear. Tullberg believes that humans are built with the capacity
to cheat and manipulate, a view taken from (Trivers 1971, 1985), hence the need
for learning normative values and rules in human behavior The most direct
benefit is reducing the likelihood of "dirty hands" (Grace and Cohen
2005), fines and damaged reputations for breaching laws or moral norms.
Organizations also see secondary benefit in increasing employee loyalty and
pride in the organization[citation needed]. Caterpillar and Best Buy are
examples of organizations that have taken such steps.[]
Increasingly, companies
are becoming interested in processes that can add visibility to their CSR
policies and activities. One method that is gaining increasing popularity is
the use of well-grounded training programs, where CSR is a major issue, and
business simulations can play a part in this.[citation needed]
One relevant
documentary is The Corporation, the history of organizations and their growth
in power is discussed. Corporate social responsibility, what a company does in
trying to benefit society, versus corporate moral responsibility (CMR), what a
company should morally do, are both important topics to consider when looking
at ethics in CSR. For example, Ray Anderson, in The Corporation, takes a CMR
perspective in order to do what is moral and he begins to shift his company's
focus towards the biosphere by utilizing carpets in sections so that they will
sustain for longer periods. This is Anderson thinking in terms of Garret
Hardin's "The Tragedy of the Commons," where if people do not pay
attention to the private ways in which we use public resources, people will
eventually lose those public resources.
Laws and regulation
Another driver of CSR
is the role of independent mediators, particularly the government, in ensuring
that corporations are prevented from harming the broader social good, including
people and the environment. CSR critics such as Robert Reich argue that
governments should set the agenda for social responsibility by the way of laws
and regulation that will allow a business to conduct themselves responsibly.
The issues surrounding
government regulation pose several problems. Regulation in itself is unable to
cover every aspect in detail of a corporation's operations. This leads to
burdensome legal processes bogged down in interpretations of the law and
debatable grey areas (Sacconi 2004). For example, General Electric failed to
clean up the Hudson River after contaminating it with organic pollutants. The
company continues to argue via the legal process on assignment of liability,
while the cleanup remains stagnant. (Sullivan & Schiafo 2005).
The second issue is the
financial burden that regulation can place on a nation's economy. This view
shared by Bulkeley, who cites the Australian federal government's actions to
avoid compliance with the Kyoto Protocol in 1997, on the concerns of economic
loss and national interest. The Australian government took the position that
signing the Kyoto Pact would have caused more significant economic losses for
Australia than for any other OECD nation (Bulkeley 2001, pg 436). On the change
of government following the election in November 2007, Prime Minister Kevin
Rudd signed the ratification immediately after assuming office on 3 December
2007, just before the meeting of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Critics of CSR also point out that organisations pay taxes to government to
ensure that society and the environment are not adversely affected by business
activities.
Denmark has a law on
CSR. On 16 December 2008, the Danish parliament adopted a bill making it
mandatory for the 1100 largest Danish companies, investors and state-owned
companies to include information on corporate social responsibility (CSR) in
their annual financial reports. The reporting requirements became effective on
1 January 2009 The required information includes:
• information on the companies’
policies for CSR or socially responsible investments (SRI)
• information on how such policies are
implemented in practice, and
• information on what results have been
obtained so far and managements expectations for the future with regard to CSR/SRI.
CSR/SRI is still
voluntary in Denmark, but if a company has no policy on this it must state its
positioning on CSR in their annual financial report. More on the Danish law can
be found at
Crises and their
consequences
Often it takes a crisis
to precipitate attention to CSR. One of the most active stands against
environmental management is the CERES Principles that resulted after the Exxon
Valdez incident in Alaska in 1989 (Grace and Cohen 2006). Other examples
include the lead poisoning paint used by toy giant Mattel, which required a
recall of millions of toys globally and caused the company to initiate new risk
management and quality control processes. In another example, Magellan Metals
in the West Australian town of Esperance was responsible for lead contamination
killing thousands of birds in the area. The company had to cease business
immediately and work with independent regulatory bodies to execute a cleanup.
Odwalla also experienced a crisis with sales dropping 90%, and the company's
stock price dropping 34% due to several cases of E. coli spread through Odwalla
apple juice. The company ordered a recall of all apple or carrot juice products
and introduced a new process called "flash pasteurization" as well as
maintaining lines of communication constantly open with customers.
Stakeholder priorities
Increasingly,
corporations are motivated to become more socially responsible because their
most important stakeholders expect them to understand and address the social
and community issues that are relevant to them. Understanding what causes are
important to employees is usually the first priority because of the many
interrelated business benefits that can be derived from increased employee
engagement (i.e. more loyalty, improved recruitment, increased retention,
higher productivity, and so on). Key external stakeholders include customers,
consumers, investors (particularly institutional investors), communities in the
areas where the corporation operates its facilities, regulators, academics, and
the media.
Branco and Rodrigues
(2007) describe the stakeholder perspective of CSR as the inclusion of all
groups or constituents (rather than just shareholders) in managerial decision
making related to the organization’s portfolio of socially responsible activities
This normative model implies that the CSR collaborations are positively
accepted when they are in the interests of stakeholders and may have no effect
or be detrimental to the organization if they are not directly related to
stakeholder interests. The stakeholder perspective suffers from a wheel and
spoke network metaphor that does not acknowledge the complexity of network
interactions that can occur in cross sector partnerships. It also relegates
communication to a maintenance function, similar to the exchange perspective.[
Arguments for Including
Disability in CSR
In recent years CSR is
increasingly becoming a part of a large number of companies. It is becoming an
important activity for businesses throughout the globe.
Basically, CSR means
that a company's business model should be socially responsible and
environmentally sustainable. By socially responsible, it means that the
company's activities should benefit the society and by environmentally
sustainable it means that the activities of the company should not harm the
environment.
But nowadays what we
can see is that there is an outburst of enthusiasm for environmental causes
only. For example, controlling pollution, global warming, deforestation,
mitigate carbon emissions, etc. Whereas it can be said that the same enthusiasm
is not seen for social welfare. This is because most of the social welfare
activities of the companies contribute to the welfare of us able bodied people
but do not take into account the disabled people who are also a part of the
society in which the company exists and who amount to at least 10% of the
population. Therefore, disability must be made a part of CSR policies of the
companies and people with disabilities must be allowed to become stakeholders.
There should be
non-discrimination or diversity management awareness-raising and training for
employees in the companies, that include disability treatment. They should
include the disability factor in employment/HR indicators (age distribution,
gender, contract type, professional categories and/or activity areas, rotation)
so that the situation of people with disabilities can be compared with that of
other employees. The companies should take into account the characteristics of
people with disabilities when managing human resources (recruitment, selection,
contracting and induction, promotion, training, prevention of risks at work).
Customer care staff training should be carried out by the companies aimed at
guaranteeing appropriate treatment of people with disabilities. They should
have a policy or directive aimed at considering or favouring suppliers and
subcontractors that employ people with disabilities, including Sheltered
Workshops.
Thus, carrying out
business practice which includes disabled people will help improve the company's
reputation and image in an increasingly competitive environment.
Finally, disability is
one of the factors that can contribute to "Diversity" and Diversity
is a rising value within companies’ management. However, disability is often
pushed behind in favour of other diversity criteria, thus disability needs to
be specifically included within the CSR.
No comments:
Post a Comment