CSR is still not a mainstream thing and there isn’t any standard definition. People still wonder the economic logic behind it, is there a positive correlation between economical performance and CSR or social standards can be a sustainable basis for the diffusion of the latter. But, very often, social standards have a positive impact on the profit only in the long term and only in a very diffuse way. For a wide range of social standards it is almost impossible to maintain that their implementation has a direct positive impact on the profit of large corporations.
Although it might be difficult to establish a clear correlation between the implementation of social standards and profit making, corporations could aim at raising their reputation by implementing social standards, in order to possibly gain profits - or at least not to make losses- from this reputation, at a later point in time.
Let’s be clear there are 2 types of CSR. CSR as marketing tool (BP) and CSR as part of a business strategy (Patagonia). BP’s marketing campaign, which is all about looking for alternative energy sources, makes the consuming public feel good about purchasing BP products. But if BP had redeployed billions of dollars into environmental investments that yielded no profits, and its stock plummeted, one would certainly expect investor to dump their stocks. And if they don't invest in alternative energy as they promised on the adv, they will lose credibility with the public, but does it hurt their profits? Is the credibility of a n oil company important?
by: Idris Mootee
Posted by: Loïc LAMY
Posted on: levidepoches.fr/contagiousideas
Source: FutureLab
