Buuuu
Corporate social responsibility – a PR invention?
Peter Frankental
The author Peter Frankental is based at Amnesty International, London, UK. Keywords Public relations, Governance, Social responsibility, Community relations Abstract Considers the paradoxes inherent in the phrase ``corporate social responsibility’’. These include procedures of corporate governance, the market’s view of organizations’ ethical stances, the lack of clear definition, acceptance or denial, the lack of formal mechanisms for taking responsibility and the placing and priority that most organizations give to social responsibility. The article concludes that until these paradoxes are properly addressed, corporate social responsibility can legitimately be branded an invention of PR. It can only have real substance if it embraces all the stakeholders of a company, if it is reinforced by changes in company law relating to governance, if it is rewarded by financial markets, if its definition relates to the goals of social and ecological sustainability, if its implementation is benchmarked and audited, if it is open to public scrutiny, if the compliance mechanisms are in place, and if it is embedded across the organization horizontally and vertically. Electronic access The research register for this journal is available at http://www.mcbup.com/research_registers The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at http://www.emerald-library.com/ft
Corporate Communications: An International Journal Volume 6 . Number 1 . 2001 . pp. 18±23 # MCB University Press . ISSN 1356-3289
The first source of inspiration for approaching this question comes from Mahatma Gandhi’s response to the question ‘‘What do you think of Western civilisation’’ on his first visit to Britain. He replied, ‘‘It would be a good idea’’. The second source of inspiration comes from the response of the former Chinese Prime Minister, Chou En-Lai, to a question asking him about the impact of the French
Peter Frankental
The author Peter Frankental is based at Amnesty International, London, UK. Keywords Public relations, Governance, Social responsibility, Community relations Abstract Considers the paradoxes inherent in the phrase ``corporate social responsibility’’. These include procedures of corporate governance, the market’s view of organizations’ ethical stances, the lack of clear definition, acceptance or denial, the lack of formal mechanisms for taking responsibility and the placing and priority that most organizations give to social responsibility. The article concludes that until these paradoxes are properly addressed, corporate social responsibility can legitimately be branded an invention of PR. It can only have real substance if it embraces all the stakeholders of a company, if it is reinforced by changes in company law relating to governance, if it is rewarded by financial markets, if its definition relates to the goals of social and ecological sustainability, if its implementation is benchmarked and audited, if it is open to public scrutiny, if the compliance mechanisms are in place, and if it is embedded across the organization horizontally and vertically. Electronic access The research register for this journal is available at http://www.mcbup.com/research_registers The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at http://www.emerald-library.com/ft
Corporate Communications: An International Journal Volume 6 . Number 1 . 2001 . pp. 18±23 # MCB University Press . ISSN 1356-3289
The first source of inspiration for approaching this question comes from Mahatma Gandhi’s response to the question ‘‘What do you think of Western civilisation’’ on his first visit to Britain. He replied, ‘‘It would be a good idea’’. The second source of inspiration comes from the response of the former Chinese Prime Minister, Chou En-Lai, to a question asking him about the impact of the French
References: Committee on Corporate Governance (1998), Final Report, Gee Publishing, London. Elkington, J. (1997), Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business, Capstone, Oxford. Frankental, P. (2000), Human Rights ± Is It Any of Your Businesss?, Amnesty International, London. Institute of Chartered Accountants Internal Control Working Party (1998), Corporate Guidance for Internal Control, Institute of Chartered Accountants, London. McCann-Fitzgerald (1998), Libel Russian Roulette, http:// www.mcann-fitgerald.ie/legal_briefing/ personal_injury/libel_russian.html PriceWaterhouseCoopers (2000), The Rewards of Corporate Virtue, http:///www.pwcglobal.com/za/ eng/ins-sol/publ/tax/corpuirt.html Shell (2000), Shell Report 2000 ± How Do We Stand?, Shell, London. 23