2nd Place Winner of the Writing Competition: "Let It Be Known" by Harrison Wang
Harrison Wang is a freshman at Fordham University and is the 2nd Place winner of the 2020 Writing Competition for the 46th International Conference, which focused on themes related to The Decisive Decade. Below is his article on how corporate social responsibility, or CSR, has become a defining metric of success that businesses can no longer ignore.
Let It Be Known: Corporate Social Responsibility is Taking the Global Stage
Harrison is currently a student at Fordham University’s Gabelli School of Business intending to pursue a B.S. in Applied Accounting and Finance. He is one of 14 freshmen selected to be a part of the Global Business Honors Program, a rigorous international business program that consists of accelerated courses, intercontinental trips and case studies, and research projects.
Since the creation of the marketing economy, companies have typically been known to exist for the purposes of either fulfilling an existing need or creating a need that they could also fulfill. However, in the past century, companies have come to reflect the values of society in their branding such that each time their customer base shifts in interests or ideals, corporations have had to adapt their approach to ensure that they could survive. For many businesses that struggle to adapt in this new era of marketing, their responses to society’s demands of greater social justice and corporate social responsibility (CSR) have been characterized as disingenuous attempts to save face and safeguard their profits. The main questions for these corporations have since become “How does a business remain financially successful and simultaneously develop a deep trust with a customer base whose values are mutable?” and “Why are society’s values changing so much quicker than ever before?” To effectively answer both questions, one has to take into account several factors that contribute to this massive crisis of longevity in business: the general history of CSR, the impact of rapid influence and communication through media, understanding a company’s role in society, and above all, fundamentally understanding what a company is.
In the decades leading up to the recognition of CSR as a central pillar of business, CSR was typically viewed as an extraneous project of minor importance for businesses during a time where consumers placed a greater emphasis on the quality of a product rather than the quality of a company. However, as technology and information have become readily available and accessible to more and more of the world population, collective oversight through social media has empowered consumers to not only figure out what products fulfill their objective needs, but also voice their opinion in both the process by which their product was forged and the subsequent impact left by producers. Consequently, people have evolved in their consumption calculus by evaluating every aspect of the product that makes it what it is.
Social media has undoubtedly accelerated the process by which people have been able to formulate values, granting them access to a vast web of intense ideologies and beliefs. As people interact with new information and ideas around the clock from a variety of sources, they are able to further their understanding of the current socio-cultural landscape and what values they concur with. This, in conjunction with greater transparency of how corporations produce, has forced corporations not only to be avid listeners but active participants in the social responsibility dialogue.
Noting a corporation as an active participant in open discourse definitely seems a bit ambiguous, not to mention contradictory, given our understanding that businesses normally echo society’s general values. Such confusion is depicted in John Steinbeck’s The Grapes of Wrath, which seeks to unpack the relationship between businesses and individuals through the example of the Great Depression. In the novel, businesses are viewed as a composite of people working toward a similar goal of providing for themselves and their families, but also as a singular entity that functions as a profit-generating machine. This may leave us with a rather baffling thought: Are model businesses metaphorically the pure, rational mirror image of a human being with the foundational goals of survival and reproduction, or in their case, profit and growth? And to that end, does this mean that business entities and humanity are similarly capable of ushering in social change?
Humanity is able to distinguish itself from most organic beings due to its innate ability to reason, but metaphorically speaking what can distinguish humanity from a corporate entity? Morality and ethical values have created another core incentive for acting and existing, and they clearly resonate more with humanity than they do with business entities. Numerous corporate entities have grappled with finding this core incentive to behave socially responsible that can humanize them. Unfortunately, many have been known to react rather than take action in situations of great social volatility.
For those companies who currently struggle to uphold social responsibility and act efficiently in accordance with constantly shifting sociocultural values, they lack a core incentive for taking action that belief systems otherwise provide for humanity. As a result of this, many companies have stood idly by while attempting to find a sufficient incentive to act and only ended up choosing to respond in a curt manner out of fear of being called out. Companies in the past, for a variety of reasons, have gone under, but the inherently short-sighted nature of an exclusively profit-driven goal has led many corporate giants to ruin. The 2008 debacle is a prime example of such myopia. Many of those who led and maintained powerful positions in financial institutions (i.e., risk department members, top level executives, etc.) unconscionably abused their positions, betraying both stakeholders and loyal employees, all without any substantial personal repercussions.
It is not difficult by any means to see how such a series of blunders have culminated in an immense distrust of companies. Consequently, now more than ever, there is a need for a quantification of success that is balanced and isn’t entirely profit-driven. There are many other reasons for individuals to willingly ignore the impact of their actions on a firm; as the archetype of a company environment is one devoid of empathy, forgiveness, and emotion, it is completely understandable that people have little to no regard for what becomes of a business entity. However, despite this disdain for such entities, they are still widely regarded as the backbone of any country and a provider for many, thus leaving most of society in a love-hate relationship with corporations that neglect the social contract that can render them feasible.
Despite the fact that the struggle to take action currently plagues a great number of businesses, there are those who have demonstrated that businesses are capable of integrating social values into actions that resonate with their shareholders. Notable examples of this include Bank of America’s chief executive announcing the firm’s plans to raise the minimum wages of its employees to $20 an hour (higher than any of the U.S.’s banks at the time); Apple’s Tim Cook revealing plans to donate $100 million towards a racial justice initiative; and Ben & Jerry’s series of ice cream flavors with proceeds being contributed toward political reformist groups as well as scathing letters calling for legislative reform. As one would guess, all of these aforementioned initiatives among many were met with high praise and, for some, higher stock prices. All of these courses of action meant having a company take a firm stance on social issues and having them “put their money where their mouth was.” The results were successful and nearly ideal in satisfying the consumer base and bolstering the trust of those within each firm as well. Thus, it can be clearly seen through solid leadership and competency that companies no longer have to remain overly rational and indifferent when in fact they all have the capacity to be invested in improving society and generating profit.
With that being said, let it be known that CSR is now the next step in preserving the livelihood and maximizing the productivity of large businesses. CSR has become just as vital to the viability of a business as its branding and product quality, and without it a company is relegated to being nothing more than another indistinct entity devoid of meaning and purpose in society.
“CSR has become just as vital to the viability of a business as its branding and product quality, and without it a company is relegated to being nothing more than another indistinct entity devoid of meaning and purpose in society.”