Corporate social responsibility strategy and competitive advantage are important issues for the contemporary discussion on corporations in society when taking into account social and environmental impacts. Empirically, we can see that social responsibility strategies are associated with competitive advantages, such as attracting valuable employees as well as enhancing the company image and reputation. This paper presents a theoretical review that demonstrates the association between social strategy and competitive advantage through the formulation of social strategies that influence and are influenced by opportunities, resources, skills, corporation merits, industry structure and stakeholders. Based on the literature and a case study of Carrefour, a model is proposed for competitive advantages stemming from the formulation of social strategies, which are explained based on their elements and adaptation to societal expectations. This article seeks to enrich the discussion on the strategic management of social responsibility and contribute to the literature on Corporate Social Responsibility as well as Strategy and Competitive Advantage.
Purpose: Using the global financial crisis as a critical event and based on institutional theory and stakeholder theory, this paper aims to explore the relationship between corporate governance and corporate social responsibility (CSR). The question is how stakeholders can influence corporate responses to societal change by using their position in the governance structure. Design/methodology/approach: The analysis is based on a historical analysis of data collected mainly between 2002 and 2004. The historical perspective enables an understanding of the response of the company to environmental changes. Findings: The approach enables researchers to relate the normative component of CSR to specific governance mechanisms. These governance mechanisms are specified in direct and indirect influence pathways. Historical data shed light on how, in the upbeat of the crisis, stakeholders have influenced the principles and policies of the ING Group, a Dutch financial company. Research limitations/implications: The paper suggests that stakeholders influence principles – normative assumptions that guide corporate decisions – mainly in dialogue-based meetings (direct influence pathways). Companies are made accountable in indirect influence pathways such as regulations. The author also demonstrates that a historical approach enables an understanding of long-term historical developments and the linking of corporate policies to the normative assumptions of stakeholders. Practical implications: If stakeholders wish to assess the social responsibility of a company, then they should assess the governance structure in relation to the principles and policies. The power structure within a company and that within the institutional framework in which the company operates (the governance system) strongly influences how a company executes its social responsibilities. Social implications: The paper demonstrates how stakeholders can use the governance structure to influence a bank. If society – or a specific group in society – wants banks to play a different role, this paper points to what could be the levers of change in the governance system and the governance structure. Originality/value: Insights into the complex relationship between corporate governance and the processes in which the social responsibilities of a company are developed.
The concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR), defined here as coordinated business actions aimed at a more sustainable world, has always been fairly controversial, both from the perspective of academic discourse and from the perspective of corporate practice. In its most basic terms, questions have been asked about whether corporations can and should actually have social responsibilities and, if so, to what extent? (cf. Davis 1973; Moon et al. 2005). Reflecting on the social responsibilities of business, a scholarly debate has developed that has given rise to a multitude of conceptions on the roles and responsibilities of business in society. These conceptions roughly vary from Friedman’s position that the social responsibility of business is to increase its profits (Friedman 1970) to positions about CSR that reflect the principle of sustainable development as formulated in the well-known “Brundtland report” as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (WCED 1987: 204) and that now extend to and is operationalized through the Sustainable Development Goals. While different positions on the responsibilities of business in society remain to be held, partly motivated by political beliefs and worldviews, the question “what is a business for?” is nowadays answered in a way that aligns with a broader conception including taking into account the interests of and being accountable to a broader set of stakeholders than merely those with a financial or otherwise economic concern as well as society as a whole, nature and future generations. A survey among consumers from 10 of the world’s largest countries showed that some 81% thought that firms have responsibilities going (far) beyond creating shareholder value, with 31% thinking that firms should change the way they operate to align with greater social and environmental needs (Cone Communications/Echo 2013).
LINK
ALE organised an event with Parktheater Eindhoven and LSA-citizens (the Dutch umbrella organisation for active citizens). Five ALE students from the minor Imagineering and business/social innovation took responsibility for concept and actual organisation. On Jan 18th, they were supported by six other group members of the minor as volunteers. An IMEM-team of 5 students gathered materials for a video that can support the follow-up actions of the organisers. The students planned to deliver their final product on February 9th. The theatre will critically assess the result and compare it to the products often realised by students from different schools or even professional ones, like Veldkamp productions. Time will tell whether future opportunities will come up for IMEM. The collaboration of ALE and IMEM students is possible and adding value to the project.More than 180 visitors showed interest in the efforts of 30 national and local citizen initiatives presenting themselves on the market square in the theatre and the diverse speakers during the plenary session. The students created a great atmosphere using the qualities of the physical space and the hospitality of the theatre. Chair of the day, Roland Kleve, kicked off and invited a diverse group of people to the stage: Giel Pastoor, director of the theatre, used the opportunity to share his thoughts on the shifting role of theatre in our dynamic society. Petra Ligtenberg, senior project manager SDG NL https://www.sdgnederland.nl/sdgs/ gave insights to the objectives and progress of the Netherlands. Elly Rijnierse, city maker and entrepreneur from Den Haag, presented her intriguing efforts in her own neighbourhood in the city to create at once both practical and social impacts on SDG 11 (sustainable city; subgoal 3.2). Then the alderman Marcel Oosterveer informed the visitors about Eindhoven’s efforts on SDGs. The plenary ended with very personal interviews of representatives of two impressive citizen initiatives (Parkinson to beat; Stichting Ik Wil). In the two workshop rounds, ALE took responsibility for two workshops. Firstly the workshop: Beyond SDG cherrypicking: using the Economy for the common good’, in cooperation with citizen initiative Ware winst Brabant en Parktheater (including Social innovation-intern Jasper Box), secondly a panel dialogue on local partnerships (SDG 17) for the sustainable city (SDG 11) addressing inclusion (SDG 10) and the livability (SDG 3) with 11 representatives from local/provincial government, companies, third sector and, of course: citizen initiatives.
The production, use, disposal and recovery of packaging not only generates massive volumes of waste, it also consumes raw materials, water and energy (Fitzpatrick et al. 2012). Simultaneously, consumers have shown an increasing interest in products incorporating sustainable and social attributes (Kletzan et al., 2006). As a result, environmentally friendly packaging, also called ecofriendly or sustainable packaging, has become mainstream. In this context, packaging is more than just ensuring the product's protection and easing transportation, it is also a communicative tool (Palmer, 2000) and it becomes associated with multiple drivers of the purchasing process. Consequently, companies face pressure to innovate responding to consumer demands, and focusing on sustainable solutions that reduce harmful materials and favour green alternatives for both, the product and the packaging. Although the above has triggered research on consumer choice for sustainable products and alternatives on sustainable packaging, the relation between sustainable packaging and consumer behaviour remains underexplored. This research unpacks this relationship, i.e., empirically verifies which dimensions (recyclability, biodegradability, reusability) of sustainable packaging are perceived and valued by consumers. Put differently, this research investigates consumer behaviour towards the functions of sustainable packaging in terms of product protection, convenience, reliability of information and promotion, and scrutinises the perceived credibility of the associated ethical responsibility claims. It aims to identify those packaging materials and/or sustainability characteristics perceived as more sustainable by consumers as well as the factors influencing actual consumer choice towards sustainable packaged products. We aim to gain more insights in the perceptual frame that different types of consumers apply when exposed to sustainable packaging. To this end, we will make use of revealed preference methods to measure consumer valuations of sustainable packaged products. This game-theoretic approach should provide a more complete depiction of consumers' perceptions and preferences.
Collaborative networks for sustainability are emerging rapidly to address urgent societal challenges. By bringing together organizations with different knowledge bases, resources and capabilities, collaborative networks enhance information exchange, knowledge sharing and learning opportunities to address these complex problems that cannot be solved by organizations individually. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the apparel sector, where examples of collaborative networks for sustainability are plenty, for example Sustainable Apparel Coalition, Zero Discharge Hazardous Chemicals, and the Fair Wear Foundation. Companies like C&A and H&M but also smaller players join these networks to take their social responsibility. Collaborative networks are unlike traditional forms of organizations; they are loosely structured collectives of different, often competing organizations, with dynamic membership and usually lack legal status. However, they do not emerge or organize on their own; they need network orchestrators who manage the network in terms of activities and participants. But network orchestrators face many challenges. They have to balance the interests of diverse companies and deal with tensions that often arise between them, like sharing their innovative knowledge. Orchestrators also have to “sell” the value of the network to potential new participants, who make decisions about which networks to join based on the benefits they expect to get from participating. Network orchestrators often do not know the best way to maintain engagement, commitment and enthusiasm or how to ensure knowledge and resource sharing, especially when competitors are involved. Furthermore, collaborative networks receive funding from grants or subsidies, creating financial uncertainty about its continuity. Raising financing from the private sector is difficult and network orchestrators compete more and more for resources. When networks dissolve or dysfunction (due to a lack of value creation and capture for participants, a lack of financing or a non-functioning business model), the collective value that has been created and accrued over time may be lost. This is problematic given that industrial transformations towards sustainability take many years and durable organizational forms are required to ensure ongoing support for this change. Network orchestration is a new profession. There are no guidelines, handbooks or good practices for how to perform this role, nor is there professional education or a professional association that represents network orchestrators. This is urgently needed as network orchestrators struggle with their role in governing networks so that they create and capture value for participants and ultimately ensure better network performance and survival. This project aims to foster the professionalization of the network orchestrator role by: (a) generating knowledge, developing and testing collaborative network governance models, facilitation tools and collaborative business modeling tools to enable network orchestrators to improve the performance of collaborative networks in terms of collective value creation (network level) and private value capture (network participant level) (b) organizing platform activities for network orchestrators to exchange ideas, best practices and learn from each other, thereby facilitating the formation of a professional identity, standards and community of network orchestrators.
