A couple of weeks back the Economist published a 'survey' of Corporate Social Responsibility; largely an attempt at a demolition-job on an idea the newspaper has always found uncomfortable. The effort was, sadly, a poor one. There was little in the way of sources and examples, the oft-mentioned and decidedly shadowy 'CSR advocates' bearing the brunt of the author's scorn. The estemed journal was demonstrating criticisms often levelled at such advocates.
This week The Economist published some of the replies, I've pulled out some excerpts below:
Your arid leader (“The good company”, January 22nd) seeks to discredit CSR by creating a false antithesis. Most advocates of CSR accept, as I do, that unadorned capitalism can serve the public interest — and adorned capitalism, through companies with an appropriate and proportionate approach to CSR, can serve that interest even better. ~ Sir Christopher Bland, Chairman, BT
A well-run company engaging in the selfish pursuit of profit would lobby for subsidies and tariffs to reduce costs and increase revenue, heedless of the market distortions they may cause. How do you square this with your usual argument that free trade is necessary to lift developing countries out of poverty? ~ Jean-Philippe Marcotte, San Francisco
Like the academics and consultants that have mushroomed under CSR, you concentrate on a woolly debate and wholly ignore the challenge that capitalism faces today. There is a prevailing public distrust of companies arising from the perception that profit precedes principle, rather than being based upon it.... Capitalism, the most effective mechanism the world has so far known for providing goods and services and creating wealth, is under threat not from without, but from itself and from its lack of underlying principles. It is a threat probably increased by the confusion of thought fostered by the proponents of CSR and the tunnel vision of its opponents, whose views dominated your survey. ~ Sir Geoffrey Chandler, Former Director, Shell International
Comments