On-Line Forum on Corporate Responsibility
The On-Line Forum on Corporate Responsibility ran for three weeks
in October-November, 2001, following Professor David Birch's seminar
on Corporate Citizenship and Sustainability. Questions pursued and
conclusions are as follows:
1) What role should government take in relation to corporate
citizenship?
This question produced most discussion in the forum. The problem
of internal tension within the regulator's role, which involves
compliance audit, enforcement action as appropriate, and advisory/educational
activities. It's therefore difficult, said James Treloar, to maintain
a level of independence that satisfies sectors of the community.
The model that's now evolved for environmental regulation looks
workable, with
certification paid for by the organisation itself, and independent
certification bodies working to standards accredited and audited
by bodies like the Joint Accreditation System, so results are both
independent and consistent.
For the regulator, this structure provides a sense of comfort in
the compliance verification role yet it is at arms length from Government
itself.
There are standards being developed for corporate citizenship.
AccountAbility, a UK-based organisation set up in 1996 to promote
best practice in social and ethical accounting has a set of standards
for reporting, and while not a standard, the Australian Business
Excellence Framework of the Australian Quality Council includes
an item on environmental and community contribution.
2) What measures of corporate citizenship would enable
investors to assess company performance?
While there's growing interest in ethical investment, there's not
much rigor in the analysis of company performance. John Bell saw
a danger that initial interest will wane unless there are credible
measures of performance in relation to corporate citizenship.
This question was raised in the first round of agenda setting,
but not pursued by participants.
3) How do companies translate the aspiration to corporate
citizenship into policy, and then into operational activity?
Peter Elliott suggested that a major avenue has been public environmental
or sustainability reports, generated by departments or sites, not
necessarily in response to corporate policy but simply because the
specialists in those departments see this as a better way to handle
the reporting task. These developments haven't necessarily been
labelled as "corporate citizenship." Hence there's a need
to work with senior management to write overarching policy on sustainability,
and to locate that inside the broader agenda of corporate citizenship.
Another avenue has been the extensive scenario planning and business
environment reviews that some large companies engage in when thinking
about their positioning. What is giving sustainability agenda "bite"
here is modelling that anticipates financial impacts. The Balanced
Scorecard approach puts an economic value on soft issues, and is
providing a platform for debate about environmental cost accounting
and new economic measures such as EVM.
What we could do with are good case studies of the different pathways
companies have taken.
Summary by Ross Colliver
Facilitator, The Training and Development Group
Tuesday, 20 November 2001
|
