When analyzing Unilever and Procter and Gamble’s corporate social responsibility stances, many similarities can be seen. The first main similarity in each company’s corporate social responsibility stance relates to common goals. Both company’s share the common goals relating to deforestation, commitment to small farmers and sustainable agriculture practices, and clean water. In Procter and Gamble’s sustainability report, they implement a no-deforestation plan for suppliers, small-farmers program to improve practices and livelihoods, and their Children’s Safe Drinking Water program to provide clean water for families. (“2015 Sustainability”, 2015). Similarly, Unilever wishes to eliminate deforestation by 2020 to combat climate change, encourage sustainable agriculture techniques to increase yields for small farmers, and make progress towards worldwide access to safe drinking water (Bartlett, 2016). The second similarity found between these two companies relates to the joining of various organizations in order to advance their cause. Unilever partners with organizations such as the Tropical Rainforest Alliance, Consumer Goods Forum, and Save the Children. These organizations do not belong to any part of the companies value chain (Bartlett, 2016). Proctor and Gamble also joined organizations outside their value chain. They have joined programs such as Climate Savers, Corporate Renewable Energy Buyers’, and RE100 (“2015 Sustainability”, 2015). Both companies commit to
Every company has a responsibility to support the society it serves. This indicates that a company that wishes to truly thrive in a market should not just follow the business and consumer laws of the country but take an active interest in the community that it serves in each country. Today’s global market is led by companies that concern themselves with the sustainability of the company and its products, as well as the continual improvement of the
Kroger’s CSR efforts regarding environmental efforts are more robust than employee stakeholder support. Even with this, Kroger is considered a laggard with environmental CSR standards when compared to Walmart and Target (van der Ven, 2014). A main reason for this could be due to Kroger’s relatively light involvement with CSR focused organizations. Their leadership may simply not be exposed to CSR ideas as much as their peers (van der Ven, 2014). Expanding CSR knowledge, and leadership widening their network on CSR possibilities will give Kroger’s leaders access to industry leaders best practice knowledge.
The purpose of this paper is to compare the sustainability practices of two companies in the same industry. The two companies chosen for comparison are The Hershey Company and Coca-Cola Enterprises, both of which are in the consumer staples industry. These two corporations are ranked sixth and eighth, respectively, on the Newsweek Top Green Companies in the U.S 2015. They have taken pride in creating sustainable product designs, having environmentally sustainable processes and supply chain management.
The evolving practices around corporate social responsibility (CSR) provide dynamic, and complex opportunities for business. Overall, businesses are modifying their core purpose from creating shareholder profit toward creating shared value across their stakeholders, with shareholders being only one of the many stakeholders. This paper analyzes the 74th ranked 2014 Fortune Global 500 Company Kroger. Kroger started in 1883 as a local Cincinnati, Ohio grocery store, and has expended to be the second largest retail grocery store in the United States, and fifth largest in the world, owning retail food and drug stores, jewelry stores, and convenience stores in the United States (Kroger, 2015). Kroger remains headquartered in Ohio. An overview of Kroger, and specifically Kroger’s corporate social responsibility (CSR) strategy and implementation will be discussed, followed by a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) CSR analysis informing a concluding plan to enhance Kroger’s CSR maturity.
or so many years our society has been thinking of forming new creative and innovative businesses, which would be more environmental and customer friendly. Nowadays a large number of different companies follow the social, ethical, as well as moral consequences when it comes to their decision making. One of the relatively new concepts involving economic and social concerns is Corporate Social Responsibility. Many of us apply this approach not only at work, but also in everyday life without even recognizing.
Shared value is a business strategy which focuses on creating overall value while addressing social problems. This concept of management strategy was expressed in the “Creating Shared Value” article by Porter and Kramer. Shared value is not just an aspect of a company’s growth strategy or general business operations. It is well integrated in the way a company operates along with what their goals are as an organization. The value created for a company’s targeted end user also has some sort of social impact which benefits their company purpose. Creating social impact is a company goal and success is measured through creating a shared value network. Porter believes that “The ability to address social issues is integral to profit maximization instead of treated as outside the profit model.” He is addressing that profits are not measured by impact not just monetary gains for the company, we can change our mindset to think of profit in a different way. Profit can be a benefit or some sort of added value. In this approach Porter argues that “Corporate social responsibility encompasses not only what companies do with their profits, but also how they make them.” This relationship is the driving force for a company’s development and future growth, and it goes beyond corporate strategy it also incorporates investments and key stakeholders for each company. Quantifying a monetary figure and amount for social impact may be extremely difficult, however it has progressed with awareness and
Exxon-Mobil is the world’s largest privately owned multi-national oil and gas company (Skjaerseth 2003). For companies as large as ExxonMobil, which possess considerable capital resources and are able to exert considerable power and influence, society is increasingly demanding that they behave in a socially responsible manner (Diara, Alilo, and McGuire 2004). There is a growing expectation that companies will adopt a business approach that illustrates responsibility to society above and beyond the economic function and legal performance of the firm (Gibbs 2009). This expectation can be understood as an implicit social contract. One of the underlying
Corporate social responsibility has been one the key business buzz words of the 21st century. Consumers' discontent with the corporation has forced it to try and rectify its negative image by associating its name with good deeds. Social responsibility has become one of the corporation's most pressing issues, each company striving to outdo the next with its philanthropic image. People feel that the corporation has done great harm to both the environment and to society and that with all of its wealth and power, it should be leading the fight to save the Earth, to combat poverty and illness and etc. "Corporations are now expected to deliver the good, not just the goods; to pursue
‘Corporate social responsibility’ (CSR) means that the firm has wider responsibilities in relation to objectives and people apart from the owners or shareholders (Beal and Goyen 2005). These responsibilities are achieved when the firm adapts all of its practices to ensure that it operates in ways that meet, or exceed, the ethical, legal, commercial and public expectations that society has of business. Objectives often associated with CSR include a responsibility to manage natural assets sustainably and not to pollute by chemical discharge, smell, noise, dust or other irritants; fair treatment of employees and ethical attitude towards clients. The other people include employees, customers, suppliers,
There are now several concepts of CSR and its definition, along with the meaning across corporations. In my opinion, and according with our textbook in page 11. CSR is about a particular set of business and strategies that deal with social issues. In addition, we can clearly perceive that CSRs application along corporations has increase in the past decade due to the several local, and international regulations in order to enforce business to act responsible.
This assignment will initially describe social marketing and then indicate how corporations affect stakeholders through companies’ social marketing and responsibility. Following that, the importance and functions of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and social marketing will be demonstrated. Finally, it will explain how organizations reflect CSR and make a short conclusion to indicate the relationship between social marketing and CSR.
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is a very controversial topic. A question that has been debated for the past few decades is; is it corporately viable to introduce social responsibility as a proposed addition to the work ethic of business organisations. As well as, if adopting the framework of corporate social responsibility would yield positive improvements for those organisations.
This is essay will focus on analyzing how corporate social responsibility (CSR) influences the investor relations of a corporation and whether it is good for the society, using Gasland and FrackNation as examples. In the contemporary society, CSR sounds like a commendatory term for the society. Over decades, it seems like that both the public and the media are trying to encourage corporations to behave more responsibly, and corporations are gradually becoming more socially aware in the contemporary society because they know they cannot afford the consequence of ignoring it. (Bernstein, 2009:606) However, CSR is not always beneficial. One of the major practices of public relations is investor relations, because the concerns of a corporation’s investors can directly relate to its welfare. When the corporations paid more attention on CSR, their investors will inevitably somehow feel ignored. As a public which has real material input to the corporations, investors are seeking for future returns, they want to be treated specially by the corporations that they invest. Also, value too much about CSR can make corporations become the victim of being morally hijacked, which may harm both a corporation’s financial success and the whole society’s harmony.
When it comes to economic and demographic forces within Unilever, we are well aware of worldwide population growth, changing mixes of age, ethnic composition, educational levels, the rise of nontradional families, and the large geographic shifts in population around the world. This is why at Unilever, we are learning how sustainability can generate growth, control costs, and help us to manage business risk. Through the Unilever Sustainable Living Plan, we have committed ourselves to cutting our environmental impact by improving health and well being for billions of people around the world. We have set tough goals to making sure we accomplish our commitments. We also work with organizations through partnerships that have the potential to change things on a global scale.
Companies that are socially and environmentally responsible in fact benefit generally a better image that allows them to improve financially. This is also reflected in the policy of Nestle company which believes, according to CEO Paul Bulcke, that “in order to prosper we need the communities we serve and in which we operate to prosper as well: and that over the long term, healthy populations, healthy economies and healthy business performance are mutually reinforcing.” Thus, if the social responsibility of the company represents a collection of principles and practices useful, the real test of a business is to create value for the company in the long term. This is particularly true for developing countries, where we often improve business conditions strengthening capacities of producers, promote the development of a skilled workforce and develop better standards for success.