Research from global PR trade body ICCO has found PROs struggling
to take control of the corporate social responsibility issue, despite
CSR's growing profile and impact on corporate reputation, says Adam
Hill.
At ICCO's global summit in San Francisco last month, the body asked
senior management from PR agencies worldwide to crystalise the nature of
the relationship between PR and corporate social responsibility.
The responses suggest PR's importance in, say, crisis management and as
a 'home for ideas' is well accepted. But overall, they said clients
massively undervalued PR's role in CSR, with the result that PR is not
as integral to the implementation of strategies as it could be.
Influence over CSR, it seems, is as likely to lie with HR departments as
with PROs.
On the setting of group strategy aspects of CSR, more than 40 per cent
of respondents thought it should reside with the office of the CEO,
against less than ten per cent in corporate affairs. This final figure
is barely more than the number who thought it should be part of the HR
brief.
PR is seen as the key function only in communicating about CSR's value.
Not, crucially, in implementation or in attempting to affect major
change.
Jim Surguy, MD of PR agency advisory firm Results Business Consulting,
insists the findings say more about the standing of PR than the
ignorance of client companies: 'CSR should be dealt with at board level.
In many cases, the PR community doesn't have access at that level, to
drive CSR activities.'
Hilary Sutcliffe, head of CSR specialist Shared View, goes further.
Although she concedes media relations is an important facet of CSR, she
believes that too many agencies simply do not understand the area.
'You are not going to hire a PR company to do CSR. Some people see PR as
a barrier to implementing CSR because PR firms can't help but think in
terms of one-way promotional activity. Stakeholder communication is a
two-way process: feeding back, consulting, dialogue,' she says.
In the wake of 11 September, the survey found, more will be expected of
companies in terms of CSR, which will in turn mean clients attach more
importance - and money - to it. But Luther Pendragon issues management
expert Ben Rich suggests that the relative newness of CSR means it has
yet to be challenged as a concept - only a recession would do that.
'The test of CSR will be through those companies which cut back CSR in
recession or those who regard it as a core driver of business. I suspect
there will be a number who just pay lip service to it,' he adds.
The Institute of Social and Ethical Accountability (ISEA) is more upbeat
and focuses on methods for evaluating the efficacy of CSR projects.
Programme manager John Sabapathy points to ISEA's fourth annual Social
Reporting Awards, handed out to companies that demonstrate their
commitment to good corporate citizenship. Although the survey found
awards were seen as the least important measure of CSR success, they are
at least one visible marker.
The research suggests there is a way to go with other methods. Because
CSR embraces a welter of reputation-affecting issues as diverse as
inward investment, environmental impact and staff training, the sector
is nowhere near having the sophisticated measures that assess even half
these things individually.
Amanda Jordan, director of Chime-backed CSR agency The Smart Company,
touches on one of two CSR headaches; first, the range of activities it
covers is bewildering; and second, the make-up of the audience of NGOs
and various opinion-formers that ultimately determine a company's CSR
success is complex.
Significantly, when it comes to the importance of measuring and
evaluating initiatives, most respondents chose stakeholder surveys as
the most important measure, with 51 per cent saying evaluation was 'very
important', and 46 per cent choosing 'quite important'.
'That 46 per cent realised that it is going to be very difficult to
quantify,' Chris McDowall, ICCO secretary-general, suggests.
John Williams, formerly at Fishburn Hedges and now an independent PR
consultant, argues that PR has the potential to play a far more
prominent role than is often believed to be the case: 'CSR must be CEO
or board-led. It's a question of who at the centre provides the support
and encouragement for that. PR isn't the be all and end all but it is
CSR's natural home. One aspect of implementation is that you must
communicate. Because CSR is a combination of managing behaviour and
stakeholder accountability, the criteria are forever changing.'
PROs' involvement is not always welcome, Williams continues: 'A lot of
(companies) still think it's a bit crass to talk about it and that's a
barrier. Some people still associate PR with cheap publicity.'
This will have to change because it is only by publicising CSR
initiatives that organisations can invite the sort of public debate that
will make their activities more meaningful, he argues.
The crucial point is engaging with stakeholders, because firms are
unable to engage with people unless through communication.
Multinationals are more susceptible to influence than traders in the
developing world.
Indeed, according to many of those working in the CSR consultancy
sector' the big mistake of anti-globalisation campaigns, and NGOs, is to
see multinationals as the enemy. They are not, the argument goes - they
are organisations whose policies the campaigners can affect.
