Are companies creating a CSR strategy for marketing or environmental reasons?

Are companies creating a CSR strategy for marketing or environmental reasons?

This question largely depends on the company; to be specific there are companies who have CSR strategies for marketing reasons, companies that have CSR strategies for environmental reasons, and there are companies that have CSR strategies for both reasons. Those companies which use CSR as a strategy for both reasons are able to obtain a competitive advantage as a result of a strong CSR strategy.
 
An article which delves into this issue is Strategy & Society: The Link between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility by Michael Porter and Mark Kramer; this article addresses the difference between responsive and strategic CSR and explains how society and business are mutually dependent on each other. Additionally it also explains how for those companies which focus on a CSR strategy purely for marketing reasons will rarely find the strategic benefit that CSR offers.

The article states that “ the most common corporate response [to CSR] have been neither strategic nor operational but cosmetic: public relations and media campaigns, the centerpieces of which are often glossy CSR reports that showcase companies’ social and environmental good deeds;” and these types of reports which are published purely for marketing reasons are receiving negative responses as activist organizations and other stakeholders are responding to these reports which often leave out important information or fail to engage properly in transparency. Thus while it is important for an organization to publish a CSR report as part of a strategic CSR initiative, these reports need to be accurate and transparent- a good starting point for most companies is to follow the GRI Guidelines. Furthermore a company which publishes a strong CSR report will find that they benefit strategically from a CSR standpoint and from the marketing exposure.
 
For those companies who appropriately engage in strategic CSR they will benefit from advantages-as stated in The Sustainable MBA: The Manager’s Guide to Green Business by Giselle Weybrecht- such as reduced costs; strong supply chain management; increased productivity- as employees who feel an internal commitment to their organization will increase their productivity; a stronger reputation; and ultimately will outperform competitors as based off of these strategic advantages.

I think that Porter and Kramer state it best as they argue that “successful corporations need a healthy society” and in turn “a healthy society needs successful companies,” and thus there is a mutual dependence between the two. Additionally those companies which recognize this symbiotic relationship will have the strongest CSR strategy as this relationship becomes mutually reinforcing as the success of the company is dependent upon the success of the community.
 
As mentioned earlier one of the biggest issues that a company who engages in CSR practices for marketing purposes should be concerned with is greenwashing and how stakeholders will be affected by such practices. Greenwashing has become very apparent in today’s society and is utilized by companies for products that we frequently purchase; and thus what we believe to be a company engaging in strong environmental practices is often actually a company using strong marketing tools to deceive us into thinking that they are engaging in CSR strategies. An example of this was posted in an article I recently read on HBR Blog called Getting Ecological Transparency Right by Daniel Goleman; this article talked about how the food industry engaged in greenwashing with its Smart Choice campaign.

This campaign put a green seal of approval on products that were apparently certified to be healthy; however questionable products received the Smart Choice seal of approval- these products included Foot Loops and Cocoa Crispies. Obviously, both of these cereals are not exactly what one would consider to be a healthy choice considering the amount of sugar in these products; thus this campaign was largely scrutinized from outside stakeholders and the FDA ended up investigating such claims which resulted in the Smart Choice program suspending its operations. While I have mentioned only one example of greenwashing this technique is frequently used by many companies and can result in operational deficiencies when identified by stakeholders.
 
While there are companies which have weak CSR programs there are companies today which are leaders in CSR practices and have shown that you can engage in CSR for both environmental and marketing reasons. Such companies include Ben and Jerry’s, Patagonia, and The Body Shop. These companies are known for pursuing CSR strategies for both calculative and value-based reasons and have seen tremendous success based off of these strategies. Therefore it is evident that there are companies who engage in CSR for different reasons, but it is those companies who have a well-rounded strategic CSR program which ultimately benefit from the competitive advantage that CSR offers. So for those companies which want to be leaders and to outperform their competition they need to adjust their practices to be aligned with a strategic CSR program rather than a responsive CSR program.