I spent the majority of yesterday afternoon preparing for my mid-year appraisal review; some of the time was spent tracking the progress that I have made on my objectives, the rest trying to evidence my ‘core behaviours’ (the behaviours that it is vital I display in order to carry out my job).  

Whilst grappling with the task of how to evidence that I can effectively communicate and influence, plan and organise, work in a team etc, it struck me how useful my volunteering really is. As an employee at the City of London, my volunteering can be linked into my appraisal process. All employees are encouraged to think of volunteering as an alternative learning and development tool. I, however, hadn’t really thought about this on a personal level. 

I volunteer giving fundraising advice to a partnership for older people in Hackney. The work that I do for them is quite ad hoc, but usually last minute so as to fit the potential funders’ guidelines. This means that I do sometimes have to juggle things around - maybe take a long lunchbreak in which to do the volunteering work and then prioritise my afternoon activities differently (planning and organising). I often end up giving feedback on written applications that have been prepared by the charity’s staff (communications and influence). Giving constructive feedback to other people is something that I sometimes find hard to do at work, so this is a great way to get practise. The volunteering is also useful in terms of practicing writing in a clear and succinct way and keeping up my knowledge of the voluntary sector. 

On top of all these skills, as I work in the Corporate Responsibility team, my volunteering is actually related to my role as I get the experience of being a corporate volunteer. This means that I can talk at a personal level when trying to encourage others to volunteer.  

I know the expression is often thrown around in relation to volunteering - but it does seem to be a win, win situation!

Last night I attended Gerry Acher’s inaugural lecture at the RSA. Gerry, Chair of the RSA is involved in CSR in a number of different ways, not least as Chair of Heart of the City and a member of the Final Judging Panel for the Lord Mayor’s Dragon Awards.

The lecture, entitled ‘Corporate Responsibility: thrive, die or be sidelined through the quest for profit’ could not have been better timed in terms of the current economic climate. The key points looked at how CSR started, where we are today, the effect of the current economic climate and where Gerry sees its future.

To me, the main question that the lecture raised was that of responsibility. Gerry cited three stages of Corporate Responsibility (CR) that companies worked through in their development: 1. Philanthropy - be it in cash, in-kind support or volunteers’ time. 2. Risk Management - including the management of reputation and the avoidance of ‘own goals’. 3. The whole-hearted embedding of CR into a business - operating with trust and transparency, and ultimately reaping business advantages in the process. This reminded me of another talk I had been too which discussed similar stages, except there were four - a new and much more basic stage 1, that of a business acting in a responsible way - paying taxes, making returns to shareholders etc.

Hold that thought, while I introduce you to another interesting insight of Gerry’s. He talked about how many companies currently look at CR in a ‘pick ‘n’ mix’ fashion. In other words, that from some angles they will look very passionate about CR and in others shy away from it completely. One example he used was Starbucks, who have done fantastic work in championing transparency and openness in their supply chains, a good example of a strong CR policy. On the other hand, they continue to open stores in small towns and villages, what is often too detrimental effect to local business.

Thinking about the pick ‘n’ mix attitude, and the various stage of CR, it occurred to me that recently we have seen this in striking terms in the banking sector. Many (if not all) the large banks, it can be claimed have acted in a way that is completely irresponsible. They could not claim to even pass the first stage in CR. However, a number of them have exceptional corporate community involvement schemes that are leading the way in this field. This to me, seems like the ultimate pick ‘n’ mix.

Dwelling on this further, I also realised that as a CR professional it can be hard. Although many banks employ a Head of CR or CR Manager, none of these roles cover the responsible commercial actions of a business. I am sure no CR manager would have dreamed it within their remit to suggest, for example, an end to short selling of shares by their employer. Yet, without this sort of responsibility, surely we are all failing at the first stage?

I know that there is always a lot of debate about the language of CR. Pretty much every talk I have ever been to on the subject starts by looking at the many different terms that can be used. Maybe the time has come for businesses to look at the term ‘responsibility’ seriously.

Last week, Goldman Sachs (GS) announced their new partners for their 10,000 Women scheme.  Some news sources viewed this as ill-timed.  But why should current economic conditions affect their Corporate Responsibility (CR) announcements? Would they delay the announcement of new contracts, investment decisions or any other business as usual? 

The GS announcement is only insensitive if we believe other institutions will be significantly scaling back their CR activity.  Let’s be honest.  There will need to be efficiency savings in CR budgets - and possible resource cuts, but this will also be true across other departments.  Let’s not forget there is a strong business case for CR activities.  Consequently, CR activities should not experience any more pressure than other departments.  If we don’t stick by that business case when it matters, what is the point of promoting it in the first place?

Those who aren’t convinced by the business case for CR will be looking to make substantial cost savings from cutting CR budgets (if not teams) during this economic decline.  This is a mistake.  We are now operating in a climate of accountability and responsibility.  Severely cutting back on CR programmes now will not only expose all businesses to a threat of future regulation, it will also continue to damage your reputation even once we are through these difficult times.

Take for example Bank of America and HSBC, who have stuck by their business case.  Both are retail banks (and therefore consumer-facing) and recognise the importance of maintaining a global brand value by developing strong CR identities.  And they continue to weather this economic storm quite well.  Let’s hope their colleagues and competitors follow suit.

For more assistance on developing the business case for Corporate Responsibility, please visit:

http://www.city-action.org/resources/index.html

http://www.volunteering.org.uk/NR/rdonlyres/2A38DB92-7B74-4CA5-9C79-46364B7FC2FA/0/business_case_SMEfinal1.pdf

http://www.responsiblepractice.com/english/issues/wbcsd-business/

http://www.bitc.org.uk/resources/publications/cr_business_case.html