Post by account_disabled on Mar 9, 2024 0:03:14 GMT -5
“There are only 500 socially responsible companies.” It referred to the companies that during 2010 had received recognition as a socially responsible company, out of the 1,000 candidates. Supposedly this means that the badge places those companies in an exclusive club. When reading the headline of the article, the novel that Enrique Jardiel Poncela published in 1930 called But were there ever 11,000 virgins? For the younger ones who never heard of him (not that I'm that old, but he was still fashionable in my youth in the sixties), Jardiel Poncela was a Spanish writer of novels, accounts, aphorisms, definitions, etc. , with a high comic-sarcastic-satirical sense unique in his time, precursor of modern comedians. Jardiel Poncela was referring, incredulously, to another exclusive club. He expressed his surprise that under current conditions (1930), there were so many members in that club. I also express my surprise that at present (2010) there are so many companies that can be classified as socially responsible in a country. Of course there are many more that have SOME responsible practices. But from there to being socially responsible in a generic way….…… Unlike virginity, the company's social responsibility is partial. Just as there is no such thing as partial virginity, there is no such thing as fully responsible business. We commented in a previous article (Accreditation of socially responsible companies? on the blog the potentially misleading use of a company's responsibility rating. In general, these recognitions are granted based on the responses that the companies themselves make to a questionnaire. In some cases, responses are verified with supporting information provided by the company and other publicly available information.
In some cases, these recognitions are granted not Phone Number List only to commercial companies but also to university campuses, to company departments and management, and to soccer clubs. Among the winners are usually liquor and tobacco manufacturers. These recognitions or awards raise awareness about responsible practices and this is an important contribution. The publicity it has makes many companies interested in obtaining them and that is why they participate. It is assumed that by having to participate they make improvements in their responsible practices, which would be a very positive contribution, although there is still no more than circumstantial demonstration of this. I wish someone would do an analytical study of how participation in these contests has impacted these practices in reality. It would be necessary to see how practices have evolved before and after participating, when they have stopped participating, in those companies that have never participated, and in the country in general, before being able to attribute causality to participation in the recognition. However, companies use and abuse recognition, making stakeholders believe that they are responsible companies, not that they have SOME RESPONSIBLE PRACTICES, but that they are socially responsible, that they are socially and environmentally virgin. To this end, workshops have been developed on how to answer the questionnaires and how to take advantage of the recognition, once they obtain it. Some companies even hire consultants to answer them.
Is obtaining recognition a strategic objective or is it recognition of responsible practices? A week after being granted the recognition, one of the most respected companies in that country, considered a leader in the issue of social responsibility, winner of many recognitions and awards, was fined in another country for violations of workplace safety regulations in its plants in three cities, resulting in work accidents with amputation. This situation is common to the vast majority of “generic” recognitions of corporate responsibility, which do not distinguish between some responsible practices and total responsibility. Is there anything wrong with this? Yes, it does, when companies use it so that interest groups associate the recognition with that all practices are responsible, which is not responsible. For example, consumers have so little information about products that we can believe that with recognition the product is responsible, has been produced responsibly, etc. and make no further inquiries. The company avoids having to provide information about its responsible practices. It has a recognition that validates them. We have nothing against recognizing the responsible practices of companies. This should be done in all countries. But from there to extending partial practices to full responsibility, based on questionnaires prepared by the company itself, there is a long way to go.
In some cases, these recognitions are granted not Phone Number List only to commercial companies but also to university campuses, to company departments and management, and to soccer clubs. Among the winners are usually liquor and tobacco manufacturers. These recognitions or awards raise awareness about responsible practices and this is an important contribution. The publicity it has makes many companies interested in obtaining them and that is why they participate. It is assumed that by having to participate they make improvements in their responsible practices, which would be a very positive contribution, although there is still no more than circumstantial demonstration of this. I wish someone would do an analytical study of how participation in these contests has impacted these practices in reality. It would be necessary to see how practices have evolved before and after participating, when they have stopped participating, in those companies that have never participated, and in the country in general, before being able to attribute causality to participation in the recognition. However, companies use and abuse recognition, making stakeholders believe that they are responsible companies, not that they have SOME RESPONSIBLE PRACTICES, but that they are socially responsible, that they are socially and environmentally virgin. To this end, workshops have been developed on how to answer the questionnaires and how to take advantage of the recognition, once they obtain it. Some companies even hire consultants to answer them.
Is obtaining recognition a strategic objective or is it recognition of responsible practices? A week after being granted the recognition, one of the most respected companies in that country, considered a leader in the issue of social responsibility, winner of many recognitions and awards, was fined in another country for violations of workplace safety regulations in its plants in three cities, resulting in work accidents with amputation. This situation is common to the vast majority of “generic” recognitions of corporate responsibility, which do not distinguish between some responsible practices and total responsibility. Is there anything wrong with this? Yes, it does, when companies use it so that interest groups associate the recognition with that all practices are responsible, which is not responsible. For example, consumers have so little information about products that we can believe that with recognition the product is responsible, has been produced responsibly, etc. and make no further inquiries. The company avoids having to provide information about its responsible practices. It has a recognition that validates them. We have nothing against recognizing the responsible practices of companies. This should be done in all countries. But from there to extending partial practices to full responsibility, based on questionnaires prepared by the company itself, there is a long way to go.