Context Goals – Blowing The Smoke Away From The Finish Line

This is a blog was originally published on the Cause Nation blog. 

Over the past 10 years, there has been a significant shift in the way that companies communicate with their stakeholders. In an increasingly connected, ‘open source’ world, company marketing and communications teams no longer have full control of their story and are held up to much higher standards of transparency. For the CSR and Sustainability field, this shift has been highly influential in moving companies – both public and private – away from over-exaggerated claims of changing the world towards more authentic and credible actions and communications.

Now expectations are shifting again.

Since the Sustainable Brands New Metrics Conference in Boston last Fall, I have been reading and feeding my inner impact geek with the latest trends around measurement, storytelling, and in particular, the emerging sphere of ‘context goals.’

Context goals highlight the scope of our entire problem or challenge and a company’s role or impact within it. Instead of companies setting discretionary goals based on what they feel able to achieve and what their competitors are doing; companies will set goals based on scientifically-derived “thresholds” that determine what needs to be done to solve the world’s pressing social and environmental challenges. For example, scientists have the data to show us what GHG emissions reductions are required to prevent the devastating impacts of climate change – this is the threshold that can work back from to set goals for the corporate and other sectors to achieve.

Up until now, organizations have been racing along, edging ahead of their competitors and trying to stay at the front of the pack; context goals finally show us the finish line so that we can all train and prepare ourselves to go the distance. As Bob Willard put it during one of the SB New Metrics panel sessions “the time for incrementalism has passed and we need to act based on the realities.”

The focus of the discussions at the SB New Metrics Conference was on context goals for environmental sustainability efforts rather than social issues as the measurement methodologies are more advanced. This highlights the need to advance our understanding of social issues and viable solutions. Having said that, there is still some way to go to set environmental sustainability context goals. There still needs to be agreement on the science behind the setting of thresholds, and the complicated questions around how accountability is determined i.e. how much one company needs to do vs. another. 

Sustainability frontrunners are already leading the charge around context goals. Ben and Jerry’s is piloting the MultiCapital Scorecard Method, which not only positions social and environmental metrics alongside traditional financial metrics, but also shows progress against third party derived thresholds.

For the Cause Consulting team, the advent of context goals is very exciting. Over the past 10 years, we have been proud to work with many companies striving to make measurable progress against difficult social and environmental challenges. The ‘context era’ will continue to support them to tackle the root causes of these issues and demonstrate their important contribution.

It may also facilitate more collaboration between different organizations – both for-profit and non-profit – because there will be unified goals that everyone can rally behind and work towards. While, it will be important to maintain some competition to drive continuous innovation and improvement, by “blowing the smoke away from the finish line,” it will be clear that no one organization can or should tackle the issues alone.

The transition will not be without its challenges. In the short-term, companies will have to find a new level of comfort in, not only being transparent about their impacts and actions, but also about what this means in terms of the broader issue or challenge. In the short-term, this may continue to widen the gap between CSR/Sustainability leaders and laggards, as companies that are not so advanced in their approach to progressive business, may be concerned about exposing the true impact of their efforts.

Rome wasn’t built in a day nor will context goals be the focus of companies tomorrow; nevertheless, as Allen White, Founder, Global Initiative for Sustainability Ranking (GISR), said at the SB New Metrics Conference, “we have a future ripe for change” and context goals are an exciting tool to get us there.

How to Drive Change Within Your Company

Don't ask people what they can do for you, ask what you can do for them.

This blog was originally published on the Net Impact Blog as part of its Voices series, featuring Net Impact leaders around the world who are making a difference on their campuses and in their careers.

At the 2014 Net Impact Conference, students and professionals from a variety of organizations (and at very different stages of their careers) gathered together. What united us all was and is a strong desire for change: a passion for making our organizations, lives, and the world better. This uniting factor is also one of the biggest challenges when it comes to breaking boundaries.

Affecting change within an organization is an art, not a science; there is no one way to shift attitudes, change behaviors, or reverse bad practices. However, during Friday’s session "Leader of the Pack: What's the Future of CSR Leadership?” the panel shared their experiences of breaking boundaries in their organizations. and there was one insight that seemed to resonate above all others:

Ask people what you can do to help them.

It sounds simple but, in our excitement and sometimes impatience, it is easily forgotten. As Leo Tolstoy put it, “Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself.”

When Tim Mohin joined AMD as Director Corporate Responsibility, he intentionally took time to understand and respond to the passions and pain points of different people across the organization. This approach got a positive response and, to this day, he continues to actively listen and work out how key Corporate Responsibility strategies and activities can support and enhance his colleagues’ priorities.

His fellow panelist, Dave Stangis, Vice President, Public Affairs and Corporate Responsibility Campbell Soup Company, agreed with this advice and encouraged all of us to get curious and take the time to meet with as many people across our organizations as possible. He added that knowledge is also crucial and coached us all to keep learning and evolving our ideas because when the people you need to work with to affect change become more engaged, you need to be prepared.

As a consultant in the CSR/sustainability world, I have always been able to add more value through listening, adapting, and being flexible rather than approaching an assignment with fixed ideas or opinions. The session with Tim Mohin and Dave Stangis confirmed this approach, as well as the importance of building relationships and gaining trust. At the end of the day, you can have a robust business case and brilliant ideas, but they will never fly if you do not have the right relationships to advance them.

Aligning CSR Strategy with Brand

This is a blog I published on Cause Consulting's Blog Cause Nation a few weeks ago. I thought some of you, my lovely blog readers, might be interested to read it too. 

CSR/Sustainability and Marketing professionals have not always been the best of friends.
In fact, recently, Thomas Kolster, Creative Director and Author of Goodvertising, and Founder of Where Good Grows, posted a cartoon showing them at opposite ends of a couple’s therapy couch. However, when they do work together and see the benefits, there is potential for transformative, long-lasting social and environmental change.

So what are the requirements for a successful relationship between CSR/Sustainability and Marketing? This was the topic up for discussion at the Net Impact Boston Career Summit on Friday February 21st. Harriet Henry joined John Rooks, President, The Soap Group, Chris Mann, Vice President of Corporate Partnerships, City Year, Kyle Cahill, Senior Manager, Corporate Citizenship, Blue Cross Blue Shield of MA, and Anne Erhard, SVP and NA Director, Corporate & Brand Citizenship, PurPle to discuss ‘Effective CSR Marketing: Aligning CSR Strategy with Brand Marketing Objectives.’

Here are the top five tips for effective CSR marketing discussed by the panel:

1. Start with a great strategy. An effective CSR strategy aligns closely with core business and brand objectives; the more closely aligned, the more successful it will be, and the more authentic any marketing and communications around your CSR activities will be. Take the time to develop a killer CSR strategy and engage your marketing teams in the process, as they understand your brand and target audiences better than anyone.

2. Engage your employees first. Everyone on the panel agreed that it may take time before you’re ready to communicate your CSR activities externally. Typically, your first audience is your employees; they are the people that will execute and bring the CSR strategy to life.  They are also the strongest brand ambassadors you will ever have. Only once the CSR strategy is embedded and generating wins internally should you start to think about going external.

3. Don’t try and go it alone – talk and listen to your stakeholders: It’s likely that your CSR strategy will deal with some complex social and environmental issues, and it is unlikely that you will have all the necessary expertise in-house. So go out and find subject-matter experts, nonprofits, and other stakeholders who can help you shape your plans. Even if you think you have a winning strategy, it never hurts to validate what you know and, what’s more, seeking support and guidance is respected and may win you essential allies and partners for the future.

4. Don’t preach: When you’re ready to communicate your CSR initiatives to consumers and customers, remember that they already have a long list of worries and don’t want something else to feel bad about. Make them your partners, treat them like humans and be humble. No one has all the answers and no one is perfect, so be honest and tell your consumers this. In the end, they’ll like you more for it!

5. Make it relevant and fun:  As good as it is, your CSR strategy is not what most people want to hear about. Similarly, just because you think something is important or interesting, it doesn’t mean others will. Talk to your consumers and customers, find out what they care about, and then engage them in a fun way that they will remember.

Isn't it a bit idealistic?

A new video popped up on my Twitter feed last week. It’s quite a cute film made by the University of St Gallen, which sets out what Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is all about. If you’re new to the concept of CSR, then it’s definitely worth a watch as it sets out the key points in a way that’s easy to digest.

When people ask me about what I do - after I've fielded the usual question ‘so you work for a charity?’ - I often get the following comment: ‘that’s great, but isn't it a bit idealistic?’ And the answer, to a certain extent, is yes. What unites people in this field is that they are aspirational and passionate about changing the world for the better; they dare to dream. However, this is coupled with strong sense of realism. The ecomaginations and Plan As of this world are still far and few between and those of us close to the action know better than anyone how much work there is still to do. It’s a positive thing - as the video shows, we know where we want to go; we're just figuring out the best way to get there.

Just in case you don’t have time to watch the film, here is a summary of the key points. The language is a bit clunky but you’ll get the general idea:

• CSR is based on the question of good business for a good society, today and tomorrow
• CSR is not charity. It is about the way a company earns its profits, not how it spends them
• It takes employees of integrity plus appropriate organizational structures to realize CSR. It is a matter of individual and institutional ethics
• Politics continue to play an important role but in a globalized world the effects of regulation can be limited, thus…
• Companies play an increasingly important role
• Soft laws are new governance mechanisms based on a company’s self commitments
• CSR has arrived in business practice and it’s necessary to support these developments professionally but also to provide critical perspectives with respect to them

Happy Watching!

New Year, New Label

Over the years, our industry has had more labels than I can remember: corporate social responsibility, corporate citizenship, community affairs, responsible business, corporate responsibility and, of course, the most recent addition, shared value. Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting these terms  all mean the same thing. In fact, as someone, who religiously chooses to use 'corporate responsibility' over 'corporate social responsibility', I'm very conscious that they don't. On the whole, the development of these new terms is a good thing and the number of them reflects the face pace of innovation. However, the introduction of 'social licence to operate' as the new 'shared value' for 2013 seems to me to be a step too far.

In an entry on the Forbes CSR Blog, Paul Klein, suggests that 2013 will be the year of the Social Licence to Operate (SLO). This is not a new term. It has traditionally been used by companies in the resource extraction sector to describe the importance of engaging local communities and other stakeholders whose support is required to secure government approval or raise capital for their projects. However, as Paul Klein argues, with the increasing use of social media the concept of a Social Licence to Operate should no longer be thought of solely in the context of the resource extraction sector; it's relevant to all companies. In today's world, there's no longer anywhere to hide and all companies have to recognize the importance of stakeholder support to continue doing business. 

It's not the argument I disagree with, it's the term Social Licence to Operate that feels wrong. I actually quite like the term 'shared value' as it expresses the balance required; it's about finding that sweet spot between business objectives and social and environmental objectives, balancing the concerns of shareholders and stakeholders. Social Licence to Operate loses that - it sounds like companies are at the mercy of what stakeholders want and need to justify their business actions accordingly. 

It's not just semantics, the way we talk about things and the words we use can have a real impact to how a concept is received. So I'm afraid my vote is for new year, old labels.