Vikrant Labde's posts on Justmeans

Weekend CSR Wrap Up

Vikrant Labde — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 04:47:26 GMT

A handful of CSR related headlines dealing with many of the topics we've been discussing on the JustMeans blogs and updates - happy Friday everyone!A New Measure of Success: Investors' Circle Launches the IC 20-The importance of tracking the growth of a business is understood as fundamental to finance. Inc. Magazine has been profiling the top 500 fastest growing companies every year since 1982. Increasingly, however, businesses and entrepreneurship organizations are recognizing the importance of measuring a company's social and environmental impact in addition to their financial success. Rockefeller Foundation, B Corporation, HIP Investor Inc, and Social Venture Technology Group are leading the effort to determine how to assess business impact. At the same time, a growing number of S&P 500 companies are self-reporting their companies' impact on their business websites and to company shareholders. Today, Investors' Circle is reconnecting with companies that approached the organization years ago with, for example--a two-person team, $50K in capital from the founders, a sound model, and a laudable mission--to find out where they are now. Are the "winners" the companies that were expected to take off all along? Are the pioneers of social impact also companies with the greatest revenue growth?-This has some interesting implications in the social entrepreneurship arena - would love JustMeans members to get involved.Greenwash: The Responsible Business Awards defy parody-The prize-giving seems to be financially sustainable, at least, with past winners saying thank you for the free publicity by forking out to pay for the marquees and sponsor the awards. But the chutzpah that lies behind it defies belief. Take the Bank of America Climate Change Award. That would be the Bank of America that was the world's biggest underwriter of debt - and so probably a tad responsible for the mess the planet is in - until it had to be bailed out by the US taxpayer to the tune of $20bn (12.4bn) in January.-With the state of the economy I'm not sure anyone really deserves a pat on the back right now...US lawyer faces investigation after battling corporations on workers' behalfDole Food Company, the world's largest producer of fresh fruit and fresh vegetables and the main target of the suit, is celebrating what it hopes is a knockout blow. "It's a very important ruling," said Ted Boutrous, one of Dole's lead lawyers. "We think the fraud that has been exposed should bring these other cases to a rapid ending. It's already having a domino effect."This could be devastating for workers' rights cases if corporations use it as a means for dismissing claims or learn that allegations of fraud, whether true or untrue, can get these cases thrown out.The Alien Tort Statute - Corporate Social Responsibility Takes On A New Meaning-Recently, Corporate Social Responsibility took on a new and enhanced meaning when Royal Dutch Shell settled with the plaintiffs for over $15 million in an Alien Tort Statute (ATS) lawsuit filed in New York federal court. Businesses with operations, suppliers or other dealings with the developing world are prime targets for ATS lawsuits, and had better sit up and take notice of this increasingly popular theory of recovery. This is the second significant public settlement to end this type of litigation, which, as defendants find, is controversial and very expensive.-More on the Saro-Wiwa/Shell settlement and a brief history of the Alien Tort Statute used in the case.Corpedia Announces Top Five Compliance and Ethics Steps Critical to Surviving Tough Economic Times-"Research proves that being ethical is more than just about saving face and preserving your reputation; this has become a 'bet the business' issue and good for a business' bottom line," said Tim Erblich, Executive Vice President of Corpedia Corporation. "With the government increasingly cracking down on violations and impropriety, companies will see that the gamble of skimping on ethical best practices such as accountability, transparency and conflict identification is not one that should be taken."-Nothing new to the JustMeans community - great to see more data to support ethical practices are as good for business as they are for the rest of the world.Walmart Announces Sustainable Product Index-"We do not see this as a trend that will fade. Higher customer expectations are a permanent part of the future," Duke continued. "At Walmart, we're working to make sustainability sustainable, so that it's a priority in good times and in the tough times. An important part of that is developing the tools to help enable sustainable consumption."-Walmart seeks to set the bar in terms of sustainability.Recession sorts out commitment from goodwash-If a company's responsible business focus is on "giving back" then it appears those initiatives have been the first to suffer as cash flows tighten. Those were hardly indicative of a truly responsible approach to business in the first place. More disturbing are tales of banks completely stripping out their CSR teams. Either those teams had the wrong kind of skills needed for rebuilding trust in the sector (i.e. they were focused on the goodwash version of CSR rather than on instilling an ethical culture and appropriate corporate governance mechanisms) or financial firms have not realised the extent of the problems their sector faces.-Yet as companies appear to tighten their belts, individuals with the means to give are apparently increasing their donations. Read on...Still giving generously: How the downturn is affecting philanthropy-THE global recession has failed to dampen philanthropic spirit, with many rich people increasing their charitable giving, according to a new report from Barclays Wealth. Among the 500 British and American individuals with at least $1m of investable assets, only education was considered a more important expense than charitable commitments. Some 28% of Americans say they are giving less money compared with 18 months ago, though 26% are giving more. A similar pattern is seen among those givers from both countries who inherited their fortune. But entrepreneurs are more likely to give their cash away31% say they have increased their giving and only 17% have reduced it.-The Ethics of Credit Cards-Anyone empathizing with Rebecca Bloomwood in Confessions of a Shopaholic might wonder if credit cards could ever be 'ethical'. But 'ethical' proves to be an attractive communications tool, so what is said to be the world's first ethical credit card, the 'think' card hit the UK markets for the conscientious shopper. That is not to say that shopaholics like Ms. Bloomwood would not suffer under the hands of a debt collector upon failure of timely payment, but the card offers ethical consumers a lower interest rate for purchases of designated 'ethical' items.-Anyone have a 'think' card yet?

The Greenest Soda

Vikrant Labde — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 10:47:52 GMT

When it comes to food and drink consumption, Americans take the cake. The average American drinks 37.5 gallons of soda every year - as a country, we drank 14.7 billion gallons in 2007. Of course, that number in and of itself has many implications for one's teeth and one's overall health, but beyond that, soda drinking has significant impacts on resource consumption.

It is estimated that to make every can of soda, it takes 4 to 10 gallons of water. And what about the bottles and cans? 65 billion aluminum soda cans are used each year and two million plastic bottles are used every five minutes.

But if you're a pop drinker, don't start fretting too much yet. There are quite a few ways that you can green your soda habit (besides simply cutting back), like drinking natural and organic soda or carbonating your own beverages. And of course, if you need a baby step, there's always the option to bring along a reusable cup when opting for a fountain drink.

On a larger scale, the organic beverage industry is growing at a rapid clip. In 2007, Research and Markets reported that the market had grown to $1.3 billion in the US.

Beyond that, some of the big players are getting in on the action too. You might be surprised to learn that Pepsi has just launched two separate websites dedicated to its eco-activity. PepsiEcoChallenge.com and Pepsirecycling.com are focused all around helping consumers educate themselves and rise to the challenge of greening their soda consumption.

Greenwashing, you ask? Actually, PepsiCo has set goals to "reduce water consumption by 20%, electricity consumption by 20% and fuels consumption by 25% per unit of production by 2015." They also operate a few different LEED certified buildings and have solar panels installed at six Frito-Lay distribution centers and at an Arizona service center. There's certainly a long way to go but my hat's off to their efforts so far.

Branding the Social Enterprise Movement

Vikrant Labde — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 08:21:07 GMT

I was at a pretty cool conference last week – Wavelength 100. The attendees were half corporate, half social enterprise/entrepreneur. Lots of great chat, good organic food, and interesting ideas to pursue successful partnerships between the two groups.

One topic under discussion was that the terms ‘social enterprise’ and ‘social entrepreneur’ don’t necessarily do the movement any favors. These words are unknown, confusing, and don’t seem to fully represent who we are and what we do. Personally I find it easier to just explain exactly and specifically what I do – after all, a banker wouldn’t say he was a capitalist or business professional, he would say he was a banker.

Along with this whole idea of branding – I was chatting with my partner’s father, a professional drummer with an incredible rock CV – and he was saying how food is the new rock ‘n roll. There seem to be more food programs than anything else, and celebrity chefs are absolutely ubiquitous.

I guess what I want is for the environment to become the new food and I don’t see why it shouldn’t. The beauty of food is that people have to eat, regularly. The environment is even more prevalent in our lives, whether we know it or not we have to interact with it 100% of the time. The other thing about food is that you can have a pretty luxurious experience for not a lot of money; the variety of ingredients available at your average grocery store is incredible. With the environment, this is where we have to catch up, composting needs to become trendy, people need to stat competing with friends on how local they can buy, and how much packaging they can leave in the shops. Food has had a sustained success, its diversity means we can have trend after trend and continued development. The environment should easily outdo food in this regard – water, air, waste, energy, pollution, and technology – there is no end to the potential for aspiration and interest.

Making trash sexy, this is what I do as an up-cycling specialist of industrial and commercial waste. So although I will never be a rock-star or a chef our brand, my identity as an environmental entrepreneur, easily has the potential to be as cool.

Weird connections in social enterprise: Playboy, drugs and Google.org

Vikrant Labde — Mon, 25 May 2009 10:15:54 GMT

The announcement that Google.org is going to concentrate on programs 'that make the most of Google's strengths in technology and information" has been the subject of some criticism, most notably Siva Vaidhyanathan's assertion that it means that "the habits and ideology of the company will lead the philanthropy rather than the needs of the communities or the planet."Personally, I think the shift in strategy was long overdue. Google has far more to offer the do-gooding world than cash; it offers expertise and experience that are most effectively applied to areas of need that the company already knows reasonably well. One could argue, a la Jurgen Habermas, that Google's action is just one more example of the colonization of the lifeworld by commerce, but such a critique glosses over the degree to which relations of exchange are embedded in civil society.Rather than dismiss the move as an advance for creeping commodified technocracy, we'd do better to assess Google.org in relation to other companies that have aligned their corporate interests with their charitable outreach. Pfizer is an obvious example--its CSR programs and The Pfizer Foundation merit careful study--but perhaps the most intriguing analogy is the The Playboy Foundation, the for-profit philanthropy within Playboy that supports free speech and documentaries promoting social change.

Conversations on the Future of the Field

Vikrant Labde — Mon, 25 May 2009 09:58:31 GMT

Last week was quite a week and I expect the trend to continue into next week as many of the leaders in the industry are in NY for the Financial Times/JustMeans Sustainable Business, Responsible Investing Conference. The conference organizers did a great job of putting together a very strong agenda with very relevant presenters. I'm lucky enough to be on the opening panel with some long-time colleagues in the fieldRob Frederick, VP, Director of Corporate Responsibility, Brown-Forman Corporation; Bennett Freeman, SVP Social Research and Policy, Calvert; and Gavin Power, Deputy Director and Head of Financial Markets, United Nations Global Compact. I think it's a safe bet the conference will be a success even with the approaching winter storm trying to keep people away.Last week was full of discussions about the future of the CSR and Sustainability profession. I still see two major trends at play.The first track is the drive for the next best thing from a green perspective or perhaps the coolest innovation in public private partnerships. I believe we see much of this in a community like JustMeans due to the audience and passion of that audience. I saw that level of interest in my exchanges this past week with a group of students from Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs that are working on a project for Campbell Soup - as well as in a discussion I had with a future Pepperidge Farm associate who will be joining us in June. These are very important efforts because they drive the creative spirit of the profession and outline some of the possibilities for the non-profit and social sectors.Secondly, there is a real desire among the long-time leaders in the field to continuously improve the management of the function. This is an area that I have always been pushing on and based on my conversations this past week, I'm not alone. Speaking from my own perspective, I have been hard at work building a set of leadership organizations to drive CSR and Sustainability at Campbell's from a set of strategic imperatives - not initiatives. I've been sharing some of my plans and perspectives in the meetings I had last week. There seems to be some good thinking going on among the large consulting firms E&Y, McKinsey; some of the membership organizations BSR, BCCCC and even a couple authors I exchanged some ideas with (you've seen them in the community - (Climb the Green Ladder). My conversations with BCCCC involved a couple sessions at their upcoming International Citizenship conference in March about the alignment of reputation and CSR as well as competencies that are needed to excel in the field.I believe that there is a broad mix of people that use JustMeans in different ways. I've seen global representation, leaders and new entrants to the field, consultants and academics. I'm interested in how the split goes in this community. It seems that there is much more interest in the first track I described above - creative projects and less in the second - leadership, change management and the future of the profession. I'll keep an eye on it and welcome your perspective in the discussion.In my next post, I'll try to share some of the strategic imperatives I'm building into the Campbell Soup Company's CSR and Sustainability strategy.

CSR as a conscious enterprise

Vikrant Labde — Sat, 23 May 2009 04:51:14 GMT

I've been writing about sustainable business for a while now. And there's lots of great comment on Justmeans about social business, social enterprise, and the greening and "CSRing" of traditional business.But more and more I'm convinced that becoming more conscious - in terms of what we are trying to achieve, as well as how we go about things - is a "critical success factor" in creating more sustainable businesses. Here's a short summary (originally from my personal blog) about why I think becoming more conscious as we do business, whether it be social or traditional, is important.By the way I am a fan of business, but I am not meaning to knock the contribution of government, NGOs and IGOs in any way. I think all of us need to work together on this. Business is great. It's a very powerful force. It's great at harnessing creativity and innovation, but mainly it's good at getting things done. While governments and non-governmental agencies alike plan and develop policy, business has usually finished the first activity and is on to the next one.And we are in a hurry. We have a lot of problems in the world. Poverty. Hunger. Disease. Climate change. Loss of bio-diversity. Desertification. War. Nuclear proliferation.All of these threats are coming closer. And many are getting worse as, for example, population grows.Business can't solve all those problems but it can contribute to solutions for many. Especially when we need new, radical solutions that haven't been tried before, the unique structure of business allows their creation and rapid deployment on a large scale.Even small business can seed changes elsewhere, by setting an example or by being a catalyst.The problem with business is that for too long the people running it have had the wrong goals. If your goal is financial, and you work at it hard enough, and diligently enough, you are likely to achieve a financial goal. While neglecting other more useful goals - such as addressing the threats listed above.So, the question is: "How do we get at least some of the people running business to adopt other, more beneficial goals?"Forcing them won't work. These are very independent-minded people.Luckily, however, I believe people evolved with a set of values that are constructive not destructive. The natural state for people is to select goals that will put back good things into the world, for all of humanity.All that has to happen is for us all to become more conscious.More conscious of more than just our material drives - in fact, conscious of what drives us mind, body and soul. As we become more conscious of our deeper values, then we will start to work towards them.More conscious of our individual contribution to the results we create.Many of us don't believe that we have much influence on what happens in the world. So then it's rational to let it just go to hell. But we all do have that influence, and once we realise that then the sky's the limit.Many of us believe that others need to be told what to do. And we don't understand that this approach itself creates unsustainable solutions. Nothing that is enforced will last. The only things that last are those that are created together by those who benefit.And more conscious of what holds us back and limits our influence. Many of us are 'hungry ghosts' - we carry around past emotional pain that makes us greedy, envious, jealous, addicted, obsessed, and compulsive.Becoming more conscious of this pain, while usually a painful process in itself, is a good way to reduce or even remove its power.So, as we become more conscious, we do more of the right things, more often. And that's what all of us need. Now in and in the future.Simple as that really.

Cadbury Fair Trade Chocolate: Is this ethical consumption?

Vikrant Labde — Sat, 23 May 2009 04:26:18 GMT

Recently, my colleagues Jeff and Martin have been talking about Cadbury and their fair-trade initiative.Now, as some of you may recall, I was ... we'll let's just say I was a little less than enthralled with the idea that Disney's Hannah Montana Bananas constituted CSR. Personally, I feel that, to call something CSR, a certain threshold has to be met. In my opinion, in this case, Disney hadn't met it. (Which isn't to say that other practices by Disney wouldn't meet the threshold. I just don't think branded fruit qualify.)On the other hand, I was quite impressed with Cadbury's fair-trade initiative. In my opinion, Cadbury's actions do meet the necessary threshold to qualify as CSR. By promoting fair-trade, Cadbury is, essentially, promoting equity. That, for me, is the key of a truly socially responsible practice.Now, Cadbury may still not be my first choice of chocolate provider ... I might still prefer to support a smaller company given a choice of every single chocolate maker. But when I'm desperate for a chocolate, and there's a nearby vending machine, I will definitely choose Cadbury.

The end of the road for social enterprise?

Vikrant Labde — Fri, 08 May 2009 03:37:37 GMT

Recently I've found myself letting out an involuntary sigh whenever anyone says the words "social enterprise".

The fact that I keep sighing is a bit of a problem, as I aim to make a living out of social enterprise.

I like terms that say exactly what they do on the tin. The term social enterprise doesn't do that. I can't help but think that social enterprise is a term that has its roots in the days when we were all a bit uncomfortable with the idea of being in business, even if it was for a social purpose.

Social enterprise always makes me think of Starship Enterprise - people with funny shaped ears boldly going where no man has gone before. Which, in many cases, probably isn't a bad description of a social entrepreneur (the funny-shaped ears come from too many years of swimming against the tide).

But having a weird name can give the impression that what we do is somehow weird. Try explaining social enterprise to someone who's never heard of it. Then try explaining social business. I promise, 9 times out 10, you'll have more success explaining social business to a novice than you will social enterprise. Because we all, to some extent or other, understand what business is. So social business is business that is social.

So join with me and embrace social business. Stand proud as social business men and women. Mingle uncomfortably with a bacon sandwich in your hand at social business networking breakfasts. Write detailed social business plans and never look at them again.

After all, if social business is good enough for Muhammad Yunus, it's got to be good enough for the rest of us.

Swooshed

Vikrant Labde — Thu, 07 May 2009 12:38:10 GMT

The Social Enterprise Coalition, in conjunction with Rise, has adopted a new certification mark designed to "raise the profile of social enterprise to key audiences." As this Third Sector article notes, the mark has prompted some criticism, with at least one social entrepreneur observing that "the mark would not be beneficial unless it brought tax or financial advantages."Of course, there are any number of similar marks that have value for organizations without tax or regulatory privileges. Perhaps most famously, kosher marks certify that foods meet specific religious standards, a function somewhat analogous to that of the social enterprise mark.My own critique of the mark focuses not so much on its utility as its design. The swoosh is a tired visual cliche--if we're trying to signal that social enterprise stands for disruptive innovation, picking a swoosh is exactly the wrong way to go. Instead, the graphic conveys that we are derivative copycats, blindly mimicking the least creative rhetoric of mass commercial culture.

Notes from the Social Enterprise Field: Nortel and One Laptop Per Child

Vikrant Labde — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 22:33:05 GMT

Last week brought the news that Nortel is withdrawing its support for One Laptop per Child. Nortel had been one of the program's major sponsors.While Nortel's bankruptcy is a primary reason for this action, we should not let the fact that the company's precarious financial condition distract us from the broader lessons. Above all, Nortel's withdrawal is a potent reminded that commercial support for social enterprise is to a significant extent a symptom of a bubble economy. Charity is a luxury good that companies may believe they can no longer afford. While academics and assorted do-gooders have touted the financial benefits of supporting social benefit, the recession highlights the extent to which such assertions lack concrete evidence. Nortel's sponsorship would no doubt have continued had OLPC been perceived as a profit point. Instead, the charity would seem to have been a drain.Also worth noting is the dog that hasn't barked--namely, the relative lack of support from companies invested in their own netbooks. As this article notes, netbook makers are focused on profiting from their own ventures rather than supporting a charitable competitor. This raises an intriguing possibility regarding the longterm impact of successful cause-marketing joint ventures. For much of the past decade we have treated cause marketing as an adjunct of social enterprise. However, we could just as well argue that cause-marketing partnerships are more likely to benefit charitable ventures that have little to no prospect of acquiring significant commercial market share, especially in the sphere occupied by their commercial partners. From a Darwinian perspective, the long-term impact of cause-marketing joint ventures could actually work against social enterprise--in particular, ventures funded primarily through earned income and innovative charities that could potentially undercut commercial products.

Is this social enterprise? Stripping for charity

Vikrant Labde — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 08:38:33 GMT

Here in New York, one of the controversial issues of the day is a proposed new tax on strip bars and erotic dance clubs. Patrons would be required to pay a $10 admission surcharge, with proceeds ostensibly going to help "victims of human trafficking, domestic violence, sexual abuse and child prostitution."Levying a sin tax to fund public benefit initiatives is not new--it's one reason why efforts to ban alcohol and cigarettes are doomed to fail, and in this time of financial crisis the practice may help bring about the decriminalization of marijuana. However, governments are not the only corporate entities that utilize this tactic--consider private sector carbon offsets, for example, which function as an informal tax to fund sustainable production.Whatever one's personal values, taxing certain behavior to promote its alleged opposite raises intriguing questions about social enterprise and the morality of exchange. Does taxing strip clubs transform them into de facto social ventures? Are initiatives such as Virgin Mobile's Strip2Clothe campaign and Maria Carolina's sex-for-charity auction socially responsible? Are unsustainable business practices appropriate means to leverage for green business initiatives? Such questions are likely to become even more relevant as the financial crisis leads people in the public service realm to look for alternate sources of financial support.

Conservative Leader Speaks at Social Enterprise Summit: Voice09

Vikrant Labde — Wed, 11 Feb 2009 07:45:03 GMT

Today was the launch of Voice09, the annual UK social enterprise conference sponsored by the Social Enterprise Coalition. The keynote speaker for the event: Conservative Party leader David Cameron.BBC News has a rundown of Cameron's speech, which focused on modernizing the government's job training system and restoring faith in free enterprise.However, what's most significant about Cameron's keynote is that it took place at all. In the United States, the social enterprise movement skews decidedly left, as if the only people who believe in blending business and social benefit are hippies who want to sell carbon-free vegan granola.This diverts us from what could be one of the movement's greatest contributions: providing an operative framework for post-partisan social change. Study history carefully and you'll find conservative thought leaders espousing many of the ideas often treated as the hallmarks of the progressive ideal. Replacing grants with earned income, ending poverty through sustainable business as opposed to handouts, strengthening the accountability of social investments, replacing bureaucratic control with a culture of entrepreneurial innovation--rather than ignoring or dismissing such rhetoric when it comes from the likes of Reagan, Gingrich or the leader of an evangelical megachurch, social entrepreneurs can increase their influence by crossing the political divide.

The bailout salary cap and social enterprise

Vikrant Labde — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 07:17:46 GMT

President Obama's plan to place a $500,000 cap on executive pay for companies receiving bailout founds may sound familiar to people working in the nonprofit world. Proposals to cap the salary of nonprofit CEOs have been floating around for years, including a recommendation to limit executive pay to the amount of the salary of the U.S. president.That the federal government is poised to impose a salary cap on for-profit companies highlights a key strategic issue for social enterprise: the rhetoric of venture design."Doing well by doing good" has long been a popular mantra among social entrepreneurs. It's a clever phrase that sounded great at the height of the economic bubble--who wouldn't want to get rich by helping people? However, now that the financial crisis has left countless people struggling, a focus on personal gain can seem unseemly. If doing well by doing business has become a ripe target for public criticism, there could be serious problems in store for those who make money from the plight of the poor.Tax-exemption increases the potential for government intervention. The justification for imposing the new $500,000 cap is that the companies in question have received taxpayer support. In the minds of many experts--and laypeople--not being required to pay tax on income is a de facto public subsidy. In other words, by virtue of tax-exemption a charity's assets become taxpayer assets subject to public oversight.If social ventures want to avoid federal salary caps and other new regulations, they may want consider how their actions might appear to those outside the world of social entrepreneurs. What this means for strategic planning is something that we'll be discussing in detail on this blog.