Tuesday 29 March 2011

The extent which the government should influence Corporate Social Responsibility

Governments can influence CSR in private sector businesses by imposing different techniques to force firms to adopt CSR and not become large profit businesses with no boundaries while governments must not jeopardise the future for the sake of current generations. The government can influence CSR by doing many techniques. These include creating legislation in relation to health and safety, employment tights and pollution, Grants for Research and Development into renewable energy for example, BP to use more environmentally friendly oils such as bio fuel in power stations in order for BP to create a better branding image and provide a lower carbon footprint. They can also impose contracts which require firms to accept CSR and discriminate against irresponsible firms so they can be dealt with by the government.
Businesses often are not socially responsible because of having a profit motive. If governments did not influence CSR, then the companies would be likely to provide ruthless profits to detriment of the rest of the community although businesses are willing to accept CSR with incentives from the government. Governments use some techniques in order for firms to not do this and force them or encourage them to accept CSR. For example, BP had a massive negative impact on the environment when they had an oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico; this means that this has had many impacts on industries such as fishing and tourism. The government has then had to step in and give BP the oil fines for cleaning up and damage to other industries. This fine came to $34 Billion and a full report by the US government into steps to prevent this happening again. This will depend on the tests done and how accurate the data they have collected. Because BP have had a massive negative effect on the environment, this means they have made less of a profit margin, meaning that people are selling their shares and withdrawing their investments, which can be seen today as the price per share drops when a disaster like this happens which in turn finds it harder to raise finance and gives them a negative reputation. Also influences that the government have to give consideration for is the companies such as large supermarkets which exploit smaller firms such as suppliers which they give harsh terms to as the large supermarkets will have orders which compensates from most of their revenue, but this depends on how large the firm is as to the action taken.
Another reason in which that the government has to influence CSR is the dangers of the pollution and the growing pressures from scientists for the government to do more on Global warming- Businesses being one main contribution to the countries carbon footprint and has been seen as one of the most challenging targets for mankind. The government can offer incentives such as receiving grants and rewards to be socially responsible. For example, if an irresponsible firm can have a grant into research and development into renewable energy, then this will impact the businesses environmental image and impact which will in turn, lower costs for the business and offer an incentives for shareholders to buy into renewable energy for the business as this doesn’t impact on costs and profit margins. The government have to influence businesses when it comes to pollution because it is invisible and it creates problems for future generations environmentally. As the carbon emissions go into the atmosphere, the future generations face greater natural disasters as global warming temperatures increase therefore the government has to try to reduce this in order reduce carbon emissions. This will depend on the political party in government and their attitude to CSR and environmental, and also the economic state of the country. The government also has to comply with EU laws so, therefore the national government has to enforce laws in compliance with EU pollution laws.

Some say, the government is damaging the “Free market” of business and enterprise if they have too much impact on the techniques used by the government as the ability of a business to be successful by having profit coming in rather than being socially responsible. A free market economy has little restrictions or minimum requirements and are said to benefit the community socially for a number of reasons. For example, a free market ensures that businesses supply the goods which people need, For example, BP selling oil to people with cars and have different types of oil which cater for everyone. They also have competition to keep the costs low and offer goods to the consumer at a fair price. This can be shown because BP have to be in line with Shell and other competitors, but as the resource of oil is running out, it can be argued these will have to change business products as the price of oil will be more expensive then Researching and developing products to spur on environmentally friendly cars which run off biodiesel or electric cars. This can also be done by reducing the amount of fuel used in cars and making them more efficient as in regards to MPG. The growth of businesses and the free market also provides high levels of economic growth and raises living standards. For example, because everyone needs oil and it’s bad for the environment, the government can only impose tax which limits the profit which they can have. Because the tax is so high, with $200m of taxes each year from big oil companies, it funds most social programmes and public resources. This limits the economic growth and has to balance the impact on the environment and businesses being socially responsible and the concept of a free market and free enterprise.
In conclusion, the government can influence a business’s attitude to CSR with different techniques mentioned above. This can be done by offering grants to become environmentally friendly to providing CSR with protection in order to force the large companies to become socially responsible without damaging free enterprise and the free market. This is because private sector businesses provides jobs to the nations, and provide economic growth. This is said to dramatically limit the amount of regulations and legislation they can enforce without damaging the economy, although the government has to look after the environment. This shows the government can enforce different techniques to help businesses to reach the minimum requirement of being socially responsible but enough penalties for them to abide by the rules while still allowing free enterprise to grow and let other entrepreneurs to be able to innovate and have the opportunity to provide economic growth. This can depend on the political party in power and their approach to businesses and the environmental policies they have as some government political parties such as green peace will have more environmental laws then someone from the conservative who believes in free enterprise and the concept of the private sector can look after itself type of attitude.

References:

Tuesday 22 March 2011

The influences determining which responsibilities are accepted by a business and which are not.

The suggestion in this is which responsibilities which can be accepted by a business. This includes going from satisfying shareholders to pleasing the government by going against the minimum legislation for the environmental and accept a high degree of responsibility of customers and to be a good employer and who has the power to have responsibilities within a business.
The first responsibilities which a company is seen to have is to comply with minimum standards and legislation and regulation and to comply with the law. This is to make sure businesses are socially responsible to the minimum extent for the business such as working conditions, minimum wage, and other legislation such as environmental pollution and how to store food, sell food and nutrition etc. For example, in the USA, as they are a multinational company, they regulate under the FDA (Food and Drug Administration).They’re regulation is to have good employee hygiene, Food storage and Nutrition Labels under regulations. The impact on this multinational company is that if they fail to comply with these, it will result in closing down the restaurant or Hefty fines. These regulations will be similar across the world in food regulations and this will depend on the amount of money which will have to go to towards fulfilling these regulations as the fines and closing of restaurants will outweigh not abiding by the regulations which means the restaurant must do this. The fines for failing health and safety range between £100,000 and £250,000 not including legal costs. This means the company will comply with the rules as the fines are so high. The success of this will depend on the size of the fine, in relation to the size of the firm, for example, if they have a fine which is not large compared to a multinational company, then the business will be willing to pay this. Also, if the costs will be less than the equipment and lawsuits etc in relation to the fine, then they will be able to keep paying the fine as it will cost less.
Stakeholders have alot of power and interest towards a business or they would not operate in the modern day, this means that these external influences on the business have power they can have over the business. One of these external influences is Shareholders. In the power to interest matrix, they are seen to have a high interest and high power within the business. This is because they are investing their money in the company’s shares which are making them more in demand and valuable and take part in decisions. These are the people with a high interest and high power as they invest into the business. This means the business has to listen to the shareholders and CSR is harder to achieve. For example, McDonalds shareholders in 2010, decided to vote on the proposal of using cage free eggs or not. Cage free is whether they should use cage free eggs or not in restaurants. The outcome was that 77% people will be against the proposal and 18% of people abstained from voting. This means that because they are bound by law to listen to the votes of the shareholders, it makes it harder for the business to incorporate CSR as shareholders aim is to make production cheaper and maximise profit margins in order to get more dividends per share. Free range eggs costs more to produce because of the amount of land and maintaining the chickens, therefore because shareholders want more dividends, they would want to keep costs down as they would get a lower profit margin if they just maintain sales therefore they will have a lower profit margin which lowers the productivity and efficiency of the business as it costs more to be more socially responsible.  Shareholders can exert their power by either demanding as a group in a vote that an action is carried forward as it is a legal requirement, but they can also withdraw investments from the business, therefore making the share price lower as they are not in demand and makes it harder and more expensive to raise finance. The power of this will depend on the amount of influence their business decisions will have for the company, so if they make a decision which worsens brand image and customers do not like the decision, they might have the power to override them as they are consuming the product.
Another stakeholder who has alot of power in the business is the customer. They have alot of power because they can withhold purchases which can be a significant threat to a globalised company which depend on word of mouth and heavy advertising in order to sell the most products. An example of this is that some customer such as environmentalists do realise they have the power to change the company, such as not buying specific products which can help stop certain actions or products within the company. They have tried to combat it by offering promotional such as The Monopoly triple play promotion in order to keep customers satisfied such as offering different foods within the menu but make sure they can keep the speed and quality by changing them every 6 weeks. The customers would be under Category C under the stakeholder mapping power interest matrix. This means that as long as McDonald’s satisfy their customers by holding promotional etc and acknowledge customer interface such as the website “Make up your own mind”. This means that customers will not use their power as they undermine it within themselves. The matrix explains the level of interest and the amount of power they have. They will be a category C because they have a low interest but a high power. This will depend on the quality of the products they have within franchised and none franchised restaurants in order to maintain positive customer branding in order to keep the customers satisfied. Environmentalists can affect the firm by protesting and if they all came together, they would be able to make better conditions if they lower the profit margins of the business by their actions. If customers are disappointed enough, then they will have a high interest and will be able to influence shareholder decisions as they are the people which consume the product and want a product which they are going to buy. This means McDonalds would have to respond to make their customers happy in order to gain a higher profit margin, which may change shareholders opinions on the “free range” eggs issue as the benefits of this would outdo the rewards.
There are many other stakeholders who can be taken into account such as the government, community and employees. These powers can be quite strong and have a high level of interest such as the employees which makes them a strong factor in keeping them happy as they make the business more efficient, to stakeholders which are very weak such as the community or the government because the government only have the power to do something if they are failing to comply with the law and only make minimum requirements and the community neither have power or interest in order to be able to take action against a company, for example the community taking action to prevent large business to make small businesses go out of business.
In conclusion, there are many influences on choosing which responsibilities should be accepted and which should not. There will be a responsibility to for fill the legislation of the business, not necessarily to not be able to pay the fine, but because of reputation and brand image.  The other influences which will be impacted our customers, as they have a low interest and high power, they have the influence whether to buy the product or not, therefore if customers are disappointed, then their interest will increase because they will not buy the product and look for alternatives, if they are deciding they do not like the product, they will also change shareholders decisions as they are investing in a business that customers are not wanting.
The final main factor and most influencing power is the shareholders power. They have a high power and interest in the business, therefore they are trying to maximise the efficiency of the business and make it so they have the most dividends in return, which also shows the level on interest as it is in their best interest to maximise the firms and create a brand image and a product which they will like so therefore they are able to maximise their dividend. They can minimise the threats of the other stakeholder as they have influence of the business such as a business complying with legal, governmental, communities and consumers which have different strains on the business. Increasing the reputation of the brand image therefore means that it would help brand loyalty with consumers and therefore a higher profit margin can be earned.
References:



Monday 14 March 2011

The potential benefits of Corporate Social Responsibility relative to the costs for business and stakeholders


The potential benefits of Corporate Social Responsibility relative to the costs for business and stakeholders
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is where a business invests into communities and infrastructure in order to increase sales and have a good reputation as a business by investing in good practises and benefiting the community as a whole. An example of this would be McDonald’s creating good living conditions or animal welfare in the food industry or using renewable resources in businesses in general and recycling as much as possible. Because of this, businesses can survive without shareholders taking profits and being successful by doing well to the environment and community. This can be seen as an addition of CSR of Michael Porters “Creating Shared Value”. This is the principle of a business addressing needs and challenges of a society and connecting company success with society progress embedded in their business model. On the other hand, the alternative of CSR is maximising share returns for the shareholder. The view from a business is that they listen to shareholders and not society. This is called free enterprise, where businesses have no boundaries in order to maximise profit margins and efficiently. This can arguably provide benefits for the customer because they are passing the price reduction onto the customer and the business has competitive advantage because of low prices and adding value to the product and company image. They have increased the shareholder returns to divert the business away from being socially responsible in recent years. In 2001- 2003 shareholders had a return total of $3.3bn whereas in 2007-2009, they had a shareholder return of $16.6bn. This shows that McDonald’s are giving profit to shareholders as well as the community and being social.
Businesses which accept CSR has many benefits which come from the concept of providing for the society rather than a shareholder. A potential benefit for accepting CSR is that it can gain a positive reputation and corporate image that can help attract new customers. For example, McDonald’s has environmental policies to help with which involves protecting the environment and strives to ensure that the operations of a business do not have a negative impact on future generations. Ways they do this are by recycling all cardboard and reducing waste energy in restaurants. This gives them a positive reputation because they are having a positive impact on operations by reducing waste of the business and recycling which will also in turn, attract new customers as they are encouraging others to do the same and know they are a part of society as well as a business. However, this may not be the case is at can be done as a publicity stunt in order to counteract the arguments from experiments such as supersize me and also the bad media they have had, therefore they may not be feeling the benefits of CSR as they are doing this to help McDonalds have better press in the future.
Another potential benefit for businesses incorporating CSR is that they have improved relations with suppliers resulting in greater flexibility, reducing stockholding and better terms of trade. For example, McDonald’s main way of distributing products to restaurants from the suppliers is with a company called “Keystone Distribution” and gets the raw products from suppliers such as McCain’s for Fries and British Farmers for their Beef. Many suppliers have also been with the company for many years and have built up good long standing relationships as well as investing in facilities. This means that McDonald’s has a good influence on suppliers as in meeting quality standards and therefore must have a good price for the goods they are supplied with good terms of trade.  Also most restaurants get deliveries from Keystone 2/3 times a week, depending on how large the store is, this also means the company has access to products when needed and in turn can do the “just in time” method in order to maximise quality and profit.
The drawback of incorporating CSR is the cost in order to become socially responsible.  One cost which might occur from CSR is that they divert attention away from profits. For example, from McDonald’s Environmental policy, the consequence on the company will be the cost of setting up their Agricultural Assurance Programme across Europe which help to improve animal welfare and supply chain. This diverts the profits for the company because they have to invest money in the programme in order to make sure all farms meet the required standards, which in a shareholders point of view, sees this as inefficient because they are diverting they’re profits to something socially responsible whereas the shareholder will get less of a dividend because of this which can hinder growth. Although, this can make them go down in share price because more people will sell them as it is a lower return, unless McDonalds diverts the attention from CSR and give the shareholders a fair share of the profit.
Another cost of becoming socially responsible is the cost of satisfying their customers though the use of ethical and fair trade. For example, because McDonald’s is such a large company, it has a large cost in investigating companies which will introduce fair trade to main menu items, but have successfully have became a part of the “Rainforest Alliance” which means the coffee bean farmers  get a fair price from the coffee which is used in the company. This means that they are paying out more money to give fair trade to coffee farmers rather than finding the cheapest available which can also be seen as inefficient in terms of the amount of money it will cost to give suppliers a fair price which also puts main companies off of fair trade as they intend on maximizing profits for the shareholder.  Large companies also have a lot of boundaries as in terms of volume of a specific amount of products which means that it costs to investigate a way of supplying every store with a specific product, such as McDonalds producing organic milk.
In conclusion, In the long term, I think CSR benefits both the company and the customer, as well as the society as they have put money into society and the community as well as paying dividends as CSR also provides cutting costs as a business tries to save energy and recycle whereas in the short term, if they wanted to raise money quickly and efficiently, stakeholders would be a good way as they intend to maximize profit and efficiency and focus on CSR in the long term as they would benefit though a long period of time, as long as McDonalds keep consistent to saving energy, if businesses did not do CSR, then most companies will have bad press along with bad customer views, depending on who they mainly see their shareholders are, for example McDonald’s view their public shareholders as the press and public and use them in order to maximize profit and grow. The success of CSR depends on how efficiently they have set goals and if they have set SMART targets to help the business achieve the goals in CSR and how they measure the success of their goal and if it has been achieved or not, as issues such as reducing energy in restaurants is particularly complex and hard to manage.
References: