The January 19 edition of The Economist contains a special report on corporate social responsibility. Several long and interesting articles, some with conflicting perspectives, but a few points emerge. First, CSR is moving slowly but inexorably to the mainstream corporate agenda. There are many arguments about what it should be called (corporate responsibility, corporate citizenship, building a sustainable business) but CSR is increasingly seen as just good business. That said, there is still a significant cadre of doubters whose core argument is that corporate executives should not be spending other people’s money on CSR—their job is to be making money for the shareholders. Period.
In one article, Nike’s VP of corporate responsibility, Hannah Jones, talks about CSR as a source of innovation for companies. Instead of spending her time at CSR conferences full of other corporate folks, she prefers to focus on interacting with the social entrepreneurs and in helping to reap both social and financial returns.
“Do it right,†the last article in the section, really resonates with us here at Acumen. It asks the question that, assuming this trend corporate “goodness†continues, where will it evolve? Some believe it is the social entrepreneur who has “cracked the code†with an approach which is for-profit and self-sustaining. The approach “brings financial rigour as well as an appreciation for risk…and can teach the big companies a thing or two about how to measure the success of social investments.”

Here they said about CSR in the Economist. VP of Corporate responsibility said about CSR as a source of innovation for companies. In her(VP) view she does not want to spend her time in CSR. Essentially, CSR is the deliberate inclusion of public interest into corporate decision-making, and the honoring of a triple bottom line: People, Planet, Profit.
http://www.MissionDrivenPerformance.com
Reply to PSIhttp://www.gsmiweb.com