implementing a sustainable csr strategy
Implementing a sustainable CSR Strategy through a System Dynamics
Perspective: evidences from a Colombian case-study
Enzo Bivona
(*)
, Sonia Herrera Daza
(**)
Abstract
During last decades, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) strategies received a growing attention from both businesses and non profit organisations. However, very often organisations fail to correctly implement a successful CSR strategy.
Through the analysis of a case-study, this paper tries to demonstrates how a CSR strategy could fail in the long term if a open-loop logic is adopted. On the contrary, by making explicit the feedback loops structure underlying a CSR strategy, the system dynamics approach is likely to better support decision makers in implementing effective CSR strategies able to foster sustainable long term growth.
After discussing the main benefits and limits of the CSR concept reported in literature, the case-study is introduced and the method adopted to introduce a CSR strategy is explored.
Then, such an approach is reconsidered in a feedback perspective and presented with reference to the case-study investigated. Finally, conclusions and further remarks are outlined. Keywords: corporate social responsibility, non profit organisations, learning, system thinking, system dynamics, Balanced Scorecard.
1. Introduction
During last decades, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) strategies received a growing attention from both businesses and non profit organisations (Kotler and Lee, 2005;
Soonawalla and Alnoor, 2005). However, there is still lack of simple descriptions on how firms implement CSR intentions. Furthermore, the analysis provided often suffer of methodological inconsistencies and very seldom take into consideration a system perspective
(Porter, 2008). As a consequence of the above remarks, organisations fail to correctly implement a successful long term CSR strategy (Schwartz and Gibb, 1999).
The purpose of this paper is to analyse the
Perspective: evidences from a Colombian case-study
Enzo Bivona
(*)
, Sonia Herrera Daza
(**)
Abstract
During last decades, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) strategies received a growing attention from both businesses and non profit organisations. However, very often organisations fail to correctly implement a successful CSR strategy.
Through the analysis of a case-study, this paper tries to demonstrates how a CSR strategy could fail in the long term if a open-loop logic is adopted. On the contrary, by making explicit the feedback loops structure underlying a CSR strategy, the system dynamics approach is likely to better support decision makers in implementing effective CSR strategies able to foster sustainable long term growth.
After discussing the main benefits and limits of the CSR concept reported in literature, the case-study is introduced and the method adopted to introduce a CSR strategy is explored.
Then, such an approach is reconsidered in a feedback perspective and presented with reference to the case-study investigated. Finally, conclusions and further remarks are outlined. Keywords: corporate social responsibility, non profit organisations, learning, system thinking, system dynamics, Balanced Scorecard.
1. Introduction
During last decades, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) strategies received a growing attention from both businesses and non profit organisations (Kotler and Lee, 2005;
Soonawalla and Alnoor, 2005). However, there is still lack of simple descriptions on how firms implement CSR intentions. Furthermore, the analysis provided often suffer of methodological inconsistencies and very seldom take into consideration a system perspective
(Porter, 2008). As a consequence of the above remarks, organisations fail to correctly implement a successful long term CSR strategy (Schwartz and Gibb, 1999).
The purpose of this paper is to analyse the
References: Becker-Olsen, Karen, and Hill, Ronald, 2005, The Impact of Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility On Consumer Behavior Responsible Business, University of California, Berkeley, California Kothavala, Soonawalla and Alnoor, Bhimani, 2005, “From conformance to performance: Burke, Lee and Logsdon, Jeanne M. 1996, “How Corporate Social Responsibility Pays Off” Dahlsrud, Alexander. 2008. “How Corporate Social Responsibility is Defined: an Analysis of 37 Definitions” Forrester, Jay Wright, 1961, Industrial Dynamics. Portland, Oregon: Productivity Press. Kaplan, Robert and Norton, David. 1992. “The Balanced Scorecard: Measures That Drive Performance” Kaplan, Robert and Norton, David. 2001. The Strategy Focused Organization. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Philip, Kotler and Nancy, Lee. 2005. Corporate Social Responsibility: Doing the Most Good for Your Company and Your Cause Linard, Keith and Dvorsky, Lubomir. 2001. People – Not Human Resources: The System Dynamics of Human Capital Accounting Marrewijk, Marcel van. 2003. “Concepts and definitions of CSR and corporate sustainability: between agency and communion” Plaza, Beatriz, Barona, Ana Beatriz, and Hearst, Norman. 2001. “Managed competition for the poor or poorly managed competition? Lesson from the Colombian health reform Porter, Michael E., Kramer, Mark K. 2006. “Strategy & Society. The Link Between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility” Porter, Terry B. 2008. “Managerial Applications of Corporate Social Responsibility and Systems Thinking for Achieving Sustainability Outcomes” Schwartz, Peter and Gibb, Blair. 1999. When Good Companies Do Bad Things: Responsibility and Risk in an Age of Globalization, Canada, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., Shuili, Du, Bhattacharya, CB. and Sankar, Sen. 2007. “Reaping relational rewards from corporate social responsibility: The role of competitive positioning”, International Journal of Sloper, Phil, Linard, Keith, and Paterson, David. 1999. Towards a Dynamic Feedback Framework for Public Sector Performance Management Winch, W. Graham, 1993. “Consensus building in the planning process: benefits from a “hard” modelling approach” Figure 1 – The new subsidized health care system in Colombia after law 100, 1993 (Source: Plaza, et al