CCSR – Catchword or Inner Conviction?

Georg Kapsch

We live today in an era of catchwords and slogans, and “corporate culture and social responsibility” (CCSR) is, in reality, also one of these. The paradox is that more and more organisations are talking about CCSR and drawing up guidelines for it, while our society, both on a large scale and in small things, is becoming colder and colder.

True social and cultural responsibility, however, happens not in guidelines but in people’s hearts.
We need to assume responsibility not only for ourselves but also for society; in other words, it is important to make a contribution to the public good, and this has to be done not only by companies, but also by each individual member of society.
Unfortunately, the fact is that today, CCSR has become a further element of the complex of marketing measures used for maintaining companies’ images, and on top of that it is also becoming bureaucratised through ISO 26000. The latter may be generally helpful in financial terms, both in the social as well as in the cultural sphere, but certainly not in the sense of involvement out of a sense of commitment.
This becomes particularly obvious in crisis situations, when those who consider CCSR basically an image-building tool reduce these budgets first of all, whereas those who are serious about bearing social and cultural responsibility only reduce CCSR budgets as a last resort.
This does not mean that economic ideas and societal values are irreconcilable. A priori, there is no contradiction between economic effectivity and sustainable societal values. The situation only becomes problematic when immoderacy, greed and sheer shareholder value are given precedence. On the other hand, negative implications can also arise when, for example, society no longer sees education as a value in itself, when achievement is not longer appreciated and freedom is restricted. There needs to be a harmonisation of the basic values of society and profitability-oriented action.
Corporate culture and social responsibility must be engaged in gladly and out of conviction; a certain image benefit will then automatically result, although in most cases by no means in proportion to the investment that is made. The common goal of the economic sector, the arts and life in society can only be to keep the world a place worth living in.

Normal 0 21 false false false DE X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4

CCSR – Catchword or Inner Conviction?

We live today in an era of catchwords and slogans, and “corporate culture and social responsibility” (CCSR) is, in reality, also one of these. The paradox is that more and more organisations are talking about CCSR and drawing up guidelines for it, while our society, both on a large scale and in small things, is becoming colder and colder.

True social and cultural responsibility, however, happens not in guidelines but in people’s hearts.

We need to assume responsibility not only for ourselves but also for society; in other words, it is important to make a contribution to the public good, and this has to be done not only by companies, but also by each individual member of society.

Unfortunately, the fact is that today, CCSR has become a further element of the complex of marketing measures used for maintaining companies’ images, and on top of that it is also becoming bureaucratised through ISO 26000. The latter may be generally helpful in financial terms, both in the social as well as in the cultural sphere, but certainly not in the sense of involvement out of a sense of commitment.

This becomes particularly obvious in crisis situations, when those who consider CCSR basically an image-building tool reduce these budgets first of all, whereas those who are serious about bearing social and cultural responsibility only reduce CCSR budgets as a last resort.

This does not mean that economic ideas and societal values are irreconcilable. A priori, there is no contradiction between economic effectivity and sustainable societal values. The situation only becomes problematic when immoderacy, greed and sheer shareholder value are given precedence. On the other hand, negative implications can also arise when, for example, society no longer sees education as a value in itself, when achievement is not longer appreciated and freedom is restricted. There needs to be a harmonisation of the basic values of society and profitability-oriented action.

Corporate culture and social responsibility must be engaged in gladly and out of conviction; a certain image benefit will then automatically result, although in most cases by no means in proportion to the investment that is made. The common goal of the economic sector, the arts and life in society can only be to keep the world a place worth living in.