16-page CSR Best Practice Analysis Pack

BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE FOR CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITYAND SUSTAINABILITY
Take a look at the corporate
responsibility analysis inside...
This pack contains a taster of the kind of analysis we publish every month
in our print magazine and everyday on our website. At the back you'll see
the many benefits of subscribing and how much it costs.
Subscribe
today
and
receive
the
analysisyou
need
to
help
advance
yourcareer
EC – Subscription Sample Pack No Discount_Layout 1 16/01/2013 11:59 Page 1

There are
inevitably concerns
about the
business-like
contractual
arrangements
emerging between
non-profit groups
and corporations
For an entire week during March, images of the
Amazon rainforest beamed into the living rooms
of Sky subscribers across the UK. Model Lily Cole
was called in to provide some glamour, but South
America’s magical biome did a good job of speaking
for itself.
Behind the lustrous images, there was a simple
but serious message: trees need to be worth more
standing up than cut down. And so into an enviro-
light version of Green Economics.
The programme wasn’t the sudden brainwave of
some young creative within Sky. Rather it emerged
as the result of a long-running, strategic partnership
between the UK satellite television operator and
conservation charity WWF.
The alliance, which dates back to October 2009,
has two stated goals. Neither is modest. First, Sky
wants to help preserve three million hectares of
rainforest, saving one billion trees in the process.
Second, it is committed to raising £4m for WWF: half
from its 10 million or so viewers and the public at
large, and half in matched funding from the
broadcaster itself.
Saving the Amazon is core to WWF’s objectives as
a globally minded conversation NGO. And £4m is a
large chunk of cash, especially at a time when purse
strings are tightening and many charities are
struggling to keep afloat.
But, there are inevitably concerns about the
business-like contractual arrangements emerging
between sustainability non-profit groups and
corporations.
Advocates of a more participatory approach insist
that the benefits outweigh the possible downsides.
Their arguments typically boil down to two salient
factors; namely, the sheer size and influence of the
private sector.
Sustainability is a complex, multi-faceted issue,
the theory runs. To design appropriate solutions, all
players must be around the table. Failing to include
business is therefore an ideological blind spot and a
debilitating oversight.
Partnership mind-shift
June 1992. That’s the date the penny dropped. Or so
says David Bent, deputy director of sustainable
business at UK sustainability charity Forum for the
Future. It was during that specific month that thou-
sands of environmentalists and policymakers
descended on Rio de Janeiro for the Earth Summit.
Businesses, it should be said, were notably absent at
the time.
Bent describes the landmark conference as
signalling the shift from a “we need to do something”
mentality to a “let’s try to get things done” mindset.
“As nice as it is to think of yourself as the white knight
charging forward, actually change on a global scale
doesn’t happen just through heroes,” says Bent.
Hence the invitation to corporations to get on board.
Forum for the Future has done more than most to
promote the partnership model. It’s there in its
language. Phrases such as “help businesses”, “work
with others” and “share what we learn” litter its
public statements.
It even calls the 100 or so businesses with which it
has dealings – a list that includes the likes of oil major
Shell, agribusiness Cargill and cement and aggregates
firm Lafarge – as “partner organisations”. This is to be
Charity partnering
Close, but not too close
By Oliver Balch
In pushing the sustainability cause, some non-profit groups are becoming more intimately
involved with the private sector
Business strategy 11Ethical Corporation • April 2013
VERNONWILEY/ISTOCKPHOTO.COM
EC April_Layout 1 28/03/2013 14:57 Page 11

Forum for the Future’s pioneer level partner programme
Forum for the Future offers a variety of partnership “products” for companies that are looking to engage on
sustainability issues. The highest level of engagement is the “pioneer” level. This is open to only a “limited
number” of companies.
Fee: £35,000
Criteria
Companies at this level must:
• demonstrate clear sector leadership or provide evidence of sector leadership aspirations;
• allocate a partnership manager and board-level partnership patron, with regular check-ins;
• ensure work programmes move the organisation forward at pace and with stretching targets for change;
• guarantee an annual board session takes place; and
• engage at the level of business strategy and sustainable development strategy.
Benefits
In return, companies will:
• receive an extended tailored advisory programme;
• have partner support and senior-level engagement;
• receive membership of Forum’s sustainable business models group;
• be entitled to involvement in Forum’s system innovation lab;
• be a placement host for Forum Masters scholars;
• have an annual dinner with founder and director Jonathon Porritt;
• have opportunities to communicate through Forum’s magazine, including being able to republish
content and advertise; and
• have standard membership level benefits, such as access to exclusive network events, subscriptions
to magazines and a bi-monthly newsletter.
Pioneer partners
Bupa; Delhaize Group; Kingfisher; Marks & Spencer; Telefónica UK; TUI Travel; Unilever
Source: www.forumforthefuture.org
expected from business-led sustainability groups,
such as Business for Social Responsibility or the World
Business Council for Sustainable Development, but
such a seemingly pro-business stance remains
atypical for most independent non-profits.
The line between “partners” and “clients” is
certainly a fine one. Forum’s advisory services can
seem close to those of a commercial consultancy. So
too does its fee structure. Companies can buy
different levels of engagement, from basic
(“membership”), to moderate (“partnership”)
through to advanced (“premier”). The price tag
differs accordingly, from £5,000 to £35,000.
The basic membership package includes access to
networking events, “cutting-edge practical tools” and
a direct line to Forum, among other benefits. For
premier partners, the list is longer and significantly
more hands-on (see box).
WWF is less publicly explicit about its commercial
arrangements. It offers a similar suite of options for
involvement, however. Companies can choose
between licensing or sponsorship arrangements
through to what WWF terms “technical” or
“transformational” partnerships.
The latter is where the charity hopes real step-
changes will occur. “WWF has moved from
philanthropic relationships to deeper partnerships that
encourage businesses to improve their environmental
performance and to play a role in taking us towards a
nature-friendly economy,” says Dax Lovegrove,
WWF’s head of business and industry.
Partnership-orientated sustainability NGOs are
not short of positive case studies. Forum’s expertise
in future modelling, for instance, has delivered
tangible results for a range of companies that are
12
The line between
"partners" and
"clients" is
a fine one
Business strategy Ethical Corporation • April 2013
Not just a pioneer, a Forum pioneer
TRACK5/ISTOCKPHOTO.COM

Teaming up with
a charity offers
corporations a
reputational boost
looking to modify their business models light of
climate change and other sustainability challenges.
The development of common tools and processes
for reducing shipping-related carbon emissions
under the rubric of the Sustainable Shipping
Initiative is illustrative of the sector-wide benefits that
a partnership approach is bringing.
WWF’s leadership of cross-sector “roundtables”
for key agricultural commodities such as palm oil,
soya and sugar also bolsters the case for combining
“individual strengths [to] forge extraordinary
change”.
Unsurprisingly, we hear less about the risks and
failures. In contrast to contracting a private
consultancy, teaming up with a charity offers
corporations a reputational boost. In the case of
cause-related marketing and other more consumer-
facing collaborations, it can result in a jump in sales
as well. But what’s in it for the charity? There is a risk
of being taken for a ride.
Getting the rules straight
Under law, there is nothing stopping charities
taking money from businesses in the form of dona-
tions (presuming, of course, that the money is
legally obtained and used). And many charities do
so. Recent research by the World Bank-based
research group CGAP indicates that corporate
support for UK charities amounts to about £1.6bn a
year. That equates to roughly 5% of the voluntary
sector’s income.
Receiving money for services rendered, rather
than as straight donations, is a different matter.
Charities operate under legal charters that accord
them fiscal advantages and other financial benefits.
These are premised on the delivery of public goods
in exchange. If a charity is found to be providing
paid-for services without the commensurate public
goods, then alarm bells will start to ring.
Some charities have found it easier to spin off
their advisory arms into explicit for-profit entities.
The emblematic example is AccountAbility. Founded
at a similar time to Forum with a similar partnership-
orientated mindset, it now operates an advisory
services arm.
As a for-profit entity, it has the stated objective of
helping “clients increase revenue, manage risk, and
enhance brand and reputation”. The New Academy
for Business, another partnership-based charity set
up in the mid-1990s, had less success and folded.
For those bent on pursuing the partnership
approach under a charitable banner, the
establishment of clear rules of the game is critical.
Designing some form of contract is “essential”,
according to Darian Stibbe, executive director of the
Partnering Initiative, a UK-based non-profit. Having
a formal agreement helps “ensure that there is 100%
13Business strategyEthical Corporation • April 2013
Blue-sky partnering with WWF – 45,000 better cotton farmers
WWF and Ikea: responsible cotton production
The WWF-Ikea partnership, which began 10 years ago, works to transform commodity markets, with a
particular focus on responsible cotton production and forest management.
“It’s contributed directly to an increase in the forest areas that are now FSC-certified, particularly in
eastern Europe”, WWF says. The partnership has helped around 45,000 cotton farmers in Pakistan and
India to grow “better cotton”, significantly reducing their water and chemical use and increasing their
profit margins as a result.
Source: WWF-INT Annual Review 2012
GMALANDRA/ISTOCKPHOTO.COM

WWF’s model for working with business
Why should companies partner with WWF?
According to WWF, only the smartest, most sustainable companies that value nature will continue to
thrive in the future. WWF’s knowledge and insight can help companies make a positive contribution to the
planet. It says there are “exciting opportunities ahead”. To realise these, it’s necessary for businesses to
unleash “the power of new thinking and innovation”. Given expertise and experience, WWF sees itself
as “the ideal business adviser or partner”.
Why WWF partners with business
WWF’s vision is a planet where business makes a “restorative contribution” to our natural world,
supports the Earth’s adaptation to a changing climate, and benefits human well-being. To achieve that
vision requires, WWF believes, engaging with the private sector, not hurling bricks from the sidelines.
How does WWF work with business?
WWF insists that it’s not enough to work with companies that are already doing everything right. That will
only lead to incremental change. What WWF aspires to is market transformation by radically altering the way
companies do business. To achieve that, it forms what it describes as “challenging and constructive relation-
ships” with businesses that are able to drive “real, lasting change”. That includes promoting green innovation
and developing “progressive strategies” that tackle environmental risks and engage a wider audience.
More information: www.wwf.org.uk
Critiques of WWF’s “constructive engagement” model
In June 2011, the German TV station ARD broadcast a documentary titled The Silence of the Pandas: What
the WWF isn’t saying. The film, which was later released in English on the internet, has an accompanying
book – Black Book WWF: Shady deals under the sign of the panda.
The work of German filmmaker, Wilfried Huisman, the film provides a powerful critique of WWF’s
alleged legitimisation of unsustainable business activities. Huisman focuses particularly on self-regulatory
schemes to establish green certificates for commodities such as timber, sugar, palm oil and soy. In
response, WWF said it didn’t “recognise” the image of it portrayed in the film, and said it was “saddened”
by the filmmaker’s sloppy fact checking. The conservation charity also reaffirmed its decision to work with
business on the grounds that “it gets results”.
Also in 2011, UK campaign group Global Witness released a report criticising WWF’s Global Forest and
Trade Network (GFTN) – as featured in Ethical Corporation. Established over two decades previously, GFTN
represents loggers, processors and retailers, which collectively represent one fifth of the world’s timber
trade. WWF offers its corporate members technical assistance in sustainable forest management.
In the report Global Witness claimed to have identified “serious systemic problems”, including a lack
of transparency, inadequate rules for membership, and instances of weak performance, monitoring
and enforcement. Most seriously, Global Witness said that the procedures to assess whether the scheme is
actually contributing to sustainable forestry are inadequate.
In response, WWF conceded that some GFTN partners have “a way to go” on their journey to sustain-
ability. Yet it argued that these are “precisely the companies that should be in GFTN”. It also confirmed
that those caught flouting the “rules and spirit” of GFTN would be removed from the network.
clarity on what the partnership is going to achieve
and what each of the parties is going to do to achieve
those objectives”, he explains. Key issues to cover
include the use of logos and intellectual property,
publicity and communication and – all importantly –
“what to do if something goes wrong”.
Most partnership-based sustainability charities
have taken such advice on board. Forum’s approach
in this respect is exemplary. To become one of its
“pioneer partners”, companies must meet five
explicit commitment criteria. These are agreed up-
front and reviewed annually during the three-year
14 Business strategy Ethical Corporation • April 2013
A campaigning-partnership balance for WWF
period such partnerships typically last.
“We do not take anyone that walks through the
door,” says Bent. In addition to its preference to
working with industry leaders, where it can Forum
opts to team up with companies in its core areas of
concern: namely, food, energy and finance.
Ambitious partners
In the same vein, WWF’s Lovegrove says a main
challenge for his organisation is “to find ambitious
partners who are prepared to break new ground”.
He confirms that WWF has decided not to pursue a
number of partnerships “after extensive explo-
rations” revealed a notable difference in ambitions.
As to the issue of terminating partnerships, Stibbe
argues that there are a number of strong grounds for
doing so.
Some are obvious. If allegations of unsustainable or

unethical activities by a company partner threaten the
charity’s brand, then that’s good reason to walk away.
Irredeemable differences of ethos and culture
represent another motive to split. Not meeting
objectives makes his list too. “You try to re-engineer
it so that [the partnership] is achieving its objectives,”
Stibbe says. “But if that doesn’t work, then of course
you close it down.”
Forum says this reflects its own policy. For
confidentiality reasons, Bent will not name names,
but he says that “a number” of partnerships have
been cancelled over the years.
That said, severing things is very much a last
resort, however. “We have terminated our
relationships on the rare occasions when companies
don’t comply, usually after a series of warnings and
a final year to turn things around,” he says. So
partners do get plenty of opportunities to improve.
Likewise, WWF says it cancelled a deal with
Powergen (before its acquisition by E.ON in 2002)
because its policy of green tariffs failed to meet its
goal of “transformative” change.
If partnerships are as important as sustainability
experts maintain, then it behoves all those involved
in the sector to find workable models. The general
feeling in the non-profit world is that charities are
still finding how they can best engage with business.
A few pioneers are taking the lead, putting
partnerships front-and-centre of their mission to
promote sustainability. But before more follow, it’s
important to establish exactly where the lines lie and
how the non-profits can most effectively make the
change that is their organisational reason for being.
And there must be rigorous scrutiny to ensure that
the line between a partnership and a consultant-
client relationship isn’t breached. I
15
To become a
Forum pioneer
partner companies
must meet
five explicit
commitment
criteria
Business strategyEthical Corporation • April 2013
RICARDOESPLANABABER/DREAMSTIME.COM

This is an
environment ripe
for activism and
campaign groups
seeking out
innovative ways
to serve members
In mid-February, 50 environmental activists were
arrested for tying themselves to the gates of the
White House. Among the protestors were Nasa
climate scientist James Hansen, actress Daryl
Hannah, and Michael Brune, chief executive of the
Sierra Club, the venerable environmental group.
They were protesting against the proposed $7bn
Keystone XL pipeline, which, if authorised by
Barack Obama, will transport oil derived from the
Canadian tar sands 1,179 miles from Alberta to
refineries in Texas.
Public confidence in political systems is at an all
time low. The economic crisis has knocked faith in
capitalism, and many – from both the developed
and developing world – increasingly question
whether their governance institutions are capable of
delivering the social and environmental justice
demanded by their citizens. It is an environment
ripe for activism and for campaign groups seeking
out new and innovative ways to serve the needs of
their members.
The Keystone XL project has not lacked opposi-
tion. Since it was approved in 2005, it has been the
target of high-profile environmental campaigns and
civil protests. Most recently, in 2011, several
thousand protestors formed a human chain around
the White House in an effort to persuade the US
president to block the proposals.
But what marked this protest out from others
was the involvement of the Sierra Club. The organ-
isation’s participation broke a 120-year prohibition
against engaging in acts of civil disobedience. It was,
in other words, the first time the Sierra Club had
broken the law in pursuit of its campaign objectives.
Founded in 1892 by the famous conservationist
John Muir, the Sierra Club is one of the oldest and
well-recognised environmental groups in the US.
With 2.1 million members across all 50 US states it is
also the largest and most diverse.
Allison Chin is president of the club and has been
a member since 1982. She participated in the protest.
While she believes that the club’s approach and
tactics have remained steady over the years, she also
argues that in exceptional circumstances civil
disobedience is acceptable.
“We have a long tradition of protest in America.
Using this tactic has been pivotal in history. Given
the right set of circumstances and moment, it can be
an effective tool if used strategically. That’s why the
board made this decision.”
Policy suspension
Participating in the protest required the club’s board
of directors to temporarily suspend the club’s policy
prohibiting engagement in illegal activities.
Although a “one-off limited exception”, many will
be assessing the long-term implications for the
club’s broader campaign strategy.
The Sierra Club example highlights one of the
modern hallmarks of social and environmental
campaigning. Pretty much anything goes, provided
it meets the interests of the membership and the
campaign objectives.
Greenpeace is one campaign group well recog-
nised for getting its hands dirty. Over the last 25
years it has pioneered a unique style of corporate
and political campaigning. Its campaigns are better
coordinated and more international than at any
Campaigning trends
Activism for the Facebook generation
By Rob Bailes
It seems as if the public is as engaged with issues as ever before, and the campaigning groups
continue to develop who they target and how they do so
Briefing: activist NGOs 15Ethical Corporation • March 2013
MRPLISKIN/ISTOCKPHOTO.COM
EC March 38_Layout 1 04/03/2013 16:13 Page 15

come up with a product that resonates with the
audience. We don’t take money from corporations
or government, only members of the public, and if
we’re not getting the results they want then we’re
not doing our job,” says Stewart.
Stewart is also responsible for coordinating inter-
national media for the Stop Shell, Save the Arctic
campaign. One of Greenpeace’s largest and well-
resourced campaigns, it has targeted Shell UK petrol
pumps as well as an oil-drilling ship in New Zealand.
At the Rio Earth Summit in June 2012, the organ-
isation launched a celebrity-backed petition calling
on the United Nations to establish a global sanc-
tuary in the Arctic. By January this year, the petition
had registered 2.5 million signatures.
Systems thinking
The Greenpeace Arctic campaign underlines one of
the most noticeable developments in social and
environmental campaigning over the last 10-15
years: the increasing scale and sophistication of the
campaigns. While the tactical mix hasn’t changed
much – press releases, protests and rallies, legisla-
tive lobbying, consumer and corporate pressure –
that mix is now deployed more strategically,
thoughtfully and internationally than ever before.
Global Witness’s Gavin Hayman says the starting
point for any new Global Witness campaign is a
rigorous power analysis of the institutions and
actors at play. “We tend to prefer systemic solu-
tions,” he says. “It’s great to get individual
behavioural modification by companies, but we
always ask what is the systemic solution so this
doesn’t happen again.”
Global Witness was formally constituted in 1995.
Its work on blood diamonds in the late 1990s thrust
the organisation into the limelight and through a
combination of detailed on-the-ground investiga-
tion and high-level networking and influencing, the
organisation has earned itself both a feared and
respected place on the NGO map.
16 Briefing: activist NGOs Ethical Corporation • March 2013
Global Witness
Mission statement
“Global Witness investigates and campaigns to prevent natural resource related conflict
and corruption, and associated environmental and human rights abuses. From under-
cover investigations, to high-level lobby meetings, it aims to engage on every level where
it might make a difference and bring about change.”
Size and organisational structure
More than 60 staff are divided between offices in London and Washington DC. The
company has a board of directors that meets quarterly. Day-to-day management is
provided by the three founding directors, the director of campaigns and the director
of finance and resources. Global Witness also has an advisory board. Its activities in
the US are undertaken through Global Witness Publishing Inc, a company registered
in Washington DC.
Sources of funding
Grants from private trusts, foundations, charities and governments.
Leadership and key personnel
Charmian Gooch, co-founder and director
Patrick Alley, co-founder and director
Simon Taylor, co-founder and director
Brief history
Established in 1993 by three friends working from home, Global Witness’s first campaign
aimed to stop the trade in illegal timber from Cambodia to Thailand that was funding the
Khmer Rouge. Within six months it achieved an astounding victory: the overland border
was closed. Global Witness has helped the issue of natural resources rise to its current
prominent position on the international agenda.
Campaign sectors
Corruption, conflict, environmental governance and maximising accountability and
transparency.
Campaigning highlights
2005: The precedent-setting arrest of timber baron Gus Kouwenhoven in the
Netherlands.
2003: Its campaign against blood diamonds led to the creation of the
Kimberley Process certification scheme and to Global Witness’s joint
nomination for the Nobel peace prize. Three years later it contributed
to research and campaigning around the 2006 Hollywood blockbuster
film Blood Diamond. In 2011, though, Global Witness left the Kimberly
Process.
1996: Its investigations resulted in the IMF withdrawing from Cambodia over
corruption in the logging industry.
time in the organisation’s history, a trend reflected
among the other big global campaign groups.
Ben Stewart is head of media at Greenpeace UK.
He has been an integral part of the organisation’s
UK campaigns for many years, devising media
strategy and working closely with the mobilisation
unit. He says those working at Greenpeace enjoy a
high degree of flexibility when determining their
approach to specific campaigns.
“To the extent that we are responsible to our
supporters, we have a huge amount of freedom to
Sierra Club's Michael Brune and campaigner Bill McKribben
protest at the White House
NGO profile
CHRISTINEIRVINE

Oxfam International
Mission statement
“Oxfam’s vision is a just world without poverty, in which people can influence decisions
that affect their lives, enjoy their rights, and assume their responsibilities as full citizens,
valued and treated equally.”
An international confederation of 17 independent organisations working together in 94
countries, Oxfam International has a council of trustees responsible for the charity’s
governance, assets and activities and its constitution. Worldwide in 2012 it had 10,230
staff; 47,097 volunteers; income of €918m (€639m spent on programme implementation,
management, campaigning and emergencies; €144m on trading; €77m on fundraising
and marketing; €40m on management and admin).
Sources of funding
Institutional donors such as the UN, the EU and governments, public donations and
fundraising appeals, corporations, and via trading income from its shop network.
Winnie Byanyima, executive director (from April)
Nitin Desai, chair of trustees (from April)
Brief history
In 1942 the Oxford Committee for Famine Relief was set up to provide relief to civilians
affected by the second world war. In 1948 it opened its first charity shop at 17 Broad
Street, Oxford (still in use today). In 1954 it began work in Africa. In 1995 the Oxfam Inter-
national confederation was formed.
Campaign sectors
Women’s rights; food for all, sustainable agriculture, climate change; health, education
and aid; arms control and people’s rights during times of conflict and disaster.
2011: Launched the international Grow campaign, aiming to help create a
world where everyone always has enough to eat.
2000s: Make Trade Fair campaign, to change the rigged rules and double
standards of world trade. Oxfam was a key partner in the Drop the
Debt, Make Poverty History and Ban Landmines campaigns, and in
the fair trade movement.
1970s: Biggest ever aid package into Bangladesh; campaigning against
apartheid in South Africa; first humanitarian access into Cambodia
following the fall of the Khmer Rouge.
Unlike other campaign NGOs, Global Witness
does not have a membership base. For Hayman, this
absence of a membership mandate provides a
unique degree of flexibility and creativity when
choosing the right approach to a particular
campaign.
“We ask, what’s the problem we’re trying to
solve and what’s the best way to do that?” Hayman
says. “It doesn’t need to be A, B or C. We can
genuinely be creative and we don’t have to speak to
a specific audience or constituency.”
This freedom may also explain why Global
Witness is more than willing to criticise other NGOs
or to drop out of coalitions entirely, if it feels they
are part of the problem.
In 2011, it accused WWF of failing to regulate its
flagship Global Forest and Trade Network in the
Global Witness report Pandering to Loggers. The
report led to a public war of words between the two
organisations.
Later that year, Global Witness announced it
would be leaving the Kimberley Process – the multi-
stakeholder initiative designed to prevent conflict
diamonds from entering the market. The process
had “failed to address the clear links between
diamonds, violence and tyranny”, said Global
Witness.
Legal and financial approaches
Systemic thinking is not unique to Global Witness,
of course. In recent years, activist NGOs from across
the spectrum have increasingly looked to target
financial power centres.
Friends of the Earth targeted UK pension
providers to pressure oil companies BP and Shell to
divest their interests in Canadian tar sands.
Through work with FairPensions, an investor
engagement and activism charity, shareholder reso-
lutions were brought forward at both BP and Shell’s
AGMs in 2010.
A similar approach has been adopted against
Sime Darby, the Malaysian-based palm oil producer.
Friends of the Earth accused the company of illegal
land grabs and human rights violations in its
Liberian palm oil operations. A targeted campaign
against the company’s European financial backers
has begun, with letters disseminated to investors as
recently as January 2013.
Systems thinking also requires legal approaches;
indeed one of the common threads uniting most
campaigning NGOs is a scepticism of the voluntary
approaches adopted by most large multinational
companies and pushed by more corporate-friendly
NGOs. Voluntary agreements and initiatives may
have a role to play, but it is only regulation – and the
enforcement of it – that can deliver a level playing
field, campaigners say.
Paul de Clerck is head of the economic justice
programme at Friends of the Earth Europe. He says
his organisation is increasingly using legal
17Briefing: activist NGOsEthical Corporation • March 2013
approaches simply because voluntary commitments
do not work in the end. Much of his time is, he says,
spent opposing corporate lobbying for deregulation
in Brussels.
“Here in the EU there is a completely unbalanced
lobby situation. Most of the advisory groups to the
European commission are dominated by advisers
from the corporate sector. They are using the
economic crisis to push a deregulatory agenda.”
Ineke Zeldenrust, international co-ordinator of
the Clean Clothes Campaign, similarly stresses the
need for binding, legal agreements in the garment
manufacturing sector. “It is quite clear that volun-
tary commitments aren’t enough,” she says. “You
NGO profile

company’s customer base across Europe and North
America while engaging APP locally, through its
Indonesian office.
In a breakthrough announcement in February
2013, APP pledged to end the clearing of natural
forests across its entire supply chain with immediate
effect, bringing forward commitments made in its
2020 Sustainability Roadmap by two years. The
announcement was hailed by Greenpeace as
“highly significant”.
These examples highlight the increasingly
important role developing country offices and their
memberships play in determining the campaign
agenda of western NGOs; a point supported by
Friends of the Earth’s de Clerck.
“FoE used to be much more active in Europe and
the US, while over the last 15 years the network has
expanded in developing countries. They have
gained in strength and importance and we are now
less dominated by US or European positions and
ways of working,” says de Clerck.
Campaign by Twitter
Advances in communications have, of course,
played a fundamental role in the way western NGO
campaign groups mobilise their supporters and
members. So too have they shaped the way the
NGOs operate and function.
The Clean Clothes Campaign is one organisation
that has benefited greatly from advances in commu-
nications. Founded in 1989, the campaign operates
as an alliance of organisations, bringing together
and mobilising the networks of a variety of different
social and labour rights groups.
Ineke Zeldenrust works at the group’s interna-
tional secretariat in the Netherlands. She says the
strength of the alliance lies in its ability to mobilise
its member networks in pursuit of its campaigns,
rather than replicating those campaign capacities in-
house. Communications media have played an
instrumental role in enabling this approach.
“When we started out it was really about
bringing people together to exchange information.
Now the partners can find each other relatively
easily and often they don’t need physical face-to-
face meetings. Our value is as a clearinghouse,”
Zeldenrust says.
The Clean Clothes Campaign has been particu-
larly effective in exploiting digital media through its
networks. In 2012, a campaign targeted the Adidas
originals Facebook page, accusing the company of
failing to pay its Indonesian workers severance pay.
The wider campaign against Adidas secured
50,000 signatures by mobilising the networks of
other groups such as Labour Behind the Label and
United Students against Sweatshops.
For supply chains expert Sean Ansett, former
director of global partnerships at Gap, the contribu-
tion of social and other digital media cannot be
overstated. It has, he says, reduced the costs of
18 Briefing: activist NGOs Ethical Corporation • March 2013
Clean Clothes Campaign
Mission statement
“Clean Clothes Campaign is dedicated to improving working conditions and supporting the
empowerment of workers in the global garment and sportswear industries.”
CCC is an alliance of organisations in 15 European countries. Its international secretariat is
based in Amsterdam. CCC members include trade unions and NGOs covering a broad
spectrum of perspectives and interests, such as women’s rights, consumer advocacy and
poverty reduction.
It relies on a partner network of more than 200 organisations and unions in garment-
producing countries to identify local problems and objectives, and to help it develop
campaign strategies to support workers in achieving their goals. It cooperates extensively
with similar labour rights campaigns in the US, Canada and Australia.
Sources of funding
Principally grants and subsidies from governments and the European Union, plus some
small private donations.
The Amsterdam-based international secretariat has a flat organisational structure and a
consensus-based decision model. The chairman of the board of trustees is Evert de Boer.
Brief history
Founded in 1989 during solidarity action for workers in the Philippines, CCC grew into an
international partner network, bringing together more than 200 unions, women’s groups
and research organisations worldwide. Since 1989, CCC has educated and mobilised
consumers, lobbied companies and governments, and offered direct solidarity support
to workers as they fight for their rights and demand better working conditions.
Campaign sectors
Workers’ rights and empowerment.
2013: CCC started a Europe-wide campaign – No More Excuses – to demand
companies pay sweatshop workers in Cambodia enough to lift them
out of poverty.
2011: After an intensive campaign launched by CCC and recently hosted by
Change.org, the Italian textile brand Versace announced it would
join other denim manufacturers around the globe in calling for a ban
on the practice of sandblasting on jeans, as it runs unacceptable
health risks.
need to translate that into law and binding agree-
ments with local unions and suppliers.”
While organisations have been smartening up
their campaigns, they have also been working on a
scale hitherto not possible. For the large interna-
tional groups such as Friends of the Earth and
Greenpeace this involves applying a mix of pressure
locally and internationally.
Friends of the Earth’s offensives against Asian agri-
business Wilmar in Uganda and Sime Darby in Liberia
have coupled local campaigning and intelligence gath-
ering with political and investor pressure in Europe.
In its campaign against the Indonesia-based pulp
and paper company APP, Greenpeace targeted the
NGO profile

campaigns and enabled campaign groups to
mobilise thousands of supporters at the touch of a
button while personalising campaigns to a degree
not possible before.
Ansett points to the influence of campaign aggre-
gators such as change.com. “They have a deep and
rich network of users that they can mobilise very
quickly. They are low cost, deliver a high gross
response, and their data is frequently used by jour-
nalists,” he says.
The information divide
Many western labour rights NGOs now operate as
information hubs as well as campaign groups in
their own right. They bridge information gaps
between local labour groups in developing coun-
tries and multinational brands and their consumers
in the west.
Ansett says the role of these groups is more facil-
itative, helping to create first points of contacts
between the western brands and local labour
groups. They often provide translation services as
well as financial and other support to local labour
rights groups in countries such as China, Vietnam
and Cambodia.
Founded in 2000, China Labor Watch is an
example of this type of labour rights group. With
offices in Shenzhen and New York, the organisation
both investigates labour rights abuses in Chinese
factories supplying western multinational brands
and provides a range of softer support to factory
workers and local NGOs. Support includes seed
funding for the establishment of local labour NGOs,
legal training to workers and a 24-hour worker
hotline.
China Labor Watch was one of the first labour
right groups to investigate Apple’s contract elec-
tronics supplier Foxconn. Coupled with the
pressure of other labour groups, its work led to
Apple joining the Fair Labor Association and an
independent FLA investigation of Apple’s China
supply chain in 2012.
NGO campaigning is evolving. So too are the
NGOs. They are smarter, better coordinated and
more global in both their approach and representa-
tion than ever before. Evaluating their collective
impact is of course difficult. But when politics and
economics fail there is increasing appetite for new
ideas and ways of working. I
19Briefing: activist NGOsEthical Corporation • March 2013
Christian Aid
Mission statement
“Poverty is an outrage against humanity. It robs people of dignity, freedom and hope, of
power over their own lives. Christian Aid has a vision – an end to poverty – and we
believe that vision can become a reality.”
Based in the UK, in 2011/12, Christian Aid worked in 48 countries with 578 partner organi-
sations and 901 staff, spending £80.9m on direct charitable activity, £12.6m on fundraising
and £1.3m on governance.
The board of trustees consists of a chair, a nominee from each of the national commit-
tees for Wales and Scotland, the chair of Christian Aid Ireland, a nominee of Churches
Together in Britain and Ireland (CTBI), and up to 20 other trustees.
Sources of funding
More than half its income comes from appeals and donations. In the 1980s, government
funding became available to Christian Aid for the first time, and in 2011/12 institutional
funding accounted for 38% of Christian Aid’s income.
Loretta Minghella OBE, director
Dr Rowan Williams (former Archbishop of Canterbury), chair from May 2013
Brief history
After the second world war, British and Irish church leaders formed Christian Reconstruc-
tion to help European refugees. During the 1950s it began working globally and in 1957
introduced Christian Aid Week.
In 1964, due to the success of Christian Aid Week, the organisation changed its name
to Christian Aid.
Campaign sectors
Christian Aid works across Africa, Asia, the Middle East and Latin America on five themes:
equality for all; power to change institutions; fair shares in a constrained world; rights to
essential services; and, tackling violence, building peace.
In the UK, key campaign themes are tax justice and climate change.
2012: Significant progress in the promotion of international financial trans-
parency, and increased awareness of tax as a fundamental
development issue.
2010: Campaigned for the UK government to use its influence at the EU, and
ensure rich countries took responsibility for their global emissions. The
EU emissions cuts target was increased to 30%.
1990s: The Banking on the Poor campaign contributed to world leaders
promising to deliver $100bn in debt cancellation.
Coordination essential for effective emergency relief
NGO profile
1001NIGHTS/ISTOCKPHOTO.COM

Literally hundreds of competing
ecolabels can be found on
products from food to detergents to
energy tariffs. Once focused prima-
rily on environmental concerns,
labelling has expanded over the
years to include social, ethical and
safety issues as well.
The Ecolabel Index now lists
more than 435 labels in 197 countries
in 25 industry sectors. A competing
organisation, Global Ecolabelling
Network (GEN) has hundreds of
government and advocacy group
members worldwide.
Consumers appreciate the labels
and the benefits are both psycho-
logical and tangible, but each one is
unique and the standards used are
often contradictory or subjective.
Some ecolabels are regionally
specific, while others are global;
and some have stricter criteria than
others. Compounding the problem
is a lack of good quality standard-
ised and comparable information
worldwide.
Consider the organics industry,
which has been at the centre of the
ecolabel movement. According to
Organic Monitor, an industry
research group, at least 84 countries
now have national organic stan-
dards. Yet they often differ,
sometimes radically.
It’s reminiscent of the early days
of ethical investing, when different
organisations, many based on reli-
gious values of 1980s ideologies,
panned and praised identical stocks
based on idiosyncratic values.
Environmental or green
labelling began in the 1970s with
green stickers on consumer goods.
By the late 1980s the Canadian
government had launched its
EcoLogo consumer product
labelling system and the Nordic
Swan system had been rolled out.
In 1992, in the wake of the UN Earth
Summit, the European Union initi-
ated the pan-European Ecolabel,
which sports a flower as its symbol.
The US Environmental Protec-
tion Agency subsequently debuted
its own Safer Chemical Ingredients
List. Green labels on the likes of cars
and major appliances are now
mandated in many countries. Many
trade groups and advocacy organi-
sations have launched labels as well.
A blunt instrument
At their best, labels force more
transparency on corporations. But
they are not problem-free and are
often a blunt way to evaluate ethical
corporations and products.
Consider the plight of Seventh
Generation, a much-praised
Vermont-based maker of environ-
mentally friendly household and
personal care products, many based
on organic ingredients.
During the 2000s, the company
embarked on a mission to develop
a new generation eco-friendly
laundry liquid. In 2011, it launched
its breakthrough detergent, with a
renewable-ingredient content up
from 77% to 97%. It also reduced
shipping and storage requirements
by cutting doses in half, and
packaged the detergent in a
plastic bag surrounded by a shell of
post-consumer newspaper and card-
board. Seventh Generation’s 2X
Liquid Laundry Detergent was born.
Proud of its innovation, in 2012
Seventh Generation added the
active ingredient to its other
laundry detergents. The US Depart-
ment of Agriculture even slapped
one of its first BioPreferred labels on
the innovation.
Then eco-ideology reared its
head. Within weeks of the introduc-
tion, the Environmental Working
Group (EWG), a Washington DC-
based organisation, weighed in
with a less friendly eco evaluation.
EWG issues an annual online
shoppers’ guide, grading more than
2,000 household cleaners. Seventh
Generation’s new detergent
received a D on the A-to-F scale.
Why? It uses boric acid. The
chemical, like many compounds, is
poisonous if taken internally in
large quantities and has been linked
to endocrine disruption in rats fed
doses tens of thousands of times
higher than found in this product.
The boric acid in Seventh Genera-
tion’s detergent is at levels that no
reasonable scientist or regulatory
body anywhere in the world
believes is harmful.
This wrenching story – a gold-
plated “good guy” corporation
seeing its cutting edge product
labelled positively by one label but
hammered by another – is a night-
mare scenario not only for companies
trying to go the extra eco mile, but
also for consumers struggling to find
reliable information in an increas-
ingly confusing marketplace.
With all their potential benefits,
ecolabels should not be considered a
panacea.
Companies quickly learn how to
“game the system”, and finding a
way past the bluster is the challenge
consumers face. That’s why we
need a guide of the guides. I
Jon Entine, founding director of the
sustainability consultancy ESG MediaMetrics,
is senior fellow at the Center for Health & Risk
Communication at George Mason University.
Ecolabels
The wild west of labelling
Jon Entine kicks off a series of columns on ecolabels, focusing
on how today’s wide array has developed
Columnist: Jon Entine 35
But what does it mean?
At their
best, labels
force more
transparency
on corporations
COLUMNIST:
JON ENTINE
ARCADY_31/ISTOCKPHOTO.COM
Ethical Corporation • March 2013

The social
responsibility
of firms is related
to the cultural and
Muslim traditions
of giving
Local culture and values play a central role in
shaping the definition and practice of corporate
responsibility – and the banking sector in the United
Arab Emirates is no exception.
In every country and every culture “corporate
responsibility” means something, but not always
the same thing. In the UAE, corporate social respon-
sibility strongly draws on cultural traditions of
philanthropy, business ethics and community
embeddedness, all of which are deeply rooted in the
teachings of Islam. These teachings emphasise
generosity and community involvement, and
stretch beyond the private realm to encompass
business activities.
The UAE is a country where collectivism runs
high. In such societies, community welfare and
family ties are primordial. Very often the social
responsibility of firms is related to the cultural and
Muslim traditions of giving. In this environment,
corporate responsibility is viewed as a religious or
cultural duty. It is not perceived as a concept tied to
business strategy, as it is increasingly in western,
developed economies.
Culture and Islam
Over the past few decades, the UAE has established
itself as a leading international business hub. The
majority of foreign multinationals settling in the
region will either choose Dubai or the capital Abu
Dhabi for their regional headquarters. A western-
based management approach is prevalent across the
UAE, which has embraced foreign management
techniques in the quest to achieve global status.
This westernisation of business and manage-
ment practices, however widespread, exists in
parallel to the fundamental teachings of Islam. The
UAE operates on sharia law, the moral code of Islam,
with an estimated 80% of the population belonging
to the Muslim faith.1
This consolidation of western
business practices with deeply rooted cultural and
religious traditions make up the UAE’s business
landscape.
The religion of Islam rests on five central pillars
of practice. The pillars guide people in their
everyday lives – including their business acumen –
by helping them develop a righteous existence. As
such, in the UAE, culture and religion are very
much intertwined.
Fatih Mehmet Gul, chief executive of csrmid-
dleeast.org, the first website dedicated to corporate
responsibility news and opportunities in the region,
agrees that the moral teachings of Islam extend well
beyond the individual’s private life to encompass
business activities.
Gul says: “In personal life or business life, Islam
always instructs Muslims to behave responsibly.
Customer relationships, employee rights, environ-
mental concerns and responsibility to the
community have all been well defined by Islamic
rules.” He adds that there is almost “a full match
between Islamic rules and corporate responsibility
principles”.
Three out of the five pillars of Islam – praying,
fasting and the practice of zakat (charitable giving) –
focus on strengthening the sense of community,
improving collective welfare, and encourage
generosity and solidarity.
As the teachings of Islam influence everyday life,
Essay: United Arab Emirates
How culture can shape sustainable business
By Nadine Hawa
A study of banks in the UAE reflects how the Islamic culture of philanthropy has influenced
corporate responsibility practices in the Emirates
Strategy and management 39Ethical Corporation • May 2013
SAMROBINSON
ECM May 2013_Layout 1 29/04/2013 10:33 Page 39

including business practices, they de facto impact
corporate responsibility practices.
Habiba Al Marashi, chief executive of Arabia CSR
Network and board member of the UN Global
Compact, says: “The five pillars of Islam teach
people at all levels of society to interact and to
provide mutual support. The pillars provide a focus
on obligations and duties as well as rights and rela-
tionships of each other, by removing social
hierarchies and barriers, and encourage the devel-
opment of individuals and the community –
spirituality, morally and socially.”
She adds: “Part of business solutions should also
include strategies for inspiring and uplifting people
spiritually, nurturing positive thinking and motiva-
tions and stronger inter-personal and social
relationships. This very same principle has been
captured in modern corporate responsibility as the
empowerment of people and the community.”
As such, Islam provides much of the foundation
for corporate responsibility in the UAE.
Islamic values
Of the many teachings of Islam, the most influential
and most embedded in business practices are best
evidenced by zakat. Zakat is the requirement of the
individual to provide financial support to the
community, particularly the needy, for the purpose
of ensuring a better society.2
This influence has often
resulted in corporate responsibility being under-
stood by local businesses as the corporate equivalent
of zakat, leaving corporate responsibility very much
tied to religious duty.
It has led to corporate responsibility activities
taking the form of corporate philanthropy, rooted in
the Islamic tradition of giving. As a result, and
perhaps not surprising, a comprehensive study on
corporate responsibility in the UAE conducted in
2010 by the Center for Responsible Business (CRB)
found that a third of companies implement (a form
of) corporate responsibility in the UAE in order to
comply with Islamic values and the practice of
zakat.3
Cultural and religious traditions are hence
the key factors that drive corporations to engage in
corporate responsibility.
As a religion, Islam has very specific rules
concerning business and economic life. This influ-
ence expands well beyond the duty of zakat, or
compulsory charity. Business practices in Muslim
countries tend to follow sharia law, which governs
nearly every aspect of Muslim life. It imposes certain
restrictions on investments in asset types that are
considered sinful.
This points to a specific overlap between western
corporate responsibility and the area of Islamic
finance in particular. A restriction on investments in
sectors or products deemed sinful under sharia law
is similar to ESG (environmental, social and gover-
nance) screening. This is probably one of the most
evident overlaps between the two concepts.
Comparable to negative screens made popular in
the US by Christian groups (also known as faith-
based investing), which prohibits investments in
alcohol or arms manufacturing, in Islam similar
screens are applied to all things considered sinful,
including alcohol, gambling and pornography.
Interest and usury are also banned under sharia
law out of concern for the moral, social and
economic well-being of society. Sharia law deems
such profit unjustly generated, as it is based on the
absence of work and the absence of shared risk
between lender and borrower. Under these criteria,
it could be argued that corporate responsibility has
existed in the UAE for as long as religion and
business have existed.
Some local banks do acknowledge a strong
overlap between Islamic teachings and corporate
responsibility. One bank says the peaceful, ethical
and responsible way of living which the Muslim
faith encourages strongly influences the way it
understands and practises corporate responsibility.
Another says the moral teachings of Islam are
embedded throughout the organisation and all its
business operations.
Habiba Al Marashi explains: “From an Islamic
40 Strategy and management Ethical Corporation • May 2013
The five pillars
of Islam
1. Declaration of faith: The
belief that must be declared
“that there is no god but
Allah and Mohammad is the
Prophet of Allah”.
2. Prayers: The rituals of
prayer are to be performed
five times a day facing
Makkah in Saudi Arabia. By
performing such frequent
prayers, one maintains God-
consciousness and discipline.
These prayers can be
performed individually or
communally. However,
communal prayers are
required for those who are
able to attend. Communal
prayers promote equality
and a strong sense of
community.
3. Zakat: Muslims are
required to pay a fixed
proportion of their posses-
sions for the welfare of the
whole community, and the
poor in particular.
4. Fasting: During the
month of Ramadan, all
adult able Muslims must
abstain from all food, drink
and sexual activity from
dawn to dusk. Fasting
promotes God-conscious-
ness, spiritual growth,
self-purification, patience,
self-restraint, generosity,
sympathy for the poor, and
communal solidarity.
5. Pilgrimage to Makkah:
At least once a lifetime, all
adult able Muslims should
make a pilgrimage to
Makkah, where Muslims
from around the world
converge annually to
perform the Hajj.8
Islam's influence is stark

perspective, corporate responsibility is a moral obli-
gation and promotes coexistence of business and
society, as they are both dependent on each other.
The Quran clearly spells out the importance of
being more socially responsible and actively striving
to balance the rights of all stakeholders based on
fairness, justice and dignity, and distribution of
wealth.
“The Quran prescribes the process of shura
[consultation] for problem solving at all levels, in the
affairs of the family, business, community, society
and state. Shura is the spirit of stakeholder engage-
ment in the modern corporate responsibility
concept.”
Rather than a link or overlap, some UAE banks
believe corporate responsibility and Islamic values
to be complementary. This view is also held by Al
Marashi, who says: “The issue is not about overlap-
ping, but it is more about reinforcing each other.
Sharia is the guiding principle.”
As a solution to avoid this confusion or the
potential overlap between the two concepts, one
bank believes it is best to be “careful not to focus on
the relationship between corporate responsibility
and sharia law, as it could easily confuse”.
The CRB report found that out of
seven sectors surveyed, including oil
and gas, real estate and hospitality,
the financial sector held the highest
percentage of corporate responsi-
bility awareness at 68%.4
In contrast
to this positive indicator, however, is
the fact that only 10% of these firms
believed corporate responsibility to
be central to business strategy.5
Upon interviewing a number of
local banks, it emerged that corporate
responsibility is often defined as a
charitable contribution rather than a
responsibility tied to business
strategy. One bank defined corporate
responsibility as a contribution to the
well-being of the community, being
environmental, social and financial.
Another said corporate responsibility
was the way in which an organisation
positively contributes to the commu-
nity in which it functions.
But these contribution-based defi-
nitions do not diminish the sense of
responsibility. One bank says respon-
sibility has been embedded in its
corporate culture since inception,
while another indicates that it has
always been mindful of its responsi-
bility to give back to the community.
While a sense of responsibility is
omnipresent, the philanthropic
nature of this responsibility clearly
ripples through the examples of
corporate responsibility provided by each of the
banks.
One bank labelled the sponsorship of events
organised by the UAE Red Crescent, such as
providing meals for the needy, as corporate respon-
sibility. Examples of corporate responsibility from
other banks included organising blood drives and
the sponsorship of health awareness campaigns.
Lack of strategic focus
While corporate responsibility is gaining traction in
the Gulf as a whole, many “corporate responsi-
bility” activities still focus on donations and charity,
lacking a strategic business element. The overlap of
corporate responsibility with corporate philan-
thropy is holding back the strategic focus of
corporate responsibility at UAE banks.
The 2010 study by the Dubai Chamber in fact
revealed that only 17% of companies in the UAE
find corporate responsibility to be central to
business strategy.6
The numerous community-
focused initiatives provided by the banks illustrate
this figure, not because they target community well-
being, but because they lack strategic focus.
This can be explained by the fact that, in some
41
As a religion,
Islam has very
specific rules
concerning
business and
economic life
Strategy and managementEthical Corporation • May 2013
The UAE
banking sector
The United Arab Emirates is
a relatively young country
established in 1971, and
comprising seven Emirates.
It is part of the Gulf Cooper-
ation Council (GCC), a region
famous for its oil and gas
reserves.
Over the past four decades
the UAE has transformed
itself from a desert commu-
nity to a modern
international business hub.
In its efforts to diversify
away from oil, the country
has delved into financial
services.
This sector has become
one of the main contributors
to economic activity. The UAE
is emerging as a top player
in financial services globally,
and as the leading banking
sector across the Middle East
region. As of 2011, the UAE
market had 23 domestic
banks and branches of 28
foreign banks.9
ISTOCKPHOTO

cases, banks believe corporate responsibility to be
synonymous with philanthropy. In others, they
consider there to be a strong cultural link between
the two. This link is thought to be based on the core
Islamic responsibility of zakat. Ignoring such duties
would be morally wrong, one bank explained.
In the west, the philanthropic aspect of corporate
responsibility can be traced back to 19th century
industrial revolutions. During that time, poor
working environments called for business owners to
provide healthier working conditions, reflecting a
sense of paternalistic philanthropy.7
Over the years, corporate responsibility in the
west has taken a calculated turn towards more
strategic integration. In the UAE where corporate
responsibility is still a maturing concept, seeds of
change are starting to sprout.
A bank that in 2007 considered encouraging
blood donations among staff to be corporate respon-
sibility, redefines it in its 2011 corporate
responsibility report as “smart community involve-
ment”. One example is the implementation of
e-waste and recycling policies, which are environ-
mentally smart and make business sense. In 2012,
another bank turned to renewable energy with the
launch of two solar powered ATM machines.
Corporate responsibility as practised by banks in the
UAE seems to be heading towards more strategic
integration, albeit at a slow pace. This move can be
attributed to the natural evolution of corporate
responsibility, irrespective of national borders.
The future
Corporate responsibility awareness levels in the
UAE, while still lagging compared with the level of
strategic integration found, for example, in the US
and Europe, are on the rise.
There clearly is a greater amount of information
available in the shape of company website content,
annual corporate responsibility reports and the
increasing number of corporate responsibility
conferences across the country. In spite of the
absence so far of macro strategic direction, corporate
responsibility at UAE banks seems to be heading
towards a more integrated approach. They are
moving away from corporate responsibility as
philanthropy to corporate responsibility as value
creation.
The Abu Dhabi government itself realises that
corporate responsibility is about more than just
charity. The department of planning and economy
believes that social commitment programmes are
not just about donations, but fully integrated plans
that are needed to bolster sustainable development.
Today UAE banks have the opportunity to incor-
porate the best of both worlds into their approach to
corporate responsibility: to assimilate best practice
by integrating corporate responsibility into business
strategy while tailoring their corporate responsi-
bility focus to issues and initiatives which resonate
with their local culture and religion. This would
allow their corporate responsibility to become more
strategic while maintaining their societal fabric of
high collectivism. I
1 U.S. Department of State: Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights,
and Labor. “United Arab Emirates: International Religious
Freedom Report 2007”. Available at: www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/
2007/90223.htm
2 Katsioloudes, M. et al. (2007). “Corporate Social Responsibility:
An Exploratory study in the United Arab Emirates.” SAM Advanced
Management Journal. Vol: 72, Iss:4. P.11.
3 Rettab, B. et al. (2010). “Corporate Social Responsibility in the
United Arab Emirates.” Dubai Chamber, Center for Responsible
Business. Dubai, UAE. P.11.
Business. P.66.
5 Ibid.
Business. P.19.
7 Blowfield, M. and Murray, A. (2008). Corporate Responsibility:
A Critical Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. P.44.
8 Adapted from Barise, A. (2005). “Social Work with Muslims:
Insights from the Teachings of Islam.” Critical Social Work. Vol:6,
Iss:2.
9 Moukahal, W. (2011). The Banking Industry in the UAE. Report by
Deloitte. Available at: www.deloitte.com/assets/DcomLebanon/
Local%20Assets/Documents/ME%20PoV/ME%20PoV%20issue%205/
POV%205%20Clearly%20very%20unclear.pdf
42
UAE banks have
the opportunity
to incorporate
the best of both
worlds into their
approach to
corporate
responsibility
Strategy and management Ethical Corporation • May 2013
Desert to downtown business hub
HEMERA

Columnist: Toby Webb50
Communications
How to shout about
sustainability effectively
While there are lots of ways to communicate badly, what are the
good things companies can do to stand out? Toby Webb has some
suggestions
Volume on its own doesn’t work
If you have
something
authentic
to say, you
should say it
JHORROCKS/ISTOCKPHOTO.COM
Ethical Corporation • February 2013
COLUMNIST:COLUMNIST:COLUMNIST:
TOBY WEBB
how you get there.
11. They don’t forget to link
sustainability with both social
issues and governance, global and
local. For many companies in the US,
sustainability is all about green. Tell
that to a Canadian mining company
or European retailer. Social issues,
and how you engage with them, are
the number one issue in the rest of
the world, so no credible company
can pretend they don’t exist.
12. They host public debates
which are streamed online and do
not always have themselves at the
centre. There are not many examples
of companies doing this well.
Unilever is probably the best known.
13. They seek crowd-sourced
solutions and encourage and fund
innovation. Marks & Spencer is a
good example of how to do this, as is
Coca-Cola Enterprises and PepsiCo.
But B2B companies can do this too.
Interface and Desso are well-known
examples.
14. They are clear about sustain-
ability as a business opportunity.
They recognise that stakeholder
engagement is about listening and
encouraging intra-preneurs, as
much as it is about responding to
external trends and pressures.
15. They are clear about their
corporate power and influence and
have a public debate about how
that power and influence are used,
and report on progress, positive
and negative. I
Toby Webb is founder of Ethical Corporation and
Stakeholder Intelligence. He blogs daily at
tobywebb.blogspot.co.uk.
There are a number of communi-
cations techniques that corporate
leaders in sustainability and corpo-
rate responsibility communication
use, to various degrees. Here are 15.
1. They have clear websites navi-
gating readers to clear targets.
Websites change and, if not planned,
can sprawl needlessly. Many compa-
nies neglect old pages, which
continue to turn up on Google
years later. These can offer a very
misleading impression of where the
company is headed. In the world of
Twitter and Facebook, everything
can unfortunately mean something.
2. They demonstrate both an
understanding of the global chal-
lenges, and their role in the world.
Getting this right does not simply
involve quoting WWF on the
number of planets we will soon
need. Showing understanding is
about demonstrating much deeper
knowledge and acknowledging the
“megaforces” driving sustainability
concerns, and showing how the
company is starting to try to tackle
them, and contribute to wider
solutions.
3. They use their reporting as
the basis for communications
campaigns, not as the campaign
itself. Short, targeted messaging to
key, focused stakeholder groups, on
top of a main website and regular
reporting. The report is just a
library. Authentic stories from the
report are what will improve your
reputation with employees,
customers and wider stakeholders.
4. They are not afraid of honest
debate about challenges, progress,
missed targets, problems and solu-
tions, online and face-to-face. They
value being challenged and seek to
use the opportunity to innovate
and improve, rather than becoming
defensive.
5. They use social media to
communicate on sustainability,
either via a corporate account or by
specific accounts. Many companies
are nervous about doing this. Social
media is risky. But if you have some-
thing authentic to say, you should
say it. That doesn’t mean you have
to issue a press release and crow
about running your business well.
Tone is everything, as is personality.
6. They publish regular perform-
ance data and updates. Publishing
annual data seems quite behind the
times now. What’s wrong with
quarterly?
7. They offer news feeds on
progress. This is a very simple thing
to do. It’s simple to drip-feed progress
reports via short news items on your
site. It looks good to stakeholders.
8. They showcase critical stake-
holder voices and suggestions for
improvement. This is vitally impor-
tant, yet few companies do it this
well. Patagonia is the best-known
example. Wal-Mart tries too. Perhaps
Waitrose would have spotted the
looming disaster of its Shell retail
partnership if it had taken this idea
on board via the web.
9. They partner with credible
academic institutions and NGOs.
Science matters. Whether it’s
technical research to improve
performance, lower impact and
drive efficiency, environmental
data, or social science research,
outside parties with good reputa-
tions can really help with both
strategy and a reputation for
authentic communications.
10. They talk about how sustain-
ability fits with business strategy –
and how that will improve. This is
hard to get right. What is strategy
anyway? Most companies seem to
confuse it with tactics. Put simply,
strategy is the destination; tactics is
ECM Feb_Layout 1 30/01/2013 17:21 Page 50

Subscribe
now
and
join
thousandsof
yourpeersasan
Ethical
Corporation
Subscriber
Enter your details
First name: ..............................................................................
Last name:................................................................................
Company: ................................................................................
Job title: ..................................................................................
Telephone: ..............................................................................
Email: ....................................................................................
Address: ..................................................................................
City:........................................................................................
State/Province: ..........................................................................
Zip/Post code:............................................................................
Country: ..................................................................................
Payment details
If you would like to pay by invoice please leave this section blank
Name (as it appears on card): ........................................................
Card number:............................................................................
Type of card: ............................................................................
Expiry date:................................ Security code: ............................
Detach this completed order form and post/mail it back to us by using the
details above.
Individual subscription
package benefits
§ Don’t miss out on business intelligence and resources that will help you and your
company drive forward your sustainable initiatives.
CALL
the Ethical
Corporation team on
+44 (0)20 7375 7235
or US toll free:
+1 800 814 3459
EMAIL
the subscription
team on
subs@ethicalcorp.com
WEB
visit the website for
online subscriptions at
ethicalcorp.com/subscribe
POST
the form to
Ethical Corporation
7-9 Fashion Street
London, E1 6PX
• No need to search, we’ll send all the latest CSR analysis straight to you
– via the monthly print magazine and weekly email updates
• Increase your understanding of the ever-changing CSR issues – receive timely,
un-biased analysis of the key CSR issues from our expert team of writers
• Drive and implement your CSR strategy – in-depth analysis, case studies and best
practice helping you discover the dos and don’ts for your company
• All the insight you need is just a click away - benefit from access to the world's largest
CR resource (containing 8,000+ searchable articles)
• Save money – receive exclusive subscriber-only discounts on all Ethical Corporation
conferences, research reports and the CSR reporting showcase.
Subscription order form All this for just £495 per year
Individual Subscription package

Subscribe
now
and
discoverallthe
latestCSR
insight
Current subscribing
companies include:
• Abbott
• ABN Amro
• Accenture
• Adidas Group
• Alliance Boots
• BAE Systems
• Barclays Bank
• BNY Mellon
• Campbells Soup Company
• Cable and Wireless Communications
• Citi
• Coca-Cola Enterprises
• Danone
• Diageo
• Dell
• E.ON
• Edelman
• First Solar
• FTSE
• GlaxoSmithKline
• Harvard Business School
• Hill & Knowlton
• HSBC
• IKEA
• InterfaceFlor
• International Post Corporation
• JCPenney
• John Lewis
• Kimberly Clark
• KPMG
• Kraft Foods
• Levi Strauss Company
• Marks and Spencer
• McDonald’s
• Monsanto
• Nestlé
• Novartis
• Old Mutual
• PricewaterhouseCoopers
• Prudential
• Royal Bank of Scotland
• SABMiller
• Shell
• Singapore Management University
• The Body Shop
• The Walt Disney Company
• Toyota
• UNICEF
• Unilever
• United Nations Library
• Virgin Media
• Weber Shandwick
• Walmart Stores
• WWF
Here’s what a few of our current subscribers have to say...
“Ethical Corporation is a valuable and comprehensive resource on the global state of affairs
in corporate responsibility” – Dave Stangis, Vice President, Corporate Social Responsibility, Campbell Soup Company
“Ethical Corporation magazine is one of the most valuable resources of business information
on sustainability” – Joaquim Croca, Head of Corporate Responsibility Performance & Reporting, Vodafone Group
“Ethical Corporation bring together the best in business to make a difference”
– Jeff Swartz, Former CEO, Timberland
“Ethical Corporation is an excellent tool for gathering stakeholder intelligence for Toyota’s
CSR Risk monitoring system” – Stefan Crets, General Manager, CSR, Toyota Motor Europe
“The essential source of critical analysis on corporate responsibility”
– Richard Ellis, Group Head of CSR, Alliance Boots

16-page CSR Best Practice Analysis Pack

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Ähnlich wie 16-page CSR Best Practice Analysis Pack

Ähnlich wie 16-page CSR Best Practice Analysis Pack (20)

Mehr von Ethical Corporation

Mehr von Ethical Corporation (12)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

16-page CSR Best Practice Analysis Pack