Lecture 1: Understanding the SDGs
This course is about how (corporate) companies implement Corporate Sustainability into their
business practices.
- Corporate focus because they are a large part of the problem, but also of the solution. Their
sustainability initiatives are in need for critical assessment to identify greenwashing.
- Start-ups/social enterprises can serve as inspirations for large corporates so they are used as
examples.
Course aims:
- Describe and apply different theoretical approaches, methods and tools for CS
implementation.
- Analyse how companies embed sustainability into their strategy.
- Critically evaluate CS and develop appropriate recommendations on how to improve CS
practices.
The concept and evolution of CS(R)
Corporate social responsibility and corporate sustainability were not the same (CSR focused more on
social, CS more on environmental). CSR and CS tackle the relationship between business and society.
- 1944: Polanyi called attention to effects of markets on society, society was serving markets.
- 1950s: corporate responsibility was introduced, managers should have moral responsibilities
to society and legal frameworks should guide their decisions related to e.g. safety.
- 1980s: civil society actors & governments advocate sustainable development because
economic development was breaching natural resource limits.
- 1990s/2000s: convergence in the concepts around the business case for socially responsible
or sustainable business practices. long-term strategy for competitive advantage, including
social and environmental issues alike.
CSR concept limitations:
- Inconclusive empirical findings
- Little explanatory power to account for the recent organisational changes (Institutional and
personal factors, pressure from social movements/personal ethics of managers)
- If everyone is socially responsible the competitive advantage will vanish
- Concept says what is good for society should also be good for corporations (Not necessarily
true!)
- Business case driven CSR will bias how corporations select their CSR strategy
Strategic CSR implementation
- No consistent understanding of CSSR
- Many companies lack a strategic approach to CSSR
- ……..
Hahn: ISO 26000 & CSSR implementation
There are different guidelines to implement CSR, but ISO 26000 is seen as the most significant
instrument.
,- SDG Compass: Tool that shows companies how they can align their strategies, measure and
manage their contribution to reaching the SDG and put sustainability at the heart of their
business strategy.
o Five steps: Understanding the SDGs, defining priorities (What should improve first
(along the supply chain)), setting goals, integrating and reporting/communicating.
o Steps can be linked with Hahn article.
o Focus on large multinational enterprises, SMEs can use it as ‘source of inspiration’.
- ISO 26000: international voluntary standard for guidance on corporate social responsibility.
o Guidance for all types of organisations regardless of size/location
o For beginners and experienced organisations
o Builds on international norms and agreements related to social responsibility
o 7 principles of social responsibility (accountability, transparency, ethical behaviour,
respect for stakeholder interests, respect for the rule of law, respect for
international norms of behaviour, respect for human rights)
o Stakeholder engagement
o 7 core subjects and their related issues (Organisation governance, Human rights,
labour practices, environment, fair operating practices, consumer issues, community
involvement and development)
o Benefits: covers a wide range of sustainability issues, shows commitment to
continual improvement, ability to attract like-minded partners, employee
safety/loyalty, public trust/reputation, establish more robust supply chains, reduce
risks, identify new opportunities
o Critique: only a guideline, no certification. ‘mock compliance’, they say they align
with the standard but they do not. Too generic/broad. Based on business case for
CSR while this business case is not verified in science (what is good for society is good
for companies).
,Lecture 2: Defining priorities
- Stakeholder theory
Stake: any interest, share or claim a group or individual has in the outcome of an organisation’s
policies, procedure or actions
Broad definition: a stakeholder in an organisation is any group/individual who can affect or is
affected by the achievement of the organisation’s objective.
Narrow definition: stakeholders are those groups on which the organisation is dependent for its
continued survival.
Stakeholder theory came to existence because corporate social responsibility was seen as too vague
by management scholars. It is easier to implement/more practical.
- Stakeholder theory sees corporations purpose in a different way: to manage the interests,
needs and viewpoints of stakeholders.
- Survival of the organisation is key (difference between social & economic goals no longer
relevant.
- A firm should create value for all stakeholders, not just the shareholders.
Understanding the impact on the value chain requires knowledge from stakeholders. Engaging with
stakeholders along the value chain can help uncover the different positive and negative impacts that
the company has on society and environment.
Benefits of stakeholder analysis and engagement (involve stakeholders in a positive way in
organisational activities)
- Allow companies to understand the impact they are making on society
- Driver of learning and organisational change
- Means to manage and reduce risk
- Generates trust and social capital
- Identifying the stakeholders (typology)
Internal (owners, employees, investors, board of directors) vs. External stakeholders (suppliers,
customers, governments, competitors, consumer advocates)
Beyond supply chain – Supply chain – Firm stakeholders
Primary stakeholders – secondary stakeholders – interested parties
Social vs. non-social stakeholders (human vs nonhuman entities)
- Determining the stakes (salience)
Managers cannot attend to all actual/potential claims of stakeholders. Stakeholder salience: the
degree to which managers give priority to competing stakeholder claims.
Managers pay attention to three attributes: power, legitimacy and urgency. Together they define
the salience of stakeholders.
Different degrees of salience: Latent (only one attribute, not much attention is given to these
stakeholders), expectant (two attributes, active stakeholders, they expect something and there is
likely a higher level of engagement), definitive stakeholders (three attributes, high salience, these
stakeholders have immediate priority).
, Additional element: Proximity. Stakeholder priority depends on the speed of feedback and
personal closeness. Entities including organisations that share the same physical space or are
adjacent to one another often affect one another.
- Stakeholder engagement and corporate sustainability
Stakeholder engagement does not necessarily lead to corporate sustainability (Greenwood). How
stakeholders are engaged matters! High engagement: numerous activities of high quality (vs. low
engagement). Stakeholder agency: number and ……
Responsible stakeholder engagement is only there when there is a high stakeholder engagement
and acts in the interests of legitimate stakeholders.
Stakeholder communication strategies:
- Stakeholder information strategy: public information, one-way communication from firm to
public. (books, newspapers, website). Only telling, no listening.
- Stakeholder response strategy: two way asymmetric interaction between the firm and its
stakeholders, e.g. conferences, contact points, interviews, opinion polls. Firm wants to know
what the consumer thinks of them and if e.g. a marketing stunt has improved their
attractiveness. Influential but passive response.
- Stakeholder involvement strategy: two-way symmetric interaction between firm and
stakeholders, a dialogue between firm and stakeholders. Firm makes changes when
necessary.
Not only the firm can have strategies to influence stakeholders, but the stakeholders can also
influence firms (stakeholder power, high interdependence, low interdependence, firm power)
The level of the firm’s dependence on the stakeholder determines the path chosen by the
stakeholder. An indirect strategy involves the stakeholder using an ally stakeholder (e.g. NGO uses
consumer power) to perform the strategy on his or her behalf.
This course is about how (corporate) companies implement Corporate Sustainability into their
business practices.
- Corporate focus because they are a large part of the problem, but also of the solution. Their
sustainability initiatives are in need for critical assessment to identify greenwashing.
- Start-ups/social enterprises can serve as inspirations for large corporates so they are used as
examples.
Course aims:
- Describe and apply different theoretical approaches, methods and tools for CS
implementation.
- Analyse how companies embed sustainability into their strategy.
- Critically evaluate CS and develop appropriate recommendations on how to improve CS
practices.
The concept and evolution of CS(R)
Corporate social responsibility and corporate sustainability were not the same (CSR focused more on
social, CS more on environmental). CSR and CS tackle the relationship between business and society.
- 1944: Polanyi called attention to effects of markets on society, society was serving markets.
- 1950s: corporate responsibility was introduced, managers should have moral responsibilities
to society and legal frameworks should guide their decisions related to e.g. safety.
- 1980s: civil society actors & governments advocate sustainable development because
economic development was breaching natural resource limits.
- 1990s/2000s: convergence in the concepts around the business case for socially responsible
or sustainable business practices. long-term strategy for competitive advantage, including
social and environmental issues alike.
CSR concept limitations:
- Inconclusive empirical findings
- Little explanatory power to account for the recent organisational changes (Institutional and
personal factors, pressure from social movements/personal ethics of managers)
- If everyone is socially responsible the competitive advantage will vanish
- Concept says what is good for society should also be good for corporations (Not necessarily
true!)
- Business case driven CSR will bias how corporations select their CSR strategy
Strategic CSR implementation
- No consistent understanding of CSSR
- Many companies lack a strategic approach to CSSR
- ……..
Hahn: ISO 26000 & CSSR implementation
There are different guidelines to implement CSR, but ISO 26000 is seen as the most significant
instrument.
,- SDG Compass: Tool that shows companies how they can align their strategies, measure and
manage their contribution to reaching the SDG and put sustainability at the heart of their
business strategy.
o Five steps: Understanding the SDGs, defining priorities (What should improve first
(along the supply chain)), setting goals, integrating and reporting/communicating.
o Steps can be linked with Hahn article.
o Focus on large multinational enterprises, SMEs can use it as ‘source of inspiration’.
- ISO 26000: international voluntary standard for guidance on corporate social responsibility.
o Guidance for all types of organisations regardless of size/location
o For beginners and experienced organisations
o Builds on international norms and agreements related to social responsibility
o 7 principles of social responsibility (accountability, transparency, ethical behaviour,
respect for stakeholder interests, respect for the rule of law, respect for
international norms of behaviour, respect for human rights)
o Stakeholder engagement
o 7 core subjects and their related issues (Organisation governance, Human rights,
labour practices, environment, fair operating practices, consumer issues, community
involvement and development)
o Benefits: covers a wide range of sustainability issues, shows commitment to
continual improvement, ability to attract like-minded partners, employee
safety/loyalty, public trust/reputation, establish more robust supply chains, reduce
risks, identify new opportunities
o Critique: only a guideline, no certification. ‘mock compliance’, they say they align
with the standard but they do not. Too generic/broad. Based on business case for
CSR while this business case is not verified in science (what is good for society is good
for companies).
,Lecture 2: Defining priorities
- Stakeholder theory
Stake: any interest, share or claim a group or individual has in the outcome of an organisation’s
policies, procedure or actions
Broad definition: a stakeholder in an organisation is any group/individual who can affect or is
affected by the achievement of the organisation’s objective.
Narrow definition: stakeholders are those groups on which the organisation is dependent for its
continued survival.
Stakeholder theory came to existence because corporate social responsibility was seen as too vague
by management scholars. It is easier to implement/more practical.
- Stakeholder theory sees corporations purpose in a different way: to manage the interests,
needs and viewpoints of stakeholders.
- Survival of the organisation is key (difference between social & economic goals no longer
relevant.
- A firm should create value for all stakeholders, not just the shareholders.
Understanding the impact on the value chain requires knowledge from stakeholders. Engaging with
stakeholders along the value chain can help uncover the different positive and negative impacts that
the company has on society and environment.
Benefits of stakeholder analysis and engagement (involve stakeholders in a positive way in
organisational activities)
- Allow companies to understand the impact they are making on society
- Driver of learning and organisational change
- Means to manage and reduce risk
- Generates trust and social capital
- Identifying the stakeholders (typology)
Internal (owners, employees, investors, board of directors) vs. External stakeholders (suppliers,
customers, governments, competitors, consumer advocates)
Beyond supply chain – Supply chain – Firm stakeholders
Primary stakeholders – secondary stakeholders – interested parties
Social vs. non-social stakeholders (human vs nonhuman entities)
- Determining the stakes (salience)
Managers cannot attend to all actual/potential claims of stakeholders. Stakeholder salience: the
degree to which managers give priority to competing stakeholder claims.
Managers pay attention to three attributes: power, legitimacy and urgency. Together they define
the salience of stakeholders.
Different degrees of salience: Latent (only one attribute, not much attention is given to these
stakeholders), expectant (two attributes, active stakeholders, they expect something and there is
likely a higher level of engagement), definitive stakeholders (three attributes, high salience, these
stakeholders have immediate priority).
, Additional element: Proximity. Stakeholder priority depends on the speed of feedback and
personal closeness. Entities including organisations that share the same physical space or are
adjacent to one another often affect one another.
- Stakeholder engagement and corporate sustainability
Stakeholder engagement does not necessarily lead to corporate sustainability (Greenwood). How
stakeholders are engaged matters! High engagement: numerous activities of high quality (vs. low
engagement). Stakeholder agency: number and ……
Responsible stakeholder engagement is only there when there is a high stakeholder engagement
and acts in the interests of legitimate stakeholders.
Stakeholder communication strategies:
- Stakeholder information strategy: public information, one-way communication from firm to
public. (books, newspapers, website). Only telling, no listening.
- Stakeholder response strategy: two way asymmetric interaction between the firm and its
stakeholders, e.g. conferences, contact points, interviews, opinion polls. Firm wants to know
what the consumer thinks of them and if e.g. a marketing stunt has improved their
attractiveness. Influential but passive response.
- Stakeholder involvement strategy: two-way symmetric interaction between firm and
stakeholders, a dialogue between firm and stakeholders. Firm makes changes when
necessary.
Not only the firm can have strategies to influence stakeholders, but the stakeholders can also
influence firms (stakeholder power, high interdependence, low interdependence, firm power)
The level of the firm’s dependence on the stakeholder determines the path chosen by the
stakeholder. An indirect strategy involves the stakeholder using an ally stakeholder (e.g. NGO uses
consumer power) to perform the strategy on his or her behalf.
