The business of corporate social investment - Is enough being done?

Over the past decade, corporate social responsibility (CSR) and, as a spin-off, corporate social investment (CSI) have increasingly become a topical subject for most companies and civil society organisations (CSOs). However, despite the fact that the subject has been rehashed in various conferences and seminars, any consensus as to what it really means, has yet to be reached. Consensus is particularly evasive when it comes to the issue of, what exactly constitutes ‘development’ and how it should be achieved.

It is an unfortunate state of affairs, but CSI is still a blurred subject for both corporations and NGOs. Both parties are still at that stage where it's easier to point fingers and criticise the other party for doing nothing or not doing enough. In a recent conference organised by CAF Southern Africa (CAFSA), Margie Keeton the CEO for Tshikululu Social Investment, adequately put it when she said that, “CSI is often more talked about than done.”

Regardless of the fact that private sector funding accounts for 25% of all non-profit income in South Africa, no link can be established between this investment and any real impact on poverty. Ultimately the jury is still out on whether CSI has the type of impact that both corporations and development practitioners would like to see.

In response to an FDA Newsletter, Wayne Newton argues that, “One of the greatest challenge(s) facing CSI/CSR initiatives is to strike a balance between the immense expectations (a) CSI/CSR (project) creates when it is initially launched, and the complete devastation it leaves in it’s wake, when it does not live up to it’s full potential, or when it fails, due a host of reasons”.

Common Mistakes / Misunderstandings

NGOs often exchange anecdotes about the frustrations they experience when trying to build relationships with CSI/CSR functions.

First and foremost is the lack of transparency and obfuscation that tends to dominate any efforts to actually find the right contact person in the corporation.

Secondly, upon making contact, NGO’s often find that they have the misfortune of being confronted by a front-office desk clerk whose understanding of social issues and general level of training and awareness is severely limited. Some NGOs have even remarked at the clearly expressed irritation in the tone and attitude of the individuals they have been forced to interact with. “Why are you bothering us?” seems to be the underlying message.

Thirdly, when trying to ascertain what types of initiatives the corporate is interested in sponsoring, NGOs face yet another void. Often, there is little documented information and what is available is dated and misleading. Furthermore, there seems to be very little ongoing engagement with the sector at a strategic level in order to ensure that CSR/CSI initiatives are closely aligned with what is happening on the ground. This is vital if (and here comes the dreaded corporate buzz-speak) the necessary “synergies” can be cultivated between civil society and the private sector.

Another complaint voiced by NGOs is the lack of feedback and clear guidelines when submitting proposals or requests for grants. The hours of effort and research count for nothing when followed by a vacuum of silence from the recipient organisation. To top it all, the corporates are often only too happy to criticise the lack of professionalism within the NGO sector and the poor quality of proposals that they receive. If the quality is poor, why not invest in a little civil society strengthening, Mr CEO?

Finally, one of the most tragic aspects of this dysfunctional relationship is the inverse adoration and sycophantic pandering that most CSR/ CSI departments demonstrate towards government. Obviously, they fail to notice that, when Government embarks on any social programme, one of their first ports of call, so to speak, is civil society. NGOs are the most predominant advisors for many implementation programmes as they are often the only structures with sufficient direct contacts in poor communities.

The social workers and activists slaving on the ground, trying to empower our citizens, are often not the same ward committee members and government officials that are courted by the large corporates. In fact, the corporate sector might save itself a lot of unnecessary bottlenecks and communication loops if it actually took the initiative and made the effort to contact those NGOs working on the ground DIRECTLY. One way of doing this would be to use the Prodder directory, both as a means of conveying clearly what CSI and CSR work they are interested in partnering in, as well as to source relevant NGOs with whom to engage with.

Give and Take / Compromise

In most CSI related conferences and seminars, the one thought that is always echoed is that there seems to be a semi-permanent divide between corporations and NGOs. The language that one speaks just does not seem to make sense to the other party and visa versa. It is a given fact that effective communication is vital for successful partnerships between these two sectors. Unfortunately, it is quickly becoming obvious that the language that is used by these two parties is so distinct that in some cases, it is even opposing.

When development practitioners speak of impact and outputs, they are not necessarily speaking of quantifiable outputs but rather of development outcomes that may or may not be quantifiable but are more qualitative. On the other hand, the corporate sector speaks to quantitative outputs rather than qualitative.

In such situations, it seems to come very easily for the corporate sector to criticise the NGO sector and say that the sector lacks professionals just because the sector does not speak the right language. In such a situation, the corporate sector does not even consider taking a step back and looking at the situation from the NGOs perspective. The question that civil society practitioners ask themselves on a daily basis is why we should be the ones who give and give all the time with very little compromise from the other side.

What companies seem to have conveniently forgotten is that CSI and/or CSR is a two-way street, just as much as the NGO sector needs the corporate sector…the corporate sector needs social partners to boost social responsibility ratings and make good on any philanthropic predilection.