By Margaret Clappison, BIS, MBA, CPA, CGA

Agenda Intent of study Background of Corporate Social Responsibility Methodology Research Survey results Interpretation of Carroll’s Pyramid using Research Data Adaptation of Carroll’s Pyramid Research Findings

Intent of study Provides a Canadian perspective on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) issues. To discover underlying motives for engaging in CSR. Do CSR motivations affect corporate strategy? Are there leadership reasons for CSR? Discover if there is a growing CSR trend in business.

Background of Corporate Social Responsibility... social responsibility refers to businessmen’s obligations to make decisions, policies and actions which follow the objectives and values of our society (Bowen, 1953, p. 6, as cited in Carroll, 1999, p.270). “Business functions by public consent and its basic purpose to constructively the serve the needs of society – to the satisfaction of society” (Committee for Economic Development, 1971, p.11 as cited in Carroll, Definition Construct, 1999, p. 275). Be a Good Neighbour (Eilbert & Parket, 1973, p.7, as cited in Carroll, 1999, p.278).

Carroll’s Pyramid Philanthropic Responsibilities Ethical Responsibilities Legal Responsibilities Economic Responsibilities Carroll's Pyramid (Carroll, 1991) “Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Our Common Future, 1987, p. 41). Report The Brundtland Report

Recent Reasons for CSR To improve company’s image Pressure for customers/consumers To comply with regulations Peer pressure from companies in the same industry To meet the demand for environmental information To acknowledge social responsibility To attract investment(Solomon & Lewis, 2002, p. 161).

Methodology Grounded Theory Research Requires suspension of pre-judgment Ask open-ended questions Conceptualization and constant data comparison to analyze patterns reveal core concepts Interview upper management who practice CSR Pilot study using Canadian Data `

Research Design Random sample of TSX Companies practicing CSR Data from Corporate Knights “Best 50 corporate Citizens “ years Table to Group companies into Categories CategoryIndustry sectors includedCompanies ProductsEnergy, Utilities and ForestryC:1, C:2, C:4 ServicesCommunications, Insurance and Industrial ServicesC:3, C:5, C:6 Industry Sectors grouped by products and services ( Motivations for Implementing Social Responsibility, Clappison, 2012, p. 44).

Percentage of Company Responses per CSR Level Percentage of Interview Responses per Carroll's Pyramid of CSR (Source: Motivations for Implementing Corporate Social Responsibility, Clappison, 2012, p. 80).

CSR Interview responses by CSR Level and Sector Percentage of Interview Responses per Carroll's Pyramid of CSR (Motivations for Implementing Corporate Social Responsibility, Clappison, 2012, p. 81.

Research Survey Results Themes from Data Shift towards businesses implementing CSR at ethical and philanthropic responsibly levels. Motivated to contribute to society, protect environment and work with stakeholders to make a difference in their communities. Willingness to accept responsibility and move to an integrated business culture centered on ethics. Emerging trend towards transparency, responsible governance and sustainable development.

Ethical Responsibilities Economic Responsibilities Philanthropic Responsibilities Legal Responsibilities Interpretation of Carroll’s Pyramid from Themes Derived from Data Contribute to Community Responsible and transparent financially and in CSR Protect Environment Good Neighbour Catalyst for change in industry Consumers patronize companies with same values Listen, respect, have stakeholder transparency Socially and environmentally responsible to attract talent Follow human rights, employment equity Board of directors to be independent Expected to follow laws of private citizen Reputation, brand affinity Business to support communities Provide return on investment Listen to public concerns Carroll's Pyramid (Carroll, 1993). Interpretation of Carroll's Pyramid from Themes derived from data ( Motivations for Implementing Corporate Social Responsibility, Clappison, 2012, p. 52).

Comments from Interviewees “… things are always changing so much that we are always learning and you are always trying to improve and be the best that you can be so I think that journey of learning never ends” (C:5, C: 6). “…if you are open and transparent about who you are, what you believe and what you stand for, … proactive in your relationships, … really get to know the people, respect… and listen to what they have to say and …incorporate their input into your planning … then that's how you become a very responsible corporation” (C: 2). It’s important … to think about our future generations and we have to be careful [with] the scarce resources … and make sure we protect them” (C:3). It’s not always about making…the most money but making the decisions that are right” (C: 1).

Adaptation of Carroll’s Pyramid using Research Data Adaptation from Carroll's pyramid (1991) using results of research data from pilot study. New diagram Source: (Motivations for Implementing Social Responsibility, Clappison, 2012, p. 84) Philanthropic Responsibilities Ethical Responsibilities Legal Responsibilities Economic Responsibilities New business standards include philanthropic and ethic responsibilities – engage in solving societal problems Government … require[s] all companies in the industry to follow... minimum standards”(C: 4). Trend towards transparency and responsible governance Recognize changing Society Norms affect company Transparency required for the public Companies “have to develop and maintain a social license to Operate” (C4.) “Companies need to report and …disclose all the activities that they do… not just financial” (C: 2). “It’s critical... we give back to that community and contribute positively to the social needs in that community” (C:5).

Thus the findings suggest: Societies’ priorities are shifting’ from concentrating on economic and legal responsibilities to the more inclusive and comprehensive responsibilities of ethics and philanthropy.