Social responsibility of business is interpreted as:

Social responsibility of business and controversial motives

So, social responsibility of business is a concept according to which organizations take into account the interests of society by taking responsibility for the impact of their activities on customers, suppliers, employees, shareholders, local communities and other stakeholders, as well as on the environment. This commitment goes beyond the statutory obligation to comply with the law and requires organizations to voluntarily take additional measures to improve the quality of life of workers and their families, as well as the local community and society at large.

The practice of corporate social responsibility is the subject of much debate and criticism. Defenders argue that there is a strong business case, and corporations reap numerous benefits from operating with a broader and longer-term perspective than their own immediate short-term profits. Critics argue that social responsibility takes away from the fundamental economic role business; some argue that this is nothing more than an embellishment of reality; others say it is an attempt to supplant governments' role as watchdogs for powerful multinational corporations. A separate part of my work is devoted to this discussion.

Two approaches to studying social responsibility of business

The practice of corporate social responsibility is the subject of much debate and criticism. Advocates argue that there is a strong business case for it, and corporations reap numerous benefits from operating with a broader, longer-term perspective than their own immediate short-term profits. Critics argue that social responsibility detracts from the fundamental economic role of business.

There are two main approaches to studying the social responsibility of business. On the one hand, this is the concept of M. Friedman, which is based on formal (instrumental) rationality. On the other hand, representatives of the second approach are researchers who rely on substantive rationality. They recognize that the social responsibility of business is complex and cannot be reduced to mere economic interest.

Before dwelling in more detail on these two opposing approaches to the study of corporate responsibility, I would like to note that executives and managers modern companies are increasingly aware of the positive impact of socially responsible behavior on achieving not only the strategic but also the financial goals of their business.

Milton Friedman against social responsibility in business

Nobel Prize winner and supporter of the policy of monetarism, Milton Friedman, in one of his articles, sets out the following view of the responsibility of business:

“When I hear businessmen talk eloquently about the “social responsibility of business in market economy", I can't help but remember a story about a Frenchman who, when he turned 70, suddenly discovered that he had been speaking in prose all his life. Businessmen believe that they are defending the market economy when, not without pathos, they assert that business is associated not only with making a profit, but also with achieving certain social results, that business has a special “social conscience”, and that it bears responsibility for ensuring employment, eliminating discrimination, preventing environmental pollution and anything else that is included in the vocabulary of the modern generation of reformers. They actually preach - or would preach if they or anyone else took it seriously - pure and undisguised socialism. Businessmen who reason in this way are puppets of the forces that have undermined the foundations of a free society over the past decades.”

Next, Friedman moves on to the definition of the very concept of “social responsibility”. He reasons: “In a market economy based on private property, the manager of a corporation is an employee of the business owners. He is directly responsible to the owners and his employers. This responsibility is to conduct the business in accordance with their desires, which, generally speaking, can be boiled down to obtaining the maximum possible profit within the framework of accepted rules in society, enshrined in laws or ethical standards. Of course, it may be that his employers do not share this goal. A group of people may start a company for charitable purposes, such as a hospital or school. The manager of such a corporation will have as a goal not the receipt of monetary profits, but the provision of certain services.

Anyway, key point is that in his position as manager of a corporation he is the spokesman for the interests of those persons who own the corporation or founded it for charitable purposes, and his primary responsibility is to them.

In each of these cases, the manager will be spending someone else's money in the name of the general public interest. If his actions, carried out for reasons of “social responsibility”, reduce the income of shareholders, he wastes their money. As soon as his actions lead to higher prices for consumers, he spends consumers' money. Since his actions reduce the salaries of some employees, he also spends their money.

Shareholders, consumers and employees could manage their money as they wished. A manager acts more out of considerations of “social responsibility” than acts as a spokesman for the interests of the same shareholders, consumers or employees if he spends their money differently than they would do it themselves.”

One cannot but agree that it is extremely difficult to choose areas for companies to demonstrate their social responsibility. In addition, according to Friedman, the corporate manager becomes a public employee, a servant of the public, although he formally remains an employee of the private sector.

Milton Friedman's ideas may appeal to some entrepreneurs. But the arguments he gives sometimes work against his own concept of a kind of social indifference. For example, the author himself advocates compliance not only with laws, but also with ethical standards, but does not consider this a manifestation of social responsibility.

Most likely, Friedman means by social responsibility of a company, first of all, charity programs, which should, in his opinion, be implemented either by individuals or public organizations.

Friedman also argues that the manager is not a servant of society. As for serving society, the prominent Japanese entrepreneur Kazuma Tateishi wrote about this well. He argues that a company's very growth should be understood as an increase in its ability to contribute to society.

It turns out that all the main groups of its stakeholders are interested in expanding the company’s activities: its employees, consumers of branded products, shareholders, the local population, and business partners, whose activities, other things being equal, will also develop successfully in parallel with the development key company. And Kazuma Tateishi writes that, in a concentrated form, the idea of ​​serving society is expressed in the following postulate: those who best serve society benefit the most. If a company is not able to serve society in the most perfect manner, then it does not deserve the right to exist. And it would only be fair to liquidate these types of companies. On the other hand, those companies that best serve society deserve oxygen for their growth and every possible encouragement.

Michael Porter: Why it pays to be socially responsible

Not everyone agrees with the views of M. Friedman, both among scientists and entrepreneurs themselves. IN recent years social responsibility in business began to be directly called the company’s “social advantage”. This idea was first expressed by Harvard Business School professor and author of the theory of competitive advantage Michael Porter in his article in Harvard Business Review « New task philanthropy - creating value" in 1999.

Porter points out that social programs today are used by companies primarily as a form of “public relations” or for advertising purposes. For example, the tobacco company Philip Morris (USA) spent $75 million on various donations in 1999, and then spent another $100 million on their advertising campaign.

As the author writes, critics of the implementation of the principle of corporate social responsibility put forward two main arguments. First: social and economic goals companies are clearly different from each other, so spending on social programs is a cost in terms of achievement economic results. Second: companies that engage in social projects bring no more social benefit than individual donors. These statements are true if corporate social programs are fragmented and unfocused, which is still the case in many companies. However, there is another way to implement socially responsible business: companies can strengthen their competitive position by improving the quality of the business environment in the places where their activities take place. As M. Porter notes, the use of philanthropy as competitive advantage allows the company to connect social and economic goals and improve long-term prospects for its development.

A study of the practices of companies that implement their social projects in the context of competitiveness indicates that both economic and social goals. In the long term, these goals do not contradict each other, but turn out to be closely interrelated. This does not mean that every company investment will bring social benefits or that every social project will improve its competitiveness. Most investments have positive consequences only for business, and various types of donations only have positive consequences for society. However, there is an area where “convergence of interests” occurs. In this case social activities the company becomes truly strategic.

The problem with “strategic philanthropy,” as Porter called it, lies in the early 19th century. is to determine in which areas you need to focus your social activities to improve the company's competitiveness and how to do this effectively.

Unfortunately, it should be noted that the management approaches of most modern corporations, including transnational ones, have not yet changed much in accordance with new ideas.

An example of a social program implemented within the framework of old approaches is one of the projects of the Avon Products company (cosmetics production). In 2002, 400 thousand people were involved in a door-to-door campaign to raise funds for a breast cancer prevention program. A total of $32 million was collected despite social significance this project, it did not lead to increased competitiveness of the company, although it was aimed at main category its consumers are women. Attempting to help the health of all women, not just certain categories of Avon consumers, seems like an attempt to solve a global problem, when it would be better to narrow the field and focus its social strategy.

A positive example is IBM, whose social activities are certainly strategically oriented. In particular, since 1994, it began to be implemented educational program retraining in the field computer technology, intended for both teachers and schoolchildren and students. Working in close coordination with city schools, colleges and state education departments around the world, IBM employees provide teacher development and student training and retraining. An independent examination showed that the level of computer training among schoolchildren and students has increased significantly.

The same approaches are used by Johnson & Johnson.

It is important to understand that new approaches to demonstrating social responsibility in business are not easy to implement in practice; they should not be considered by management as some kind of short-term companies - they are designed for the long term and must gradually expand and develop. The more closely social responsibility in business is linked to the goals of achieving competitive advantage, the more social benefits the company's stakeholders will receive. Thus, the new business paradigm proposed by M. Porter, in my opinion, can become the basis strategic management both national and transnational corporations in the 21st century!

Social responsibility of business is a voluntary contribution of business to the development of society in the social, economic and environmental spheres, directly related to the main activities of the company and going beyond the minimum required by law. Volgina N.A. Social corporate policy: problems, experience, prospects: Textbook / Ed. ed. N.A. Volgina, V.K. Egorova. - M.: Publishing and trading corporation "Dashkov and K", 2004.

Social responsibility of business includes:

Charity;

Charity is the provision of free (or preferential) assistance to those who need it. Alekseeva O. History of trust in distrustful times. Modern Russian charity / O. Alekseeva. - M.: Eksmo, 2008. The main feature of charity is the free and relaxed choice of form, time and place, as well as the content of assistance.

Patronage;

Initially, philanthropist is a proper name. Gaius Tsilnius Maecenas was a friend and adviser to Emperor Augustus, and became famous for supporting aspiring poets. At first glance, patronage differs from charity in a narrower scope of activity: the patron provides support only to projects in the field of culture, science and art, but there is a deeper difference between charity and patronage, which lies in the field of motivation. A philanthropist helps not so much a person, but rather the social role he plays. He supports the poor, brilliant artist not because he is poor, but because he is an artist. That is, it is not the person himself who is supported, but his talent; its role in the development of culture, science, art.

Patronage differs from charitable activities in its social and cultural goals. The motives for charity are related to compassion and mercy. The motives for patronage are social mutual assistance. The goals of charity are to ensure social well-being in society. The goals of patronage are to ensure the preservation and development professional types cultural activities. Thus, the concept of charity is broader in meaning than the concept of patronage, and patronage can be considered one of the forms of charity, so specific that it is specifically identified as a cultural category.

Corporate social responsibility;

Corporate social responsibility (CSR, also called corporate responsibility, responsible business and corporate social performance) is the concept that organizations consider the interests of society by taking responsibility for the impact of their activities on customers, suppliers, employees, shareholders, local communities and other stakeholders, and the environment. Korsakova M.I. Corporate social responsibility / M.I. Korsakov. -- M.: Association of Managers, 2003. This commitment goes beyond the statutory obligation to comply with the law and implies that organizations voluntarily take additional measures to improve the quality of life of employees and their families, as well as the local community and society as a whole.

Sponsorship.

Sponsorship is understood as a contribution made by a legal or individual (sponsor) (in the form of provision of property, results of intellectual activity, provision of services, performance of work) to the activities of another legal or individual(sponsored) on the terms of distribution by the sponsored advertisement about the sponsor and his products. The sponsorship contribution is recognized as payment for advertising, and the sponsor and the sponsored are recognized as the advertiser and the advertising distributor, respectively. Federal law dated July 18, 1995 N 108-FZ “On Advertising”

Social responsibility in general should be understood as the relationship between the more powerful strata of society and the less powerful and needy strata. The state must provide the population with all the most important social, material, i.e. all the necessary things for its development, but in reality everything is not so simple. The state inherently plays the role of some kind of regulator in market relations. Society consists of individuals, who in turn form into social groups, these groups then make up the country, the regulator of which is the state.

Main tasks social policy are:

1. Harmonization of social relations, coordination of the interests and needs of individual groups of the population with the long-term interests of society, stabilization of the socio-political system.

2. Creating conditions to ensure the material well-being of citizens, creating economic incentives for participation in social production, ensuring equality of social opportunities to achieve a normal standard of living.

3. Ensuring social protection of all citizens and their basic state-guaranteed socio-economic rights, including support for low-income and weakly protected groups of the population.

4. Ensuring rational employment in society.

5. reducing the level of criminalization in society.

6. Development of sectors of the social complex, such as education, healthcare, science, culture, housing and communal services, etc.

7. Ensuring the country's environmental safety.

Social responsibility of business is multi-level:

· The basic level involves fulfilling the following obligations: timely payment of taxes, payment wages, if possible, provision of new jobs (expansion of the workforce).

· The second level of social security involves providing workers with adequate conditions not only for work, but also for life: increasing the level of qualifications of workers, preventive treatment, housing construction, and development of the social sphere.

This type of responsibility has been conventionally called “corporate responsibility.”

· Third, highest level responsibility, according to the dialogue participants, involves charitable activities.

There are two types of social responsibility of business: internal and external.

TO internal social responsibility business can be classified as:

1. Occupational safety;

2. Stability of wages;

3. Maintaining socially significant wages;

4. Additional medical and social insurance for employees;

5. Development human resources through training programs and training and advanced training programs;

6. Providing assistance to employees in critical situations.

TO external social responsibility business can be classified as:

1. Sponsorship and corporate philanthropy

2. Promoting environmental protection

3. Interaction with the local community and local authorities

4. Willingness to participate in crisis situations

5. Responsibility to consumers of goods and services (production of quality goods)

The collapse of the USSR and the introduction of “shock therapy” ideas in some countries gave rise to a stereotype about business as an unprincipled and selfish phenomenon. However, already at the beginning of the twentieth century. Some entrepreneurs took a completely different path, declaring the need for social responsibility in business. About whether business can be socially responsible, whether there are such precedents in the Eurasian Union and where Belarus, Kazakhstan and Russia are on this list, read the article by Pavel Samusev, Chairman of the Board of the International Socio-Economic Foundation “Idea” (Minsk, Belarus), especially for "Eurasia.Expert".

IN modern world Its image and properly established communications with society are increasingly important for the success of a business; corporate social responsibility is a key factor in the sustainability of business in the modern world.

The idea of ​​a socially responsible business

The idea of ​​social responsibility of business began to take shape at the beginning of the 20th century. in the USA among large industrialists, such as Henry Ford from the Ford Motor Company, Gerard Swope, president of General Electric, and Walter Gifford, president of the most powerful company in the world at that time telephone communication American Telephone and Telegraph Company.

The key stimulus for the development of social responsibility of business was the growth of leftist ideas in Western societies, the struggle of trade unions and the reaction of Western capital to the revolution in Russia.

Big capital began to realize the danger of the “red revolutions” and, as a consequence, the loss of control over own enterprises. Exactly October Revolution is a factor in the emergence of the middle class, the social responsibility of business and the welfare state in Western societies. The implementation of the principles of the welfare state arose in the post-revolutionary period, but the idea originated earlier. It was first implemented in Germany starting in the mid-19th century, when the Bismarck model dominated. Bismarck introduced “health insurance,” “accident insurance,” and “old-age pensions” in an attempt to turn the working class away from social democracy.

The concept of CSR was further formulated in the 1930s; economists F. Burley and G. Means wrote in their book “Modern Corporations and Private Property”: “to ensure survival corporate system those who control large corporations must become a completely neutral territory, managing the diversity of demands of different groups in society and assigning to each of them a share of the income stream based on public policy, not private greed.”

In the early 70s. XX century In the West, a theory arose that explained the essence of the relationship between business and society. Its main postulate was the thesis that if a company pays taxes, sets an acceptable level of wages, meets labor safety and environmental protection conditions, then it conducts fair business practices and, therefore, is socially responsible. For the first time, the main provisions of this theory, called the theory of corporate egoism, were presented by Nobel laureate M. Friedman, who wrote in 1971 in New York Times: “There is one and only one social responsibility of business: to use its resources and energies in activities that lead to increased profits, as long as this is done within the rules of the game.”

Can egoism be enlightened?

Another point of view is called the theory of enlightened egoism. It identified CSR with sponsorship and charity as types of social investment. The quintessence of the theory is the thesis that the current reduction in company profits due to socially oriented spending creates a favorable social environment that promotes sustainable business development.

In the 90s After the collapse of the USSR and the socialist bloc, the concept of social responsibility begins to shift towards sustainable development. The founder of the concept of corporate sustainability is the American economist and entrepreneur John Elgington, his CSR model is based on the concept of 3P - People, Planet, Profit (from the English People, Planet, Profit). This principle is often used for the preparation of corporate social reporting and implies the inclusion of economic, environmental and social criteria. Following the principles of corporate sustainability in international business is a deliberate strategy used by companies to achieve competitive advantage. This advantage is achieved by increasing employee loyalty, managing the company’s reputation and non-financial risks.

Individual steps to implement CSR help reduce costs; moreover, many investors believe that socially responsible companies are safer to invest in.

There are studies according to which companies that implement the concept of social responsibility for 10 years financial indicators were higher than those of companies that do not follow CSR principles, namely: income per invested capital– higher by 9.8%, income from assets – by 3.55%, income from sales – by 2.79%, profit – by 63.5%.

What about today?

On modern stage There are the following interpretations of corporate social responsibility. The European Union's GreenPaper defines social responsibility as a concept in which companies voluntarily integrate social and environmental policies into business operations and their relationships with all associated organizations and people. According to the US NGO Business for Social Responsibility, CSR involves achieving business success in ways that are based on ethical standards of respect for people, communities, environment.

UN Secretary-General Kofi Annon, in his report on the occasion of the launch of the Global Compact to Support CSR in the World initiative, said: being socially responsible means not only meeting society’s expectations, but also investing in human resources, environmental protection and relationships with stakeholders. The essence of the UN Global Compact is a voluntary commitment to adhere to ten principles, based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Declaration of Fundamental Rights and Principles at Work International organization Labor, Declaration on Environment and Development.

Human rights

Principle 1: Commercial companies must ensure and respect the protection of internationally proclaimed human rights.

Principle 2: Businesses should ensure that their own activities did not contribute to human rights violations.

Operating Standards

Principle 3: Businesses should support freedom of assembly and meaningful recognition of the right to collective bargaining.

Principle 4: Businesses should contribute to the elimination of compulsory or forced labor.

Principle 5: Businesses should contribute to the elimination of child labor.

Principle 6: Businesses should contribute to the elimination of discrimination in labor and employment.

Environment

Principle 7: Businesses should take a precautionary approach to environmental issues.

Principle 8: Businesses should initiate the promotion of environmental responsibility.

Principle 9: Businesses should encourage the development and diffusion of environmentally friendly technologies.

Anti-corruption

Principle 10: Businesses must resist all forms of corruption, including extortion and bribery.

Who are they – socially responsible businessmen?

There can be several approaches to the implementation of social responsibility; one of the recognized world authorities in the field modern marketing Philip Kotler identifies six types of corporate social initiatives: social marketing, promotion of socially significant issues, charity marketing, corporate philanthropy, corporate volunteering and socially responsible approaches to doing business.

Today, social responsibility of business is widely implemented in almost all major corporations in the world.

While three years ago, out of 1,192 top managers surveyed by the Economist Intelligence Unit, just over 30% named corporate responsibility as their priority, now this figure is close to 60%. And in the next three years it is expected further growth. As a result, the share of those managers for whom social responsibility is not a priority will be reduced to just a few percent.

Company Walmart created The Walmart Foundation, which focuses on five areas: eliminating hunger and healthy eating, sustainable development, women's economic empowerment, leadership and support for veterans and military families. In 2010, the company launched the “Fighting Hunger Together” project, aimed at combating hunger in the world. The Walmart Foundation has committed $100 million to support women's economic empowerment. The project provides women with additional training, access to markets and opportunities career growth. The Walmart Foundation also supports projects such as training low-skilled workers, assisting them in finding employment, and also helping young professionals get their first job.

Corporation Apple focuses on environmental projects. Apple pays great attention design of its products, making its products smaller and thinner, which significantly reduces the amount of materials used and reduces its carbon footprint. The corporation tries to eliminate the use of mercury, arsenic, and brominated flame retardants in production. An important mission of the company is the recycling of old devices; the recycling program has been implemented in 95% of countries in the world and allows for the recycling of more than 70% of Apple products.

Company Procter&Gamble It uses palm oil to produce its products. The environmental organization Greenpeace has accused Procter & Gamble and other cosmetics companies of causing enormous damage to the environment from palm oil. To meet demand for palm oil, Indonesian farmers are developing new areas for palm plantations, burning forests and draining swamps. At this stage, Procter & Gamble has adopted a program to reduce the use of palm oil in its creams, hair care products, etc.

The largest transnational corporation in the field of electronics Sony carries out various charitable programs to help children from countries South America. Thanks to the “DreamGoal” and “Street football stadium” projects, training centers and stadiums that help more than 14,000 children learn communication and leadership skills through football. The Siyakhona Media Skills charity project is aimed at helping young people from 11 countries with low levels of social development.

Concern BMW Group launched the Junior Campus program, in which specialists teach children the basics of road safety. Today there are four JuniorCampus centers around the world - in Munich, Berlin, South Korea and in Moscow.

Eurasian tigers of social responsibility

Despite the not so long traditions of capitalism in our region, Eurasian companies are currently not much inferior to Western corporations in the field of social responsibility. State standard Republic of Kazakhstan “Social responsibility. Requirements" (Social account ability international (Mod)), abbreviated CT RK 1352-2005 (SA 8000:2001, Mod) was developed in order to promote corporate values ​​in matters of social responsibility of the employer, promotes the dissemination of acceptable on a global scale requirements for the organization's social responsibility.

Back in the 2006 Address, the President of Kazakhstan Nursultan Nazarbayev first touched upon the topic of social responsibility domestic companies, emphasizing its importance both for the business and workers themselves, and for the interests of the country. “We have to bring our standards in line with special program UN Implementation international standards management of social responsibility of business. It is necessary to develop and implement generally accepted rules for social reporting of business and increasing its social responsibility in solving national problems, accompanied by the creation of advantages for socially responsible businessmen. They must provide for the solution of environmental issues, socially significant national and regional problems, training of professional personnel, protection of workers’ health, economic prosperity and well-being of citizens.”

Kazakhstan along with other countries Eurasian Union takes steps towards increasing the social responsibility of business.

This can be confirmed by the competition on social responsibility of business, “Paryz”, established by Decree of the President of the Republic of Kazakhstan dated January 23, 2008 No. 523. This competition is aimed at forming and increasing by private business entities their corporate social responsibility to society for further improvement welfare of the population. The practice of concluding memoranda and agreements on social responsibility of business has developed in the country; more than three thousand memorandums worth 54.8 billion tenge have been concluded. Of these, in Eastern Kazakhstan - 592 memorandums worth 16 billion tenge, in Pavlodar region - 60 memorandums worth more than 3 billion tenge.

Investments from entrepreneurs have begun to influence the social development of regions: new schools, healthcare institutions, rehabilitation centers, cultural, sports and social protection facilities are being built, and support is provided to low-income citizens.

The institute is actively operating in the republic social partnership. Every year a national tripartite General Agreement is concluded, which includes the most current issues social and labor relations: creating new jobs, reducing unemployment, improving the wage system, labor protection and safety. There are about two hundred regional and 19 sectoral agreements in force. Currently, more than 31 thousand collective agreements have been concluded.

Russia is not lagging behind

Russian companies, in line with global trends, also demonstrate the principles of corporate social responsibility. According to the Donors Forum, in recent years the volume of contributions Russian companies for charitable projects increased by 84%, and the total budget charitable foundations in Russia increased by 39% (from 6.77 billion to 9.38 billion rubles).

The number of large Russian companies publishing non-financial reporting is growing: according to the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs, in 2017 there were already 842 of them.

The leaders of CSR in the Russian Federation are Sberbank, Gazprom, Rosneft, Rosatom, ALROSA, VTB, KAMAZ, Lukoil, Rostelecom, AFK Sistema, MTS, Uralkali. The Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs annually holds the “Leaders” competition Russian business: dynamics and responsibility”, in addition to large corporations, in recent years the number of winners has been growing among medium-sized companies such as PJSC PhosAgro, LLC Ural Locomotives, CJSC Voronezh Tire Plant.

Corporation Gazprom Neft As part of its social responsibility, it implements the “Home Towns” program. It covers 35 regions of Russia, 560 projects have already been implemented and 339 charitable and volunteer events have been carried out; over the five years of the program, the corporation has invested 19 billion rubles in the social sphere.

Corporation Lukoil Since 2014, it has been implementing the “More than a purchase!” project. The goal of the project is to develop the entrepreneurial initiative of residents of Russian regions, expand opportunities for socially disadvantaged sections of society to get a job and improve their lives. As part of the project, social entrepreneurs can sell their products on preferential terms through the stores of the Lukoil gas station network, thus they have the opportunity to achieve financial sustainability.

Group RusHydro pays special attention to the protection of the biological fund in the area of ​​industrial activity. As part of the construction of the Nizhe-Bureyskaya hydroelectric power station in the Amur region, the “Bureya Compromise” project was launched; the project is intended to demonstrate best practices for preserving biological diversity when implementing industrial facilities; in addition, it serves as a shining example effective interaction authorities, business and society in matters of nature conservation. In 2016, with the support of the RusHydro company, a specialized enclosure with an area of ​​5 hectares was built on the territory of the Turmonsky reserve to preserve individuals of the Caucasian bison.

Company Severstal implements the “Museums of the Russian North” program in 12 regions of Russia. The goal of the program is to identify and support best projects aimed at enhancing the activities of regional museums, promoting the development of connections between museums and other cultural and educational institutions, creation and development of new directions and forms of museum work.

Belarusian socially responsible business

Based on the results of data analysis sociological research of large Belarusian businesses conducted by the Idea Foundation, it can be noted that of all the companies that took part in the survey, more than half (51%) participate in some type of corporate social responsibility. The implementation of CSR projects was most often recorded in the following areas: assistance to children and child care institutions (73.8%), support for the development of sports (42.6%), support for educational institutions and institutions (36.1%). The main indicators of the effectiveness of completed projects in the field of CSR by respondents implementing projects in the field of CSR were: the number of beneficiaries covered (63.9%); number of employees involved (52.5%); PR effect (publications, mentions in the media) (39.3%).

According to companies that have experience in implementing such projects, the following positions were highly effective: 1) increasing the company’s image, loyalty of consumers and business partners, 2) strengthening the corporate and morale of employees and company management; 3) standing out from competing companies and 4) benefits for the company (increased profits, influx of qualified personnel). At the same time, 84% of the respondents implementing CSR projects indicated that the assessment of the effectiveness of completed CSR projects is high or average. The respondents identified the following as the main reasons for companies’ non-participation in CSR projects: lack of financial and human resources (67.2% of the number of companies not implementing CSR), low awareness of CSR projects (60.3%), as well as lack of knowledge and practical experience in sphere of CSR (39.7%).

An analysis of the results of the Annual Study on the topic “Dynamics of CSR Development in the Republic of Belarus” showed a fairly high involvement of business, NGOs and the state in socially significant projects.

The most significant projects in the field of social responsibility in Belarus include “Jazz Saturdays with BelVEB Bank”, “Classics at the Town Hall” and “Reading Belarusian Culture” with the support of Velcom, street exhibitions “The Artist and the City” with the support of VTB Bank. Belarusian companies make a great contribution to supporting cultural, educational, social projects in the Republic of Belarus.

Business is increasingly contributing to sustainable development in the world, the system of social responsibility of business is becoming more complex and covers more and more industries. In just over a century, CSR has gone from an idea to an integral component of the development strategy of large corporations.

Pavel Samusev, Chairman of the Board of the International Socio-Economic Foundation “Idea” (Minsk)

Social responsibility of business- responsibility of business entities for compliance with norms and rules, implicitly defined or undefined by law (in the field of ethics, ecology, mercy, philanthropy, compassion, etc.), affecting the quality of life of individuals social groups and society as a whole.

Responsibility arises as a result of ignoring or insufficient attention of business entities to the requirements and demands of society and manifests itself in a slowdown in reproduction labor resources in territories that are a resource base for this type of business.

Social responsibility of business (CSR) is a voluntary contribution of business to the development of society in the social, economic and environmental spheres, directly related to the company’s core activities and going beyond the minimum required by law.

This definition is rather ideal, and cannot be fully translated into reality, if only because it is simply impossible to calculate all the consequences of one decision. But social responsibility is not a rule, but an ethical principle that must be involved in the decision-making process. The obligation here is internal, to oneself, and is based on moral norms and values ​​acquired in the process of socialization.

Links

Main works in Russian

• “Social investments in business” (Turkin, 2003)
• “Social responsibility of business: current agenda” (Litovchenko and Korsakova, 2003)
• "Control social programs companies" (Konovalova, Korsakov, Yakimets, 2003)

• “City and business: formation of social responsibility of Russian companies” (Ivchenko, Liborakina, Sivaeva, 2003).

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

See what “Social responsibility of business” is in other dictionaries:

social responsibility- A principle that should underlie business to ensure the well-being of society, and not just to maximize profits. Most corporate annual reports usually indicate what the company has done to further education, assist... Financial and investment explanatory dictionary

It is necessary to check the quality of the translation and bring the article into compliance with the stylistic rules of Wikipedia. You can help... Wikipedia

International Academy of Business (IAB) ... Wikipedia

Management- (Management) Management is a set of methods for managing an enterprise Theory, goals and objectives of management, the manager and his role in the development of the enterprise Contents >>>>>>>>>>>> ... Investor Encyclopedia

UniCredit Bank- (UniCredit Bank) Information about the bank UniCredit, mission, values ​​and management Information about the bank UniCredit, mission, values ​​and management of the bank, business and awards Contents Contents Definitions of the subject described General Details Bank Group ... Investor Encyclopedia

SA 8000 (Social Accountability 8000) is a standard for assessing the social aspects of management systems. This universal standard is based on several conventions of the International Labor Organization,... ... Wikipedia

URL: di.by ... Wikipedia

The significance of the subject of the article is called into question. Please show in the article the significance of its subject by adding evidence of significance according to private criteria of significance or, in the case of private criteria of significance for ... ... Wikipedia

GSS- senior officer of the military battery. Dictionary: Dictionary of abbreviations and abbreviations of the army and special services. Comp. A. A. Shchelokov. M.: LLC Publishing House AST, CJSC Publishing house Geleos", 2003. 318 p. SOB SOB Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation public security service of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation state, Russian Federation ... Dictionary of abbreviations and abbreviations

The style of this article is non-encyclopedic or violates the norms of the Russian language. The article should be corrected according to Wikipedia's stylistic rules. Social Marketing this is a direction that uses marketing tools to improve life as... ... Wikipedia

Books

• Social responsibility of business in the post-Soviet space, Evgeniy Yakovlevich Wittenberg. The monograph was prepared at the Department of Post-Soviet Foreign Countries of the Russian State University for the Humanities and is dedicated to one of the most pressing problems of the development of the class of entrepreneurs in the former Soviet republics, namely...
• Social responsibility in a market economy: employee, business, state, Tatyana Vladimirovna Chubarova. The monograph examines general approaches to meeting the social needs of citizens in modern society from the point of view of the employee, business and state and ways of dividing social...

The Kommersant newspaper published a column http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2509458 href="http://www.kommersant.ru/doc/2509458" target="_blank"> by Mikhail Prokhorov, in which he proposes reconsider the relationship between business and society, in particular the concept of social responsibility of business and charity

Photo: Irina Bujor / Kommersant, http://www.kommersant.ru

“The job of entrepreneurs is to produce high-quality products, create modern jobs, generate demand for new technologies, invest in production development, respect the environment and local residents and, of course, pay taxes honestly and in full. This ends their responsibility to society,” writes Prokhorov.
What does business now mean by social responsibility? Is caring for socially vulnerable people the task of the state, business or charity? We asked these questions to the experts.

Caring for people with disabilities is a task of the state rather than of business

/Photo: http://www.pravmir.ru

Alexey Ulyanov, development director National Association procurement institutions:
— In general, Mikhail Prokhorov’s proposals seem reasonable to me. When talking about the social responsibility of business, we often forget about who creates jobs. They are created by business, entrepreneurs. But society’s attitude towards entrepreneurs, although it has undergone certain changes over the past 20-25 years, still remains quite wary. They are still called: “speculators”, “commercialists”, and the opinion that “you can’t earn much with honest work” is also in vogue. But, nevertheless, only entrepreneurs generate jobs. And those 65 million new jobs were created thanks to their efforts.
The charity proposal expressed by Mikhail Prokhorov can also only be supported. The abolition of the income tax benefit for charity in 2002 had an impact on charitable programs. I know this personally, many of my friends and comrades entrepreneurial activity carry out charitable programs and, of course, when additional taxes are charged for charity, this raises questions.

— Do you support the point of view that the social responsibility of a business is limited to its responsibility to its employees?
— Responsibility to its employees and charitable programs.

— What about creating additional jobs for people with disabilities?
— All attempts to oblige businesses to create jobs for people are ineffective. Both in Russia and abroad, there have been attempts to oblige entrepreneurs to create additional jobs - for young professionals, single mothers, women, people with disabilities, people of retirement age, etc.

And in the United States they even went so far as to begin introducing quotas for jobs for national and sexual minorities. But, in my opinion, even such good intentions as creating additional jobs for people with disabilities do not give positive effect, these measures lead to the fact that jobs appear only on paper, or to the fact that the promotion of people with disabilities career ladder finds it difficult.

Caring for people with disabilities is rather the task of the state. But in our society, unlike most developed countries, it is entrepreneurs who are required to have a special attitude towards this category of the population and strict adherence to the rules governing labor relations between the employer and the disabled person. Moreover, everyone understands that it is impossible to comply with these rules, and everything is done on paper, or bribes are given. But if we look at how the state itself treats these citizens, we will see that it is in no hurry to provide an accessible environment for people with disabilities, jobs in government institutions, and at least ramps in public places, and public transport adapted for the disabled. Attempts to make the city accessible to people with disabilities began quite recently and only in Moscow, but so far all this is a drop in the ocean.

Towards the social sphere – with economic objectives?

Photo: http://www.avon-protivraka.ru

Polina Filippova, Director of program activities and donor relations CAF Russia:
— Some of Mikhail Prokhorov’s statements raise questions. For example, an offer to switch to a fixed-term employment contract as the only form employment contract. This, of course, is a rather radical idea for our tradition. I once studied labor rights, and I can say that now in Russian Federation It is very difficult to fire a person. And this, of course, in a sense is a brake on economic development. But there needs to be a balance between economic development and protection of rights. This point raised questions for me; Before agreeing with it, it is worth reviewing all existing international practices and assessing the effectiveness of the proposed protective mechanisms. In order for a person who loses his job upon graduation fixed-term contract, still somehow support and help him survive the period of lack of employment.

There are also questions related to the fact that, on the one hand, a more stringent approach to licensing of education is proposed, and on the other hand, it is proposed to make it completely autonomous from the state, which is some kind of contradiction.

A negative reaction may be caused by the phrase that a business should not be socially responsible. I think this is the line that will “hook” most people working in our field. But, in my opinion, Prokhorov does not at all offer an approach that was characteristic of classical capitalism, when the formula “The business of business is business” existed. The author of the column quite clearly articulates what he means and what protective measures he proposes for socially vulnerable people.

The situation when the entire state appears to be a complete ineffective social security agency is unfavorable. In this sense, Prokhorov’s proposal to approach the social sphere with economic objectives, to see if the “social network” can become more profitable, and even start bringing in money - this is absolutely legitimate. But this does not at all mean any aggression towards socially vulnerable groups of the population.

On the contrary, the system of social insurance and outsourcing in the field of social assistance proposed by Prokhorov is in line with what they are trying to do now charities. For example, the task of introducing competition into the system social services seems to me extremely important, and our state has already recognized this; there are already various laws and regulations that should stimulate its development.

Nowadays, many non-profit organizations provide much more efficient services than the state, including unique services, which in state system just no. For example, the services that the state offers to children with special needs in social assistance centers are not always of high quality and correspond to the child’s diagnosis, because not all centers have competent specialists. In addition, the work of such centers is too regulated. And non-profit organizations that provide assistance to children with special needs work on request, they draw up an individual development plan for each child, and work with the family as a whole. In addition, NPOs are able to quickly respond to a changing situation and actively apply new educational opportunities. The unified system of state aid is outdated. And in many countries, NPOs successfully compete with government agencies social protection.

But for us, participation in state or municipal procurement for NPOs is still a new and complex matter, including because the only determining factor in such tenders is the issue of price. And it's clear that non-profit organization, which itself must rent premises and does not have a constant source of funds for the salaries of specialists, it is difficult to compete with municipal institutions who have it all. But, nevertheless, such competition is healthy and correct. It should help our social sphere get out of the “orphan” state, when not only the recipients of help are orphans and wretched, but the help itself is in the same state. Many NGOs already offer a worthy alternative to government social services, but I would like this movement to be more energetic.

Returning to Mikhail Prokhorov’s column, I can say that although some of the theses seem frightening at first glance, the content of the article is absolutely correct. Prokhorov has been successfully involved in charity work for a long time; he speaks of charity as a connecting element for business and the social sphere. Speaking about replacing terms, he is not talking about refusing to participate in charitable activities. But the words that there is a need for legislative support for charity for companies, tax breaks, that is, the way this is done all over the world, are completely reasonable and fair. It is also true that when collecting taxes from us, the state should not decide for us and without us exactly where this money will go.

It is quite obvious that Mikhail Prokhorov and the people who work with him have carried out a great analysis, many facts are interesting and important, and we have been saying for a long time that, for example, creating boarding schools for children with disabilities is much more expensive than supporting families with such children or adoptive families. I tend to agree with Prokhorov’s development vectors and ideas.

Large business is close to international standards

Photo: http://xn--90achbnqgkaffbdbpxenf1i5a6a5a.xn--p1ai

Natalia Kaminarskaya, Executive Secretary of the Non-Profit Partnership of Grant-Giving Organizations “Donors Forum”:
Corporate social responsibility in Russia today is a rather complex concept, which at the level of specific implementation differs from company to company. So, big business in its understanding and implementation of the concept of CSR is close to international norms: there are policies and standards covering the company’s behavior as a responsible taxpayer, employer, quality manager, as well as positioning the company in the local community as a corporate citizen. On a practical level, this represents various charity programs and support for public initiatives, as well as socio-economic agreements with the administrations of the regions of presence.

For small and medium-sized businesses, CSR is a rather complex area, which they traditionally reduce to direct targeted support with goods own production those who approach them or financial support for projects “proposed” by local authorities.

In recent years, the topic of CSR and business charity in general has only been developing and acquiring new aspects. Yes, the majority large companies, according to the “Leaders of Corporate Philanthropy” project, plan their expenses for charity and allocate funds to manage their projects in this area. Most large companies (80%) have specific policies and procedures, as well as specific areas of support they provide. But the main trend remains the development of corporate charity – activities in which businesses create conditions and support the initiatives of their employees. This activity is typical not only for large, but also for regional and medium-sized companies.