By Leigh Andrews

While most communications agencies specialise in creating citizenship and corporate social responsibility initiatives and responsibilities for their clients, there has been a re-think regarding the draft rules surrounding socio-economic development policies. One of the stand-out changes that is expected is that the blanket term, ‘Corporate Social Activity’, (CSA) will be the new reference point in this area. This has been further divided into two categories, namely CSI, which covers Corporate Social Investments or Initiatives; and CSR, which stands for Corporate Social Responsibility.

At the February BEE Forum held by the BEE Institute, draft guidelines from the Association of BEE Verification Agencies (ABVA) were explained. In terms of socio-economic development, one of the seven pillars of BEE, verification agencies must now measure the economic development and socio-economic development (SED) contributions of a measured entity cumulatively over a rolling five year cycle, starting from either the commencement date of the BEE Codes (09/02/2007), or for a period of up to five years before the commencement date of the Codes. Prior to the release of these best practice guidelines, certain verification agencies measured their clients' enterprise development and socio-economic development contributions on an annual basis. SED contributions are defined in the dti’s Codes of Good Practice as allowing a beneficiary ‘sustainable access’ to the economy, including examples such as programmes aimed at HIV/ AIDS awareness, as well as those raising the living standards of youth and people in rural areas; the support of arts and culture; and environmental awareness training. From the inclusion of these additional examples in the BEE Codes, ABVA has suggested that the definition of SED can be extended to include broader social upliftment objectives.

Helen Wasley, Newsclip’s Human Capital Manager, attended the Forum, and states that while these proposed changes are all good and well, “unless one addresses the imbalances or ‘strains’ on the economy that form part of CSR, such as HIV programmes and visiting retirement villages, ‘feel good initiatives’ that include investing in the community through arts and cultural initiatives are pointless and one-sided.” Leila Moonda, CEO of the BEE Institute, goes on to add: “CSR and SED initiatives that aim to address the social; educational; and skills challenges faced by communities are the ones that will address the imbalances and strains on the economy. It is only through addressing these challenges that we can successfully give the beneficiaries meaningful and sustainable access to the economy, and thereby aim to grow the economy."

In this light, some companies embark on CSA programmes just to ‘look good’ in society by ‘doing good’, claiming that they are environmentally-friendly by recycling office paper, and offering ‘green’ services – but I wonder what exactly a ‘green’ service would be? One with less resulting carbon emissions? After all, agencies are quick to jump on the corporate social activity bandwagon with what is now called 'green-washing’ campaigns – these involve the unjustified appropriation of environmental virtue by a company, to try and reinforce its standing with consumers. In simple terms, these campaigns are simply an attempt to ‘paint’ their company initiatives in a green light, without actually making a real effort – in a sense, they have green skin but their hearts don’t bleed green blood.

FinancialExpress.com quotes Pankaj Baliga, VP of global CSR at Tata Consultancy Services (TCS), as stating that: “Corporate Social Responsibility needs to be seen as a way of sustainability, rather than just responsibility.” As Lisa Roner, North American Editor of Ethical Corporation magazine, argues, "It appears PR firms may have to clean up their own ethics, since many corporate buyers seem to believe that a messenger with internal issues of its own may not be best placed to deliver a credible message."

Many companies touting environmental improvements have plenty to gain from a little good publicity. However, it is also important that green initiatives are sustainable, from the point of view of good publicity, as well as in terms of living up to the environmental promise. Part of good PR is following through and not dropping an initiative if a cheaper or more amenable one comes along.

Therefore, CSR doesn’t just imply advocating the need to plant trees and limit one’s carbon footprint to clients, but for communications agencies to go beyond this and make a real impact in the communities too, as it’s not just about ‘going green’ to show you care.

From a Generation G perspective, enterprise development is another of the seven pillars of BEE. This entails managers giving less developed companies more than just money, but something far more valuable – their time. By mentoring and sharing their knowledge, they will improve the standard of entrepreneurship in the country and ensure that true skills transfer takes place, thereby potentially decreasing unemployment levels.

This is a key component of CSA - giving of one’s time and expertise to uplift the community, rather than money, which is often seen as an ‘insensitive gesture’ as donations qualify a company for tax exemptions or rebates, therefore, this is to their own benefit. By embarking on a knowledge-sharing drive, and giving examples from your experience in the industry, you are not merely ‘doing well by doing good’ for yourself, but by ‘doing good’ for others, too – and this is the true spirit of corporate social investment and responsibility.

For more information, contact the BEE Institute on www.beeinstitute.co.za.

What are your thoughts on greenwashing and taking part in CSA just to build a better name for your organisation? Leave your comments on our blog.