Corporate Social Responsibility and Talent Management

Phrases such as corporate social responsibility/corporate citizenship (CC) are typically associated with environmental disasters like the current Gulf of Mexico oil spill. Historically, CC initiatives, such as philanthropic contributions and volunteer programs to a lesser degree, have been used in response to adverse public and investor reactions following such disasters (Waddock, Bodwell, & Graves, 2002). Within this older paradigm of management thinking, CC initiatives represent a useful public relations tactic for preserving market share.


Today’s firms are increasingly realizing that proactive integration of CC thinking into their risk management and business planning framework may not only support increased market share but could also address human resource challenges (Porter & Kramer, 2008; Snider, Hill, & Martin, 2003). Moving further along the spectrum of CC initiatives, beyond philanthropy and volunteerism, cross-sector alliances between private sector and non-profit organizations (NPO) have historically been used to support advocacy and caused-based marketing programs (Austin, 2000). There is a growing body of research which focuses on the use of these alliances to support a firm’s talent management priorities (Bhattacharya, Sen, & Korschun, 2008; Gibbons, 2006). My doctoral research focused on the influence of participating in a cross-sector alliance program on employee engagement (Nanderam, 2010).

Strategic cross-sector alliances offer the potential to realize the following organizational and talent management benefits which ultimately benefit the bottom line.

Private sector firm:

      Organization level

• Expanded risk management capabilities. Alliances provide a broader environmental awareness which helps to manage business uncertainty regarding new market/product/service development.
• Alliances support a positive corporate image which is a desirable investment community attribute.

      HR Priorities

• Positive corporate image is a market differentiator for recruitment of top talent.
• Promotes employee engagement through employer/employee value alignment. Employee engagement is positively linked to increased profitability and shareholder value.
• Opportunities for customized skills development that is aligned with talent management needs. Volunteer programs, unless aligned with talent management priorities, may not lead to requisite leadership/skills development.
• Cost-efficient service delivery. In-house learning and development infrastructure can be augmented through field assignments/placements. Aligns with the 70-20-10 rule for learning. Specifically, 70% of learning is attributable to job related activities and problem solving assignments; 20% from coaching/support of peers/supervisors; and 10% through formal learning.
• Opportunities for retiring employees to transition into civic engagement.

Employee:

• Strengthens the affective employer connection by addressing key employment deal expectations including a positive corporate profile and opportunity for meaningful work.
• Customized leadership/skills development opportunities.
• Opportunity to assess career goals/work environment fit.

NPO:

• Supports resource planning at Board/operational/program levels.
• Increases social capital. Alliances offer additional opportunities for supporting NGO goal/objectives.

The mantra of “doing well by doing good” reflects an evolution in management thinking. In line with this perspective, integrating CC thinking into a firm’s talent management activities provides a win-win-win opportunity for organizations, employees and local NPOs. Recognition of broader stakeholder perspectives as a basis of effective and efficient service delivery also reinforces the strategic value of the HR function.

References:

Austin, J. E. (2000). The collaboration challenge: How nonprofits and businesses succeed through strategic alliances. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Bhattacharya, C. B., Sen, S., & Korschun, D. (2008). Using corporate social responsibility to win the war for talent. MIT Sloan Management Review, 49(2), 37–44.

Gibbons, J.M. (2006). Employee engagement: A review of current research and its implications. Research report E0010-06-RR. NY: The Conference Board Inc.

Nanderam, D. (2010). Corporate social responsibility and employee engagement: An exploratory case study. Ph.D. dissertation, Capella University, Dissertations & Theses @ Capella University (Publication No. AAT 3398748).

Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78–92.

Snider, J., Hill, R. P., & Martin, D. (2003). Corporate social responsibility in the 21st century: A view from the world’s most successful firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 48(2), 175–187.

Waddock, S. A., Bodwell, C., & Graves, S. B. (2002). Responsibility: The new business imperative. Academy of Management Executive, 16(2), 132–148.