Parable of The Acorns

Addressing the Top Citizenship
Concerns of Canadians:
Perspectives from Fourteen

Sustainable Canadian Corporations
By: Marilyn Friedmann
For: Ron Knowles

The Certificate in Corporate Social Responsibility
September 18, 2006.
University of St. Michael’s College

in The University of Toronto
In Collaboration with
The Conference Board of Canada
Marilyn Friedmann Page 1 of 30 9/27/2008

Addressing the Top Citizenship Concerns of Canadians:
Perspectives from Fourteen Sustainable Canadian Corporations
Profile
• Advise CEOs and senior management teams on market development and
stakeholder engagement opportunities and issues
• Lead strategic assessment and marketing change initiatives
• Establish priorities for carrying out strategic change plans that are precise,
efficient and effective
• Lead corporate social partnership strategies and projects, particularly those
involving partnering for social and / or environmental benefit, sustainable
development and stakeholder engagement
Representative assignments
• Led the Development Division at World Vision Canada through strategic change
and cultivation of expertise to realize growth opportunities available in the major
donor and corporate market segments
• Negotiated World Vision Canada’s first corporate social engagement contract
with Barrick Gold, thereby establishing business processes and nurturing
organizational readiness for corporate partnering
• Conducted organizational assessment, delivered recommendations and wrote
position descriptions for new marketing department structure within credit
insurance division of major bank
• Led change management initiative for Canadian Life Insurance division to
transition from channel-centric marketing strategy to incorporate stronger end
customer orientation and more disciplined planning process
• Led North American brand development strategy to move niche brand into
mainstream through extending usage occasion from side dish special occasion to
main meal solution
Marilyn A. Friedmann, Principal

• Financial services marketing with Manulife Financial, Sun Life, Scotiabank
• Packaged goods marketing with Nestle, Best Foods, Campbell’s Soup Company
and Mattel
• Not-for-profit major donor and corporate fundraising with World Vision Canada
• Corporate social partnerships for sustainable development and brand relevance
• Visionary strategist, high integrity, results-focused, committed to transfer of
knowledge and expertise

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.Purpose...........................................................................................................................4
II.Scope / Methodology....................................................................................................4
III.Findings........................................................................................................................7
IV.Conclusions................................................................................................................11
Under-utilized opportunities to improve competitive differentiation / brand

reputation through pursuing global citizenship strategies...................11
So many opportunities, so little time!!........................................................11
Convergence: It’s no longer just a PR thing or a philanthropic thing!.......12
Economic and environmental components of CSR tend to be more

effectively linked with overall business strategy at present than social
component does..................................................................................13
V.Recommendations......................................................................................................13
VI.Appendices................................................................................................................18
Appendix 1: Companies selected to request interviews...........................19
Appendix 2: Copy of letter sent to corporations........................................20
Appendix 3: Survey instrument.................................................................21

Marilyn Friedmann
Ron Knowles
The Certificate in Corporate Social Responsibility
September 18, 2006.
“Let us choose to unite the power of the market with the authority of universal
ideals.”
- Kofi Annan
I.Purpose
The purpose of this research is to obtain insight into where leading Canadian
corporations are positioned in addressing the top citizenship concerns of Canadians,
how they are currently responding to social issues, what changes they anticipate in their
investment in addressing social concerns and finally their attitudes towards and
experience with private / public partnerships aimed at addressing social objectives.
These insights will be relevant to readers who have an interest in CSR within a
Canadian market context, including progressive corporate leaders and management,
not for profit leaders and managers with an interest in nurturing corporate engagement
and consultants, researchers and educators working in this arena.
II.Scope / Methodology
Globescan’s Social Responsibility Monitor was used to define the parameters for
consumers’ citizenship expectations of Canadian companies. The most recent Monitor
study was completed in 2005 and is conducted every other year. Globescan’s Monitor
research asks consumers to rate the extent to which companies should be held
responsible for 13 different actions, using a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is not hold
responsible, 3 is hold partially responsible, and 5 is hold completely responsible. The
most notable finding in the CSR 2005 Monitor research was that:
… societal expectations of companies appear to be increasing.
Compared to 2001, when this question was first asked, consumers across the

countries surveyed are more inclined than before to hold companies responsible
for nearly all of the various social, environmental, and economic actions tested.
Expectations for corporate responsibility are rising, having potentially
important effects on corporate reputation and the adoption of CSR as a
business imperative.1
Corporate Responsibilities
“Companies Held Completely Responsible for,” Expectations of Companies

2005
As can be seen in the chart above2, Globescan classifies corporate
responsibilities into Operational and Citizenship categories. Operational responsibilities
“are defined as actions that are directly related to a company’s operations. These types
of actions are seen as the standards that companies should achieve in their normal
course of business”.3 Citizenship responsibilities “are defined as actions that are more
socially oriented, which companies need not undertake in their normal business
operations”.4 While operational responsibilities are important, their accomplishment is
a basic expectation of consumers today.
Because expectations for operational responsibilities are high, companies

must perform impeccably in these areas; experience has shown that failure to
1
Globescan Corporate Social Responsibility Monitor 2005, Executive Report, p. 17.
2
Globescan Corporate Social Responsibility Monitor 2005, PowerPoint presentation
3
Globescan Corporate Social Responsibility Monitor 2005, Executive Report, Expectations of
Companies, page 16.
4
Ibid.

live up to these expectations has dire reputation consequences. However, it is

difficult to enhance corporate reputation by meeting the public’s expectations on
matters which they simply consider a company’s “license to operate.” Rather,
top performance on operational responsibilities is important more for the
sake of risk management than for brand distinction. In contrast, focusing
on citizenship responsibilities, for which expectations are more reserved,
allows a company to exceed stakeholder expectations, thereby
differentiating itself from competitors. Although much more challenging to
achieve, these are the actions that can impress stakeholders, improve
competitive advantage, and have a positive impact on corporate
reputation.5
While there may be some degree of skepticism in the business community
regarding the degree to which consumers actually make decisions based on
perceptions of corporate social responsibility, consumers surveyed by Globescan
reported that they can and do select against companies that they perceive as not
behaving in responsible ways and that they will reward companies that demonstrate
progressive responses to social responsibility issues through their purchase behaviour
and investment decisions.
While Globescan’s Corporate Social Responsibility Monitor evaluates consumer
expectations of corporate responsibility, this research project focused on obtaining
insight into where leading Canadian companies are positioned in terms of the
importance they place in their business strategies and tactics on these same citizenship
responsibilities and how they see their involvement changing in the near future. For the
purposes of this project, the sample base was drawn from corporations, with operations
in Canada, which have been subject to rigorous analysis that has qualified them as
leaders in sustainability. Several sources were referred to in selecting companies for
this survey:
• Corporations that are listed on the Dow Jones Sustainability Indexes

• Corporations that are listed on the Jantzi Social Index
5
Ibid. p. 17

• Corporations that report using the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)

framework
• Corporations that have signed on to the U.N. Global Compact
Internet research was used to find contact information for relevant staff members
/ leaders within these companies. Phone contact was made and email letters sent
outlining the purpose of the research and requesting to interview a senior business
manager (i.e. Manager, Director or above) involved in leading corporate social
responsibility programs and strategies. Of the fourteen interviews completed, six were
completed face-to-face in the company’s office and eight were completed over the
phone. While the response rate was high, the sample is not statistically projectable.
However, the results are both interesting and valuable, providing an interesting indicator
of where leading corporations are positioned with respect to engagement in citizenship
responsibilities.
III.Findings
1) Increasing economic stability and solving social problems appear to be tied as the
most important citizenship issues for participating companies as part of their overall
business / CSR / citizenship strategies. These two broad social issues both
received a Top 2 box score6 of 79% with the mean score7 for increasing economic
stability being slightly higher at 3.36 out of 4 versus solving social problems at 3.21.
Reducing human rights abuses also fits in as a most important issue with a Top 2
box score of 72% and a mean score of 3.29.
6
A top-2-box score represents the sum of the top two scaled responses in each question. For example, in
an importance question with a four-point scale (very important, somewhat important, not very important,
and not at all important), the top-2-box score would represent the results of those that responded with
very or somewhat important to the social issue at hand.
7
The mean score is also known as the average score and is calculated by adding each respondents
score together and then dividing by the total number of respondents.

2) Reducing the rich – poor gap appears to be somewhat less important in terms of the
focus corporations are placing on this in their strategies. It received a Top 2 box
score of 64% and a mean score of 2.71
3) Preventing and reducing the spread of HIV / AIDS appears to be of less importance
as part of the strategies of companies participating in this survey. It received a Top 2
box score of only 36% and a mean score of 2.36. While this may seem surprisingly
low, it is important to bear in mind that 4 of the 14 companies participating in the
survey are focused on Canada as their market and, of the 9 that are focused
internationally, only those in the extractives sector (mining, oil and gas), a total of
three responding companies, perceive that HIV / AIDS has a major impact on this
business. It is very clear that companies face a plethora of opportunities to engage
in social issues and they tend to select those issues that are most relevant to their
stakeholders, including employees, customers, investors and government.
4) There is a fair degree of correspondence between what respondents report as
important to their company strategies and how effective they believe their company
is at present in engaging in these issues.
5) A statistically valid comparison of consumer versus corporate responses is not
possible given corporate sample size and slight difference in the way the questions
about social actions were asked. For example, consumers were asked to rate
using a scale of 1 to 5 the extent to which companies should be held responsible
for each action (e.g. Reducing human rights abuses) while corporations where
asked to rate on a scale of 1 to 4 how important the social action was to their
company as part of its Citizenship / CSR / Community Involvement / overall
business strategy. Despite these limitations I believe it is worth at least a glance at
the directional differences in consumer versus corporate responses within Canada.

Comparing Consumer Expectations

with Corporate Importance
57
Reduce human rights abuses
50
14
Prevent spread of HIV/AIDS
43
29 Corporations
Reduce rich-poor gap
43
Consumers
64
Increase economic stability
41
43
Solve social problems
32
0 20 40 60 80
Consumers were asked to rate the extent to which companies should be held responsible for these areas of action. Light blue bars
indicate percentage of respondents who held companies completely responsible for the action specified. Corporate respondents
were asked to rate the importance of each area as part of company’s Citizenship/ CSR/ Community Involvement or overall business
strategy. Corporations score represents the percentage of respondents who gave a response of very important for the action
specified (top box).
Where we observe the largest gaps between consumer expectations and the
importance placed on these actions by the 14 participating companies are:

• Preventing the spread of HIV / AIDS
• Increasing economic stability
• Reducing the rich – poor gap
The gaps are interesting to note but, given statistical limitations of corporate sample
size and differences in how the question was asked, doing much comparison based on
this data is not recommended. Overall, there is a directional sense that Canadian
consumers perceive that companies should hold some fairly significant level of
responsibility for a few key global issues, while companies in this study tend to focus on
actions that are more related to what is happening in their own backyard, unless they

are operating in an international context where these issues are relevant to the
communities they operate in.
6) Looking forward, over the next 12 to 18 months, nine in ten respondents expect that
their company will boost the effort invested in increasing economic stability. Seven
in ten respondents expect their company to increase efforts invested in solving
social problems and six in ten expect their company will increase investment in
reducing human rights abuses and reducing the rich-poor gap. Three in ten
respondents saw investment in preventing and reducing the spread of HIV / AIDS as
increasing over the next 12 to 18 months while seven in ten saw it remaining
unchanged. It appears that this is driven by the perception that HIV / AIDS does not
register as a high priority issue amongst their stakeholders. Please note that there
were no pharmaceutical companies included in this survey. It is likely that
pharmaceutical companies, in particular, those which produce HIV / AIDS drugs,
would rate this area as higher in importance.
7) 13 of the 14 respondents reported that their company has engaged in partnering
with non-governmental organizations in the past.
8) Forming partnerships with NGOs is perceived as an effective way for corporations to
engage in addressing social issues. This received a strong top 2 box score of 92%
and a mean score of 3.4 out of 4.
9) There was very high awareness in general of the international non-government
organizations (NGOs)8 probed in the survey, however, there was a low level of
outright commitment to consider specific international NGOs for partnership in
addressing citizenship responsibilities, with some NGOs scoring quite low in terms of
8
“A non-governmental organization (NGO) is a non-profit group or association that acts outside of
institutionalized political structures and pursues matters of interest to its members by lobbying,
persuasion, or direct action. The term is generally restricted to social, cultural, legal, and environmental
advocacy groups having goals that are primarily non-commercial. NGOs usually gain at least a portion of
their funding from private sources. Because the label "NGO" is considered too broad by some, as it might
cover anything that is non-governmental, many NGOs now prefer the term private voluntary organization
(PVO) or Private Development Organization (PDO).” Source: Wikipedia.org

being considered for potential social partnerships. This is perhaps one of the most
interesting observations coming out of this research, especially for international
NGOs. It would seem that no internationally-focused NGO stands distinctly above
the rest in being broadly perceived as a potential social partner. Part of the rationale
for this is attributable to the fact that four of the fourteen corporations are focused on
the Canadian marketplace and tend to currently perceive that international NGOs do
not have a mandate that is of high enough relevance to their stakeholders.
However, there appears to be an opportunity for international NGOs to seek to
establish themselves as viable and suitable partners for highly sustainable
companies operating in Canada with an international market focus.
IV.Conclusions
A.Under-utilized opportunities to improve competitive differentiation /
brand reputation through pursuing global citizenship strategies
There is an opportunity for companies to better address consumer expectations
through more strategic investment of time and energy in global citizenship issues, such
as working to prevent the spread of diseases like HIV / AIDS and helping reduce the
gap between the rich and the poor. Alcan seems to be at the leading edge of Canadian
companies who are demonstrating more proactive leadership and action in their role on
the global citizenship stage.
B. So many opportunities, so little time!
Many of the companies that are recognized for their sustainability efforts are
overwhelmed by the number of requests they receive for interviews and information
from social index and market research firms, CSR academics and the time demands
associated with being available for interviews, researching information to respond to

index firm requests, and responding to changing approaches to rules of engagement
such as recent changes to the Global Reporting Initiative standards and the Equator
Principles. We seem to be approaching a tipping point in the area of sustainability
reporting and CSR. Companies are looking for ways to more effectively handle the
requests that are put before them and to establish priorities in terms of selectively opting
out of interviews, information requests, etc. that are not perceived to provide a
reasonable return for the amount of time and effort expended. The larger organizations
have created multiple staff positions to address voluntary CSR reporting requirements
on top of all the legal reporting requirements. We seem to be approaching a point
where some rationalization is needed in the CSR / social indexing sector.
C. Convergence: It’s no longer just a PR thing or a philanthropic thing!
Many respondents indicated that they are becoming increasingly selective in
defining social priorities and whom they might partner with. Many spoke in terms of
clearly identifying what is important to stakeholders within a local community context
and finding ways to engage at a grassroots level. They desire to partner with
organizations that understand their business objectives and are looking for win – wins,
not just handouts to fund the charity’s mission.

Philanthropy, corporate social responsibility and community engagement seem to
be converging and falling into line as aspects of core business strategy, not just cost
centers. Increasingly, these companies are looking for tighter alignment and integration
of these areas with business strategy and ways to measure impact of CSR investment.
Unless there is a well-established corporate history of philanthropic giving, NGO’s would
be well-advised to do more homework upfront to identify those companies where there
is reasonable alignment in social priorities and then to demonstrate professionalism,
accountability and seek to completely understand what the company’s objectives are
and to deliver effectively upon those objectives. In many cases, company’s
expectations seem to be on the rise for employee volunteerism opportunities and for
providing the company with feedback on outcomes. In essence corporations seem to
prefer to work with social agencies that demonstrate strong commitment to cultivating a
partnership approach and value system.
D. Economic and environmental components of CSR tend to be more
effectively linked with overall business strategy at present than social
component does
The social component of CSR is slowly beginning to link more closely with overall
business strategy but, in several cases, there still seems to be more of a philanthropic
approach, where money is given to charities that are important to employees or other
stakeholders.
V.Recommendations
B.For Corporations
1.Strive to improve alignment of social aspects of Corporate Social
Responsibility with overall business strategy. More progress seems to
have been made on the Economic and Environmental aspects of CSR.

While employee and local community engagement are critical stakeholders
to consider, diffusing financial and other resources may not provide the
best opportunity for impact – on the issues, on brand reputation and on
stakeholder engagement. As in marketing strategy, it is important to take
time to stop and consider what your organization stands for and align
citizenship strategies tightly with this.
2.While a decentralized approach to C.S.R. for companies that operate
internationally makes sense in terms of empowering and engaging local
leaders and their staff, there may be a trade-off in terms of diluting impact if
efforts are too diffused. Some companies are seeking to develop a hybrid
loose-tight approach where central themes for citizenship strategy are
developed jointly and then country offices have flexibility to identify local
partners who can most effectively deliver on those citizenship objectives.
C.For Social Agencies / NGOs
1.Be prepared. Know your value proposition. Companies are
inundated with requests to fund citizenship initiatives. There are simply
too many “funding opportunities” chasing too few resources. While
leading sustainable companies, by and large, mastered the importance
of “knowing your customer” and offering a “unique value proposition”,
social agencies, for the most part, have a long way to go to establish a
deep understanding of the needs and expectations of corporate
partners and to deliver a differentiated value proposition that is relevant
to the corporate sector. A few savvy social agencies have made
admirable progress on this front in recent years and are becoming
recognized as valuable brands on a global basis. This requires an
upfront investment of funds and time that many social agencies are not
comfortable with and / or don’t believe it is an appropriate use of funds.

It is also an investment that most donors would not value. In an
overcrowded market, cultivating a brand value proposition is critical to
achieving sustainable partnerships.
2.Demonstrate a higher level of financial transparency and
accountability. By and large, corporate respondents sense that
social agencies are not subject to anywhere near the same level of
accountability and transparency as the business world is, particularly
in the Sarbanes-Oxley era. Corporate respondents tend to see the
focus on 80 percent of funds to program and 20 percent to
administration as somewhat of a black box that is inadequate to
demonstrating financial stewardship. Corporations want to have a
better understanding of how funds are used and know that they can
expect highly accountable measurement of impact over time.
3.Decide whether your organization comprehends the extensive
investment in change required to engage the corporate sector,
including addressing cultural divides. Corporations do not want to
work with social agencies that are critical of the company’s
operations. Many respondents suggested that NGO’s don’t need to
agree with the company’s business objectives and that corporate /
NGO attempts at partnership in the past have sometimes been
undermined by social activists who refuse to acknowledge that
corporations play a legitimate and very valuable role in economic
development. Overcoming cultural differences / biases is a
significant challenge.
4.Change leadership expertise is vital
The rapidly developing language of partnerships for
sustainability that bring corporations and NGOs

together requires the development of new ways of
thinking, relating and operating. The rules of the game
for NGOs, who may be very comfortable with
fundraising and grant seeking, are not the same rules
that are being developed in the area of corporate social
partnerships. While the two sectors are starting to
become more aligned around environmental and other
operational elements of sustainability, there are rapidly
developing opportunities for social agencies focused on
citizenship issues such as human rights and poverty
mitigation to adapt to the changes required to attract
and retain strong corporate partners.
D.For Both Corporations and Social Agencies / NGOs
1.Translation skills are critical
Businesses and NGOs frequently experience a cultural
chasm in cases where they lack experience in working
together. The two sectors think differently, speak
differently and, for the most part, place primary focus in
different areas. Businesses think in terms of
maximizing long-term shareholder value. They use the
language of business and competitive markets and
drive for measurable return on investment. NGOs tend
to think more in terms of social change, the language of
fundraising (e.g. gifts), and social cause. NGOs are
perceived to place higher value on the process than

business people do. Business people are more
energized by results. Several of the people interviewed
expressed frustration with the level of bureaucracy they
had encountered in trying to work with NGOs. They
would like to see tighter alignment of objectives and
stronger commitment to timely and quality reporting
that measures impact and outcomes against
established objectives. The one language that is
starting to draw the corporate and social sectors
together is the language of sustainability. In seeking to
broker partnerships for sustainability between
corporations and NGOs, it is important to ensure
effective translation and to help each group seek to
deepen their understanding of the other and to respect
their differences.

VII. Appendices

Appendix 1:
Companies selected to request interviews:

Company Interviewed?
Alcan Yes
Bank of Montreal Yes
Bank of Nova Scotia Yes
Bell Canada Yes
CIBC Yes
Enbridge Inc. Yes
Encana No
George Weston Limited / No
Loblaw Companies Limited
Inco Ltd. No
Manulife Financial Corp. Yes
Nexen Inc. Yes
Nortel Networks Yes
Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) No
Shell Canada Ltd. Yes
Suncor Energy Inc. No
TELUS Corp. Yes
TD Canada Trust No
TransCanada Pipelines Corp. No
Barrick Gold Yes
Goldcorp Yes
Falconbridge No
(now Xstrata PLC)
Sun Life Financial Yes

Appendix 2: Copy of letter (names masked) sent to corporations

Marilyn Friedmann
357 Markland Drive
Toronto, Ontario M9C 1S1
<date>
Re: Request to Participate in Executive Interview on Corporate Social Responsibility as it relates to the social
concerns of Canadian consumers and investors
My name is Marilyn Friedmann. I am currently completing a certification program in Corporate Social Responsibility
at University of St. Michael’s College, which is associated with University of Toronto. One of the key requirements in
order to complete the certificate program is to complete a major research project on Corporate Social Responsibility.
I would like to respectfully request one hour of time from a senior business executive involved in leading corporate
social responsibility programs and strategies for XXX. This time would be used to conduct a one-to-one interview,
either face-to-face or over the phone. My desired sample includes companies that are included in either or both of
the Dow Jones Sustainability Index and / or the Jantzi Social Index. Results will be confidential and only aggregate
results used for reporting. A copy of the report will be sent to those participants who wish to receive a copy. It is my
intention that this research will be valuable to your company in planning and assessing Corporate Social
Responsibility priorities and programs. I would be pleased to debrief on results, should you wish to do so.
I would expect that you receive a lot of requests of this sort and that it is difficult for someone in your role to find the
time. I am hopeful that my extensive work experience and understanding of strategic engagement and marketing
strategy will make this a worthwhile investment of your time. I have 19 years of work experience in marketing and
business development leadership, primarily in the corporate world of consumer packaged goods and financial
services. Over the past several years I have become involved in leadership in the international development N.G.O.
sector. I am now focused on building my knowledge and expertise to serve as a consultant in strategy, marketing and
corporate development, particularly focused on stakeholder engagement and facilitating partnerships for sustainable
development.
The purpose of my research is to obtain insights into:

• The degree to which a sample of well respected Canadian corporations perceive the top social concerns
that Canadian citizens hold corporations responsible for to be important issues for their company
• how effective these companies have been in engaging in the top social concerns and what sorts of actions
/ programs they have been involved in
• anticipated changes in investing efforts in these social concerns
• what the opportunities and barriers are to improving performance in these areas
• previous experience in and likeliness in future of partnering with non-governmental organizations such as
international development organization
• awareness of various non-government organizations
• attitudes towards engaging in corporate social partnerships with NGOs in order to contribute to social
objectives.
Would you be willing to participate in this research please?
May I please request the honor of scheduling a time to meet with you either in person or over the phone for a
maximum of 60 minutes sometime before August 25th?
Thank you very much for your time and consideration! I look forward to the opportunity to speak with you.
Sincerely,
Marilyn Friedmann
Email: mpfriedmann@rogers.com

Mobile: (647) 200-2938

Appendix 3: Survey instrument
Questionnaire on Corporate Social Responsibility as it relates to the social concerns of Canadian consumers
1. Looking at the top citizenship concerns that Canadian consumers hold Canadian corporations responsible for,
a) How important are the following global issues to your company as part of its Citizenship / Corporate Social
Responsibility / Community Involvement efforts?
Very Important Somewhat Important Not very important Not at all important
Reducing human rights
4 3 2 1
abuses
Preventing / reducing
4 3 2 1
spread of HIV / AIDS
Reducing rich-poor gap 4 3 2 1
Increasing economic
4 3 2 1
stability
Solving social problems 4 3 2 1
b) How effective do you believe your company is at present in engaging in these global issues?
Very Effective Somewhat Effective Not Very Effective Not At All Effective
4 3 2 1
abuses
4 3 2 1
Reducing rich-poor gap 4 3 2 1
Increasing economic
4 3 2 1
stability
Solving social problems 4 3 2 1

c) We have looked at 5 social issues so far. Are there other areas that are of specific importance to your company?
 What are they?
d) What is influencing your company’s effectiveness in engaging in social issues?
e) Please highlight the most relevant efforts your company has undertaken in terms of engaging in social issues.

f) Thinking ahead, over the next 12 to 18 months are these areas likely to increase, decrease or remain unchanged in
terms of the effort your organization invests?
Increase Decrease Remain Unchanged
4 3 2
abuses
4 3 2
Reducing rich-poor gap 4 3 2
Increasing economic
4 3 2
stability
Solving social problems in
4 3 2
general
Other from c above 4 3 2
Other from c above 4 3 2

2. The final section explores attitudes toward corporate social partnerships or public / private partnerships aimed at addressing
social objectives.
a) Has your company engaged in partnering with non-governmental organizations such as global development agencies to
address / support social issues?
YES NO
• If yes, which agencies have you worked with and on what issues?
b) If no to (a), how likely is it that your company will consider partnering with NGOs or other social agencies to address social
objectives over the next 12 to 18 months? [Use 4 or 5 point scale for likely?]
Very Likely Somewhat Likely Not very Likely Not at all likely
4 3 2 1
• If likely, which issues are you most likely to focus on?

c) What does the word partnership mean to your organization when you think about “partnering” with an NGO to address
social issues?
Open ended response:
d) (Unaided awareness) Which non-government organizations / agencies would you consider partnering with on social issues?
Why?

e) Which of the following agencies are you aware of and which of the agencies would you consider (top of mind) as potential
partners that your organization might work with to address social issues?
Aware of already Potential partner
(√) Yes / No / Don’t
Agency Yes / No Know
CARE
World Vision
Foster Parents Plan
OXFAM
UNICEF
Other UN Agencies
Global Compact
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)
Global Labour Organization (ILO)
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)
United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO)
Save The Children
Right To Play
VSO (Voluntary Service Overseas) Canada
African Medical and Research Foundation (AMREF)
Feed The Children
Food For The Hungry
CUSO
Health Partners Global
Medicins Sans Frontieres (MSF) / Doctors Without Borders
Engineers Without Borders
f) Attitudes towards partnering with NGO’s

1. Forming partnerships with NGO’s is an effective way for corporations to engage in addressing global social issues

Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree

4 3 2 1
2. Open-ended probe: What could NGOs do to improve their attractiveness as partners in addressing social issues?
3. Open-ended probe: How would you prefer that an NGO approach your company about partnership opportunities?
4. Open-ended probe: What would discourage your company from partnering with an NGO on addressing social issues?
5. Are there any other comments you would like to make that would be helpful in designing effective partnerships between
corporations and NGOs?
Thank you very much for your help.

Please answer the following questions so that we can classify your company:
Size – revenue
Industry
Market focus: Canada / Global
Your position
Would like a copy of the top line summary?

YES NO
Would like to schedule a debriefing on results?

YES NO


Parable of The Acorns

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Parable of The Acorns

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Addressing the Top Citizenship

Perspectives from Fourteen

By: Marilyn Friedmann

For: Ron Knowles

University of St. Michael’s College

Marilyn Friedmann Page 1 of 30 9/27/2008

Marilyn A. Friedmann, Principal

Marilyn Friedmann Page 2 of 30 9/27/2008

Under-utilized opportunities to improve competitive differentiation / brand

So many opportunities, so little time!!........................................................11

Convergence: It’s no longer just a PR thing or a philanthropic thing!.......12

Economic and environmental components of CSR tend to be more

Marilyn Friedmann Page 3 of 30 9/27/2008

corporations are positioned in addressing the top citizenship concerns of Canadians,

experience with private / public partnerships aimed at addressing social objectives.

Canadian market context, including progressive corporate leaders and management,

and consultants, researchers and educators working in this arena.

consumers’ citizenship expectations of Canadian companies. The most recent Monitor

responsible for 13 different actions, using a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is not hold

responsible, 3 is hold partially responsible, and 5 is hold completely responsible. The

Marilyn Friedmann Page 4 of 30 9/27/2008

“Companies Held Completely Responsible for,” Expectations of Companies

As can be seen in the chart above2, Globescan classifies corporate

responsibilities into Operational and Citizenship categories. Operational responsibilities

operations”.4 While operational responsibilities are important, their accomplishment is

a basic expectation of consumers today.

Because expectations for operational responsibilities are high, companies

Marilyn Friedmann Page 5 of 30 9/27/2008

live up to these expectations has dire reputation consequences. However, it is

While there may be some degree of skepticism in the business community

regarding the degree to which consumers actually make decisions based on

perceptions of corporate social responsibility, consumers surveyed by Globescan

progressive responses to social responsibility issues through their purchase behaviour

and investment decisions.

While Globescan’s Corporate Social Responsibility Monitor evaluates consumer

expectations of corporate responsibility, this research project focused on obtaining

leaders in sustainability. Several sources were referred to in selecting companies for

• Corporations that are listed on the Dow Jones Sustainability Indexes

Marilyn Friedmann Page 6 of 30 9/27/2008

• Corporations that report using the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)

manager (i.e. Manager, Director or above) involved in leading corporate social

of where leading corporations are positioned with respect to engagement in citizenship

box score of 72% and a mean score of 3.29.

Marilyn Friedmann Page 7 of 30 9/27/2008

score of 64% and a mean score of 2.71

as part of the strategies of companies participating in this survey. It received a Top 2

low, it is important to bear in mind that 4 of the 14 companies participating in the

business. It is very clear that companies face a plethora of opportunities to engage

stakeholders, including employees, customers, investors and government.

4) There is a fair degree of correspondence between what respondents report as

is at present in engaging in these issues.

5) A statistically valid comparison of consumer versus corporate responses is not

using a scale of 1 to 5 the extent to which companies should be held responsible

company as part of its Citizenship / CSR / Community Involvement / overall

business strategy. Despite these limitations I believe it is worth at least a glance at

the directional differences in consumer versus corporate responses within Canada.

Marilyn Friedmann Page 8 of 30 9/27/2008

Comparing Consumer Expectations

importance placed on these actions by the 14 participating companies are:

• Increasing economic stability

• Reducing the rich – poor gap

Marilyn Friedmann Page 9 of 30 9/27/2008