Today's topic would be: ISORES as new Sustainability Consultant Services
ISORES is actually a short version of Indonesian Social Responsibility, which is this blog. In 2015 me and some expert friends in Sustainability gather to open a one stop Sustainability Services Consultant Company.
ISORES provides services that could assist in your Business and Management, in your Environmental Stewardship and Protection, and also in your Social Responsibility. ISORES services provides assistance from strategic, up to program implementation, monitoring and audit preparation.
Among other things that they could assist you with, they could assist your preparation of ISO 14001, OHSAS 18001, ISO 26000, RSPO P&C implementation, RSPO gap analysis for audit preparation, ISPO preparation, etc. They also could assist you with training and capacity building.
They could help you to develop your own unique Sustainability Strategy, SOP, Policies, Tools and up to Performance Indicator for the employee and also for the Sustainability Program apply to your stakeholder.
They had tools to measure your stakeholder satisfaction, your program CSR implementation, your employee satisfaction, and develop performance index for your program to communities.
please do visit their website www.isoresid.com and feel free to contact them for further information at servicedesk@isoresid.com
Showing posts with label CSR. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CSR. Show all posts
Tuesday, June 7, 2016
Sunday, September 18, 2011
CSR Project Dashboard
Today's topic would be: Project Management dashboard for CSR performance monitoring
Using speedometer chart we can then indicate the status in unique way as right sample.
It start with how?.. How we present our CSR performance, how we monitor our performance?
Can it be measure with quantitative analysis or only pure qualitative analysis or both?
If it can, then how is the presentation would be like? can it be a simple as Project Management Dashboard?
And my answer would be, Yes It can..
Using Balance Score card as our tools to score our performance indicator which we have agreed taken from our CSR program. It could be; Community Health Performance (if we have health services program), Access to Education performance (if we have Education program), Household income performance (if we have economic empowerment program that lead to income generating scheme for our community) and other indicator that we could agreed taken from our baseline data.
If we have so much number on negative indicator such as infected diseases then our indicator performance would be "reduction percentage or number of infected diseases cases" in a village or in a district depend on how large your program affected.
All these data then add up with internal update such as, pending grievances, outstanding of dispute cases, negative publication, positive publication, etc.. touch with simple or complicated formula in an excel then we could rating our status; are we in normal situation, alert situation or emergency situation
Using speedometer chart we can then indicate the status in unique way as right sample.
or just traffic light chart ..
CSR Dashboard could be showing something like this;
The important things is to start having the data supporting your performance, you need to have quantitative data that is updated every month or every quarter (your choice), that you could present in a chart based program.
I consider a dashboard as a window to what you need to see, what your company need to know, need to be alert with towards a risk analysis and and performance evaluation.
there are many website providing free trial, free template and free tutorial for developing your own dashboard.
Remember, decide your target, set your indicator then develop your supporting data and update it regularly to see the movement of your performance.
Good luck..
Monday, April 18, 2011
Strategic Plan
Today's topic would be:
Strategic Plan
To start your CSR framework, you need to have a strategic plan, it could be for period of five years or 10 years. The important thing is that within that document you need to anylize your target, set an indicator of your performance, and milestone per year so then you understand what to do every year.
there are some organization supply free strategic plan for CSR by free sometime, you search one of them at the net. One of them is mystrategicplan.com, here is what they view about strategic CSR;
So what is Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility? By taking a strategic approach, companies can determine what activities they have the resources to devote to being socially responsible and can choose that which will strengthen their competitive advantage. By planning out CSR as part of a company’s over all plan, organizations can ensure that profits and increasing shareholder value don’t overshadow the need to behave ethically to their stakeholders.
Strategic CSR provides companies with solutions for:
To start your CSR framework, you need to have a strategic plan, it could be for period of five years or 10 years. The important thing is that within that document you need to anylize your target, set an indicator of your performance, and milestone per year so then you understand what to do every year.
there are some organization supply free strategic plan for CSR by free sometime, you search one of them at the net. One of them is mystrategicplan.com, here is what they view about strategic CSR;
Strategic CSR provides companies with solutions for:
- Balancing the creating of economic value with that of societal value
- How to manage their stakeholder relationships (especially those with competing values)
- Identifying and responding to threats and opportunities facing their stakeholders
- Developing sustainable business practices
- Deciding the organization’s capacity for philanthropic activities
Other than that is using Balance Score Card, but not just any BSC since this is more similar to non provit project, then we need to apply the social enterprise BSC. This is also freely provided by some organization at the internet, one of them is http://www.proveandimprove.org/new/tools/socialenterprise.php
Key: White circles reflect objectives
Dotted arrows reflect cause and effect linkages
Note: this is meant as an example; organisations customise their strategy maps to reflect their goals
Jadi caranya adalah pertama buat Strategi CSR or Sustainability Anda, kemudian identifikasi tolak ukur keberhasilannya melalui analisa indikator keberhasilan dimana setiap indikator harus bisa dibuktikan dengan data kuantitatif dan data kualitatif.
terakhir adalah, monitoring pencapaian atau pelakasanaan berdasarkan indikator dan milestone yang sudah kita buat.
Analisa kembali apakah dalam kurun waktu yang direncanakan target tersebut akan tercapai, jika tidak mulai analisa kendala nya lalu analisa resikonya dan identifikasi solusinya hingga Anda bisa membuat revisi strategy atau rencana startegy lanjutan.
Many companies does not have a strategic plan particularly for CSR or Sustainability, that may be what cause some company didn't do excellent in their CSR performance, they just did but no direction, no performance indicator, then under what indicator they could say they succeed?
this is purely personal opinion with meant only to take a lesson learn
Dotted arrows reflect cause and effect linkages
Note: this is meant as an example; organisations customise their strategy maps to reflect their goals
Jadi caranya adalah pertama buat Strategi CSR or Sustainability Anda, kemudian identifikasi tolak ukur keberhasilannya melalui analisa indikator keberhasilan dimana setiap indikator harus bisa dibuktikan dengan data kuantitatif dan data kualitatif.
terakhir adalah, monitoring pencapaian atau pelakasanaan berdasarkan indikator dan milestone yang sudah kita buat.
Analisa kembali apakah dalam kurun waktu yang direncanakan target tersebut akan tercapai, jika tidak mulai analisa kendala nya lalu analisa resikonya dan identifikasi solusinya hingga Anda bisa membuat revisi strategy atau rencana startegy lanjutan.
Many companies does not have a strategic plan particularly for CSR or Sustainability, that may be what cause some company didn't do excellent in their CSR performance, they just did but no direction, no performance indicator, then under what indicator they could say they succeed?
this is purely personal opinion with meant only to take a lesson learn
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Social Responsibility (?)
Today's topic would be:
Social Responsibility..?
As we all may read in news paper, watch in television, news channel, radio and internet that our world is now facing several crisis.
Middle east with their awaken-democracy spirit rebel the rulling government who has been rulled for decades..
Japan eart quake and tsunami, with additional of nuclear crisis and economy challenges ahead them as an after shock of their natural dissaster, factories closed, people jobless, poverty will soon be a threat..
While the rest of the world are fighting to green economic with sustainability development as their new point of view and faith.. balancing profit and protecting planet and prospering the people are not easy nor simple.. it takes long debatable effort, commitments and faith towards betterment of our dear live in earth.. our existing as human being, a mojority species on earth.. or for some people on..entire universe..
If we take Corporate Social Responsibility as a topic then we might talked about how the business in Japan response to their crisis, how Tepco mitigate their nuclear crisis..
how Unilever might act with their supplier and vendor in terms of fullfiling their green commitment or how KFC said they would change their oil with rapeseed oil from palm oil.
But with what happend in Japan, in middle east and other crisis all over the world.. I think its about time we ask about "Country Social Responsibility" if a corporate can be consider as a corporate citizenship, then why not a country?
We then could talk about how a country could share some responsibility from what they are doing as a business, as a community that effect to other country as their neighbour.. If we think that then human relief to neighbouring country will be consider as mandatory relief.. beacuse if that country failed to survive then will create a domino effect world wide..
then we further ask about how each country treat their waste management, their carbon footprint, their water and soil..
do they comply with Human rights, with environment management like ISO 14001? etc...
why not bother a country? ... debat them.. why not?
why only hit a corporate when if in some facts government of a country contributes half of their sins? because their in charge with monitoring, license and certain kind of certification that they said has to be comply with..
If a president of a house member vocally support to reduce green house gases provoke their business community and people to concern with carboon foot print, then why not asked them their own track record on carbon foot print? how their country minimize the use of fossil energy? ..etc..
then when its done, we again question, how about our personal social responsibility? to your family, to your neighbour.. to your community.. to your country..
So I guess the bottom line is that;
Social responsibility is not about who doing it? is about how you do it? .. and the most importance thing is every one, every community, every business and every country need to doing it..
Only by then, our dear planet could reach a balance..and sustainbility will achieved
Social Responsibility..?
As we all may read in news paper, watch in television, news channel, radio and internet that our world is now facing several crisis.
Middle east with their awaken-democracy spirit rebel the rulling government who has been rulled for decades..
Japan eart quake and tsunami, with additional of nuclear crisis and economy challenges ahead them as an after shock of their natural dissaster, factories closed, people jobless, poverty will soon be a threat..
While the rest of the world are fighting to green economic with sustainability development as their new point of view and faith.. balancing profit and protecting planet and prospering the people are not easy nor simple.. it takes long debatable effort, commitments and faith towards betterment of our dear live in earth.. our existing as human being, a mojority species on earth.. or for some people on..entire universe..
If we take Corporate Social Responsibility as a topic then we might talked about how the business in Japan response to their crisis, how Tepco mitigate their nuclear crisis..
how Unilever might act with their supplier and vendor in terms of fullfiling their green commitment or how KFC said they would change their oil with rapeseed oil from palm oil.
But with what happend in Japan, in middle east and other crisis all over the world.. I think its about time we ask about "Country Social Responsibility" if a corporate can be consider as a corporate citizenship, then why not a country?
We then could talk about how a country could share some responsibility from what they are doing as a business, as a community that effect to other country as their neighbour.. If we think that then human relief to neighbouring country will be consider as mandatory relief.. beacuse if that country failed to survive then will create a domino effect world wide..
then we further ask about how each country treat their waste management, their carbon footprint, their water and soil..
do they comply with Human rights, with environment management like ISO 14001? etc...
why not bother a country? ... debat them.. why not?
why only hit a corporate when if in some facts government of a country contributes half of their sins? because their in charge with monitoring, license and certain kind of certification that they said has to be comply with..
If a president of a house member vocally support to reduce green house gases provoke their business community and people to concern with carboon foot print, then why not asked them their own track record on carbon foot print? how their country minimize the use of fossil energy? ..etc..
then when its done, we again question, how about our personal social responsibility? to your family, to your neighbour.. to your community.. to your country..
So I guess the bottom line is that;
Social responsibility is not about who doing it? is about how you do it? .. and the most importance thing is every one, every community, every business and every country need to doing it..
Only by then, our dear planet could reach a balance..and sustainbility will achieved
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Stakeholder Engagement
Today's topic would be:
Stakeholder Mapping, analysis and planning
What is stakeholder? Who are they? what do we going to do with them, how do we engage them? Do we need to? why?
All these question are main question that we all asking when we need to develop strategy for our stakeholder engagement strategy which very useful tool to use as basic information developing our Sustainability strategy for let say five years ahead.. or even ten years forward.
I think, it was very smart thinking, that Indonesian Center for Sustainable Development or known as ICSD create three days training regarding an Effective Stakeholder Engagement for Sustainable Development, as tools to develop CSR strategy towards sustainable operation.
And lesson learn approach that the speaker and trainer used, provides a wide range of divers experiences from coal mining company, oil and gas company to plantation based company.
Not many company actually understand that approaches and stages.. although most big company has done it, by their consultant.. only few who hired their staff with this kind of knowledge., fortunately our company did.
Actually there are many template which could be use and easily found in google, such as below:
matrix of stakeholder identification
which then need to be analyze and map it as below;
The one thing that summarize the stages of stakeholder mapping are: Identify your SH, analyze them, plan type of approach you will use to deal with them, then Engage.. with the strategy design earlier as your mapping guide you to.
During your identification, you will also need to identify level or ring of your SH, from one who is directly affected to one who influence your operation in international level..
The more accurate and complete information you have about your SH, then more guideline you have to develop your strategy based on your SH profile.
Always maintain all your SH, don't create a room for their jealousy among them which led into discrimination accusation.
for more complete template you may find it at below link
Teman-teman CSR
Untuk memudahkan pekerjaan kita dalam merencanakan program dan metode pendekatan yang akan kita laksanakan untuk setiap SH kita, maka sebaiknya kita melakukan stakeholder identification terlebih dahulu, membuat pemetaannya, menganalisa hingga kemudian merencanakan apa yang akan kita lakukan.
Sementara khusus untuk SH masyarakat, kita membutuhkan baseline information yang kemudian akan kita analisa potensi dan needs nya digabungkan dengan SH mapping kita untuk menentukan prioritas SH kita.
Yang perlu kita hindari adalah memberikan sesuatu yang tidak mereka perlukan, dan hindari pemberian atau perencanaan program yang tidak memandirikan masyarakat dampingan kita. Selalu pikirkan exit plan untuk setiap bantuan kita.
Ingat apa yang dilakukan oleh setiap individu dalam sebuah organisasi akan berdampak pada organisasi tersebut dengan besaran yang mungkin tidak sama.. namun semua nya dan setiapnya berdampak..
maka analisa semua dampak tersebut untuk menghindari kemungkinan buruk dikemudian hari.
sebuah contoh kurangnya analisa dampak adalah kasus kecelakaan kereta api beberapa waktu lalu, saat kereta Agro menabrak kereta ekonomi senja utama.. PT KAI selaku induk perusahaan kedua kereta tersebut seharusnya melakukan analisa menyeluruh sebelum memberikan pernyataan pada media.
Kenyataan bahwa masinis kereta mengantuk perlu ditelusuri guna mencegah secara permanen kelalaian seperti ini terjadi dimasa datang. Mengapa masinis sampai mengantuk? Apa karena terlalu banyak lembur? apa dia kurang cukup istirahat, jika ya .. mengapa? apakah cuti masinis ini tidak cukup, atau tidak ada cuti, atau apa? mana saja yang menjadi pemicu kesalahan individu dan mana yang dipicu oleh kebijakan perusahaan?.. apakah ada tindakan perusahaan dalam mencegah kejadian ini terjadi, adakah semacam screening prosedur untuk menghindari masinis yang mengantuk beroperasi? Di Indonesia, rasanya sangat lebih mudah untuk melimpahkan kesalahan pada human error, tapi reason atau pemicu dari error itu tidak pernah dicari atau dicari tapi tidak diakui bahwa ternyata ke-error-an yang terjadi dipicu dan dimulai oleh kebijakan perusahaan atau institusi lainnya yang kurang bijak.. jadi grass root problem nya tidak selesai.. sehingga tinggal menunggu rumput liar lain yang tumbuh menjadi terlalu liar hingga akhirnya merusak tatanan taman yang indah..
personal opinion, October 2010
Stakeholder Mapping, analysis and planning
What is stakeholder? Who are they? what do we going to do with them, how do we engage them? Do we need to? why?
All these question are main question that we all asking when we need to develop strategy for our stakeholder engagement strategy which very useful tool to use as basic information developing our Sustainability strategy for let say five years ahead.. or even ten years forward.
I think, it was very smart thinking, that Indonesian Center for Sustainable Development or known as ICSD create three days training regarding an Effective Stakeholder Engagement for Sustainable Development, as tools to develop CSR strategy towards sustainable operation.
And lesson learn approach that the speaker and trainer used, provides a wide range of divers experiences from coal mining company, oil and gas company to plantation based company.
Not many company actually understand that approaches and stages.. although most big company has done it, by their consultant.. only few who hired their staff with this kind of knowledge., fortunately our company did.
Actually there are many template which could be use and easily found in google, such as below:
matrix of stakeholder identification
The one thing that summarize the stages of stakeholder mapping are: Identify your SH, analyze them, plan type of approach you will use to deal with them, then Engage.. with the strategy design earlier as your mapping guide you to.
During your identification, you will also need to identify level or ring of your SH, from one who is directly affected to one who influence your operation in international level..
The more accurate and complete information you have about your SH, then more guideline you have to develop your strategy based on your SH profile.
Always maintain all your SH, don't create a room for their jealousy among them which led into discrimination accusation.
for more complete template you may find it at below link
www.stakeholdermap.com
www.stakeholdermapping.comTeman-teman CSR
Untuk memudahkan pekerjaan kita dalam merencanakan program dan metode pendekatan yang akan kita laksanakan untuk setiap SH kita, maka sebaiknya kita melakukan stakeholder identification terlebih dahulu, membuat pemetaannya, menganalisa hingga kemudian merencanakan apa yang akan kita lakukan.
Sementara khusus untuk SH masyarakat, kita membutuhkan baseline information yang kemudian akan kita analisa potensi dan needs nya digabungkan dengan SH mapping kita untuk menentukan prioritas SH kita.
Yang perlu kita hindari adalah memberikan sesuatu yang tidak mereka perlukan, dan hindari pemberian atau perencanaan program yang tidak memandirikan masyarakat dampingan kita. Selalu pikirkan exit plan untuk setiap bantuan kita.
Ingat apa yang dilakukan oleh setiap individu dalam sebuah organisasi akan berdampak pada organisasi tersebut dengan besaran yang mungkin tidak sama.. namun semua nya dan setiapnya berdampak..
maka analisa semua dampak tersebut untuk menghindari kemungkinan buruk dikemudian hari.
sebuah contoh kurangnya analisa dampak adalah kasus kecelakaan kereta api beberapa waktu lalu, saat kereta Agro menabrak kereta ekonomi senja utama.. PT KAI selaku induk perusahaan kedua kereta tersebut seharusnya melakukan analisa menyeluruh sebelum memberikan pernyataan pada media.
Kenyataan bahwa masinis kereta mengantuk perlu ditelusuri guna mencegah secara permanen kelalaian seperti ini terjadi dimasa datang. Mengapa masinis sampai mengantuk? Apa karena terlalu banyak lembur? apa dia kurang cukup istirahat, jika ya .. mengapa? apakah cuti masinis ini tidak cukup, atau tidak ada cuti, atau apa? mana saja yang menjadi pemicu kesalahan individu dan mana yang dipicu oleh kebijakan perusahaan?.. apakah ada tindakan perusahaan dalam mencegah kejadian ini terjadi, adakah semacam screening prosedur untuk menghindari masinis yang mengantuk beroperasi? Di Indonesia, rasanya sangat lebih mudah untuk melimpahkan kesalahan pada human error, tapi reason atau pemicu dari error itu tidak pernah dicari atau dicari tapi tidak diakui bahwa ternyata ke-error-an yang terjadi dipicu dan dimulai oleh kebijakan perusahaan atau institusi lainnya yang kurang bijak.. jadi grass root problem nya tidak selesai.. sehingga tinggal menunggu rumput liar lain yang tumbuh menjadi terlalu liar hingga akhirnya merusak tatanan taman yang indah..
personal opinion, October 2010
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Update September 2010
Todays Update would be:
Newmont Included in Dow Jones Sustainability World Index for Fourth Consecutive Year
Posted: Sep 22, 2010 – 01:47 PM EST at http://www.csrwire.com/
DENVER, Sep. 22 /CSRwire/ - Newmont Mining Corporation (NYSE: NEM) ("Newmont" or "the Company") today announced that it was selected to be included in the prestigious Dow Jones Sustainability World Index (www.sustainability-index.com) for the fourth consecutive year. In 2007, Newmont became the first gold company included in the index. In addition, Newmont was selected for inclusion in the DJSI North America Index in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010.
"Demonstrating industry leadership in our environmental and social performance over the long-term is vital to the ongoing success of our business," said Richard O'Brien, Newmont's President and Chief Executive Officer. "To ensure Newmont remains sustainable, profitable and responsible we must strive to lead in safety, environmental stewardship and social responsibility."
DJSI World, Dow Jones' premier sustainability index, tracks the performance of 2,500 leading companies, worldwide. The index independently evaluates companies' long-term economic, environmental, and social performance, publicly identifying the top 10 percent of performers in areas of sustainability.
O'Brien went on to add, "I am especially proud of our employees whose ongoing commitment to sustainability honors our core values. Year after year, our employees consistently demonstrate leadership by delivering sustainable value and opportunity for our shareholders, employees and host communities."
Companies are selected based on a systematic assessment identifying the top sustainability leaders in 58 different industry groups. The methodology evaluates companies based on a variety of criteria, including transparency, corporate governance, risk and crisis management, environmental management and performance, stakeholder engagement, community development, energy management and climate change, biodiversity, human resources, and safety.
Earlier this year, Newmont was ranked 16th on Corporate Responsibility magazine's annual list of 100 Best Corporate Citizens. Newmont is the only mining company in the list's top 20, joining businesses such as Intel, Gap, IBM and Microsoft.
More information on Newmont's environmental and social performance can be found in the company's annual sustainability report, www.BeyondTheMine.com. The report is published as part of the company's ongoing obligations as a founding member of the International Council on Mining and Metals (www.icmm.com) and in accordance with its commitments under the United Nations' Global Compact (www.unglobalcompact.org) and the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights (www.voluntaryprinciples.org).
About Newmont
Founded in 1921 and publicly traded since 1925, Newmont (www.newmont.com) is one of the largest gold companies in the world. Headquartered in Colorado, the Company has approximately 35,000 employees and contractors, with the majority working at core operations in the United States, Australia, Peru, Indonesia and Ghana. Newmont is the only gold company listed in the S&P 500 index and in 2007 became the first gold company selected to be part of the Dow Jones Sustainability World Index. Newmont's industry leading performance is reflected through high standards in environmental management, health and safety for its employees and creating value and opportunity for host communities and shareholders.
taken from http://www.businessrespect.net/
Germany: Deutsche Telekom CEO in bribery investigation
Deutsche Telekom chief executive Rene Obermann and seven others are being investigated by the German authorities over allegations of bribery, according to the company.
The move focuses on activities in some of the company's businesses based in Macedonia and Montenegro, where bribes have allegedly been paid to influence regulators. Rene Obermann has rejected the suggestions of bribery as being false.
An investigation by the US authorities has been underway already for the last four years. It called upon Mr Obermann as a witness last year, and has to date made no charge that the chief executive was thought to have been directly involved.
Last month, the German authorities raided Mr Obermann's home - a move which the company labelled as 'disproportionate'.
Dated :15 Sep 2010
Russia: Microsoft tries to sidestep crackdowns on political groups
Microsoft has announced that it is instructing its Russian business not to take part in software piracy actions. The move follows criticism that the security services in Russia had been using alleged software piracy as an excuse to harrass and suppress opposition groups.
Raids against opposition groups have often been supported by private lawyers working from Microsoft, which has been more assertive in recent years over trying to defend its intellectual property rights. However, such raids have been noted to coincide with events being organised by the groups, and illegal software has rarely been discovered.
Previously, Microsoft had dismissed accusations, suggesting it was simply complying with local laws. The new policy, that the company would no longer support what it considered to be politically motivated actions, recognises that this has not been the case. In a statement on its blog, the company also said that it would offer legal aid to nonprofit groups that have been the target of software piracy actions.
Dated :13 Sep 2010
Apple suppliers in bribery charges
The two Apple suppliers named as having benefited from bribery allegedly received by its procurement executive Paul Devine have responded to charges. Devine has been accused by the company of having received more than $1m from Asian suppliers in return for confidential market information.
Taiwan firm Pegatron said that it has now suspended a manager that had been involved in the practices pending its own investigations.
South Korea's Cresyn has denied any wrongdoing, saying that it had signed a legal consultancy agreement with Paul Devine providing legal information about US market trends. However, Apple has said that the consultancy agreement included confidential information such as Apple product roadmaps and sales forecasts.
Devine is currently held in prison pending trial.
Dated :18 Aug 2010
Newmont Included in Dow Jones Sustainability World Index for Fourth Consecutive Year
Posted: Sep 22, 2010 – 01:47 PM EST at http://www.csrwire.com/
DENVER, Sep. 22 /CSRwire/ - Newmont Mining Corporation (NYSE: NEM) ("Newmont" or "the Company") today announced that it was selected to be included in the prestigious Dow Jones Sustainability World Index (www.sustainability-index.com) for the fourth consecutive year. In 2007, Newmont became the first gold company included in the index. In addition, Newmont was selected for inclusion in the DJSI North America Index in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010.
"Demonstrating industry leadership in our environmental and social performance over the long-term is vital to the ongoing success of our business," said Richard O'Brien, Newmont's President and Chief Executive Officer. "To ensure Newmont remains sustainable, profitable and responsible we must strive to lead in safety, environmental stewardship and social responsibility."
DJSI World, Dow Jones' premier sustainability index, tracks the performance of 2,500 leading companies, worldwide. The index independently evaluates companies' long-term economic, environmental, and social performance, publicly identifying the top 10 percent of performers in areas of sustainability.
O'Brien went on to add, "I am especially proud of our employees whose ongoing commitment to sustainability honors our core values. Year after year, our employees consistently demonstrate leadership by delivering sustainable value and opportunity for our shareholders, employees and host communities."
Companies are selected based on a systematic assessment identifying the top sustainability leaders in 58 different industry groups. The methodology evaluates companies based on a variety of criteria, including transparency, corporate governance, risk and crisis management, environmental management and performance, stakeholder engagement, community development, energy management and climate change, biodiversity, human resources, and safety.
Earlier this year, Newmont was ranked 16th on Corporate Responsibility magazine's annual list of 100 Best Corporate Citizens. Newmont is the only mining company in the list's top 20, joining businesses such as Intel, Gap, IBM and Microsoft.
More information on Newmont's environmental and social performance can be found in the company's annual sustainability report, www.BeyondTheMine.com. The report is published as part of the company's ongoing obligations as a founding member of the International Council on Mining and Metals (www.icmm.com) and in accordance with its commitments under the United Nations' Global Compact (www.unglobalcompact.org) and the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights (www.voluntaryprinciples.org).
About Newmont
Founded in 1921 and publicly traded since 1925, Newmont (www.newmont.com) is one of the largest gold companies in the world. Headquartered in Colorado, the Company has approximately 35,000 employees and contractors, with the majority working at core operations in the United States, Australia, Peru, Indonesia and Ghana. Newmont is the only gold company listed in the S&P 500 index and in 2007 became the first gold company selected to be part of the Dow Jones Sustainability World Index. Newmont's industry leading performance is reflected through high standards in environmental management, health and safety for its employees and creating value and opportunity for host communities and shareholders.
taken from http://www.businessrespect.net/
Germany: Deutsche Telekom CEO in bribery investigation
Deutsche Telekom chief executive Rene Obermann and seven others are being investigated by the German authorities over allegations of bribery, according to the company.
The move focuses on activities in some of the company's businesses based in Macedonia and Montenegro, where bribes have allegedly been paid to influence regulators. Rene Obermann has rejected the suggestions of bribery as being false.
An investigation by the US authorities has been underway already for the last four years. It called upon Mr Obermann as a witness last year, and has to date made no charge that the chief executive was thought to have been directly involved.
Last month, the German authorities raided Mr Obermann's home - a move which the company labelled as 'disproportionate'.
Dated :15 Sep 2010
Russia: Microsoft tries to sidestep crackdowns on political groups
Microsoft has announced that it is instructing its Russian business not to take part in software piracy actions. The move follows criticism that the security services in Russia had been using alleged software piracy as an excuse to harrass and suppress opposition groups.
Raids against opposition groups have often been supported by private lawyers working from Microsoft, which has been more assertive in recent years over trying to defend its intellectual property rights. However, such raids have been noted to coincide with events being organised by the groups, and illegal software has rarely been discovered.
Previously, Microsoft had dismissed accusations, suggesting it was simply complying with local laws. The new policy, that the company would no longer support what it considered to be politically motivated actions, recognises that this has not been the case. In a statement on its blog, the company also said that it would offer legal aid to nonprofit groups that have been the target of software piracy actions.
Dated :13 Sep 2010
Apple suppliers in bribery charges
The two Apple suppliers named as having benefited from bribery allegedly received by its procurement executive Paul Devine have responded to charges. Devine has been accused by the company of having received more than $1m from Asian suppliers in return for confidential market information.
Taiwan firm Pegatron said that it has now suspended a manager that had been involved in the practices pending its own investigations.
South Korea's Cresyn has denied any wrongdoing, saying that it had signed a legal consultancy agreement with Paul Devine providing legal information about US market trends. However, Apple has said that the consultancy agreement included confidential information such as Apple product roadmaps and sales forecasts.
Devine is currently held in prison pending trial.
Dated :18 Aug 2010
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
The case against CSR
Today's topic would be:
Reply to the Case Against CSR - The Latest VersionArticle by Mallen Baker
The Wall Street Journal recently carried a piece by Aneel Karnani, associate professor of strategy at the University of Michigan's Stephen M Ross School of Business. Karnani was the author some years ago of a thoughtful and trenchant critique of the 'Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid' work of CK Prahalad, which I wrote about at the time. Now he has turned his attention to an attack against corporate social responsibility generally.
Unlike his previous critique, the CSR arguments draw upon well-trod ground. The summary goes something like this.
* Executives owe a single duty in their jobs - to maximise returns for shareholders.
* Where the interests of company and society are aligned, then maximising profits can work to the benefit of society. But it isn't CSR.
* Where the interests of company and society are opposed, then executives have no business looking to the benefit of society, because it's against the interest of their shareholders.
* It is the job of governments to worry about society. They should introduce the laws, taxes and other incentives to make sure that companies can operate without having to worry about such things.
This line of argument is simply the most recent expression of the rationale that goes back to Milton Friedman. It has the illusion of being based on mathematical certainty - where there is no such thing - and carries a value judgement that we have a duty to question.
First, the maths. People that argue that the duty of CEOs is to maximise profits for shareholders imply that it is possible to know in advance how this is to be done. At the very least, they carry the implication that it is all about the cash - and any dilemma or problem can be resolved by calculating how it will impact the bottom line in the short term.
You would think that - post financial crisis, post BP oil spill - nobody would use such arguments with a straight face. But never underestimate the resilience of old ideas even in the face of new realities.
How does one make profits? By and large by providing goods and services that customers want and prefer, with the agreement of society. The best CEOs describe this task in terms of getting the right people and looking after them, finding the best products that meet customer needs in new ways, and doing so in a way that governments, their employees and customers feel good about in terms of the impact on society.
That is not the only way to make short term profits, of course. And that is the point. There is a choice.
If, as Karnani implies, there were no choice, it wouldn't matter. But the fact that you find successful companies today that are committed to social responsibility, and you find successful companies today that couldn't care less - apparently - shows that there is a choice about how profits are made.
Social responsibility is not, in itself, a guarantee of profits. Lack of concerns for the impact of your operations is hardly one either.
Badly executed, either approach can destroy value.
You can take this as an 'enlightened self interest' argument if you like. Ironically, Karnani quotes auto makers as an example where business interest and social welfare have been aligned. "Auto makers have profited from responding to consumer demand for more fuel-efficient vehicles, a plus for the environment".
Well, that's not quite how it happened.
Auto makers in the US for years fended off legislation to improve energy efficiency standards, and were supported in so doing because of customer indifference to fuel efficiency during a time of cheap oil.
Companies in other countries - notably Japan - took a different approach. Rather than ONLY asking 'what does the customer want today?' - which they did, of course - they also asked where society, and the science of climate change, was taking us into the future. They created the vehicles that would begin to meet those needs before the customer had actually got there.
Had US companies had more of a care to the environmental impact of the vehicles they might have survived in better shape. As it is, they went to the brink.
The fact is that businesses only do well so long as they provide things that people want. Those that see opportunities to make their products serve their customers well and benefit society will generally do well if they execute effectively. Profit maximisation as a strategy has been historically poor in actually delivering profit. Ask the banks.
So much for the maths. The other aspect is to do with values.
The argument that says that the role of the executive is to maximise profits regardless of the consequences depends upon a view of business as standing apart from society. This is just not true, and neither should it be.
Businesses will do well in a healthy society, with a thriving economy and a robust natural environment. These are life support systems for the business, they are not unnecessary distractions. Few businesses will thrive as little islands of prosperity alone in a sea of deprivation.
This is why, through history, businesses have often supported education. They understood easily and intuitively that if people were generally better educated, it would pay dividends for them when they were recruiting into the workforce.
Such things, according to Karnani, are best left to governments. Even, he says, when those governments are weak or corrupt.
So, on that basis, those companies like Anglo American who gave AIDS support to their workforce, their families and local communities at a time when the South African government was officially in denial about the disease - these companies were going beyond their brief.
And when Hurricane Katrina ripped through New Orleans, Wal-Mart should have sat on its hands and nursed its profits, not mobilised its logistical network to the benefit of the country on the basis that it had a better position to do so than did the federal government.
Such a position is to deny that companies are a part of society, and that therefore they have no role as corporate citizens. Without being silly about it, it is time to challenge the absence of values behind such a position. We create our own reality. If we want businesses that have values, we can have that. It is our choice, as a society. The law of 'profit maximisation' is not as immutable as the laws of physics.
It may not be the primary role of a business to alleviate poverty, as Karnani says, but it benefits business if poverty is minimised. Henry Ford understood this when he paid his workers more, seeing the logic that this would make them able to afford to buy his cars.
Of course, that led to the first shareholders' action against Ford in 1919 that disputed his right to pay workers more, because this reduced profits. The case (Dodge vs Ford) was won - and serves as the origin of the logic over profit maximisation in the first place.
I have seen no shareholders attacks on, for instance, Marks & Spencer for adopting a highly ambitious 'Plan A' programme prompted by climate change. The company's board reviewed Al Gore's presentation on An Inconvenient Truth, and came to the conclusion that business in the next decades would have to evolve radically to meet the new demands that would emerge from our fast-changing world.
On the one hand, you could say they went far beyond their brief. But they have found a way to make real progress whilst continuing to make profits - indeed many of the things they do add to the profits. But that was not clear before they took the commitment. The commitment came first. They found the way to make it work to the benefit of the business.
That is what it means to make a choice. That is corporate social responsibility.
Reply to the Case Against CSR - The Latest VersionArticle by Mallen Baker
The Wall Street Journal recently carried a piece by Aneel Karnani, associate professor of strategy at the University of Michigan's Stephen M Ross School of Business. Karnani was the author some years ago of a thoughtful and trenchant critique of the 'Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid' work of CK Prahalad, which I wrote about at the time. Now he has turned his attention to an attack against corporate social responsibility generally.
Unlike his previous critique, the CSR arguments draw upon well-trod ground. The summary goes something like this.
* Executives owe a single duty in their jobs - to maximise returns for shareholders.
* Where the interests of company and society are aligned, then maximising profits can work to the benefit of society. But it isn't CSR.
* Where the interests of company and society are opposed, then executives have no business looking to the benefit of society, because it's against the interest of their shareholders.
* It is the job of governments to worry about society. They should introduce the laws, taxes and other incentives to make sure that companies can operate without having to worry about such things.
This line of argument is simply the most recent expression of the rationale that goes back to Milton Friedman. It has the illusion of being based on mathematical certainty - where there is no such thing - and carries a value judgement that we have a duty to question.
First, the maths. People that argue that the duty of CEOs is to maximise profits for shareholders imply that it is possible to know in advance how this is to be done. At the very least, they carry the implication that it is all about the cash - and any dilemma or problem can be resolved by calculating how it will impact the bottom line in the short term.
You would think that - post financial crisis, post BP oil spill - nobody would use such arguments with a straight face. But never underestimate the resilience of old ideas even in the face of new realities.
How does one make profits? By and large by providing goods and services that customers want and prefer, with the agreement of society. The best CEOs describe this task in terms of getting the right people and looking after them, finding the best products that meet customer needs in new ways, and doing so in a way that governments, their employees and customers feel good about in terms of the impact on society.
That is not the only way to make short term profits, of course. And that is the point. There is a choice.
If, as Karnani implies, there were no choice, it wouldn't matter. But the fact that you find successful companies today that are committed to social responsibility, and you find successful companies today that couldn't care less - apparently - shows that there is a choice about how profits are made.
Social responsibility is not, in itself, a guarantee of profits. Lack of concerns for the impact of your operations is hardly one either.
Badly executed, either approach can destroy value.
You can take this as an 'enlightened self interest' argument if you like. Ironically, Karnani quotes auto makers as an example where business interest and social welfare have been aligned. "Auto makers have profited from responding to consumer demand for more fuel-efficient vehicles, a plus for the environment".
Well, that's not quite how it happened.
Auto makers in the US for years fended off legislation to improve energy efficiency standards, and were supported in so doing because of customer indifference to fuel efficiency during a time of cheap oil.
Companies in other countries - notably Japan - took a different approach. Rather than ONLY asking 'what does the customer want today?' - which they did, of course - they also asked where society, and the science of climate change, was taking us into the future. They created the vehicles that would begin to meet those needs before the customer had actually got there.
Had US companies had more of a care to the environmental impact of the vehicles they might have survived in better shape. As it is, they went to the brink.
The fact is that businesses only do well so long as they provide things that people want. Those that see opportunities to make their products serve their customers well and benefit society will generally do well if they execute effectively. Profit maximisation as a strategy has been historically poor in actually delivering profit. Ask the banks.
So much for the maths. The other aspect is to do with values.
The argument that says that the role of the executive is to maximise profits regardless of the consequences depends upon a view of business as standing apart from society. This is just not true, and neither should it be.
Businesses will do well in a healthy society, with a thriving economy and a robust natural environment. These are life support systems for the business, they are not unnecessary distractions. Few businesses will thrive as little islands of prosperity alone in a sea of deprivation.
This is why, through history, businesses have often supported education. They understood easily and intuitively that if people were generally better educated, it would pay dividends for them when they were recruiting into the workforce.
Such things, according to Karnani, are best left to governments. Even, he says, when those governments are weak or corrupt.
So, on that basis, those companies like Anglo American who gave AIDS support to their workforce, their families and local communities at a time when the South African government was officially in denial about the disease - these companies were going beyond their brief.
And when Hurricane Katrina ripped through New Orleans, Wal-Mart should have sat on its hands and nursed its profits, not mobilised its logistical network to the benefit of the country on the basis that it had a better position to do so than did the federal government.
Such a position is to deny that companies are a part of society, and that therefore they have no role as corporate citizens. Without being silly about it, it is time to challenge the absence of values behind such a position. We create our own reality. If we want businesses that have values, we can have that. It is our choice, as a society. The law of 'profit maximisation' is not as immutable as the laws of physics.
It may not be the primary role of a business to alleviate poverty, as Karnani says, but it benefits business if poverty is minimised. Henry Ford understood this when he paid his workers more, seeing the logic that this would make them able to afford to buy his cars.
Of course, that led to the first shareholders' action against Ford in 1919 that disputed his right to pay workers more, because this reduced profits. The case (Dodge vs Ford) was won - and serves as the origin of the logic over profit maximisation in the first place.
I have seen no shareholders attacks on, for instance, Marks & Spencer for adopting a highly ambitious 'Plan A' programme prompted by climate change. The company's board reviewed Al Gore's presentation on An Inconvenient Truth, and came to the conclusion that business in the next decades would have to evolve radically to meet the new demands that would emerge from our fast-changing world.
On the one hand, you could say they went far beyond their brief. But they have found a way to make real progress whilst continuing to make profits - indeed many of the things they do add to the profits. But that was not clear before they took the commitment. The commitment came first. They found the way to make it work to the benefit of the business.
That is what it means to make a choice. That is corporate social responsibility.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Community Social Responsibility
Mungkin belum banyak orang sadari bahwa masyarakat Indonesia mungkin sudah lebih dahulu mengembangan praktek-praktek tanggung jawab sosialnya, atau yang saya sebut Community Social Responsibility.
Jika saya ingat, rasanya sejak saya masih balita atau bahkan jauh sebelumnya, saya sudah sering mendengar kegiatan-kegiatan sosial yang didedikasikan untuk membantu masyarakat sekitarnya atau bahkan masyarakat yang mereka tidak kenal namun dianggap membutuhkan seperti korban bencana alam, sudah banyak orang yang mengatasnamakan komunitas tertentu menerapkan dan melaksanakan CSR mereka.
Hal ini mungkin terjadi karena secara culture, masyarakat Indonesia adalah masyarakat yang berkoloni atau mengelompok. Mulai dari yang atas dasar kesamaan kepercayaan/agama seperti kelompok pengajian atau komunitas gereja, kesamaan hobby seperti komunitas sepeda tua/ motor gede, kesamaan aspirasi politik, kesamaan lokasi rumah seperti komunitas sunda kelapa, atau karang taruna dan masih banyak contoh lainnya.
Dengan berkembangnya teknologi komunitas-komunitas seperti ini pun semakin tumbuh subur mulai dari blogger group sehat yang akhirnya membela prita mulyasari melawan Omni, kemudian komunitas facebookers yang membela kasus bibit dan chandra beberapa waktu lalu. Dan masih banyak lagi komunitas-komunitas baru yang tumbuh dan berkembang pesat dengan berbagai dasar persamaan sebagai alasan pertemanan dan jaringan mereka.
Jika kita cermati, banyak dari komunitas-komunitas ini yang kemudian memiliki rasa tanggung jawab sosial yang cukup tinggi kepada masyarakat sekitarnya. Sebagian dari mereka bahkan sudah memiliki target penerima manfaat yang jelas dan terstruktur.
Sebuah contoh di perumahan kami, di bilangan kemang pratama bekasi, dengan komunitas masjid dan komunitas gereja mereka. Komunitas masjid Baitul Jihad kemang pratama 2, memiliki program tanggung jawab sosial (paling tidak ini analisa saya) dengan menyediakan sekolah untuk anak-anak kampung di sekitar perumahan mereka mulai dari jenjang TK-SD, dimana anak-anak diberikan pendidikan tidak hanya soal agama tetapi juga sesuai kurikulum nasional. Pihak masjid juga menyediakan balai pengobatan gratis bagi siapa saja yang mau mengecek kesehatan mereka di masjid.
Pada hari-hari tertentu pihak masjid mengadakan seminar mengenai isu-isu penting seputar masalah rumah tangga, pendidikan anak hingga isu umum lainnya.
Kegiatan mereka telah mampu memberi dampak yang cukup positif dari masyarakat sekitar perumahan yang mungkin menganggap penghuni kemang pratama adalah orang-orang yang mampu dan tidak mau bergaul dengan mereka. Apa yang dilakukan oleh komunitas masjid telah menjembatani kesenjangan dan komunikasi antara para pihak yang berkepentingan.
Sama halnya dengan komunitas gereja, pada hari-hari tertentu mereka mengadakan pengobatan gratis, donor darah, dan kegiatan pemberdayaan lain yang cukup terlihat dampak positifnya bagi masyarakat kampung sekitar perumahan.
Di beberapa perusahaan, yang memiliki komunitas perempuan, kegiatan sosial juga banyak dilakukan mulai dari baksos ke panti asuhan, mengumpulkan sumbangan saat terjadi bencana alam hingga turun ke lokasi bencana dan memberikan pelatihan pada para ibu yang saat itu mengalami trauma psikis dengan keterampilan-keterampilan hidup yang mampu memberdayakan mereka setelah bencana usai.
Di semarang, ada sekelompok ibu-ibu pengajian yang jauh-jauh pergi ke jogja pada saat terjadi gempa dan memberikan sumbangan kebutuhan wanita pada ibu-ibu dan remaja putri disana. Mereka juga mengajak mereka mengaji untuk menguatkan hati menghadapi cobaan hidup dan memberikan pelatihan keterampilan seperti; bekal untuk membuka salon.
Komunitas remaja atau mahasiswa peduli, juga banyak yang melakukan rentetan kegiatan sosial sebagai perwujudan tanggung jawab sosial mereka terhadap lingkungannya.
Ada yang mendedikasikan diri mengajarkan anak-anak jalanan, mendirikan sekolah untuk anak pemulung, memberikan keterampilan hidup seperti mendaur ulang limbah plastik, menjahit dan lain-lain.
Semua contoh tadi membuktikan bahwa di Indonesia CSR sudah lama dan mendarah daging namun dalam bentuk yang berbeda, bukan Corporate yang menjadi penggeraknya, tetapi Community.
Analisa saya yang saya yakin masih perlu diperdalam dengan survey dan riset dari berbagai sisi, memang masih memiliki kekurangan dan keterbatasan yang mungkin dapat membantu kita, praktisi CSR memahami dengan lebih baik mengenai budaya CSR di Indonesia.
Sehingga memudahkan kita dalam merancang dan mempersiapkan strategi dan kerangka kerja untuk komunitas kita atau untuk perusahaan kita.
Di beberapa perusahaan yang memiliki komunitas atas produknya atau komunitas internal atas aktifitas non office mereka, terbukti lebih solid dan lebih mudah menerapkan atau melaksanakan program sosial mereka.
Perusahaan seperti GE dan SCB membentuk komunitas sukarelawan mereka sendiri yang terdiri dari karyawan mulai dari level bawah hingga atas, yang mereka dedikasikan untuk terjun melakukan berbagai kegiatan sosial.
Yamaha dengan komunitas bikers nya, juga sering kali mengadakan aktifitas sosial yang melibatkan masyarakat umum.
Belajar dari contoh-contoh tersebut saya merasa, pendekatan Community Social Responsibility lebih cocok dikembangkan di Indonesia dibandingkan Corporate Social Responsibility.
Secara individu, masyarakat Indonesia lebih mudah disentuh hati nuraninya dibandingkan secara business atau jabatan.
Ini pendapat saya, yang saya harap dapat saya perkuat dengan riset yang lebih dalam lagi.
Desember 1009
Jika saya ingat, rasanya sejak saya masih balita atau bahkan jauh sebelumnya, saya sudah sering mendengar kegiatan-kegiatan sosial yang didedikasikan untuk membantu masyarakat sekitarnya atau bahkan masyarakat yang mereka tidak kenal namun dianggap membutuhkan seperti korban bencana alam, sudah banyak orang yang mengatasnamakan komunitas tertentu menerapkan dan melaksanakan CSR mereka.
Hal ini mungkin terjadi karena secara culture, masyarakat Indonesia adalah masyarakat yang berkoloni atau mengelompok. Mulai dari yang atas dasar kesamaan kepercayaan/agama seperti kelompok pengajian atau komunitas gereja, kesamaan hobby seperti komunitas sepeda tua/ motor gede, kesamaan aspirasi politik, kesamaan lokasi rumah seperti komunitas sunda kelapa, atau karang taruna dan masih banyak contoh lainnya.
Dengan berkembangnya teknologi komunitas-komunitas seperti ini pun semakin tumbuh subur mulai dari blogger group sehat yang akhirnya membela prita mulyasari melawan Omni, kemudian komunitas facebookers yang membela kasus bibit dan chandra beberapa waktu lalu. Dan masih banyak lagi komunitas-komunitas baru yang tumbuh dan berkembang pesat dengan berbagai dasar persamaan sebagai alasan pertemanan dan jaringan mereka.
Jika kita cermati, banyak dari komunitas-komunitas ini yang kemudian memiliki rasa tanggung jawab sosial yang cukup tinggi kepada masyarakat sekitarnya. Sebagian dari mereka bahkan sudah memiliki target penerima manfaat yang jelas dan terstruktur.
Sebuah contoh di perumahan kami, di bilangan kemang pratama bekasi, dengan komunitas masjid dan komunitas gereja mereka. Komunitas masjid Baitul Jihad kemang pratama 2, memiliki program tanggung jawab sosial (paling tidak ini analisa saya) dengan menyediakan sekolah untuk anak-anak kampung di sekitar perumahan mereka mulai dari jenjang TK-SD, dimana anak-anak diberikan pendidikan tidak hanya soal agama tetapi juga sesuai kurikulum nasional. Pihak masjid juga menyediakan balai pengobatan gratis bagi siapa saja yang mau mengecek kesehatan mereka di masjid.
Pada hari-hari tertentu pihak masjid mengadakan seminar mengenai isu-isu penting seputar masalah rumah tangga, pendidikan anak hingga isu umum lainnya.
Kegiatan mereka telah mampu memberi dampak yang cukup positif dari masyarakat sekitar perumahan yang mungkin menganggap penghuni kemang pratama adalah orang-orang yang mampu dan tidak mau bergaul dengan mereka. Apa yang dilakukan oleh komunitas masjid telah menjembatani kesenjangan dan komunikasi antara para pihak yang berkepentingan.
Sama halnya dengan komunitas gereja, pada hari-hari tertentu mereka mengadakan pengobatan gratis, donor darah, dan kegiatan pemberdayaan lain yang cukup terlihat dampak positifnya bagi masyarakat kampung sekitar perumahan.
Di beberapa perusahaan, yang memiliki komunitas perempuan, kegiatan sosial juga banyak dilakukan mulai dari baksos ke panti asuhan, mengumpulkan sumbangan saat terjadi bencana alam hingga turun ke lokasi bencana dan memberikan pelatihan pada para ibu yang saat itu mengalami trauma psikis dengan keterampilan-keterampilan hidup yang mampu memberdayakan mereka setelah bencana usai.
Di semarang, ada sekelompok ibu-ibu pengajian yang jauh-jauh pergi ke jogja pada saat terjadi gempa dan memberikan sumbangan kebutuhan wanita pada ibu-ibu dan remaja putri disana. Mereka juga mengajak mereka mengaji untuk menguatkan hati menghadapi cobaan hidup dan memberikan pelatihan keterampilan seperti; bekal untuk membuka salon.
Komunitas remaja atau mahasiswa peduli, juga banyak yang melakukan rentetan kegiatan sosial sebagai perwujudan tanggung jawab sosial mereka terhadap lingkungannya.
Ada yang mendedikasikan diri mengajarkan anak-anak jalanan, mendirikan sekolah untuk anak pemulung, memberikan keterampilan hidup seperti mendaur ulang limbah plastik, menjahit dan lain-lain.
Semua contoh tadi membuktikan bahwa di Indonesia CSR sudah lama dan mendarah daging namun dalam bentuk yang berbeda, bukan Corporate yang menjadi penggeraknya, tetapi Community.
Analisa saya yang saya yakin masih perlu diperdalam dengan survey dan riset dari berbagai sisi, memang masih memiliki kekurangan dan keterbatasan yang mungkin dapat membantu kita, praktisi CSR memahami dengan lebih baik mengenai budaya CSR di Indonesia.
Sehingga memudahkan kita dalam merancang dan mempersiapkan strategi dan kerangka kerja untuk komunitas kita atau untuk perusahaan kita.
Di beberapa perusahaan yang memiliki komunitas atas produknya atau komunitas internal atas aktifitas non office mereka, terbukti lebih solid dan lebih mudah menerapkan atau melaksanakan program sosial mereka.
Perusahaan seperti GE dan SCB membentuk komunitas sukarelawan mereka sendiri yang terdiri dari karyawan mulai dari level bawah hingga atas, yang mereka dedikasikan untuk terjun melakukan berbagai kegiatan sosial.
Yamaha dengan komunitas bikers nya, juga sering kali mengadakan aktifitas sosial yang melibatkan masyarakat umum.
Belajar dari contoh-contoh tersebut saya merasa, pendekatan Community Social Responsibility lebih cocok dikembangkan di Indonesia dibandingkan Corporate Social Responsibility.
Secara individu, masyarakat Indonesia lebih mudah disentuh hati nuraninya dibandingkan secara business atau jabatan.
Ini pendapat saya, yang saya harap dapat saya perkuat dengan riset yang lebih dalam lagi.
Desember 1009
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Sebuah Analisa
Analisa terhadap Implementasi CSR di Indonesia
Jurnal sosioteknologi Edisi 12 tahun 6, Desember 2007 oleh Chairil N.Siregar menuliskan bahwa dalam perjalannya CSR banyak menghadapi kendala-kendala yang diantaranya;
a. Program CSR belum tersosialisasikan dengan baik di masyarakat
b. Masih terjadi perbedaan pandangan antara institusi-intsitusi pemerintah mengenai CSR berdasarkan UU PT tahun 74 yang baru.
c. Belum adanya aturan jelas dalam pelaksanaan CSR di kalangan perusahaan
Menanggapi identifikasi kendala a dan b, berbagai departemen yang terkait dengan pelaksanaan CSR di Indonesia telah berusaha untuk menyamakan persepsi mereka. Hal ini dapat kita cermati melalui berbagai seminar yang mereka adakan bekerjasama dengan pihak LSM, Perguruan Tinggi dan Swasta. Beberapa diantaranya bahkan memiliki jaringan atau forum CSR sendiri. Seperti Menkokesra, yang setiap tahun berusaha mensosialisasikan kepada masyarakat umum mengenai trend terbaru konsep dan pelaksanaan CSR oleh praktisi Swasta, LSM dan PT.
Sepatutnya kita memberikan dukungan positif dan terus menerus memberi masukan, ide serta terobosan-terobosan baru kepada pemerintah dan masyarakat umum mengenai konsep, strategi dan pelaksanaan terbaik program CSR yang lebih mengacu pada pemberdayaan dan mulai meninggalkan konsep charity yang terbukti tidak berkelanjutan dan kurang mendidik.
Untuk kendala c, kita patut bersyukur bahwa beberapa tahun belakangan ini konsep standarisasi pelaksanaan CSR mulai bermunculan. Beberapa diantaranya bahkan cukup detil mengatur bagaimana CSR harus dilaksanakan dan didokumentasikan. Ada SA 9000, ISO 26000 untuk standarisasi manajemen CSR, sementara itu GRI (Global Report Initiative) lebih mengatur masalah standarisasi pelaporan secara internasional yang lebih dikenal dengan Sustainability Report dimana ada lebih dari 70-an kriteria yang dipertanyakan. Pemerintah Indonesia pun telah mengeluarkan sistem standarisasi sendiri yang mereka sebut PROPER dengan penetapan level tanggung jawab perusahaan yang terepresentasi dalam warna mulai dari hitam hingga hijau.
Untuk itu, sekarang sebenarnya tidak sulit mendapatkan referensi CSR mulai dari konsep, strategi pengelolaan, pembuatan program hingga penyusunan indikator keberhasilannya, beragam CSR forum dan reseach telah menyediakan semua hal tersebut. Bahkan beberapa kantor consultant yang dahulu mungkin hanya melayani management, marketing, branding hingga customer service mulai melirik bisnis baru yaitu menyediakan layanan konsultasi strategi CSR untuk pelanggannya.
Apapun konsep yang digunakan, tidak akan efektif dilaksanakan jika pada saat penyusunan program perusahaan tidak berusaha melakukan survey kebutuhan program terhadap target penerima manfaatnya terlebih dahulu.
Beberapa perusahaan sudah mulai melakukan pendekatan CSR dengan melaksanakan baseline survey terhadap target masyarakat yang menjadi stakeholder perusahaan, kemudian needs assessment analysis berdasarkan baseline survey tadi.
Baseline survey dibutuhkan oleh perusahaan dengan komunitas masyarakat penerima manfaat tetap seperti perusahaan perkebunan, pertambangan, miyak/gas dan pabrik. Dimana aktifitas usaha mereka berdampak langsung pada kondisi masyarakat sekitarnya.
Baseline survey memberi cara bagi perusahaan untuk menemukan indikator dasar masyarakat sekitarnya, yang nantinya ia bantu dan berdayakan melalui program-program sesuai arahan visi misi perusahaan. Hanya dengan mengukur dan menganalisa indikator-indikator yang telah ditentukan tadi, pihak manajemen mendapatkan persentase perubahan aktual atas program yang mereka laksanakan.
Sebagai contoh; jika awal indikator pendidikan masyarakat setempat adalah tingkat buta huruf yang tinggi, maka program pendidikan yang mereka lakukan sebaiknya mampu menurunkan angka atau jumlah masyarakat buta huruf itu tadi sehingga sekian persen (tergantung target perusahaan masing-masing).
Dengan demikian, pihak manajemen akan lebih mudah membuat analisa keberhasilan program dimana manfaatnya dapat langsung terbaca oleh pihak luar, selain itu program tadi dapat menurunkan budget rekruitmen karena perusahaan bisa mengambil calon tenaga kerja lokal lebih tinggi dari sebelumnya.
Selain dari baseline survey dan Needs Assessment Analysis, perusahan juga perlu melakukan social impact assessment yang mengukur tingkat kepuasan penerima manfaat (dalam hal ini masyarakat) untuk memahami apakah program yang dianggap penting dan baik untuk mereka juga dianggap sama pentingnya. Dan mengukur sejauh mana image building yang dilakukan perusahaan berhasil.
Sebenarnya banyak cara yang bisa dilakukan untuk mengukur keberhasilan pelaksanaan CSR sebuah perusahaan. Salah satunya adalah jika perusahaan tersebut adalah perusahaan yang memiliki produk yang dijual. Perusahaan bisa mengambil data awal market share mereka sebelum program CSR mereka laksanakan. Kemudian setelah itu membandingkan market share mereka setelah program CSR mereka laksanakan. Apakah naik atau turun.
Bisa juga mengukur seberapa jauh masyarakat mengenal perusahaan tersebut, lagi-lagi melalui survey langsung. Bisa lewat telpon atau face-to-face, perusahaan bisa mengukur perubahan tingkat image building mereka dimata masyarakat sebelum dan sesudah CSR dilaksanakan.
Banyak referensi-referensi dan metode lain yang bisa kita akses melalui internet untuk membantu kita melaksanakan program CSR kita. Beberapa situs seperti business respect bahkan menyediakan analisa pembelajaran atas kasus tanggung jawab sosial beberapa perusahaan terkemuka dan mendunia.
Sekian dulu sharing nya dari saya, mohon maaf atas kekurangan atau kekeliruan yang saya tuliskan. Monggo silahkan email saya atau komentari jika memang Anda tertarik untuk berdiskusi lebih lanjut.
Desember 2009
Jurnal sosioteknologi Edisi 12 tahun 6, Desember 2007 oleh Chairil N.Siregar menuliskan bahwa dalam perjalannya CSR banyak menghadapi kendala-kendala yang diantaranya;
a. Program CSR belum tersosialisasikan dengan baik di masyarakat
b. Masih terjadi perbedaan pandangan antara institusi-intsitusi pemerintah mengenai CSR berdasarkan UU PT tahun 74 yang baru.
c. Belum adanya aturan jelas dalam pelaksanaan CSR di kalangan perusahaan
Menanggapi identifikasi kendala a dan b, berbagai departemen yang terkait dengan pelaksanaan CSR di Indonesia telah berusaha untuk menyamakan persepsi mereka. Hal ini dapat kita cermati melalui berbagai seminar yang mereka adakan bekerjasama dengan pihak LSM, Perguruan Tinggi dan Swasta. Beberapa diantaranya bahkan memiliki jaringan atau forum CSR sendiri. Seperti Menkokesra, yang setiap tahun berusaha mensosialisasikan kepada masyarakat umum mengenai trend terbaru konsep dan pelaksanaan CSR oleh praktisi Swasta, LSM dan PT.
Sepatutnya kita memberikan dukungan positif dan terus menerus memberi masukan, ide serta terobosan-terobosan baru kepada pemerintah dan masyarakat umum mengenai konsep, strategi dan pelaksanaan terbaik program CSR yang lebih mengacu pada pemberdayaan dan mulai meninggalkan konsep charity yang terbukti tidak berkelanjutan dan kurang mendidik.
Untuk kendala c, kita patut bersyukur bahwa beberapa tahun belakangan ini konsep standarisasi pelaksanaan CSR mulai bermunculan. Beberapa diantaranya bahkan cukup detil mengatur bagaimana CSR harus dilaksanakan dan didokumentasikan. Ada SA 9000, ISO 26000 untuk standarisasi manajemen CSR, sementara itu GRI (Global Report Initiative) lebih mengatur masalah standarisasi pelaporan secara internasional yang lebih dikenal dengan Sustainability Report dimana ada lebih dari 70-an kriteria yang dipertanyakan. Pemerintah Indonesia pun telah mengeluarkan sistem standarisasi sendiri yang mereka sebut PROPER dengan penetapan level tanggung jawab perusahaan yang terepresentasi dalam warna mulai dari hitam hingga hijau.
Untuk itu, sekarang sebenarnya tidak sulit mendapatkan referensi CSR mulai dari konsep, strategi pengelolaan, pembuatan program hingga penyusunan indikator keberhasilannya, beragam CSR forum dan reseach telah menyediakan semua hal tersebut. Bahkan beberapa kantor consultant yang dahulu mungkin hanya melayani management, marketing, branding hingga customer service mulai melirik bisnis baru yaitu menyediakan layanan konsultasi strategi CSR untuk pelanggannya.
Apapun konsep yang digunakan, tidak akan efektif dilaksanakan jika pada saat penyusunan program perusahaan tidak berusaha melakukan survey kebutuhan program terhadap target penerima manfaatnya terlebih dahulu.
Beberapa perusahaan sudah mulai melakukan pendekatan CSR dengan melaksanakan baseline survey terhadap target masyarakat yang menjadi stakeholder perusahaan, kemudian needs assessment analysis berdasarkan baseline survey tadi.
Baseline survey dibutuhkan oleh perusahaan dengan komunitas masyarakat penerima manfaat tetap seperti perusahaan perkebunan, pertambangan, miyak/gas dan pabrik. Dimana aktifitas usaha mereka berdampak langsung pada kondisi masyarakat sekitarnya.
Baseline survey memberi cara bagi perusahaan untuk menemukan indikator dasar masyarakat sekitarnya, yang nantinya ia bantu dan berdayakan melalui program-program sesuai arahan visi misi perusahaan. Hanya dengan mengukur dan menganalisa indikator-indikator yang telah ditentukan tadi, pihak manajemen mendapatkan persentase perubahan aktual atas program yang mereka laksanakan.
Sebagai contoh; jika awal indikator pendidikan masyarakat setempat adalah tingkat buta huruf yang tinggi, maka program pendidikan yang mereka lakukan sebaiknya mampu menurunkan angka atau jumlah masyarakat buta huruf itu tadi sehingga sekian persen (tergantung target perusahaan masing-masing).
Dengan demikian, pihak manajemen akan lebih mudah membuat analisa keberhasilan program dimana manfaatnya dapat langsung terbaca oleh pihak luar, selain itu program tadi dapat menurunkan budget rekruitmen karena perusahaan bisa mengambil calon tenaga kerja lokal lebih tinggi dari sebelumnya.
Selain dari baseline survey dan Needs Assessment Analysis, perusahan juga perlu melakukan social impact assessment yang mengukur tingkat kepuasan penerima manfaat (dalam hal ini masyarakat) untuk memahami apakah program yang dianggap penting dan baik untuk mereka juga dianggap sama pentingnya. Dan mengukur sejauh mana image building yang dilakukan perusahaan berhasil.
Sebenarnya banyak cara yang bisa dilakukan untuk mengukur keberhasilan pelaksanaan CSR sebuah perusahaan. Salah satunya adalah jika perusahaan tersebut adalah perusahaan yang memiliki produk yang dijual. Perusahaan bisa mengambil data awal market share mereka sebelum program CSR mereka laksanakan. Kemudian setelah itu membandingkan market share mereka setelah program CSR mereka laksanakan. Apakah naik atau turun.
Bisa juga mengukur seberapa jauh masyarakat mengenal perusahaan tersebut, lagi-lagi melalui survey langsung. Bisa lewat telpon atau face-to-face, perusahaan bisa mengukur perubahan tingkat image building mereka dimata masyarakat sebelum dan sesudah CSR dilaksanakan.
Banyak referensi-referensi dan metode lain yang bisa kita akses melalui internet untuk membantu kita melaksanakan program CSR kita. Beberapa situs seperti business respect bahkan menyediakan analisa pembelajaran atas kasus tanggung jawab sosial beberapa perusahaan terkemuka dan mendunia.
Sekian dulu sharing nya dari saya, mohon maaf atas kekurangan atau kekeliruan yang saya tuliskan. Monggo silahkan email saya atau komentari jika memang Anda tertarik untuk berdiskusi lebih lanjut.
Desember 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
