Philanthropy

Last week the Financial Times published an article about how corporations and non-profits can work together productively. The relationship is probably always going to be an awkward one, especially for NGOs that don’t want their corporate partners to make any money off the arrangement. The FT is particularly concerned with the division of intellectual property rights for innovations that come out of development partnerships. They list several models, but admit that this is an area that requires more work.

CSRwire is a site that covers pretty much everything to do with corporate social responsibility. It tends to take a pro-business slant on the issue, but also contains a lot of useful information. Interested in the CSR profile of Coke vs. Pepsi, CSRwire is a good place to start.

They’ve just added a multimedia section that they call Video, Commentary, and Research (VCR). So far it has a few videos and audio files, as well as a lot of information about VCR itself, but should be collecting more. They also put out a press release on VCR.

This nice overview of CSR begins with an illustrative short anecdote that shows how “creative capitalism” has been around for a while.

“Like many people in Guatemala, Dona Blanca grows crops which are exported to companies in North America and Europe. But unlike most of them, she is paid fairly for her work.

That’s because Dona grows aloe vera for The Body Shop - a leader in corporate social responsibility. The money she makes allows her to send her daughter to school, one of 200 funded by the UK-based natural beauty products company.”

Then, just to demonstrate the breadth of sources that Google Alerts can turn up, I saw this article in Furniture Style magazine. It quotes research showing that consumers really do prefer to buy from companies that aren’t evil. Good to know.

Here’s a pro-Gates perspective in the Herald Sun, an Australian morning tabloid owned by News Corp.

A study has shown that there is only a small correlation between corporate social responsibility practices and profitability. Particularly scandalous corporate behavior brings poor profits, though. The study authors interpret (and admit they are being cynical with this) that it pays to be good, but not too good. Put another way, profit should not be the reason for socially responsible activities.