Executive Interviews: Interview with Michael Hopkins on Corporate Social Responsibility
September 2007 - By Dr. Nagendra V Chowdary

Dr. Michael Hopkins
CEO and Chairman of MHC International Ltd. (London & Geneva).
He is a part-time Professor of Corporate Responsibilty
Business Performance (VRBP) at Middlesex University Business School
Visitng Professor at Brunel and Geneva Universities.

Google, for instance, collaborates with China to filter content so as to obtain competitive advantage. To date, Google has produced a code of conduct and corporate governance guidelines but no CSR report!

Service companies also affect our way of life; there is no doubt that they should also show the same commitment to CSR as do more obvious agricultural and manufacturing companies. One has to simply ask who funds non socially responsible companies and you quickly find the biggest investment funds and banks. Would Halliburton have promoted its lobbyist friends to launch the war on Iraq if it had been considered a socially irresponsible company and therefore, outed by investment fund managers? Hardly!

• How do you assess and distinguish between corporate social responsibility initiatives of companies from developed world and companies from emerging economies?
  The definition remains the same, of course, wherever the company is based. Consequently, stakeholder initiatives should be of similar nature. In practice, however, CSR initiatives vary greatly from region to region and country to country. For instance, in the Middle East, a company tends to focus upon corporate philanthropy because of Islam. The notion of other aspects of CSR, including whether corporate philanthropy is the correct approach, is rarely covered.

  One issue of huge contention has been the application of ILO core labor standards. Neither the ILO nor the World Trade Organization (WTO) has broached the subject of whether to include labor standards in trade agreements. Objections have been voiced by developing countries who argue, rightly or wrongly, that this is protectionism through the back door by the developed countries. The argument is that emerging economies cannot afford the level of labor legislation experienced in the richer countries simply because they are developing and need to reap benefits from cheap and unskilled labor.

  As so often is the case, however, the issue is much more complicated than as so simply stated here. Briefly, therefore, the notion of CSR should be the same but the devil is in the detail. And the application of CSR, as so often is the case, must be applied on a case by case basis with the broad principles in mind.

• Are corporations doing enough on corporate social responsibility? If yes, can you share with us a few exemplary and outstanding instances? If no, why do you think so and what needs to be done to sensitize them to be "socially responsible" companies?
  Most large corporations have CSR activities and nearly all now produce social reports of one form or another. Clearly, the level of intensity varies from one company to another. Models of best practice come and g oRoyal Dutch Shell was at one point, the leader, as was British Petroleum and there are many rankings these days that purport to say who is the best and the worst. Coca-Colas report is currently highly regarded by many.

  I have detected in recent months a slight move away from social concerns as the issue of global warming and company carbon emissions take centre stage. Clearly an important issue, but the intensity of change reflects the current fad as much as the seriousness of the issue. There is no doubt that companies must be swift to cope with current concerns or their reputation will suffer. However, we in the social responsibility must continue to make companies aware of the balance of the various issues in the CSR portfolio by continually pointing out the business case options. I would warn some commentators that criticizing companies for not following CSR activities must be carefully balanced with what companies see as their benefits. It is no use driving a company into the ground through over insisting on ridiculous commitments. A company not making profits will quickly go out of business and, in general, not quite what CSR practitioners would want!

• Has the relevance and importance of Corporate Social Responsibility grown with increased globalization, seamless world and companies being subjected to microscopic scrutiny?
  The short answer is yes. No doubt that globalization has made the world a smaller place with information quickly being passed from one part to another in seconds. 200 years ago, one of the most famous victories in Britains history that of Nelson at Trafalgar took weeks to reach London. Today, drones over Iraq are controlled instantaneously from a US military base in Florida.

  The same is true for companies. Reports of poor treatment of workers in Vietnamese shoe factories greatly embarrassed Nike who had received a clean bill of health from former UN Ambassador Young. The debate ran for sometime and forced Nike to introduce very careful controls. But Nikes HQ is in a land that has an open press and freedom to publish (despite attempts in recent years to curb these hard won freedom). Those countries that are more closed and host large companies one immediately thinks of China have much poorer records. But, as noted above, China is playing on a sticky wicket. There is a real danger of a huge consumer reaction to the purchase of Chinese goods should news of poor quality control, environmental damage and labor abuse start to bite in its main export markets! Other rogue nations will also be in trouble as world attention translates into commerce.

1. Corporate Social Responsibility Case Study
2. ICMR Case Collection
3. Case Study Volumes