|
|
Prof. Porter participated as a speaker on November 16 at ExpoManagement 2011, a business forum in Mexico, to promote the concept of shared value. Expok reports, without passing judgment, Michael Porter's 10 phrases on Shared Value. Among these ten quotes there are two that I want to comment on . I do so under the assumption that the reporter quotes Prof. Porter correctly and his interpretation of his talk into Spanish was accurate. The first says: “To be honest, CSR has not brought the benefits of capitalism to society.” Did any of you believe that corporate responsibility was intended to transfer the benefits of capitalism to society? Are the responsible practices of companies powerful enough to be able to counteract the problems of market functioning, perverse incentives, and individual irresponsibility? Does capitalism only have benefits? Is it the responsibility of companies to solve the problems of capitalism? Or do we have to radically change the objective of the company so that it brings the benefits of capitalism to society? Can companies, operating independently, bring the benefits of capitalism to society, which requires collective and coordinated action between all companies, governments, civil society, consumers, etc. ? The second quote I want to comment on is: “Shared value is creating economic value from the generation of social benefits” I thought it was the other way around. That the company had to generate social benefits through its normal activities, through the creation of economic value.
The first responsibility of the company is Phone Number List to create economic value, continue to exist, be profitable in order to: · Earn money ethically and responsibly , respecting current laws, whether they apply or not, and those that apply in other countries where it operates, which are more rigorous and applicable. · Pay all taxes that apply , so that the government, elected by society, redistributes it. · Generate decent jobs , paying fair wages, in healthy environments, with opportunities for personal growth and dignity. · Produce responsible products, which society demands and needs for its harmonious development. · Use the planet's resources responsibly, paying for them prices consistent with their value to society (whose pricing is the responsibility of the market, and if this does not work, that the government introduce taxes or fees to compensate for the externalities) · Contribute to solving social problems that affect its operations , in the short or long term, in a tangible or intangible way. Of course, there are ways and means to do all this. You will have noticed that I have given each one a qualification on how that action should be carried out.
It would be enough for us if all companies did it this way. I'm also not idealistic enough to think that those qualifications apply at all times, but it is our responsibility as members of society to make them do so. But not all companies produce that economic value responsibly. This is where efforts must be concentrated: on the creation of economic value, at the level of each company, which leads to the creation of social value. According to Prof. Porter, it seems that the company has the responsibility of generating social benefits and, in the process, generating economic value. If this were the case, it could have difficulty obtaining the financial resources necessary to carry out its tasks, unless altruistic financiers did so, or society was willing to do so in exchange for social benefits, or unless the government, not very adept at the time of economic intervention, did so. One thing is the strategy of creating economic value to share it and the other is a strategy of creating social value and, in the process, creating economic value. One thing is a responsible commercial company, which wants to be socially, environmentally and financially sustainable and the other is a social company, which has been created with the aim of solving a social problem that the market or government cannot solve, but financially. sustainable.
|
|
發表於 18:27:38