Sustainability Strategies, Whistle Blowing and Workplace Ethics - Essay Example

Corporate Social Responsibility Table of Contents Part A: Analytical View of Theories 3 Sustainability strategies 3 Preparation 3 Seminar Discussion 4 Reflection 5 Whistle blowing and workplace ethics 5 Preparation 5 Seminar Discussion 6 Reflection 6 World Approaches to CSR 7 Preparation 7 Seminar Discussion 8 Reflection 9 Part B: Contrasting Discussed Theories 9 Insight Relating to CSR 9 Understanding Sustainability 10 Whistle Blowing and Global CSR 10 Reference List 12 Part A: Analytical View of Theories Sustainability strategies Preparation We are currently living in a world characterized with strong competition levels and rapidly depleting resources. The needs of economic growth has threatened the environmental conditions and created imbalances in our eco system (Van Marrewijk, 2003). Such perilous actions are required to be brought to check and controlled immediately so that our future generations are able to thrive. Sustainability strategies are focused towards adopting an industrial growth approach that not only meets the needs of the present generation but also those of the future. By adopting the sustainability models of working, organizations are able to focus upon providing long term values for stakeholders of present as well as the future (Baumgartner and Ebner, 2010). PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) is one of the most globally renowned financial services firms. Their sustainability strategies are known to be highly feasible. The framework the company follows in this respect is as follows: (Source: PwC, 2015) PwC’s sustainability strategies focus upon four important business areas. These are essentially; the marketplace, people, community and the environment. The sustainability strategies of PwC focused on two crucial tenets which are being the catalyst of change and to pursue the right activities (Dyllick and Hockerts, 2002). Starbucks and Ford are also companies which are popular globally for their feasible and logical sustainable practices. Corporate analysis in general reveals that sustainable strategies are a responsibility of not just a single firm. It is an aspect that must be given effect to by a number of organizations collectively. Sustainability strategies are related to meeting issues such as weather change and resource scarcity (López, Garcia and Rodriguez, 2007). Being a broad phenomenon, such issues can only be met through collective efforts. Sustainability, in most firms as also in the case of Ford, is about balancing the needs of stakeholders and the environment, keeping in mind the needs of the future generations. In many companies such as in Nike, innovation is considered to be a useful tool for meeting sustainability related objectives (Salzmann, et al., 2005). Seminar Discussion During the seminar, a number of aspects relating to sustainability and the manner in which firms adopt different approaches and strategies for meeting sustainability needs were elaborately discussed. Through the discussion carried out, I could gain valuable insights regarding the subject matter of sustainability. On the basis of the discussions carried out, I came to the realization that firms many at times due to unfavorable market conditions and inability to meet the basic market needs, lose their focus upon meeting basic sustainability objectives (Wagner, 2005). Seminar members had stated that sustainability strategies are forward looking strategies, while corporate social responsibilities focus on past actions. It was stated by one of the members that sustainability strategies many at times alter the nature of the firm, just like corporate social responsibilities. Another member cited how Shell’s sustainability strategies are primarily related to providing employee benefits. In my opinion, even though Shell’s strategies are very effective, the company has been in the recent times losing their focus from meeting consumer needs. Also, a number of negligence’s in meeting environment needs was observed at Shell (Gao and Zhang, 2006). Concerns in respect of the same were raised by a number of stakeholders. Another team member spoke about the strategies followed at Primark. Primark’s strategies were completely new to me, and I found the information provided was very useful (Primark, 2015). Primark’s strategies are deeply associated with ethical trading norms alongside of meeting environment related objectives. The company puts adequate focus on using only recycled materials for packaging. Additionally, the company emphasizes that their suppliers and business associates also follow adequate sustainable processes (Hahn, et al., 2010). Reflection In my opinion, the triple bottom line approach can be considered to be the most feasible model by which organizations can meet the sustainability needs. The triple bottom line approach can be broadly classified into three parts. These are financial, social and environmental (Benn, Dunphy and Griffiths, 2014). My personal studies in the area of sustainability reveal that DuPont’s strategies are highly effective for meeting both organizational and environmental needs. The strategies followed by the company have resulted in the reduction of carbon emission considerably. Additionally, the sustainable strategies of DuPont had led to the saving of about 3 billion dollars. Whistle blowing and workplace ethics Preparation Ethical means of working is often put into effect through whistle blowing techniques. Whistle blowing is a process whereby a corporate misconduct is brought under the notice of the managers or administrators. It is essentially an employee empowerment technique whereby they can bring activities which requires being corrected into the notice of everyone (Laufer, 2003). The technique facilitates in taking action upon episodes of misconduct and ensuring that organizational profits are not affected. The technique also ensures that reputation and the work culture of the organization are protected at all times (Mizutani, 2007). Many at times, such whistle blowing initiatives may lead to causing conflicts between individuals or between stakeholders such as the government and the organization. One of the recent whistle blowing incidents was observed at GlaxoSmithKline, where an employee exposed issues relating to contamination in the company’s manufacturing activities (Pemberton, et al., 2012). The exposure led the company towards paying a large sum as settlement to the U.S government. Similarly, the whistle blowing practice at JP Morgan Chase led the company into a number of court cases making it lose their reputation in the industry. Stakeholders also had criticized the company’s lack of ethical practices and had urged the managers to reform the code of ethics. Sales representatives at Eli Lilly had stated that the firm illegally markets a number of their drugs (Perks and Smith, 2008). Whistle blowing practices are seen to be diversely opined upon by various individuals and organizations. It is generally presumed that organizations which possess good corporate governance practices do not require implementing many whistle blowing practices. Whistle blowing practices are seen to be more pronounced in nations where the corporate legal framework is just and highly responsive to such issues (Hurn, 2008). Seminar Discussion Since the subject matter of whistle blowing is highly subjective of individual perceptions, the seminar discussion also witnessed such tendencies. While many claimed that whistle blowing techniques may not be supportive of organizational growth, it was also stated by many that such measures protect employee and organizational interests at large (Diale, 2010). During the seminar, I had spoken about the standard theory established by Richard T De George. The theory lays down the basic policies in respect of the aspects that a whistle blower must consider or fulfill before he or she unravels any information (Chan, Ip and Lam, 2009). The seminar members on the basis of numerous cases discussed had stated that when an employee perceives a wrong doing within the organization, he or she must initially report the same to the immediate leader and the persons who are involved in such wrong activities. If the immediate authorizes and the accused individuals are not taking any corrective actions should the employee consider undertaking the whistle blowing initiatives. During the seminar, I had shared with the other team members that Chinese legal authorities must provide adequate protection to whistle blowers and ensure that the companies take no action against them. However, in reality more than 70% of the whistle blowers were retailed against and very less or no judicial help was provided to them (Maclagan and Campbell, 2011). Reflection In my opinion, whistle blowing is an essential aspect for ensuring that companies maintain their code of conduct and internal governance polices effectively. From the seminar discussions I came to the understanding that whistle blowing practices makes employees and managers realize that their actions are constantly observed and therefore they must remain accountable and just (Andrew, et al., 2012). Additionally, I also came to the understanding post evaluation of the subject of whistle blowing that incidents of misconduct are largely not reported because of fear and peer pressure from superiors (Shell Global, 2015). Hence, in order to increase the reporting of unethical activities and to ensure that corporate codes of conduct are followed, protection of whistle blowers becomes essential (Hoque, et al., 2014). Such protection can be provided in numerous ways such as the use of equipments like close circuit cameras which consistently keeps a check upon the internal organizational activities. On the basis of my understanding, organizations have the crucial responsibility towards implementing adequate whistle blowing practices as part of their corporate social responsibilities. Whistle blowing techniques are often misused by strong employee unions to fulfill their interests. Hence, when judicial authorities investigate cases and allegations relating to corporate misconduct, they must ensure that the source of crime is on justifiable grounds and is not merely for fulfilling the interests of any particular group (Lewis and Uys, 2007). World Approaches to CSR Preparation Companies nowadays operate globally. Hence, they possess stakeholders in a number of nations. Following corporate social responsibility strategies (CSR) which are similar for many organizations makes it easy for managing corporate activities and to improve the responsiveness of external stakeholders. When international firms follow similar types of CSR policies, governance related activities become easy to implement. Firms irrespective of their activities possess similar responsibilities towards the society (Cadbury, 2006). World approach to CSR would be a difficult concept to implement as many few firms would be uniting their long term CSR strategies with those of others. However, a global approach to CSR is possible through government initiatives. Government authorities must impose regulations which are required to be followed mandatorily by organizations. This would facilitate in creating some common grounds. The regulations in this context can be related to meeting the needs of suppliers, consumers and the government. CSR activities are mainly about establishing relationships with consumers. Organizations must come to the realization that establishing CSR related initiatives is not only about meeting transactional needs, but it is also about developing long term sustainable relations with suppliers, consumers and other important stakeholders. This relationship aspect must unitarily be fulfilled by various organizations (Lindgreen and Swaen, 2010). Additionally, it is also seen that organizational responsibilities towards the environment is crucial. Meeting environmental needs is not the responsibility of a single organization; instead it is a collective activity. The climatic changes of the recent times have been massive and have led to altering the ecosystem conditions (Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001). The imbalances caused in the ecosystem cannot be corrected or checked by the efforts of a single organization. Instead, many firms must collectively work towards ensuring that environmental footprint is low and that the organization irrespective of their nature of activities must developing sustainable resource utilization practices. In case of exploitation of resources, government authorities in a number of nations have laid down strict regulations and have instructed firms to diligently follow the same. Non compliance with such regulation often leads to strict actions on behalf of the government (Keinert, 2008). Seminar Discussion During the seminar, I cited the example of Coke and Pepsi. Both Coke and Pepsi vigorously compete with each other for enhancing their market share and achieving higher profits. However, both the firms follow similar strategies in respect of sustainable strategies (Fast Company, 2015). Both Pepsi and Coke follow the strategy of water conservation and using recyclable packaging bottles. The difference in their social responsibility activities are only seen to arise out of the manner in which employees are treated and the relationship shared with stakeholders. The example I suggested was supported by many. However, there were also opinions that as the aspect of similar CSR roles are seen to exist between firms belonging to the same industry. Hence, Coke and Pepsi having similar social responsibility initiatives do not come as a surprise (Carroll, 2004). Another member participating in the seminar stated that social media is one of the most effective ways in which a united approach towards CSR can be developed. Through social media, consumers can be made aware of different situations existing in the market in respect of resources, operation methods, products and services and their quality. Accordingly, a united approach can be developed towards the manner in which consumers perceive companies by setting some common standards. Thus it can be stated that through generation of awareness, by using the social media platform, similar grounds of CSR requirements can be implemented (Aaronson, 2003). Reflection In my opinion, developing world approaches to CSR eases better governance. Additionally, it is seen that those CSR initiatives which lead to cost reduction becomes widely accepted and is implemented by most firms thereby effecting similarity. According to me, firms must innovate and develop ways in which cost effective production is possible. This might facilitate in developing globalised approaches to CSR activities (Chaudhri, 2006). Part B: Contrasting Discussed Theories Insight Relating to CSR CSR is gaining increasing importance in today’s globalized business environment which is characterized with rapidly changing resource structures and their massive exploitation. The most important aspects triggering the need to undertake CSR is the changes in the environmental conditions. Additionally, CSR is not just about achieving environmental objectives and controlling resource utilization, it also about ensuring that the present activities of organizations do not negatively impact the future generations. Hence, sustainability is a vital feature in the adoption of CSR. On the basis of my understanding, the domain of CSR also takes into consideration the responsibilities businesses have towards stakeholders such as consumers, employees, suppliers and financiers. Such interests groups play a vital role in the growth of a business. Hence, their satisfaction and meeting of expectations is extremely vital for an organization to remain successful. In my opinion, organizations are required to meet the expectations of consumers most importantly. This includes aspects such as ensuring the products and services manufactured are not harmful for the society in any way. It is also essential to ensure that companies are able to meet their quality related objectives. Products and services provided to the society must be of high quality leading to its enhancement in value. Moreover, innovation and strategic CSR initiatives have facilitated in gaining a number of financial benefits such as reduction in cost of operations (Prieto‐Carrón, et al., 2006). Understanding Sustainability On the basis of the points discussed in the seminar, I have come to the conclusion that sustainability is also an effective tool by which organizations gain empathy from consumers. Through sustainability, related initiatives organizations are able to ensure that they meet the needs of all stakeholders of the present as well as future generations. As a result, consumers get the impression that organizations are responsibly operating, enhancing the organizational value in their eyes. This is one reason why companies such as Toyota, British Petroleum and Apple have massive reputation in the market. It is also seen that a number of firms which operate in the industry procure different types of assets and leads to the development of a number of assets and developmental procedures (Toyota, 2015). However, my analysis reveals that most organizations are seen to face issues in respect of being able to meet organizational as well as sustainability objectives simultaneously. Many at times, organizational needs collide with their long term sustainability needs. Therefore, functional heads face constrain of balancing the needs of the stakeholders with that of the firm. Neglecting sustainability measures may prove to be profitable for short duration, but in the long run the firm may lose its reputation. Many firms such as Starbucks and Nokia have made sustainability a part of their long term sustainability needs (Nokia, 2015). Starbucks ensured that their suppliers of present and the future operate in a highly sustainable manner, so that they can easily be aligned with the missions of the organization (Christensen, et al., 2007). Whistle Blowing and Global CSR The seminar also included discussions relating to whistle blowing. I was fortunate enough to be a part of this discussion and gain valuable understanding regarding the subject matter of whistle blowing. I came to the realization that most organizations do not formally encourage whistle blowing as they fear it may tarnish the reputation of the organization. On the other hand, employees fear to bring into light aspects relating to misconduct as they fear that their superiors might take strict actions against them. Moreover, in most cases whistle blowers remain incapable of proving allegations due to the lack of availability of sufficient proof. The organizational structures are often developed in a manner such that they resist whistle blowing. Employees do not consider it important to reveal much information relating to misconduct and continue to remain silent in respect of such issues. In order to give effect to whistle blowing, employees must be first given complete assurance that their interest would be protected at all times. From the seminar discussions carried out, I came to the realization that whistle blowing is largely a neglected area of CSR as compared to sustainability related measures (Christensen, et al., 2007). Companies such as Ford encourage whistle blowing and ensure that mangers do not neglect any allegations raised by employees. It is often seen that when managers mitigate issues which arise in the organization during the initial stages, tend to prevent losing reputation. This also prevents bringing external parties such as government authorities to intervene. As per my understanding, it is essential that organizations make whistle blowing a vital part of their CSR initiatives. In reality, there exist very few firms who support whistle blowing and similar employee empowerment processes. However, firms which encourage such processes are seen to be able to retain employees for longer and give effect to greater employee satisfaction (Christensen, et al., 2007). Whistle blowing was seen to be quite rapid post the financial crisis, when a number of companies reported fraudulent activities happening internally. Most of such reports were negotiated and solved by ensuring that the whistle blowers do not lose their rights in any manner. The system of whistle blowing although is highly encouraged in the developed nation; developing nations are still seen to suffer from a number of drawbacks and fail to control fraudulent activities occurring internally in organizations. Government support in most developing nations for protecting employee rights are also not effectively carried out. The seminar members also carried out discussions related to a number of vital aspects relating to global CSR. As per my knowledge in respect of the area of study, implementing uniform CSR measures across industries would lead to better implementation of corporate governance policies. From the discussions it is expected that globalised implementation of CSR may encourage enhanced whistle blowing and make the same an integral par of CSR initiatives (Muller, 2006). Reference List Aaronson, S. A., 2003. Corporate responsibility in the global village: The British role model and the American laggard. Business and Society Review, 108(3), pp. 309-338. Andrew, N., Wickham, M., ODonohue, W. and Danzinger, F., 2012. Presenting a Core-Periphery model of voluntary CSR disclosure in Australian annual reports. Corporate Ownership & Control Journal, 9(2), pp. 438-448. Baumgartner, R. J. and Ebner, D., 2010. Corporate sustainability strategies: sustainability profiles and maturity levels. Sustainable Development, 18(2), pp. 76-89. Benn, S., Dunphy, D. and Griffiths, A., 2014. Organizational change for corporate sustainability. London: Routledge. Cadbury, A., 2006. Corporate social responsibility. Twenty-First Century Society, 1(1), pp. 5-21. Carroll, A. B., 2004. Managing ethically with global stakeholders: A present and future challenge. The Academy of Management Executive, 18(2), pp. 114-120. Chan, A. K., Ip, P. K. and Lam, K. C. J., 2009. Business ethics in greater China: An introduction. Journal of business ethics, 88(1), pp. 1-9. Chaudhri, V. A., 2006. Organising global CSR. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 2006(23), pp. 39-51. Christensen, L. J., Peirce, E., Hartman, L. P., Hoffman, W. M. and Carrier, J., 2007. Ethics, CSR, and sustainability education in the Financial Times top 50 global business schools: Baseline data and future research directions. Journal of Business Ethics, 73(4), pp. 347-368. Diale, A. J., 2010. The role and importance of whistle-blowing in building organisational integrity in the public sector: a theoretical exposition. Journal of Public Administration: Special Issue 1(45), pp. 295-305. Dyllick, T. and Hockerts, K., 2002. Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Business strategy and the environment, 11(2), pp. 130-141. Fast Company, 2015. Sustainability Faceoff: Coca-Cola Vs. Pepsico. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 27 April 2015]. Gao, S. S. and Zhang, J. J., 2006. Stakeholder engagement, social auditing and corporate sustainability. Business Process Management Journal, 12(6), pp. 722-740. Hahn, T., Figge, F., Pinkse, J. and Preuss, L., 2010. Trade‐offs in corporate sustainability: you cant have your cake and eat it. Business Strategy and the Environment, 19(4), pp. 217-229. Hoque, N., Uddin, M. R., Ibrahim, M. and Mamun, A., 2014. Corporate Social Responsibilities (CSR) as a Means of Materializing Corporate Vision: A Volvo Group Approach. Asian Social Science, 10(11), p. 258. Hurn, B. J., 2008. Ethics in international business. Industrial and commercial training, 40(7), pp. 347-354. Keinert, C., 2008. Concrete CSR Measures: What can a Firm do? Corporate Social Responsibility as an International Strategy, 1(1), pp. 77-87. Laufer, W. S., 2003. Social accountability and corporate greenwashing. Journal of Business Ethics, 43(3), pp. 253-261. Lewis, D. and Uys, T., 2007. Protecting whistleblowers at work: A comparison of the impact of British and South African legislation. Managerial Law, 49(3), pp. 76-92. Lindgreen, A. and Swaen, V., 2010. Corporate social responsibility. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), pp. 1-7. López, M. V., Garcia, A. and Rodriguez, L., 2007. Sustainable development and corporate performance: A study based on the Dow Jones sustainability index.Journal of Business Ethics, 75(3), pp. 285-300. Maclagan, P. and Campbell, T., 2011. Focusing on individuals ethical judgement in corporate social responsibility curricula. Business Ethics: A European Review, 20(4), pp. 392-404. Mizutani, H., 2007. Whistleblower protection act. Japan labor review, 4(3), p. 95. Muller, A., 2006. Global versus local CSR strategies. European Management Journal, 24(2), pp. 189-198. Nokia, 2015. Sustainability reports. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 27 April 2015]. Pemberton, S., Tombs, S., Chan, M. M. J. and Seal, L., 2012. Whistleblowing, organisational harm and the self-regulating organisation. Policy & Politics, 40(2), pp. 263-279. Perks, S. and Smith, E. E., 2008. Employee perceptions regarding whistle-blowing in the workplace: a South African perspective: empirical research. SA Journal of Human Resource Management, 6(2), 15-24. Prieto‐Carrón, M., Chan, A., Muro, A. N. A. and Bhushan, C., 2006. Critical perspectives on CSR and development: what we know, what we dont know, and what we need to know. International Affairs, 82(5), pp. 977-987. Primark, 2015. Our Ethics. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 27 April 2015]. PwC, 2015. Sustainability strategies. [online] Available at: [Accessed 27 April 2015]. Salzmann, O., Ionescu-Somers, A. and Steger, U., 2005. The business case for corporate sustainability:: literature review and research options. European Management Journal, 23(1), pp. 27-36. Sen, S. and Bhattacharya, C. B., 2001. Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of marketing Research, 38(2), pp. 225-243. Shell Global, 2015. Sustainability Report. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 27 April 2015]. Toyota, 2015. Sustainability report. [Online] Available at: [Accessed 27 April 2015]. Van Marrewijk, M., 2003. Concepts and definitions of CSR and corporate sustainability: Between agency and communion. Journal of business ethics, 44(2-3), pp. 95-105. Wagner, M., 2005. How to reconcile environmental and economic performance to improve corporate sustainability: corporate environmental strategies in the European paper industry. Journal of environmental management, 76(2), pp. 105-118. Read More