I noted that the ‘about this commons’ reads:

“Discussions will center around ways to promote the visibility, vitality and value of the communication profession to non-communication audiences as well as how IABC and its members can address a broad spectrum of social, economic, ethical and professional issues.”

What better way to promote the visibility and value of the communication profession and further profile IABC to non-communication audiences than by volunteering our services and expertise to organisations (not-for-profit) who need assistance in these areas.

I agree that the IABC SR subcommittee may have to formulate, among other things, the broad parameters (or policy) for the engagement of individual chapters in SR. But to me it doesn’t have to get too complicated after that; small incremental steps can make as good an impact as giant ones.

So I truly hope that as an organisation we can move forward in this area. There are so many possibilities for incorporating our SR work with other IABC chapter activities such student and mentoring programmes etc.

So Mike, Tom, Wilma and everyone who has contributed thus far, I truly love our discussions and look forward to reading more posts on this topic.

Carol-Ann

Kristen, SR can indeed be defined in several different ways, and regardless of how we distinguish between SR and Philanthropy, I don’t think the two are mutually exclusive — especially in IABC. The fact that some conference attendees participated in the Habit for Humanity project shouldn’t be viewed as a distraction. In fact, judging from conversations I had with a few Habitat participants, the experience may actually have strengthened their desire to support such “core” SR initiatives as sustainability, governance, accountability and so on.

That would seem to dovetail nicely with your definition of SR as “a renewal of links between businesses and communities.” As Wilma stated so well, “we are a community of a larger, global community and cannot easily separate what we are from who we are.” This may in itself provide an opportunity for IABC: how can we, wearing our hats as business communication professionals, facilitate that renewal?

To help answer that question, the Social Responsibility subcommittee, a small group of volunteers across three geographic regions led by Michelle Bernhart in Atlanta, has identified several key focus areas:

• Support of IABC members and chapters with information and resources in social responsibility
• Continuous improvement in IABC’s own social responsibility performance
• Partnerships with other global organizations to advance social responsibility worldwide

The subcommittee is now identifying and prioritizing opportunities that will benefit IABC and its members as well as the global community. At the same time, it’s important to understand that participating in an activity like Habitat also reflects good timing — i.e., our ability to take advantage of an opportunity when it presents itself — and not necessarily that we’re favoring one facet of SR over others. Rest assured that SR in IABC will include not only community service, but also a focus on how we can impact SR’s other vital components.

So rather than try to use different terms to describe its different facets, I think we can comfortably use “SR” to include all of the above. Perhaps in a series of small steps that will, over time, come together to represent major steps forward for all of us.

Which leaves me wanting to ask everyone a very key question:

What would you like to see us do next, in the area of Social Responsibility?

Let’s hear from you!

BAK

I mostly care about contributing in whatever appropriate ways I can to furthering the spread of “good” within the world in general, IABC as an organization, and our members individually.

As I wrote in my post:

“I received the most enthusiastic responses [at the 2007 IABC International Conference in New Orleans] when I talked about using our communication skills and experience to “make a difference” globally and locally, as we would support charitable organizations and causes, and allow them to “Be Heard.”

“The vision that I discussed with Mike Zimet includes working with local IABC chapters throughout the world, helping them to identify local causes or organizations that need the kind of help that chapter members could provide on a pro-bono basis.”

I’m waiting patiently until the members of the Social Responsibility Subcommittee of the IABC Advocacy Initiative and Mike Zimet have an opportunity to share more about their intended direction.

You raise a concern that I share — let’s get the nomenclature correct so that we may understand what we’re discussing.

As a prime example, I differ with your definitions in this way:

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) often is associated with those businesses you described and especially those operations in the extraction business, such as mining, forestry. There, the company gives back to the community substantial benefits that make up for the damage the company does to the landscape — benefits such as training programs, schools or even hospitals.

Social Responsibility (SR) most often is associated with companies that fully engage in the community through employee volunteerism, and financial and other contributions to non-profit organizations engaged in bettering the community. Intel Corporation is a shining light and example in SR and CSR. Individuals who volunteer and give their time/money to help improve the community also are engaged in SR.

And, finally, Philanthropy. This is most often associated with significant individual financial donations such as funding for a new college building, a new wing at a hospital or an important exhibit at a museum.

In New Orleans, IABC, as an association, and individuals associated with IABC, engaged in Social Responsibility by helping build homes. I can’t think of any reason why SR would NOT be part of an organization’s core business. We are a community of a larger, global community and cannot easily separate what we are from who we are.

I once saw a great explanation of social responsibility as a renewal of links between businesses and communities that were gradually lost as companies grew larger and larger. Accountability and social responsibility are built into small, local businesses: if you don’t like how the baker treats his dog, wife, employees, etc., you could just buy your bread from his rvial. But as bakeries become huge multinationals, it becomes more difficult to distinguish what such behaviour is, let alone to tie it to your behaviour as a consumer.

My point is that social responsibility is both about how you conduct your core business and the context in which it occurs. This is a debate that’s been raging for years. Some NGOs argue that business-as-usual can’t be socially responsible, whereas businesses argue that social activities that aren’t intertwined with core activities are not social responsibility. Obviously the two are not completely unlinked, but the nuance is there.

Given that perspective, I think IABC’s ISO work counts as helping worthy causes to improve their communications. But picking up hammers and building roofs in the context of an IABC conference is philanthropy. It’s not a bad thing, just a different thing. I don’t think IABC should be distracted from its core social responsibility work by becoming an agency for communicators who happen to want to conduct philanthropy.