Beware of companies bearing gifts. Corporate social resonsibility is not to be trusted because it has built-in incentives for hypocrisy. Such is the warning from financier George Soros.
Speaking at a conference in Milan, Soros has warned that market fundamentalism of a short-term outlook creates a huge problem for genuine social responsibility. If there is a conflict between making money and doing good, making money will win out every time, he says.
At the same time, however, he says companies have a responsibility to at least pretend to be interested in corporate social responsibility.
The comments of Soros caught my attention because they raise the possibility of companies using corporate social responsibility to cover up dirty dealings. That's a point raised by W. P. Carey School of Business professor Marianne jennings, something I explore here.
But what about Soros himself? How much of a double standard do we have there?
It was a question raised by Slovenian philosopher and psychoanalyst Slavoj Zizek in the London Review of Books earlier this year.
According to Zizek, Soros along with the likes of Bill Gates and the Google founders are the new "liberal communists", counter cultural geeks who have taken over big business, billionaires who worry about global problems, and use the riches gained by capitalist exploitation for the greater good.
But at the same time, their ethos is two-faced, he says. They need the problems of the world to hide their exploitation.
"According to liberal communist ethics, the ruthless pursuit of profit is counteracted by charity: charity is part of the game, a humanitarian mask hiding the underlying economic exploitation. Developed countries are constantly 'helping' undeveloped ones (with aid, credits etc), and so avoiding the key issue: their complicity in and responsibility for the miserable situation of the Third World."
All that is encapsulated in the approach of Soros and Gates, says Zizek:
"Soros's daily routine is a lie embodied: half of his working time is devoted to financial speculation, the other half to 'humanitarian' activities (financing cultural and democratic activities in post-Communist countries, writing essays and books) which work against the effects of his own speculations. The two faces of Bill Gates are exactly like the two faces of Soros: on the one hand, a cruel businessman, destroying or buying out competitors, aiming at a virtual monopoly; on the other, the great philanthropist who makes a point of saying: 'What does it serve to have computers if people do not have enough to eat?'."
So when Soros talks about the in-built hypocrisy of corporate social responsibility, he could be talking from the heart.
Corporate responsibility starts with Soros – AND ME.
The points made in your post underscore the inescapable fact that ethics start with me. Unless and until we each examine our own behavior in light of our true and deeply held beliefs, we will continue to see a cognitive dissonance in corporations, individuals, governments and society. SWiM(TM) is a reminder that responsibility for ethics is Starting With Me.
Interesting post, and I agree that certain companies do use CSR as a way to hide ‘dirty dealings’. CSR is something that needs to be built into the dna of a company, all the way from the CEO down to the lowest of employees. It’s a culture that went done right can be powerful and when done wrong can be extremely dangerous – for all stakeholders involved.