“Employees are a critical part of the whole sustainability initiative.” – Harry Pfaff (Verizon) Pfaff’s quote signals some of the Verizon’s sustainability initiatives. With “Go Green” website, Verizon employees make suggestions about the sustainability strategies of the company (Daniels, 2010). Verizon is not the only company which recognizes the importance of employee participation in sustainability initiatives. Intel’s and eBay’s green teams organize volunteer sustainability projects in the workplace and encourage employees to participate in them (Fleisher, 2009). Whether you agree with Pfaff’s ideas or not, there is a long list of companies following this principle. E&Y’s survey reveals this fact – employee engagement is one of the major trends in corporate sustainability (E&Y, 2011). The success stories have appealed more and more companies to follow this trend. For example, Intel employees produced sustainability projects that helped the company save $136m in 2010 (Baya & Gruman, 2011). Companies commit to sustainability initiatives to achieve the triple bottom line (social, environmental and economic benefits) (Accenture & UN Global Compact, 2013). While companies have increasingly focused on sustainability, scholars have been attracted by the issues such as the financial outcome of these investments, and strategic importance of sustainability (Orlitzky & Benjamin, 2001; Orlitzky, Schmidt, & Rynes, 2003). However, the employee involvement in sustainability initiatives, and the effect of sustainability strategies on employee outcomes are not yet fully discovered. Given the emphasis on employee participation in corporate sustainability initiatives, understanding its effect on the employee related outcomes is critical. The imp... ... middle of paper ... ...ta-Analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403–441. doi:10.1177/0170840603024003910 Porter, L. W., Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T., & Boulian, P. V. (1974). Organizational commitment, job satisfaction, and turnover among psychiatric technicians. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59(5), 603–609. doi:10.1037/h0037335 Robertson, J. L., & Barling, J. (2013). Greening organizations through leaders’ influence on employees’ pro-environmental behaviors. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 34(2), 176–194. doi:10.1002/job.1820 Turban, D. B., & Greening, D. W. (1997). Corporate Social Performance And Organizational Attractiveness To Prospective Employees. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 658–672. doi:10.2307/257057 Turker, D. (2009). How Corporate Social Responsibility Influences Organizational Commitment. Journal of Business Ethics, 89(2), 189–204. doi:10.1007/s10551-008-9993-8
Supplying eco-friendly products has been on the Walmart agenda since the early 1990s. After a failed first attempt and much criticism, the company decided to try again. In a speech made in October of 2005, CEO of Walmart, H. Lee Scott Jr., declared Walmart would devise a “business sustainable strategy” to reduce the environmental impact the company had. Walmart could not pull this off alone. If they only focused on the confines of themselves, rather than all that they were involved with, it was estimated that they’d only reduce their impact by about 10%. To reach that goal of 100%, Walmart had to involve stakeholders to make networks which achieve sustainability. These networks proved to be vital in not only Walmart’s goal in minimizing its environmental impact, but recovering their reputation, avoiding criticism, saving money, raising awareness, improving customer satisfaction, and creating incentive for other businesses to work towards sustainability.
Social responsibility can be defined as “the continuing commitment by business to behave ethically and contribute to economic development while improving the quality of life of the workforce and their families as well as of the local community and society at large” (Mallen Baker, 2004). In addition, social responsibility has been defined differently by various corporate leaders that provide guidelines which impacts how one manages the core business. Social responsibility is an essential part of a business. If managed correctly should strengthen the competitive spirit of the company and provide prosperity to society.
An organization must always look within and outside of themselves to assess their internal strengths and weaknesses and realize which external factors pose a threat or an opportunity for them. These factors have direct impact on how the organization operates, allowing them to mitigate their threats and maximize their opening to create new and diverse products as the demands of the people grow and technology advances (Rothaermel, 2013). The desire to have greener options in the products people use has forced The Home Depot and Ford Motor Company to respond. However, these two companies not only enforce the environmental concerns of the people with the products they offer to the public, but also in how their plants and stores are ran under sustainable energy. This will
The agent-of-society view holds that corporate managers are prima facie obligated to consider the interests of everyone who is likely to be affected by what managers decide to do. With this view in mind, Michael Hoffman states, “Corporate managers should be held morally responsible for going beyond considerations of profits, law, and market morality to try to do what they can to help solve our most pressing environmental problems.” In his article, Hoffman argues that business must creatively find ways to become part of the solution, instead of the problem. Business should try to become more environmentally friendly and think of ways to help mitigate the many environmental problems we have. Consumers argue they have no control over or say in whether business provides environmentally friendly products or not. They argue that it’s not up to them “how the products are made, how the services are provided, or how the legislation is enacted.” Although, some businesses have tried to come up with environmentally friendly products but they find that consumers are unwilling to pay extra for them. He thinks corporations can and must develop a conscience, including an environmental conscience. Like the owner of the paper company, business should think of ways to stop the pollution and harm to the environment and take action quickly so that they can set an example for other businesses to follow.
Jared Diamond, in his essay “Will Big Business Save the Earth?”, argues that even though multi-billion dollar corporations generate massive amounts of waste, they are also capable of being forerunners in support of environmentalism. Without a doubt, Diamond makes it very clear to the reader that, originally, he was of the opinion that big corporations were incapable of minimizing their impact on the environment, due to their purely financial drive to accumulate revenue for their investors. But when he became a board member of environmentalist outfits like the World Wildlife Fund and Conservation International, he was given the task to assess the environmental impact of various companies across differing economic sectors. While there were indeed some that made a huge negative impact on the environment, in his research, Diamond noticed that were a sizeable number of companies that excelled greatly in being more cautious in how they affect the environment. Of these companies, he takes note of
Griffin, Jennifer, and John Mahon. 1997. The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate: Twenty-five years of incomparable research. Business and Society 36(1): 5–31.
Another approach is bottom-up and it makes the employees the central cog in the innovation process. Such a concept, when applied to sustainability, shifts the focus from the happenings at the management level to what decisions the mid and front-line level employees make. The lower level employees are the ones who take daily actions that could make or break a company’s sustainability potential. A bottom-up approach has a multiplier effect since it is easily visible to others and becomes quite difficult to thwart. Furthermore, the daily decisions made by mid-level employees incorporate the views of the
Rupp, D. E., Ganapathi, J., Aguilera, R. V., & Williams, C. A. (2006). Employee reaction to corporate social responsibility: an organizational justice framework. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 27, 537-543. doi: 10.1002/job.380.
An organization’s Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) drives them to look out for the different interests of society. Most business corporations undertake responsibility for the impact of their organizational pursuits and various activities on their customers, employees, shareholders, communities and the environment. With the high volume of general competition between different companies and organizations in varied fields, CSR has become a morally imperative commitment, more than one enforced by the law. Most organizations in the modern world willingly try to improve the general well-being of not only their employees, but also their families and the society as a whole.
In conclusion, going green in the workplace is catchy new trend. Choosing to go verdant can be a grueling task and one that is confronted with some unique pros and cons. Although making green choices come at a slightly higher price, the rewards that are earned more than cover these costs. When a company chooses wisely going green can not only help the environment, and reduce the carbon foot-print the company makes but it can also prove to be a very smart business decision that can be financially gratifying.
The arguments for and against corporate social responsibility have captured two points of view. Those who believe that organizations should not be concerned about social responsibility base many of their arguments on the costs involved and whether organizations should shoulder those costs on behalf of society. And those who are in favor feel that organizations benefit from society and, therefore, have an obligation to improve it. Although there is no universal agreement, surveys and other reports express that many organizations are, becoming increasingly active in addressing social
Important companies like Shell, DuPont, BP have been reorganised to generate profits from this green market of goods and services. In this sense, it may sound altruistic, "the sustainability", the logic of profitability and competition is what will determine the ability of companies of the future to meet the changing needs of consumers. This premise of "sustainability" as a necessary quality to be competitive, falls short, according to Bryan Walsh of Time magazine. In a 2007 article, the expert shows how "sustainable" is helping to drive out competition, given the approach taken by companies to become more efficient, flexible and cutting waste, which helps them provide better products and reduce costs. Companies that refuse to accept that they will face a strict and demanding environment.
Incomes have been lowered, due to a shortage of hours, and people are losing jobs. Technology is performing the work of human beings because it requires less work and it is more efficient to use machines than to use hands. According to the article, Technology Explains Drop in Manufacturing Jobs, Sherk says, “manufacturing employment has fallen by one-third over the past decade. In fact, technology has driven down manufacturing employment. Computers have made manufacturers more productive by automating many routine tasks. American manufacturers now employ fewer workers to produce more goods” (Sherk, 2010). One can understand that not as many people work today compared to the number of people that worked a few decades ago. When America use to be a manufacturing society, there was more work for people because people used machines or hands to do the work. Now, the evolution of technology is causing work supervisors to rely more on technology, and less on human labor. The goal is to help boost customer’s satisfaction in establishing an eco-friendly business environment (i.e. online coupons, machine food maker, do-it-yourself grocery checkout). According to the article Green Industry Analysis 2016 - Cost & Trends, Sena says, “green industry practices not only enjoy favorable public sentiment and the psychic income of a lower carbon footprint, but increased cost
Now-a-days it is considered that CSR is one of the major concerns of organization’s business ethics. Companies increasingly increase their corporate social responsibility (CSR) and ethical management accepting the positive impact on the bottom line. The vast bulk of Standard & Poor’s 500 companies publish sustainability reports unfolding their program challenges and achievements. These pre-emptive efforts can pr...
Corporate Social Responsibility also attracts potential employees and increases current employees motivation, morale, a better working attitude and greater productivity. Organizations have to make sure you publicly acknowledge the employees who contribute to your CSR activit...