With CSR being a priority for businesses small, big and very big these days, it is no surprise that social responsibility and engaging the Vulnerable, the Needy and the Disadvantaged has gained much more a function within many an industry,
I'm all for CSR.
There is no reason for me, both on a personal and professional level, to refute the importance of getting corporations, businesses and individuals involved in the communities that they're in.
However, it gets my goat whenever people approach me using their CSR as an excuse to get free stuff. And they always seem to have the same recurring pattern. (I suppose it must have worked before..)
The conversation usually begins with them and what they do. That's the business side. Subsequently, it then follows into the secondary mission and the convictions that they have towards a particular Disadvantaged or Needy group. And then after that, there is the mention of a possible partnership where the thus-far concealed agenda comes out. Generally it flows along the lines of "let's work together for this (insert Disadvantaged group) so you do a piece of commissioned work for my business and then I'll take that piece of work and use it to raise funds/raise awareness for the said group where you'll also get publicity. Oh, by the way, since we're using it for charity purposes, oops, CSR purposes, could you not charge me anything for the work that I'm commissioning you to make?"
I don't know whether others have agreed to such a partnership.
For me, I won't.
Straight out, no matter what you think of me, or of us, yes, I won't.
It's not because we're cold-hearted and cruel and selfish and unkind. No, no, it is nothing like that. It is a more practical business that we speak of. We are comfortable, more than comfortable, to do CSR for NGOs and VWOs. We understand what being a Vulnerable, a Disadvantaged and a Needy is like.
But coming to tell me that you'e an ardent supporter of this cause and that cause when you don't have third-party validation is not really a very reason for me to participate together with you. Anyone can say that they're supporting this cause and that cause, but the crux of the whole question is what exactly they're doing for the cause and how their business (and thereby the CSR) will benefit the particular Disadvantaged or Needy group.
How involved you are, how much of a direct consequence your business will do for them is a determinant of whether I should do pro-bono for you on behalf of the VWO. It's like how I generally support pet adoption and pet fostering and I'm not adverse to a cause as such, but I can't be compared to someone I know who not only actively participates in the pet adoption days but fosters a few of them as well. Honestly, I wouldn't know about a dog named Krunchy who is looking for a permanent home if not for this someone. ;)
If you're telling me that I should do pro-bono for you so that you can do your CSR for the Disadvantaged group, why should I not do pro-bono for the NGO or VWO directly? Is there any reason why I should only have to partner you in order to do something good for the society? What is it in the work that I do where I cannot work with them directly? Is it not better that the work I do reaches them straight? Or is because I'm not familiar with this particular or that particular Disadvantaged group that I have to go through you?
Look, it's not about being cynical. It's about assessing whether the non-NGO person approaching me to partner him/her to do CSR for an NGO that he/she claims he/she is involved in is really about the beneficiaries or simply using them as a means to get free stuff for himself/herself. Whether I have the capabilities to assess or not is my business, and the NGO's. :D
Of course, the part about raising funds is often indirect and, well, it is done through strategic alliances and strategic partnerships, but see, more and more Coordinators and NGOs and VWOs are requesting for direct involvement anyway, so if that be the case, why not I be involved in the fund-raising part and be directly involved at the same time?
After all, Banks and Insurance companies have been doing it for a long time. They make donations and they get their staff to get down to the ground, sometimes armed with water bottles, Happy Meals and snack packs, someimes armed with bags and bags of groceries, and other times armed with pails, newspapers, ladders, paint rollers, boxed lunches and tins of paint.
I'm all for CSR.
There is no reason for me, both on a personal and professional level, to refute the importance of getting corporations, businesses and individuals involved in the communities that they're in.
However, it gets my goat whenever people approach me using their CSR as an excuse to get free stuff. And they always seem to have the same recurring pattern. (I suppose it must have worked before..)
The conversation usually begins with them and what they do. That's the business side. Subsequently, it then follows into the secondary mission and the convictions that they have towards a particular Disadvantaged or Needy group. And then after that, there is the mention of a possible partnership where the thus-far concealed agenda comes out. Generally it flows along the lines of "let's work together for this (insert Disadvantaged group) so you do a piece of commissioned work for my business and then I'll take that piece of work and use it to raise funds/raise awareness for the said group where you'll also get publicity. Oh, by the way, since we're using it for charity purposes, oops, CSR purposes, could you not charge me anything for the work that I'm commissioning you to make?"
I don't know whether others have agreed to such a partnership.
For me, I won't.
Straight out, no matter what you think of me, or of us, yes, I won't.
It's not because we're cold-hearted and cruel and selfish and unkind. No, no, it is nothing like that. It is a more practical business that we speak of. We are comfortable, more than comfortable, to do CSR for NGOs and VWOs. We understand what being a Vulnerable, a Disadvantaged and a Needy is like.
But coming to tell me that you'e an ardent supporter of this cause and that cause when you don't have third-party validation is not really a very reason for me to participate together with you. Anyone can say that they're supporting this cause and that cause, but the crux of the whole question is what exactly they're doing for the cause and how their business (and thereby the CSR) will benefit the particular Disadvantaged or Needy group.
How involved you are, how much of a direct consequence your business will do for them is a determinant of whether I should do pro-bono for you on behalf of the VWO. It's like how I generally support pet adoption and pet fostering and I'm not adverse to a cause as such, but I can't be compared to someone I know who not only actively participates in the pet adoption days but fosters a few of them as well. Honestly, I wouldn't know about a dog named Krunchy who is looking for a permanent home if not for this someone. ;)
If you're telling me that I should do pro-bono for you so that you can do your CSR for the Disadvantaged group, why should I not do pro-bono for the NGO or VWO directly? Is there any reason why I should only have to partner you in order to do something good for the society? What is it in the work that I do where I cannot work with them directly? Is it not better that the work I do reaches them straight? Or is because I'm not familiar with this particular or that particular Disadvantaged group that I have to go through you?
Look, it's not about being cynical. It's about assessing whether the non-NGO person approaching me to partner him/her to do CSR for an NGO that he/she claims he/she is involved in is really about the beneficiaries or simply using them as a means to get free stuff for himself/herself. Whether I have the capabilities to assess or not is my business, and the NGO's. :D
Of course, the part about raising funds is often indirect and, well, it is done through strategic alliances and strategic partnerships, but see, more and more Coordinators and NGOs and VWOs are requesting for direct involvement anyway, so if that be the case, why not I be involved in the fund-raising part and be directly involved at the same time?
After all, Banks and Insurance companies have been doing it for a long time. They make donations and they get their staff to get down to the ground, sometimes armed with water bottles, Happy Meals and snack packs, someimes armed with bags and bags of groceries, and other times armed with pails, newspapers, ladders, paint rollers, boxed lunches and tins of paint.