Monday, 12 March 2018

The Conversation/Olorunjuwon Samuel: How corporate social responsibility projects can be derailed

The Conversation  

Edition:

Available editions
Africa

    Job Board

    Become an author
    Sign up as a reader
    Sign in

The Conversation
Academic rigour, journalistic flair

    Arts + Culture
    Business + Economy
    Education
    Environment + Energy
    Health + Medicine
    Politics + Society
    Science + Technology
    In French

How corporate social responsibility projects can be derailed
March 11, 2018 11.02am SAST
Shutterstock
Author

    Olorunjuwon Samuel

    Associate Professor, University of the Witwatersrand

Disclosure statement

Olorunjuwon Samuel does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Partners

University of the Witwatersrand

University of the Witwatersrand provides support as a hosting partner of The Conversation AFRICA.

The Conversation is funded by Barclays Africa and seven universities, including the Cape Peninsula University of Technology, Rhodes University and the Universities of Cape Town, Johannesburg, Kwa-Zulu Natal, Pretoria, and South Africa. It is hosted by the Universities of the Witwatersrand and Western Cape, the African Population and Health Research Centre and the Nigerian Academy of Science. The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is a Strategic Partner. more
Republish this article

Republish
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under Creative Commons licence.

    Email
    Twitter1
    Facebook10
    LinkedIn
    Print

Big companies operating in developing countries often use corporate social responsibility initiatives to position themselves as development agents and friends of the host communities.

But in places like South Africa – and within the mining sector in particular – initiatives aren’t achieving the objectives they were designed to meet. Animosity between corporations and hosting communities persists.

The Marikana massacre is a case in point. A labour dispute between platinum mining company, Lonmin, and its workers, spiralled out of control, resulting in the death of 34 miners after police opened fire on a demonstration. The events at Marikana show how animosities continue to exist, and the damage they can cause.

One of the factors that’s emerged in the intervening four years is that there were major gaps in Lonmin’s corporate social responsibility programme. An analysis of the Marikana events show that the company failed dismally to meet its housing plans for workers. This left a significant portion of the workforce living in dehumanising conditions.

The Lonmin case illustrates two key areas of failure that are common in approaches taken companies. These are a failure to appreciate the cultural sensitivities of host communities and poor communication.

In our paper we review various approaches taken by companies. The paper uses key dimensions of corporate social responsibility – moral, ethical, economic, cultural and consultative and legal. The aim was to identify which the weakest links in the strategies pursued by big corporates.

The research could contribute to a theoretical framework that can be used to develop negotiated and mutually acceptable outcomes. This could potentially reduce the friction and tension that are often present when corporate social responsibility projects are implemented.
Communication is key

Why do companies engage in corporate social responsibility projects? The main reason is a growing realisation that they have a compelling moral, ethical and legal obligation to protect their operating environment as well as stakeholders. They’re also motivated by strategic and economic imperatives.

Our study confirms two key factors. The first is that communication plays a huge role in corporate social responsibility projects. The second is that many have been derailed by uninformed assumptions about the needs and priorities of host communities.

Adopting a consultative decision making approach is essential. If initiatives are viewed as being community oriented, then it makes sense to involve the intended beneficiaries – both in initiation and implementation.

Our study encountered a case where a company encouraged farmers in the community to form themselves into a cooperative society. The company was collaborating with a university faculty of agriculture to train cooperative farmers. The training focused on the use of modern technology and the cultivation of high yielding crops. The idea was that the company would then purchase the crops at prevailing market prices.

The initiative generated a reasonable amount of employment and sustainable income for the community members. But community leaders reacted with hostility. They dismissed the project because they argued that it was fraught with nepotism and favouritism. They also saw it as an attempt to divide and rule. The project, they said, was devised

    to cause confusion amongst our people so that we do not speak with one voice against the operations of the company.

They charged that distributors were selectively appointed by the company without consultation. They added that:

    Most of the distributors are relatives or extended family members of a major shareholder of the company, who is a native of our neighbouring village.

The cooperative project became moribund.

The community leaders’ reaction points to poor communication and consultation. A participatory decision making approach would have resolved the community’s allegations and perceptions.
Cultural sensitivities

Our study also shows that corporations should consider cultural and traditional values when initiating projects. Not doing so could prove expensive.

Cultural and property rights practices differ from one jurisdiction to the other. In most African societies, land is central to people’s existence and identity. Cultural beliefs and traditional practices are often tied to the land.

People’s homes, and the land around them, are considered to be a heritage from ones ancestors and must therefore be preserved and sanctified through rituals. These cultural beliefs and practices don’t always make business sense to multinationals. They, perhaps even unconsciously, underestimate the significance attached to ancestral lands.

Land is sometimes appropriated by government, while businesses are required to pay compensation and relocate people. From our interviews, it was inferred that a company does not see anything untoward in acquiring graveyards and compensating families to exhume and re-bury their ancestors.

But communities consider this to be taboo and a process that could invoke the wrath of their ancestors.

It’s therefore imperative for corporations – particularly multinationals – to foster cultural understanding with local communities.
Your heading here

Overall, we found that companies were willing to embrace corporate social responsibility. This was often expressed in their vision and mission statements and through considerable monetary allocations towards corporate social responsibility initiatives. But many fail due to cultural insensitivity and misplaced communication strategies.

    Mining
    Africa
    Corporate governance
    Corporate Social Responsibility
    Responsibility
    Culture
    South Africa
    Marikana
    CSI
    Corporate

    Tweet
    Share
    Get newsletter

You might also like
South Africa’s land debate is clouded by misrepresentation and lack of data
Snakes and monkeys are getting the blame for corruption in Nigeria
Plant fossils have a lot to teach us about Earth’s history
Very few women oversee US companies. Here’s how to change that
Sign in to comment
0 Comments

    There are no comments on this article yet.
    Have your say, post a comment on this article.

Most popular on The Conversation

    What ‘blackface’ tells us about China’s patronising attitude towards Africa
    Spike in Listeria infections in South Africa: why it matters
    Land debate in South Africa is about dignity and equality - not the constitution
    South Africa returns to apartheid-era censorship with the “banning” of Inxeba
    South Africa’s land debate is clouded by misrepresentation and lack of data

    African universities are ignoring a rich, invaluable resource: their alumni
    Six challenges that impede entrepreneurs with disabilities in South Africa
    Electric vehicles are changing the world. And they’re only just getting started
    What’s stopping Zimbabwe’s young people from participating in elections?
    Three reasons why Africa should treat Tillerson visit with scepticism

Expert Database

    Find experts with knowledge in:*

Want to write?

Write an article and join a growing community of more than 63,900 academics and researchers from 2,278 institutions.

Register now
The Conversation
Community

    Community standards
    Republishing guidelines
    Research and Expert Database
    Analytics
    Job Board
    Our feeds

Company

    Who we are
    Our charter
    Our team
    Partners and funders
    Contributing institutions
    Resource for media
    Contact us

Stay informed and subscribe to our free daily newsletter and get the latest analysis and commentary directly in your inbox.
Email address
Follow us on social media

Privacy policy Terms and conditions Corrections

Copyright © 2010–2018, The Conversation Africa, Inc.

No comments: