CSR in times of disaster
If nature has a quota on how many natural calamities a country can suffer every year, the Philippines has probably gotten its allotment, and more.
Until climate change reared its ugly head, the average number of typhoons or tropical disturbances that visit the country yearly was 20.
The rainy season was predictable then. It started at the latter part of May and lasted until October. By mid-November, the weather eased up to usher in the cool holiday season climate.
Not anymore. Except in March and April, the rains come without schedule. As of this week, 25 severe weather disturbances have hit the country. Worse, we had the misfortune of playing host to typhoon Yolanda, the strongest ever in recorded history.
With one and a half months still remaining in the year, there are dire predictions that two to three more weather bumps may enter the Philippine area of responsibility.
As if the havoc from the heavens was not enough, the earth below Bohol and Cebu shook in a 7.1-magnitude earthquake last Oct. 15 that resulted in massive destruction of properties, injuries and loss of lives. Hardly had the affected Filipinos recovered from the tragedy, Yolanda came to aggravate their miseries.
Response
The series of natural calamities had some people in the social media asking “What crimes have the Filipino people committed to deserve all these?”
In the aftermath of these disasters, it is heartening to see the country’s major corporations, including those beginning to make their mark in the business community, contribute their share in alleviating the financial and social burdens of the victims.
The real nongovernment organizations (not the type that Janet Lim-Napoles allegedly used as conduit to steal the people’s money in collaboration with corrupt congressmen and senators) are similarly engaged in this activity.
They are sometimes on the scene even ahead of government agencies in extending assistance to the victims of natural, as well as man-made, calamities.
This is not surprising because corporations and NGOs can mobilize their resources quickly since they are not hampered by bureaucratic processes that government offices have to go through before they can get their acts together.
Noticeably, for the country’s three major broadcast networks, helping victims of calamities appears to have become part of the ratings game or competition for radio or TV audience.
The newscasts of the kapamilya, kapuso or kapatid networks always carry segments on how their crews or foundations have sent relief goods to the affected areas or helped people in distress.
The manner and extent by which these activities are reported sometimes raises questions on whether they are being done for their publicity value or for humanitarian purposes.
Paradigm shift
The active participation of local corporations in disaster relief operations and other forms of humanitarian activities is of recent vintage.
Until the late 1990s, the mission statement of corporations centered on giving their stockholders and investors the highest returns on their money as soon as possible.
The interests of their customers or clients mattered only to the extent that they affected the viability of the business or their bottom line.
The paradigm shift in business attitudes in developed countries—from pure materialism to sharing wealth with the community—had a profound influence on our corporations.
The change came under the name “corporate social responsibility,” or the obligation of business to go beyond making profits and be an instrument for positive social and environmental changes.
In other words, business should be a meaningful partner of the community in which it operates and, to the extent its finances would allow, contribute to the wellbeing of its stakeholders.
To the credit of our business community, CSR has become an integral part in the operation of many businesses, especially listed and public companies, that funds are purposely set aside in the budget (and actually spent) for their intended objectives.
Advertisement
The true meaning of CSR can be seen in the manner in which it is performed, before and after, by a corporation.
If an act of CSR is done for purposes other than, say, to assist a community in distress or protect the environment, it ceases to be a gesture of social consciousness and instead becomes an instrument for corporate aggrandizement.
There is nothing wrong with attaching a corporation’s logo or brand name on relief goods or in services rendered to victims of calamities if it is done for identification purposes only. At least, the recipients would know who to thank for the benefits received.
But not if the labels are used as props in advertisements and other promotional activities aimed at making the corporation look good in the eyes of its customers, and the public in general.
Natural calamities should be viewed as occasions for performing acts of humanity to our fellow men, not an opportunity for being seen on the evening TV news broadcasts or featured on the front page of a broadsheet.
It is despicable to mine tragedies for their promotional value. Compassion, not exploitation, should be the norm of conduct in times of disasters.
A corporation that entertains a contrary idea is no different from politicians who repack relief goods given by private donors in bags that bear their name to earn the gratitude of their recipients.
The public can see through the true motives behind acts of CSR.
(For comments, e-mail to [email protected].)
