Rough Middle 2

Arc 1: History of Corporations

 

I’d like to start with the arc on current CSR initiatives, since this sets the stage well for thinking about what companies are currently doing and where they could go. By doing that first, I could keep current CSR initiatives in my mind as I go through the rest of my research, so I will have more time to think of new ideas and things to explore. Arc 2 will probably be a deep dive into the tech industry and what problems arise from its rise. Then I could explore what aspects of the tech industry could be utilized to create mutually beneficial CSR initiatives.

 

The most compelling aspects of my research are the propositions of what tech companies could do. Since the emergence of powerful tech companies is fairly recent, there hasn’t been much done in terms of exploring how CSR should change for them, so it’s exciting to be exploring this topic.

 

I am adding the angle of how to make CSR initiatives mutually beneficial, so that companies will actually be more successful in doing them, to oppose what some argue is a paradox: companies are profit-driven, so they shouldn’t or won’t do anything that reduces profits. By making CSR profitable, it will remove this supposed paradox, as well as encourage more companies to pursue it.

 

I will organize my project by these concepts: history of corporations, emergence of CSR in manufacturing, rise of the tech sector, CSR in tech, future CSR initiatives for tech companies

 

I was most intrigued by the text “What Does Corporate Social Responsibility Mean for the Technology Sector?” as it described concrete ways tech companies could leverage their power and innovation to help solve society’s problems. It connects to other articles that focus on only problems of environment and labor, as these are issues of the manufacturing industry, and although these are important issues, we should prioritize the issues that arise from technology, such as inequality and gentrification. I’d like to explore what other problems the tech industry causes, and what ways it can fix these problems.

 

Arc 1: History of Corporations

·      History of corporations

·      Purpose of CSR and emergence

·      Manufacturing forms of CSR

 

Evidence:

·      Timeline of corporate power

·      Definition of CSR, does the definition change?

·      Emergence of manufacturing CSR

·      Social movements that spurred a change in the manufacturing industry, how these social movements came to be

·      What the current forms of CSR are in different industries, how these CSR initiatives came to be

·      Current CSR goals, what do they hope to achieve? Better brand image? Are they just out of the goodness of the company’s heart? Do they align with the company’s mission statements? Do they increase profit margins?

·      CSR goals in tech specifically, how did these CSR initiatives emerge? Just borne out of the manufacturing industry?

·      How, if at all, has CSR changed in the brief history of the tech industry? Was CSR always present? Why? Because tech companies tend to be more liberal and educated? What effect has CSR had on the tech industry?

 

 

Analysis:

·      Corporations were originally profit-driven, but have the trend of becoming more socially conscious, can they fully evolve to be social enterprises?

·      CSR emerged out of social movements, environmental awareness, labor rights, what other social movements may spur further changes?

·      Current CSR initiatives are based on manufacturing problems, how can we get them to shift to solve problems caused by technology? And can they solve problems they don’t directly cause? Could doing so benefit themselves?

·      What are the biggest issues caused by tech companies? What are the biggest problems in our society? How should we prioritize these issues?

 

Ideas and Significance:

·      Corporations in technology have more power than ever before, in terms of generating a lot of wealth, political influence, social media/celebrity presence of key members (eg Elon Musk, Zuckerberg)

·      How can this power be utilized for good? What will happen if it is not utilized for good?

·      With big power comes big problems, issue of privacy (our data being shared without our consent), huge increase in inequality (big CEOs earning larger share of income), gentrification around tech areas (also Airbnb driving up rent, Uber causing taxi drivers to lose jobs, etc)

·      Should corporations utilize their power to have more of a governance role in our everyday lives? Should they fund education, infrastructure, initiatives to reduce inequality, protection against threats? What are the pros and cons, for both them and for us?

·      What is the distinction between a social enterprise and corporate social responsibility, how much can they merge onto one another, where is the ideal on that spectrum for a company to be? What are the pros and cons of each? Should different types of companies be at different places on the spectrum?

·      Should we return to policies limiting corporate power instead? Can we trust companies to do good with the power they have or should we return to governance rules that reduce corporate power or place limits on it? How powerful should we allow a company to get, and how do we define power (money, cultural influence, clout)?


 

History of corporations:

https://newint.org/features/2002/07/05/history

“A Short History Of Corporations.” New Internationalist, 5 July 2002, newint.org/features/2002/07/05/history.


 

Arc 2: Causes of CSR

 

Arc 2: Political, social, and economic climates that caused (primarily manufacturing) CSR initiatives in the past, and how they differ in today’s tech-dominant society.

·      How are politics, economics, and society different today then they were in the past?

·      How is the dominance of tech companies different from the dominance of manufacturing companies? In terms of structure, goals, and impact. What caused/is causing those differences?

·      What are the big social issues of today? How did they emerge? What, if anything, should corporations do about them? Are corporations to blame for these social issues?

 

Evidence:

·      Social issues and social movements of today, what have the most impact and traction, what’s the climate like

·      Historically, what have been the “checks and balances” between government, corporations, and citizens? Has that changed with this new tech power?

·      Issues to consider:

o   The digital divide, access to technology, access to opportunity, discrimination based on race, gender, or not being able to afford college (pay to play)

o   Needing connections to succeed, a big concept today, nepotism, creating an elite society?

·      Merging of the rich, powerful, and celebrities

o   Elon Musk becoming a celebrity, very popular and well-known

o   Trump, businessman (albeit a poor one) becoming president, also represents anger of working-class, perhaps due to the wage inequality

·      The power of money, corporations and leaders of corporations have a larger share of income than before, can fund many things, good or bad

·      Corporate governance or corporate citizenship- should corporations intervene in social issues, or should they not have the power to do so? Should the government increase restrictions on corporations?

o    Should corporations instead just be good citizens, work on solving only the issues they create?

o   But issues today are multidimensional, hard to untangle and solve from other issues, how can they solve inequality? Can change wage inequality, but then might lose good corporate leaders.

o   How to change gentrification? A lot of times, corporations exacerbating existing issues, to what extent should they fix it then? How to calculate their impact?

·      Brand image, brand value, marketing very important in this day and age, social media and the internet allows people to look up a company and choose whether to support it/buy its products

o   Big change since the manufacturing industry?

 

Analysis:

·      CSR initiatives usually arise from public pressure, what are the specific factors that cause it to arise? How can we get companies to do good? What incentives must be in place?

·      What in society caused CSR to emerge in the first place? What things had to be in place?

·      As corporations become more and more powerful, we assume they should be more responsible for their actions

·      What should the distinctions be between corporations, citizens, and the government? Should corporations act as a sort of government, providing public goods and services? Or should it act more as a responsible citizen, obeying restrictions placed on it and reducing the damage it causes, environmental, social, economic, and otherwise? How can a line be drawn? Or where on the spectrum should it be?

·      A lot of the effects of tech companies are hidden. Manufacturing directly causes pollution and sometimes labor abuse. Tech companies have some overt effects, such as an increasing income inequality, but also a lot of more subtle effects, such as creating an elite society where you have to know people in power and go to an expensive school to get the highest jobs, gentrification around these areas, making many jobs obsolete so making it harder to predict what jobs will still exist by the time you start studying for it

o   Computer science is an ever-growing field, very profitable to get a major in, but not everyone has access to computers, so not everyone can learn it. The digital divide shows here, widening the opportunity gap

 

Ideas and Significance:

·      Are tech companies to blame for the social issues that arise? Focusing especially on inequality, gentrification, what role do they play in these issues, and what responsibility should they have to mitigate them?

·      Is simply having a lot of power enough of a reason to make a company responsible?

·      How were these tech companies able to amass such power? Some issues before were monopolies, labor issues, but today it seems that just all the money is going to tech companies, yet the very well-compensated programmers benefit from it

o   Should there be more taxes on companies or some other restriction to limit their power? Or should we instead allow them to govern themselves and our society?

o   Are programmers being paid the natural market value of their work, or is it overinflated? Will natural causes reduce it, and/or should it be reduced?


 

CSR to mitigate market and redistributive failures

BÉNABOU, ROLAND, and JEAN TIROLE. “Individual and Corporate Social Responsibility.” Economica, vol. 77, no. 305, 2010, pp. 1–19. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/27764393.

 

-This paper is about corporate social responsibility as a way to mitigate market and redistributive failures.

-This is particularly interesting when looking at the relatively recent technology industry, as it has greatly increased inequality, raising income of the .01% and .001%, so is it thus responsible for undoing some of the inequality it caused by redistribution?



 

Arc 3: Tech Giants and their effects on our society

 

·      How much power and influence do these corporations have on our lives?

·      What impact has these corporations had on our lives?

·      What problems arise with this consolidation of power? What have been the effects, good or bad or somewhere in between?”

·      What are companies currently doing with the great power they have? Are they using it to their own advantage? What CSR or philanthropic initiatives are already in place?

 

Evidence:

·      How much power these companies have in terms of political and social sway, what their net worth is. How does money correspond with power in social, economic, and political influence of these companies?

·      How do people feel about these companies? Nowadays, people have a sort of affection towards some companies, as if they’re people. They also have a hatred towards others. What determines how people feel towards these companies?

·      What have been the impacts that are the direct or indirect effect of corporations? How, if at all, can these impacts be measured or quantified? What complex relationships exist between corporations and civilians?

·      In the past, government has worked to break up monopolies, corporations with too much power, why have they not done that today? Would it cause a public uproar? Are these tech companies gaining power and profit in a fair way, while before companies did so in an unfair way?

o   What restrictions are currently on companies?

·      What are companies doing, deliberately and unintentionally, to change the US or world?

·      Are any companies abusing their power?

·      What are companies required to do in terms of mitigating negative impacts they have? What environmental and social restrictions are in place (as remnants of the manufacturing industry’s power), and what, if any, restrictions are in place for problems caused specifically by the tech sector?

·      What CSR initiatives are currently in place by different companies? What motivated these companies to have CSR initiatives? What effect have these initiatives had?

 

Analysis:

·      How corporations have influenced the economy, politics, the social sector

·      In what ways people interact with companies, how people feel about them, what determines how people feel about them

o   Is a company liked or disliked because of the social good it does? Is it because of marketing tactics? Is it somewhat random?

·      How people’s relationships and conceptions of businesses have changed, and the reasons there has been change

·      The impact of the growing power of the corporate sector

o   Do the social initiatives these companies push outweigh the costs of their negative effects?

o   Can corporations be more effective at creating positive social change than government in some cases?

o   Should corporations have the power to create change or should they be limited?

·      Should there be more restrictions to break up corporations’ power? New policies to reflect this drastic change in power structure? How do we analyze and create new policy for such a radically different corporate power structure?

 

 

Ideas and Significance:

·      With this new era of corporate power, should we play by new rules? Even inadvertently, corporations can worsen societal problems such as inequality because of how highly valued their services are, allowing them to pay workers increasingly high salaries

·      Are these jobs really worth the extremely high salaries they pay? Is that fair and conductive to growth, or does it just create a inequality gap that represses most of our workforce, allowing only kids of the rich who can afford the best education and opportunities to find success

·      Should corporations have the power and influence that they do, or should we find some way to limit it? In what ways, if any, should power be limited? Should the pay higher taxes, with a certain amount going to fix societal problems they contribute to? Should they not be allowed to grow past a certain point and not be allowed a monopoly on the market? Is it possible for such laws to be enforced?

·      What current CSR initiatives are in place, and which are working? How can we even measure effects of CSR initiatives, as many issues are multifaceted and cannot be easily measured? What CSR initiatives should be replicated and expanded upon? Are these CSR initiatives profitable, in the short and long term? What does it take to implement them?

How can we make doing good sustainable for businesses and our society? How can we mitigate and reverse the damage done to the environment, if at all? How can we address labor law issues, inequality, gentrification, and other world problems?


 

What companies are currently doing:

 

CSR and Sustainability in the Technology Industry: Case of Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Intel and IBM.

https://www.cheshnotes.com/2017/10/csr-sustainability-technology-industry/

 

Pratap, Abhijeet. “CSR and Sustainability in the Technology Industry.” Cheshnotes, 8 Oct. 2018, www.cheshnotes.com/2017/10/csr-sustainability-technology-industry/.

 

“Environmental responsibility is a core value that has been a part of Google’s culture since the beginning.  The company has remained carbon neutral since 2007. The Geo team at Google is building a living breathing dashboard for the planet using cloud computing and machine learning. In 2017, it will reach its target of 100% renewable energy for its global business operations.”

        -lead to higher energy efficiency, less consumption and costs for Google, benefiting them directly, at the same time as the planet

-Google has also invested in creating sustainable workplaces and empowering through technology

 

“Amazon too takes CSR and sustainability seriously. The brand has invested in several areas including a cleaner future for the planet, renewable energy, sustainable operations and packaging, reducing global carbon footprint and on engaging the community for a better environmental future.”

 

“Microsoft too like the other three technology giants is a leader in terms of sustainability and CSR. This year in July it launched a new program designed for accelerated use of AI for environmental protection.  Microsoft has focussed its sustainability efforts in five major areas where it believes it can have the best impact – carbon, energy, water, ecosystems, and circular economy.”

 

“IBM’s approach to CSR is a reflection of its business that includes applied technology, continuous transformation and sustainable change… IBM has invested in learning around the world to prepare the workforce of tomorrow. It is working in tandem with educators and other important stakeholders to create innovative technologies and education models that can ready people for the opportunities available in the 21st century.”

        -Created P-Tech 9-14 school model in New York, Teacher Advisor and Teachers Try Science models

        -Also helps military veterans through Veteran Employment Accelerator Impact Grant program, trains them to fill skill gaps and helps find employment

        -Can companies help teach skills they’re looking for in lower-income schools to help these kids overcome the inequality in our nation? Start with education inequality

 

 

“Bosch has created a Micro Climate Monitoring System (MCMS) using Intel’s IoT technology that can help manage air quality around the world in previously impossible ways.”

        -Intel has invested in innovative technologies in transportation and lighting for cities, created wearable device that flashes when the level of carbon monoxide gets unsafe

 

-Sustainability helps businesses reduce costs, minimize wastes, and get a positive reputation, they have technology to improve the world, they can form large collaborations and work together, the four technology giants are leading in this area and others are following


 

Arc 4: What new CSR initiatives should tech companies undertake?


 

·      Define the issues tech companies should be tackling,

o    Inequality and gentrification

·      How tech companies should address these issues, both in terms of best utilizing its great influential power and the creativity of its employees

·      How these CSR initiatives can benefit the tech companies themselves

o   Improved marketing, brand image

o   Employees tend to be educated and liberal, perhaps more inclined to work at companies that do good

o   A more productive economy will make everyone better off

·      How to assess the impacts tech companies make

o   Issues are multifaceted and difficult to quantify

 

Evidence:

·      What are the negative impacts of the tech industry? Any big issues besides inequality and gentrification?

·      How are tech companies currently addressing these issues? Can these strategies by adopted by other companies?

o   Is the way these tech companies are helping mitigate these issues unique to their company? How do their CSR initiatives interact with their business and mission?

·      How do companies decide which CSR initiatives to implement?

·      What strategies are economists, social activists, and business leaders suggesting be implemented in terms of CSR in the tech industry? What are the pros and cons of these strategies?

o   How effective do they seem to be? How realistic do they seem to be?

·      How can strategies differ to best align with different businesses, so that the CSR initiatives are mutually beneficial?

·      What non-profit organizations or other organizations are working with tech businesses to make them more sustainable?

 

 

A non-profit aimed at reducing inequality and gentrification through tech firm leadership: https://techequitycollaborative.org/

 

 

The Rise of Tech Workers as a Political Force for Good

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHqwnV8mERc

·      rents increasing in SF because of tech companies moving in

·      Uber moved into Oakland, residents felt despair, company moving thousands of high paying jobs into an economically depressed inner city, and people would not want them to come, when before would’ve celebrated

o   Internet thought to drive democracy, yet also causes this inequality and displacement

o   Most people in the industry want it to be contributing to broad based growth and opportunity, not inequality and displacement

o   But also, housing crisis in California is decades in the making, Bay Area has only produced 57% of the housing we need to keep up with growth

·      Tech isn’t at the table, working to help solve these issues, even though people in the industry want to

·      Tech employees protesting Trump presidency, and “you can’t protest these issues on a national level if you’re ignoring them in your own backyard”

·      Tech Equity Collaborative is focusing on issues of housing, workforce development, and access to technology, doing it through campaigns (for funding of anti-displacement and homelessness prevention services), events & awareness-raising, and volunteer opportunities (training members to be non-profit board members)

 

Analysis:

·      Corporations have worked with the government to improve the public sector, as tech corporations often have more advanced technology

o   Should this be expanded upon, or do we need to draw a line for limiting the power of corporations and protecting the privacy of people?

·      How can corporations help solve the issues they cause? For example, gentrification is caused by companies moving into areas, and employees following. However, corporations generally don’t hire out of these areas, so rents increase and residents are forced out. How can companies fix this problem they seem to directly cause?

o   Contracts with government to subsidize low-income housing? How can this benefit the companies too? Or should it just be law?

·      Tech companies are good at collecting and analyzing data, how can this skill set be used?

o   How to best allocate funds to help mitigate inequality?

·      Investment in the education of nearby schools, what impact does this have?

·      What is the projected growth of the tech industry?

 

 

Idea and Significance:

·      Tech company is growing rapidly, and already has a huge impact on society, both good and bad

o   Technology is democratizing in a way, power of the internet, yet can also lead to issues such as inequality, with those in tech industry paid extremely high

·      Issue of digital divide, part of population cut off from the potential to go into this booming industry, what can we do about it

·      Tech companies have perhaps unprecedented power, what should they do with it? They can make a huge positive impact, and doing so now would set that in place for future generations

·      Alternatively, should the power of the tech industry be limited? Should they not be given this much influence?

·      Politically, tech tends to lean left, while older financial institutions centralized in New York often lean more right, what effect does this have?

o   For one, tech employees more likely to support CSR

·      Tech companies have unique skills, great creativity, and apply data and programming to almost every problem now, how can they apply these capabilities to improving society?

 

Different ways tech can improve CSR:

What Does Corporate Social Responsibility Mean for the Technology Sector?

https://ssir.org/articles/entry/what_does_corporate_social_responsibility_mean_for_the_technology_sector

 

Morfit, Simon. “What Does Corporate Social Responsibility Mean for the Technology Sector?” Stanford Social Innovation Review, 3 Oct. 2014, ssir.org/articles/entry/what_does_corporate_social_responsibility_mean_for_the_technology_sector.

 

 

“The industry faces mounting calls to make greater societal contributions beyond those of profit. The technology field is uniquely positioned to give back to society in ways that distinguish it from other industries.”

 

“However, for a field that prides itself on innovation, the prevailing manner in which the technology sector is giving back looks a lot like every other industry: corporate philanthropy and volunteer campaigns. This begs the question: Are there unique ways that the information technology sector can give back, and if so, what are they? The answer lies in invigorating how the sector pursues corporate responsibility (CSR) strategies.”

 

-Major companies now have in-house CSR divisions and strategies; traditional manufacturing sectors have made big advances in defining and implementing responsible business practices, CSR focus on wellbeing of labor and the environment

        -but this clarity doesn’t exist for the technology sector, labor is not vulnerable but a well-compensated programmer, environment is confined to reducing carbon emissions by increasing computing efficiency

 

So technology professionals are trying to figure out what it means to give back and how to do so, some promising practices

        -hackathons are a common technique to spur innovation in the technology field, Cloudera hosted a hackathon to help a nonprofit

        -sf.citi fosters partnerships b/w its members and gov’t to use technology to solve city problems (here is an example of the lines between government and corporations blurring)

        -Google’s Person Finder web application to find people after emergencies, allows nonprofits and gov’t agencies to contribute and receive data

        -show that the technology sector is best at capturing, analyzing, and sharing data, so data analytics is the best they can offer the social sector; the social sector is lacking the ability to collect/use data so would be extremely helpful, would build public trust and support for companies in return




 

Different forms of CSR:

Kerlin, Janelle A. “A Comparative Analysis of the Global Emergence of Social Enterprise.” Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, vol. 21, no. 2, 2010, pp. 162–179. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/27928210.

·    This article is about social enterprises, the ways they effect change, and the ways they differ across countries. It would add a way of thinking about how a corporation's business can be built around creating social change, rather than being detrimental to society or making a positive impact as a side goal.

·    This article differs from the others in that it looks at how social enterprises are not created in just one way, but rather can be vastly different based on the society they come from. This indicates that there is significant leeway in how a social enterprise can function, leaving room for creativity and new ways to think about how social enterprises can work in and for our society.



 

Counter arguments: should CSR even be implemented?

 

De Colle, Simone, et al. “The Paradox of Corporate Social Responsibility Standards.” Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 125, no. 2, 2014, pp. 177–191., www.jstor.org/stable/24033226.

·    This article criticizes corporate social responsibility, saying it creates a paradox, as CSR can create a thoughtless and blind mindset that undermines its goals. This contradicts a lot of sources pushing for CSR, so it would be interesting to engage the opposite point of view.

·    This article differs from others because it views CSR negatively, arguing it does not meet the goals it intends to, and suggests some ways we could look at and develop CSR differently to avoid the negative effects it may otherwise bring.

Buccholz, Rogene A., and Sandra B. Rosenthal. “Technology and Business: Rethinking the Moral Dilemma.” Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 41, no. 1/2, 2002, pp. 45–50. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/25074905.

·    This article argues that corporations, since they are primarily interested in economic goals, neglect safety and practicality of technology. It says this is a structural problem inherent in the capitalist system, and one way to solve it is to encourage engineers' whistleblowing. This is an interesting idea to consider: is there an inherent connection between something being profit-driven and being immoral?

·       The author approaches the topic with the assumption that businesses tend to be immoral, while individual engineers in them tend to be moral. Technology is seen as creating a moral dilemma and a tension between businesses and the engineers in them, which is a different view than the other articles.

 

 

Companies getting involved in education can be good or could be misguided

 

The Silicon Valley Billionaires Remaking America’s Schools

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/06/technology/tech-billionaires-education-zuckerberg-facebook-hastings.html

 

Singer, Natasha. “The Silicon Valley Billionaires Remaking America's Schools.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 6 June 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/06/06/technology/tech-billionaires-education-zuckerberg-facebook-hastings.html.

 

-billionaires are reinventing the school system, applying many techniques of start ups to education. However, this interference is largely unchecked, and implemented fast, with little data showing its effects. Students are turned into guinea pigs for billionaires to test on

-can companies/billionaires help, but not feel the need to take over?


 

Is CSR even beneficial and can corporations be trusted in enacting them?

L'Etang, Jacquie. “Public Relations and Corporate Social Responsibility: Some Issues Arising.” Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 13, no. 2, 1994, pp. 111–123. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/25072512.

 

-This paper questions whether CSR is beneficial and whether corporations can be trusted to enact them. It brings up the point that CSR efforts are mostly environmental, rather than social, which could indicate that CSR programs are reactionary, responding to pressures rather than out of real responsibility or morality.

-This is an interesting point of view, as many believe corporations need to enact CSR to make up for damages corporations may have caused, but this article argues that perhaps CSR initiative are not beneficial to society, at least the way they are structured now. It also emphasizes that CSR initiatives have been mostly reactionary, so it begs the question of whether corporations have changed their ways, how we can get corporations to change CSR initiatives and what they should be changed to, and whether they should have CSR efforts in the first place.

 

Capitalism 3.0: The Social Capitalism Revolution. February 01, 2007. 2003C87.3827. Commonwealth Club of California records. Hoover Institution Archives, Stanford, CA. https://digitalcollections.hoover.org/objects/4138. http://digitalcollections.hoover.org, 24 October 2018.

 

Lecture titled “Capitalism 3.0: The Social Capitalism Revolution” that talked about the modern age of increasing corporate social responsibility and social capital, and how that is affecting our capitalist economic system. This brings up the larger trend of CSR, rather than focusing on the efforts of individual companies it looks more at the overall trend of CSR and how that’s shaping and being shaped by our modern society.

© 2018 by Danielle Egan