No ratings yet.

Due to increasing globalization, many governments have lost their ability to regulate and execute social and environmental policies. However, the demand for corporations to take responsibility has significantly expanded. This suggests a greater role for civil society in enforcing ‘corporate social responsibility’ (CSR) efforts. CSR is mainly described as a social contract between business and society. It basically represents a company’s duty to consumers. One of the main reasons for the increasing influence of civil society was the development of social media specifically. It is important to clarify the role of the Internet and social media, in order to understand companies’ motivations to act socially and environmentally responsible. This blog describes the influence that the Internet and social media have on CSR activities, with respect to an environmental and business perspective.

Independent organisations, media and citizens have great capacity to impose transparency on companies, due to the Internet. This indicates that scandals or non-environmental practices could easily be exposed, which potentially lead to more environmental friendly actions by companies. For instance, Nestle raised their standards for its palm oil suppliers as a result of Greenpeace Internet campaigns that raised consumer concerns about environmental impacts of different supply choices. Additionally, Volkswagen’s emissions cheating scandal was exposed on the internet, with enormous consequences. The rising negative attitudes of consumers on social media towards the company resulted in direct actions. Volkswagen took back cars to adjust them and they changed their standards. These examples indicate the important role the Internet has in forcing companies to act environmentally responsible.

Despite the risk of being negatively publicized, the Internet, and especially social media, could also be used as a strategic platform by companies to communicate their CSR activities. This implies that the Internet could be considered as a business opportunity in this area, like we have seen many times before in other perspectives (e.g. strategic, financial, marketing). When companies use the Internet and social networks to promote CSR activities, this possibly offers returns. As stated in research, these returns may include an increased reputation. For example, research showed that people’s attitudes towards the companies Johnson&Johnson and ChevronTexaco increased, when they gained knowledge about their CSR activities. Moreover, companies could better meet the demand of stakeholders when they engage them in decision-making processes and their implementation, by actively involving them in applications like blogs, social networks and online communities. However, communication of CSR activities on online platforms normally only attracts those who actively look for online discussions. Nevertheless, social media can reach the larger sphere trough opinion leaders. The Internet enables companies to communicate and promote their CSR activities, which could increase their reputation and forge long-term relationships with stakeholders. This possibly triggers other companies to act more responsible as well, which results in more CSR activities in general. Subsequently, this contributes towards achieving the global sustainable goals.

The Internet is both a threat and an opportunity for companies, with respect to the realization of CSR activities. The transparency of the Internet, leads to an increasing power of civil society and the exposure of environmental-harming actions on the Internet. Therefore, companies are forced to act more environmentally responsible. However, the Internet also provides strategic opportunities regarding CSR. By communicating CSR activities through the Internet, and involving stakeholders in decision-making processes, companies may increase their reputation and strengthen long-term relationships. Thus, CSR activities may also be executed voluntarily, instead of being forced by stakeholders. In the upcoming years, companies will probably act even more environmentally responsible, due to the increasing importance and benefits of CSR, and the still rising power of the Internet and social media.

 

References

Chaudhri, V., & Wang, J. (2007). Communicating corporate social responsibility on the internet: A case study of the top 100 information technology companies in India. Management Communication Quarterly, 21(2), 232-247.

Fieseler, C., & Fleck, M. (2013). The pursuit of empowerment through social media: Structural social capital dynamics in CSR-blogging. Journal of Business Ethics, 118(4), 759-775.

Revkin, C. (2016). With Imposed Transparency and Concerned Millennials, a Boom in Corporate Responsibility? The New York Times.Retrieved November 27, 2017, from https://dotearth.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/01/25/with-imposed-transparency-and-concerned-millennials-a-boom-in-corporate-responsibility/

Russell, C. A., Russell, D. W., & Honea, H. (2016). Corporate Social Responsibility Failures: How do Consumers Respond to Corporate Violations of Implied Social Contracts?. Journal of Business Ethics, 136(4), 759-773.

Wigley, S. (2008). Gauging consumers’ responses to CSR activities: does increased awareness make cents?. Public Relations Review, 34(3), 306-308.

No ratings yet.

People consider employment and job opportunities as major issues. Much of the blame for lost jobs goes to globalization and manufacturing facilities overseas. However, automation seems to bear more blame. Technological developments will replace many jobs around the world. Therefore, some solutions that could tackle the job losses will be described. I will identify the problem in the labour market, with respect to automation, and come up with two possible solutions to overcome future job losses.

Many jobs will be exposed to automation, which could result in job losses. For instance, 47 percent of the total employment in the US seems to be at risk. Furthermore repetitive and predictable tasks are at higher risk than jobs involving social interaction and creativity. However, computerization also affects the healthcare sector, where social interactions are unavoidable. This implies that automation could potentially affect the whole labour market and solutions are required.

Although automation leads to future job losses, it also helps to create new jobs in auxiliary sectors. For instance, jobs like app developers did not exist ten years ago. In order to benefit from technological developments, the labour market policy requires change. Governances should focus on cross-disciplinary cooperation, which needs to be tailored to unique locational advantages of a region. This could create the right mix of local specialization, education and welfare policies. Successful examples of sectoral employment programs include Project Quest in San Antiono and Per Scholas in New York City, which successfully facilitated collaboration between employers and other stakeholders. Moreover, in the future, people will probably work in transitional labour markets and switch between socioeconomic statuses like ‘employed’, ‘caring’ or ‘in education’. Employment programs could potentially help people to remain socially included.

Another solution is to provide ownership stakes in robotic machines for employees. To implement this, the ownership of capital should be widened. A form of ownership that seems to have an economic benefit is ‘employee ownership’. Employees could make profit through owned shares and stock options or other forms of incentive payments. Furthermore, this benefits a firm’s performances. Companies like Google and John Lewis compensate their employees with capital stakes. This seems to motivate them to work harder, which results in better firm performances. When employees own capital, they can benefit from technology that replaces them. Thus, no person individually owns the machines, but every employee owns a substantial part. However, people will work less, which could make them feel bored on the long road. Sectoral programs could partly manage this problem, but other additional solutions are necessary.

Changes in labour market policies are required, in order to overcome unemployment or social exclusiveness due to automation. Therefore, governances should focus on sectoral employment programs. Furthermore, employees could own larger stakes in firms instead of receiving wages, in order to benefit from technologies that replace them. Technology continues to develop, and it is important to be prepared in order to benefit from it. Do you think these proposed solutions could tackle the problem of automation in the labour market? Let me know in the comments!

 

References:

 

Freeman, R. B. (2015). Who owns the robots rules the world. IZA World of Labor.

Frey, C. B., & Osborne, M. A. (2017). The future of employment: how susceptible are jobs to computerisation?. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 114, 254-280.

Katz, L. (2014). Long-term unemployment in the Great Recession. Members-only Library.

Lukina, N. P., Slobodskaia, A. V., & Zilberman, N. N. (2016). SOCIAL DIMENTIONS OF LABOUR ROBOTIZATION IN POST-INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY: ISSUES AND SOLUTIONS. Man In India, 96(7), 2367-2380.

Mahdawi, A. (2017). What jobs will still be around in 20 years? Read this to prepare your future. The Guardian. Retrieved December 2, 2017, from https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/26/jobs-future-automation-robots-skills-creative-health.

Rotman, D. (2017). “The Relentless Pace of Automation”. MIT Technology Review. Retrieved December 2, 2017, from https://www.technologyreview.com/s/603465/the-relentless-pace-of-automation/.

Van Dijk, J., & Edzes, A. (2016). Towards inclusive and resilient regional labour markets: challenges for research and policy. Investigaciones Regionales, (36), 169.