According to Mainwaring:

• 83% of consumers are willing to change their consumption habits if it can help make tomorrow’s world a better place to live.
• 61% have sought a brand that supports a good cause even if it was not the cheapest brand.
• 64% would recommend a brand that supports a good cause, up from 52% last year.
• 56% believe the interests of society and the interests of businesses should have equal weight in business decisions.
• 67% would switch brands if a different brand of similar quality supported a good cause.

The data point to a warning for companies that choose to ignore CSR and to an opportunity for those that embrace it. More and more consumers are factoring corporate social responsibility into their buying decisions.

Mainwaring believes the consumer drive for CSR will become unstoppable for three reasons:

1. Many consumers are frustrated and angry at corporations. “Millions of them have been personally affected by the relentless corporate drive for profit above all else, having lost their jobs. These are people who are now distrustful of corporations and intolerant of selfish behaviors that negatively affect their lives and their planet.”
2. Many consumers, especially Millennials, won’t tolerate corporations and brands that neglect purpose or weasel their way around being responsible citizens. If you “greenwash” (lie about the ecofriendliness of your products), “cause-wash” (advertise support for a cause that you actually do little or nothing to support), or “local-wash” (claim your products are locally made when they’re not), you will be vilified.
3. Consumers believe capitalism needs to evolve. “Consumers will increasingly seek to conduct their business transactions only with corporations and brands that practice purposeful capitalism with transparency, authenticity, and accountability throughout their entire supply and sales chains.”

To read more about CSR, click on these articles:

• Baldrige Model: How do you govern and fulfill your societal responsibilities?
• Sustainability: A Business Imperative
• Strategic Value of CSR
• Corporate Social Responsibility in 2010
• Save Money – and the Environment
• Not CSR: Shared Value

Your organization needs processes for:

• Management and fiscal accountability
• Transparency in operations and in the selection and disclosure polices for board members
• Independent internal and external audits
• Protecting stakeholder and stockholder interests, as appropriate
• Evaluating the performance of senior leaders and the board
• Using senior leader and board member reviews to develop and improve performance of these leaders and of the leadership system
• Preparing for and addressing any adverse impacts on society of your products and operations
• Promoting and ensuring ethical behavior in all interactions
• Contributing to the well-being of your environmental, social, and economic systems
• Actively supporting and strengthening your key communities

Best practices to consider:

• Key measures are identified for evaluating the performance and improvement of leaders and of the leadership system.
• Senior leaders and board members use formal processes for reviewing their performance and that of the leadership system and use the results of those reviews, which are typically annual, to improve personal and organizational performance.
• Key processes, measures, and goals for achieving and surpassing regulatory and legal requirements and for promoting ethical behavior are identified, implemented, and systematically improved.
• Societal well-being is an integral part of the strategic planning process and of senior leadership team reviews.
• Long-range strategies focus the organization on identifying its key communities, determining areas for involvement, which are aligned with the organization’s core competencies, and contributing to improving them.

Common problem areas:

• No systematic processes exist to hold management accountable for their actions or to promote transparency in operations.
• The performance of the Board and of individual board members is not reviewed or improved.
• No processes, measures, or goals are in place to manage compliance and ethics performance.
• Societal well-being is not part of strategic planning or senior leadership discussions.
• Community support is an afterthought rather than a strategic decision to focus knowledge and resources on those key communities where your organization can make the greatest impact.

To read more about governance and societal responsibility, click on these articles:

• Sustainability: A Business Imperative
• Corporate Social Responsibility in 2010
• Best-in-Class Community Support

The answer is: Yes.

Such initiatives mark the intersection of sustainability and business, according to Dhiraj Rajaram in this HRB blog. He notes that the chain has 25 distribution centers across the U.S., which means it can cut millions of miles of transportation costs and emissions by optimizing its transportation routes.

The CEO of an analytics firm, Rajaram has noticed “a surge in interest among Fortune 500 companies for analytical models that help determine the impact of going green on their bottom line.” One-hundred-thirty of the Fortune 500 have officers at the level of vice president or higher who are focused on sustainability.

The Baldrige Criteria ask how “you contribute to the well-being of your environmental, social, and economic systems.” Rajaram suggests five ways to address the well-being of your environmental and economic systems by analyzing the impact of going green on your company’s financial performance:

1. Take a close look at your supply chain. Collect baseline measurements of the environmental impact of operations.
2. Establish short-term goals. Select an initial project where you can realize a quick impact by improving performance on the metrics you’ve collected.
3. Expand the initiative. If the project succeeds, expand it to other areas.
4. Communicate your vision. Share your goals and progress with employees, suppliers, and customers.
5. Engage the entire supply chain. “Begin with choosing the right vendors,” Rajaram writes, “then incorporate green compliance checks and choose vendors not just on price but also based on quality and environmental factors.”

To read more about sustainability, click on these articles:

• Sustainability: A Business Imperative
• Sustainability Forces Wheel
• 4 Parts of True Sustainability
• P&G Sets High Bar for Environmental Responsibility
• Porter: CSR Is Dead End

FastCompany expert blogger Alice Korngold follows the CSR story. She identified four CSR trends in 2010 (“The Year in CSR: The Four Trends of 2010,” December 21, 2010):

1. Leadership matters. Korngold talks about the annual September meeting of the Clinton Global Initiative at which “scores of CEOs from global corporations” reported “on the completion of previous years’ multimillion dollar commitments and made new commitments to address global social, economic, and environmental challenges.” These are not tree-hugging dreamers but the kind of visionary leaders Baldrige applauds. “Corporate leaders with vision are recognizing that by advancing global solutions, they can create valuable renewable resources to their advantage, establish new markets for their companies, and otherwise unleash tremendous opportunities,” she writes.

2. Consumers care. According to the 2010 Cone Shared Responsibility Study, 84% of Americans believe their ideas can help companies create products and services that are a win for consumers, business, and society, but only half (53%) feel companies are effectively encouraging them to speak up on corporate social and environmental practices and products. The study also observed that “Americans hold companies accountable for a range of global issues that may impact their businesses.”

3. Measurement matters. It’s called “greenwashing” and “faking CSR,” and it doesn’t work. A company that says one thing and does another will get eventually get busted on the Internet. Here’s a recent example from a Minnesota business icon, Target. Last fall, Target made campaign donations to support the Republican candidate for governor who had a history of opposition to gay rights. Outrage forced Target’s CEO to apologize and promise a new process to review future political donations. Earlier this week, The Awl used documents filed with the FEC in October to show that Target continued to donate to anti-gay politicians after its CEO’s apology and promise (click here for article). By contrast, companies that truly pursue CSR establish their own metrics or participate in CSR networks like the Global Reporting Initiative and Social Accountability International. And they use performance on those metrics to show their commitment to and the value of CSR, rather than hollow words.

4. Accountability and integrity matter. “CEOs and boards must ensure that their communications are honest and candid,” writes Korngold. “They should assume that in today’s media environment, the truth will out.”

To read more about CSR, click on these articles:

• Sustainability: A Business Imperative
• 4 Parts of True Sustainability
• How to Build a Culture of Social Responsibility
• P&G Sets High Bar for Environmental Responsibility

This week, P&G announced that its ninth manufacturing plant—and its first in North America—earned the distinction of beneficially using 100% of its waste, with more than 60% recycled or reused and the rest converted to energy.

P&G’s vision is to have zero manufacturing waste going to landfills from any of its plants anywhere in the world. It is moving toward that vision through its Global Asset Recovery Purchases (GARP) program, which uses internal innovation and external partnerships to help plants reach the zero waste goal. In the case of the latest plant, a feminine care facility in Auburn, Maine, the GARP team partnered with a provider to sort recyclable materials and convert non-recyclable materials to energy through incineration. The electricity from the incineration is used by the incineration facility with the excess sold to the local power company. According to P&G, in the last year “the GARP team has diverted tens of thousands of tons from landfills while delivering tens of millions of dollars in cost recover to the company” (“P&G Announces Its First North American Manufacturing Plant to Achieve Zero Waste to Landfill,” IW Staff, IndustryWeek, December 6, 2010).

To read more about Baldrige and the environment, click on these articles:

• Do You Know Your Externalities?
• Sustainability: A Business Imperative
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Another Case of Corporate Irresponsibility

The Baldrige Criteria ask how you consider societal well-being and benefit as part of your operations, including the environmental systems to which you contribute. As with everything in the Baldrige model, acting on your environmental responsibility requires well-defined  and deployed processes that align with your mission and vision and support sustainability and long-term success.

IBM seeks the same systemic approach by its suppliers. According to Wayne Balta, IBM’s VP for corporate environmental affairs and product safety, “We want them all to build long-term sustainability in a way that is integral to their routine operations, not as an add-on fix.”

The Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program (VACSP) Clinical Research Pharmacy Coordinating Center, which won the Baldrige Award in 2009, is a small organization of approximately 112 people that supports and manages drug-related activities in clinical trials. In its application summary, it describes how it considers societal well-being and sustainability:

“As a small organization, the Center has a culture of improvement, including a strong commitment to conserving natural resources and to environmental stewardship. The Center maintains a constant focus on process improvement and efficiency, including the assessment of the environmental impact of our administrative operations and trial-related processes. The Center has recycling programs for paper, cardboard and aluminum. Used equipment, including manufacturing or lab equipment and computers, is repurposed through the VA Excess Program, which reuses or recycles the equipment. From study design to closeout, the Center has developed approaches to minimize environmental impact. The Center continually seeks new technologies that minimize the amount of chemical waste generated during the manufacturing process and regularly implements waste-reduction improvements in the packaging of drug products. Over the years, the Center has shifted from using kit boxes to cartons to trays, which use 65% less material and are recyclable. The Center is committed to total incineration of all non-useable drug products. This practice exceeds federal and state requirements and thus avoids landfill and groundwater contamination.”

That’s what 112 people are doing. How is your organization supporting sustainability?

To read more about corporate social responsibility, click on these articles:

• How to Build a Culture of Social Responsibility
• New Guidelines for Social Responsibility
• Another Sign That Green is Mainstream
• Purpose-Inspired Growth
• Corporate Social Responsibility

According to Covalence, a Swiss research firm, Monsanto is the least ethical multinational corporation in the world. Covalence used quantitative and qualitative data to evaluate 581 companies over a seven-year period. Criteria included labor standards, waste management, and human rights records.

The top-ranked companies were IBM, Intel, and HSBC. Rounding out the top ten were Marks & Spencer, Unilever, Xerox, General Electric, Cisco Systems, Dell, and Procter & Gamble.

The worst were:

1. Monsanto Co. This is the same corporation that Forbes named America’s Best Company in December. Apparently, ethics wasn’t part of the equation.
2. Halliburton Company. Dick Cheney’s legacy lives on in both the business and political worlds.
3. Chevron Corp.
4. Freeport-McMoRan Copper & Gold Inc.
5. Philip Morris International Inc.
6. Occidental Petroleum Corporation
7. Ryanair Holdings plc
8. Syngenta AG
9. Grupo Mexico SA de CV
10. Total SA

The companies on this list may survive in the short term because of their economic success, but sustaining that success is another matter. As Adam Werbach, former Sierra Club president, wrote, true sustainability has four equal parts: economic, social, environmental, and cultural (click here). It’s hard to imagine any corporation standing for long on one of those legs, no matter how strong it is.

To read more about corporate social responsibility, click on these articles:

• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Purpose-Inspired Growth
• New Guidelines for Social Responsibility
• Supporting Your Communities
• New Study of Corporate Citizenship