CSR is totally pointless, right!? (Just kidding)

Hello, everyone! Well, it's almost time for April Fools', isn't it? I'm really looking forward to seeing what big, fun lies everyone is planning this year. I hope you pull off a bright, laughable prank. Of course, I intend to declare that this year, I'll live every day without telling lies (already a lie♪).

Lately, clients have been coming to me wanting to do "social good" initiatives. So, I ask them, "What exactly is 'social good' for you?" And the answers I get are things like, "Hmm, you know, like that CSR stuff from a while back? Or CSV, maybe?" Honestly, this whole area remains pretty vague. And it feels like every time a new term like "social good" pops up, people get curious and just want to try using it—that cycle keeps repeating.

So, this might be a very personal take, but I want to try organizing my own thoughts on it. Seriously, this is just my own interpretation, so if you have strong opinions on this topic, you might get annoyed. Please feel free to skip this part if you can. With that timid attitude, let's go for it!!

CSR and CSV are fundamentally the same thing

Let's pull the definition of CSR from Wikipedia, since that's what everyone uses. Well, I'm cutting corners here, so please forgive me.

"Corporate Social Responsibility ( CSR ) refers to the concept that companies should not only pursue profits but also take responsibility for the impact their organizational activities have on society, making appropriate decisions in response to demands from all stakeholders (consumers, investors, and society as a whole)."

Corporate Social Responsibility - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Only quoting the summary part. Because the more I read ahead, the more confused I get. Linda's in trouble... so yeah. Well, basically, when you're doing business, you're affecting consumers, investors, and society as a whole—both positively and negatively—so you need to take proper responsibility! That's what it boils down to, I think.

But of course, people interpret this differently. Someone once said, "Everyone is different, and that's okay." But for example, one person might say, "Considering shareholders, business continuity is crucial. We should focus on corporate governance and compliance to ensure sustainable operations." Another might say, "CSR is about solving current challenges to ensure sustainable operations—it's investing in the future!"

Incidentally, in Japan, most people probably see it as "social contribution activities." That kind of attitude like, "You're making money, so shouldn't you give back to society a bit as a corporate citizen?" After all, it's "corporate social responsibility." You get this intense feeling of piercing stares from many people saying, "We're holding you accountable!" That makes companies end up thinking, "Well, we do things like cleaning roads and donating blood, so could you maybe cut us some slack? I mean, we really are sorry..." That's how companies end up responding. Oh, you've been there, haven't you? That sigh is incredibly deep.

Is corporate activity really that bad?

Well, even I get angry when companies do things that are really bad for the environment, all in the name of industrial development, and then just pretend they don't know about it.

If my beloved bonsai dies, or my dog (a lovely Chihuahua) coughs during our walk, I'd naturally want to hunt down the culprit, thinking "Could it be?!" But here's the thing: companies can continue their economic activities because what they produce is needed by society, because it benefits people's lives (basically, anyway. There are exceptions). So, doesn't it feel fundamentally wrong for them to force themselves into doing charity-like things?

Of course, people who do that are welcome and appreciated, but I wonder if everyone needs to focus solely on that direction. I mean, properly processing the waste generated by your own economic activities so it doesn't cause environmental harm is necessary. That's a basic responsibility, right? I want to take it a step further.

For example, what about developing technology that prevents that waste from being generated in the first place? And if that technology were made available not just within the company but to society at large, so anyone could use it, that would be truly valuable. Or what if the waste itself could be transformed into useful materials?　This secondary utilization of resources would also be highly valuable to society. In other words, we should consider how to create new value for society as an extension of our own business. That value could be a product, a service, or even knowledge. Any company should be able to take on this challenge.

CSV is only found by proactively engaging with societal challenges

This is precisely what CSV—Create Shared Value—advocated by my respected mentor Professor Michael E. Porter—is all about. CSV means "Let's create value we can share together!" If we can build something valuable for both sides, conflicts of interest won't arise, and we can maintain a lasting, positive relationship. Well, I've always lived that way (not really), so I have no enemies (not really), and I'm still hanging in there (sort of). And I believe that what resonates with society and its members is precisely what we call "social good."

While the perspective of "social good" is universal, everyone has their own view, and what society considers "good" is constantly shifting. In other words, people may think many things are "good," but what they prioritize differs, and it also changes with the times and social environment.

Therefore, to consistently create points of connection that gain societal resonance, companies must now adapt their activities to these shifts. While a stubbornly single-minded approach like "This is our unique selling point, so we'll stick to it!" has its merits, a posture of staying attuned to the world is also crucial for gaining broader resonance and acceptance. Where is public attention currently focused as a pressing social issue? And what can our company contribute to that? I believe constantly considering this matching will be essential going forward.

Future information dissemination must start with extracting facts that resonate with the audience.

This mindset will significantly shape future communication approaches. Currently, in strategic PR planning, I focus on refining how to present corporate facts in ways that resonate with consumers. Simultaneously, I recognize the importance of the reverse approach: structuring facts to align with current consumer interests. We've entered an era where perspective and attitude—how closely we can align with the audience, rather than just imposing our own convenience—are crucial. It's precisely the stage where we must fundamentally reexamine how information has been communicated up to now.