The Good, the Generous and the Galvanic: Marketing's Role in Social Responsibility

Thought Leadership Series
The good, the generous and the galvanic | Marketing’s role in social responsibility 1
AUSTRALIAN MARKETING INSTITUTE
Produced by the NSW Council of the Australian Marketing Institute

Table of Contents
Introduction 3
Purpose 3
The Framework 4
The Good 4
The Generous 7
The Galvanic 8
Why should marketing take a lead? 9
How can marketing help? 10
Why is marketing able to take the lead? 11
Are some customers willing to pay more for socially
responsible products? 12
Where to from here? 15
Final word 17
Credits 18
About the Australian Marketing Institute 19
References 19

Introduction
As the leading professional association for marketing in Australia, the Australian Marketing
Institute (AMI) has consistently shown leadership in critical areas that impact on the future of
the marketing profession and those who practise it. Whether it is marketing’s role in the
Boardroom, the need for greater accountability, learning the nuances of NFP marketing,
championing a multi-sectoral approach to the Chinese market or researching the emerging
challenges faced by marketers, the AMI has always assumed a matured approach that
balances responsiveness and speed with rigour and sound judgement.
Purpose
This paper will explore another area that is returning to the consciousness of organisations
and marketers as they simultaneously grapple with shareholders’ growing demands for
bottom line performance with the community expectation for them to be more socially,
environmentally and ethically responsible. Marketers face a daunting challenge that also
presents a daring opportunity but, we believe, are well placed to balance these seemingly
conflicting forces.
The document does not profess to be a complete or authoritative source on the subject. It is
merely the work of a few passionate and likeminded, practising marketers who form the
membership of the New South Wales Council of the AMI. Our primary purpose is to
generate wider discussion on what we consider a vital topic.
The paper is therefore designed to stimulate thinking and debate within organisations and
the broader marketing community by highlighting key issues around social responsibility and
their connection with marketing at multiple levels. In particular, it explores how marketers
could play a more proactive role in enabling organisations to become increasingly
responsible socially, environmentally and ethically while ensuring the sustainability of bottom
line performance.
We hope it will spark animated and informed discussions among a cross section of
marketing practitioners, educators and business leaders through a variety of channels
including direct feedback, social media conversations, and attendance at AMI events etc., so
a balanced view and concerted action are both possible. Some others like consultants,
accountants, lawyers, HR professionals, Not for Profit organisations, community groups,
NGOs and Government agencies may also find this of interest.

The Framework
The paper looks at social*
responsibility at three levels. However, these three dimensions
are not mutually exclusive and could overlap in different ways and to varying degrees
depending on the sector, scale, location and style of an organisation’s operations.
The good looks at aspects of marketing mostly within the direct control or influence of the
marketing function. In other words, decisions relating to product, pricing, promotion and
distribution etc., that have the potential to create opportunities for demonstrating greater
transparency in corporate behaviour and concern for the consumer, society and environment
collectively leading to increased reputation, competitive advantage or brand preference.
The generous focuses on what is commonly regarded as corporate social responsibility, a
term that has been used loosely to represent any activity that signals an organisation’s
commitment to giving back to society and the community whether or not there is a direct or
indirect benefit to the organisation’s present or future performance.
Generous includes:
a) Philanthropy or altruistic giving
b) Cause related marketing involving purchase or promotion of a product or service and
c) Sponsorship, i.e. a contribution in cash or in kind in return for access to
property/assets that can be commercially leveraged.
The third and final dimension, the galvanic, represents the emerging trend towards creating
shared value, a concept that symbiotically links community and business self-interest,
integrating corporate social responsibility into an organisation’s core business model. Such
an approach delivers outcomes that help less advantaged communities to build both
productive and consumptive capacity i.e. to become capable producers and able consumers,
while creating a spin off bottom line benefit to the business.
We will examine each of the above dimensions more closely, explore how they could be
meaningfully leveraged while encouraging marketers to think about the opportunities and
challenges presented within their own organisations.
The Good
Marketers have influence on a number of key organisational processes which generally
relate to their core marketing responsibility: management of the 4 Ps. It could be argued that
*
The word social in the context of this discussion is used inclusively to encompass environmental (e.g. protection
of the environment, sustainability of resources), ethical and in some instances, governance considerations

in many organisations, while marketers have control of promotion and possibly place, their
influence on other elements of the marketing mix, namely, pricing and product (for instance,
in terms of sourcing) can be limited.
Related to the product are warranties, recall policies, after sales service, technical support,
customer helplines, plain English T&Cs and so on.
Sustainability (i.e. meeting present day needs without causing scarcity of resources for
future generations), acceptable working conditions, avoidance of child labour and absence of
harmful ingredients/components etc., are also issues that are integral to product and brand
responsibility although usually not seen as integral to a marketer’s day-to-day decision-
making responsibility in many organisations.
The variable influence of marketing however does not preclude marketers from becoming
more proactive in demonstrating a greater level of social, environmental or ethical
responsibility in achieving a higher level of:
i. Product quality
ii. Safety and reliability
iii. Consumer friendly design and packaging
iv. Responsible disposal and
v. Concern for vulnerable segments (e.g. physically, mentally, materially challenged
consumers or children).
It is ominous that in its report titled The State of CSR in Australia – Materiality: A
stakeholder’s perspective, the Australian Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility
(ACCSR) found that product responsibility was the least mentioned category of material
issues across stakeholder groups and industries.
It is comforting though that the report goes on to indicate that the absence of comments
relating to this issue could also demonstrate a general lack of understanding of the matter or
the fact that the report captures the views of stakeholders mainly from the mining, energy
and financial services industries where product responsibility may not be as material. The
report suggests that product responsibility could be an area for future focus. The 2014
Report has just been released and we have made references to it later in the document.

In terms of pricing, can marketers attempt to make price structures less complicated, more
transparent, allow ease of comparison with competing offerings, ensure greater consistency
in price practices, provide clear explanation for any changes, and avoid unhealthy methods
and more?
In respect of promotion, ensuring truth and honesty in communications (without sacrificing
creative licence), avoidance of embellished claims, objectivity in comparative advertising,
balanced rather than stereotyped portrayal of gender roles, greater concern for children’s
wellbeing, and fairness and equity in promotional contests are some of the many aspects
that could be addressed.
In the case of distribution, providing increased access to disadvantaged, remote or
indigenous communities, equitable sharing of value across all channel players, promoting
ethical competition, more cost effective logistics solutions, efficiency, trust and reliability of e-
commerce channels, and commitment to fair retail practices etc., merit particular scrutiny.
There are other related areas such as market research, data driven marketing, customer
relationship management, social media conversations etc., where a greater degree of
ethical, social, environmental or governance responsibility can be exercised to protect
privacy, trust and confidentiality.
The above list is only illustrative and different organisations could have unique priorities
based on their industry and/or company circumstance.
What this shows however is ample scope for marketers to look within rather than outwards
when seeking an opportunity for responsible corporate behaviour. In other words, marketers
can apply a duty of conscience test even when making day-to-day marketing decisions
without waiting for changes to the law.
This is more easily said than done because of potential cost impacts and uncertain dollar
benefits of modifications to current practices especially in an economic environment where
businesses are struggling to survive. Establishing a robust correlation between such
initiatives and brand reputation as well as measuring potential flow on effects (e.g. increased
market share or price advantage) should therefore be a priority for marketers and
businesses. The ‘R’ in ROI tracking must link transactional metrics with transformational
measures.

While not all of the above initiatives may fall within the definition of corporate social
responsibility, they will help in building marketers’ credentials in this area and bringing about
a cultural shift within organisations that can drive even more change over time.
The Generous
The word generous is used here in the context of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) as
has been known to be practised for decades. Some CSR programs may have emanated
from a sense of guilt or in an attempt to overcome any negative reputation (or potential risk
of negative perception) either in the broader community or among particular environment or
social activist groups. Increasingly, however, organisations are doing this out of a genuine
desire to help the environment, the wider society or the community in which they operate.
The actions also have the effect of creating a feel-good sentiment†
among employees often
leading to greater engagement and motivation levels, quality improvement and even
productivity increases‡
. There are also benefits in the form of attracting superior talent,
reducing training costs from lower people churn, and delivering better service. Evidence that
such involvement can also enhance customer trust and company reputation that has a
longer term impact on brand preference, price differential and a healthier bottom line is
growing. Employees becoming more directly involved with the community, for example
made possible by the organisation allowing volunteering during work time, has empirically
shown to create a stronger sense of brand community.
As part of their CSR charter, organisations can support a wide range of programs involving
health, literacy/education, indigenous wellbeing, human rights, poverty alleviation,
homelessness, women’s emancipation, discrimination against girls, youth suicide, obesity,
environment protection, pollution, alternative energy, waste disposal and so on.
Given that the choices are many, marketers can play a pivotal part in:
a) Identifying issues that have greater resonance with customer and/or shareholder
groups; and
b) Optimally communicating company contributions so as to deliver tangible commercial
value.
†
From How Virtue Creates Value for Business and Society, a survey of 238 CFOs, investment professionals and
finance executives across industries and 127 corporate social responsibility and sustainability professionals and
self-described socially responsible institutional investors
‡
Ibid.

In its 2012-13 Annual Review, the Australian Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility
(ACCSR) highlights how businesses such as Intrepid Travel (global human rights policy),
NRMA Insurance (partnership with State Emergency Services for knowledge sharing and
mutual benefit), National Australia Bank (corporate responsibility governance framework)
and Main Roads Australia (sustainability reporting) have effectively managed their CSR
activities through committed leadership at the highest level.
The Galvanic
We chose the word galvanic to describe this dimension because of its inherent energy to
drive change and potential to generate business benefits. Creating shared value has been
practised for some years, but a significant trigger for its popularity was the article with the
same title by Michael Porter and Mark Kramer in the Harvard Business Review of Jan-Feb
2011. Although its proponents believe it to be fundamentally different from the concept of
Fortune at the bottom of the Pyramid attributed to the late C K Prahalad, these two schools
of thought have much in common.
The underlying principle is the creation of value that can be shared by both the community
and the organisation. This incremental value could be a result of a new technology, a
renewed operating model, transfer of missing skills or infrastructure, or building additional
capacity; anything that allows the organisation to add value to their business model through
cost reduction, assured supply, improved quality or similar benefits. At the same time, it
allows the host community to become engaged in productive income-generating activity,
boost its purchasing power and improve the lifestyles of its people.
In late July, 2013, AMI NSW was represented at a Round Table organised by the Poverty
Alleviation and Profitability Research Group at the University of Sydney led by Dr Ranjit
Voola, Associate Professor and the Group’s Director. The presentations by experts
(academics, consultants and change agencies) and the discussions that followed
underscored the fact that poverty alleviation is not about giving charity but building capacity
where organisations leverage their business models to bring about transformational change
in communities in a way that delivers mutual benefit to both parties. Among others, B4MD
(Business for Millennium Development) shared the experience of Mondelez International in
integrating cocoa farmers in Papua New Guinea into an ethical, economically beneficial and
commercially viable supply chain.
The idea of public-private partnership has assumed a new avatar with private enterprises
working alongside community groups, government bodies and NGOs to jointly produce and
share value, often catalysed by Not for Profit (NFP) agencies who serve as intermediaries.

We have come across many other examples around the world e.g. ACE Insurance,
American Express, Coca Cola, Dow Chemicals, IBM, Marks & Spencer, Medtronic, Nestle,
Novartis, Novo Nordisk, PepsiCo, Starbucks, Sumitomo, Telefonica, Thompson Reuters,
Vodafone/Verizon, etc., that illustrate the same concept. However, creating shared value
need not be the exclusive domain of large corporations; smaller businesses such as Seven
Seeds coffee in Melbourne have also demonstrated positive results.
Why should marketing take a lead?
We chose the topic of marketing and social responsibility for this paper because of the
nebulous nature of corporate social responsibility and the diverse opinions and perspectives
that have been put forth over the years. We believe marketing can bring greater
convergence to this all-important area as the concept of shared value gains momentum.
More so, during times when profit pressures begin to pull organisations away from their
commitment to social good.
There are some who still believe in Nobel prize winning economist Milton Friedman’s words
in the New York Times Magazine back in September 1970: “There is one and only social
responsibility of business – to use its resources and engage in activities designed to
increase its profits so long as it stays within the rules of the game, which is to say, engages
in open and free competition without deception and fraud**
”. At the other extreme, we have
those who advocate the view that businesses have a fundamental responsibility to society
and consider CSR as a totally virtuous activity whose purpose is diminished by any active
self-promotion in the media.
The corporate responsibility balance lies somewhere in the middle of absolute virtue and
absolute profit and our considered view is that some degree of self-interest is a prerequisite
for organisations to be continually motivated to do good while getting better.
The days when companies cared about CSR only for its cosmetic PR value or marketing
effect, media visibility or access to launch events etc. are long over. However, the argument
that businesses need to be more actively involved because Governments alone cannot
address the planet’s problems will not receive broader support unless there is the prospect
of some self-interest.
**
Some, like John Friedman (no relation of Milton’s) have argued in the Huffington Post that the absence of
deception and fraud subsumes a responsibility to the consumer, competitor, supplier, shareholder etc. and by
extension to the larger community.

How can marketing help?
The areas we identified when dealing with the good have the potential to grow an
organisation’s top line because there seems to be an emerging group of socially conscious
consumers who are willing to pay more for safer, more durable, environmentally friendly,
socially responsible, and ethically acceptable products and services (please see next
section). For too long, businesses have focussed on improving the bottom line by cutting
costs.
In respect to the generous, companies usually get involved in such projects by accident.
The process is more opportunistic than a pursuit of a strategic opportunity that delivers
tangible good to beneficiaries and intangible value to the business. Many CSR initiatives
come about as a result of a chance approach from someone known to a Board Member, a
C-suite executive, or the PR/Marketing boss. Or, a beneficiary organisation may target a
potential sponsor because they have the capacity to fund and not necessarily the emotional
connection to its cause.
If a CSR investment can resonate better with one or more of these target groups –
employees, consumers and shareholders – the cumulative benefit to the organisation of
such association can be significant and long lasting.
Marketing can play a pivotal role in identifying areas for potential partnership as well as
devise optimal ways to emotively communicate outcomes to key stakeholders.
The relevance of marketing can seem more obvious when it comes to the galvanic because
such social enterprise is inextricably linked to the DNA of the business. However, it is still
vital for marketing to continually monitor, sense and respond to new opportunities for social
initiative that have benefits for the business in the form of virgin market segments, new
sources of supply, additional distribution channels or innovative operations.
The case for marketing’s involvement becomes even stronger when we consider a longer
term perspective. A business can only thrive if the ecosystem in which it operates continues
to exist. This ecosystem goes beyond the economic system to include a range of
stakeholders – employees, customers, suppliers, shareholders, community, environment etc.
Marketing is in a unique position to take an outside-in view of a business whether
undertaking an environment scan, performing a SWOT analysis, envisioning alternative
scenarios, reviewing the competitive landscape or monitoring consumer trends and market
opinions. Marketers are also required to develop communication strategies and tactics

targeted at diverse stakeholders that require an insight into their values, attitudes,
motivations, beliefs and behaviour.
Can marketers therefore seize the opportunity to potentially elevate their involvement in CSR
to a strategic contribution that defines the future of the business and possibly determines its
very survival?
Why is marketing able to take the lead?
In researching this paper, we attempted to identify sources that could provide a relevant
basis for linking marketing more closely with the social, environmental or ethical
considerations that confront organisations.
One of these is the Australian Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility’s Annual Review
2012-13. According to a survey††
which formed the basis of this Report, respondents
considered the following companies as CSR leaders – ANZ, Interface, Marks & Spencer,
National Australia Bank, Nike, Patagonia, Rio Tinto, Stockland, Unilever and Westpac.
The top reason (24% of responses) for which these companies were chosen as leaders was
around integrating CSR with core business activities and strategies. This included “making
sustainability part of the business proposition and integrating it with products and services;
having strongly embedded sustainability practices in operations and walking the talk – living
and promoting CSR values”.
This was followed by communication of CSR performance (19% of responses): “Responses
related to companies using public relations and advertising to promote their efforts, regular
updates on their progress and having a willingness to share their own story. Good
performance aside, it is notable that CSR professionals deemed the act of promoting CSR
values, activities and commitments a sign of leadership, rather than the proven achievement
of these initiatives”.
Notwithstanding that the survey captured the views of CSR professionals and not people
from the broader community or a subset of consumers, and despite a likely skew towards
sustainability, these findings support the potential for marketing’s role in:
a) Exploring alignment between business strategy and socially responsible initiatives;
and
b) Leveraging communications to effectively promote social outcomes achieved.
††
Online survey of 160 professionals working in sustainability and corporate responsibility roles

Marketing’s awareness and understanding of organisational strategy and knowledge and
experience in communications with diverse stakeholders (not just customers) lend it greater
competence and credibility in performing this task.
Even as horrific events such as the collapse of the Rana Plaza factory in Bangladesh in April
2013 rekindle the responsibility debate, there has been no consistent and compelling
evidence to suggest that consumers are willing to pay a premium for ethical behaviour.
There has been uncertainty about the value that CSR activities deliver to the bottom line (in
terms of increased sales, decreased costs, or reduced risks) despite some measured
impacts on reputation leading to an indirect effect on quality perception. The tough
economic conditions and growing corporate collapses may have also shifted attention
somewhat from social responsibility to governance, an area that portends far greater and
more immediate negative impacts because of its associated risks. Marketing has a rare
opportunity to show leadership in addressing this gap.
It is pleasing to see eight Australian companies sign up to the Bangladesh Fire and Building
Safety Accord (according to the Oxfam case study cited in the just released ACCSR 2014
Report). The Accord is an innovative multi-stakeholder initiative set up by the International
Labour Organisation. More significantly, Kmart has gone beyond the requirements of this
agreement by publicly disclosing the location of its supplier factories. Could marketing have
been a driver of this CSR initiative?
The Report also showcases Teachers Mutual Bank (TMB), a credit union turned mutual
bank that has embraced sustainability as its core purpose and brand driver, fully integrating
it across the bank’s strategic direction and day to day operations. This has earned Teachers
Mutual Bank a coveted listing among the World’s Most Ethical Companies.
The global “New Nature of Business” initiative’s (www.newnatureofbusiness.org) first Report
(sponsored among others by the University of Sydney Business School) provides a useful
decision-making framework that can help businesses support biodiversity and ecosystem
services.
Are some customers willing to pay more for socially responsible
products?
In order to answer this question, we sifted through literature to unearth a relevant article
titled ‘Global segments of socially consumers: do they exist?’ by Pat Auger, Timothy M
Devinney and Jordan Louviere from the book Global challenges in Responsible Business.

The primary objective of the authors was to determine if a segment of socially conscious
consumers (i.e. consumers willing to pay more for socially responsible products) existed and
how to identify this cohort if they did. Importantly, the underlying premise of the article was
that CSR activities require a better understanding of the consumer perspective with respect
to social and ethical issues not merely the corporate view as this would help in more closely
aligning social responsibility with bottom line benefits.
The authors used data from a six country‡‡
choice experiment incorporating two product
categories – AA batteries (low involvement) and athletic shoes (high involvement) and
studied how trade-offs are made between functional, price and social attributes. We have
excerpted here only the findings that are relevant to the subject of our discussion while
providing cues on how a consumer led approach can work in implementing corporate social
responsibility.
In the case of shoes, the social attributes evaluated were workers’ minimum wages, working
conditions, absence of child labour, and freedom to unionise. In respect of batteries, the
attributes considered were use of recyclable materials, absence of mercury/cadmium, no
hazardous waste and on pack disposal information. Respondents to the survey included
middle class consumers represented by median groups in terms of age, income, education,
and marital status to allow for better comparison across diverse economies.
The learnings from this experiment are relevant to every marketer:
 Socially conscious consumers (consumers willing to pay more for socially
responsible products) account for nearly a third of the middle class market
(important, this is not to be confused with a share of the entire market universe)
 The other two segments were driven primarily by brand and price (it is not clear how
a brand’s consideration and its social reputation were isolated)
 Socially conscious consumers cannot be easily segmented using traditional socio-
demographic variables
 Individuals cannot be labelled as socially conscious across categories; the segments
could differ for each category. In other words, an individual who values
environmental values does not necessarily value labour issues and vice versa
 Not all social attributes have equal effect on consumption; environmental attributes
(e.g. mercury free) are more functional than labour attributes and therefore more
salient
‡‡
USA, Germany, Spain, Turkey, India and Korea

 Consumers are not willing to sacrifice functionality for social desirability but may not
possess enough knowledge to make socially responsible choices
 Cultural differences have a smaller effect on perception of consumption ethics than
generally believed
In the context of our discussion on marketing and social responsibility, the implications of the
above analysis for marketers could be summarised thus:
I. Avoid CSR strategies that are too broad or try to cover too many issues
II. Focus on one single social issue (or a few at most) that are particularly important for
customers and have functional relevance and emotional connection
III. Research on social consciousness must not only evaluate attitudes but also measure
behaviour (is the consumer willing to pay i.e. trade off other attributes)
IV. Effectively communicate and educate consumers about CSR strategy in order to
influence consumer purchase decisions (including packaging which appears to be a
potent medium for consumer products).
An approach informed by such insights can help in better aligning marketing and business
imperatives with social responsibility priorities.
Interestingly, the Nielsen Global Survey of Corporate Citizenship, in 2013§§
found that
globally, 50% of consumers are willing to pay more for goods and services from socially
responsible companies, an increase of 5 percentage points from 2011. Over the same
period, the Australian figures have increased from 31% to 37% (the scores are, not
surprisingly, consistently lower for countries in the developed world). Notably, 43% of global
consumers also claim to have actually spent more on products and services from companies
that have implemented programs to give back to society. Despite the survey measuring
claimed behaviour rather than metered data and being only accessible to respondents
online, the findings show a growing trend towards socially responsible buying.
§§
The survey was conducted during February/March 2013 and polled more than 29000 consumers with online
access in 56 countries with 60%+ internet penetration and an online population of at least 10 million. The
research for the article on socially conscious consumers cited above was also undertaken by Nielsen but in fewer
markets using a different methodology.

Where to from here?
Our attempt to introduce the good, generous and galvanic framework is not meant to be
prescriptive in any way. Also, the three tiers are not suggested to be a hierarchy of any kind.
In other words, creating shared value is not in any way superior to traditional forms of CSR
or other marketing driven consumer care initiatives. While a food business could work with
indigenous populations in remote communities to develop new products that potentially add
a new revenue stream, not every business will have the opportunity or resources to pursue
such avenues.
Sonic Healthcare, an Australian business, has developed its own home grown model. The
company’s venture into Africa began in a small way with its pathology lab services (a primary
activity). Today, it has evolved into a broader involvement in the HEAL Africa program –
helping women with a fistula condition and children affected with clubfoot, promoting primary
education, setting up mobile health clinics and medical equipment servicing facilities etc. –
none of which is directly connected to its core business (as in a shared value model). There
are, however, spinoff benefits in the form of greater employee engagement.
Our purpose in producing this paper is not merely to describe what is happening in the
domain of corporate social responsibility. It is also to enthuse marketers to participate more
purposefully in this activity and share their experiences where possible.
The AMI urges marketers at all levels – those serving on Boards, CMOs, senior, middle level
and emerging marketers, academics and doctoral students (teaching or pursuing research in
related areas) – to be involved in this exchange. Contributions can come in the form of
letters, emails, blog posts or group discussions on the AMI website or participation in a
National or State event. Each of these singly and all of them collectively will greatly enrich
the outcomes of this white paper and make it more practical and meaningful to every
marketer in Australia.

Some of the questions we hope you will consider (not all questions may be relevant to
everyone):
 How do you see the state of CSR and marketing’s role within it with respect to your
industry/organisation or more broadly in Australian business?
 What are the opportunities, challenges and barriers to your organisation becoming
more socially responsible?
 What are the opportunities, challenges and barriers to marketing becoming more
proactive in driving corporate social responsibility in your industry/organisation?
 If not already covered above, what are the benefits and costs of actively embracing
socially responsible marketing in your organisation/industry?
 Are any of the approaches discussed in this paper appropriate for your business
either in their current or modified form? If yes, how do you see these being applied?
 What other factors such as legislative changes, tax incentives, growth in number of
bridging agencies (that are able to establish relationships with community or NGOs)
etc. can be helpful in promoting socially responsible behaviour?
 What role can industry, business or marketing bodies such as Business Council of
Australia, Chambers of Commerce, AICD, AIG, AIM, AMI, AANA, ADMA, PRIA and
the Communications Council etc. perform in influencing change?
 What local, regional or global CSR and related experiences (including highlights of
research studies), are you able to share that could benefit others?
 Any other relevant questions/issues
We also invite those from the academic community to share with the AMI any past, ongoing
or planned research that might help the marketing profession in Australia to assume
leadership in demonstrating social responsibility. Equally, we ask institutions/initiatives in
Australia and overseas e.g. Australian Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility, St. James
Ethics Centre, Sustainable Brands, Effective Brands and many others to lend support to this
movement whose time has come.
Please post feedback on social media or the AMI blog. You may also email your
comments/contributions to editor@ami.org.au.

Final word
In conclusion, we would like to emphasise that social responsibility is not something
organisations should take on impulsively. It should be an integral part of a business’s ethos
and culture, be embedded in its DNA and embraced by its people at every level. It is equally
important that organisations appreciate the social and cultural context of the communities
that are the target of its attention and approach the task as an opportunity for learning as
much as for giving.
The label ‘CSR’ may give the impression that it is the responsibility of someone else in
Corporate to do this. By taking ownership of social responsibility, marketing can become the
driver of change across the organisation while communicating its benefits more effectively to
internal and external audiences. It is a tough ask given everything else that we marketers
are required to do today. But think of the time and effort we could save if we did not have to
respond reactively to reputational damage or forced to prop up declining demand because of
something we did that was socially, environmentally or ethically less desirable.
Businesses should monitor progress periodically, measure both tangible and intangible, and
short and long term impacts while being prepared to make any mid-course corrections. We
sincerely hope that in future Australian marketers will not have to choose between profit and
purpose but are able to ring in a new era where both can be optimally pursued.
We end this paper with some sobering news as well as some restrained hope. The ACCSR
2014 Annual Review on The State of CSR in Australia and New Zealand reveals an increase
in awareness of CSR with the focus being on environment. However, it also highlights the
fact that the progress during the last decade has been slow and insufficient. The nearly
1000 CSR professionals who participated in the latest survey lament the failure of leadership
in both business and government in nurturing the cause of CSR.
On the other hand, respondents are optimistic that the future will bring greater collaboration
with multiple stakeholders, increased accountability, a more systemic thinking and new ways
of reporting. These will occur only if CSR is integrated with business strategy, secures
organisation wide support, resonates with decision makers and reflects true brand purpose.
Our belief is that marketing can make this happen.
We at the New South Wales Council of the AMI are a mix of mainly corporate marketers,
consultants and a couple of academics. While we have tried to make this paper practical
and simple, the inclusion of information from diverse sources has made it longer than we
hoped for. We appreciate and thank you for your time, patience and attention. July 2014

Credits
Mahesh Enjeti FAMI CPM
Fellow and NSW State Councillor, Australian Marketing
Institute. Managing Director, SAI Marketing Counsel
Pty Ltd
strategy@saimarketing.com.au
Cover image © janceluch/iStock

About the Australian Marketing Institute
The Australian Marketing Institute (www.ami.org.au) is the peak membership body for
professional marketers. Our purpose is to advance the marketing profession. Our belief is
that marketing should be future focussed. It unlocks the potential in ideas, markets and
businesses, expresses these possibilities and realises their value – for customers and the
organisation. We ensure our members have the resources they need to fuel their abilities
and put them ahead of the game. This unlocks the potential for them to create value now
and lead their organisations into the future.
The Australian Marketing Institute, as the voice of the marketing profession, has established
strong links with business, academia and government.
Membership of the Australian Marketing Institute offers you the opportunity to further your
professional development through attendance at targeted training workshops, network
events, conferences, seminars and access to online resources.
References
Auger, P, Devinney, T & Louviere, J 2010, ‘Global segments of socially conscious
consumers: do they exist?’ in Smith, N, Bhattacharya, C, Vogel, D & Levine, D
(eds.), Global Challenges in Responsible Business, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, pp135-160.
Australian Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility 2012, The State of CSR in Australia –
Materiality: A stakeholder’s perspective, ACCSR, Melbourne.
Australian Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility 2013, The State of CSR in Australia
and New Zealand, Annual Report 2012-13, prepared by Wright Communications,
New Zealand.
Australian Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility 2014, The 10th
Year – Progress and
prospects for CSR in Australia and New Zealand - The State of CSR in Australia
and New Zealand, Annual Review 2014, prepared by csrconnect.ed, Wright
Communications and Deakin University.
Bonini, S, Koller,T & Mirvis, P 2009, ‘Valuing Social Responsibility Programs’, McKinsey on
Finance, no. 32, pp. 11-18.

Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship, 2009, How Virtue Creates Value for
Business and Society, Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship , Boston,
viewed 12 September 2013,
http://commdev.org/files/2426_file_Boston_College_McKinsey_31909.pdf.
Creel, T 2012, ‘How Corporate Social Responsibility Influences Brand Equity’, Management
Accounting Quarterly, vol. 13, no. 4, p. 20.
Kramer M & Porter, M 2011, ‘Creating shared value: How to reinvent capitalism-and unleash
a wave of innovation and growth’, Harvard Business Review, vol. 89, no. 1/2, pp.
62-77
Lii, Y, Wu, K and Ding, M 2013, ‘Doing Good Does Good? Sustainable Marketing of CSR
and Consumer Evaluations’, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental
Management, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 15-28.
Murphy, P & Sclegelmilch, B 2013, ‘Corporate social responsibility and corporate social
irresponsibility: Introduction to a special topic section’, Journal of Business
Research, vol. 66, pp. 1807–1813.
Pfitzer, M, Bockstette, V & Stamp, M 2013, ‘Innovating for Shared Value: Companies that
deliver both social benefit and business value rely on five mutually reinforcing
elements’ Harvard Business Review, vol. 91, no. 9/10, pp. 100-107.
Smyth, T, Faulmann, D, Sridharan, S, Jegatheeswaran, T, Goodwin, S Leth, M & Voola, R
2013, discussions at the Roundtable: Poverty Alleviation And Profitability, Sydney,
NSW, 29 July.

The Good, the Generous and the Galvanic: Marketing's Role in Social Responsibility

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (20)

Similar a The Good, the Generous and the Galvanic: Marketing's Role in Social Responsibility

Similar a The Good, the Generous and the Galvanic: Marketing's Role in Social Responsibility (20)

Más de Sustainable Brands

Más de Sustainable Brands (20)

Último

Último (20)

The Good, the Generous and the Galvanic: Marketing's Role in Social Responsibility