Going with the flow? What CSR can learn from innovation Going with the flow? What CSR can learn from innovation

Introduction Introduction Despite having attracted academic attention for more than half a century, corporate social responsibility (CSR) has remained a fuzzy concept. Its precise meaning is shaped by a multitude of actors who interact at various levels in constant attempts to define and redefine the concept (Sahlin Andersson, 2006; Windsor, 2001). At the same time, CSR has become increasingly difficult to ignore. As it is becoming expected of companies to address their responsibilities to society in some form or other, CSR managers are confronted with numerous challenges. Not least these include the challenges to infuse their organisation with novel values and ways to operate and to tap into perceptions of a range of external and internal stakeholders (De Bakker and den Hond, 2008; Donaldson and Preston, 1995). The central argument of the paper The central argument of the paper It is the central argument of this paper that the situation for CSR as a field – and for CSR managers as those charged with implementing the concept – is very similar to that of innovation and technology development – including the situation for those in charge of implementing these. Innovation too is a fuzzy process that is shaped through a constant interaction of multiple stakeholders and one that flows in sometimes unpredictable directions – with the resulting danger that a firm becomes locked into an outmoded way of ‘doing things’. This raises the question what scholars and practitioners of CSR can learn from the innovation literature, in particular from those parts that deal with the processes in which innovation and technological development emerge rather than get implemented. Such insights could perhaps make CSR genuinely innovative rather than ‘just’ strategic, focussed on the business case (Preuss, 2010). The paper proceeds by examining the nature of innovation as operating at three interlinked levels, the micro-level of the innovating firm, the meso-level of the infrastructure that surrounds it and the macro-level of society. Societal perspectives of innovation Societal perspectives of innovation Innovation does not exist in a vacuum but is shaped and moulded by a myriad of societal pressures reflecting varying power relations, perceptions and interactions at different levels (Williams and Edge, 1996). This social emphasis on the process of innovation and technology development suggests that innovation and technology developments is not pre-determined, programmed in as it were by inviolable characteristics, but rather shaped and constructed by society as a whole (MacKenzie and Wajcman, 1985; Biker and Law, 1992). Exploring the antecedents to change, as opposed to the impacts of change, can thus expose new insights in terms of societal accord in encouraging or dissuading paths of potential development (see for example, Jørgensen and Jørgensen, 2009). Intermediate- Intermediate-level perspectives of innovation level perspectives of innovation level perspectives of innovation At the intermediate level, we can point to a change in orientation from closed environments dependent upon the interaction of internal members to more outward facing, open environments encouraging the bringing in of external actors to enrich and enhance internal abilities. Such open innovation systems (Chesbrough, 2003) emphasise the innovation is a collaborative process requiring the input of many (specialised) actors or institutions. Commonality and openness at the intermediate level has the flipside of proprietary and closed systems. Where differing systems are seen to compete, witness for example the contemporary battle between blu ray and HD DVDs, there may be a long period of flux before a unified view emerges and a successful innovation path is established. This has some compelling lessons for CSR in that competing solutions may hamper diffusion here too. Firm-level perspectives of innovation level perspectives of innovation level perspectives of innovation The sharing and bringing-in of knowledge to translate into innovation has implications for individual firms in terms of competitive advantage. Innovation at this level takes on the perspective of openness and an encouragement to learning for all in the firm. Thus we see a new emphasis upon encouraging input from all employees, in other words a democratization of innovation. Innovation within the firm thus spills over from traditional focused departments, such as R&D, to embrace the whole firm (Christensen, 1997). Implications for CSR Implications for CSR Discussing antecedents to innovation at societal, intermediate and firm levels points to a number of implications for CSR. The fuzziness inherent in innovation can be taken as indication that CSR too is likely to remain in flux. Although developments in CSR have at times lead to new institutions, such as United Nations Global Compact or the Sustainability Reporting Guidelines by the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), apparently stable entities may be more thixotropic in nature as they are made fluid again through stakeholder interaction. Such a conceptualization of CSR has important implications for CSR research and consulting. If CSR is an inherently contradictory and uncertain process, just like innovation, then attempts to measure CSR are likely to be futile. Any such attempt treats CSR as proceeding on a predetermined path, whereas it will only be possible with hindsight to say how relevant the measures were, at a point in time when that relevance may have been challenged again. For CSR managers, this points to yet another challenge, namely to avoid getting locked into modes of ‘doing CSR’ that are outdated tomorrow.