Sustainability equals environment. For years this has been the prevailing equivalence. Today, however, a different awareness is maturing, as the Sodalitas Foundation has pointed out for some time. The growth of poverty and the increase in inequalities require greater social commitment. From improving the quality of work / well-being of employees in the company to reducing gaps (generation, gender …), companies want to do more. This is what emerges from the results of the 1st Observatory on Corporate Social Sustainability, of the Sodalitas Foundation.
From gaps to well-being: open challenges
According to the survey, companies are called upon to act on a double front: internal (employees) and external (the community to which they belong). In particular, companies are expected to make a commitment to:
o Improve the quality of work / well-being of employees in the company
o Improve the quality of life of the communities where the company operates
o Promote active policies for young people to enhance and motivate them
o Reduce inequalities (social, geographical / territorial, generation,
gender…)
o Defend human and social rights through careful management of the chain of
supply.
The theme of measurement is crucial
This first edition of the Observatory was conducted with a qualitative methodology
or through personal interviews with a small but qualified sample of subjects
experts. 16 opinion leaders / academics were interviewed, 10 members of Csr Europe; 12 Csr Manager of “best in class” companies chosen by Sodalitas as they are considered excellent in terms of commitment to environmental and social sustainability. An analysis of 16 Sustainability Reports was also carried out in order to identify the areas and methods of social commitment by companies.
The companies interviewed show that they are fully aware of the importance of the challenge that awaits them and are oriented towards an authentic commitment, not a facade. The issue of measuring the impact of the initiatives implemented was decisive as regards corporate social sustainability. Unlike the environmental commitment which has numerical indicators (reduction of emissions, energy saving, water saving …), social commitment is now almost always “narrated” in a qualitative way, ie without the use of numerical KPI’s. This makes measuring progress over time and comparing different realities problematic. It also makes the risk of social washing easier and less verifiable.
What economic return?
A brake on the commitment to social sustainability by companies is constituted by the greater difficulty in evaluating the economic return and this means that – unlike the environmental commitment that can generate tangible savings (of water, energy, raw materials … ) and consumer goodwill – often seen as a cost rather than an investment. In truth – the experts suggest – the link between well-being in the company and productivity is demonstrated: leading companies on a social level are more profitable and are more easily able to attract and retain the most qualified young talents. Furthermore, a good local roots is a competitive factor as it generates good
reputation and good relations locally and beyond.