CSR vs. Sustainability: Defining Corporate Responsibility Terms
Reprint from the 2011 Forbes CSR Blog by James Epstein-Reeves
It’s not a good sign when an entire profession can’t agree on what to call itself. Here’s a short list: corporate responsibility (CR), sustainability, corporate social responsibility (CSR), sustainable development, corporate accountability, creating shared value (CSV), corporate citizenship, and just plain social responsibility.
These terms are often used interchangeably, held together by little more than disagreement over their precise meanings. While the differences may be subtle, debating them endlessly can be exhausting. So what is a CSR/CR/CSV professional supposed to do? My advice: pick one (or two, as the case may be) and move on.
The Alphabet Soup of Corporate Responsibility (CSR, CR, CSV)
For me, describing what I do has evolved over the course of my career. Lately, I’ve settled on using two terms: one I wish I could use — sustainability — and one I have to use — corporate responsibility.
Over the past few years, I’ve tried these terms on like different shirts. At networking events, conferences, and cocktail parties, whenever I answered the inevitable question, “So what do you do?” with “CSR,” philanthropy immediately became the next topic of conversation — much to my dismay.
Why “Corporate Responsibility” Works Better Than “CSR” in the US
CSR is much broader than philanthropy. CSR looks to change business operations in ways that maximize a company’s benefits to society while minimizing its risks and costs to society — all while maintaining a focus on business value and risk management.
The idea that a company can be socially responsible while focusing only on philanthropy is as old-fashioned as my grandmother serving me Ovaltine while we waited around the radio for news from the telegraph.
Yet in the United States, CSR remains the comfort food of corporate responsibility language. It’s familiar, widely used, and often misunderstood by non-practitioners. Through a bit of experimentation, I’ve found that using the term corporate responsibility helps short-circuit the immediate association with philanthropy. Perhaps it’s the omission of the word “social.” It allows me to spend less time clarifying misconceptions and more time explaining how responsibility is embedded in business strategy.
Sustainability: The European Standard for Business DNA
Sustainability, is the more commonly used term in Europe — and my personal preference. Not because I daydream about Parisian croissants along the Seine (though I do), but because sustainability implies that social and environmental considerations are truly embedded within a company’s business model.
CSR or CR often manifests as a collection of programs designed to address social or environmental issues. Sustainability, however, makes these issues part of a company’s DNA. It reflects a shift from peripheral initiatives to integrated strategy.
Moving from Programs to Business as Usual
Ultimately, that’s what the profession is striving for: to make sustainability business as usual.
So what about you? If you’re a sustainability or CSR professional, what term do you use? And if you’re not involved day-to-day, which terms resonate — or confuse — you the most?
Reprint & Author Information
This article is a reprint of the 2011 Forbes CSR Blog by James Epstein-Reeves
🔗 Original source: Forbes – Corporate Social Responsibility Blog
James Epstein-Reeves is a Chicago-based expert in corporate responsibility, philanthropy, and cause-marketing. He began his career in Washington, DC’s think-tank community, researching public policy and corporate responsibility.
He is the co-author of the book
📘 Corporate Responsibility in the Global Village, which examines government-led initiatives promoting responsible business practices in Europe and North America.
Follow James on X (formerly Twitter):
🔗 @ChicagoCSR