Gaining sustainable competitive advantages through CSR engagement and communication A case study of Starbucks

Tine  Grarup    

January  27th  2012    

Corporate  Communica7on  Exam  MARSTER  of  ARTS  in  CORPRATE  COMMUNICATION  

Agenda The  Findings  

CSR  Cri/cism  

Gaps  in  the  corporate  brand  Starbucks:  Green  or  Greenwashing?  

Ques/ons  and  Comments  

Why  have  a  Unified  Corporate  Brand?  

Transparency  

How  to  overcome  CSR  Challenges  

The Findings •  CSR:  a  valuable  and  central  element  of  corporate  strategy  

•  First  mover  advantage  ▫  Capitaliza7on  on  compe77ve  asymmetries    ▫  Mission  central,  corpora7on-­‐specific  and  stakeholder  visible  CSR  engagement    

•  Stakeholder  management  and  communica7on  ▫  Reputa7onal  benefits    ▫  Behavioral  commitment  

•  Unique  corporate  brand  -­‐>  sustainable  compe77ve  advantage  

CSR Criticism

•  CSR  is  misused  as  a  marke7ng  ploy  ▫  Is  Greenwashing  now  CSR  washing?  

•  Abuse  of  power  through  CSR  

•  CSR  favors  the  interest  of  business  over  the  righVul  concerns,  demands  and  expecta7ons  of  wider  society  

•  Are  companies  using  CSR  to  hide  unsavory  business  ac7vi7es?  

 

“There  is  one  and  only  one  social  responsibility  of  business  –  to  use  its  resources  and  engage  in  ac7vi7es  designed  to  increase  its  profits”  Friedman,  1970  

Gaps in the Corporate Brand Starbucks: Green or Greenwashed?

Vision  

Image  

Culture  

Ø     Stakeholder  awareness  

Ø     Effec/ve  communica/on  of  vision  

Why have a Unified Corporate Brand?

•  To  integrate  the  corpora7on’s  stakeholders  

•  Internal  commitment  and  iden7fica7on  with  the  CSR  agenda    •  Give  customers  a  sense  of  community  –  brand  iden7fica7on  allows  for  premium  pricing  

•  Corporate  brands  create  common  grounds  

•  No  ma[er  the  product,  the  corporate  logo  will  aspire  corporate  values  

CSR scandals

Ø Nike  accused  for  using  sweatshops  (1990’s  )  

Ø BP’s  oil  spill  in  the  Gulf  of  Mexico  (2010)  

Ø MaOel  using  lead  poisoning  paint  in  their  toys  (2007)  

Transparency

Ques/oning  Transparency…  

•  The  double-­‐sided  nature  of  transparency  •  Are  stakeholders  really  interested  in  more  informa7on?  •  Corpora7ons  are  (re)defining  boundaries  of  transparency  

•  Is  transparency  simply  a  simula7on  of  openness?  

•  Transparency  –  now  a  tool  of  power  

“You  cannot  stop  people  talking  about  you,  but  you  can  show  a  willingness  to  be  open  an  honest”

How to overcome CSR Challenges

Is  it  socially  responsible  to  influence  behavior?    

•  Corpora7ons  take  advantage  of  consumer  trends  and  a_tudes.    

However…    

•  Consumers  want  to  be  a  part  of  the  solu7on  not  the  problem.  

   

The  corporate  idenCty  is  not  worth  much  without  a  favorable  image  

Think  twice   Be  aware  of  context  

Tell  a  true  story  

Keep  CSR  central