What's your process for prioritizing social and environmental issues in your CSR strategy?

Listening to stakeholders is definitely important, but in my experience should not be the first step. CSR has evolved along decades, and the body of knowledge available is huge. A more effective first step is to review what existing CSR frameworks prioritize for your business sector and geography. This will help the company to narrow the list of issues, thus making stakeholder consultation more effective.

Stakeholders engagement/dialogue process should be a key process for development strategy as well as for the evaluation of effectiveness of CSR program.

Simultaneously; UNDERSTAND YOUR BUSINESS, in and out, especially the mechanics how it may impact mentioned stakeholders. Management tends to develop 'blind spots' re: sustainability risks, trying to present the most favorable image possible for the company. CSR people have to challenge the company even more thorougly than external stakeholders to be on the safe side. Listen to colleagues from all relevant departments regularly, moreover, proactively ask them to share their views about sustainability / CSR. SWOT-mapping these topics with their contributions may help a lot.

I would rather say engage with your stakeholders, not assess them. Dealing with their needs and expectations will not come from a distant survey of experts but from a relationship of trust building and collaboration. Stakeholder dialogues at local, regional and international level should be part of the ESG toolbox of every company.

The first step to prioritising social and environmental issues is to strengthen families. 100 healthy families shall mitigate their issues and support another 100 families. Also, the families will be sensitised to form their own social and environmental committees, involve the key stakeholders in the village or ward- level committees for sustainable support system.

When considering materiality in various contexts such as CSR strategy planning, it's essential to take into account the double/impact materiality. Double materiality holds significance in the identification of environmental and social priorities for your CSR strategy. This concept ensures a comprehensive assessment that takes into account both the internal impact on your company and the external effects on the environment and society. This thorough evaluation aids companies in risk management and fostering long-term value through strategic handling of environmental and social issues. It is in harmony with regulatory shifts, guides investor choices and improves a company's image and brand value in a dynamic business environment.

Materiality Assessment: Conduct a materiality assessment to determine which social and environmental issues are most significant to your business and stakeholders. This involves evaluating the potential impacts on your company’s performance and reputation.

The cause and the strategy needs to be futuristic when choosing a CSR cause. As focus can be shifted to educating kids on their role as future citizens. CSR focusing on education of the cause to future generations will last longer and have impact not only the kids but also the parents. Reviews and updates become must in this case as the regular reminders are needed in such cases to retain the information provided and to also check the implementation.

A quantitative approach is fundamental in materiality assessment for CSR. It not only enhances precision, objectivity, and risk management but also facilitates stakeholder engagement, resource allocation, and strategic alignment. As CSR continues to evolve as a strategic imperative, embracing quantitative methods and frameworks is vital for companies seeking to thrive in a socially and environmentally conscious world. It is the pathway to making CSR a measurable, actionable, and impactful aspect of corporate strategy.

One should consider materiality in terms of social benefits as well as environmental protection. Only social benefits will not work for long.

Purpose-led businesses and organisations need to really understand their positioning compared to competitors/allies, and capitalise on organisations' unique strengths and opportunities. Global NGOs with national branches ideally share objectives and key results based on strategic principles to maintain a coherent identity and culture, but they will have national focus areas tailored to their strengths and opportunities. Some flexibility is required to adapt to market/environment changes, but agreed values or theory of change pathways should remain the driver behind creating change. Communication with stakeholders about the vision and values is key for ongoing engagement and change opportunities.

Not only values should be considered, but, also, products or services of the company. When working in the sharing economy, the projects I promoted the most were those who were connected to the sharing economy principles and services (sharing homes, sharing rides etc..). If your company is aligned with some of the elements of the CSR strategy/project, it will be easier to communicate and, possibly, more effective.

While aligning CSR with your organization's vision and values may seem straightforward, it's essential to delve deep into the purpose behind these actions. This profound reflection should guide every decision and action. CSR should not be merely an obligation but an agreement, a path, and a way to make a genuine, positive impact that resonates with your core beliefs.

Benchmarking can indeed provide valuable insights, but I share your sentiment that it should be a springboard for innovation, not a path to mediocrity. Rather than emulating what others have done, view it as an opportunity to differentiate yourself. Be bold, be authentic, and dare to think outside the conventional CSR box. Innovate and set new standards that inspire others.

Benchmarking should go beyond the analytics; it is also about sharing good practices and learning together. All kin of ESG related networks, like CSR Europe, provide such an opportunity. It will also allow to incubate and develop collaborative solutions rather than the (current) individual approaches with higher cost and less impact

Developing a CSR project requires full commitment to strategy and measuring. Why are we promoting this project? What would be the positive externalities for both our company / organization and the public? In order to estimate the impact, we can be helped by GRI Standards (available on the Internet). Calculations should be accurate, for example: if a company sustains a project for children with disabilities, the direct beneficiaries will be the children (i.e: 100). But the indirect beneficiaries will be the families (we can calculate 2 members for each family including either parents or single parents with sibling etc..). GRI standards can help us addressing this issue, identifying a more accurate impact.

“CSR” needs to move away from being a separate initiative - companies should be looking at a doughnut economics type review of their operations, supply chains, business model itself. Not viewing CSR as something to work on post making profits, but re-examining, how are we making money and how can we do that in a way that is socially and environmentally responsible?

CSR begins with the genuine “good will” to define , plan and implement commitments that are socially responsible by aligning to human rights and human development as well as environmental sustainability. To this end, concrete commitments are required, to be defined, implemented, monitored and evaluated over time. Building alliances , synergies , partnerships and ultimately networks is crucial to attain both individual and collective goals. Prior to engaging in formal partnerships and joint programming, due diligence is key to ensure partnering with organizations which share common values and seek not only financial gain but also the “greater good”, “humanity’s good “ , in equilibrium with the environmental care.

Corporate Social Responsibility needs to ensure companies are truly climate-resilient- in terms of aiming and achieving climate mitigation targets that contribute to the Paris Agreement and ensuring their operations and supply chains adapt to climatic extremes. Furthermore, climate-resilient organisations ensure Nature-Based Solutions are utilized in mitigating and adapting to extremes in operations and supply chains.

CSR should be the norm for all organisations and companies. Lack of transparency, accountability or misleading practices should be questioned much more by customers, stakeholders and politicians. Other contributors have made good points about doughnut economics, sustainability (and ESG), and the circular economy. We need to consider impacts on the environment (soil, biodiversity, climate change, water and air pollution), animals (farmed and wildlife), and public health. The 'polluter pays principle' should be applied to all sectors, and the (environmental) costs/externalities included in production and consumption costs.

It's high time we humanize CSR! For far too long, CSR has been viewed as a transactional endeavor. I firmly believe that the CSR of the future should embrace a more collaborative and inclusive approach. This new model should involve stakeholders in the thinking and design processes. I particularly advocate for involving local and underprivileged communities at the core of CSR initiatives. They hold valuable insights, and their voices should shape the future of CSR. Let's shift from mere corporate responsibility to genuine co-responsibility, where all stakeholders contribute to meaningful change.