George and Richard Cadbury, Titus Salt, Lord Leverhulme and Joseph Rowntree were not only entrepreneurs but social reformers. They built healthy, sustainable communities that continue to thrive today, at the same time as creating profitable enterprises. Though we're living in a period of economic constraint, businesses can and should be responsible for finding solutions to the challenges that society faces.
Why the decline in community?
Every generation has been plagued by social ills, but they change over time and will continue to do so. The common thread that runs through today's so-called 'social evils' is the decline of community. As Britain moved from a manufacturing economy to a service one, the industries that defined so many communities (mining, steel, car making, textile) disappeared. The back-to-back terraces that characterised our industrial landscape may have lacked mod cons but they provided people with an identity, a sense of place and a set of shared values.
Globalisation bought business consolidation and industrial parks and secure office campuses replaced factories. The beacons of local communities – the pub, the park, the school and even the church – have (in many neighbourhoods) closed. The vacuum filled by Victorian social reformers (healthcare, education, sanitation, clean water and housing) is now occupied by the welfare state.
In the second half of the 20th century competition between businesses delivered significant benefits for the economy, consumers and society in general and gave millions of people a better standard of living and greater disposable income. However, the pursuit of shareholder value alone, if it is the only determinant of 'success', can be argued to have contributed to big business' abdication of their wider responsibilities to society. I would argue that blaming business alone for the decline in community is too simplistic. Other institutions, public and third sector, have also been players in this decline.
Responsibility in the post-recession era
Companies and individuals are now re-appraising their responsibilities in the wake of the global recession. Seismic and profound shifts in society's attitudes and behaviour are already taking place. People are anxious about the future and particularly what the prospects will be for their children.
Recently I listened to a group of mothers from London talk about trust. Top of their list were Google, the NHS and supermarkets. At the bottom were politicians, the banks and the tabloid media. But what differentiates those who are trusted and those who are not?
It's too simple to say that those who are not trusted are those who helped to get us into the current mess. For me, it's the difference between those who are judged as 'problem makers' and those who help ordinary people and are judged to be solution providers.
That's why supermarkets remain trusted because, despite rising prices, they provide commonsense solutions to everyday problems.
In uncertain times people look for leadership and vision to give them hope as to what the future looks like. They are turning to family and friends and longing for a return to community values in this search for hope. Politicians tuned into this zeitgeist put forward a vision of local empowerment with people in control of the decisions that will shape their communities. It remains unclear to me, however, how such a concept will benefit those people who feel detached from society. The post-recession business model will be more transparent as empowered consumers hold companies to account for the impact they have on society.
'Responsibility'
To rebuild trust in business and help tackle the challenges that face our communities a new breed of social reformer will emerge who recognises that business has three core obligations to society – economic, social and environmental – what I have termed 'Responsibility'.
Generating revenue and profits through which shareholder and stakeholder interests can be managed must remain the core purpose of business. But to build healthy, sustainable communities that benefit the many, not the few, will require business to think longer term and develop new models for managing and evaluating their social and environmental responsibilities.
By understanding what matters to their customers, colleagues and the wider community, companies can develop integrated national programmes on the issues that are most relevant to their business. Solutions, though, are unlikely to be delivered nationally. Tackling issues such as drug and alcohol abuse, homelessness or crime require initiatives that are tailored to local circumstances.
Nor is it businesses role to tackle these issues alone. We need to create collaborative delivery models with the public and third sectors. These partnerships need to engender the importance of personal responsibility to reconnect people to the communities they live in.
A great example of this approach is in Burnley where ASDA has been working with stakeholders from across the public and private sectors to tackle criminal damage, anti-social behaviour and nuisance associated with young people. As a result of this there has been a noticeable reduction in incidents of criminal damage and anti-social behaviour. This has resulted in far fewer people being victimised and nearly 700 less deployments for police officers in less than six months.
Conclusion
Tough economic times are when business needs to demonstrate that it takes its responsibilities seriously. Building new partnership models that leverage expertise from across the private, public and third sectors is good business. We can rediscover the values of earlier entrepreneurs and find new ways of managing business that make commercial sense and create stronger communities.
Paul Kelly is External Affairs & Corporate Responsibility Director at ASDA. He is Chair of the ASDA Foundation, a board member of the British Retail Consortium and the School Food Trust and a member of the Council of Food Policy Advisers. He also chaired Plough to Plate for Business in the Community which examined corporate responsibility in the food chain.
From Bubb's Blog
From Whitehall Watch
