What's love got to do with it?

The concept of CSR is that if a company is making money off a community it should demonstrate its commitment to its host community and its environment by giving something back. The firm needs to take responisibility on the actions of its activities within its environment and seek ways to ensure the sustained livibility of its host communty. CSR has grown, changed, expanded and retracted but hasn't stopped being a relevant course for any firm to follow. People thought it would be a fad but it has endured till today. The same thing happened when management thoguht turned to business continuity planning (the concept/ methodology of determining how to assure the continutity of business critical functions, so in the event of a disaster or a shockingly interruptive event, critical stakeholders e.g. customers, suppliers, regulators etc; can have access to these fucntions) and quality mangement. Each of these movements were thought to be that - movements. They were called fads and touted to wearout with time. However, till date, there is still a debate on the relevance of each of these processes with those for and against making arguments against them. One thing i have found consistent with all these fads is that all of them demand a rigourous amount of measuring and using the results of measures to inform the next steps of decision making. In other words, a great deal of time, effort and sustained energy had to be paid to the movement. It needs to be "preached" as a movement and "sold" to the masses/ employees forst. It may need to be demonstrated or little "tasters" set out for it to be seen as relevant and for its impact to be shown. this might involve "consistent advertising" and even special " marketing blitzes" for it to stop becoming a movement and be a part of life. Then the focues must expand to it now being for granted, and also then expanded to ensure that the reasons for its existence in the first place be remembered for ALWAYS.

UBS (yes I am still banging on about that!) has responded to the problems its faced by firing 2 members of its top amangement team and stating they will be developing a more rigourous managment structure for the ..desk. they might profit mmore from first of all reading the report from the Boston Research Group titled "National Governance Culrure and Leadership Assessment". they found that 43% of those surveyed described their organisations as "command -control" or leadership by coercion and of thes 43%, half of them had observed unethical behaviour and only a quarter of those were likely to blow the whistle on the perpetrators!! Basically, it didn't matter what the controls said, human beings still made a judgement call on what they would enforce and what they woudl ignore. And herein lies the problem - how do you enforce vlaues of integrity and ethics, when at the end of the day the individual still has the option of choice?