Standing at the CSR Crossroads

Business in the 21^st century is now full of catch phrases such as employee engagement, embedding CSR into the DNA, alignment of values and behavior, integrity, core values, going green, sustainability, corporate survival and respect.

Companies that are stumbling into this cry for transparency (another positive trend) may be overwhelmed or even intimidated by both the pressure to perform an unfamiliar set of behaviors, and by the variety and complexity of the types of CSR activities – with the added catch that those that are too tentative about the process and chose to stay with familiar and true behaviors run the risk of watching their companies fade into the background or cease to exist all together. No pressure.

A few years ago I had the pleasure of attending a presentation by David Suzuki the renowned environmentalist, documentarian and activist. He was speaking passionately and at times angrily about the stupidity and selfishness of man and big corp as we systemically create irreversible harm to the ecosystem that we depend on for our survival as a species. And then…he paused. He recounted a conversation he had had with his twenty-something daughter. As I recall it went something like this. He asked his daughter how she felt about the future, her future. Her reply was that she was excited. Suzuki senior was incredulous, “Excited?....Excited? How the hell can you be excited? Don’t you know what is happening to our planet? To the food we eat, the oceans we harvest, the air we breathe?”….”Dad”, she replied…”We are standing at the crossroads of choice. If we continue on the path we are on we will destroy ourselves, but if we take the other road we have an opportunity to truly change the future of humanity – what an opportunity, to be part of taking the right road”.

Companies that choose to see themselves as part of the fabric of the communities in which they operate and in which their employees live, or where they outsource….are facing this wonderful choice. They too have a tremendous opportunity to contribute to the future of humanity. They get to use their innovative skills that differentiate them from their competitors to create a method of practice that sets them firmly on the course of sustainability.

In the brilliant book The Responsibility Revolution – Jeffrey Hollender outlines the notion that corporate consciousness is the latest horizon in the competitive landscape. Those corporations that are seriously engaged in CSR strategies understand that true transformative change can have its genesis today but that the benefits of this change may be a generation or more away. These corporations acknowledge and then act upon effective environmental and social agendas that are integrated with the value proposition of the company and give back to the communities in which they do business. They have moved beyond measurement of ROI in the next quarter to understanding that investment today has to be for the long term. Fundamentally they understand two principles, first of all. Do something of substance. Second of all – Commit to see it through.

Hollender outlines key steps of developing a CSR strategy, including and not limited to; keeping mission and legacy front and center, elevating sustainability to the top of the corporate agenda and supporting authenticity by allowing individuals to “own” sustainability ……. Are these activities easy? No. The tendency to go toward the bright light of short term gains to meet the hungry and perceived needs of shareholders is still compelling. But progressive companies make the hard choices anyway. To pull from a previous blog, they see that they need to do the right thing not just when it is convenient for them, but as a standing method of practice. They have reached the crossroad and are choosing to make their journey longer by making the right choice.

The Acacia Group’s mission is to offer transformative and unique leadership development for organizations seeking to live out their global citizenship. To do this we blend knowledge from Corporate Social Responsibility, Community Development and Leadership Development and Learning to create new opportunities for excellence for our clients. For more information, visit www.theacaciagroup.ca

CSR & Stakeholder Engagement - What's your metaphor

In the world of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) the importance of stakeholder or community engagement is recognized. This can, however, be a large learning curve for any organization regardless of its size or industry. The journey into CSR for an organization may be initiated from a range of imperatives including: defense against a negative event that has occurred (think BP); compliance to imposed regulations; or an opportunity and desire to contribute to a just and civil society. Depending on where the organization is currently, their openness to engaging with stakeholders and communities may vary. I am struck by the potential for a disconnection between corporations and the communities with whom they need to engage so to explore this further I thought it might be interesting to juxtaposition two frameworks – one for CSR and the other for Community Engagement (CE).

Corporate Social Responsibility – AccountAbility five stage model by Simon Zadok

Community Engagement – IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation

Defensive – somebody has exposed poor behavior or practices and the company is being pushed to improve Compliance – company leaders know they need to comply with external requirements – preferably in a way that requires minimum investment of precious resources Management – CSR begins to be internally driven as management structures and roles are formalized for the business function of CSR Strategic – CSR is beginning to be viewed as part of the value and opportunity creating opportunity for the business. Civil – is when the organization is fully mature in its CSR role and the company chooses to change the rules of the game, raises the civil foundation and indelibly changes society

Inform – when an organization needs to inform the public and stakeholders with balanced and objective information to assist them (the public and stakeholders?) in understanding the problem, alternatives and opportunities/ or solutions Consult – to obtain public feedback on analysis, alternatives and or decisions (We will keep you informed and acknowledge your concerns) Involve – to work with the publicly (directly) throughout the process to ensure that public concerns and aspirations are consistently understood and considered Collaborate – to partner with the public in each aspect of the decision making including the identification of alternatives and the identification of preferred solutions. We will look to you for innovation in formulating solutions. Empower – to place final decision making in the hands of stakeholders. We will implement what you decide.

I suspect that as leaders integrate CSR as a strategic and civil initiative into their corporate and personal thinking and value structure, the openness to collaborate and empower stakeholders would increase. Think of a new seedling emerging from the ground to seek the nutrients it needs to thrive.
And vice versa – the more defensive an organization and its leaders are the more closed they will be to hearing from their stakeholders. It is hard for any organism to `hear’ from the external environment when a defensive stance is being held. Think of a turtle with its head tucked inside its shell or a medieval castle with thick and high walls.

As a company becomes confident of its role as a contributor to a healthy planet and a just society, the ability of its leaders to be open and curious about the perspectives of their partners and stakeholders will increase. The language used and the nature of the conversations will shift from ‘announce and defend’ to `share and explore’.

The stance an organization takes with its stakeholders may provide a helpful diagnostic tool for assessing its evolution in CSR and the capacity of its leaders to engage with partners, stakeholders and communities. All three – CSR strategy, stakeholder engagement and leadership capacity - may need to align for the full potential of an organizations social responsibility to emerge.

The Acacia Group’s mission is to offer transformative and unique leadership development for organizations seeking to live out their global citizenship. To do this we blend knowledge from Corporate Social Responsibility, Community Development and Leadership Development and Learning to emerge new opportunities for excellence for our clients.

Experiencing the Immersion that Leads to Learnng

This blog is a personal reflection on time spent in Mexico and the learning that emerged.
Once again I have immersed myself into a Latin culture and have experienced the dislocation of place and identity that moves me to an experience of intense personal observation and reflection. Each time I come into this community I find that I must first adjust my hearing and listening. My friends are speaking Spanish and my mastery of this language is still in its infancy. I pick up every third or fourth word, make assumptions about meaning, and am hesitant to say `no I didn’t understand that’. I am very aware that the literal translation of words does not capture meaning – and for me I suspect that the last thing that I will really get in this language is the jokes.
As I struggle to understand I observe a few things that happen to me; I listen very intently, I must watch the face of the person who is speaking, and I pay attention to gestures and facial experiences. My mind processes what I am hearing and asks `what am I understanding’, and `do I have the words to respond to what is being said’. I am reminded of the practice of active listening as it is described in the process of dialogue – listening for meaning, paying attention to my own assumptions, holding curiosity. It would be easier at times to sit back, stop listening and not be present, to not try to understand, however I value these relationships too much to allow any appearance of disinterest appear in my demeanor.
When I return home I want to be reminded of the importance of paying attention, to the energy that I put into listening when I am in conversations. Do I listen as intently, do I pay attention to what is being communicated in addition to the words being spoken, am I listening to each word or am I assuming the meaning that is being spoken and getting ahead of the speaker, do I recognize when I am not understanding and do I take the time to ask the questions.
As I write about this experience I find myself reflecting on why I hesitate to declare my lack of understanding and I recognize a few reasons: I am reluctant to acknowledge that I didn’t understand, I am reluctant to alter the flow of the conversation if I interject with an `I don’t understand’, I am embarrassed to acknowledge my lack of knowledge (in this case of the language however at home it might be the subject matter), I struggle with being a novice when in most areas of my life I operate from a place of expertise.
Philippe Rosinski, author of Coaching Across Cultures identifies that the cross culture environment provides a unique chance to step outside one’s comfort zone. Adapting to differences requires you to bravely step outside and experiment with changing some of your behaviors. This time I am paying attention to my patterns of communication, choosing to hone my listening skills, and choosing to stay outside of my comfort zone a little longer before I seek out people who speak my language and make it easier for me to relax back into what I know.

Asserting Leadership, Not Authority - CSR and the Art of Balance

The first part title of this blog is borrowed from an article from the Stanford Business Review written in 2004. The article, “Leading Boldly” describes how in the early part of this decade three powerful foundations that had committed over $12 million to a city school district over the previous five years – withheld their grants due to the poor performance of the board and the “total dysfunction in the system”. This decision by the foundations led to an investigative inquiry into the district’s operations and a subsequent improvement in performance led to the foundation’s funds being reinstated in the following year.

Corporate Social Responsibility or CSR continues to evolve and adapt and increasingly organizations are using CSR as a corporate differentiator in a competitive manner. Witness Coke’s “Live Positively” campaign versus Pespi’s “Refresh” Numerous discussions have occurred as to the depth of legitimacy of CSR with arguments speculating on whether or not it is merely repackaged public relations. But as corporations become more sophisticated in their efforts and in the reporting of their efforts, it seems as it is here to stay, and with this, the desire to align with established causes and NGO’s will grow also.

So the question is this; With the new level of complexity and the preponderance of programs that are being announced, is it now, or will it be acceptable in the future for corporations to not just support social programs but to influence and to withhold support to NGO’s until they get their desired outcome? Corporate involvement in social or environmental programs follows a continuum from check writing with no strings attached to full on strategic engagement (e.g. the very positive relationship of Timberland, led by Jeff Schwartz and City Year Youth Corps). Taking this to the next level and moving to the role of key stakeholder and major funder of an NGO, a corporation has the potential to shift the relationship landscape from one of strategic benevolence to that of a quasi government body.

The difference of course is that we tend to favor democratically elected officials to provide oversight and regulation to social, health, educational and environmental programs. If the rise of CSR continues and there are opportunities for corporations to engage in social engineering according to a preconceived template, are we risking too much? Could this even happen?

The decision by the various funders in the example above was criticized by some and applauded by others. These actions served as an impetus for the district and the City to clean up their activities – without corporate help. In today’s CSR climate, as the dependencies between NGO’s and corporations grow more complex and the contribution of personnel, intellectual capital and finances become increasingly intertwined – it would seem wise that standards of practice be made clear and perhaps more importantly that any alliances between NGO’s and corporations are well contemplated, and explicitly lay out in terms of engagement, expectations, and responsibilities. CSR is a very good thing as long as the governance and intent of the respective programs remains intact.

How do we ensure that social programs do not become dominated by private (corporate) interests? Are you aware of programs where an NGO has been censured for lack of adherence to a corporate standard? If so, is that a good thing?

The Challenges of Intercultural Leadership - Watching out for Blindspots

Cross-cultural, multicultural, intercultural...these terms are often used interchangeably yet have finely nuanced distinctions. For a leader, the cross cultural context means literally crossing cultures to do business, provide service, or vacation in another culture. Multicultural refers to multiple cultures existing in a geographic place or organization, each separate and distinct. Intercultural refers to the act of understanding the values and beliefs of a culture and being able to communicate and collaborate with people across multiple cultures. Interculturalism has as its goal innovation, inclusion, and friendship. Intercultural ism implies interaction.

Milton Bennett, an interculturalist and the founder of the Intercultural Communication Institute in Portland, Oregon suggests the following definition for “Interculturalism”. It is “the learned and shared values, beliefs, and behaviours, of a group of interacting people”. There are at least two key ideas embedded in this definition. One is the notion that with enough curiosity and respect we can come to share values and beliefs and the second is that real understanding between people has to come from mutual interaction. The positive spinoffs to this approach are manifold. The act of valuing differences rather than imposing your own norms, values, and beliefs, applies to all cultures...international, professional, corporate, and perhaps best of all, families.

It seems to me that many organizations believe that a “global” perspective on leadership will simply emerge as a leader interacts with diverse cultures. This is unlikely to happen. Our own western culture values and recognizes certain kinds of behaviours. As leaders grow within an organization they quickly discover what gets recognized and therefore rewarded. We place a high premium on “getting it done”, on production, and timeliness. Someone who can bring a project in “on time and on (or under) budget” is likely to be highly sought after. Yet these valuable skills may be at odds with another cultures respect for relationship and collective decision-making. The challenge in becoming truly intercultural is raising our awareness of how and why we do, say, react and respond in the ways in which we do. It requires a high level of curiosity aimed not only at another culture but at our own.

My own curiosity is piqued when I see the preponderance of leadership books, articles, and blogs with diversity or multicultural leadership as their subject. My lived experience tells me that few of us actually know how to enact these competencies. What prevents us from seeing our own way of being in the world? Is it system blindness, cultural blindness, personal blindness? Is it because our systems don’t recognize and reward curious, reflective, experimental behaviour? What’s more rewarding the path of greatest or least resistance? Let me know when you figure it out...I’m curious.

This blog was written by Christine Bonney – Managing Partner at The Acacia Group – responsible for leadership and coaching.

Can Voluntourism Work?

Can Voluntourism Work?


Voluntourism = volunteer + tourist. Ironically the word itself seems to reflect the western or developed world’s voracious appetite to do it all and do it all at once. From all accounts the voluntourism market is a growth market and with that growth more organizations – both for profit and not for profit – are flocking to offer as exotic a destination and experience as possible so that westerners can `compete’ with their friends and family for the best `What did you do on your most recent vacation’ response at their next social gathering. Now as I read that… I do hear the cynicism coming through…

A few years ago my daughter and I read an article that differentiated between travel and tourism. Travel was the intentional way of visiting another place with a heart and mind open to exploration, risk, and getting off the beaten track. Tourism was about travelling to another country to experience my own culture in a setting that protected me from the culture of the country I was in. We decided that we wanted to be travelers. When I find myself in a conversation where someone will say ‘we are going to insert name of exotic developing country but we won’t leave the resort because it just isn’t safe’ – I think to myself `oh this person is a tourist’. I begin to wonder then about the consequences when we ‘commodify’ tourism to meet the market demands of the latest consumer trend and when we project our tourist perspective onto the communities we are visiting.

So let’s start with the position that voluntourism is a good thing. At its best voluntourism is connecting people to their global context, challenging world views, and uncovering deeper altruistic motivations to `make a difference’ when they return. But is it possible to overdo a good thing? I think it is both possible and probable. With any service or commodity that becomes `in’, the market can become saturated, the uniqueness of the experience can become commonplace, and in the search for the leading edge of trendiness people begin to look for something new to distinguish their services from what has become ordinary. In that search, ethical boundaries can become stretched and the focus can become too much on the `experience’ and less on what we, collectively, are actually trying to achieve for social and environmental good.

The question about voluntourism and whether or not it can work now has become much more complex in my mind. As I started to think about the question `can volunteerism work?’ I began to generate a series of questions to help me examine the issues from a variety of perspectives. Consider the following:

What is voluntourism?


What would voluntourism that works look like?


What would voluntourism that is not working look like?


Who is voluntourism intended to work for?


Who, in fact, is voluntourism really for?


How would we know if voluntourism is working?


Why do we want voluntourism to work?


What are the intersections between voluntourism and relief work or development work and what are the implications of the intersection points? (We are hearing many stories of individuals flocking to Haiti to lend a hand. There is an understandable desire to be doing something rather than just hearing about the devastating effects of the recent earthquake. Is this type of experience now going to become part of the voluntourism opportunities and is this a good thing…what are the consequences of inexperienced people entering into a disaster area? I suspect that in some situations they may be putting added strain on an already strained infrastructure)

Perhaps the starting point for considering the question of `can voluntourism work?’ is `Who are the stakeholders for whom volunteerism needs to work? Off the top four stakeholder groups come to mind:

Voluntourism Organizations – these are the organizations that make the connections between the person who is looking for the voluntourism experience and the host site. Within this group there are sub groups of stakeholders that can be differentiated primarily by their motivations for providing the services. Generally these subgroups would be: non-profits organizations motivated by a well intended desire to connect western resources and influence with important issues ranging from human rights, social justice, health and education, and environmental; philanthropic organizations with access to significant resources and that carry an issue specific focus; for profit organizations motivated by issues that are similar to the non profits; for profit organizations motivated by a love of travel and a genuine desire to share the experience; and for profits who have seen the trend and believe there exists a market to occupy.

Host communities/ countries – the places that we visit are significant stakeholders in voluntourism. With some agencies there is a commitment to the community or local issue that transcends the visits by voluntourists. What does `voluntourism working’ mean to the individuals and communities that are touched by tourist volunteers? Of all the stakeholders they may carry the highest risk when voluntourism does not work

Voluntourists – as stakeholders they pay the money and receive the experience. Does their measure of `did that experience work for me’ skew the delicate balance of a positive outcome for all stakeholder groups because the voice of the voluntourist may be the loudest for the organizations who are making or receiving money from the voluntourism marketplace.

Other agencies working in a community/ country – When voluntourism has a positive outcome for the local community, the respect and influence for all agencies in a community or country can benefit. However, if voluntourism has a negative impact on a community it may be the other agencies that experience the collateral damage to their own reputations.

From your perspective in the field of voluntourism – What is the outcome that you would like to see? What is the primary purpose of voluntourism? What is the outcome for each of the stakeholder groups? What other stakeholders need to be considered? What are the unintended consequences that we will be hearing about in a few years as the impact of voluntourism becomes clearer?

Developing Personally – Thinking Globally - Moving Beyond McLeadership

In 2008, as my colleagues and I were exploring our concepts around socially responsible leadership, I had an opportunity to spend a week in northern Mexico serving in a community food program. The challenge we tasked ourselves with was to fully immerse ourselves in the culture and to contribute in a way that met the needs of the community with a focus on the development of capacity rather than aid. As we crossed the border into Mexico I realized that for the first time in my adult life I was the wrong gender and colour. I had no language, in fact I had little to offer other than a heart for serving and a desire to learn. What they taught me was the meaning of community. A lesson so powerful and evocative that even the smell of fresh cilantro sharpens both my senses and my memories and brings the experience rushing back.


Learning is a basic human function. We are primed to learn from our first precious minutes of existence. While babies are interacting with and learning about their environment they are creating new connections and pathways between nerve cells both within their brains, and between their brains and bodies. While physical growth and change is easily observed and measured, cognitive and psychosocial change and development is a little harder to determine as clearly.

The kind of learning that has the greatest impact on adult learners (and therefore the greatest possibility for transformation) is the kind of learning that takes place when an adult is fully immersed in the learning experience. When the individual’s heart, mind and body are fully engaged in the experience powerful and often transformational change occurs. Barbara K. Given in her book, “Teaching to the Brain’s Natural Learning Systems”, identifies five major systems: emotional, social, cognitive, physical, and reflective. The Greeks had a word that describes learning of this magnitude...metamorphoo. It is learning that literally renews the mind.

Most traditional training events fall far short of the five natural learning modalities. Warren Bennis addresses this in his seminal work, “On Becoming a Leader”. Bennis suggests that leadership cannot be learned in a weekend training seminar...”I’ve come to think of that one as the microwave theory: pop in Mr. or Ms. Average and out pops McLeader in sixty seconds.” Our most powerful learning experiences in life typically take place in a total immersion environment when all five of the natural learning modalities are present and we are able to gather information from ourselves, our colleagues/friends, and our environment.

Erik Erikson described a pivotal stage in adult psychosocial development as generativity vs. stagnation. A hallmark of this stage in adulthood is the growing desire to contribute to society and to guide the coming generations. Erikson postulates that as we work toward the betterment of society a sense of accomplishment and generativity results. Researchers claim that this stage of psychosocial development is actually the intersection of society and the human life cycle. Erikson’s theory teaches us that when this desire for generativity is stifled a kind of stagnation permeates our lives with a growing sense of alienation and disenfranchisement. It would seem that ongoing adult learning and development is as critical to our world as the glorious wonderment of our children’s first years.


Where do you turn for your generative conversations and experiences? Do you think there’s more to life than paying the power bill? Are you interested in thinking deeply about the developing world and developing communities and your place within it? If so, maybe an immersion experience is just what you’re looking for. Sure beats stagnation...

This blog was written by Christine Bonney, Managing Partner, The Acacia Group