Distribution Network
Content
A bid to close the gap between the way European and domestic arms of US
multinationals approach corporate responsibility is being made by a
group of CSR practitioners.
Executives based in Europe hope to work with their US colleagues to find a common approach and, as a first step, will propose the creation of consultation groups on both sides of the Atlantic.
Views gained from companies in Europe and the US will be collected in a report proposing ways ahead and could lead to a meeting between representatives from both continents ‘to increase understanding of differences and find new, more effective approaches’.
The initiative stems from a private meeting that took place last year between European representatives of a number of US-based companies. Now three consultants – Hilary Sutcliffe of UK-based Responsible Futures, Neil Smith of the US-based management consultancy SmithOBrien, and Jennifer Zerk, a legal specialist – are seeking financial support from various sources, including the European Commission, to extend the work.
Sutcliffe said: ‘The Atlantic divide has been a recurring theme in the discussions. The difficulty arises from what appear to be two different views in Europe and the US. There’s an emphasis on corporate philanthropy in America, whereas in Europe the prime concern is to embed social, environmental and ethical considerations into management culture.
‘The US also takes a more legalistic approach and has a culture of litigation, while in Europe there is a growing inclination to engage and involve stakeholders.’
Sutcliffe said the tensions were ‘hindering the ability of many corporations to integrate the issues into their operations’. Fear of litigation in the US appears to be a particular problem. A UK-based consultant who recently worked with an American multinational’s European arm to prepare its annual CSR report told EP he had become so exasperated by the defensive posture of the head office that ‘in the end I basically gave up and told them to put in what they liked’.
He added: ‘I blame the corporate lawyers a lot of the time. They have a lot of power and are far too conservative. In my case the lawyers just took over the whole process, and in the end we couldn’t say anything meaningful at all.’
In another recent example of the Atlantic divide, the consultancy URS Corporation decided to withdraw from the assurance market for non-financial reports, a stance believed to have been adopted on the instructions of US lawyers, and against the wishes of URS executives in Europe.
Executives based in Europe hope to work with their US colleagues to find a common approach and, as a first step, will propose the creation of consultation groups on both sides of the Atlantic.
Views gained from companies in Europe and the US will be collected in a report proposing ways ahead and could lead to a meeting between representatives from both continents ‘to increase understanding of differences and find new, more effective approaches’.
The initiative stems from a private meeting that took place last year between European representatives of a number of US-based companies. Now three consultants – Hilary Sutcliffe of UK-based Responsible Futures, Neil Smith of the US-based management consultancy SmithOBrien, and Jennifer Zerk, a legal specialist – are seeking financial support from various sources, including the European Commission, to extend the work.
Sutcliffe said: ‘The Atlantic divide has been a recurring theme in the discussions. The difficulty arises from what appear to be two different views in Europe and the US. There’s an emphasis on corporate philanthropy in America, whereas in Europe the prime concern is to embed social, environmental and ethical considerations into management culture.
‘The US also takes a more legalistic approach and has a culture of litigation, while in Europe there is a growing inclination to engage and involve stakeholders.’
Sutcliffe said the tensions were ‘hindering the ability of many corporations to integrate the issues into their operations’. Fear of litigation in the US appears to be a particular problem. A UK-based consultant who recently worked with an American multinational’s European arm to prepare its annual CSR report told EP he had become so exasperated by the defensive posture of the head office that ‘in the end I basically gave up and told them to put in what they liked’.
He added: ‘I blame the corporate lawyers a lot of the time. They have a lot of power and are far too conservative. In my case the lawyers just took over the whole process, and in the end we couldn’t say anything meaningful at all.’
In another recent example of the Atlantic divide, the consultancy URS Corporation decided to withdraw from the assurance market for non-financial reports, a stance believed to have been adopted on the instructions of US lawyers, and against the wishes of URS executives in Europe.
Super Featured
No
Featured
No