A process for evaluating csr strategies, practices and programs.pdf

Running Head: A Framework for Measuring and Monitoring CSR Strategies, REV April 2014
Professor Brian L. Maruffi, Yeshiva University, Sy Syms School of Business
EVALUATING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CORPORATE SOCIAL
RESPONSIBILITY PRACTICES AND PROCESSES
A CSR Continuous Framework for Assessing, Monitoring and
Improving CSR Programs, Practices, Processes and Strategies
Brian L. Maruffi, Ph.D.
Yeshiva University
Sy Syms School of Business
drbmaruffi@gmail.com
April 16th
2014
Accepted for Publication:
The Journal of Global Business Issues, April 2014

Running Head: A Framework for Measuring and Monitoring CSR Strategies, REV March 2014
Professor Brian L. Maruffi, Yeshiva University, Sy Syms School of Business 2
MEASURING THE EFFECTIVENESS OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND
PRACTICES AND PROCESSES
Table of Contents
Abstract:
Introduction—Why Monitor and Measure CSR Programs and Practices
1. A Framework for Monitoring and Measuring CSR
1.0 Continuous Improvement
1.2 Continuous CSR Improvement defined
1.3 Continuous Improvement Model
2. Phase #1: Scanning
2.1 Concept and Definitions
2.2 Purpose and Objectives
2.3 Critical Issues & Questions
2.4 The Strategic Scanning Process
2.5 Critical Tasks, Activities and Outcomes
3.0 Phase#3: Forecasting Concepts and Methods
4.0 Phase#4: Assessment Concepts, Process and Outcomes
5.0 Phase #5: Targeting Concepts, Process and Outcomes
6.0 Phase#6: Remediation, Concepts, Processes, Tools and Outcomes
7.0 Conclusions: Linkages between 6 Phases of the Continuous Improvement
Process
8. Implementation—How to Make it Work
9. Conclusions and Applications
10. References
ABSTRACT
Whereas some companies have built comprehensive CSR systems, while others have introduced only
limited efforts to create products and programs that protect the environment and the community. Most
US and European companies have been struggling to determine whether they are have effective CSR
strategies, programs and measures. Clearly, the two biggest challenges are 1) Balance the needs of
the community with the economic demands and expectations of shareholders and 2) Accurately
determining the long-term positive impact of CSR strategies and programs. Currently, there is a lack of
universally accepted standards and measures required to evaluate the relative and/or sustainable
impact of alternative CSR programs and interventions.
This paper presents integrated processes that can be used for monitoring and evaluating Corporate
Social Responsibility Strategies. By implementing these processes and associated metrics provides
companies with a framework and methodology for benchmarking their CSR policies, programs and
interventions. The approach outlined in this paper, provides a basis for systematically optimizing
benefits of deploying a wide range of alternative CSR practices. A seven step CSR Strategy review
process provides regulators, the community, operating managers and senior executives with a more
transparent understanding of a company’s CSR position and identifies gaps between maintaining the
status quo and more effective CSR practices and programs. This set of processes facilitates better
more transparent communication, promotes organizational change and can result in dramatic
performance improvement through use of best practices, better customer perceptions.

Introduction
With the introduction of innovative CSR strategies, a company declares its willingness to contribute not
only to improving the financial bottom line but also to focus on improving social and environmental
problems. Senior Executives are often confronted with the question, where CSR involvement ends,
where it begins? and how the firm can optimize the benefit of CSR pro9grams without increasing
internal policies, bureaucracy and cost.
Continuous Improvement is defined as a measurement process that facilitates and enables
organizational change and dramatic performance improvement through use of best practices,
customer focus and external value-added perspectives. SRO concentrates on quality
management processes and is based on evaluating seven critical factors; leadership, strategic
planning, customer and market focus, information and analysis, human resources focus, process
management and business results.
CSR Continuous Improvement Process
CSR Continuous Improvement Framework:
The CSR continuous improvement process consists of 6 phases:
1.Scanning—Identifying broad, early signals of internal and external environmental trends or changes.
2
2.
.Monitoring— Detecting meaning or the significance of changes in observable social, operational and
performance indicators, trends or patterns.
3.Forecasting— is the process of predicting future events. This stage involves the development and
projection of anticipated outcomes based on-going observation derived from monitoring significant
operational or social trends or indicators.
4.Assessing—Evaluating the relative significance or importance and potential impact based on an
analysis of current or projected changes in relevant indicators and trends
5.Targeting—Identifying operational/performance/functional areas within that require significant
improvement and assessing magnitude of deviation from established standards
6.Remediation—Developing corrective action plans, implementing these plans and evaluating
results/actual improvement.

4
1-Scanning
4-Assessing
CSR Assessment Framework
Critical
Succe s s Factors
Strate gie s
Manage ment
Operating Practic
es
Proce s ses
Policie s
Trans actions
Phase#1: Scanning
1.1 Core Concept & Definition:
The purpose of scanning is to alert the organization, board of directors and senior managers to issues or
situations that can have a significant impact on the effectiveness and/or quality of management,
operational and social responsibility issues and practices. Scanning serves a preventative function. By
identifying early warning signals, managers will have as much time as possible to determine appropriate
alternative courses of action. Scanning is a first step towards exploring and identifying opportunities to
improve management practices, programs, compliance with policy, and processes. Scanning surfaces
early warning signals alerting managers, units and departments about important trends and events that
could have either a positive or negative impact on employees and on the organization. Scanning is the
first phase of the management improvement process. Scanning is defined simply as Scanning—
Identifying broad, early signals of strategic, social, performance and operational trends or changes. It is
the basis for effective monitoring and corrective action. This first stage serves as the foundation for all
subsequent stages in the SOR. Scanning focuses on identifying current and/or potential
strategic/social/operational trends, patterns or changes that need to be addressed by units, departments,
managers or the entire organization.
1.2 Critical CSR Issues and Questions:
There are several key questions and issues that should be addressed during the CSR scanning
phase:
1. Level of Analysis--What is the appropriate unit of analysis and segments of the within the
organization (units, departments, locations or levels) and outside the organization
(environmental/constituencies) that need to be evaluated?
CONTINUOUS
IMPROVEMENT

2. Program Scoping--What current indicators or trends are used to assess the strengths and
weaknesses of management in the organization?
3. Stakeholder Sponsorship—who are the key internal and external stakeholders/groups that need
to be targeted.
4. Performance Measurement--Which internal and external performance measures, patterns,
trends, or indicators are most important and relevant to the organization?
5. Identification of Trends and Critical Success Factors--What is the likely impact of negative or
positive trends on the health, safety and effectiveness of the organization and its internal/external
constituencies short-term and longer term?
1.3 Assessing the effectiveness CSR Operational Scanning Processes:
An effective scanning process should be based on frequently updated data from reliable sources of
information. Cross-functional teams or panels consisting of internal managers and external
experts/stakeholders can be used to decide which information should be scanned and interpret and/or
validate patterns or trends that are uncovered in the scanning phase. Multidisciplinary task groups can
also be used to identify which environmental, social and operational issues or trends are most important
or are likely to have the greatest financial, social/community or strategic impact on the organization and/or
stakeholders. Scanning can identify early warning signals such as potential issues or changes into the
monitoring and forecasting process. Scanning is especially useful when changes take time to unfold or
emerge to a point where there is a significant impact on the organization. It can be used to provide
managers, units or departments with valuable lead-time for examining implications and considering
alternative courses of action. Most changes in performance/operations/communities do not take place in
days or even months, but evolve gradually over time. Certain changes or trends may take years to
develop and unfold. Scanning can reveal indications of early-stage changes in populations, social values,
environmental trends, community/demographic composition, workforce composition or longer-term
changes in performance, organizational flexibility/capability, and turnover and customer/stakeholder
satisfaction. Once the organization becomes aware of specific trends, changes or warning signals, it can
be monitored and tracked and forecast their impact on the organization.
1.4 Critical CSR Monitoring Process Tasks & Activities: The Scanning process consists
of three critical tasks:
1. Establishing Scope--Determining the scope and range of relevant data and sources of information.
The primary objective is to narrow down the scope so that it is more likely that important early
warning signals will not be missed;
2. Interpreting Trends—Integrating and making sense out of relevant operating/social performance
indicators and other relevant data is a critical component of scanning.
The primary objective here is to determine the meaning of integrated data and identifying important
correlations or relationships between organizational/social performance indicators that signal future
events.
3. Selection—this involves evaluating the relative importance of indicators or precursors. Those
indicators with the greatest relevance or importance will selected for further monitoring, forecasting
and assessment at later phases of the stakeholder/social/operational assessment process. Only, the
most relevant and reliable signals or performance indicators should be considered for further
monitoring, forecasting or assessment. The result from phase#1 is the identification critical area,
trends and indicators that should be monitored. Scanning can be a continuous process or follow an
annual or bi-annual cycle.
Phase#2—Monitoring
2.1 Monitoring Definition and Objectives
 The process of verifying a number of outputs and results (pre-selected and well-defined)
together with the process through which these results have been obtained In order to secure valid
and relevant information on work in progress on an ongoing basis

CSR Monitoring Objectives:
To ensure that:
I. Established social responsibility/operational standards, norms an specifications are
reviewed;
II. Manage environmental/operational regulations, rules, policies, delegated authority
and procedures effectively;
III. Ensure that social and operational performance targets are met;
IV. Support and guidance is provided where required
V. Best practices across organizations, constituencies, communities, units,
departments, offices and throughout the organization are shared and communicated
internally and as relevant, externally.
VI. Align social responsibility philosophy, standards and practices (internal and external)
with operational measures, systems, processes and results
2.2 Monitoring Process: Core Concepts:
Monitoring is an essential function of modern management is becoming an integral part of all activities. It is the
process of tracking and verifying, on an ongoing basis, a number of pre-selected, well-defined outputs and
results, together with the processes through which those results have been obtained, with the aim of securing
current, valid and relevant information on work in progress in order to ensure that:
a) Established standards, norms and specifications are respected;
b) Regulations, rules, policies and procedures are adhered to;
c) Performance targets are met;
d) Support and guidance is given where required;
e) Best practices are shared throughout the organization.
Social Responsibility/Operational Performance Monitoring Process involves periodic observation and tracking of
changes in HR management functions, practice, indicators or performance over time. Monitoring is defined as
detecting meaning or the significance of changes in observable performance indicators, trends or patterns.
Organizational Performance Monitoring is focused on the evolution of trends such as demographic changes in
the workforce, staff turnover, absenteeism, retirements, vacancy rates and workforce diversity. Trends, events,
or changes in these areas will surface and be identified during the scanning process or brought to the
organization’s attention through benchmarking and obtaining best practice data from other organizations.
Monitoring and scanning serve different purposes in the CSR continuous improvement process. The purpose of
monitoring is to assemble sufficient reliable performance data that can be used to discern or validate whether
specific patterns of changes are emerging. Patterns consist of a complex or set of discrete trends. When
several trends or indicators are connected and evaluated, patterns can be detected. Monitoring ensures that
intuitive or superficial judgments about weak signals observed during scanning undergo more careful scrutiny
and are then communicated to the heads of units, offices or departments for verification. These initial
judgments need to be tracked for confirmation, elaboration, modification or invalidation. The evaluation of
indicators and discrete data is much more focused, specific and detailed in the monitoring compared to initial
scanning.
The analysis of early warning signals from inside or outside of the organization provides a general sense of the
patterns that should be reviewed periodically over time. As the monitoring phase continues, trends accumulate
into patterns that evolve into a picture of the changes identified initially during scanning. In the monitoring
process, trends observed superficially during scanning are clarified. As more detailed and specific data are
collected, tracked and analyzed, it becomes feasible to begin to locate the source of problems, trends or
changes. Effective monitoring requires integration and interpretation of a variety of data and indicators from
multiple sources. As trends or patterns of change in the data are tracked, judgments and conclusions can be
verified.

2.3 The Monitoring Process: Guiding Principles—a comprehensive, integrated
monitoring
system is based on the following guiding principles:
1. Monitoring is a management process with the purpose of:
a. Providing assistance to management, managers and business units who are
responsible for managing the organization’s, corporate social and operational
responsibilities;
b. Monitoring focuses on continuous improve of management practices to achieve
better results through, the relevant management information, early warning signals
and guidance, which would allow for remedial action wherever possible;
2. Monitoring requires partnership, clear communication and collaboration between
stakeholder/constituencies/regulators and the organization;
3. Monitoring must be a proactive and ongoing process that should be integrated and
implemented throughout the entire enterprise/organization;
4. Monitoring must be incorporated into all relevant aspects of management activities in order to
elicit information on: achievements or lack thereof; adherence to standards, norms and
specifications; and compliance with regulations, rules, policies and procedures;
5. Monitoring must follow clearly defined methodologies and must utilize and be supported by
appropriate mechanisms and tools. Identifying useful, easily available and current
information, data and reports depend on the support of a strong information technology
capacity;
6. Effective monitoring requires dedicated resources, supported by specialized teams of staff
with the necessary skills, knowledge and experience, using SOPs to effectively manage
within the context of a clearly defined program of work.
7. Monitoring is a process of observing, and tracking relevant performance, stakeholder
sponsorship, and providing management and intervention teams with information about
trends in operations/functions/process and environmental functions that will enable
management and managers to effectively respond to and address these issues. The
long-term goal of monitoring aims to continuously improve management practices
and achieve better results. This is achieved by scanning, interpreting and evaluating
relevant management information and identifying early warning signals, which should
allow for timely remedial action.
2.4 Distinguishing Auditing From Monitoring
Monitoring and auditing are very different ways of approaching operational/organizational
effectiveness and improvement.
The goal of auditing is to enforce or reinforce compliance with established organizational policies,
rules and procedure. It is not focused on identifying best practices or recognizing units/departments
for finding effective solutions. Auditing is focused on evaluating whether operating processes,
policies, practices or procedures are in compliance or meet established or agreed on standards.
The auditing process is an independent evaluation of whether there have been serious violations or
departure from stated rules, policies and procedure. The goal of auditing is to reduce or eliminate
non-compliance and/or establish penalties for not conforming to standards. The auditor represents
the interests of the organization and by definition is expected to be an objective evaluator and as
such, someone in this role would not be expected to collaborate with the members of units or
departments that are being scrutinized. On the other hand, the objective of monitoring, on the other
hand is to prevent non-compliance and assist managers, units and departments in finding solutions
to underlying problems that cause deviations from standards. Monitoring is a process that focuses
on creating continuous improvement and organizational revitalization. A key role of the monitor is to
facilitate communication and facilitate sharing of best practices and lessons learned between units,
offices, functions, levels and departments.

While auditing processes are focused on maintaining the “status quo”’ or a one-size fits all
approach, the focus of monitoring is to enable managers and units to find the best solutions that fit
their particular problems and circumstances. While, monitoring may lead to improved results or
corrective actions, the goal of monitoring is to observe and report trends and patterns, which could
have a negative impact if preventative action is not taken. In order effective, monitoring must be a
partner-based endeavor. Monitoring is an integral part of the continuous improvement process.
When combined with forecasting and assessment, it should aim at anticipating problems before
they occur. Monitoring must be incorporated into all areas and functions of human resources
management. This will allow the organization to assess performance improvement and best
practices as well as identify lapses, or targets or areas for improvement in practices, processes,
policies and procedures. Monitoring must follow clearly defined methodologies and be supported by
appropriate mechanisms and tools. To ensure the usefulness of data and reports, it is essential
that monitoring be supported by a strong information technology capacity.
2.5 Monitoring Review Process: Some Critical Issues and Questions
Several critical issues need to be addressed during the monitoring process:
1. Which types of social responsibility and operational data, information or indicators are
most or least relevant or important?
2. What sources of data are most accurate, up to date and useful?
3. Which indicators, trends and data fit together to form a pattern?
4. How can inconsistencies or gaps in the data be interpreted or reconciled?
2.6 Monitoring Process--Expected Results and Outcomes
Monitoring results in several key outcomes for the organization:
1.Specific descriptions of events or patterns in the data that can be forecasted or used for
scenario analysis.
2.Identification of trends or patterns that require additional monitoring (observation) or
tracking to determine if the pattern is cyclical, sequential or due to chance.
3.Identification of early warning signals that require scanning in the future,
4.Evaluating the rate or speed of change in trends, how quickly or slowly are patterns
emerging or changing
5.Evaluating the magnitude and direction of trends
The results of monitoring are not limited to providing inputs to forecasting. Monitoring can
be used to uncover and identify apparent trends that were not included in the scope of the
original monitoring program.
Phase#3--Forecasting:
3.1 Definition and Concepts
F
Fo
or
re
ec
ca
as
st
ti
in
ng
g i
is
s t
th
he
e p
pr
ro
oc
ce
es
ss
s o
of
f p
pr
re
ed
di
ic
ct
ti
in
ng
g f
fu
ut
tu
ur
re
e e
ev
ve
en
nt
ts
s.
. It involves developing projections of anticipated
outcomes based on-going observation derived from monitoring significant
environmental/social/operational trends or indicators. Forecasting provides line managers and heads of
offices, units and departments with a projection of what is more or less likely to take place in the
future based on the tracking of past events, indicators or trends. It serves as an un
nd
de
er
rl
ly
yi
in
ng
g b
ba
as
si
is
s
f
fo
or
r m
ma
ak
ki
in
ng
g i
im
mp
po
or
rt
ta
an
nt
t d
de
ec
ci
is
si
io
on
ns
s a
an
nd
d i
im
mp
pr
ro
ov
vi
in
ng
g m
ma
an
na
ag
ge
em
me
en
nt
t p
pr
ra
ac
ct
ti
ic
ce
es
s.
. F
Fo
or
re
ec
ca
as
st
ti
in
ng
g p
pr
ro
ov
vi
id
de
es
s a
a
p
pi
ic
ct
tu
ur
re
e o
of
f w
wh
ha
at
t i
is
s m
mo
os
st
t l
li
ik
ke
el
ly
y t
to
o t
ta
ak
ke
e p
pl
la
ac
ce
e i
in
n t
th
he
e f
fu
ut
tu
ur
re
e b
ba
as
se
ed
d o
on
n t
th
he
e t
tr
ra
ac
ck
ki
in
ng
g o
of
f p
pa
as
st
t e
ex
xp
pe
er
ri
ie
en
nc
ce
e,
,
t
tr
re
en
nd
ds
s o
or
r e
ev
ve
en
nt
ts
s.
.

T
Th
he
e p
pu
ur
rp
po
os
se
e o
of
f f
fo
or
re
ec
ca
as
st
ti
in
ng
g i
is
s t
to
o d
de
ev
ve
el
lo
op
p p
pl
la
au
us
si
ib
bl
le
e p
pr
ro
oj
je
ec
ct
ti
io
on
ns
s o
of
f t
th
he
e f
fu
ut
tu
ur
re
e s
sc
co
op
pe
e,
, d
di
ir
re
ec
ct
ti
io
on
n,
,
m
ma
ag
gn
ni
it
tu
ud
de
e a
an
nd
d c
co
om
mp
pl
le
ex
xi
it
ty
y o
of
f c
ch
ha
an
ng
ge
es
s t
th
ha
at
t c
ca
an
n h
ha
av
ve
e a
a s
si
ig
gn
ni
if
fi
ic
ca
an
nt
t l
lo
on
ng
g-
-t
te
er
rm
m i
im
mp
pa
ac
ct
t o
on
n u
un
ni
it
ts
s,
,
d
de
ep
pa
ar
rt
tm
me
en
nt
ts
s,
, o
of
ff
fi
ic
ce
es
s o
or
r t
th
he
e e
en
nt
ti
ir
re
e o
or
rg
ga
an
ni
iz
za
at
ti
io
on
n.
. M
Ma
an
na
ag
ge
er
rs
s u
us
se
e f
fo
or
re
ec
ca
as
st
ti
in
ng
g,
, e
ex
xt
te
er
rn
na
al
l e
ex
xp
pe
er
rt
ts
s a
an
nd
d
u
un
ni
it
t/
/d
de
ep
pa
ar
rt
tm
me
en
nt
ts
s t
to
o a
an
nt
ti
ic
ci
ip
pa
at
te
e c
ch
ha
an
ng
ge
es
s i
in
n s
si
ig
gn
ni
if
fi
ic
ca
an
nt
t m
ma
an
na
ag
ge
em
me
en
nt
t f
fa
ac
ct
to
or
rs
s a
an
nd
d m
ma
ak
ke
e c
co
on
nn
ne
ec
ct
ti
io
on
ns
s
b
be
et
tw
we
ee
en
n s
se
ee
em
mi
in
ng
gl
ly
y u
un
nr
re
el
la
at
te
ed
d d
da
at
ta
a a
an
nd
d i
in
nd
di
ic
ca
at
to
or
rs
s.
.
T
Th
he
e k
ke
ey
y e
el
le
em
me
en
nt
ts
s o
of
f f
fo
or
re
ec
ca
as
st
ti
in
ng
g a
ar
re
e:
:
(
(a
a)
) S
Sc
co
op
pe
e c
co
on
ns
si
is
st
ts
s o
of
f t
th
he
e s
su
ub
bs
st
ta
an
nc
ce
e,
, c
co
on
nt
te
en
nt
t o
or
r r
ra
an
ng
ge
e o
of
f t
th
he
e f
fo
or
re
ec
ca
as
st
t—
—F
Fo
or
re
ec
ca
as
st
ts
s c
ca
an
n b
be
e b
br
ro
oa
ad
d
(
(m
ma
an
ny
y t
tr
re
en
nd
ds
s)
) o
or
r n
na
ar
rr
ro
ow
w (
(f
fe
ew
w t
tr
re
en
nd
ds
s)
).
. S
Sc
co
op
pe
e i
is
s a
al
ls
so
o d
de
ef
fi
in
ne
ed
d i
in
n t
te
er
rm
ms
s o
of
f t
ti
im
me
ef
fr
ra
am
me
e (
(l
lo
on
ng
g-
-t
te
er
rm
m
v
ve
er
rs
su
us
s s
sh
ho
or
rt
t-
-t
te
er
rm
m t
tr
re
en
nd
ds
s)
).
. T
Th
he
er
re
e a
ar
re
e 3
3 T
Ti
im
me
e H
Ho
or
ri
iz
zo
on
ns
s f
fo
or
r f
fo
or
re
ec
ca
as
st
ts
s;
;
(b) S
Sh
ho
or
rt
t-
-r
ra
an
ng
ge
e f
fo
or
re
ec
ca
as
st
t-
--
-U
Up
p t
to
o 1
1 y
ye
ea
ar
r,
, g
ge
en
ne
er
ra
al
ll
ly
y l
le
es
ss
s t
th
ha
an
n 3
3 m
mo
on
nt
th
hs
s-
--
- S
Sh
ho
or
rt
t-
-t
te
er
rm
m f
fo
or
re
ec
ca
as
st
ts
s
t
te
en
nd
d t
to
o b
be
e m
mo
or
re
e a
ac
cc
cu
ur
ra
at
te
e t
th
ha
an
n l
lo
on
ng
ge
er
r-
-t
te
er
rm
m f
fo
or
re
ec
ca
as
st
ts
sM
Me
ed
di
iu
um
m-
-r
ra
an
ng
ge
e f
fo
or
re
ec
ca
as
st
t-
--
-3
3 m
mo
on
nt
th
hs
s t
to
o 2
2
y
ye
ea
ar
r;
;
(d) L
Lo
on
ng
g-
-r
ra
an
ng
ge
e f
fo
or
re
ec
ca
as
st
t—
—m
mo
or
re
e t
th
ha
an
n 2
2+
+ y
ye
ea
ar
rs
s-
--
-M
Me
ed
di
iu
um
m a
an
nd
d l
lo
on
ng
g-
-r
ra
an
ng
ge
e f
fo
or
re
ec
ca
as
st
ts
s d
de
ea
al
l w
wi
it
th
h
m
mo
or
re
e c
co
om
mp
pr
re
eh
he
en
ns
si
iv
ve
e i
is
ss
su
ue
es
s a
an
nd
d s
su
up
pp
po
or
rt
t m
ma
an
na
ag
ge
em
me
en
nt
t s
st
tr
ra
at
te
eg
gi
ie
es
s,
, p
pl
la
an
ns
s a
an
nd
d
d
de
ec
ci
is
si
io
on
ns
sDirection—describes the persistent, overall upward or downward patterns in the
data or indicators. For example are transfer or mobility rates increasing or decreasing over
time.
(f) Speed—describes how fast a trend is changing—is projected trend changing slowly or
quickly
(g) Volatility –Is the relative level of stability or unpredictability of patterns or trends. The greater
the volatility, the less predicable or reliable the forecast.
(h) Intensity—describes the strength of the forces or factors (underlying causes) producing or
driving projected trends or patterns
(i) Magnitude—refers to the degree of potential impact that increases or decreases in projected
trends or patterns will have on staff, performance or the organization.
3.2 Types of Forecasts:
A. Qualitative Forecasts—is u
us
se
ed
d w
wh
he
en
n s
si
it
tu
ua
at
ti
io
on
n i
is
s v
va
ag
gu
ue
e a
an
nd
d l
li
it
tt
tl
le
e d
da
at
ta
a e
ex
xi
is
st
t
T
Th
hi
is
s t
ty
yp
pe
e o
of
f f
fo
or
re
ec
ca
as
st
t i
is
s b
ba
as
se
ed
d o
on
n e
ex
xp
pe
er
rt
t k
kn
no
ow
wl
le
ed
dg
ge
e,
, i
in
nt
tu
ui
it
ti
io
on
n a
an
nd
d/
/o
or
r e
ex
xp
pe
er
ri
ie
en
nc
ce
e
 J
Ju
ur
ry
y o
of
f e
ex
xe
ec
cu
ut
ti
iv
ve
e a
an
nd
d/
/o
or
r s
st
ta
ak
ke
eh
ho
ol
ld
de
er
r o
op
pi
in
ni
io
on
ns
s-
--
-P
Po
oo
ol
l o
op
pi
in
ni
io
on
ns
s o
of
f h
hi
ig
gh
h-
-l
le
ev
ve
el
l e
ex
xe
ec
cu
ut
ti
iv
ve
es
s,
,
s
so
om
me
et
ti
im
me
es
s a
au
ug
gm
me
en
nt
t b
by
y s
st
ta
at
ti
is
st
ti
ic
ca
al
l m
mo
od
de
el
ls
s-
--
- Involves small group of high-level managers,
group of managers estimates future trends by working together relying on their management
knowledge and experience
 D
De
el
lp
ph
hi
i m
me
et
th
ho
od
d-
--
-P
Pa
an
ne
el
l o
of
f e
ex
xp
pe
er
rt
ts
s,
, q
qu
ue
er
ri
ie
ed
d i
it
te
er
ra
at
ti
iv
ve
el
ly
y—
—I
In
nt
te
er
ra
ac
ct
ti
iv
ve
e a
an
nd
d i
it
te
er
ra
at
ti
iv
ve
e g
gr
ro
ou
up
p
p
pr
ro
oc
ce
es
ss
s,
, 4
4 t
ty
yp
pe
es
s o
of
f i
in
np
pu
ut
ts
s—
—e
ex
xp
pe
er
rt
ts
s,
, d
de
ec
ci
is
si
io
on
n-
-m
ma
ak
ke
er
rs
s,
, s
st
ta
af
ff
f (
(e
em
mp
pl
lo
oy
ye
ee
es
s)
) u
un
ni
it
t/
/d
de
ep
pa
ar
rt
tm
me
en
nt
t
m
ma
an
na
ag
ge
er
rs
sEmployee or Management Surveys--A
As
sk
ks
s e
em
mp
pl
lo
oy
ye
ee
es
s,
, m
ma
an
na
ag
ge
er
rs
s a
an
nd
d/
/o
or
r e
ex
xp
pe
er
rt
ts
s
t
th
he
ei
ir
r o
op
pi
in
ni
io
on
ns
s a
ab
bu
ut
t p
pr
ra
ac
ct
ti
ic
ce
es
s;
; F
Fo
or
r e
ex
xa
am
mp
pl
le
e –
– Ask decision makers about corrective action
plans, Ask line managers who score higher on strategic performance indicators what they do
differently from mangers in lower performing units, offices or departmentsDemographics--
Estimates of trends or patterns from experts or line managers are reviewed for
reasonableness, and then aggregated—data are combined at office, unit, and department
levels. Can be combined with surveys to validate or confirm results
B. Quantitative Forecasts
Quantitative Forecasts are us
se
ed
d w
wh
he
en
n s
si
it
tu
ua
at
ti
io
on
n i
is
s ‘
‘s
st
ta
ab
bl
le
e’
’ a
an
nd
d h
hi
is
st
to
or
ri
ic
ca
al
l d
da
at
ta
a e
ex
xi
is
st
t.
. I
It
t i
in
nv
vo
ol
lv
ve
es
s
m
mo
or
re
e s
so
op
ph
hi
is
st
ti
ic
ca
at
te
ed
d m
ma
at
th
he
em
ma
at
ti
ic
ca
al
l t
te
ec
ch
hn
ni
iq
qu
ue
es
s t
to
o e
ev
va
al
lu
ua
at
te
e p
pe
er
rf
fo
or
rm
ma
an
nc
ce
e t
tr
re
en
nd
ds
s.
. T
Th
he
es
se
e f
fo
or
re
ec
ca
as
st
ts
s
r
re
ev
ve
ea
al
l p
persistent, overall upward or downward patterns in the data or indicators that are due to or
driven by underlying factors or events that are typically several years duration. There are two
distinctive types of forecasting are used to predict changing performance trends or patterns.

The first of these referred as Predictive Forecasting involves trends that are consistently
detected in internal/external data or indicators over time. This type of projective forecasting
assumes that the future will be consistent with the past and therefore future trends are developed
based on past experience, patterns or trends.
The second type of forecasting focuses on the development of Scenarios or Alternative Futures
that are based judgments by experts or managers about what is most likely to occur or made to
happen in the future by the organization in the future. Alternative futures are scenarios developed
by evaluating the interaction among several major trends impacting the work environment. This
type of forecasting is more complex, difficult to construct and more uncertain predictive forecasts.
By developing several alternative scenarios or “possible futures”, contingency plans can be
formulated to deal with much broader and more complex changes that may or may not occur in
the future. A scenario is a description of how one version of the future might unfold.
As a forecasting tool, simple scenarios, based on a limited amount of data can have significant
strategic management implications for different units, departments or offices in the organization.
There are significant differences between these two types of forecasting. Projections or predictive
forecasts reflect a largely pre-determined and relatively stable future. Trends and patterns are
therefore likely to continue for some period of time. Alternative futures, on the other hand,
represent “possible” futures—and involve depicting several potential paths to the future.
Alternative futures are more elaborate and robust compared to projections. Scenario analysis
enables external stakeholders/experts and managers to develop long-term preventative policies
or action plans that will be effective in responding to a variety of possible futures. If alternative
futures are not considered or evaluated external experts and line managers are much more likely
to be constrained by the implicit or common sense assumption that the future will be a repeat of
what has occurred in the past.
3.3 The Forecasting Process: There are seven steps in the forecasting process:
1. Determine the use of the forecast
2. Select the items to be forecasted
3. Determine the time horizon of the forecast
4. Select the forecasting model(s)
5. Gather the data
6. Make the forecast
7. Validate and implement results
3.4 Forecasting: Key tasks: There are several key forecasting tasks and actions
that need to be addressed:
a) Identifying the underlying factors or circumstances that drive the evolution of long-term
trends and patterns.
b) Determining the scope, speed, direction, intensity, volatility and magnitude of patterns,
indicators or trends. This involves an analysis of whether detected or projected change is
a quickly passing episode or an event of some duration. Patterns can be systematic
(continuous over time) or cyclical (reoccurring up and down variations over time).
c) Effective forecasting should focus on 1) Identifying what should be forecast and 2) why it
should be forecast. This involves identifying the projected changes that will have the
greatest relevance or impact on the organization or staff. It is both time consuming,
unnecessary and counter-productive to focus on forecasting of large number of trends
and patterns. As you try to forecast and track too many areas, the amount of data
collection and analysis expands exponentially. If the scope of forecasting is too broad, it
is difficult to detect errors or separate relevant trends from irrelevant or insignificant ones.

Also, the greater the scope of forecasting, the greater the tendency for “analysis
paralysis”. In other words, trying to cover too much territory prevents managers from
focusing on finding solutions to observed or projected problems.
d) Other considerations-- Forecasts are seldom perfect. Most forecasting methods assume
that there is some underlying stability in the system. Aggregated forecasts consisting of
many indicators tend to be more accurate than any single-indicator forecast.
Phase#4 Trend Analysis and Assessment
4.1 Core Concepts:
Trend Assessment is defined as the identification and evaluation of how current and anticipated
(projected) patterns, trends or changes will impact or effect the organization. The purpose of assessing is
to analyze current or projected changes in performance indicators and trends. Assessment involves
evaluating how the impact of relevant trends and patterns are likely to be felt in the future. During the
assessment focus on continuous HR improvement shifts from understanding what is changing to
evaluating how trends and patterns are likely to have a positive or negative impact on specific units,
departments and offices within the organization.
4.2 The Assessment Process:
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs):
During the targeting phase, specific management areas or performance indicators that have been
monitored should be selected for further analysis and evaluation. An outcome of the assessment
phase is identifying and prioritizing the potential negative or positive impact of the most relevant
and important strategic issues and trends. A probability-impact assessment matrix (see
diagram below) is used to prioritize the importance of HR issues relative to short and long-term
planning. Issues and trends in order of priority, probability and timing can be arrayed on the
matrix. separate matrix can be prepared for each of the three planning periods—short-, medium-
and long-term. Although the scoring system for assessing probability and impact can be simple or
complex, a general categorization of high, medium and low is usually sufficient. This matrix has
several merits. It provides a comprehensive, at a glance array of issues, orders them in a manner
that facilitates discussion, planning and evaluation in time frames appropriate to the allocation of
resources and management attention.
Probability-Impact Assessment Matrix
Probability and
Timing of Events
Event #1 Event #2 Event #3 Event #4
Event #1 (Probability
and Timing)
and Timing)
and Timing)
and Timing)

Phase #5—Targeting
5.1 Core Concepts and Definitions:
Targeting is defined as identifying areas within the internal/external environment that require significant
improvement and assessing magnitude of deviation from established management practices and/or
standards. This involves determining what specific areas, practices or indicators need the greatest
amount of improvement. This also consists of linking resources and tools to facilitate dramatic
improvement in the targeted performance or process areas.
The Targeting Process: Targeting consists of 6 steps:
1. Management/stakeholders identify priorities or targets for improvement
2. Specifying the timeframe required for benchmarking and improvement
3. Establishing the magnitude, scope and direction of change that is desired or required for each
area or process
4. Conduct Gap Analysis (Comparison of current area to internal or external best practices,
measures and/or standards. Gap analysis is the process of measuring current management
processes, policies, practices, and operations to internal standards used by high performing units,
offices or departments or with external organizations that are recognized as high performers in
the targeted area(s).
5. Reporting the findings and conclusions constitutes another step in the targeting phase. This
includes making recommendations to address particular situations such as under performance,
alarming trends, potential improprieties, oversights, and shortcomings for corrective actions or
recommending measures for improvement of performance.
6. Identify alternative strategies, objectives, solutions or action plans, specifying the expected
outcome or results to be achieved --A standard, norm or target for each area to be monitored is
established and recorded. (E.g. an output in terms of numbers or time required to complete the
task).
There are several tools that enable the targeting process. The first of these is referred to as Prescriptive
Improvement. Prescriptive improvement is the use of a consistent and systematic processes or
techniques to close the gap between current performance and desired performance (or between current
performance compared to internal or external benchmarks or standards) for each strategic area that is
targeted by introducing new or modified management processes and/or practices. Use of Quantitative
Performance Measures—this technique involves an on going process of comparing current indicators
and measures of performance compared to best practice or best in class standards.
Phase#6—Remediation and Improvement
6.1 Definition and Core Concepts:
Operational/performance process improvement does not stop at the targeting phase. After the
issuance of a report to management, advice and assistance are provided to facilitate corrective
action plans and activities meant to implement recommendations for correction of oversights,
mistakes and shortcomings. While action planning and implementation are essentially the
responsibility of the department/office concerned the continuous improvement process would be
a meaningless and unproductive exercise unless a Management Remediation Committee with
constituencies, units and departments to ensures that recommendations are implemented,
oversights, shortcomings and that alarming trends are corrected, underperformance addressed.
The MRC supports the implementation process by providing departments/offices with assistance
needed to improve performance including training, tools, templates, and interpretation/clarification
of rules, polices and guidelines. Remediation is defined as the plan or process that brings about
significant improvement in operational performance, practices and/or policies. Remediating—this
phase of the social/operational performance review that involves developing corrective action
plans, implementing these plans and evaluating results/actual improvement.

6.1 The goals of remediation
1. Select a plan or process such as benchmarking, reengineering, etc, that will accelerate
and facilitate improvement,
2. Measure the amount of change or improvement that takes place and
3. Evaluate the results/outcomes compared to the corrective action and improvement plans
6.2 The Remediation and Corrective Action Process: Steps in the remediation
process
1. Review and Prioritize Targets for Improvement
2. Determine How to Assess and Close Gaps (GAP Analysis)
3. Develop Targeted Practice/Process Improvement Goals, Objectives and Action Plans
4. Select Improvement Techniques/Methods (e.g. benchmarking)
5. Obtain required internal and external advise (MRC committee) support, resources and
expertise
6. Implement plan—deploy solutions (e.g. apply best practices)
7. Evaluate and monitor results (actual improvement compared to targets)
8. Continuous Improvement Mechanisms and Tools
Several factors can contribute to accelerating the improvement process:
a) Internal or internal expert assistance or consultation can be used remotely or
through use of specific performance templates and assessments
b) Internal and or external benchmarking Best-practice benchmarking is a process
whereby organizations pursue enhanced performance by measuring their processes and
practices against those in other organizations. For example, comparisons may be made
with competitors, partners, and organizations with similar processes operating in different
spheres and even other parts of the same organization. This technique involves an on
going process of comparing current indicators and measures of performance compared
to best practice or best in class or established standards.
c) Group problem-solving is the use of social action advisory committees to recommend
solutions and assist in tracking/measuring improvement
1.3.1 Performance Measurement—many assessment tools and techniques are used
to target improvement. These include the change history assessment,
transaction/administrative assessments, 360-degree feedback process, process
reengineering, systems/It/process evaluation, and capability/capacity analysis.
1.3.2 The Balanced Scorecard Is a performance measurement and management
framework, which was developed in 1992 in order to measure the economic and
operating performance of a firm? The Balance Scorecard helps aligning
performance measures with organizational objectives through strategic
performance management.
The framework provides a balance between financial and non-financial
measures, as well as internal and external measures and usually integrates four
dimensions of performance are:
(i) the customer perspective; (ii) Internal business process perspective;
1.3.3 Results-Based Management is a broad performance management strategy
aimed at achieving changes leading to improved performance and better results?
Performance Indicators and the Logical Framework are key components of Results
Based Management systems.

The different Results Based Management phases include: the identification of
objectives, indicators, and target for each indicator, the establishment of a
monitoring system for regular data collection, the comparison of targets with actual
results, the integration of evaluations to provide complementary performance
information-and the use of performance information for internal management
accountability, learning and decision-making processes, as well as for external
performance reporting to stakeholders and partners. In this light, RBB is only an
initial step to introduction of Results Based Management.
1.3.4 Resource Deployment is the process used to assess and develop operational
capacity and build organizational capability
1.3.5 Remediation Taskforces or SWOT Teams SWOT Team Intervention is used in
cases where greatest improvement is desired and unit, department, or office has
reduced capacity.
1.3.6 Focus Groups and issues Management Interactive meetings with management,
experts, stakeholders, staff and customers/clients.
1.3.7 Clarification of policies/practices and procedures Reviewing and discussing key
CSR strategy, operational and social policy issues related to CSR management,
policies, procedures, practices and service to clients with a view to identifying
situations that need to be addressed or improved.
1.3.8 Documentation Reviews This involves a Review and analysis of CRS data,
sampling of documentation, management files and records. The review is used to
evaluate program outcomes, ascertain end results, adherence to or deviations from
rules, regulations and procedures, respect of the integrity of processes, quality of
work accomplished and level of guidance and support received or needed.
References
1. Archie B. Carroll, Corporate Social Responsibility Evolution of a Definitional
Construct, Business Society September 1999 vol. 38no. 3 268-295
2. Herman Aguinis and Ante Glavas, What We Know and Don’t Know About Corporate
Social Responsibility: A Review and Research Agenda, Journal of Management July
2012 38: 932-968, first published on March 1, 2012
3. Azzone G. and U. Bertèle, (1994) Exploring Green Strategies for Competitive
Advantage, Long Range Planning 27 (6), pp. 69–81.
4. Kunal Basu
1
and Guido Palazzo, Corporate Social Responsibility: A Process Model of
Sense making, ACAD MANAGE REV January 1, 2008 vol. 33 no. 1 122-136
5. Stephen Brammer, Gregory Jackson,
*
and Dirk Matten, Corporate Social Responsibility
and institutional theory: new perspectives on private governance, Socio-Economic
Review January 1, 2012 10: 3-28
6. I Lila L. Carden and Raphael O. Boyd, lNTEGRATING CORPORATE SOCIAL
RESPONSILBITY WITH A RISK MANAGEMENT METHODOLOGY: A STRATEGIC
APPROACH, Volume 3, Southern Journal of Business and Ethics, 2011
7. Carroll, A. B (1979), ‘A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate
Performance’, Academy of Management Review 4(4), 497–505.
8. Carroll, A. B. (2001). Ethical challenges for business in the new millennium:
Corporate social responsibility and models of management morality. In J. E.
Richardson (ed.), Business Ethics 01/0 (Guilford, CT: Dushkin, McGraw-Hill, 200–203).
9. Max E. Clarkson, A Stakeholder Framework for Analyzing and Evaluating Corporate
Social Performance, ACAD MANAGE REV January 1, 1995 vol. 20 no. 1 92-117

10. Jenny Dawkins and Stewart Lewis, CSR in Stakeholder Expectations: And Their
Implication for Company Strategy, Journal of Business Ethics, May 2003, Volume
44, Issue 2-3, pp 185-193
11. Jeremy Galbreath, "Corporate social responsibility strategy: strategic options, global
considerations", Corporate Governance, Vol. 6 Issue: 2, pp.175 – 187, (2006)
12. Elisabet Garriga and Domènec Melé, Corporate Social Responsibility Theories:
Mapping the Territory, Journal of Business Ethics, August 2004, Volume 53, Issue 1-
2, pp 51-71
13. Thomas Hanke and Wolfgang Stark, Strategy Development: Conceptual Framework
on Corporate Social Responsibility, Journal of Business Ethics, April 2009, Volume
85, Issue 3 Supplement, pp 507-516
14. McElhaney, K. (2009). A strategic approach to corporate social responsibility. Leader
to Leader, 52(1), 30-36.
15. Jean B. McGuire, Alison Sundgren
2
and Thomas Schneeweis, Corporate Social
Responsibility and Firm Financial Performance, ACAD MANAGE J December 1,
1988 vol. 31 no. 4 854-872
16. Abagail McWilliams
,
and Donald Siegel
,
Corporate social responsibility and financial
performance: correlation or misspecification?, Strategic Management Journal,
Volume 21, Issue 5, pages 603–609, May 2000
17. Abagail McWilliams
,
and Donald Siegel, Corporate Social Responsibility: a Theory of the
Firm Perspective, ACAD MANAGE REV January 1, 2001 vol. 26 no. 1 117-127
18. John Meehan, Karon Meehan, Adam Richards, "Corporate social responsibility:
the 3C-SR model", International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 33 Issue: 5/6,
pp.386 – 398, (2006)
19. Maruffi, Brian and Petri, Wolfgang, Corporate Social Responsibility and the
Competitive Advantage of Multinational Corporations: What is the Right Balance?”
Journal of Global The Journal of Global Business Issues, Volume 7,
Issue 2, Fall 2013
20. Schönbohm, Avo, Maruffi, B.L., and Petri, Wolfgang R., MVAC: A Quantitative
Method for Measuring the Value Added from Improving Manufacturing
Operations, submitted for publication, International Business and Management
Review, October 2013
21. Keith B. Murray, Christine M. Vogel, impacts, Journal of Business Research, Volume
38, Issue 2, February 1997, Pages 141-159
22. Eccles, R., Ioannou, I., and Serafeim, G., The Impact of a culture of a Corporate
Culture of Sustainhability on Corporate Behavior and Performance, Working Paper
12-035, November 2011
23. Linda O’Riordan and Jenny Fairbrass, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR):
Models and Theories in Stakeholder Dialogue, Journal of Business Ethics,
December 2008, Volume 83, Issue 4, pp 745-758
24. Moses L. Pava and Joshua Krausz, Criteria for Evaluating the Legitimacy of Corporate
Social Responsibility, Journal of Business Ethics, February 1997, Volume 16, Issue
3, pp 337-347
25. Julie Pirsch,Shruti Gupta and Stacy Landreth Grau, A Framework for Understanding
Corporate Social Responsibility Programs as a Continuum: An Exploratory Study,
Journal of Business Ethics, January 2007, Volume 70, Issue 2, pp 125-140
26. Manfred Pohl and Nick Tolhurst Responsible Business: How to Manage a CSR
Strategy, successfully, ISBN-13: 9780470712429, Publisher: Wiley, John & Sons,
Incorporated, 2010

27. Rumelt R., (1980) The evaluation of business strategy, In W. F. Glueck, Business Policy,
and Strategic Management, 3rd ed, McGraw-Hill: New York.
28. Russo M. and P. Fouts, (1997) A Resource-Based Perspective on Corporate,
Environmental Performance and Profitability, Academy of Management Journal 40 (3),
pp. 534–559
29. Salzmann Oliver, Aileen Ionescu-somers and Ulrich Steger (2005) The Business Case
for Corporate Sustainability:: Literature Review and Research Options, European
Management Journal Volume 23, Issue 1(February)Pages 27-36
30. Sethi, S.P. 1979. A conceptual framework for environmental analysis of social
issues and evaluation of business response pattern. Academy of Management
Review, 4(1): 63-74.
31. Shrivastava, P. (1995) The Role of Corporations in Achieving Ecological
Sustainability, Academy of Management Review 20 (4), pp. 936–960.
32. Stead, J. G., & Stead, E. 2000. Eco-enterprise strategy: Standing for sustainability.
Journal of Business Ethics, 24: 313-329.
33. Sze´kely Francisco, Marianna Knirsch, (2005) Responsible Leadership and Corporate
Social Responsibility: Metrics for Sustainable Performance , European Management
Journal , Vol. 23, No. 6,
34. Wen-Hsien Tsai and Jui-Ling Hsu, Corporate social responsibility programs
choice and costs assessment in the airline industry—A hybrid model, Journal
of Air Transport Management, Volume 14, Issue 4, July 2008, Pages 188-196
35. W-H Tsai, W-C Chou and W Hsu, The sustainability balanced scorecard as a
framework for selecting socially responsible investment: an effective MCDM
model, Journal of the Operational Research Society 60, 1396-1410 (October 2009)
36. Manuela Weber, The business case for corporate social responsibility: A company-
level measurement approach for CSR, European Management Journal (2008) 26,
247–261, pp. 628–647,
37. Werther, William B and David Chandler, (2006), The Strategic Context of CSR,
Strategic corporate social responsibility: stakeholders in a global environment,
Sage Publication: London
38. Windsor Duane (2006) Corporate Social Responsibility: Three Key Approaches,
Journal of Management Studies 43:1 January p-93-114
39. Wood, D. (1991) Corporate social performance revisited, Academy of Management
Review, 16(4), 691–718.
40. Porter, M. E., and Mark R. Kramer. "Strategy and Society: The Link between
Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility." Harvard Business
Review 84, no. 12 (December 2006).
41. Porter, Michael E., and Claas van der Linde. "Toward a New Conception of the
Environment-Competitiveness Relationship." In A Reader on Environmental Law. Oxford
Readings in Socio-Legal Studies, edited by Bridget Hutter. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 1997.
42. Porter, M. E., and Claas van der Linde. "Green and Competitive: Ending the
Stalemate." Harvard Business Review 73, no. 5 (September-October 1995).
43. Porter, M. E. Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and
Competitors. New York: Free Press, 1980.

A process for evaluating csr strategies, practices and programs.pdf

More Related Content

Similar to A process for evaluating csr strategies, practices and programs.pdf (20)

More from April Knyff (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

A process for evaluating csr strategies, practices and programs.pdf