100 Best Corporate Citizens 2008
|
By Dennis Schaal This list—CRO’s 100 Best Corporate Citizens 2008—matters. If you think for a minute that it doesn’t, then get on the phone or sit upright at your computer to listen to or read some of the phone calls and e-mails CRO magazine received from irate companies that found themselves MIA from the list or lower in the rankings than they would have liked. Somewhere in a corporate boardroom or in the compliance officer’s suite, rest assured that an Excel wizard is analyzing the category ranks and studying the algorithm, trying to figure out what Intel (No. 1) did right in Environment or Climate Change, or why a competitor ascended or nosedived this year in the ordering. And, although it may be about bragging rights for some firms, for many corporations their position on 100 Best may impact operations. It also translates into recognition for some of their policies and practices, a well-earned “attaboy” from an unbiased arbiter. Dave Stangis, the Director of Corporate Responsibility for Intel, which has been on the list since Business Ethics magazine developed it nine years ago, characterizes Intel’s top-of-the heap ranking as “a really strong attribution.” He adds that 100 Best over the years has had “a huge impact internally” at the company and executives view the category scores and rankings as a Business Ethics magazine published 100 Best for the first seven years, and CRO published 100 Best in 2007, and now presents 100 Best 2008. In the nine years that 100 Best has been tabulated, just three companies—Intel, Cisco (No. 14) and Starbucks (No. 35)—have appeared on the list every year. See the full list now (pdf). In 2008, CRO—in partnership with IW Financial, a Portland, Maine, research and consulting firm that did much of the heavy lifting—tweaked the methodology to emphasize the corporate responsibility efforts of large, impactful corporations in eight categories: Climate Change, Employee Relations, Environment, Financial, Governance, Human Rights, Lobbying and Philanthropy. In so doing, we added, renamed, combined or dropped other categories, and gave Climate Change and other issues related to Environment the greatest weight because of their acute importance. For information about the methodology, see “Transparency, Policy, Performance Weighed Heavily in the Rankings.” As an aside, you won’t find CRO or IW Financial on the 100 Best list itself. Neither company was under consideration because the companies were not in the Russell 1000 index, our starting universe for the 100 Best evaluations. But I believe both companies deserve a footnote mention because despite taking a few elbows by companies looking to curry favor, we stood by our principles and let the 100 Best category data speak for themselves, watching the proverbial chips fall where they may concerning companies’ rankings. As author Kurt Vonnegut famously wrote in “Slaughterhouse Five,” when things got messy, “so it goes.” As you will see, the 100 Best rankings, which were compiled without interviewing companies under consideration, were driven by the numbers. Period. CRO’s new single-minded focus in 100 Best 2008 on large-cap, U.S.-headquartered public companies meant that 23 companies on the 100 Best 2007 list, including Green Mountain Coffee Roasters (No. 1 in 2007), weren’t under consideration for the 2008 rankings. Another three companies in 100 Best 2007 weren’t in the mix in 2008 because they merged with other companies or were acquired. And, eight companies that would have secured places in 100 Best 2008 were excluded this year because of alleged transgressions that ranged from suppression of information about product risks to accounting scandals. For details, see “In the Penalty Box.” Even with those eight companies temporarily pushed aside, a spot on 100 Best shouldn’t be viewed as an automatic sainthood nomination. Among the largest companies in the United States, many of the corporations that made the list face complex regulatory issues, some cope with the consequences today of yesterday’s sub-par practices, and many have very diverse businesses scattered across dozens of countries, further complicating the equation. Instead, these data-driven rankings should be seen as a way to gauge how the major players in U.S. business stack up against one another relative to their corporate responsibility programs in the real world. Even 100 Best 2008 leader Intel, based in Santa Clara, Calif., faces antitrust regulatory probes in Korea, Europe and the U.S., as well as class-action lawsuits in the U.S., related to an Advanced Micro Devices’ (AMD) lawsuit alleging that Intel violated the Sherman Act. Intel readily addresses the issue, and is contesting the allegations. Stangis says Intel recently filed answers to questions on the issue from the European Commission, for instance, and he argues that the “push” for much of the scrutiny comes from AMD, a competitor. And, Gap (No. 61) faced a corporate responsibility crisis in October when a published report in the U.K. alleged that the apparel retailer was using child labor in India. Gap says it quickly launched an investigation and cancelled the work order because an unauthorized subcontractor was using child labor to manufacture a GapKids product. Gap says in 2006 it shut operations in 23 factories for violations of its Code of Vendor Conduct. Overall, 21 corporations that were listed in 100 Best 2007 found themselves among the 100 Best in 2008, as well. They range from IBM (No. 21) and Pepsico (No. 22) to Motorola (No. 51) and Avon Products (No. 98). It may surprise some that the utilities industry, frequently under fire for its massive carbon footprint and other environmental missteps, was the most heavily represented sector in 100 Best 2008, with 19 corporations, from PG&E (No. 10) to El Paso (No. 87), among the listees. Companies in these industries have more potential problems than those in supposedly “clean” industries so chemical, oil and utilities companies may be more sophisticated in addressing environmental management and human rights concerns than the financial sector, Bateman adds. Incidentally, nine banks, brokerages or financial companies have spots on 100 Best 2008. These rankings and the companies Financial tallies were not impacted by the companies’ huge write-downs in the fourth quarter related to subprime mortgage-related debt. Most of the data for 100 Best 2008 were collected through Aug. 31, prior to the write-downs. Other companies, like Freeport-McMoran Copper & Gold (No. 52), with its copper and gold reserves, and media conglomerate Walt Disney Co. (No. 50), were the sole representatives of their industries on the list. Intel showed ample corporate responsibility soul, and sits solely atop 100 Best 2008 overall. Intel ranked in the top 100 in five of the eight categories, scoring its best mark in Environment (which measures environmental disclosures, policies and performance) and in the top 200 in another category, Philanthropy. IW Financial notes that “Intel believes that global climate change is a serious economic, social and environmental challenge that warrants an equally serious societal and policy response.” “Intel helped establish a goal for PFCs (perfluorocompounds) that the entire industry could support,” Intel President and CEO Paul Otellini told CRO.“ It came together before Kyoto and was the first worldwide, industry-wide goal to address climate change. We view our environmental strategies as integral to the way we do business. We strive to lead by example, and to be trusted stakeholders to governments worldwide.” Otellini says Intel views sustainability “through a business lens” and such an approach can lead to a competitive advantage. “For example, we have a dedicated capital funding program for energy conservation projects,” Otellini adds. “Since 2001, we have spent more than $20 million and achieved savings of more than $42 million and more than 500 million kilowatt hours.” As Intel’s Corporate Responsibility Director, Stangis notes that his role is almost like an internal consultant on corporate responsibility issues. He has found, too, that Intel’s credibility on sustainability issues is far-reaching. For example, Otellini is a member of the Copenhagen Climate Council, which hopes to push for a new global treaty on climate change. And when Stangis met with the CEO and senior staff of Woolworths, a supermarket chain in Australia, a two-hour discussion ensued about Intel’s corporate responsibility initiatives. “It is a boardroom conversation,” Stangis says, referring to corporate responsibility. “It hasn’t been at this level before.” Eaton (No. 2) , a diversified industrial manufacturer operating in more than 140 countries in industries ranging from aviation and military weapons to machinery and passenger cars, ranked in the top 100 in four categories and in the top 200 in two others. The company scored its best marks in Employee Relations and Climate Change. Alexander Cutler, the Cleveland, Ohio, company’s President, CEO and Chairman, says Eaton is a “different” kind of company because of the importance it places on values, including establishing a global ethics framework, respect for the individual and a holistic approach “to doing business right.” Eaton never asks employees to compromise their personal ethics, and supports internal help and counseling phone lines, Cutler says. He adds that about 97 percent of the company’s approximately 63,000 employees complete the annual employee survey. On the employee front, too, Eaton participates in the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s Voluntary Protection Programs. Regarding its 22nd rank in Climate Change, Eaton’s goal is to reduce GHG emissions 18 percent (adjusted for production) by 2012. And it has several employee education programs to emphasize the company’s curbing of water usage and waste. Eaton scored 80th in Environment and was among the first diversified industrial companies to earn global ISO 14001 certification for its environmental management systems. Deere & Co. (No. 4), the farm equipment and lawn mower manufacturer headquartered in Moline, Ill., ranked in the top 100 in Climate Change and Human Rights and in the top 200 in Philanthropy, Environment and Financial. The company ranked 80th in Human Rights. Robert Lane, Chairman and CEO of Deere, says of the company’s human rights stance that it has consistent employee guidelines and a worldwide supplier code of conduct despite operating in many countries with varied cultures. “We are often noted for the clean and safe working conditions in non-U.S. factories that we provide our employees here in the U.S.,” Lane says. “For instance, I have personally had the opportunity to observe the same low emissions paint process in our China factory as we use in the U.S. factories. We maintain the same high standards and our employees embrace this commitment.” Deere earned its best category mark, 47th, in Climate Change. Lane notes that Deere in 2007 invested almost $500 million in wind energy to assist rural economies in electricity production. For example, Deere’s PowerTech Plus diesel engines, which are certified Tier 3 and Stage III-A by the EPA and European Union (EU), respectively, “boast best-in-class fuel economy as well as increased performance and power density compared with earlier engines,” IW Financial states. Lane believes that Deere’s position in 100 Best is “rewarding” and means recognition “for being a strong corporate citizen.” He notes that 100 Best may assist employee retention and recruitment efforts. “We know from our own experience that current employees and future employees want to work for a good corporate citizen,” Lane says. “This is an important trend that is showing even more strength with new employees.” Meanwhile, Motorola (No. 51), the communications company headquartered in Schaumburg, Ill., has the distinction of garnering the top ranking, among 1000 companies considered, in Climate Change. A founding member of the Chicago Climate Exchange in 2003, Motorola in 2007 became the first member to include all of its worldwide manufacturing sites that aren’t currently covered under the Kyoto Protocol and the EU’s Emissions Trading Scheme in the company’s GHG-reduction commitment, says Maryann Clifford, Motorola’s Ethics & Compliance Officer. “Motorola has worked for many years to reduce its GHG emissions and mitigate contributions to global climate change,” Clifford says. “This is not just the right thing to do. It also helps us reduce costs, improve operational efficiency and meet the expectations of our stakeholders.” As part of that effort, in 2007 Motorola completed a transition from managing and auditing environmental, health and safety compliance on a site-specific basis to a common system that takes in all of the company’s manufacturing facilities around the world, Clifford says. “Reporting has helped us to drive continuous improvement,” Clifford says, referring to annual environmental reports. She adds: “As the saying goes, what gets measured, gets managed.” A similar thing could be said about CRO’s 100 Best Corporate Citizens 2008: What gets measured, managed and disclosed, gets ranked. Agree or disagree with the companies that made our list, or have any other thoughts to share? Let us know by emailing us at editorial@thecro.com or commenting below. We welcome your feedback. Find out more about the methodology behind the list... CORRECTION: After publishing the CRO's 100 Best Corporate Citizens 2008, we discovered a math error. We incorrectly stated that the weighting of the Lobbying category used to generate the rankings was 2 percent. The actual weighting used was 1.3 percent. We regret the error.
|
Learn more about the list: |
Social Responsibility
The motto of business - is to make profit by any means in a competitive environment since Adam Smith popularized his theory of "Laissez Faire". But time has changed since then and now big corporations have more money than economies of most third world countries. On the other hand the world is divided into "haves" and "have-nots" - millions of people are suffering from uncurable diseases and hunger. In this scenario- corporations with hundreds of thousand employees and operations in many countries can't escape their responsibilities towards societies. I am really glad to find a list like this on the basis of business ethics. It is a much needed list - so that corporations get aware of their responsibilites. Thanks for the list. Cheers and best wishes ------------------
Suggestion
I agree with many comments here - the methodology isn't just flawed, it's preposterous. You cannot compare year over year improvements (or declines) because the methodology changes each time the CRO updates the list.
I do not believe the CRO makes these changes objectively - I believe they try to make the list reflect that companies want it to reflect, thereby leading companies to purchase membership in the organization, a magazine subscription, use of the logo, etc.
For example, this year the CRO removed executive compensation from consideration - and reduced the weighting of governance - after corporate feedback. No wonder, then, some of these companies are on the list (and high up there).
To be clear, IW Financial does not make decisions about the methodology. That firm just carries out the research the CRO has hired them to do.
So my suggestion is that someone credible buy the list from the CRO and start over...
Monsanto?
Is this a joke? Since when are herbicides a positive thing for the environment? HA!
Monsanto on 100 Best Corporate Citizens list
I don't know about herbacides being a "positive" thing for the environment, but I think that herbacides that are environmentally friendly (as some claim to be) can be used with a much lesser impact on the environment than traditional weed killers. Monsanto's herbacide products do not seem to fall in this category due to all of the complaints about it not being environmentally or even human friendly, but if we're judging corporate citizens on their ability to monopolize an industry they would certainly be considered for any list.
J.Tayler of Blogs Search
I was just reading about
I was just reading about Intel’s latest award as the #1 corporate citizen and I was moved to write.
I was an employee of Intel many years ago - almost at the beginning. I was an admin, working with the engineers who were working on the development of the 4004, 4040, 8008 and 8080 chips…yes, THAT long ago! Some of the names from folks in my area - Bill Davidow, Hal Feeney, Justin Rattner, Jim Lally, Larry Goff, Terry Opdendyke, Sam Chiina, Jack Carsten, Ted Hoff. It was an amazing time and place.
Even then, it was a great place to work - I was fresh out of junior college and wanted to get in on this “computer revolution”. Intel gave me a chance. I eventually earned the responsibility for getting user manuals and data sheets out to customers and engineering students and groups for those chips. And everything was done manually - no PCs back then! Calls would come in, an order was hand written and the documents went out in the next day’s mail. I had no idea the size of the impact this group and their work would make on the world. I just knew that I loved my job and the people around me.
I had to leave Intel after just a couple of years to return east because of a family issue. That was a sad day. I never forgot how well I was treated, how much I learned while I was there, and how proud I was to tell anyone that I had worked for Intel.
Today I own a promotional marketing company and am back in California . I still own my Intel stock and I’m still proud to be an “alumni” of Building B - Intel. I’m glad to see the corporate culture I loved so much is still alive and well.
arda turanmsn nickleriÇok Güzel Hareketler Bunlarkral tv
Rather than rant, maybe everyone can suggest ways to improve
If you disagree with the "Top 100" list, then it's probably much more helpful to suggest ways in which the methodology can be improved, than to rant about how you dislike CRO and the companies on their list. The fact is, a lot of companies are starting to take initiatives, and regardless of why you think they're taking those initiatives, it's a good thing that action is happening. By having a ranking, and making that ranking be based on truly important criteria, you give companies a lot more direction as to how to improve.
By providing CRO with ideas for criteria they may not currently use in their evaluation, you help everyone gain from this. For example, there are a lot of comments about where products are produced and what "Made in the USA" really means, this indicates that a helpful metric might be "% of production in the USA".
Also, as is pointed out in the introduction to the list, a lot of weight is given to a company's level of transparency. Recognizing and admitting fault is necessary before any action can be taken to correct that fault. Encouraging transparency is therefore a very good thing although it may inflate a company's rating, as their reporting is probably older and more developed than their implementation capabilities. Besides, the more transparent a company is about their practices, the more people have to rant about...
It's good to see companies
It's good to see companies making efforts,and be informed about what they do! it's good for their business and it's good for our Planet, but we know much more can be done
___________________________
Submited by : Libros Gratis
This requires a lot of work
and people want to be in everyone's interest to reach the desired goal ... And therefore must be found working hard and sincerity and love the good of the people and thank you for all comments
By: شباب ليبيا
In 2008, CRO—in
In 2008, CRO—in partnership with IW Financial…tweaked the methodology to emphasize the corporate responsibility efforts of large, impactful corporations in eight categories: Climate Change, Employee Relations, Environment, Financial, Governance, Human Rights, Lobbying and Philanthropy…[T]hese data-driven rankings should be seen as a way to gauge how the major players in U.S. business stack up against one another relative to their corporate responsibility programs in the real world…Intel showed ample corporate responsibility soul, and sits solely atop 100 Best 2008 overall…[F]our companies (…Ford in Human Rights, Motorola in Climate Change…) achieved a category ranking of “1”. [also refers to Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Gap, IBM, Pepsico, Avon Products, PG&E, El Paso, Freeport-McMoran Copper & Gold, Walt Disney, Eaton, Deere & Co.]
________________________
Submited by : Libros Gratis
Respect for Intellectual Property?
Anyone ever consider that for a qualifier? Copyright compliance might be a good benchmark..
I was an employee of Intel many years ago
I was just reading about Intel’s latest award as the #1 corporate citizen and I was moved to write. I was an employee of Intel many years ago - almost at the beginning. I was an admin, working with the engineers who were working on the development of the 4004, 4040, 8008 and 8080 chips…yes, THAT long ago! Some of the names from folks in my area - Bill Davidow, Hal Feeney, Justin Rattner, Jim Lally, Larry Goff, Terry Opdendyke, Sam Chiina, Jack Carsten, Ted Hoff. It was an amazing time and place. Even then, it was a great place to work - I was fresh out of junior college and wanted to get in on this “computer revolution”. Intel gave me a chance. I eventually earned the responsibility for getting user manuals and data sheets out to customers and engineering students and groups for those chips. And everything was done manually - no PCs back then! Calls would come in, an order was hand written and the documents went out in the next day’s mail. I had no idea the size of the impact this group and their work would make on the world. I just knew that I loved my job and the people around me. I had to leave Intel after just a couple of years to return east because of a family issue. That was a sad day. I never forgot how well I was treated, how much I learned while I was there, and how proud I was to tell anyone that I had worked for Intel. Today I own a promotional marketing company and am back in California . I still own my Intel stock and I’m still proud to be an “alumni” of Building B - Intel. I’m glad to see the corporate culture I loved so much is still alive and well.
It would be nice
It would be nice if you had a survey that nonpublic companies could fill out and therefore participate in this ranking/benchmarking process.
Palestine Students forum
It would be nice if you had
It would be nice if you had a survey that nonpublic companies could fill out and therefore participate in this ranking/benchmarking process.
BY :توبيكات
Agreed
Sorry, but your logic escapes me. Of course a company can be #1 in one year and slide to a much lower number simply by not "taking care of business" with regard to the criteria being used to rank. I can understand some movement within the rankings from one year to the next, but this does not make sense.
Shedding light on CRO methodology
I do PR for a company that made the list in 2007 but did not in 2008. I can shed some light on the flaws in CRO's methodology. First of all, companies do not pay to be on this list or even apply; we didn't even know about CRO until the list was announced in 2007. They use an independent firm that does its homework without bias.
When we made the list, our investor relations specialist clued me in to the reason: Our stock price had jumped in the previous year due to really strong earnings growth over several years. The CRO list is based on how well companies take care of "constituents," and stock investors (and employees who hold shares) are among those constituents. Sure enough, when our industry turned down in 2007 and our stock price suffered (even though earnings remained solid), we fell off the list despite having implemented a number of measures to be more socially responsible.
I should note that my company really IS socially responsible. From the CEO's office on down there is a strong emphasis on ethics. Our commitment to sustainability is not just window dressing, our corporate governance is totally above-board, we provide some non-standard employee benefits, and we've managed to avoid major scandals (a competitor had to pay out millions in sex discrimination, e.g.) We don't do much in the philanthropic area--frankly I think consumer-oriented companies do that for image-building and B-to-B companies don't have that motivation. We've made FORTUNE's Best Places to Work and Most Admired Companies lists (which you DO have to apply for, and it's a grueling process) as well as many other "Best Places" lists for women and minorities and regional employees.
The point is that CRO goes at this fairly but the methodology is flawed in several ways, particularly in giving significant weight to stock growth but also in failing to severely penalizing companies for serious transgressions that could and should be avoided.
This is very interesting
This is very interesting that their commitment to sustainability is not just window dressing, our corporate governance is totally above-board, we provide some non-standard employee benefits, and we've managed to avoid major scandals (a competitor had to pay out millions in sex discrimination, e.g.) thanks
The data-driven rankings
The data-driven rankings should be seen as a way to gauge how the major players in U.S. business stack up against one another relative to their corporate responsibility programs in the real world…Intel showed ample corporate responsibility soul, and sits solely atop 100 Best 2008 overall
Re: Your views about the methodolgical flaws
You make some pertinent comments and I am from another hemisphere exploring the effectiveness of this approach. Can you elaborate further and perhaps consider allowing for a case study of your firm as a good corporate citizen internationally?
Motorola? Are you on crack?
Sure. Outsource ALL the manufacturing to China and you can say you made a 100% reduction of GHG emissions...in the United States. Who concocted this list?
How many company's still
How many company's still manufacutre electronics in the U.S.? Motorola does. In the Chicago area, Florida and others. Please do your research before blogging.
It doesn't matter where they
It doesn't matter where they manufacture, we are all citizens of the world.
Liz
Over time what has been the reduction
I think the previous post may have been referring to the total amount of production since the 1950s and what the decline has been over the past 50 plus years
How many company's
How many company's still manufacutre electronics in the U.S.? Motorola does. In the Chicago area, Florida and others. Please do your research before blogging.
يوتيوب
Social Responsibility? Or Socialism? Or leftist Politics?
I'm not at all impressed by your methodology or your obvious biases. Carbon emissions and buying green credits? This is all hypocritical marketing. Look at PHILANTHROPY.
As for the Lobbying aspect, we can all see too clearly what CSR is lobbying for: a "Global" economy where American workers are disenfranchised and their labor replaced by workers overseas, while large multi-nationals import the component products and merely have them assembled in the USA so they can put a "Made in USA" sticker on it somewhere. The same companies who "lobby" for CSR are also making large contributions to gay marriage -- or telling their employees to rack up volunteer hours for secular, public entities but discriminating against faith-based initiatives.
By the way, Lockheed Martin discriminates against K-12 Catholic, Christian, and Jewish schools in many areas; its rival Boeing does not and will match employees' charitable contributions for ALL K-12 schools as well as accredited colleges, regardless of affiliation. Boeing didn't make your list -- but then again, they're not making planes in South America and shipping the parts to the USA, or supporting the Komen Foundation.
EMC didn't make your list either -- but they probably wouldn't want to. TARGET did make your list -- but Target does not discriminate against schools according to their religious affiliation. I like Target, and for a French multi-national retail/disount company they seem pretty nice.
I think the "green credits" idea and global warming in general is probably the biggest lie fostered on the public in a long, long time. It punishes US companies and employees while rewarding Communist China and India for their heavy and reckless pollution of the environment.
I found your category of "Human Rights" interesting. I doubt that your definition of human rights will bear up under close scrutiny. I hope I am mistaken. How companies could do business in China and yet be rated as "green" or caring about human rights shows a total lack of reality.
Given the support of companies like Ford, Proctor and Gamble, and Disney for support of Gay Marriage, stock holders should look elsewhere for "socially responsible" investments. Like Ave Maria Funds or any of a number of other investments.
Insightful
This is a very insightful "rant" that strips the hypocrisy of the CRO movement to its core.
Incredibly biased
Incredibly biased statement.
Target a French Multi-national?...Target is HQ'd in Minneapolis and deals exclusively in the US...
Your either an internet troll or a HUGE jackass.
And don't worry, they're not trying to impress you, and were not impressed by your weak rhetoric.
Target is not a French
Target is not a French mulit-national company - started here in the great USA
Show me a socially responsible list based upon your criteria
Let's look at the socially responsible lists based upon your criteria, and not leftist politics like you suggest. They are located at what site? Where is the URL? Oh there isn't one because the right generally will not put anything above the dollar including values! You know why there are so many green SRI's that cater to left wing politics, so many that cater to human rights, etc... because there is a market for it, a group of people who will care about it!
FYI there is an SRI that is run by some catholic values, a large one I can't recall the name, I ran into it when I was searching for some SOCIALLY responsible funds for my liberal dollars. Amen!
I would agree....nice rant.
I would agree....nice rant. Now try writing without vocalizing your internal frustrations and individual biases.
Nice rant...where are the
Nice rant...where are the facts to back it up?
New List is Good for Business--CRO Magazine's, that is...
When CRO adds companies like Monsanto and drops top CSR performers like Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Salesforce.com, and Interface, one has to ask, "Who benefits?"
Clearly, the larger, less socially responsible companies benefit by getting positioned as the best corporate citizens. Clearly, IW Financial benefits since there's no money in gathering and crunching CSR data on less-traded companies (though there is for the big stocks thanks to true pioneers like KLD, who were dropped from the CRO rating process).
And clearly, CRO Magazine better positions itself to "play with the big boys," for advertising dollars, CRO conferences fees, and corporate credibility (whatever that is). Want to know what CRO's game is about? Check them out the "About Us" section of this site (just above "Media Kit"). Almost zero CSR or stakeholder representation, but tons of publishing, marketing, and sales expertise.
And the "objective" system behind the new ratings? Also BS. There is so little standardized publicly-available CSR data for even the largest companies that FW Financial is basically running their patented computations on thin air. Aaah, but the CRO marketers claim that using public data is about transparency! Well, real transparency comes through when you send a survey to a company and it doesn't get returned. Real transparency means publishing your ratings methodology--which, after all, is protected by US patent law, no? As for that patent, FW Financial has basically claimed as their original invention CSR ranking methods that have been around since the 80's.
The 2008 CRO list is clearly part of a larger shift in CRO Magazine toward a more "commercially palatable" platform, driving by a bunch of marketers, and supported by a hollow ratings platform. Give me Business Ethic's subjectivity and real values over this any day.
Well said
I couldn't agree more with your statement. I've been saying this since the CRO bought the list. It's all about selling membership, subscriptions to the magazine and use of the logo for corporate web sites and CSR reports.
We're on the list but are not buying any of what the CRO sells until it gets its act together.
ITT Corporate Criminals Honored By CRO list-says it all
Unbelievable
In 2007 ITT pleaded guilty to one of the worst cases of breach of US arms control laws ever, landing them with THE largest penalty for such an offence. Rogue individual arms dealers have been imprisoned for doing less than ITT have admitted to including over 208 violations. CEO of ITT left his job after it came out but quickly got offered a new one by the Carlyle Group for services to military industrial complex.
The CRO list appears to be an industry attempt to make the worst corporate devils look like the sweetest smelling angels this side of the pearly gates.
What a joke!
What about nonpublic companies?
It would be nice if you had a survey that nonpublic companies could fill out and therefore participate in this ranking/benchmarking process.
Tweety
I think that is the whole point.
Monsanto???
Monsanto on the list is appalling.
I believe whoever put the list together did not take into account the crimes that company has committed.
Following is a sampling of the google search "Monsanto Crimes"
http://www.corporatewatch.org.uk/?lid=210
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/news/monsanto-are-wanted-for-crimes
http://www.google.com/Top/Society/Issues/Business/Allegedly_Unethical_Firms/Monsanto/
It seems that you now a lot
It seems that you now a lot about Monsanto Crimes. But one of the ways to prevent crime to happen is to have good security systems.
Funny list
Its funny to see Monsanto, Dow and coke in the list.
Monsanto: unethical ways of influencing governments in developing countries
child labour exploitation in India
Dow: Union Carbide is still fresh in people's mind
Coke: use of pesticides and exploitation of ground water
Such a funny list you prepare and expect it to remain credible
100 Best?
I'd like to know what scoring criteria was used (specifically what the individual scores were by company and component). If they are awarded objectively then CRO should be willing to publish them. How can CRO say that these are the 100 best when at least nine of them have been investigated or found guilty within the last nine months of overcharging customers, participating in fraud, price fixing, racial discrimination; even terminating employees while in service to the National Guard. It doesn't appear that they put too much effort into their research as all this information is from a single source. There is probably more if you look for it on the internet.
An example:
A jury awarded a former Target employee nearly $1 million in response to his lawsuit against the retail giant. James Patton, who was demoted and then terminated following two weeks of service with the Oregon National guard, sued Target citing federal and state laws, which prohibit discrimination against military personnel and wrongful discharge.
The jury sided with Target as they saw Patton’s demotion as a decision made regardless of his military service. However, the jury decided that the company retaliated against Patton for asking the National Gaurd to intervene following his demotion. In a statement, Target revealed its intent to appeal the decision on the ground that they believe the case is “without merit” and cited Target’s strong history of support for its employees (many of whom, as the statement pointed out, are veterans, reservists, or members of the National Guard).
View the entire text of these incidents by searching the blogs here:
http://ethisphere.com/category/corporate-ethics/
GREENWASH
THIS IS TOTAL BS! YOU ARE DOING A DISSERVICE TO CSR! HOW MUCH DID THEY PAY TO BE ON THIS LIST,OR MAYBE YOU DON'T MEASURE BOMBS THAT KILL PEOPLE, OR BANKS THAT ROB PEOPLE! YOUR ANALYSIS SHOULD BE SHOT FOR TREASON.
#33 Raytheon Co
This list (just like last year's) is Greenwash. Let's take just one easy example: #33 Raytheon Co. - a simple google search for "raytheon watch" reveals such allegations as: The Patriot Missile Deception Corporate Crime and Punishment Black Tuesday - Securities Fraud Exploitation of Employees Age Discrimination Spying and Internet Censorship Weapons Trafficking Corporate Welfare Environmental Concerns Influence Peddling You may try to pass off the blame on IW Financial (which stands (or stood) for "Ideals Work"), but you selected them, and you published the list. You could have hired other researchers, or spent 5 minutes on google validating the results. Here are some starting points to understand the truth about Raytheon's Citizenship: www.gis.net/~larrabee/raytheonwatch.htm www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Raytheon www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=13 www.corporatewatch.org.uk/?lid=141 Customers and investors who want the truth can't rely on SRI & CSR. It's been sold.
Your assessments must be superficial
The usefulness of your list is questionable. You are only scratching the surface when you assess company ethics. It cannot be done by looking at policies and manuals. (Enron had great policies.) You have to get into the behavior of the people, not the philosophies of the CEO. And that cannot be done quick and dirty. Goodyear making the list is amazing considering their payment of bribes and their own in house survey showing people were fearful of speaking up.
Best dressed stars
"In the nine years that 100 Best has been tabulated, just three companies—Intel, Cisco (No. 14) and Starbucks (No. 35)—have appeared on the list every year."
That is evidence of the stupidity of such lists. A company that is a best corporate citizen in year A cannot cease to be a best corporate citizen in year F, unless the criteria used to make the judgment are flawed.
Why rate responsibility?
It is sad that social responsibility has not always been apart of the bottom line philosophy as profit has, but thank God it is apart of it now. So why rate these companies on how responsible they are being, and who has the right to determine how responsible they should be being? If a company is being socially responsible in any form they should receive recognition, but why the need to judge one good deed against another? It's as if you are trying to discourage the selfless acts the companies are trying to perform by measuring them to someone else's standards. Making the top of the list one year and not making it the next could really discourage a company from believing they are not doing enough. Obviously, we should all try to continuously be better, work harder, learn more, and be more responsible, but should not we all be greatful, not judgemental, for any effort these companies take, and not just for our sake but our children's too! Am I wrong to think this way? Does anyone else share this view?
Best dressed stars rebuttal
Could not disagree more. It's precisely with reasonings such as this that we allow ourselves to slip back into complacency and miss the mark. Not one of us can squarely declare having understood and mastered it all. Proper Corporate Citizenship is a target as rapidly evolving as society and environment themselves. It's elusive, it's complex, and it's the right thing to strive for every day of our lives. And yes, it seems logical that only a few would achieve consistency. Such a ranking allows an even-keeled comparison with companies that are innovative in their response to Corporate Citizenship challenges. Identifying them gives anyone the opportunity to learn lessons and apply ideas that challenge one's company to become a better Corporate Citizen. Once one understands this and rises to the challenge, we all win.
Criteria
Sorry, but your logic escapes me. Of course a company can be #1 in one year and slide to a much lower number simply by not "taking care of business" with regard to the criteria being used to rank.
Yes and No
I agree that you can rank well and at the same time, the company could be not the #1 but the #19281
Agreed
Plus, I am trying to figure out how a company like Pitney Bowes, which has ranked highly on ALL eight of the previous 100 Best lists, failed to make this year's list completely. As far as I know, they are not in the penalty box and have not changed their corporate responsibility strategy.
I can understand some movement within the rankings from one year to the next, but this does not make sense. Did your methodology change that much in just one year?
Yes
The methodology changed that much in one year. In fact, it changed twice within the year.
Publix should be on the list
Publix should be on the list at least somewhere. They are well known for their excellent business ethics and have even contributed to helping the environment by opening stores with only orgsnic products. They also have the best customer service you can find.