Movement (noun): a diffusely organized or heterogeneous group of people or organizations tending toward or favoring a generalized common goal

As you consider the question, you can see why some people would say “absolutely not.” Is someone at Calvert or Starbucks trying to accomplish the same thing as someone at McDonalds or International Paper? People argue about the definition of corporate citizenship all the time. Some use it as an aspiration, others as a strategy. Cynics talk about greenwashing and the tribute that vice pays to virtue. True believers talk about the right thing to do and changing the world one yoghurt at a time.

However, I tend to come down on the side of the affirmative, and here is my evidence. Thirty years ago, few companies thought in these terms. Ten years ago, fewer than 50 Fortune 500 companies issued corporate citizenship reports. Now if you search “corporate citizenship” you get almost 2 million hits. “Corporate social responsibility” generates over 5 million hits. There are over a thousand codes of conduct. Almost every large company issues a report on its ethical practices. But what is the “generalized common goal”?

I don't think a mission statement has been wordsmithed to anyone's satisfaction, but I would submit that it has to do with helping businesses to build trust among key stakeholders on the one hand, and expanding their concept of enlightened self–interest on the other.

The last thirty years have not been kind to any major institutions. Since the 1960s, many scandals have battered people's confidence. Initially, attitudes toward business might have suffered as part of the collateral damage of Watergate and the Vietnam War, but there have been plenty of self–inflicted wounds as well. “The Predator's Ball” of the junk bond kings, short–termism, unwarranted golden parachutes, Dennis Kozlowski, Enron, Bernie Madoff, the mortgage crisis, defective tires and toys, tainted foods, petty frauds and massive rip–offs provided plenty of fuel for the bonfire.

One of the first things that any reputation expert will tell you is that it may take years to build up trust, but it can be destroyed in an instant.

So I would argue that the generalized movement toward corporate citizenship has been spawned, at least in part, as a reaction to these self–inflicted body blows. Within the business community there is a righteous reaction that this behavior doesn't reflect what business is about or what it does. More needs to be done to show that the vast majority of businesses not only are ethical, the success of business as a whole is dependent on trust and ethics.

The crooks and villains and sociopaths and free riders threaten the honest work and diligence of the rest of us. In the absence of internalized morality, people are moving toward more standard management practices to create “trust substitutes” that reassure customers, investors, regulators, and employees that there interests will be looked after.

The second element triggering this movement isn't reactive, but proactive. An increasing number of managers are taking a more expansive view of their business responsibilities, because they want to maximize profits for the long–term, not just the next quarter. The more that managers raise their vision and look 5, 10, 20 years out, the more issues they see that affect their business.

In this context, it makes sense to invest in Pre–K youth development programs like PNC and GlaxoSmithKline do. You start getting companies thinking about global issues like sustainability and emerging market governance practices. You have companies invest billions of dollars in their local communities, the way Prudential, Dow, and Microsoft have.

I would estimate that roughly 20%–25% of business managers in the U.S. still subscribe to a short–term, narrow view of business, and that almost every manager is deeply concerned about profits over the long–term (or they won't be in business), but I would also argue that business attitudes have changed dramatically since the 1980s too.

If that doesn't constitute a movement, then what does?

The next question is how long will it take for this movement to achieve its desired objectives – more trust and more efficient and effective linkages between social and economic development?

___

Stephen Jordan is Executive Director of the Business Civic Leadership Center at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. This piece is reposted with permission from the BCLC blog.