Lawrence Kimmel: Why CSR Isn’t Cutting It
Lawrence Kimmel, agency CEO and former chair of the DMA, remembers when local business helping out communities wasn’t called “Corporate Social Responsibility”— It was just called being a good neighbor. He shares his POV on how to market for the greater good.
“Corporate Social Responsibility can be good for the company bottom line if smartly executed—and for individuals, social responsibility is good for the soul however it’s done.”
By Lawrence Kimmel
When I was a kid, many local businesses supported community activities like the Little League and school fundraisers. We, in turn, supported those businesses. No one called these efforts “Corporate Social Responsibility.” People were just being good neighbors. For the most part, this was a win-win for everyone involved.
Yet today, hometown hardware stores and local newspapers are rarities. Our country is divided between left and right; red and blue; black, brown, and white; rich and poor; and business behemoths and everyone else. For many of us, we’ve lost the connectedness to our communities—and too many businesses are takers, not givers. They’re searching for tax breaks, pitting one state against another; lobbying government for corporate welfare; paying their CEOs or private equity backers obscene sums while fighting against living wages for their workers. To me, this suggests a rupture of the social contract business had with their communities.
Many people believe this corporate behavior is outrageous and flock instead to companies that align with their sense of morality. They may proudly wear Patagonia clothing, consume Paul Newman’s salad dressing, or invest in socially responsible funds. Their purchase decisions are aligned with their definition of self. Thankfully, many such companies are profiting as a result of their social commitments. Kudos to all the organizations that are doing well by doing good.
Unfortunately, despite some optimistic reports spotlighting consumers spurred to protest with their pocketbooks over our increasing divisiveness, too many consumers are unconcerned or unaware of how brands act, so many companies still don’t feel compelled to be socially responsible. Further, since customers often hold different views on social issues than brands they otherwise admire, many companies avoid taking positions that might alienate a large percentage of their customers. There are too few Taylor Swifts out there willing to take a stand that is antithetical to what many in their core audience believe.
Honestly, I can appreciate this corporate dilemma. I’ve run a big public company. We had a responsibility to shareholders, and I don’t begrudge companies that feel conflicted about acting in ways that can alienate large swaths of their customers. But that doesn’t mean organizations need to abdicate their responsibility to positively contribute nor lose the benefits that come from being purpose-driven. For example, we have a client working to combat hate. Some of our social media ads were inviting a fair number of hateful comments. We isolated the segments of the population within our media targeting that were posting racist comments. Then we refined our targeting to reach even more people willing to support the organization’s activities. The campaign’s power and influence grew substantially with vastly reduced negative comments.
“Since customers often hold different views on social issues than brands they otherwise admire, many companies avoid taking positions that might alienate a large percentage of their customers. There are too few Taylor Swifts out there willing to take a stand that is antithetical to what many in their core audience believe.”
Ideally, more companies will come to understand how good socially responsible behavior can drive their business success, yet this will never be enough. As a society, we need more socially responsible religious institutions that live by The Golden Rule. We need more media responsibility — outlets that clearly delineate between fact and fiction, news and opinion. We need more companies who can clearly afford to pay living wages to their employees.
And most importantly, we need more Individual Social Responsibility.
For me personally, after leading a global agency network and the industry’s trade association for direct and database marketing, I decided to dedicate most of my time to help organizations that help others. I started a boutique firm, Rung-UP, that largely supports nonprofits and organizations that have a true social conscience. Socially responsible actions are what most of our clients do every day — but that doesn’t automatically mean that their activities build their brands or revenues – which limits how much good they can do. Being socially responsible by itself isn’t enough either. To bastardize an old movie line, if you build it, they don’t automatically show up. You need to align goodness with good strategic marketing solutions.
One of our clients was fighting antisemitism around the world with activities that largely spoke to engaged Jews. When we changed their narrative to include xenophobia and racism against all people, the content we created exploded. The organization dramatically raised their visibility. And over a four-year period, donations quadrupled.
Another organization, an iconic teaching institution, was doing good work but still struggled. Their board was more obsessed with the organization’s endowment than their students. We worked to reinvent the student experience, and the school’s reputation, enrollment, and revenues all climbed.
Corporate Social Responsibility can be good for the company bottom line if smartly executed -- and for individuals, social responsibility is good for the soul however it’s done. When I was a kid, I believed “all you need is love.” I’m still hoping the world will prove that I wasn’t a naïve child.
March 30, 2021
