-
Prof. G. V. Chalam and Siddam Venkata Narayana Rao,
International Journal of Research in Engineering, IT
and Social Sciences, ISSN 2250-0588, Impact Factor: 6.565,
Volume 09 Issue 01, January 2019, Page 108-113
http://indusedu.org Page 1
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License
Corporate Sustainability Relationship
Management Practices: Perceptions of the
Stakeholders – An Empirical Analysis
Prof. G.V. Chalam1 and Siddam Venkata Narayana Rao
2
1(Department of Commerce & Business Administration, Acharya
Nagarjuna University, Nagarjuna Nagar,
Andhra Pradesh, India) 2(Research Scholar, Department of
Commerce & Business Administration, Acharya Nagarjuna
University,
Nagarjuna Nagar, Andhra Pradesh, India)
Abstract: The sustainability relationship management practices
are increasingly prevalent during the recent past in business
corporations and their institutional landscape. Actually, these
organizations have been waiting
for guidelines on sustainability since several years on
economic, environmental and social perspective. In fact,
the corporate managements believe that sustainability is
important for future success and growth and is
interested in blending it with its day-to-day business
strategy.
This paper aims at to elicit the perceptions of the selected
respondents on the corporate social
sustainability relationship management practices in the select
companies. From the analysis it was found that
the practices of corporate social sustainability relationship
management are ingrained in the company policies,
vision and mission. The stakeholders are identified through
internal reviews, face to face meetings, activity
related peer groups, and other methods of interactions. The
social sustainability is practiced as a life cycle
management starting with health and safety, housing, education,
ethics, philanthropy through equity and
welfare without deviation the human rights principles. Most of
the companies are concentrating on the
economic and environmental sustainability programs rather than
on social sustainability initiatives. Though
some environmental and economic initiatives tend to look as
social sustainability initiatives.
Keywords: Sustainability, Sustainability Relationship,
Stakeholders, Corporate Social Responsibility, Corporate Social
Sustainability, Local Community, Social Equity
I. INTRODUCTION The sustainability relationship management
practices are increasingly prevalent during the recent past
in business corporations and their institutional landscape.
Actually, these organizations have been waiting for
guidelines on sustainability since several years on economic,
environmental and social perspective. In fact, the
corporate managements believe that sustainability is important
for future success and growth and is interested in
blending it with its day-to-day business strategy.
As a fact, sustainability is the program and process in any
organization woven into the social fabric of
the community through broad-based interest, involvement and
investment in the fulfillment of the corporate
mission and vision. The program and process involve a complete
network of individuals, stakeholders and
business partners investing their time and resources for the
purpose.
There are several tasks that must be accomplished to develop and
implement a sustainability plan. But
fundamentally, sustainability is about developing, nurturing and
managing various relationships. In
sustainability relationship, building a strong stakeholder
network becomes a valued and mission-critical asset for
any organization. Sustainability is viewed as a continuous
journey rather than a destination. This research argues
in favor of recognition of corporate social sustainability as
both a normative and analytical concept. Of late,
sustainability has been used more in the sense of human
sustainability on planet earth. It has many situations and
contexts depending on many scales of space and time.
Corporate Sustainability Relationship Management
The social sustainability can be achieved through social
mobilization. By doing business, the
companies have an effect on their neighbors, customers,
suppliers and the economic vitality of the entire region.
There are many simple steps that a company can take to improve
the lives of people in its community, including
volunteer projects and contributions to charitable organizations
and interest groups. The stakeholders or
business partners for a corporate business houses are partner
companies, investors, specialist organizations,
government, workers and employees’ groups and the general public
associated directly or indirectly with the
business of the company.
The sustainability is a multidimensional approach and there are
several key areas an organization has to
begin exploring stakeholders to develop relationships. Though
the list is not an exhaustive, business and
industry, non-profit organizations, education, religious
congregations, healthcare services, government, civic
-
Prof. G. V. Chalam and Siddam Venkata Narayana Rao,
International Journal of Research in Engineering, IT
and Social Sciences, ISSN 2250-0588, Impact Factor: 6.565,
Volume 09 Issue 01, January 2019, Page 108-113
http://indusedu.org Page 2
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License
service, activist organizations, etc., can be considered as a
starting point for developing corporate sustainability
relationships. The company reports to and learns from its
stakeholders to assess the company’s performance and
aspirations on the sustainability.
Thus, the social sustainability has become an issue for the
public and private sector organizations
during the recent years. Many problems associated with social
injustice, slavery, child labor, racial
discrimination, unsafe workplaces, etc., are covered under
national, regional and local regulations. There are a
number of issues to consider regarding the implementation of
these programs. A constant review and evaluation
of these strategies need a close monitoring. The shareholders,
investors, employees, communities, etc., look
into the financial, environmental and social wellbeing of the
company.
In this paper, an attempt is made to know the perceptions of the
stakeholders on the corporate
sustainability practices in the sleeted organizations in India.
For this, the data is collected from the stakeholders
through personal internal reviews, face to face meetings,
activity related peer groups, and other methods of
interactions. The social sustainability is practiced as a life
cycle management starting with health and safety,
housing, education, ethics, philanthropy through equity and
welfare without deviation the human rights
principles.
The data collection has been collected in two-fold, i.e., face
to face interviews and the second one is the
online responses of the sample respondents. The face to face
interviews are carried out and simultaneously
online data collection started. The same questionnaire format is
used for face to face interviews, distributed for
questionnaire survey and online collection of data. For the
purpose of data collection, an internet-based survey
was also conducted, with a website http://www.sustainquest.info
created for the respondents to login and
complete the questionnaire. Users initially register their
credentials to log on to the site and then complete the
questionnaire.
The data so collected is computerized primarily in MSSQL
database. This data is transferred in a
structured format to IBM SPSS. The IBM SPSS is software that
addresses the entire analytical process, from
planning to data collection to analysis, reporting and
deployment. It provides tools that allow users to quickly
view data, formulate hypotheses for additional testing, and
carry out procedures to clarify relationships between
variables, create clusters, identify trends and make
predictions.
Section-I: Implementation of CSRM Practices – Companies
Views
From 1st April of 2014 as per the Companies Act 2013, the larger
companies in India are mandated to be
required to spend at least 2 per cent of the net profits of
prior three years of business on CSR activities, on
projects or activities from the set list (as per Schedule VII of
the Companies act 2013). Further, it is required to
comply or explain the expenditure and any shortfall below the 2
per cent threshold. It is mandatory to set-up a
CSR committee of the board of 3 or more directors, whose members
will include at least one independent
director and to ensure that the board establishes a policy for
CSR within the company, which will report
exclusively on the CSR activities.
In the following tables, percentage responded are the total
number of respondents that opted for the
answer, while percentage response is the number of responses
received to the question to the total responses
received for that question.
Table-1: Implementation of Sustainability Programs - Companies
Objectives
Objectives No. of Responses % Responded % Response
Customers’ Demand 460 50.77 12.71
Reputation 408 45.03 11.27
Competition 399 44.04 11.02
Cost Savings 377 41.61 10.41
Executive Commitment 365 40.29 10.08
Shareholders’ Demand 360 39.74 9.94
Industry trend 325 35.87 8.98
Government Regulations 252 27.81 6.96
Social Community demand 222 24.50 6.13
Demand from NGOs 178 19.65 4.92
Public demand 166 18.32 4.59
Others 54 5.96 1.49
No response 54 5.96 1.49
Total 3620
100
Source: Collected from the Survey
-
Prof. G. V. Chalam and Siddam Venkata Narayana Rao,
International Journal of Research in Engineering, IT
and Social Sciences, ISSN 2250-0588, Impact Factor: 6.565,
Volume 09 Issue 01, January 2019, Page 108-113
http://indusedu.org Page 3
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License
Identify your company’s top five reasons to implement
sustainability programs?
The select companies are implementing sustainability programs on
customers’ demand. Many times,
companies conduct sustainability programs to build up their
reputation in the market. On the other hand, often
the sustainability programs are conducted for competition from
the other companies. Cost Savings, Executive
Commitment, Shareholders Demand, Industry trend, Government
Regulations are among the other important
reasons for implementing the sustainability programs in an
organization.
Table-2: Obstacles Faced by the Companies in Promoting the
Stakeholder Engagement
Obstacles No. of Responses % Responded % Response
Lack of time 429 47.35 19.86
Lack of leadership 387 42.72 17.92
Inadequate funding to support the cause 294 32.45 13.61
Weak regulations 258 28.48 11.94
Resistance to change 198 21.85 9.17
No training or education on the subject 187 20.64 8.66
Geographical distances 146 16.11 6.76
Motivational Factors 79 8.72 3.66
Language and cultural barriers 75 8.28 3.47
No response 59 6.51 2.73
Others 36 3.97 1.67
Lack business planning capabilities 12 1.32 0.56
Total 2160
100
Source: Collected from the Survey
What obstacles does your company face in the process of
promoting the stakeholder engagement?
The sample companies do face lot of obstacles in the process of
stakeholder engagement. Stakeholder
engagement is critical in implementing the corporate social
sustainability initiatives and programs. The
companies most often understand the importance of sustainability
programs but lack strategy on how to engage
the stakeholders at the right point of time to the right
activity. Lack of time, lack of leadership, inadequate
funding to support the cause, weak regulations and resistance to
change are a few major obstacles companies are
facing in the process of promoting the stakeholder engagement.
There are both enablers and resistors in the
stakeholder’s engagement process. Inability or unwillingness to
change, inability to see potential benefits of
getting involved, and lack of awareness, are a few traits of the
resistors, while active involvement and show of
interest, and assuming roles and responsibilities, are a few of
the traits of the enablers from among the
stakeholders.
Table-3: Environmental Aspects for the Implementation of the
Sustainability Programs
Environmental Aspects No. of Responses % Responded %
Response
Materials 366 40.40 13.47
Water 349 38.52 12.85
Products and Services 305 33.66 11.23
Energy 298 32.89 10.97
Biodiversity 291 32.12 10.71
Transport 236 26.05 8.69
Effluents and Waste 220 24.28 8.10
Emissions 215 23.73 7.91
Compliance 190 20.97 6.99
Overall 85 9.38 3.13
No response 65 7.17 2.39
Environmental Grievance Mechanisms 51 5.63 1.88
Supplier Environmental Assessment 46 5.08 1.69
Total 2717
100
Source: Collected from the Survey
-
Prof. G. V. Chalam and Siddam Venkata Narayana Rao,
International Journal of Research in Engineering, IT
and Social Sciences, ISSN 2250-0588, Impact Factor: 6.565,
Volume 09 Issue 01, January 2019, Page 108-113
http://indusedu.org Page 4
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License
Which “Environmental” aspects of the following does your company
organize in the sustainability
Programs?
On the environmental aspect the sample respondent companies are
organizing the sustainability
programs on materials, water, product and services, energy,
biodiversity, waste, emissions and compliance
during the period of study.
Section II: Satisfaction Levels of Stakeholders on Corporate
Sustainability Initiatives
The sustainability initiatives are being implemented by both
private and public enterprises. Is it because
of legal obligations and government mandates or merely for
prestige and reputation? On the other hand, how
seriously are they implementing and do the employees often
underutilize resource in the development and
implementation of sustainability programs are examined in the
following paragraphs.
Table-4: Satisfaction Levels on Safety and Security in the
Community
Satisfaction Level Number of responses % Response
Satisfied 460 50.77
Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied 139 15.34
Completely Satisfied 100 11.04
Dissatisfied 79 8.72
Very Dissatisfied 68 7.51
No response 61 6.62
Total 907 100
Source: Collected from the Survey
How satisfied are you with safety and security in your
community?
The balance between the work and life is important for increase
in productivity of the company.
Corporate companies encourage a healthy work-life balance for
its employees. Around 42 per cent of the
stakeholders are satisfied with the balance between the work
place and the community life while 13 per cent are
dissatisfied. On the other hand, there is double the number of
stakeholders who are very dissatisfied over the
completely satisfied stakeholders with the balance of work place
to community life.
Table-5: Satisfaction Levels with Relationships with the People,
Institutions in Community
Satisfaction Level Number of responses % responsed
Satisfied 430 47.35
Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied 180 19.87
Dissatisfied 99 10.93
Very Dissatisfied 68 7.51
Completely Satisfied 65 7.17
No response 65 7.17
Total 907 100
Source: Collected from the Survey
How satisfied are your relationships with the people,
institutions in your community?
The community relationship is strategic aspect of business for
organization sustainability. These
relationships help retain the position in the market. Companies
continue to integrate community relations into
their overall business strategy to maintain the corporate social
sustainability relationship. On the relationships
aspect around 55 per cent are satisfied or completely satisfied
and around 19 per cent are dissatisfied and very
dissatisfied.
Table-6: Satisfaction Levels Meeting Local Community Needs such
as Energy/Water
Satisfaction Level No. of Responses % Responsed
Satisfied 416 45.92
Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied 169 18.65
Dissatisfied 115 12.69
Very Dissatisfied 89 9.82
No response 64 6.84
Completely Satisfied 55 6.07
Total 907 100
Source: Collected from the Survey
-
Prof. G. V. Chalam and Siddam Venkata Narayana Rao,
International Journal of Research in Engineering, IT
and Social Sciences, ISSN 2250-0588, Impact Factor: 6.565,
Volume 09 Issue 01, January 2019, Page 108-113
http://indusedu.org Page 5
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License
How satisfied are you meeting local community needs for basic
resources such as energy or water?
A considerable percentage of population lives in the rural areas
where there is lack of adequate energy
or water resources. Most of businesses especially the
Manufacturing industries are located in the suburban areas
or slightly away from the urban population due to land
availability. Factors such as unemployment, poverty
levels or lower economic groups, occupational reasons, rural
areas face serious problems with regards to the
energy and clean water resources. It is important that
corporates ensure that energy efficient and cost-effective
programs are taken up for company's social sustainability. On
the aspect for meeting the community needs for
basic resources such as energy and water, 46 per cent
stakeholders gave positive satisfactory note while 12.7 per
cent are dissatisfied.
Table-7: Satisfaction Levels with Places of Learning, Health,
Safety, Welfare, Recreation and Faith
Satisfaction Level No. of responses % Responded
Satisfied 401 44.26
Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied 160 17.66
Dissatisfied 142 15.67
Completely Satisfied 69 7.62
Very Dissatisfied 68 7.51
No response 67 7.28
Total 907 100
Source: Collected from the Survey
How satisfied are you with the places of learning, health,
safety, welfare, recreation and faith in your
community?
From the social sustainability point of view, corporates
organize several community development
programs which include organizing health camps, Safety and
welfare activities, providing recreation facilities,
involving in funding worship and faith related initiatives and
such programs for the good of the community.
Regarding community facilities like places of learning, health,
hospitals, safety, welfare amenities, recreational
facilities, faith and worship 52 per cent are either satisfied
or completely satisfied; on the other hand, 23 per cent
are dissatisfied or very dissatisfied.
Table-8: Satisfaction Levels with the Efforts to Waste
Minimization and Recycling
Satisfaction Level No. of Responses % Responded
Satisfied 414 45.70
Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied 139 15.34
Dissatisfied 123 13.58
Completely Satisfied 83 9.16
Very Dissatisfied 81 8.94
No response 67 7.28
Total 907 100
Source: Collected from the Survey
How satisfied are you with the corporate attempts and efforts to
waste minimization and recycling?
Waste minimization or elimination is one most important process
for a sustainable society to help
eliminate generation of waste. Companies need to take
responsibility in providing the in the environment
friendly methods of waste minimization, reduction, recycling and
disposal. As far as corporate commitment to
waste disposal, minimization and recycling is concern over 45
per cent stakeholders are satisfied and around 14
per cent are dissatisfied. Almost equal number of stakeholders
is completely satisfied or very dissatisfied.
Table-9: Satisfaction Levels with the Efforts to Reduce or
Prevent Pollution
Satisfaction Level No.of Responses % Responded
Satisfied 393 43.38
Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied 180 19.87
Dissatisfied 112 12.36
Very Dissatisfied 77 8.50
Completely Satisfied 75 8.28
No response 70 7.62
Total 907 100
Source: Collected from the Survey
-
Prof. G. V. Chalam and Siddam Venkata Narayana Rao,
International Journal of Research in Engineering, IT
and Social Sciences, ISSN 2250-0588, Impact Factor: 6.565,
Volume 09 Issue 01, January 2019, Page 108-113
http://indusedu.org Page 6
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License
How satisfied are you with the corporate attempts and efforts to
prevent pollution (Air, Water, effluent,
noise etc.)?
Reducing environmental impact by preventing pollution associated
with various sources. The
companies concentrate on managing and reducing chemical
substances, take measures to reduce carbon
emission and air pollution, to prevent water pollution, to
prevent soil contamination, preventing sound pollution
etc., 43 per cent of stakeholders are satisfied with the
corporate attempts to prevent pollution while 12 per cent
are dissatisfied. There are 8 per cent, who agreed on completely
satisfied and as many stakeholders are very
dissatisfied.
Table-10: Satisfaction Levels with the Efforts to Protection of
Natural Environment
Satisfaction Level No. of Responses % Responded
Satisfied 412 45.47
Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied 170 18.76
Dissatisfied 117 12.91
Very Dissatisfied 73 8.06
No response 70 7.62
Completely Satisfied 65 7.17
Total 907 100
Source: Collected from the Survey
How satisfied are you with the corporate attempts and efforts to
protection of natural environment?
With the increasingly environmental conscious world, Companies
now have obligation to protect the
natural resources and prevent further deterioration.
Environmental protection is now a legal and ethical
obligation on the part of corporate businesses. There are
several regulations which mandate these sustainability
programs to be implemented as a practice. On the Corporate
attempts of protecting natural resources 45 per cent
satisfied and 13 per cent are dissatisfied.
Table-11: Satisfaction Levels with the Efforts to Sustainable
Transport Options
Satisfaction Level No. of Responses % Response
Satisfied 383 42.27
Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied 177 19.54
Dissatisfied 139 15.34
Very Dissatisfied 72 7.95
Completely Satisfied 68 7.45
No response 68 7.45
Total 907 100
Source: Collected from the Survey
How satisfied are you with the corporate attempts and efforts to
sustainable transport options?
With the environmental and climate impacts companies are
providing sustainable transport facilities.
The mass transport, energy efficient vehicles are few examples.
Companies offer their employees the chance to
reduce transit costs by providing mass public transportation for
social progress. On the corporate, attempts on
sustainable transport options 42 per cent are satisfied and 15
per cent are dissatisfied.’
Table-12: Satisfaction Levels of Clear and Accurate Information
on Products, Services, Labeling
Satisfaction Level No. of Responses % Response
Satisfied 426 47.02
Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied 166 18.32
Dissatisfied 113 12.47
Completely Satisfied 68 7.45
No response 68 7.45
Very Dissatisfied 66 7.28
Total 907 100
Source: Collected from the Survey
How satisfied are you with your enterprise’s supply of clear and
accurate information on its products,
services, labeling and activities to customers, suppliers, local
community, etc.?
As there is a demand from consumers that companies should inform
about its product to take decisions
about their purchases. Similarly, stakeholders do demand
corporate organizations to inform and publish accurate
information on its products, services and labeling to its
customers, suppliers and local community. Around 47 %
stakeholders are satisfied with your enterprise supply of clear
and accurate information on its products, services,
labeling and activities to customers, suppliers, local
community
-
Prof. G. V. Chalam and Siddam Venkata Narayana Rao,
International Journal of Research in Engineering, IT
and Social Sciences, ISSN 2250-0588, Impact Factor: 6.565,
Volume 09 Issue 01, January 2019, Page 108-113
http://indusedu.org Page 7
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License
Table-13: Satisfaction of the Stakeholder on the Overall CSRM
Practices
Satisfaction Level No. of Responses % Response
Satisfied 406 44.81
Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied 127 14.02
Dissatisfied 124 13.69
Very Dissatisfied 107 11.81
Completely Satisfied 68 7.51
No response 62 6.73
Can’t say 13 1.43
Total 907 100
Source: Collected from the Survey
How satisfied are you with the implementation of sustainability
in your organization?
Only 44% of the stakeholders are satisfied while 14% are
dissatisfied with the present state of
implementation of sustainability initiatives in the
organizations. Totally dissatisfied stakeholders are more than
the completely satisfied stakeholders.
Table-14: No. of Trees planted in the Community
No. of Trees No. of Responses % Response
In Hundreds 346 38.19
In tens 280 30.91
None 108 11.92
In Thousands 73 8.06
No response 68 7.40
In Lakhs 32 3.53
Total 907 100
Source: Collected from the Survey
How many numbers of trees planted in the community?
Around 38% responded that tree plantation in hundreds is done in
the community by the local
companies. Another 30% responded that it is only done in tens.
12 % responded there is no plantation activity
done by the local companies.
Table-15: Social Sustainability Training Programs Companies
Organized
Social sustainability programs company organize No. of Responses
% Responded % Response
Women’s Empowerment 294 32.45 10.58
Working conditions 253 27.92 9.10
Wages & benefits 245 27.04 8.81
Human rights 214 23.62 7.70
Environmental issues 213 23.51 7.66
Rural development 209 23.07 7.52
Collective bargaining 203 22.41 7.30
Anti-corruption and bribery 197 21.74 7.09
Discrimination 188 20.75 6.76
Forced or Child labour 175 19.32 6.29
Climate changes 167 18.43 6.01
Agriculture 129 14.24 4.64
Youth and Education 81 8.94 2.91
None 67 7.40 2.41
No response 66 7.28 2.37
Microenterprise/ Microfinance 47 5.19 1.69
Others 32 3.53 1.15
Total 2780
100
Source: Collected from the Survey
What social sustainability training programs does your company
organize?
Woman’s empowerment, working conditions, Wages and benefits,
Human rights, Environmental
issues, Rural Development, Collective bargaining,
Anti-corruption and Bribery Discrimination, forced child
labor are among the foremost social sustainability training
programs companies organizing. There are a few
responses that no programs were being organized by the company
in respect of Sustainability training programs
which constitute 2.4 % of the total respondents.
-
Prof. G. V. Chalam and Siddam Venkata Narayana Rao,
International Journal of Research in Engineering, IT
and Social Sciences, ISSN 2250-0588, Impact Factor: 6.565,
Volume 09 Issue 01, January 2019, Page 108-113
http://indusedu.org Page 8
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License
Table-16: Total No. of Hours per Year Company Impart Training
and Education
No. of hours per year No. of Responses % Response
Less than 80 hours 383 42.27
81 to 160 hours 218 24.06
None 99 10.93
161 to 320 hours 85 9.38
No response 70 7.62
More than 320 hours 52 5.74
Total 907 100
Source: Collected from the Survey
How many hours per year does your company allot to impart
training and education for sustainability
efforts (Considering 2000 working hours per year)?
Corporate policies involve training and education for its
employees on sustainability practices. Green
Education, Sustainability Coaching are the few training and
education programs many companies are offering
for its employees on the sustainability aspects. To achieve
company's sustainability goals, they need to involve
the employee workforce on these activities. Considering 2000
hours of work per employee per year 42 %
respondents think that only 80 hours or less is being spent on
the sustainability activities. Another 24% feel 80
to 160 hours are spent for the purpose of sustainability
activities. At least 11% of companies are not spending
any amount of time for these activities.
Table-17: Satisfaction Levels of Company Policy or Training
Opportunities to Local Community
Satisfaction Level No. of Responses % Response
Satisfied 404 44.59
Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied 146 16.11
Dissatisfied 123 13.58
Very Dissatisfied 101 11.15
No response 79 8.61
Completely Satisfied 54 5.96
Total 907 100
Source: Collected from the Survey
How satisfied are you with your company’s offer for training
opportunities to people from the local
community to enhance the understanding of Corporate Social
Responsibility/ Sustainability (e.g. anti-
corruption, health & safety, apprenticeships or work
experience for the young and sustainability
awareness programs)?
Local communities face lot of social challenges if their
resources are depleted and destroyed.
Sustainable development is the only way to recovery and enhances
the quality of life for everyone in these
communities. This is achieved by developing local assets,
limiting waste and pollution, improving the status of
people, conserving natural resources, and promoting cooperation
and efficiency. To achieve this continuous
training should be imparted to the people of local community in
the fields of anticorruption, health, safety and
similar sustainability-oriented programs. Around 44 % of
respondents are satisfied with the programs being
implemented by their company while 14 % disagree and
dissatisfied with the sustainability programs.
Table-18: Job Opportunities are Generated Exclusively for Local
Community
No. Job opportunities generated for local candidates No. of
Responses % Response
1 to 10 393 43.27
11 to 50 164 18.10
None 113 12.47
51 to 100 99 10.93
100 above 69 7.62
No response 69 7.62
Total 907 100
Source: Collected from the Survey
How many job opportunities are generated exclusively for local
community candidates?
Over 43% responded that at least 1 to 10 jobs are being
generated exclusively for the local community
candidates per annum. Another 16% responded that 11 to 50 jobs
were created. However nearly 13 % responded
to say that there are none offered to the local community
candidates.
-
Prof. G. V. Chalam and Siddam Venkata Narayana Rao,
International Journal of Research in Engineering, IT
and Social Sciences, ISSN 2250-0588, Impact Factor: 6.565,
Volume 09 Issue 01, January 2019, Page 108-113
http://indusedu.org Page 9
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License
Table-19: Satisfaction Levels of Company Financial Support to
Local Community activities
Satisfaction Level No.of Responses % Response
Satisfied 419 46.25
Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied 157 17.33
Dissatisfied 103 11.37
Very Dissatisfied 79 8.72
Completely Satisfied 78 8.61
No response 71 7.73
Total 907 100
Source: Collected from the Survey
How satisfied are you with your Company’s regular financial
support to local community activities and
projects (e.g. charitable donations or sponsorship)?
The corporations give funding to the local communities to help
establish good corporate relations. This
is in the form of Financial Cash funds or non-cash contributions
like gifts and supplies. Financial support to
local community activities and projects are done not merely for
good business sense but also oriented to
establish long-term corporate social sustainability
relationship. 46 % feel satisfied with 11% dissatisfied with
the
company's financial support to the local communities.
Table-20: Community support programs/ events companies support
or fund
Community support programs company support No. of Responses %
Responded % Response
Awareness Programs 313 34.55 7.48
Charity and Donations 277 30.57 6.62
Health, Dental and Eye Care 256 28.26 6.12
Health Run or Walkathons 253 27.92 6.04
Community Health programs 207 22.85 4.95
Sports and Games 201 22.19 4.80
Arts and Culture 194 21.41 4.63
Education (Adult and Children) 194 21.41 4.63
Baby/ Child Care 188 20.75 4.49
Disaster Relief Programs 185 20.42 4.42
Tree planting 178 19.65 4.25
Clubs and Associations 176 19.43 4.20
Animal Care 168 18.54 4.01
Safety events 168 18.54 4.01
Elderly Programs 167 18.43 3.99
Exhibitions 148 16.34 3.54
Fairs and Carnivals 144 15.89 3.44
Excursions and short tours 133 14.68 3.18
Stage and Cultural Activities 123 13.58 2.94
Luncheons 109 12.03 2.60
Parks and Recreational facilities 108 11.92 2.58
Spiritual Services / Yoga 86 9.49 2.05
Workshops 76 8.39 1.82
No response 65 7.17 1.55
Youth Programs and activities 48 5.30 1.15
Others 21 2.32 0.50
Total 4186
100
Source: Collected from the Survey
What community support programs/ events does your company
support/funds?
Awareness programs, charity and donations, health dental and eye
care, health run, community health
programs sports and games, Arts and Culture, Adult education,
Baby/child care, disaster relief, Tree planting are
among the foremost programs generally companies are performing.
Apart from the above list animal care, safety
events, exhibitions workshops are also popular events companies
are organizing.
Table-21: Satisfaction levels of company policy to register and
resolve complaints
Satisfaction Level No. of Responses % Response
Satisfied 419 46.25
Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied 188 20.75
-
Prof. G. V. Chalam and Siddam Venkata Narayana Rao,
International Journal of Research in Engineering, IT
and Social Sciences, ISSN 2250-0588, Impact Factor: 6.565,
Volume 09 Issue 01, January 2019, Page 108-113
http://indusedu.org Page 10
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License
Dissatisfied 99 10.93
No response 75 8.17
Very Dissatisfied 66 7.28
Completely Satisfied 60 6.62
Total 907 100
Source: Collected from the Survey
How satisfied are you with your company’s policy to register and
resolve complaints from customers,
suppliers and stakeholders?
Generally, companies have their own policies to handle
complaints from their stakeholders in several
ways by designing policies handbook, assigning staff to handle
grievances, receive complaints through boxes or
through mail, through discussions, addressing concerns or
similar feedback mechanisms. 46 % of the
Stakeholders are satisfied with the existing mechanism of their
company in handling the stakeholders’
complaints and grievances. 11 % are dissatisfied with the
Grievance mechanism.
Table-22: Total number of stakeholders’ complaints per year
Total number of Stakeholders complaints company gets per year
No. of Responses % Response
Fewer than 5 417 46.03
6 to 50 231 25.50
51 to 100 88 9.71
None 72 7.89
No response 72 7.89
More than 100 27 2.98
Total 907 100
Source: Collected from the Survey
How many stakeholders or community complaints does your company
get per year?
To maintain good stakeholder relations, it is the Management
Standard to receive Complaints and
Grievances either through mail or complaint boxes set up
conveniently at various locations within the
organization. Often such complaints received are those of
discrimination and harassment. 46 % responded they
receive fewer than 5 complaints a year while 8% reported that
there are no complaints.
Table-23: Does your company publish a CSR sustainability
report
Does your company publish a CSR Sustainability Report No. of
Responses % Response
Yes 384 42.38
No 265 29.25
Don’t Know 185 20.42
No response 73 7.95
Total 907 100
Source: Collected from the Survey
Does your company publish a Corporate Social Responsibility
(CSR)/ Sustainability Report?
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a business approach
that contributes to sustainable
development. 42 % responded that their company publish the CSR
30 % companies surveyed are not publishing
the CSR. Another 20 % of respondents are totally unaware if
their company publishes a CSR.
Table-24: Health and safety programs company organize
Health and safety programs company organize No. of Responses %
Responded % Response
General Health Awareness 403 44.48 15.07
HIV AIDS Awareness 352 38.85 13.16
Women’s Health 328 36.20 12.27
Cancer Awareness 286 31.57 10.70
Malaria/Filaria /Dengue 238 26.27 8.90
Lifestyle Diseases 231 25.50 8.64
Tuberculosis 215 23.73 8.04
Anxiety/ Anger/ Stress Management 175 19.32 6.54
Alcohol/ Nicotine Counselling Programs 145 16.00 5.42
Drug Abuse Counselling Programs 115 12.69 4.30
Rehabilitation Programs 73 8.06 2.73
No response 71 7.84 2.66
Others 42 4.64 1.57
Total 2674
100
Source: Collected from the Survey
-
Prof. G. V. Chalam and Siddam Venkata Narayana Rao,
International Journal of Research in Engineering, IT
and Social Sciences, ISSN 2250-0588, Impact Factor: 6.565,
Volume 09 Issue 01, January 2019, Page 108-113
http://indusedu.org Page 11
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License
What health and safety programs does your company organize?
Programs on general health awareness, HIV AIDS awareness,
women’s health, cancer awareness and
other life-threatening diseases are the most organized social
sustainability programs by the companies.
Table-25: Community sustainability projects company involved
Community sustainability projects
Company involved Projects No. of Responses % Responded %
Response
Women’s Welfare Centers 278 30.68 10.46
Water Supply Drinking Water 268 29.58 10.09
Waste Treatment plants 256 28.26 9.63
Roads and Buildings 234 25.83 8.81
Child Welfare/ Education Projects 232 25.61 8.73
Animal Shelter Projects 229 25.28 8.62
Sewage / Drainage and Toilets 219 24.17 8.24
Adult Education 208 22.96 7.83
Solar Electrification projects 168 18.54 6.32
Wind Power Projects 157 17.33 5.91
Health Clinics 146 16.11 5.49
Rural Electrification projects 145 16.00 5.46
No response 72 7.95 2.71
Others 45 4.97 1.69
Total 2657
100
Source: Collected from the Survey
What community development sustainability projects is your
company involved in?
Women’s welfare centers, drinking water supply, waste treatment
plants, roads and buildings, child
welfare and educational projects, sewage and drainage toilets,
adult education and solar electrification power
projects, wind power projects, health clinics are the most
common sustainability projects companies are
involved in.
Table-26: Satisfaction levels on Corporate Governance
Satisfaction Level No. of Responses % Response
Satisfied 448 49.45
Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied 129 14.24
Dissatisfied 99 10.93
Completely Satisfied 75 8.28
No response 69 7.51
Very Dissatisfied 64 7.06
Can’t be said 23 2.54
Total 907 100
Source: Collected from the Survey
How satisfied are you with the ‘Corporate Governance’ in
balancing the interests of the many
stakeholders in your company?
The corporate governance simply is a framework where the Higher
Management (Board of Directors)
runs the company with the help of employees as (Executives
Members) work for the benefits, rights,
responsibilities and rewards of the stakeholders. 59% are
satisfied and 18 % are dissatisfied with the corporate
governance system in their company.
Table-27: Type of Social Responsibility Programs Organized by
the select Companies Type of Programs Organized No. of Responses %
Responded % Response
Medical health camps / mobile clinics 364 40.18 13.33
Funds and donations for charities 349 38.52 12.78
Health and safety awareness drive 337 37.20 12.34
Plant trees / Agri-development 270 29.80 9.89
Improve infrastructure facilities 257 28.37 9.41
Education for poor and under privileged 256 28.26 9.38
Programs for physically disabled/impaired 230 25.39 8.42
Environmental development activities 222 24.50 8.13
Adopt a highway/ village 175 19.32 6.41
Develop recreational facilities 04 11.48 3.81
No response 72 7.95 2.64
Animal shelters / animal clinics 58 6.40 2.12
Others 36 3.97 1.32
Total 2730
100
Source: Collected from the Survey
-
Prof. G. V. Chalam and Siddam Venkata Narayana Rao,
International Journal of Research in Engineering, IT
and Social Sciences, ISSN 2250-0588, Impact Factor: 6.565,
Volume 09 Issue 01, January 2019, Page 108-113
http://indusedu.org Page 12
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License
Which of the following corporate social responsibility programs
does your company organize?
The specific sustainability programs, which are organized in the
companies are Medical health camps,
funds and donations, health and safety awareness drive, tree
plantations, education for poor and under privileged
which range from 9 % to 13 % responses.
II. FINDINGS Employees, customers, suppliers, shareholders/
investors and creditors are among the foremost
stakeholders for any company.
Annual general meetings, Surveys, interviews, meetings, social/
electronic media, training and development are the main methods of
communications with the stakeholders for the sustainability
programs.
Most companies engage its stakeholders by joint decision making,
negotiations, workshops, mediation conferences for the social
sustainability programs.
The reasons for companies to implement sustainability programs
are due to the demand from customers, the need to maintain
reputation, competition and for cost savings. Executive commitment
is
only moderate in Indian companies.
Companies are striving to achieve economic growth and equity
implementing good labor practices and decent work policies, healthy
labor management relations, adopting to occupational safety and
health
procedures. Equal opportunity employment practices, Equal
remuneration irrespective of gender
differences.
Collective bargaining, child labor, investment, security
practices, non-discrimination and human rights grievance mechanisms
related sustainability programs are implemented by the companies on
the
human rights aspects.
Improving local communities, anti-corruption programs,
regulatory compliance, public policy. Anti-competitive behavioral
programs are practiced mostly.
Regarding product responsibility aspect of GRI guidelines, the
companies are implementing product and service labeling, customers
health and safety, customer privacy and marketing
communications.
Economic performance is an important element for most of the
companies followed by Market presence as for the Economic aspect of
GRI guidelines.
As per the Environmental indicator of GRI guide lines Materials,
Water, Energy, Bio-diversity, Transport and Waste effluents are
among the foremost sustainability features the companies are
concentrating on.
More than 50% of the stakeholders are not involved in the
sustainability programs organized by the companies, few
stakeholders are merely informed of the activities.
Depending on the size of the company on an average 1 to 10 job
opportunities are earmarked exclusively for the local community as
a measure of sustainability effort.
Tree plantation activity by the companies is initiated and
organized but the maintenance aspect has failed due to which most
of the tree plantation programs are going waste.
The Companies are practicing empowerment for women by increasing
the woman employees in the organizations and raising the levels to
senior positions within the industry.
The Companies are receiving feedback from the stakeholders on
the sustainability programs and measuring the effectiveness through
surveys, face-to-face meetings, mailing, telephone interviews,
public meetings and committees.
Insufficient time, Lack of commitment, lack of coordination and
lack of infrastructure facilities are the major hurdles in the
implementation of sustainability programs.
The satisfaction levels of implementation of sustainability
programs are not adequate. Only very few companies are effective in
implementation of sustainability programs as the level of
engagement is
limited.
Dissatisfaction levels are more than satisfaction levels when it
comes to balance of work place and social community life with
reference to sustainability initiatives companies are
undertaking.
Companies are not meeting the basic level of satisfaction with
regard to fulfilling the community needs for basic resources like
energy and water.
Satisfaction levels are balanced with reference to companies
organizing the health and safety, welfare and recreation facilities
in sustainability programs.
Dissatisfaction levels are high on the corporate attempts to
reduce the environment impact sustainability initiatives. This is
the same in case of waste minimization efforts and recycling
efforts.
Only a few companies are doing commendable work with
professional approach and long-term sustainability when it relates
to Air, water, effluent treatment, and noise reduction activities
for
preventing pollution and protecting natural environment.
-
Prof. G. V. Chalam and Siddam Venkata Narayana Rao,
International Journal of Research in Engineering, IT
and Social Sciences, ISSN 2250-0588, Impact Factor: 6.565,
Volume 09 Issue 01, January 2019, Page 108-113
http://indusedu.org Page 13
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License
Though companies are leveraging in the mass transport system by
organizing company arranged buses and transport facilities,
dissatisfaction level still remains on a higher side. Companies are
not taking
much lead in improving transportation facilities.
With strict enforcement of Government regulations, the companies
are ensuring to furnish clear and accurate information on its
products, services, labeling activities.
Dissatisfaction levels are more while dealing with registration
and resolving the customer complaints as a part of sustainability
activities.
Only 20% of employees in an organization are actively
participating in the community sustainability developmental
activities organized by the companies. The time spent on these
developmental activities
account to less than 80 hours per year.
Binding to the regulatory compliance most of the companies are
publishing the CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) report.
Community awareness programs, charity and donations, health
programs and health runs, sports and games, arts and culture,
education are some of the social sustainability programs widely
organized by
the companies.
General health awareness, HIV AIDS awareness, women’s health,
cancer awareness, malaria, lifestyle diseases, TB, Alcohol/
Nicotine counselling programs, and anxiety anger management
programs health
and safety related initiatives are organized by the
companies.
Most of the community development programs organized include
women’s welfare programs, drinking water supply, waste treatment
plants, building roads and buildings, child care, education
programs,
health clinics and camps, Solar and wind power electrification
programs.
Social networking and social media are widely used to advertise
and propagate the sustainability programs to the masses. Companies
are finding the technology useful and most successful.
Most of the companies are concentrating on the economic and
environmental sustainability programs rather than on social
sustainability initiatives. Though some environmental and economic
initiatives
tend to look as social sustainability initiatives.
III. REFERENCES [1] Making Sustainability Work, Mark J. Epstein,
Berrett Koehler Publishers, Second Edition, 2014. Making
Sustainability Work:
Best Practices in Managing and Measuring Corporate Social,
Environmental and Economic Impacts, that was published this
month (January 2008) by Greenleaf Publishing in the U.K. and by
Berrett-Koehler Publishers in the U.S.
(www.bkconnection.com). You can reach Marc at [email protected].
[2] Creating a Sustainable Organization, Approaches for Enhancing
Corporate Value Through Sustainability by Peter A. Sokya. ©
2012 FT Press, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458.
[3] Corporate Social Responsibility and Sustainable Business - A
Guide to Leadership Tasks and Functions by Alessia D’Amato, Sybil
Henderson, Sue Florence. Center for Creative Leadership.
[4] Design for Sustainability, by Tracy Bhamra and Vicky
Lofthouse, Gow2er Publishing Limitedm Croft Road, Hampshire, GU11
3HR England. ISBN – 13:9780566087042
[5] Beyond the Business Case for Corporate Sustainability,
Published online in Wiley InterScience
(www.interscience.wiley.com).
[6] The strategic value of corporate social responsibility: A
relationship management framework for public relations practice
Kevin Jones (Lucid Communications) Jennifer L Bartlett (Queensland
University of Technology) (2009).
[7] Business Sustainability Culture Change,
URL:http://blog.taigacompany.com/blog/sustainability-business-life-environment/business-sustainability-culture-change-2014-food-for-thought
[8] Reporting Principles and Standard Disclosures. G4
Sustainability Reporting Guidelines. 2013 Global Reporting
Initiative., www.globalreporting.org, Amsterdam, Netherlands.
Updated on 5 August 2015, www.globalreporting.org.
[9] An exploration of measures of social sustainability and
their application to supply chain decisions Margot J. Hutchins,
John W. Sutherland* Department of Mechanical Engineering –
Engineering Mechanics, Sustainable Futures Institute, Michigan
Technological University, USA. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Available online 11 July 2008
[10] Evolution of corporate sustainability practices
Perspectives from the UK, US and Canada, 2010, Eric Krell and
Jessica Fries (2010) for CIMA, CICA, and AICPA research study.
[11] Assessing the sustainability performances of industries,
Carin Labuschagnea, Alan C. Brent a and Ron P. G. van Erckb,
Department of Engineering and Technology Management, University of
Pretoria, Room 4-12, Engineering 2, Pretoria 0002, South Africa and
Department of Technology Management, Technical University
Eindhoven, Eindhoven, The Netherlands
[12] Communications to Promote Interest and Participation »
Chapter 7. Encouraging Involvement in Community Work » Section 8.
Identifying and Analyzing Stakeholders and Their Interests » Main
Section.
http://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/participation/encouraging-involvement/identify-stakeholders/main
[13] Sustainable development in agricultural sector in India,
The Business & Management Review, Volume 5 Number 4, January
2015, Krishna H. Shukla and Nitin U. Dwivedi
[14] Economic, social, and environmental sustainability in
development theory and urban planning practice, The
Environmentalist 19, 145]161 1999, 1999 Kluwer Academic Publishers,
Boston. Manufactured in the Netherlands by A.D. BASIAGO.
https://www.amherst.edu/system/files/media/0972/fulltext.pdf
[15] Social sustainability practices in the supply chain of
Indian manufacturing industries Venkatesh Mani University of Porto,
Rajat Agrawal Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee,
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281584819
[16] IBM SPSS Statistics Base 25, IBM Corporation 1989, 2017
ftp://public.dhe.ibm.com/software/analytics/spss/documentation/statistics/25.0/en/client/Manuals/IBM_SPSS_Statistics_Base.pdf
http://blog.taigacompany.com/blog/sustainability-business-life-environment/business-sustainability-culture-change-2014-food-for-thoughthttp://blog.taigacompany.com/blog/sustainability-business-life-environment/business-sustainability-culture-change-2014-food-for-thoughthttp://ctb.ku.edu/en/promoting-interest-and-participation-initiativeshttp://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/participation/encouraging-involvementhttp://ctb.ku.edu/en/community-tool-box-toc/promoting-interest-and-participation-initiatives/chapter-7-encouraging-33http://ctb.ku.edu/en/community-tool-box-toc/promoting-interest-and-participation-initiatives/chapter-7-encouraging-33http://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/participation/encouraging-involvement/identify-stakeholders/mainhttps://www.amherst.edu/system/files/media/0972/fulltext.pdfhttps://www.researchgate.net/publication/281584819