Work Life Balance pays off

One of my favorite pieces of reading is HR Magazine, which plops into my postbox each month. I find this is always choc-a-bloc with relevant and insightful, informative and entertaining articles which I both enjoy and learn from. The website is pretty good too, and HR Magazine is one of the few publications which always includes a CSR-HR perspective. Some of you may recall that I was a guest speaker at an HR Magazine event last year. Since then, I keep a keen eye on what they are publishing.

A recent article caught my eye (the same eye!). It's called: Work/life balance ranks higher than stress as the biggest health concern for employers, says GRiD. GRiD is Group Risk Development, and they advise as follows:

"After enduring a difficult year where many businesses were obliged to reduce headcount, the survey of 500 employers with 5-1000 employees from the trade body for the group risk industry, found maintaining a good work/life balance for staff remaining in the business ranked as the top health issue for more than one in five employers (21%). This is ahead of stress and mental health issues (19%) - currently cited as the most common cause for workplace absence."

This is a fascinating finding and should make HR Managers sit up. Work/life balance has been one of those amorphous subjects that doesn't quite seem important enough to address in a detailed, formal, structured way.  It's sort of about how people feel and not really a hard numbers easy-to-grasp issue. It's also very easy to ignore. And yet, an uncaring and inflexible work culture can be one of the biggest hidden costs of any business budget and can, to a large degree, be quantified in cost terms related to productivity, absenteeism, health costs, workplace conflict and customer service. 

Volkswagen made news recently when they took a step to force employees to observe work/life balance rules by introducing a ban on work emails outside work hours on employee's cellphones by blocking Blackberry servers. This is an interesting development and may go some way to limit employees' exposure to unreasonable work demands outside hours. However, releasing employees from commitments outside work hours is only one part of a holistic approach to work/life balance issues. A lot of what affects work/life balance relates to how many hours people work and the kind of programs that are in place while they are at work. In 2011, the Quebec Government thought this whole subject was so important that they launched a program for rewarding employers who provide work-life balance benefits to employees.

In my book, CSR for HR, I address this subject. First, I say that there is no such thing as work/life balance - balance is something that we can almost never achieve and sometimes don't want to achieve. Basically, we need to achieve a harmonious stressless approach to managing out total life responsibilities which derive from all our activities in work and outside work. These can be multiple. It's not just about work and family. Here are just some (definitely not an exhaustive list) of the aspects of being at work that can affect the way we manage our total life responsibilities:

And here are some of the overall types of programs and policies that HR Managers can consider in order to assist employees in addressing the way work can fit into their overall harmonious life planning.

We have seen that overall wellness programs in business, which often include elements which affect work/life balance, can deliver a 10% increase in financial performance. So, HR Managers, it is time to wake up to CSR!

And back to HR Magazine, you might enjoy this article which quotes research that found by giving employees input into the development of their workspace, productivity can improve by as much as 32%.

Or this article, which refers to research that found almost two thirds (64%), of employers do not expect female employees to return to work after their maternity leave; of which 47%, say they believe this because of 'previous experience.' Now that's a whole other issue which is of major significance both for women and for businesses. But we should leave that for another post.

In the meantime, I think an ice cream just about right now would significantly improve my work/life balance!

elaine cohen, CSR consultant, Sustainabilty Reporter, HR Professional, Author of CSR for HR: A necessary partnership for advancing responsible business practices. Contact me via www.twitter.com/elainecohen  on Twitter or via my website www.b-yond.biz/en  

Keeping up with CSR for HR

So much is happening in CSR for HR these days. This post is to help you (and me) keep up.

First, two forthcoming events on different sides of the world which I am immensely looking forward to:

7th February in London: The CIPD, the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, Europe's largest HR and development professional body, is hosting a conference on CR for HR Professionals. I don't recall seeing a dedicated conference on this subject ever, so this is a very welcome development. The conference opens with the brilliant Jonathon Porritt, Founder Director of Forum for the Future, who will talk about the business case for sustainability and then an impressive array of Sustainability and HR Professionals from IBM, KPMG, Prudential, Aviva, Nationwide and more, will lead presentations and discussions on employee engagement, employer branding, aligning CR and business strategies and communication of CSR to employees, and other fascinating CSR-HR topics. I am looking forward to attending, and also holding a raffle for 5 free signed copies of CSR for HR during the course of the day.

16-18th February in Mumbai, India: The 20th Anniversary event of the World HRD Congress will take place in Mumbai at the Taj Lands' End Hotel. It's been over 10 years since I visited Mumbai, so I am especially pleased to be returning to address this congress. My session, entitled: "Sustainable HRM: A strategic imperative" will be from 11:15 - 12:00 on 17th February. I am looking forward to hearing perspectives on CSR/HR Management from many local professionals and am honored to join an impressive list of speakers from all over the globe.

And another event which I unfortunately cannot attend but which is worth noticing. It has been put together by a friend and colleague who contributed to my book, CSR for HR, Cathy Joseph. It is in New York next week, January 10th at 5:30pm and is all about Organizational Development and the Sustainable Business, and features great speakers. I would be there if I could!

In the meantime, even the Carbon Trust has published a tool to help empower employees reduce carbon emissions in the office.  After registering on the website, you can launch the Empower tool, explore your office, take a trip to the bathroom, kitchen or server room, all the while checking out opportunities to save on lighting, water, packaging waste, use stairs instead of elevators, bicycles instead of cars, unplug your mobile phone chargers and more, as your responses to intended behavioral change clock up kg of carbon emissions saved and new policies to suggest to your manager. It's rather simplistic, but any HR Manager intent on having employees understand where they can make a basic difference, could incorporate this into broader environmental training, if supported by policy and some form of measurement of achievement. I already saved 547 kg of carbon in half a dozen pledges to do things differently. Oops, but that's just on the computer screen. Let's see what happens on Monday morning.

 

Also, a couple of very interesting publications you might have missed:

 

Towards Employee Engagement 2.0: A report by Greenbiz.com and the National Environmental Education Foundation (NEEF), the third report on this subject produced by NEEF’s Business & Environment Program, examining how leading companies are moving toward a more strategic approach to employee engagement in corporate sustainability activities by creating a culture of sustainability throughout their firms. This one has examples from Baxter, JC Penney, Stonyfield Farm and Walmart and more and is a useful and interesting read.

 

Brighter Planet's Greening the Workplace Survey 2011: A total of 972 individuals from 51 countries and 47 US states completed the survey. Key conclusions:

• Organizations are increasingly engaging employees on sustainability. More than half now promote sustainability frequently or very frequently.
• Although engagement efforts are spreading, their effectiveness has dropped. The most successful organizations have official policies with upper-level leadership.
• The role of investor pressure and corporate accountability as a driver of sustainability strategies increased dramatically—it was a factor at 23% of organizations, up from 13% in 2009. Sales and marketing, while the foremost motivator, was unchanged at 30%.
• The most effective programs promote sustainability in emerging areas like business travel, purchasing, water use, and food at much higher rates than their ineffective counterparts. That said, the most common areas of sustainability engagement are still waste and recycling, energy use, and commuting.
• Organizations with a method for employees to share ideas were more than six times as likely to have a very effective program. 41% of employers support these communication channels.
• Organizations that collected data on their footprint, the impact of staff travel and commuting, and employee sustainability efforts were roughly three times as likely to have a very effective program. The number of employers collecting these data increased 15% since 2009, to three in ten.

HR Managers need to think about these findings. What processes to HR Managers need to put in place to support environmental practices? Helping employees share ideas and collecting data (highlighted in red above) seem to have big multiplier effects. Makes absolute sense to me.

So, while all this is positive, I don't quite think it is time yet to abandon my mantra:  "It is time for HR to wake up to CSR".  More HR Managers need to get engaged and make use of all these fabulous opportunities to drive improved sustainability through leverage of core HR tools and new processes. Here's looking forward to a great 2012 in which more HR Managers take the bait.

 

 

elaine cohen, CSR consultant, Sustainability Reporter, HR Professional, Author of CSR for HR: A necessary partnership for advancing responsible business practices. Contact me via www.twitter.com/elainecohen  on Twitter or via my website www.b-yond.biz/en

CSR for HR begins at home

The new Do Well Do Good Public Opinion Survey on Sustainability survey has just been published. The survey was conducted through an online panel organized by Qualtrics Labs, Inc. between October 28 and November 2, 2011 with 1,001 respondents consisting of 500 women and 501 men on behalf of Do Well Do Good, LLC. The report contains a wealth of perspectives and insights about the way consumers view the responsibilities of corporations, for example, these top level findings:

 

Support for Sustainability: 83% of consumers think companies should try to accomplish their business goals while still trying to improve society and the environment, down from 88% in last-year’s survey.

Leadership: 70% believe that corporate CEOs hold a high level of responsibility for their company’s impacts on the environment, employees, and the larger community.

Climate Change: Nearly 64% agree that climate change is real and 65% agree that human activities have contributed to it and 48% claim to have been affected personally by climate change.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions: 78% of consumers believe that companies should decrease their emissions of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide, but 40% and less believe that companies in the United States or in their own communities are looking for ways to do so.

 

However, what caught my eye was this:

 

Choosing from a list of 17 issues, respondents were asked to rate how important it was for companies to address them. The top five most important issues represent a cross section of social, environmental and governance topics, namely:

1. Pay employees competitive wages and benefits (e.g. health care, pension)
2. Provide training and educational opportunities for employees
3. Effectively manage their use of energy
4. Be honest and transparent about their business practices and manufacturing processes
5. Ensure that their suppliers respect human rights

See that? The TOP THINGS that consumers want companies to do when they consider responsible behaviors is treat their employees right - care for their economic and professional wellbeing. 

CSR for HR is not just something that companies should do to make themselves feel good. Consumers are noticing! Every employee is also a consumer. Company practices are an open secret. When I started to work for a multi-national corporation over 25 years ago, I was told that my salary is personal and I should keep it to myself. Would that fly today? Corporate practices are so transparent that those companies which do not deal with the core issues of how their CSR and Sustainability practices are embedded in all management decisions may lose not only the best talent but also consumers.

Is there better proof that it is time for HR to wake up to CSR?


elaine cohen, CSR consultant, Sustainability Reporter, HR Professional, Author of CSR for HR: A necessary partnership for advancing responsible business practices. Contact me via www.twitter.com/elainecohen  on Twitter or via my website www.b-yond.biz/en

I am not a human resource : 10 tips for handling layoffs

I read an interesting article in India's Business Line about the way Bank of America is handing layoffs of 30,000 people over two years.

The author reports:

"I called a friend who works at the bank to ask if the company had announced a schedule internally of how and where the lay-offs would take place, and how employees could find more information about it. She said she didn't know much more about it than what was reported in the papers, and employees were calling one another to find out if anyone knows more. "

The article goes on  to discuss the logic of decisions to reduce headcount ("When personnel costs are a major part of the business, it is so much easier to reduce the numbers employed and show quick results, rather than find and execute new growth opportunities.") but perhaps more importantly, the way in which such massive layoffs are executed. The article concludes with a classic sentence : "One protestor in the Occupy Boston movement held a sign that read: “I'm not a human resource. I'm a human being.” I guess that said it all." 

This reminds me of Anita Roddick's iconic statement which I have quoted for years, which she wrote in her book, Business as Unusual: "We were searching for employees but people turned up instead!" Yes, it's true. People are entire microcosms and each one is a link in a very large social chain. Companies which believe people are simply "resources" to be hired and fired depending on the way the numbers on the balance sheet show up on a given day are sorely missing the essence of sustainable business. Companies which take a nonchalant attitude to layoffs are destroying much of the social value they create in other ways. 

When I was ah HR Director with Unilever, we, regrettably, had to take a decision to close down a production plant employing 100 people. The plant had been operating for many years and it was loss-making to continue manufacturing at that site. There were many ethical issues to deal with arising from the decision to close the site, not least of which was when to advise employees. On the one hand, why not tell them as early as possible to enable them to prepare effectively for closure? On the other hand, the plant needed to continue operating until closure and if people know the plant will close, they may leave early or reduce motivation or productivity . Catch 22.

We ended up on the side of giving employees almost one year notice of intention to close the factory. Then, we worked with every single employee to offer relocation, outplacement support and provide financial and other assistance. By the time the plant gates shut for the last time, all employees had a solution - some were relocated to another plant, some had found jobs, some retired and some were in vocational retraining programs. Some had left, by agreement, during the closure notice period, with full severance benefits, to enable them to take another job much earlier than their scheduled release. The factory continued production right up until the last unit on the production schedule. While employees would probably have preferred to keep the plant open, everyone agreed that the way the plant was closed was responsible, fair, supportive and decent. What was the cost? Probably a lot less than if we had given the statutory month's notice and left people to fend for themselves.

How do you release employees in a fair and responsible manner? Some guidelines from my personal experience:

Provide timely information: Advise employees as early as possible after a firm decision has been made. Don't let them hear it first from the newspapers. Present the rationale for closure while emphasizing your commitment to the wellbeing of employees through the change. Emphasize values and principles in the way the company is approaching the closure or layoffs. Make sure employees know that the "what" is hard but the "how" will be carefully and caringly supported. Equally, in the case of downsizing, keep up a strong communication line with employees who will remain with the business. Their morale and peace of mind is just as seriously affected by layoffs of colleagues and their concern both for friends and for themselves (maybe they will be laid off in the next round ?) needs to be managed no less sensitively.

Engage the unions: If employees are represented by a Union or Employee Association, work closely and respectfully with the representatives. Keep talking. Stay open and honest. Remember that severance terms may seem high in the short term but they protect the business interests in the long term - within reason, be generous.

See the individuals: Work with employees to understand their personal circumstances and the implications of the change for them and their families. Each employee has individual needs. A collective severance package may not be the right approach for everyone. It is worth understanding where employees are in their life-cycle and what kind of assistance would be most relevant for them during a difficult period of change.

Involve families when appropriate: Sometimes the blow of layoff may affect the family as much as it affects the employee. A husband or wife, or even children, may find the stress of mom or dad losing their job very difficult to handle. Practically it might affect personal plans such as pension options, housing situation, higher education plans or payments for ongoing medical needs etc. If appropriate, for those employees where this is critical, involve the families, talk to them as well, help them to understand the company decision and the support it can provide. This may seem like overkill to some, but not all employees will need this and for those that do, it can make the difference between getting the best out of the layoff situation and becoming immobilized by double stress.

Be clear about severance terms and conditions: Make sure every employee knows her or his precise entitlement upon departure from the company. Help employees understand what this means - how much actually will be left after they have received severance pay, paid taxes, managed insurance policies etc. What holiday pay is still due to them? What other payments will they receive?

Provide practical assistance where it is needed. Some employees might require early retirement preparation and support for managing personal finances. Some might require retraining. Some might need outplacement services to help them prepare for a job. Longer-serving employees might not have been on the job market for 15 years or more - preparing a resume or handing an interview will be as easy for them as doing a PhD. Some employees might want to start an own business and may need some referrals. Be flexible in providing what is needed, not just a standard one-size-fits-all package.

Proactively locate alternative jobs: Contact all potential employers in the area and try to match their needs with those of the employees you are relasing. Do what's necessary to open up opportunities which might not have automatically appeared on the radar.

Train all managers to be sensitive, supportive and responsive. Managers may not have the authority to change a decision to release employees but they all have the opportunity to be caring and supportive. Make sure managers talk with "one voice" and present an aligned picture to employees.

Smile in the face of adversity. Employees need you to maintain a positive and optimistic, confident approach. Losing a job may seem like the worst thing in the world, but it can often represent an opportunity. While that's not easy to hear for most when faced with a redundancy notice, a sensitive but optimistic approach can help them grasp the positive and not get stuck in the negative.

Keep talking: Even when you have nothing to say, say it. Create opportunities to talk about the situation and let people vent while reinforcing possible opportunities. Celebrate when employees find alternative solutions. Keep people informed. Answer the tough questions. Be open. This may well be the most important topic of conversation for employees for months. Join them. Keep telling them what you know, even if it's not significantly different from what you told them before.

In summary, managing layoffs is real CSR-HR stuff and HR Managers must bear responsibility for the way this is handled, even if they are not responsible for the business decision to downsize. Ultimately, this approach will strengthen the business.

elaine cohen, CSR consultant, Sustainability Reporter, HR Professional, Author of CSR for HR: A necessary partnership for advancing responsible business practices. Contact me via www.twitter.com/elainecohen  on Twitter or via my website www.b-yond.biz/en

Too little, but not too late: gender equality

I came accross two pieces of news yesterday:

The first:

The first woman on Henkel’s Management Board

The second:

2020 Women on Boards Releases 2020 Gender Diversity Index

The Gender Diversity Index data shows that the average percentage of women on Fortune 500 Boards of Directors is 16.42%, based on research from the 2020 Women on Boards organization, whose  objective is to have 20% of women on corporate boards by 2020. The current status ranges from 32% in the winning boards and 10% of companies which had zero female Board Members. After all these years, and all the fights, campaigns, programs and commitments made,  female representation in the largest 500 companies in the USA remains at 16.42% on average. And the fact that some consider 20% by 2020 to be an inspiring objective is just plain sad.

However, Henkel are doing their bit to advance women, through the appointment of Kathrin Menges as the first woman on the Management Board. The first ever woman since Henkels' founding 135 years ago. This is the team she joins:

What a great diverse bunch! And now they have Kathrin Menges. Well done!

Henkel has a great blog all about diversity and inclusion. Full of information and stories about what Henkel is doing to create an inclusive culture.

One aspect of diversity is gender balance. I looked at how many women there are overall in Henkel's team - from their 2010 online Sustainability Report, we can see that women are still very much a minority:

My only question is: why on earth did it take 135 years to get one woman on the Management Board? And will it take another 135 years for the second?

elaine cohen, CSR consultant, Sustainability Reporter, HR Professional, Author of CSR for HR: A necessary partnership for advancing responsible business practices.  Contact me via www.twitter.com/elainecohen  on Twitter or via my website www.b-yond.biz/en

Executive Briefing :HR's role in CSR

Just published!! The Society for Human Resources Management (SHRM) Foundation Executive Briefing on HR's Role in Corporate Responsibility and Sustainability. Produced in partnership with the World Federation of People Management Associations (WFPMA) and the North American Human Resource Management Association (NAHRMA), this report explores the important role HR can play in both developing and implementing sustainability strategy.

Download this briefing here!

The Executive Briefing is authored by :

Sully Taylor : Professor of International Management and former associate dean for graduate programs at the School of Business Administration, Portland State University. She has published extensively in international HRM, global mindset, leadership and corporate cultures, and also teaches sustainable HRM and leadership. She is currently a guest editor of Human Resource Management Journal for a special issue on sustainable HRM.

Michael Muller-Camen : Professor of International HRM at Middlesex University Business School in London and has a chair in HRM at Vienna University of Economics and Business. He has published extensively in international HRM, green HRM and age management, and is the co-editor of a special issue of Zeitschrift fur Personalforschung (German Journal for Research in Human Resource Management) on green HRM.

and myself.

It has been a privilege to work with two such distinguished academics on this Briefing. Our work continues as we collaborate on a more extensive report for publication next year covering Best Practice Guidelines for HR Managers. Watch this space!

elaine cohen, CSR consultant, Sustainability Reporter, HR Professional, Author of CSR for HR: A necessary partnership for advancing responsible business practices.  Contact me via www.twitter.com/elainecohen  on Twitter or via my website www.b-yond.biz/en

CSR for HR: Romania rocks!

I am delighted to announce the first foreign edition of CSR for HR in Romanian which is now available for purchase online and called "Responsabilitatea socială corporatistă în sprijinul resurselor umane". It was translated by Daniela-Giorgiana Arşinel şi Marius Chitoşcă, who had a mammoth task, as my language is often not very conventional (I confess to often making up words as I go along!)

I am grateful to the Post-Privatization Foundation for their idea and willingness to translate and publish this edition. The Post-Privatization Foundation (FPP) is the first Romanian foundation devoted solely to entrepreneurship. Created in 1996 by the European Commission, FPP is a private organization that promotes entrepreneurial education and supports initiatives aimed at the sustainable development of the Romanian business environment – with a focus on small and medium-sized enterprises. I had the pleasure of meeting the Executive Director, Péter Barta and hearing about the outstanding work the foundation is doing.

"Responsabilitatea socială corporatistă în sprijinul resurselor umane" was launched at the LBG Annual Conference on 12th September, organized by the LBG Representatives in Romania, ARC Romania. LBG is a model that evaluates and enhances community project performance that was mainly designed for companies. ARC, the Association for Community Relations, is an organization which matches corporate philanthropy and capacity building activities with non-profit causes and has been doing magnificent work in Romania for the past ten years. The LBG has six members in Romania including BDR Societe Generale, Lafarge, Orange, Danone, Ursus Breweries and Raiffeisen Bank whose total corporate community investment is equivalent to 14.5 million Euros with a beneficiary group of 720,000 individuals in 2010. Member companies reach an average of 28% employee volunteering which is high by any standards.

During the conference, I was honored to share the stage with a range of impressive individuals such as Toby Webb, Ethical Corporation founder, John Scade, LBG representative in Spain, Adela Jansen, Executive Director of Human Resources at BRD Societe Generale, Ramona Gotteszman, Community Impact Manager at United Way Foundation Romania,  Suzana Gras, CSR Manager at Raiffeisen Bank and more. Catalin Gheorghe, ARC's Communication Director facilitated the conference, and Ioana Satzmari, LBG Program Manager  presented LBG's annual results for 2010.

The conference content was most interesting, ranging from a discussion of the impacts of corporate community investment, to an overview of CSR and regulatory developments, to the way the CSR - HR partnership is practiced in leading Romanian companies and a view of tax developments and corporate tax relief considerations for local companies. I was interested to learn from Toby Webb, who now uses the term "smarter business" instead of CSR, about the forthcoming regulation in the EU which is likely to be law by end 2013, requiring EU countries to regulate locally for CSR disclosure by companies. You can find his presentation here. Adela Jansen and Suzana Gras both made excellent presentations showing that CSR (and HR) can really make a difference in the ways companies work and lead to more sustainable results.

I presented on the subject of my regular mantra, focusing on the partnership that CSR and HR needs to forge in order for both to deliver optimum results.  Here is my presentation:

CSR for HR - why partnership is necessary

View more presentations from elaine cohen.

Finally, the conference ended with great excitement with the launch of CSR for HR in Romanian and a book giveaway by lottery! I am grateful to ARC and FPP for their generous support.

I didn't manage to get see much of the city of Bucharest, though I do think this is probably my most favorite sight:

Tasted pretty good, too. But don't tell anyone .......

elaine cohen, CSR consultant, Sustainability Reporter, HR Professional, Author of CSR for HR: A necessary partnership for advancing responsible business practices. Contact me via www.twitter.com/elainecohen  on Twitter or via my website www.b-yond.biz/en

17 DJSI super sector leaders fail at CSR Employer Branding

So many companies claim to have embedded CSR into their core strategies. So many companies issue Sustainability Reports about their sustainability performance. So many students claim that they would like to join a company with a good social responsibility record. So why is the HR function not leveraging this valuable platform in their employer branding and offering to potential new recruits?

This week, the new Dow Jones Sustainability Leaders list was published. The list of Super Sector leaders, the most sustainable companies in the world, according to the DJSI, looks like this:

How many of these companies are exploiting this sustainability-super-sector-leadership in their Employer Brand? Let's take a quick look:

Air France KLM - Working at KLM

While the Air France KLM corporate website does have a section on Corporate Responsibility, a visit to the corporate job site won't inspire your sustainability sensitivities, even though, there too, there is a short summary of why KLM tops the DJSI list every year. "Passion, energy, drive and brainpower are common traits of KLM team members".  Social responsibility, apparently, isn't worth a mention. 

BMW AG Careers website invites you to be part of the success. The focus here is on performance orientation, flexible working hours, family and career and pay and benefits. While the website navigation bar includes CSR, so the prospective candidate searching the careers site may be tempted to have a look, the careers page itself gives no hint that new hires at BMW will be doing anything more fulfilling than selling more cars.

I couldn't find a careers section on the Enagas SA website though you can find a short Human Resources policy, committing the company to fair and decent labor practices, but not necessarily to provide jobs with meaning.

The Hyundai Engineering and Construction Company Ltd also does not have a careers section, through the company has a lot of sustainability messaging on the website. Maybe they are not hiring? Similarly, the Brazilian Itausa-Investimentos Itau S/A does nothing to attract grads other than the presence of a Sustainability Report on the website, while Koninklijke DSM N.V. gets closer to making the company sound attractive to the sustainably minded  grads, asking them:  "Do you see your work in the context of society and the planet at large?"

Koninklijke Philips Electronics N.V.(or Philips to most of us) doesn't go the extra mile on its careers website, stressing  a diverse choice of ways that grads can use their talents. Is that it?

The Japanese KT Corp has no careers information on their website, nor does the Lotte Shopping Company, but Pearson plc does make the case for "getting excited about job opportunities", though, regrettably, not because of sustainability.

And then we get to Pepsico. Given Indra Nooyi's claims about the attractions of working for a company which puts Performance with Purpose first, you might expect the company's website to be attractive for students interested in sustainability. You would be right.  Why work at Pepsico? Culture, diversty, benefits, development. And what's culture? Performance with Purpose, of course. Pepsico is the first company I come across as I run down the Super Sector leaderboard which aligns its employer branding with its corporate branding and with a sustainability theme. Hurrah!

The people of Pepsico are an inspiring bunch, and all have something to say about both Performance and Purpose.

PostNL NV is the Dutch postal service with over 77,000 employees. Those interested in sustainability apparently didn't get inspired by the PostNL website which does not have a careers section, while Repsol YPF SA does list the ten reasons you might want to work for Repsol and number three (following "worldwide energy company" and working on a "solid business project") is  that Repsol is "committed to society". 

Roche Holding AG on the other hand, has the most compelling sustainability related careers proposition on the company's global careers portal.

This is a clear link between the employer brand and the company's business purpose. It promises a career which is about personal growth AND a contribution to society.

Samsung Electronics careers website runs with the theme of working for a world-class company which is passionate about its people (how original!). Nothing related to sustainability. Stockland in Australia has a careers section on their website. The company lists two days of paid personal volunteering leave as one of the benefits employees can expect to receive though the company values do not relate to sustainability. Swiss Re Ltd, global insurer, also has a website careers section which lists some of the company's do-gooding projects.

Westpac Banking Corp, a company whose approach to CSR and sustainability I have long admired (and featured in my book, CSR for HR), has a surprisingly drab careers section and the "Westpac as an employer" page is about as boring as you can get, with no connection to the corporate sustainability strategy, except for a section about values. The People Policies page starts out with a section entitled "Harassment and Discrimination"  which maybe specifically material in Westpac's business but it's hardly a reflection of how corporate polices advance corporate sustainability strategy.

Finally, Xstrata, a global mining group, tells students why they should choose an Xtrata career. Why? Because you can embrace your entrepreneurial spirit. Sustainability? Who knows?

So there we have it. 19 leaders of the leaders of the leading sustainability-driven companies worldwide are barely making the connection between their leadership in sustainability and their potential to attract employees who are interested in working for sustainability-leading companies. Of these 19 companies, 6 (32%) do not have a careers section on their website and only two (10%)  link their Employer Brand in a credible and inspiring way with their sustainability-driven corporate purpose. Well done Pepsico and Roche!

As for the other 17 companies, what a wasted opportunity! Where is the HR function in these companies and why hasn't the HR function woken up to the fact that the corporate website is probably the most relevant and important place to showcase the corporate Employer Brand which should be aligned with the corporate sustainability strategy?  While it's been a  l-o----n-----g  time since I graduated, and things were different back then (people talked security, not opportunity), I feel sure that today, especially if I were graduating from a Green MBA program or similar, that I would be interested in knowing not only whether the company has a sustainability strategy (and learning about it though the corporate Sustainability Report) but also I would like to know what opportunities there would be for ME to contribute to creating a better, more sustainable world. Only Pepsico and Roche make this connection. If I were HR Manager of all the other 17 companies in this list, I would be getting my act together and using the corporate website as my most prominent mouthpiece, in a way which aligns with both sustainability and recruitment needs.

HR Managers, wake up!!! CSR Managers and Chief Sustainability Officers, why are you not insisting that your hard work in driving sustainable practices in your company is not leveraged as a tool to help your company win the war for talent? Employer Branding is a key tool in the arsenal of the CSO to showcase your company's sustainability culture, to appeal to the new pool of sustainability-aware green-minded, human-rights-supporting, social-justice-oriented, exceptionally intelligent young graduates of today. Sustainability is a key differentiator. With the exception of Pepsico and Roche, nothing else sets these DJSI leaders apart from the bunch. And if I read one more careers website that says "we are passionate about people" I will probably have to go drown myself in a vat of ice cream.  

It is time for HR Managers to wake up to CSR. It is time for CSR Managers to wake up to HR.

elaine cohen, CSR consultant, Sustainability Reporter, HR Professional, Author of CSR for HR: A necessary partnership for advancing responsible business practices.  Contact me via www.twitter.com/elainecohen  on Twitter or via my website www.b-yond.biz/en

Can you afford not to let your employees work from home?

The question of what kind of policy to adopt regarding working from home is always a tough one for HR Managers. In a CSR-enabled organization, which values the overall well-being of a key stakeholder group, employees, flexible working is an attractive option (as part of an overall work-life management approach) when it can reasonably be integrated with job requirements, agreed boundaries are defined and a communications infrastructure is in place. A handy, fun decision-tree which was posted on Facebook today made me think about this a little more. Here is the link to decision-tree. It might not be entirely relevant for everyone (one of the questions in the decision tree is: Does the employee work with deadly viruses or flesh-eating bacteria?!) but the basic approach is worth considering.

For years, home working was not seen as an attractive option, but that was mainly based on myths that in most cases can be managed to ensure employee productivity and effectiveness. Issues cited to prove that home working is not effective include:

• Managers can never quite know what employees are doing and whether they are working all the required hours.
• Employees are distracted by children, laundry, TV repairmen, personal phonecalls, afternoon naps, mother popping in, ice-cream breaks and more.
• It's too easy for employees not to be available just when you want them.
• Employees can disappear and go to job interviews on your time.
• Employees' home internet connection always seems to go into downtime just before a project deadline.
• Information security issues - maybe employees are storing company secrets on their home computers and sharing them with all their friends, or even worse, your competitors.
• Some managers just can't manage remote employees effectively. Or don't want to.

In a CSR-enabled workplace, the Corporate Social Human Resources (CSHR) Manager sees working from home as an opportunity, rather than a problem, and one which ultimately has many benefits including a positive ROI. Telecommuting, as it called, has many benefits for employees, employers and the community.

The following is a great list which I did not invent, you can find it on a fabulous site which contains just about anything you might want to know about telecommuting: Telecommute Connecticut! - the commuter service of the Connecticut Department of Transportation which offers a comprehensive resource that helps employers design, implement and maintain a telecommuting program that enhances the bottom line and makes them the employer of choice.

This is the list as it appears on the Telecommute website:

Employer Benefits

Employee Retention

Many companies use telecommuting as a perk to attract and retain top talent.

Expand Recruiting Options

Home-based work gives organizations the ability to attract a wider range of workers, including the physically challenged, parents with young children, people with elder care responsibilities and members of dual-career families.

Reduced Overhead

Telecommuting enables employers to share work space and reduce the need for parking spaces and alleviates the need for office expansion as their workforce expands.

Increased Productivity

Telecommuters and their managers report that workers get more done when out of the office.

Reduced Absences

According to the National Center for Health Statistics, colds force American workers to miss 20 million workdays a year. The flu accounts for another 70 million missed workdays. Telecommuters continue to work at home with a cold or other minor ailments that may have kept them out of the office. Also, fewer sick employees at work reduces the spread of germs and illnesses around the office.

Employee Benefits

Improved Work/Life Balance

The average American spends about 1.5 hours daily commuting to and from work. Telecommuters spend more time with family and less time on the road.

Stress Reduction

Those who telecommute experience less stress caused by commuting, including physical discomfort, air pollution and noise.

Savings

Telecommuters save an estimated $1,200/year on fuel costs alone, and even more when considering wear and tear on their cars.

Increased Productivity

Telecommuters are more productive and produce better quality work because they work in a quiet environment with minimal interruptions and have an increased ability to focus on specific work tasks.

Business Continuity

Companies with telecommuters keep going in spite of the environment, weather or other disasters that may keep employees out of the office.

Community Benefits

Reduced Traffic Congestion

Traffic congestion has become worse in practically every large metropolitan area. Delays are growing by a 41 percent average since 1990 and commuters are wasting three times as long dealing with delays than they did 20 years ago. Economists say it costs tens of billions of dollars in lost productivity and employee turnover annually as workers, goods and materials are delayed.

Reduced Auto Emissions That Contribute to Air Pollution

Reducing auto emissions isn't the main reason for most employers to offer telecommuting. One exception: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which permits up to 30 percent of its 18,000-strong workforce to telecommute one or two days each week, partly because it helps reduce auto emissions.

Less Gas Consumption

Telecommuting twice weekly can conserve resources through reduced gas consumption

Any organization who wants to assess its readiness for telecommuting can do so using the Telecommute Connecticut readiness checklist.

Telecommuting options, then, should be one of the radar-topics of the sustainability-minded HR Manager. One of the most challenging aspects of implementing such a policy may well be persuading the managers in the organization that it's worth their while. But with such a strong list of benefits, with a tangible and measurable ROI, the HR Manager has a good basis for making a strong case and delivering a strong HR contribution. In this regard, as so many others, it is time for HR to wake up to CSR!

Oh and by the way, one more cost of non-CSHR management just popped into my inbox via the Ethisphere newsletter: "3M will pay $3 million to settle age-bias suit" for laying off hundreds of employees over the age of 45.

elaine cohen, CSR consultant, Sustainabilty Reporter, HR Professional, Author of CSR for HR: A necessary partnership for advancing responsible business practices. http://www.greenleaf-publishing.com/productdetail.kmod?productid=3282 Contact me via www.twitter.com/elainecohen  on Twitter or via my website www.b-yond.biz/en