I ask prompted by current UK news coverage - economic gloom compounded by the weather, which for us in rain soaked London is indeed the 'perfect storm'.

But also having co-hosted an event this morning with our friends at Opinion Leader Research – for which I was joined by celebrated economist Paul Ormerod, OLR Marketing Director Nicola Austin, and Co-Chair of Corporate Citizenship, Amanda Jordan.

We heard a number of powerful contributions (that you can hear for yourself on forceforgood.com here):

Paul Ormerod was fascinating, and forgive me whilst the former economist in me 'goes off on one': he made the general point that, like an earthquake, it does not need a massive event to trigger a recession; he went on to comment that massive recessions can happen in peace-time; and that if there is a recession it could be deep, as there so much debt out there – pointing in particular to the ratio of house: general prices, which has risen substantially, with the result that huge debt now has to be squeezed out of the system.  For Ormerod this was explained by the ‘wholly irresponsible policies’ of many major western governments, creating massive debt, which was not called back in.

But the good news, and potentially it is very good news, is that every recession since 1870 has not lasted long -  two thirds lasted less than one year.  So it is worth asking how best to survive, as it is practical to manage and plan ‘through’ the recession.  Western economies, he concluded, are resilient and can survive.

Nicola made a number of very telling points, arguing that CSR for consumers is now far more intrinsic than it has been previously.  She noted that there is no precedent for what is happening now given that we have enjoyed 15 years of uninterrupted affluence.

There is the possibility of a ‘soft squeeze’ from new forms of cost-exposure, which questions what is discretionary nowadays – there has been a shift from aspiration to expectation in relation to, for example, holidays which will condition how people react. 

Under the theme of ‘values to value’, Nicola predicted the rise of ‘frugal chic’, such that making savings will be ‘cool’, especially if this is shared not only by early adopters but also with the middle classes and beyond.

Emphasising the importance of the link between the audience, issue and the sector, she counselled against those who ‘drop’ issues when the going gets tough because of the cynicism that arises.  Traditional communication strategies are not enough she concluded, citing survey results which conclude that 79% of those asked say that companies need to prove they are ethical, not just say it.  In this context, being smarter, depends on how best to segment the audience, identifying social influencers, and linking to word of mouth to play to advantage or secure early warning.

Nicola urged that we learn from other disciplines, such as the need for achieving the discipline required  for permanent campaigning, citing the example of Dove ‘self esteem fund’, running across media, permanently, across national boundaries, keeping a single tone of voice.  Consider then two examples from Tesco: the ‘less co2’ on freight trucks, resulting in 20% reductions in C02 due to the transfer from lorries to freight vs, the negative publicity received as a result of the recent TV chef campaign on factory chickens

Finally, she celebrated the example of Innocent ‘smoothie’ bottle hats - all being hand knitted, with no less than  400,720 being knitted and put on bottles last year; and 50p per hat given to Age Concern.  It would not be possible to cut back on CSR programmes in such deeply rooted examples, Nicola argued.

Amanda Jordan began by commenting that Wallmark and Nike are now the biggest purchasers of organic cotton; she reminded us of the backlash against ‘green washing’ in advertising, with a big rise in complaints, upheld by ASA, which amounts to an expensive waste of advertising; she underlined her argument by talking about the loss of reputation suffered by Primark, questioning whether for such cheap goods, low costs will be sustainable; and she went on to compare what is happening in other parts of the globe, where business is booming and CR is very much on the agenda  (And lest we in the West become complacent Amanda reminded us that those in the Middle East would if challenged on labour standards respond by questioning the very notion of ‘responsible gaming’)

That said, Amanda sounded a note of caution, quoting a recent Hayes survey of 120 executives, many of whom had no strategies to deal with a down or upturn, emphasising that CR/CSR is not emebedded, for those who have only known good times.

So can it?  Can CSR survive the recession?!  What is the Tomorrow's Company view?

Out answer is an unequivocal – No, Yes and Maybe!

(You can always count on clarity from Tomorrow's Company ...)

Why?

Well we have long argued that there is an important distinction to be drawn between compliance and conviction CSR - indeed, it could reasonably be argued that our Founder Director has helped lead the debate on CSR in the UK, and a key paper he wrote is on this site.  See my recent blog and our debate section.

But more than that, we now believe that the business model for future success is fundamentally changing - our analysis is underpinned of course by the global inquiry, and is the basis of this website.  I've developed this argument in other blogs, too.

Forceforgood companies, we argue, recognise that business success and sustainability are integrally linked, go hand in hand, and are mutually reinforcing.

So back to our answer:-

No – ‘CSR 1.0’, to coin a phrase, won't survive the recession unless there are fundamental reasons of compliance, or conviction is so deep rooted within key decision makers with some elbow room to do what they want and believe in:

Yes – ‘CSR 2.0’ which recognises the step change in creating and embedding a new business model of success, and in effect, arguably is such a changed model of CSR that it becomes unrecognisable from what we usually mean by it.

Maybe - the audience for this question is now global, and different companies in different countries will respond differently. 

For those experiencing continued growth CSR 1.0 will survive and prosper, very nicely thank you.

But the real winners will be those who move to CSR 2.0 - it is forceforgood companies that will be the real winners in the CSR shake-out that is to come

PS – Thanks to Dan Gray for following up on this morning as follows:-

Hi all - thanks for a really interesting and enjoyable session this morning. In my enthusiasm, I've already added a new post on my blog, which I trust is a fair analysis of the key points. Best regards, Dan

PPS – Chickens featured quite a lot during the discussion, doing a lot more than merely coming home to roost.  I will be blogging on Schrodinger’s Chicken in due course, with thanks to Nick Flynn for subsequent and greatly appreciated emails

PPPS – There were many excellent questions, and answers.  I was struck by Deborah Mattinson’s characterisation of the shift from the ‘me to we/deference to reference’ society; to Paul Ormerod, him again, commenting that the only example of a people voting for an end to a market economy was Czechoslovakia in 1948; and to David Wasdell arguing that it is the growing energy debt, rather than housing, that we need to worry about.