Summary

Many of those most interested in forceforgood.com and the arguments of the global inquiry will be advocates for Corporate Social Responsibility. Our focus on Tomorrow’s Company is very much on understanding the future conditions of business success, how these are changing, and how does the relationship between business and society need to change as a result.

 

We therefore have a lot to say about ‘CSR’, but we start by focussing on business success, and would argue that the new model of business as a force for good needs to recognise the integral link between business success and sustainability, which gives us a different perspective from many who argue for CSR.

 

forceforgood.com is not primarily a site about CSR therefore – but it has plenty to say about it.  We discuss the distinction between conviction and compliance CSR; we consider further new definitions of CSR, and the  different language that gets used; and we consider the emergence of CSR 2.0 and whether CSR can survive the recession.

 

We look forward to contributing to the debate on CSR as content on forceforgood.com develops.

  Sort by : Title Sort  Date 

posted by Admin  on August 27, 2008

This paper outlines a new generation of consumers, Generation C. Generation C demands more control of the products and services they buy than any other generation The term was originally coined by trendwatching.com An extract from Generation C. “In our new world, customers co-create products and services. For example, the Procter & Gamble Connect and Develop programme now produces more than 35% of the company’s innovations (P&G has launched more than 100 new products for which some aspect of development came from outside the company).Consumers can also create their own enterprises. Sony PlayStation2’s Noiseupthesuburbs.com invites the emerging generation of DIY music pioneers, from bedroom DJs to pirate radio and independent label founders, to make use of its music-making software.
     

posted by Admin  on March 30, 2010

In the UK, the US and many other countries, existing board election processes mean shareholders rely almost entirely on existing board members to identify board candidates. In the vast majority of cases, shareholders have no real say over who is chosen to represent their interests and those of the company they own. Board nomination committees are sub-committees of the board itself. Over the last 10 years, Sweden has moved away from such a system.This report examines the Swedish experience of shareholders taking this key governance function into their own hands. The report also considers lessons that can be drawn for governance in the UK and other countries with dispersed shareholdings.  It  concludes with an agenda for action by listed companies, institutional investors, the Institutional Shareholders Committee  and the Financial Reporting Council. 
     

  Showing 11-12 of 12