Co-creators.co.uk

A topic close to my heart is Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), and in today’s world of shrinking resources and an increasing divide between the industrialized world and the world’s poorer nations, it is becoming more of a topic by the day.

Reading this, you may recall a number of the large CSR initiatives by large companies. BP’s Carbon Footprint campaign, for example, or the fact that Shell is now the new sponsor of the Natural History Museum’s Wildlife Photographer of the Year exhibition.

Both will try and make us believe, subconsciously, that the big companies are cleaning up their acts and becoming “green”. A traditional term for such campaigns is “green wash” – when corporations attempt to “massage” the truth so it looks more environmentally and socially responsible to the consumer. For a brief history of “green wash” go to Corpwatch.org.

I think you will agree with me that no matter what an Oil company does or how much money it spends on alternative fuel research, it still is an oil company and can therefore only add to the world’s pollution.

But there are smaller examples of CSR campaigns, where companies volunteer to go carbon neutral, or where your stay at a hotel is carbon neutral. These smaller examples are far removed from green wash, not only because they aim for a more achievable result, but also because they are initiated by companies that have a realistic chance of achieving these results. Maybe BP should answer the question they put to the consumer “How big is your carbon footprint?”

There already is a large movement towards more social responsibility through fair-trade initiatives, but also around topics such as organic food, non-GM food and even around pharmaceuticals.

So how does this relate to co-creation? Well, of the many co-creation examples I have come across, a large percentage had a very responsible approach. Having thought about this I have come to two conclusions:

1. People practicing co-creation are more responsible
2. The concept of Co-creation facilitates CSR, because it is a more open process than R&D behind closed doors.

Conclusion number 1 operates bottom-up (i.e. from the consumer to the co-creative business), whereas conclusion number 2 operates top-down (i.e. from the co-creative business to the consumer). This allows for a third conclusion:

3. The increasing knowledge of social and environmental issues directly impacts on the creation of personal (conclusion 1) or corporate (conclusion 2) trends towards more CSR.

I am sure, as always, there are exceptions to the rule – but I think that as a general statement Co-creation and Corporate Social Responsibility are closely connected.

If you are not convinced yet, let me try and illustrate my points a bit more. Imagine consumers were involved in the co-creation of a new yoghurt for children, do you think there would be as much as 10 teaspoons of fructose (form of sugar) in a single cup? Or how about those chicken nuggets or fish fingers? Would they still contain bones, fat, gristle etc if consumers were involved in the creative process? I think Jamie Oliver has shown us that the answer is ‘No’.

I could write up more examples, but I think you get my point.
I think it is safe to say that where the consumer demands, or at least participates in, co-creation they create a more open process of consumption. By default co-creation gives consumers a role in product development, and where the product is for personal use or consumption the creation process will be more responsible than if it is done behind closed doors. The degree of this may vary, and certainly where food products are concerned there will be a higher degree of CSR, but there is little doubt that the direct involvement of the consumer will have a positive impact on Corporate Social Responsibility.

If you want to go carbon neutral check out Carbonfund.org.

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.