Inner-driven vs outer-driven CSR

CSR is about responsibility.

Responsibility for your employees.

Responsibility for your business partners.

Responsibility for your clients.

Responsibility for your stakeholders.

Responsibility for environment (which actually means responsibility for people who are living on the planet earth because sustainable environment benefits the people who are living in this environment).

Responsibility for your community. (includes CSR initiatives (in the worst case donating to the NGO for social cause) - the most common understanding of CSR which is only a fractional/tiny part of CSR).

What does being responsible mean?

Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary provides the following definition for responsibility:
The quality or state of being responsible: as a : moral, legal, or mental accountability b : reliability, trustworthiness

From the definition above a (moral, legal, or mental accountability) could be described as an outer-driven responsibility that might come within the law, social norms etc., whereas b (reliability, trustworthiness) could be described as inner-driven responsibility that comes within our own state of mind.


Lets draw these parallels into the CSR context.

Outer-driven CSR - comprises CSR activities under the PR and law regulations
In this case undertaken CSR activities are superficial. The reason is to improve the corporate image and foster the sales. Or the CSR activities are driven from the law regulations where the government agitates corporates to involve into CSR.

Inner-driven CSR - comprises CSR activities and policies evolved from the management level. It is all about they do the business, the responsible business. Company is doing what is right, not what is easy.
In the case of Inner-driven CSR, the whole CSR concept is embraced. CSR is part of the strategy and there is no decision made that contradicts the core of the CSR.

What I want to say is that Outer-driven CSR is not the true CSR. This is just putting on the mask and using CSR as a tactics, not as a strategy.


A lot of outer-driven CSR is happening out of there. And even more is about to come if the governments and politicians don't stop announcing the policies for the companies to engage into CSR.

'Closer home several state government has begun framing rules to make
companies become more responsible to their stakeholders. The Gujarat
government is drafting a fresh Company law which will make it
mandatory for companies to spend a goodly part of their profits on
corporate responsibility.'

Does the government really think that the Company law will transform the companies' performance? Okay, they will donate the money to the NGO (which they will choose from some NGO of their relative or friend, so this is pure business again where the dirty money matters only). And that's it. Company will take it as an outer-responsibility and will not care about the cause and why they are doing it.

In contrast if there is no such a law, the companies that spend on the cause are at least thinking to some extend why they are doing so. (The true companies are thinking about it anyway). Thus outer pressure is not leading to the true CSR. It only suppresses it.

One more point about the company law on the mandatory donation. Why don't the government just spend the certain amount of money on the social cause? Companies are paying taxes anyway. Why to make it too complicated and keep adding different laws?
Simplicity should be the key to all the regulations. And contributions should come from the inner-state, not from somewhere above.


If you take the responsibility for yourself you will develop a hunger to accomplish your dreams.
-Les Brown