We can start by asking what Corporate Social responsibility, which I will hereafter refer to as CSR. There is a definition which I found on the internet, presented under the name, “Reset, Times for a Better World” which describes CSR as “a concept whereby companies decide voluntarily to contribute to a better society…”I think this is a simple enough definition which I propose that we adopt. In doing so, some things become immediately striking namely:
a) CSR is more attributable to the action of Companies rather than individuals, and this explains the use of the adjective “Corporate”
b) CSR is voluntary, and this is important because there is no compulsion
c) CSR seeks to “…better the society…”
In practice, the areas where CSR has been active are areas like Health, Education, Security, Environment and Sports.
With this definitional emphasis now set, some of the questions that readily come to mind then are:
What is the business of companies and corporations in voluntarily assuming responsibility for what Governments are elected to do, instead of focusing on their shareholder’s mandate to earn profit? Are these corporations just busybodies who have nothing useful to do with their time or are they making too much profit and know not what to do with it? Who is even regulating them? Should Government make laws to regulate what they voluntarily undertake to do or should they be allowed to regulate themselves?
These are some of the raging debates and questions being asked in the report from which I borrowed our definition, which is from Europe. Indeed, some people have asked whether “CSR is designed to distract the public from the ethical questions that [the] activities [of these corporations] create?”
We have cultural differences and different levels of development in Nigeria and Africa, as distinct from Europe and other parts of the West. Therefore, I have looked for local content and examples and thankfully found some guide. One of my local examples is the MTN Foundation whose 10th Anniversary we gather to commemorate today.
Has MTN as a company and by its foundation been a good corporate citizen by their operational activity? By extension, can we review MTN’s conduct against some of the accusations levelled against European corporate CSR practitioners that they seek to mask or distract the public from the ethical questions that their activities create?
I must confess that I do not know all the details of the MTN foundation’s CSR interventions but I know some and it is against what I know that I will seek to assess them and answer those questions.
Let me start by asking whether anybody thinks that MTN’s operational activity as a phone company has adversely affected the vocational and technical skills and development of our youth in Lagos.
I ask this question because I know that the MTN foundation singlehandedly equipped a laboratory with vocational and technical equipment for the training of our young children in our technical college in Ikorodu and I know that Nigerite also set up a training school in the same college to train young people in modern roofing techniques.
Let me again ask if anybody can fairly allege or demonstrate that MTN’s operational activity is linked to increasing cases of Kidney diseases because I know that MTN foundation intervened in collaboration with us to provide 2 Haemodialysis machines in our General Hospital in Igando, Alimosho, although we have since completed the Gbagada Cardiac and Kidney centre that now has 24 dialysis machines.
Of course I will also ask if anybody can assert that MTN’s operational activity was responsible for the past neglect of public school infrastructure, because over 7 years, I know that MTN foundation was a major partner and donor to our ‘Adopt a School’ policy by which we got many individuals and corporates to partner with us to revamp the quality of our public schools.
Finally, at this point, I will ask if MTN’s operational activity was responsible for the absence of emergency telephone lines on our highways because I know that MTN foundation worked with our Government to install free emergency phones on the 3rd Mainland Bridge which was eventually unsuccessful because the phones were vandalized.
Therefore, ladies and gentlemen, on the basis of the evidence available to me, MTN foundation must stand free of any suggestion that they seek to mask or distract the public from the ethical question that their [operational] activities create. Can MTN do more and improve itself operationally and in its CSR? Yes, I would think so.
In an interview Dr. Dozie revealed that the MTN foundation, which is the CSR platform of the MTN business, is funded with 1% of MTN’s profit after tax.
I will not go into the details of how much that is. It is not important. What is important is that CSR achieves its virtuous objectives and adheres to the principles of Good Governance that what is given to the community has been earned.
Therefore, it will seem to me that there will be ethical questions, if any part of MTN’s profit from which 1% goes to the foundation for CSR, was from a dropped call for which a subscriber is charged and does not get a refund. Such income would not have been earned and that would not be giving back and neither will it be good governance. I am sure that this issue of dropped calls and service levels to subscribers is not new. It applies to all operators in the business and the MTN management has heard it severally.
Therefore, it seems to me that improving on its service level quality and solving these problems will certainly improve the levels of compassion that underlie MTN’s CSR initiatives.
This also applies to all other corporations who provide all sorts of services, because if the quality of your primary and contractual obligation does not give full value for money, what real value can attach to your voluntarily assumed obligation?
By Babatunde Raji Fashola
