遵循字面与法律的精神
布拉德利·谷歌和菲利普·米尔维斯著
刘易斯研究所的两家每月分期付款社会创新人:布拉德利Googins和菲利普Mirvis。
像联合利华这样的进步公司，雀巢,达能(Danone)而其他人则以创新“领先”和盈利的企业社会责任战略，the news of late has also highlighted less salutary backward business behavior. Consider several cases where companies have hewed to the "letter" of the law,但似乎忽视了它的精神。
孟加拉国的“时尚受害者”
达卡郊外一家劣质制衣厂倒塌，造成大约1127名纺织工人死亡。孟加拉国在4月份2013–and this roughly four months after a fire claimed 111 in another of the country's 4,500 such facilities. The latest: in mid-June hundreds more workers in two other plants were sickened from drinking contaminated water.
十多年来，像李维斯这样的领先服装制造商，的差距,耐克和其他公司一直在监测和改善健康状况，安全,and working conditions in their overseas supply chains in Southeast Asia and the Indian subcontinent. Continuing this tradition in the aftermath of the building collapse,30多个国际品牌(包括H&M、Abercrombie & Fitch,PVH,汤米·希尔费格(Tommy Hilfiger)和卡尔文·克莱因(Calvin Klein)的母公司签署了一项改善孟加拉国消防和建筑安全条件的全球协议。
How about the retailers? Well,沃尔玛,目标，梅西百货,西尔斯,和J.C.Penney have balked at signing on. It seems that their lawyers advised that the pact might make them "legally liable" for hazardous workplace conditions in the places that make the clothes they sell.
与此同时,一幅茫然的工人们在倒塌工厂的废墟中行走的照片在网上疯传:“时尚受害者够多了?”
在美国偷税漏税
在美国,苹果公司(Apple)新任首席执行官蒂姆·库克(Tim Cook)在华盛顿面临参议院一个小组委员会的质询，该委员会将对最近披露的苹果公司在爱尔兰设立子公司以躲避美国740多亿美元制裁的消息做出回应tax payments. Months ago,我们在博客中写道史提夫的工作对苹果中国供应链中的企业社会责任和人权问题缺乏兴趣。库克一直在积极地解决这些问题，但在参议员面前，他辩称公司的逃税策略完全合法，并声称“苹果已经支付了所欠的每一美元税款”。
然后,他补充说，不像其他美国公司,“苹果并没有把钱放在加勒比的一个小岛上，在开曼群岛没有银行账户，并且不会将任何应纳税收入从销售转移到美国。客户为了避免前往其他司法管辖区税收。”
好吧,we grant that Apple may be "no worse than anyone else" when it comes to tax dodging. But that's not exactly an uplifting brand message from America's most iconic brand.
来自含糖软饮料制造商的“不那么糟糕”
可口可乐已宣布，它希望成为解决全球肥胖大流行的一部分。它大胆的计划是：使热量在产品上更加明显，停止向12岁以下儿童投放广告，促进锻炼和积极的生活方式。过去，我们曾因可口可乐和百事可乐将其广告智慧运用于此而受到指责慈善活动but not to ones concerned with healthy eating (or drinking). So here's a "shout out" to both these soft drink makers for joining First Lady Michelle Obama's让我们动起来!运动和“脱帽致敬”可口可乐，至少承认它是肥胖问题的一部分。
But how about Coke's funding of "New Yorkers for Beverage Choices" in response to Mayor Bloomberg's ban on super-sized soft drinks? Is that being "part of the solution?" Or,正如一些评论家所主张的，可口可乐的最新举措仅仅是“给猪涂口红”吗?
是否应该有更强有力的法律？
问问公众对于不安全的工作环境和狡猾的企业偷税漏税应该做些什么，绝大多数人回答说，"there ought to be a law." Note,同样，这是立法或立法的威胁这导致许多学校取消了含糖软饮料，为了消除针对儿童的软饮料广告，减少软饮料的分量。
在美国，有些意见领袖会让政府处于主导地位CSR/sustainability equation. Former U.S.劳工部长罗伯特·赖克，作为一个例子，坚持这是政府的工作，而不是公司的,承担公益责任。He regards CSR as a potentially "dangerous diversion" that lets regulators "off the hook" when it comes to protecting the public's interest. From a far different tack,business professor Aneel Karnani resurrects Milton Friedman's argument that business has no social role to play because it is the government's job to attend to society's needs. So,如果你想做更多的生意，通过一项法律!
虽然一些欧洲国家已经通过立法来引导具有社会责任的公司行为，美国的传统。has been more laissez-faire. The dominant logic has been that U.S.公司自愿采用基于可持续发展的企业社会责任政策和实践市场驱动,设置他们自己的议程和速度,锻炼自律,并以自己独特的活动组合作为获得竞争优势在市场上。
还是更注重早期信号和法律精神?
好吧,suppose business lets the market rule in this arena. Historically,一组领先的美国公司在民权领域采取进步政策方面“走在曲线的前面”，劳工标准,工作与生活的平衡,环境保护、社区保护,and good governance. Why so? Our colleague Sandra Waddock contends that these leading businesses are attentive to "early signals" of emerging trends and take forward-looking action long before a public consensus emerges on what should be done and legislation is introduced.
So what's a company to do? McKinsey and Company has issued a new report entitled超越企业社会责任:整合的外部参与(2013年3月)美国零售商，软饮料制造商,and Apple would be wise to contemplate. It recommends that companies "engage radically" with the social-environmental issues of our times. That means talking-and-listening to stakeholders that range from investors,的员工,非政府组织的客户，有关问题的专家,以及各级政府。
今天，在企业的雷达屏幕上出现了一系列气候变化领域的新问题，肥胖,食物安全及保安，网络隐私,透明度，and the like. Companies like Unilever,联合利华雀巢,达能之所以处于领先地位，正是因为他们从根本上解决了这些问题，并通过创新行动帮助创造更美好的未来。
另一种方式,他们倾听未来，选择“超越法律”，遵循法律的精神，而不是信守法律。