FULL TEXT

WSPÓàCZESNE ZARZĄDZANIE nr 2/2010
Kwartalnik ĝrodowisk Naukowych i Liderów Biznesu
Culture and Art Sponsorship Adaptation
Possibilities within the Framework of the
Corporate Social Responsibility Strategy
Katarzyna Dorota Kopeü*
Keywords: sponsorship, corporate social responsibility CSR, corporate cultural responsibility CCR
Słowa kluczowe: sponsoring, społeczna odpowiedzialność przedsiębiorstw, odpowiedzialność biznesu
w sferze kultury
Synopsis: The article focuses on the sphere of culture as a subcategory of the corporate social responsibility strategy. It analyses the aspect of sponsorship activity that can be effectively adopted/used within the
framework of the strategy of socially responsible enterprises. The author lays a particular stress on the approach towards the inclusion of culture and arts related objectives in the sponsorship activity undertaken
by enterprises.
The objective of this paper is to verify the thesis making the assumption that sponsorship is an effective form of including social and cultural goals in the process of
corporate management of an enterprise which remains within the system of interactions and interrelationships with different groups forming its environment. A social
challenge ahead of enterprises is to find a way of combining the economic and ethical spheres as well as finding harmony between the two social expectations – demand
for making high economic profit and demand for maintaining high ethical standards.
The starting point for the following analysis will be a review of the concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and one of its constituents – corporate cultural responsibility (CCR). The term and determinants of sponsorship in the context of corporate cultural responsibility will also be elucidated. Special attention will be drawn
to the establishment of a pro-social strategy, within the framework of which an enterprise seeking opportunities to contribute to the common good of the community, undertakes a variety of social or cultural activities. The summary of the paper will point
to the benefits for the enterprise and its environment stemming from the realization of
the social responsibility strategy.
-
-
-
-
Introduction
-
* Katarzyna Dorota Kopeć, Ph.D. student, Jagiellonian University.
K.D. Kopeü, Culture and Art Sponsorship Adaptation Possibilities...
79
The concept of corporate social responsibility so far remains a public discourse
category which gives rise to a lot of controversy. Researchers keep defining the term
in manifold different ways, pointing to its different aspects, sources and objectives. In
this paper the concept of corporate social responsibility will be explained by means of
the basic definitions as well as with the help of two models of social responsibility proposed by American authors: A. B. Carroll (after profit obligation) and Y. Ch. Kang and
D. J. Wood (before profit obligation).
The concept of corporate social responsibility from the perspective of the Chicago
school, represented by M. Friedman, can be defined as “carrying out the responsibilities towards the enterprise’s shareholders, i.e. its owners, striving at the maximization
of the company’s market value” [Żemigała, 2007, p. 19]. The advocates of this understanding are of the opinion that the interests of other groups connected in one way or
another with the company’s activities are safeguarded by means of additional regulations or contracts. On the other hand, J. Ansoff and R. Steward draw one’s attention to
the fact that an enterprise is interrelated with many different market entities exerting
influence on its activities and at the same time remaining under its influence. Hence,
the idea that an enterprise is part of the society and operates within the network of social relations [Adamczyk, 2009, pp. 46–48]. This line of thinking is also represented by
D. J. Wood, according to whom social responsibility is a logical corollary of the fact
that “business and society are interwoven rather than distinct entities; therefore, society has certain expectations for appriopriate business behavior and outcomes [Luo,
2007, p. 197].
According to the definition of the European Commission, social responsibility is
a “voluntary type of an organisation, taking into account social interests, environmental protection and relationships between the shareholders, which contributes to the increase in their competitiveness as well as to the European and global socio-economic
development” [Borkowska, p. 12].
Responsible business is a strategic and long-term approach based on the principles of social dialogue and on the search of the win-win solutions. B. Rok believes that
in the definitions of social responsibility attention should be drawn to the „manner of
conduct [of an enterprise] in the process of profit-making and on the effects of such
conduct” [Rok, p. 4], and at the same time to the extension of the notional range of the
word “profit” taking on a new social dimension.
-
-
The Concept of Corporate Social Responsibility
-
-
-
After ProÞt Obligation Model
According to A. B. Carroll, there are four types of responsibilities which constitute corporate social responsibility: economic, legal, ethical and discretionary (philanthropic) responsibilities. The hierarchy model of social responsibility has been presented by Caroll in the form of a pyramid constructed on the basis of A. Maslow’s needs
80
I. PROBLEMY WSPÓàCZESNEGO ZARZĄDZANIA
pyramid. In Carroll’s model economic responsibility lies at the bottom of social responsibility and forms the basis for other types of business responsibilities. Economic responsibility is of fundamental significance to every enterprise, similarly to man’s existential needs in A. Maslow’s needs pyramid. What follows is the observation that
business organizations have been created in order to deliver necessary goods and services to the society, and on the other hand the idea of maximization of profit is the main
objective and value of business. Any enterprise must strive at making profit, without
generating loss, as in case of the enterprise’s unprofitability any discussion on social responsibility is rendered purely theoretical.
Law is the codification of actions deemed acceptable or unacceptable by the society, which is why the companies should aim at fulfilling their economic goals in compliance with the binding laws and regulations. Ethical responsibility comprises such
activities and practices as are expected by the society or which are denounced by the
society, even if they have not been codified within the legal system. These are the standards, norms or expectations which reflect the opinions of the interested parties on what
is considered fair and honest by them. The category of ethical responsibility wields influence on the process of extending the understanding of the category of legal responsibility, at the same time demanding it from the entrepreneurs to undertake more and
more actions other than those required by law. Philanthropic responsibility „is connected with devoting part of the enterprise’s resources (financial resources, employee’s
time) to the society in order to provide specific assistance, enhance the living conditions or solve different social problems” [Rybak, 2004, p. 31]. It should be emphasised
that philanthropic activity is one of the elements of social responsibility, but social responsibility is not limited to it.
The interpretation of corporate social responsibility by A. Carroll is classified as
the so called after profit obligation model, since economic responsibility of an enterprise is the priority responsibility in this case and one conditioning the undertaking of
socially responsible actions.
-
-
-
-
-
Before ProÞt Obligation Model
The recognition of the priority of moral values over any others and inclusion of socially responsible principles in business management forms the basis for the model of
corporate social responsibility referred to as the before profit obligation model. Y. Ch.
Kang and D. J. Wood enter into polemics with the model proposed by A. Carroll. Their
model is based on the assumption that each enterprise is obliged to observe moral and
social norms at every stage of its activity, and not only after achieving profit. In line
with this idea, profit made without adherence to the above mentioned principles cannot be morally justified. The authors of the model assume that „modern societies comprise functionally interrelated and fluid social structures, and not permanently isolated
units whose actions are based on the functions resulting from a fixed division of labour”
[Rybak, 2004, p. 32]. In accordance with this interpretation, „corporate social responsibility may be understood as responsibility for the obligations taken on as a result of
K.D. Kopeü, Culture and Art Sponsorship Adaptation Possibilities...
81
such social coexistence. Hence, this type of responsibility emerges as a result of the social will for a certain pattern of corporate behaviour” [Adamczyk, 2009, p. 43]. Therefore, the objective of economic institutions operating within the framework of a given
social structure is to accomplish their fundamental economic goal – maximization of
profit – in compliance with the binding moral rules maintaining socio-economic order in a given society [Rybak, 2004, p. 32].
According to the authors of the model, such an approach allows one to achieve lasting socio-economic development through the cooperation of a given enterprise with
all of the groups forming its environment, which is conducive to the establishment of
long-lasting ties between the stakeholders and the organization. Thus, this model focuses on elements such as the significance of the moral aspect of decisions taken by
the management and economic activity driven by ethics. Such an approach entails the
assumption that no enterprise can operate for an indefinite period other than the one
which measures up to the social expectations of moral nature. According to the above
model, companies should take into account the expectations of their stakeholders and
treat them on par with their own objectives. Working on the assumption that the above
conditions are met, the company obtains the possibility to choose a method of increasing profit. However, only after having met the legal and ethical conditions, the enterprise may focus on the generation of profit and philanthropic activity.
-
-
-
-
-
Corporate Social Responsibility Models – Comparison
The above presented models of after profit obligation and before profit obligation are
not contradictory, though. They do place emphasis on different aspects – the after profit
obligation model treats aspiration for the realization of economic objectives as a priority and basis for the company’s activities, since the profit made becomes the basis for
the company’s existence and operation, which in turn enables it to undertake different
actions within the framework of the social responsibility strategy. It does not, however,
suggest a time sequence. In other words, it does not mean that legal, ethical or philanthropic activity may only be carried out after the profit making condition has been
met. The achievement of profitability is here perceived as a “low-level” need – similarly
to A. Maslow’s pyramid – whose fulfilment constitutes the basis for operation and the
source of motivation to carry out tasks pertaining to social responsibility. The author
of the model asserts accordingly that “the total corporate social responsibility of business entails the simultaneous fulfilment of the firm’s economic, legal, ethical, and philanthropic responsibilities. Stated in more pragmatic and managerial terms, the CSR
firm should strive to make a profit, obey the law, be ethical, and be a good corporate
citizen” [Carroll, 1991, p. 8].
On the other hand, the before profit obligation model lays particular stress on the
aspiration for the harmonization of the company’s interests and the interests of all
its stakeholders, thus giving priority to the broadly understood pro-social responsibility on the way to carry out economic objectives. This model also emphasises that
all four of the responsibility postulates mentioned by Carroll should be carried out
82
I. PROBLEMY WSPÓàCZESNEGO ZARZĄDZANIA
simultaneously, although the focus is shifted. In the firm’s practical activity, however,
regardless of the social responsibility model chosen as the basis for its operation, the
way of carrying out the objectives set will remain identical, since in both cases the enterprise should, within the framework of corporate social responsibility, strive at making profit in compliance with the legal regulations, ethical code and with the common
good in mind.
-
-
-
-
-
Establishment of the Pro-social Corporate
Responsibility Strategy
P. Banaszyk defines the strategy as a “conceptual pattern of the company’s operation
and its development in the ever changing environment. The pattern is constructed on
the basis of the data collected as a result of the company’s goals and resources analysis
as well as the status of its environment” [Banaszyk, 1998, p. 65]. The basic assumption
of the corporate pro-social strategy is that every firm acts for its environment and remains under its influence – in living up to the social expectations of its environment,
the company finds approval of its activities. Elaboration of a corporate social responsibility strategy is a social process, taking into account the different interest groups and
networks of social interdependencies. “The idea of social responsibility should transcend all management levels and govern the system of strategic objectives, starting with
the company’s mission and finishing with the measures of goal accomplishment evaluation” [Adamczyk, 2009, p. 111].
M. Rybak claims that „economic and social objectives do not necessarily need to be
in conflict, as they may also be mutually complementary. In modern times, social and
ethical objectives gain greater and greater prestige. It stems from the fact that society exerts a greater and greater influence on the process of setting corporate goals and objectives and companies need to take it into account” [Rybak, 2004, p. 100]. The author also
draws our attention to the fact that „the variability of the companies’ operating conditions is connected not only with the dynamic process of setting their goals and objectives, but also with the new methods of their realization, which are incessantly reformulated, rediscovered and modified during the learning process” [Ibidem, pp. 100-101].
In specialist literature four approaches to the establishment of pro-social strategy
are singled out, taking into account the enterprises’ response to the social environment and its problems [Adamczyk, 2009, pp. 110-116; Frederick, David, Post, 1988,
pp. 100-103]:
– passive strategy,
– reactive strategy,
– proactive strategy,
– interactive strategy.
These strategies determine the ways in which a given enterprise includes social objectives in its management process.
We talk about the passive strategy when a given company does not take social opinion – its approval of or opposition to a given corporate policy – into account. In this
K.D. Kopeü, Culture and Art Sponsorship Adaptation Possibilities...
83
approach the company changes its policy only under the influence of a legal order or
prohibition so as to avoid a potentially serious social conflict which might put its economic activity at risk. Social responsibility is thus treated as a regulation imposed by
the law.
Reactive strategy is an approach consisting in the fact that a given enterprise introduces certain modifications only under the impact of a growing external pressure,
adapting its policies to external expectations. A characteristic attitude in this model is
the feeling of a social obligation, i.e. an obligation to undertake actions in compliance
with the legal requirements.
Implementing a proactive strategy means that companies involved wish to introduce changes in their environment or to anticipate their occurrence. The strategy involves undertaking actions aimed at the anticipation of the directions of change in the
environment, focusing on certain needs concerning e.g. the implementation of legal
modifications or the use of innovative solutions. The enterprises can thus act in such
a way so as to translate the changes into benefits from the perspective of their corporate interests.
The interactive strategy is an approach which links corporate goals with the social
expectations of the environment and anticipates the changes about to occur in the social environment. The company following such a strategy takes into account the expectations of all of their stakeholder groups and seeks ways of fulfilling the expectations
in its cooperation with the social partners, e.g. undertaking different social actions addressed to the local community. Such an active approach in the establishment of prosocial strategy leads to the minimization of contrast between the social expectations
and the corporate goals, which is conducive to harmonious relations between the enterprise and the society. The awareness of corporate social responsibility plays an important role here and it often bears fruit in the form of the company’s active and dynamic activity for the social good.
According to J. E. Post and R. E. Freeman, “passive, reactive and proactive strategies
may bring the company temporary, short-lasting success. However, in the long-term
perspective, the interactive strategy generates greater and lasting benefits both for the
company and the society at large” [Frederick, David, Post, 1988, p. 103].
-
-
-
-
-
The Concept of Corporate Cultural Responsibility (CCR)
After 1989, the sphere of culture, as a result of the economic transformation, became to a large extent subject to capital market laws. Artistic freedom was greater, but
at the same time public outlay on culture was largely limited, which from then on has
forced the institutions of culture to seek additional or alternative sources of funding
for their activities.
It should be worthwhile to make an attempt here at answering the question about
the conditions for a greater involvement of the private sector in the financing of culture and undertaking cultural initiatives. Financing culture is a long-term investment,
bringing real benefits not only for the society – in the form of new jobs or additional
84
I. PROBLEMY WSPÓàCZESNEGO ZARZĄDZANIA
Culture and Art Sponsorship in the Context
of Corporate Social Responsibility
-
-
-
-
-
sources of funding for the activities which are highly significant from the social point
of view – but also for the private entrepreneurs. The impact of the involvement in cultural activity on the shaping of a positive corporate image may be the reason why culture is becoming a field worth investing in. Hence the evident change in the attitude of
companies to social and cultural activities. One-time, unsystematic assistance makes
way for a strategically minded approach. More and more often the companies establish a separate corporate social responsibility department and devote a part or the entirety of its activities to culture and art projects.
Initially, social responsibility was not considered equivalent to the activities oriented on the support of culture and art – they do not fit in the generally understood
concept of corporate social responsibility. However, in 1975 W. C. Frederick, in the
book entitled Business and Society. Public Strategy, Public Policy, Ethics, distinguished
the sphere of culture as one of the areas of socially responsible actions undertaken by
the corporate world [Frederick, David, Post, 1988, p. 33].
The need for emphasising the element of concern for culture within the framework of social responsibility was recognized by the Western academic circles involved
in the research on the interaction of business and culture. The research on corporate
cultural responsibility (CCR) was taken up in 2002 within the framework of a joint research project of the modern culture section forming part of the Siemens Arts Program and the Witten/Herdecke University in Germany. The researchers and founders
of the term – B. Hentschel and M. Hutter – claim that the above mentioned concept is
an innovative way of establishing a company’s competitive edge. In literature devoted
to the subject, it is emphasized that corporate social responsibility sets the company
a task of fulfilling an important economic role consisting not only in the satisfaction
of material needs, but also in the participation in the civilization and cultural development of the society.
The meaning of the concept of corporate cultural responsibility goes beyond that
of “sponsorship” and is closer to a certain approach and way of thinking rather than to
a marketing activity, as it does not only focus on the promotional potential of the actions undertaken. According to A. Podczaska and K. Kujawiak-Krakowska corporate
cultural responsibility „is manifested in the awareness of the essence of investment in
culture, art and education, and in the feeling of collective responsibility for cultural legacy” [Podczaska, Kujawiak-Krakowska, 2007, p. 65].
T. Griffin defines sponsorship as a “means of promotion which utilizes the connection between a given company or brand and a certain social, cultural or sports event in
such a way so as to benefit from the exploitation of the commercial potential linked to
that event and field of activity” [Datko, 2003, p. 14].
According to M. Datko and T. Redwan the following features of classical sponsorship may be distinguished [Datko, 2003, pp. 15–16; Redwan, 1998, p. 160]:
K.D. Kopeü, Culture and Art Sponsorship Adaptation Possibilities...
85
– mutual benefit of financial, material or service nature (the sponsor offers their re-
–
–
–
-
-
-
-
-
–
sources to the sponsored entity in exchange for the performance of certain activities conducive to the accomplishment of the sponsor’s marketing objectives),
activity inspired by commercial motivation, usually carried out in a field other
than the major field of the sponsor’s activity,
a sponsor’s or product’s promotional instrument making use of the media accounts which helps the sponsor to create a given image and achieve desired economic effects,
systematic, usually long-term activity which is an inherent part of the company’s professional management system (the following stages may be distinguished
here: planning, organization, performance, control of the sponsored entity, evaluation of the actions undertaken),
activity based on the elaborated general sponsorship strategy compliant with the
company’s marketing strategy.
The issue of perceiving sponsorship as an instrument of corporate social responsibility is a debatable one due to its nature which can be defined as a mutual benefit of
the two parties involved. However, following J. Adamczyk it is worth noting that the
process of adapting sponsorship to new fields – in this case to the concept of corporate
social responsibility – is connected with the “evolution of the society’s interests and its
hierarchy of values, including the fashion for charity, the new lifestyles and constant
changes life brings” [Adamczyk, 2009, p. 152]. M. Datko also observes that “the main
objective of sponsorship is to derive profit from the support offered to different spheres
of life” [Datko, 2003, p. 11]. The following line of argumentation allows one to conclude that sponsorship is a flexible and socially accepted marketing instrument, and
thus it can be equated with the actions undertaken within the framework of the social
responsibility concept.
The Quantitative Research Report Concerning Culture and Art Sponsorship, carried
out by the Commitment to Europe Arts & Business Foundation in the period of JulyDecember 2008, shows that 56% of the respondents believe that involvement in sponsorship activity reflects the company’s social responsibility. A great majority, i.e. 70%
of the respondents, perceives activity in the sphere of corporate social responsibility as
an element of the firm’s promotional activity. 76% of the respondents believe that sponsorship is not selfless, but as many as 82% of them recognize the pro-social aspect of
sponsorship, understanding that sponsorship links the company’s promotional activity with aid offered to others. According to 74% of the respondents, sponsorship may
be understood as an element forming part of the corporate social responsibility activities, while 13% of the respondents believe exactly the opposite. Generally speaking,
sponsorship activities enjoy wide recognition – this is the opinion of 65% of the respondents. According to 93% of those polled, sponsorship is both useful and needed.
The following main reasons for undertaking socially responsible actions have been
mentioned: the wish to stand out against competition (81%), sensitivity to social problems (72%), and need to combine commercial activity with charity actions (46%). According to the respondents, companies involved in the socially responsible activities
86
I. PROBLEMY WSPÓàCZESNEGO ZARZĄDZANIA
are perceived as entities offering support to significant social initiatives (94%) and as
caring organizations (63%) [The Quantitative Research Report Concerning Culture and
Art Sponsorship, pp. 11–23].
The initiators of the above mentioned research, A. Podczaska and K. KujawiakKrakowska, also point to the pro-social nature of sponsorship and justify their opinion
reminding us of the origin of sponsorship, i.e. patronage. It is worth quoting the argumentation of K. Davis here, which offers justification for corporate social responsibility. He claims namely that “social responsibility has its origin in the strength of the society which demands it from the corporate world to bear responsibility for the social
conditions stemming from the impact of their activity” [Adamczyk, 2009, p. 42]. What
it means is that the functioning of a company should be transparent, open to social expectations and informative as regards the actions undertaken and the costs involved.
The society expects enterprises to be involved in the process of solving different social problems, and a company which serves its environment includes social objectives
in its strategic mission, adopting concrete methods of measuring the accomplishment
of such objectives, evaluating the costs and benefits stemming from their implementation and drawing up reports presenting the effects of the accomplishment of a variety of social tasks.
Thus, the above interpretation would suggest that sponsorship may be considered
a type of activity which is part of the social responsibility concept, due to, among others:
– the genesis of sponsorship pointing to its roots in the classical institution of patronage,
– the communicative function played by sponsorship, which links the sphere of
business with those represented by different groups of stakeholders,
– the positive evaluation of the instrument by the society,
– possibility of integrating sponsorship into the corporate management system (it
is possible to devise a marketing strategy that would take into account sponsorship activities, select sponsorship effectiveness indicators, and integrate sponsorship with the other instruments of the marketing mix, and especially promotion).
-
-
-
-
-
Sponsorship-derived BeneÞts for the Company
and its Environment
Sponsorship involves diverse objectives, such as creating brand awareness, enhancing the position of a given product on the market or supporting the initiatives of the
local community. As has already been mentioned, sponsorship activity which forms
part of the corporate social responsibility strategy is an innovative method of creating
the competitive edge.
Sponsorship activity which forms part of the corporate social responsibility policy
brings many benefits for the company [on the basis of Podczaska, Kujawiak-Krakowska, 2007, pp. 56–57]:
K.D. Kopeü, Culture and Art Sponsorship Adaptation Possibilities...
87
External BeneÞts
– increase in the investors’ interest (investors make the company’s financial cred-
ibility conditional on its social credibility),
– increase in the social awareness, as well as consumer and stakeholder loyalty as
regards a given brand, product, company,
– improvement of the mutual relations with the local community and local au-
thorities thanks to the long-term social investments, which has a positive impact on the residents’ attitude towards the company and allows the company to
win the trust of the authorities and to operate in a given environment without
causing unnecessary conflicts,
– increase in the company’s competitiveness
Internal BeneÞts
– enhancement of the company’s organizational culture, which is based on the
-
-
-
-
-
principle of transparency to all stakeholders, by means of raising the standards
of conduct in the relations with external and internal stakeholders,
– shaping the company’s positive image among its employees through the implementation of ethical codes or social programmes, which is one way of motivating the employees with the use of incentives other than the financial ones,
– acquisition and maintenance of the best possible employees thanks to the improved image of the company, which makes the company more attractive on the
labour market.
U. Gołaszewska-Kaczan names the following positive effects of social responsibility, which exert a positive impact on the company’s competitiveness [on the basis of
Gołaszewska-Kaczan, 2004, p. 364]:
– hindered imitation by other companies (the process of winning trust and confidence is a long-term one and potential competitors will need to wait for a longtime to achieve similar effects);
– opportunity to shape the client’s preferences, who will choose the products of
a socially responsible company, and opportunity to raise prices (the consumer,
convinced about the safety or higher quality of a given product manufactured
by an ethically conscious company, agrees to spend more money to purchase the
product);
– implementation of the social responsibility strategy does not mean the necessity
to give up mass sale.
88
I. PROBLEMY WSPÓàCZESNEGO ZARZĄDZANIA
Conclusions
-
-
-
-
-
Social responsibility has not appeared spontaneously as a concept, and its initiators
have not been entrepreneurs seeking opportunities to do good, but participants of the
market looking for the answers to the questions concerning the treatment of employees, corruption practices, companies’ attitude to the issues of ecology, problems of the
local community, etc. Social responsibility has thus turned out to be a method of gaining competitive edge on the market, with a view to safeguarding lasting value for all of
the groups forming part of the company’s environment.
The necessity to look for new instruments of influencing the market and for new
opportunities of gaining the competitive advantage creates a free space for the elaboration of the best strategies and standards of conduct in the relations with the groups
forming part of the company’s environment – shareholders, employees, consumers,
suppliers, or representatives of the local community. Hence, when devising the strategy
of corporate social responsibility, one needs to emphasize elements such as the achievement of lasting benefits parallel to the creation of dialogue with the stakeholders in
order to improve the company’s development strategy, the application of transparent
business practices and the production/offer of such goods and services which exert the
smallest possible negative impact on the natural and social environment.
Adaptation of sponsorship as an element of the corporate social responsibility strategy allows one to shape positive relations with the groups forming part of the company’s environment and to expand the spectrum of possibilities to shape them to the best
interest of the company. Sponsorship influences the multifaceted approach to social responsibility, which plays an important role in the process of effective communication
with the market. Sponsorship actions are often motivated by the ever growing competition and the ever higher awareness of the modern consumer. Sponsorship is a tool
which can be perfectly integrated into the corporate marketing management strategy
and which is fully approved by the environment groups.
The innovative character of the use of culture and art sponsorship in the context of
corporate social responsibility consists in a shift of focus onto its strategic dimension
and in the use of the creative potential of enterprises by means of translating their creative approach in the field of culture into the field of business.
Bibliography
1. Adamczyk J., (2009), Społeczna odpowiedzialność przedsiębiorstw. Teoria i praktyka, Polskie Wydawnictwio Ekonomiczne, Warsaw.
2. Datko M., (2003), Sponsoring. Strategia, promocja, komunikacja, Wyższa Szkoła Komunikacji i Zarządzania, Poznań.
3. Frederick W. C., Davis K., Post J. E., (1988), Business and Society. Corporate Strategy, Public Policy, Ethics,
McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, New York–Toronto.
4. Gołaszewska-Kaczan U., (2004), Społeczna odpowiedzialność przedsiębiorstwa jako instrument walki
konkurencyjnej, [w:] J. Szabłowski (red.), Strategie konkurencji przedsiębiorstw – wybrane zagadnienia,
Wyższa Szkoła Finansów i Zarządzania w Białymstoku.
K.D. Kopeü, Culture and Art Sponsorship Adaptation Possibilities...
89
5. Hopkins M., (2007), Corporate Social Responsibility and International Development: Is Business a Solution?, Earthscan, London.
6. Luo Y., (2007), Global Dimensions of Corporate Governance: Global Dimensions of Business, Blackwell
Publishing Ltd, Malden MA. 7. Podczaska A., Kujawiak-Krakowska K., (2007), Sponsoring kultury i sztuki w praktyce. Istota sponsoringu, aspekty prawne, case studies, Commitment to Europe – Arts & Business, Warszawa.
8. Redwan T., (1998), Dzisiaj i jutro sponsoringu w Polsce – punkt widzenia agencji, „Zeszyty Naukowe Kolegium Gospodarki Światowej SGH”, nr 5, Warszawa.
9. Rybak M., (2004), Etyka menedżera – społeczna odpowiedzialność przedsiębiorstwa, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warszawa.
10. Żemigała M., (2007), Społeczna odpowiedzialność przedsiębiorstwa. Budowanie zdrowej, efektywnej organizacji, Wolters Kluwer Polska, Kraków.
11. Banaszyk P., (1998), Formułowanie celów strategicznych w zarządzaniu polskimi przedsiębiorstwami,
Akademia Ekonomiczna w Poznaniu.
Electronic Bibliography
1. Borkowska S. (2006), CSR – wyzwaniem dla zarządzania zasobami ludzkimi; podejście unijne, „Zarządzanie Zasobami Ludzkimi”, nr 6, Instytut Pracy i Spraw Socjalnych, Warszawa [online], http://www.
ipiss.com.pl/zzl/6_2005/A_bor_6-2005.pdf.
2. Carroll A.B., The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders, [online], http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/faculty/dunnweb/rprnts.pyramidofcsr.pdf,
[31.05.2009].
3. Rok B., Społeczna odpowiedzialność biznesu w kontekście przemian rynkowych, Business Horizons, July-August 1991, [online], http://www.cebi.pl/texty/CSR-BR-IPISS.doc, [31.052009].
4. Raport z ilościowych badań sponsoringu kultury i sztuki, Commitement to Europe – arts & business,
Warszawa 2009, [online] http://cte.org.pl/pliki/caly.pdf, [31.05.2009].
-
-
-
-
-
MoĪliwoĞci adaptacji sponsoringu kultury i sztuki w strategii
spoáecznej odpowiedzialnoĞci przedsiĊbiorstw
Problematyka artykułu koncentruje się na sferze kultury jako subkategorii strategii
społecznej odpowiedzialności przedsiębiorstwa. Analizie poddany jest aspekt działalności
sponsoringowej, która może być efektywnie wykorzystywana w ramach strategii firm społecznie
odpowiedzialnych. Szczególną uwagę autorka zwraca na kwestię włączania celów z zakresu
kultury i sztuki do działalności sponsoringowej podejmowanej przez przedsiębiorstwa. Celem
artykułu jest weryfikacja tezy zakładającej, że sponsoring jest efektywną formą włączania
celów społecznych i kulturalnych w proces zarządzania przedsiębiorstwem, które znajduje
się w systemie interakcji i zależności z grupami otoczenia. Społecznym wyzwaniem stojącym
przed przedsiębiorstwami jest znalezienie sposobu zespolenia sfery gospodarczej i etycznej
oraz znalezienia harmonii między dwoma społecznymi oczekiwaniami – żądaniem osiągania
wysokich zysków ekonomicznych oraz wysokich standardów etycznych.
Potrzeba zaakcentowania elementu troski o kulturę w ramach społecznej odpowiedzialności
została dostrzeżona przez zachodnie środowiska nauki, związane z badaniami nad interakcjami
biznesu i kultury. Badania dotyczące zagadnienia odpowiedzialności biznesu w sferze kultury
(corporate cultural responsibility CCR) podjęte zostały w 2002 r. w ramach wspólnego projektu
badawczego sekcji ds. kultury współczesnej, funkcjonującej w ramach Siemens Arts Program
oraz Uniwersytetu Witten/Herdecke w Niemczech. Badacze i pomysłodawcy tego terminu –
B. Hentschel i M. Hutter – podnoszą, iż powyższa koncepcja jest innowacyjnym sposobem
-
-
-
-
-
90
I. PROBLEMY WSPÓàCZESNEGO ZARZĄDZANIA
budowania przewagi konkurencyjnej przedsiębiorstw. W literaturze przedmiotu podkreśla
się fakt, iż społeczna odpowiedzialność przedsiębiorstwa stawia przed nim zadanie spełnienia
ważnej roli w gospodarce, która polega nie tylko na zaspokajaniu potrzeb materialnych, lecz i na
uczestnictwie w rozwoju cywilizacyjnym i kulturowym społeczeństwa.
Dyskusyjna jest kwestia postrzegania sponsoringu jako narzędzia społecznej
odpowiedzialności przedsiębiorstw z uwagi na jego charakter określający go jako wzajemne
świadczenie dwóch stron. Jednak za J. Adamczyk warto zwrócić uwagę na fakt, iż adaptowanie
sponsoringu do nowych dziedzin – w tym przypadku do koncepcji społecznej odpowiedzialności
przedsiębiorstw – związane jest z ewolucją zainteresowań społeczeństwa i jego hierarchii wartości,
z modą na dobroczynność oraz ze stylem życia i jego zmianami. Powyższa argumentacja pozwala
na konstatację, iż sponsoring jest elastycznym narzędziem marketingowym, akceptowanym
społecznie, dlatego może być utożsamiany z działaniami podejmowanymi w ramach koncepcji
społecznej odpowiedzialności.
Raport z ilościowych badań sponsoringu kultury i sztuki przeprowadzonych przez
Fundację Commitment to Europe arts&business w okresie lipiec-grudzień 2008 r. pokazuje,
że 56% ankietowanych uważa, że zaangażowanie w działalność sponsoringową stanowi
o odpowiedzialności społecznej firmy. Znaczna większość, bowiem 70% ankietowanych,
postrzega działania w sferze społecznej odpowiedzialności przedsiębiorstw jako element
działalności promocyjnej firmy.
Sponsoring można uznać za działanie wpisujące się w koncepcję społecznej odpowiedzialności
m.in. ze względu na:
– pochodzenie sponsoringu od instytucji klasycznego mecenatu,
– pełnienie przez sponsoring funkcji komunikacyjnej między sferą biznesu a grupami interesariuszy,
– pozytywną ocenę tego narzędzia przez społeczeństwo,
– możliwość jego zastosowania w systemie zarządzania przedsiębiorstwem (możliwość sformułowania strategii marketingowej z uwzględnieniem działań sponsoringowych, doboru
wskaźników pomiaru efektywności sponsoringu, współdziałania z innymi instrumentami
mieszanki marketingowej marketing mix, w tym szczególnie w ramach promocji).
Adaptowanie działalności sponsoringowej jako elementu strategii społecznej
odpowiedzialności przedsiębiorstw pozwala nie tylko na kształtowanie pozytywnych relacji
z grupami otoczenia, lecz również na zwiększenie spektrum możliwości ich kształtowania
w myśl potrzeb przedsiębiorstwa. Sponsoring wpływa na wieloaspektowe traktowanie społecznej
odpowiedzialności, co odgrywa ważną rolę w procesie efektywnej komunikacji przedsiębiorstw
z rynkiem. Podjęcie działalności sponsoringowej jest często rezultatem rosnącej konkurencji
oraz coraz większej świadomości współczesnego konsumenta. Sponsoring jest narzędziem
doskonale wpisującym się w ramy zarządzania marketingowego przedsiębiorstw, jak i w pełni
akceptowanym przez grupy otoczenia.
Innowacyjność zastosowania sponsoringu kultury i sztuki w kontekście społecznej
odpowiedzialności przedsiębiorstw polega na położeniu akcentu na jego wymiarze strategicznym
oraz na zwiększeniu twórczego potencjału przedsiębiorstw poprzez kreatywne podejście
stosowane w sferze kultury, które można przenieść na grunt biznesu.