Which improvements arise with the adaption of Creating Shared Value into the core strategy compared to the use of Corporate Social Responsibility

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

LIST OF FIGURES

1 INTRODUCTION

2 CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

2.1 CORPORATE CITIZENSHIP
2.1.1 Corporate Giving
2.1.2 Social Sponsorship
2.1.3 Cause-Related Marketing
2.1.4 Corporate Foundations
2.1.5 Corporate Volunteering
2.1.6 Social Commissioning
2.1.7 Public Private Partnership
2.1.8 Social Lobbying
2.1.9 Venture Philanthropy (VP)
2.2 CSR ACCORDING TO EUROPEAN STANDARDS
2.2.1 Definition
2.2.2 The Environment
2.2.3 Community Involvement and Development
2.2.4 Labor practices
2.2.5 Human Rights
2.2.6 Consumer Issues
2.2.7 Fair operating practices
2.2.8 Organizational Governance

3 CREATING SHARED VALUE
3.1.1 Development
3.1.2 Definition
3.1.3 Reconceiving Products and Markets
3.1.4 Redefining Productivity in the Value Chain: General Information
3.1.5 Enabling Local Cluster Development: General Information

4 COMPARISON OF CSR AND CSV APPROACHES
4.1 POSITIVE IMPACTS AND ADVANTAGES FOR THE COMPANY
4.1.1 Positive Impacts and Advantages for the Company in General
4.1.2 Positive Impacts and Advantages by Reconceiving Products and Markets
4.1.3 Positive Impacts and Advantages by Redefining Productivity in the Value Chain
4.1.4 Positive Impacts and Advantages by Enabling Local Cluster Development
4.2 POSITIVE IMPACTS AND ADVANTAGES FOR SOCIETY: IMPROVEMENT OF THE LIVING STANDARD
4.2.1 Fair Distribution of Profits
4.2.2 Development of New Clusters
4.2.3 CSV is More as a Guideline
4.2.4 Focus on Needs Instead of Sales Figures
4.3 POSITIVE IMPACTS AND ADVANTAGES FOR THE ENVIRONMENT
4.3.1 Responsible Use of Resources
4.3.2 Environmentally Friendly Creation of Value Chains
4.4 CHALLENGES AND DISADVANTAGES FOR THE COMPANY
4.4.1 Acceptance by Shareholders
4.4.2 Change in the Corporate Culture
4.4.3 Change in the Remuneration System
4.4.4 Resistance to Change
4.4.5 Modifications in the Hiring Process
4.4.6 Laws and Regulation
4.4.7 Local Conditions
4.4.8 Uneconomical Business

5 CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

List of abbreviations

illustration not visible in this excerpt

List of figures

Figure 1 framework covered by the thesis

Figure 2 Corporate Giving Program

Figure 3: Areas of activity defined by ISO 26000:2010

1 Introduction

In 2001 the bankruptcy of Enron caused by falsification of the company’s balance sheet caused over 4,500 people lose their jobs and the stock value of around 60 billion dollars was wiped out. Many shares were held by pension funds as well as private people, destroying trust in the capital market as well as in the people’s pensions.¹ But it was only the starting point for many big bankruptcies in the early 2000s.

The Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill was where the conglomerate around BP failed to keep the safety systems in service and used concrete to seal the bore- hole,^{2 3} causing one of the worst environmental disasters in the world. According to researchers, its impact on nature still cannot be assessed but the oil spill will show its impact in the upcoming years. This accounts especially for the Mississippi River Delta ecosystem, where about 30% of the fishery production of the United States is done. ⁴ But British Petrol (BP) has estimated the costs for the removal and effects at over $ 53 billion.⁵

The common issue that these incidents have are the misbehavior or misrep- resentation of events by the management and employees. There are still many more incidents that could be named. All of them have shown that issues like corruption, social and environmental violations need to be addressed to reinstate trust in com- panies and assure a sustainable, growing economy that benefits not only the com- panies and their owners or managers but also society, workers and the environ- ment. To counteract these issues, different acts, regulations and NGOs were cre- ated as well as laws set in force all over the world. Until today, not very many different approaches had been established at all. Thereby, the United States of America and Europe took the lead in the development. A two-tier system has been developed with the instruments ‘Compliance’ and ‘Corporate Social Responsibil- ity’, respectively, ‘Corporate Citizenship’, compliance being that, which shall en- sure the adherence of statutory laws and regulations. But also other rules that are dictated from outside and inside the company like a code of conduct have been created, while Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) shall go beyond the statutory minimum standard and guide companies with a foundation where they can address social and environmental issues besides their business.⁶ In the US, the Corporate Citizenship model was developed with the aim of demonstrating the company as a “good citizen” that cares for the community and environment of its business. But are the used concepts and their rankings appropriate to fight against today’s issues?

In 2015 Germany’s biggest car manufacturer, Volkswagen (VW), was ranked as the most sustainable company in the automotive business by the DOW JONES Sustainability Index (DJSI). But with the disclosure of the exhaust gas ma- nipulation of cars with diesel engines, VW was removed from the ranking by the 29th of September.⁷ On behalf of this example it needs to be stated that they are not appropriate or at least can be outsmarted to a range where the future of many em- ployees is in danger and the health of the people and the balance of the environment is threatened.

But how was it possible that a company, which had been ranked as number one of the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI) because of their CSR activities, commits such a serious infringement against society’s and the environment’s well- being?

Is there a concept, which can solve this discrepancy between what is written on paper and reality, and that may improve the sustainability of companies? Ac- cording to Porter and Kramer, ‘Creating Shared Value’ is the solution. But is their concept able to harmonize business activities with the needs of society and the environment so that companies are transparent and better than they are with the CSR approach, which is today still the approach, which is implemented by many companies all over the world?

In this thesis the author strives to find out if the Shared Value approach will help to improve the sustainability of a company in comparison to the Corporate Social Responsibility approach significantly. First the Anglo-American approach, called Corporate Citizenship (CC), regarding its elements and supplemented by examples of companies, will be discussed. Afterwards the European approach of CSR, will be analyzed based on the latest definition issued in 2011 by the European Commission. In the next chapter, the Shared Value approach by Porter and Kramer will be described.

Each concept will be substantiated by company examples. Finally, the CSV approach will be compared with the CSR approach. Thereby the author will show the improvements as well as the challenges a company faces if it introduces the CSV approach into its corporate strategy.

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Figure 1 framework covered by the thesis

2 Corporate Social Responsibility

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is the tool to fight against the development of an unhealthy, unstable, highly liable business environment. But still today, there is no general definition in use. During the last decade, two approaches, the Corporate Citizenship and CSR in Europe, have been developed. In this chapter, the definition and instruments with practical company examples of the Corporate Citizenship approach will be shown. Secondly, CSR, defined in 2002 or, respectively, in 2011 by the European Commission will be pointed out and the ideas of the concept demonstrated with practical examples.

2.1 Corporate Citizenship

The term ‘Corporate Citizenship’ describes the social engagement of a company in order to present themselves as “good citizens”.⁸ Before the functions of the CC approach can be examined, we must differentiate between CC and patronage.

While patronage is mainly known through famous people like Melinda and Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Michael Bloomberg or Robert Bosch who contrib- uted or still contribute an impressive amount of their private fortunes for social or environmental projects and foundations, the CC is about social engagement that is within or connected to the core business of the company. The contribution is based on the expectation of adding value to the company and not based on philanthropic reasons.⁹

Thus, CC can be seen more as a tool that tries to picture a company in as many ways as possible in a positive way and link it to the community.¹⁰ Engage- ment can be segmented into nine categories that will be shown in detail in the following pages.¹¹

2.1.1 Corporate Giving

Corporate Giving, often referred to as ‘Employee Giving’, describes ethically and selflessly motivated giving by a company. It is done through donations or financial matching of money, or by giving material and equipment. Some companies con- tribute their products and services as well as their logistics.¹² Nowadays, these kinds of engagement are very common. Thereby the following three different kinds of programs are used the most and will be explained and illustrated with examples.

illustration not visible in this excerpt

Figure 2 Corporate Giving Program

The Fabric of America Program, an initiative of BP launched in 2007 is a great example of the “No Strings Attached Grants” approach to do corporate giving. The company determines a fixed amount of money they want to contribute to non- profit organizations. In the case of the BP program, each full-time employee can determine a charitable organization, which shall receive a grant of $300 and BP will write the check without any questions.¹³ In 2011 BP donated, according to their website, $3.3 million to charitable organizations like animal rescue agencies or the American Cancer Society.¹⁴ In 2012 $20 million was contributed by US- based BP employees, towards over 14,500 charitable organizations.¹⁵

GsK provides organizations that meet the requirements for a 501(c)(3) IRS designation with the option to apply for donations if they help create a healthier community.¹⁶

The Electronic Arts ’ Employee Giving Program shows another option for how corporate giving can be done with their employee-matching program. The Electronic Arts’ Employee Giving Program matches employee donations of up to an amount of $5,000 annually.¹⁷ According to www.doublethedonation.com, 65% of the company’s listed in as fortune 500, match the donations of their employ- ees.¹⁸

And as can be seen on the example of Electronic Arts there is even one step beyond with the option to use employee volunteer grants to support organizations where employees donate their free time to. The companies reward the organization where the employee volunteers with a fixed amount per hour.

One of the most generous programs is maintained by Soros Fund Manage- ment, which rewards organizations with up to $50 for each volunteered hour, up to an amount of $4,000 if the employee contributed at least 20 hours annually.^{19 20} But the Soros Fund Management, BP, and Electronic Arts as well as most US companies that participate in the Corporate Giving Program, use a mix of the named options.

2.1.2 Social Sponsorship

The term ‘Social Sponsoring’ describes the support of people, organizations and associations in the areas of sports, culture, social, education, media and the envi- ronment, based on the principle of performance and consideration. The compa- nies’ support is contributed in terms of money, tangible means, services and know- how. Therefore, they receive their reward in the form of good publicity,²¹ and both sides in the transaction have a calculable profit through the partnership.²² Compa- nies aim to support events, incidents or initiatives which are noticed by their cus- tomers.²³ The sponsorships can be done in many different ways.

An example of the sponsorship of cultural events is the Bayrische Motoren- werke AG (BMW). The company supports a concert of the London Symphony Orchestra in Trafalgar Square, London. In return, they have gotten their brand name, BMW, integrated into the concert name: BMW LSO OPEN AIR Classics.

The support of BMW provides the Orchestra with the possibility to do the concert without any entrance fees, giving people who cannot usually afford tickets for such a concert at the Barbican Centre, London, to listen to one of the five best orchestras in the world.²⁴

Similar deals can be noticed in the sports sector. In Germany, the credit bank Deutsche Kreditbank (DKB) sponsors the DKB Handball Bundesliga. The Turkish company Beko also supports the different premier basketball leagues among Germany with the Beko Basketball Bundesliga²⁵ and Italy with the Lega Basket Series A²⁶, where you can find the logo of Beko beside the league name. In this case, Beko and DKB help keep the leagues alive, which suffer from low social recognition and willingness by companies to pay for the advertisements.

The environmental sponsoring covers the topics of environmental protection and solutions for environmental problems. A great example for this field of social sponsorship is the Lufthansa Group. The crane is a part of the corporate logo of the Lufthansa Group and today, 10 of the 15 different crane species are threatened with their extinction. Since 1991 the Lufthansa Group has supported the German Crane Protection team as well as the Crane Information Centre in Groß Mohrdorf, Germany, and raises awareness for the problem.^{27 28}

Educational sponsorship is of steadily increasing importance. Bad educa- tion is one of the main reasons for unemployment. But, for example, when a person is very well educated with another perspective, or from a second opinion, this is beneficial regarding the diagnosis of diseases from cancer to skin problems. There- fore Galderma created the website DermArena²⁹, to provide dermatologists with an online platform where they can hold live meetings and discuss patient cases with registered doctors of private practices or hospitals on a weekly basis. This benefits the patients because additional experts will see their case and give feed- back. But also, the doctors benefit from the platform because they learn from each other.³⁰ In return, Galderma “participates in yearly DermArena sponsor meet- ing.”³¹

The Daimler AG provides another good example of public sector sponsorship. For seventeen years, Mercedes Benz has supported the Bundesverband Deutsche Tafel e.V., an association that provides needy people with food, with their vans and transport vehicles. Daimler reduces the list price depending on the model by up to 50%. Additionally, they ensure a flawless buying process from the selection of the model up to the foliation.³²

2.1.3 Cause-Related Marketing

In 1999, cause-related marketing was defined by Adkins as, “activity by which businesses and charities or causes form a partnership with each other to market an image, product or service for mutual benefit.”³³ Thus, the company donates a part of the product price towards a charitable organization or a social purpose.³⁴ Up to today, beneficial partnerships have regularly been developed and are widely used by companies to push their sales figures.

In 2006, Pampers started their partnership with UNICEF to fight against tetanus infections in newborns. For every purchased pack of pampers, one vaccine dose is donated by Pampers. But they do not stop with their commitment at this point. The transportation costs, as well as the costs for the injection are paid by the company. Since 2006, over 300 million vaccine doses have been distributed to the project and over 100 million newborns and their mothers have been protected.³⁵

The initiative shows a great social impact. According to research conducted by Linda M. Scott, DP, World Chair for Entrepreneurship and Innovation at Ox- ford’s Said School of Business, there have been many positive effects for the UNICEF brand of this program. Today the brand is associated with social respon- sibility, which is very rare for private sector brands.³⁶ The initiative helped to eliminate MNT in seventeen countries - mainly in Africa - and already aims to eliminate tetanus in an additional twenty countries.³⁷

But now, a wider strategic understanding of partnerships has been devel- oped. According to Hessekiel, “With a focus on creating lasting, quantifiable so- cial impact, prospective partners are inviting more players to the solutions table to attack an issue from all sides.”³⁸ Thus, it is no longer the case that only one profit and one non-profit company can work together to approach a social or environ- mental problem. A good example of this new reality has, therefore, been delivered by the Entertainment Industry Foundation and Albertson’s Company Foundation in the USA, who have a joint charitable program, called “HungerIs”, voiced by Viola Davis.

In March 2014, the program was initiated with the mission to fund and raise awareness in order³⁹ “to eradicate childhood hunger in America and improve health-related outcomes for hungry children and their families”.⁴⁰ One of the pro- jects, the Hunger IS Program, additionally supports the “Cooking Matters In Pre- school Collaborative” program of the “Share Our Strengths: Cooking Matters” in- itiative in Colorado. Their mission is “to provide low-income families with nutri- tion, shopping, and cooking skills they need to prepare healthy and affordable meals for their children”.⁴¹ Based on the experience the author made during his study abroad in the United States, this is a very important issue that needs to be addressed because many poor families feed their children with instant food like Hamburger Helper everyday. And with this program, children develop healthy eating habits that will be very important for their cognitive and physical develop- ment. By November 2015, 600 kids and 672 families have been educated, and a survey has shown a decrease in the amount of participants who were worried about their ability to cook healthy and run out of money to buy food.⁴²

Another example of the use of the cause-related marketing strategy is shown in the small, Irish tea company, Nambarrie, and their partner Action Can- cer. “Nambarrie Think Pink for Action” raises awareness regarding breast cancer through their breast cancer awareness event each year in October. The organiza- tion, Action Cancer, benefits from the partnership not only through donations based on promotional tea packs but also from television advertising and the possi- bility to use the Nambarrie warehouse and distribution channels. The benefit for Nambarrie can be seen in the positive public relations in their target market, which are women from 16 to 60, and a positive impact on society.⁴³ In the words of Brian Davis, the Managing Director of Nambarrie Tea Company Ltd,⁴⁴ “The return on investment has been enormous in terms of corporate, brand and internal commu- nication. Most importantly it has directly benefited our community and our cus- tomers, the women in Northern Ireland who buy our tea”.

2.1.4 Corporate Foundations

A corporate foundation is a “charitable foundation, which serves as a channel of distribution of a firm’s profit into non-profit activities”.⁴⁵ This kind of engagement is widely used by midsized companies.⁴⁶ Thereby the foundation has a kind of double-blind function. It has to show that the company really wants to be a good citizen while it serving the company and, respectively, the owner’s interest to be stable and fulfill the mission.⁴⁷

There are many different forms to set up a foundation. But there are two main characteristics that can be found: The foundation is set up to target a specific issue by the founder (the corporation). Additionally, it is provided with enough money to address these issues independent from the financial situation of the founding company.⁴⁸

But there is a kind of foundation that is known in the United States as “pass through-foundations”. “Pass through-foundations” are not set up with enough money to accomplish their goal in long term. These foundations rely on the yearly financial support of the company.⁴⁹

An example of a clearly defined mission and well-financed foundation is the foundation of Veolia. Veolia, a German environmental service provider, founded its charitable foundation “Fondation d’Enterprise Veolia Environment”, with the aim of supporting unemployed people, by providing innovative solutions for the recycling economy and giving emergency aid for natural disasters.^{50 51} Af- ter the tsunami in Haiti, the foundation delivered twenty tons of equipment like water treatment plants which provided up to 20,000 people with fresh drinking water. In 2016, UNICEF asked the foundation for help in Sri Lanka because, if conflicts arose, it would have been necessary to accommodate 90,000 people into a refugee camp. Therefore UNICEF needed support to provide the people with fresh water. The Veolia Foundation provided the camp with four water treatment plants to guarantee a fresh water supply.⁵²

2.1.5 Corporate Volunteering

A corporate volunteering program is the planned, managed effort that seeks to mo- tivate and enable employees to engage in effective volunteerism under the official sponsorship and leadership of the company. In the Anglo-American areas, corpo- rate volunteering is supported by corporate volunteering councils like the Corpo- rate Volunteering Council New York.⁵³ It is one strategy among many that a com- pany can use to address issues that affect its ability (or license) to operate.⁵⁴ There are four key characteristics of corporate volunteering; the voluntary commitment or initiative by the company; the initiative can arise through the management of the company, charitable institutions or through the employees themselves;⁵⁵ the contribution needs to be free of charge and the commitment of the employee needs to be on a voluntary basis. Additionally, the commitment has to be elaborated on formally in the form of a program.⁵⁶ Thereby, there are four program designs in use:

2.1.5.1 Secondment

Secondment, derived from the term “Second Regiment”, was originally used by the military to describe the temporary stationing of a soldier at another operation site while he or she still belongs to the regiment.⁵⁷ Nowadays, it describes the “sit- uation” where a few, selected employees work for a period of some weeks or even months in projects for charitable institutions paid for by the company. A good example is the project “SeitenWechsel” or the “Trust Secondments” by Johnson & Johnson. “SeitenWechsel” is a project that was introduced in 1994 in Switzer- land and, in 2000, in Germany, which makes it possible for managerial staff to work for a social institution of their choice.⁵⁸

In 2014, Johnson & Johnson introduced the “Trust Secondment” to the EMEA region as part of their Secondment Strategy Program. The company started their engagement with four Secondment placements, which they increased up to twelve placements with five NGOs in 2016; the Program is supported by three flagship partners, the Aga Khan Development Network, North Star Alliance and the INSEAD Business School. The time frame for every Secondment is up to six months and many of them are continuing assignments in order to increase the longterm impact as well as the scope of the project.

The projects have benefits for the company as well as the NGOs. On the one side, Johnson & Johnson provides the NGOs with the specialized skills of their employees, that the NGOs need to solve problems. On the other side, the profes- sional and personal development of the employees is fostered. In 2015, two em- ployees worked in cooperation with SOS Children’s Villages to improve the man- agement efficiency of the SOS medical clinics in Kenya and the communication and marketing within the CEE/CIS regions. In 2014, J&J seconded two employees to North Star Alliance, in Africa. They standardized the HR procedures and poli- cies in the thirteen African countries where the NGO is located. With their help, the NGO introduced the “Star Driver Program”, which encourages long distance truck drivers to visit North Star’s Roadside Wellness Centers for regular health checks. In 2015 they improved the amount of re-visiting truck drivers with the help of two secondees in the ongoing assignment.⁵⁹

2.1.5.2 Social Mentoring Program

This kind of program supports the company’s employees to foster and develop their social and communication competencies as well as their abilities to improvise and find creative solutions. The mentees get direct insights into the jobs of their mentors and can learn from them.⁶⁰

An example, therefore, is the “Partners in Leadership Program”, firstly in- troduced in Great Britain. KPMG and BildungsCent e.V. have used it as a role model and started a similar project in schools in Brandenburg, Germany. Since 2004 leaders of KPMG support the schools in the field of quality improvement.⁶¹ Today, 100 companies support over 430 schools. Because of the great success, the program was awarded the “Generali European Employee Volunteering Award in Germany in the category” Innovation.⁶² Additionally, the program received the predicate “highly recommended”.⁶³ As the program shows, a mentoring program can be the start of a long-term relationship towards governmental institutions and non-profit organizations.

2.1.5.3 Support and Recognition of the Charitable Engagement of Their Em- ployees

This kind of engagement covers the “informal facilitations like flexible working hours and leave up to active collaboration with placement agencies in order to support and honor the engagement through the company.”⁶⁴

The MIT (Miteinander im Team) initiative, translated as “together as one team”, was founded in 1998 by the Henkel AG. Since its foundation the company has supported many different projects around the globe. For example, the employ- ees in China helped to collect cloths for the needy people in Tibet and an exchange program for students in Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina and Serbia.⁶⁵ Micros, a Swiss retail company, therefore supports the voluntary work of their employees if the employee asks.⁶⁶

2.1.5.4 Action Days

Once a year, employees, a whole team or even all employees of the company do voluntary work in any kind from small repairs up to the supervision of children or support of construction projects. Sometimes the engagement can exceed the time frame of one day.⁶⁷ The Novartis “Community Partnership Day” or the “Global Community Day of the Citi Foundation”, the foundation of the Citi Group, are great examples of action days.

In 2006, Novartis introduced their action day, which celebrated its twentieth anniversary in 2016. Over 27,500 associates devoted approximately 220,000 hours. The associates in Switzerland contribute their work time as volunteers in family support centers and nursing homes. In Bangladesh, associates help provide food to visually impaired kids with a deprived background.⁶⁸

In 2015, Citi’s Global Community Day had its tenth anniversary. Since 2015, this action day has supported over 11,000 events where employees have contributed over two million hours. The action day of 2015, where over 80,000 employees in over 1,200 events contributed their time across ninety-three coun- tries, delivered 42,607 meals, and over 76,000 hours were spent with the focus on environmental sustainability, while 149,000 young people received job training as well as college preparation.⁶⁹

2.1.6 Social Commissioning

Social commissioning is the term that describes a business relationship or partner- ship with a social institution in order to provide support for that social institution.⁷⁰ Thereby the company contracts institutions or organizations, which employ disa- bled or disadvantaged people. Currently this kind of engagement is very rare be- cause there are not many institutions that apply for contracts.⁷¹ But also, laws in the USA and Europe prevent Social Commissioning. Nevertheless a good example of how it could work is shown in the case of Hinngingsdorfer Wohnungbaugesell- schaft, in Germany.

In one of their residential areas, they hired street workers of an independent sponsor of children and youth work to solve the problem of vandalism, which they had previously failed in solving. The solution was that, the street workers were provided with an agreement that obligated the company to support the reconstruction and maintenance of the destroyed areas while the street workers guided the young people through the process.⁷²

2.1.7 Public Private Partnership

The General Accounting Office of the United States of America defines a publicprivate partnership as follows:

Under a public-private partnership, sometimes referred to as a publicprivate venture, a contractual arrangement is formed between public and private sector partners. These arrangements typically involve a government agency contracting with a private partner to renovate, construct, operate, maintain, and/or manage a facility or system, in whole or in part, that provides a public service.⁷³

According to the definition, a public-private partnership can be used to address a wide variety of issues that are faced by the government. An example of the con- struction and also maintenance and management of a facility can be identified in the “Guerdane Irrigation Project” in Morocco. Many lasting droughts and sinking groundwater levels, due to groundwater use for agriculture, forced the government to search for a solution to provide the farmers and the population with enough water for the future.

In July 2004, the Moroccan government signed a thirty year partnership with a consortium under the leadership of the Moroccan conglomerate, Omnium- African. To solve the issue, the consortium built a 300 kilometer water irrigation network to bring water from the Sous-Massa, built around sixty kilometers from Guerdane. Additionally, it provided the farmers with a distribution system that matched their needs.

[...]

---

¹ Weltethos (editor) no year, online.

² Mullins 2006, online.

³ Eley 2010, online.

⁴ Medelssohn et al 2010, p. 562.

⁵ BP (editor) 2015, online.

⁶ Gabius 2012.

⁷ S&P Dow Jones Indices (editor); RobecoSam (editor) 2015, online.

⁸ Springer Gabler (editor) no year, online.

⁹ Habisch; Wildner; Wenzel 2008, pp. 4-5.

¹⁰ Waßmann 2012, pp. 18-19.

¹¹ Suchanek; Lin-Hi, Günther no year, online.

¹² Dresewksi; Kromminga; Lang 2008, p. 382.

¹³ Weinger 2012, online.

¹⁴ BP (editor) no year, online.

¹⁵ Weinger 2012, online.

¹⁶ Gsk (editor) no year, online.

¹⁷ Weinger 2015, online.

¹⁸ Double the donation (editor) no year a, online.

¹⁹ Weinger 2014, online.

²⁰ Double the donation (editor) no year b, online.

²¹ Wismeth; Reuss 2013, p. 148.

²² Kliincewicz 1998, pp. 1103-1110.

²³ Wismeth; Reuss 2013, pp. 149-150.

²⁴ London Symphony Orchestra (editor) no year, online.

²⁵ www.beko-bbl.de

²⁶ www.legabasket.it

²⁷ Lufthansa Group (editor) no year a, online.

²⁸ Lufthansa Group (editor) no year b, online.

²⁹ www.dermarena.ch

³⁰ Galderma (editor) no year, online.

³¹ Galderma (editor) no year, online.

³² Mercedes Benz (editor) no year, online.

³³ Adkins 2003, p. 670.

³⁴ Dresewksi; Kromminga; Lang 2008, p. 383.

³⁵ Pampers (editor) no year, online.

³⁶ Scott; Dolan; Johnstone-Louis 2011, online.

³⁷ Pampers (editor) no year, online.

³⁸ Hessekiel 2014, online.

³⁹ Safeway foundation (editor) 2014, online.

⁴⁰ HungerIs (editor) no year, online.

⁴¹ HungerIs (editor) 2015, online.

⁴² HungerIs (editor) 2015, online.

⁴³ Chaffey 2003, pp 587-688.

⁴⁴ Theaker 2004, p. 202.

⁴⁵ WebFinance (editor) no year, online.

⁴⁶ Dresewksi; Kromminga; Lang 2008, p. 384.

⁴⁷ Schwertmann 2005, p. 199.

⁴⁸ Schwertmann 2005, p. 215.

⁴⁹ Schwertmann 2005, pp. 2015-2016.

⁵⁰ Veolia Stiftung (editor) no year a, online.

⁵¹ Dresewksi; Kromminga; Lang 2008, p. 384.

⁵² Veolia Stiftung (editor) no year b, online.

⁵³ Michels 2016, p. 33.

⁵⁴ Gentile 2012, p. 55.

⁵⁵ Cf. Gentile 2012, p. 55 &, Michels 2016, p. 35.

⁵⁶ Cf. Gentile 2012, p. 55.

⁵⁷ Habisch 2006, p. 229.

⁵⁸ Ettlin 2008, p. 271.

⁵⁹ Johnson & Johnson Corporate Citizenship Trust (editor) no year, online.

⁶⁰ Michels 2016, p. 118.

⁶¹ KPMG (editor) no year, online.

⁶² UPJ e.V. (editor) no year, online.

⁶³ KPMG (editor) no year, online.

⁶⁴ Gentile 2012, p. 61.

⁶⁵ Henkel (editor) no year, online.

⁶⁶ Gentile 2012, p. 61.

⁶⁷ Gentile 2012, p. 61.

⁶⁸ Novartis (editor) 2016, online.

⁶⁹ Citi foundation (editor) no year, online.

⁷⁰ Dresewksi; Kromminga; Lang 2008, p. 384.

⁷¹ Fifka 2011, p. 84.

⁷² Dresewksi; Kromminga; Lang 2008, p. 385.

⁷³ Fifka 2011, p. 116.