1. PAUL CAULFIELD
Love not Money
Substitution and complementary effects in
the dissemination of corporate community
investment practices

2. LOVE NOT MONEY
In
UK
from
2001
to
2011
• Range
of
corporate
community
investments
• Rela:ve
level
of
CCI
allowing
for
“size”
• Resources
deployed
– Human
resource
(Employee
volunteering)
– Financial
resource
(Corporate
Dona:ons)

3. LOVE NOT MONEY
• How
are
decisions
made
about
corporate
community
investment?
• What
determines
choice
between
corporate
community
investments
of
different
types?
• How
do
philanthropic
prac:ces
disseminate?

4. Where
are
decision
&
Who
sets
targets?
How
ac:vely
to
communicate
&
promote?
How
much
to
invest/allow?
What
type
of
rela:onship
&
who
with?
Strategic decisions about CCI
From
interviews
and
focus
groups
(N=35)
What
is
our
strategic
intent?
(opaque)

5. Corporate
Responsibility
Principles
(Mission
Statement)
Resources
&
Investment
Rela:onship
&
Ac:vi:es
Organisa:on
&
Administra:on
Communica:on
&
Promo:on
Administrate
•
Department/staffing
•
Data
collec:on
•
Policies/prac:ces
Resource/Invest
•
Manager
support
• Time-­‐off/
flexibility
•
Matched-­‐funding
/
Rewards
Manage
rela7ons
&
ac7vity
•
VSO
causes
supported
•
Placement
arrangements
•
Ac:vity
team/individual
Promote
(Internal/External)
• Recogni:on
•
Awareness/PR
•
Informa:on/Recruitment
Administrate
•
Department/staffing
• Policies/prac:ces
Resource/Invest
•
Manager
support
• Amount
donated
Manage
rela7ons
&
ac7vity
•
VSO
causes
supported
•
Themes
supported
Promote
(External)
• Awareness/PR
Employee
Volunteering
Corporate
Dona7ons
From
coding
of
FTSE
All
Share
Annual
Reports
2001-­‐2011
(N=333)
Higher
complexity

6. Corporate
Responsibility
Principles
(Mission
Statement)
Resources
&
Investment
Rela:onship
&
Ac:vi:es
Organisa:on
&
Administra:on
Communica:on
&
Promo:on
14
item
coding
instrument
with
four
independent
coders
(V02)
The
company
shows
evidence
of
recording
data
on
volunteering
levels
through
targets
or
sta:s:cs
(McPhail&Bowles
2009)
Employee
Volunteering
Corporate
Dona7ons
Strategic
Management
of
CCI
Resource
Commitment
to
CCI
Two
factors
under
PCA
with
cronbach
alpha
>0.69

7. “EMBEDDED”
High
strategic
management
High
resource
commitment
“SUPERFICIAL”
High
strategic
management
Low
resource
commitment
(possibly
reputa:on
led)
“REACTIVE”
Low
strategic
management
High
resource
commitment
(possibly
employee
led)
“UNSUPPORTIVE”
Low
strategic
management
Low
resource
commitment
Strategic
management
of
CCI
Resource
commitment
to
CCI
How
are
decisions
made
about
volunteering?
Over
65%
of
firms
Employee
led
Smaller
&
regional
firms
(under
reported?)
“2
days
a
year
to
volunteer”
Senior
management
backing
Larger
firms
Extensive
communica:ons
“Bob
ran
the
half-­‐marathon”
PR
styled
“nice”
news
“Nice
to
our
neighbours”
Mission
statement
only

8. How
are
decisions
made
about
corporate
community
investment?
Money
is
easier!
Whilst
rela:onship
and
communica:ons
prac:ces
are
similar
across
both
volunteering
and
dona:ons…
…level
of
organisa:onal
commitment
and
resource
investment
are
dis:nct
LOVE 0 MONEY 1

9. LOVE 0 MONEY 1
• How
are
decisions
are
made
corporate
community
investment?
• What
determines
choice
between
corporate
community
investments
of
different
types?
• How
do
philanthropic
prac:ces
disseminate?

10. -.50.511.52
Count
FT AllShare FTSE 250 FTSE 100
Volunteer Factor 1
-.50.511.52
Count
FT AllShare FTSE 250 FTSE 100
Volunteer Factor 2
Significant
differences
with
FTSE100
or
FTSE250
membership,
p=0.003)
Resource
commitment
For
Volunteering
–
“Size”
makers!

11. Significant
differences
with
FTSE100
or
FTSE250
membership,
p=0.003)
For
Dona:ons
–
History
makers!
• Decisions
to
donate
a
highly
stable
over
:me
• Using
models
from
medicine
to
study
“Non-­‐
donors”
suggests
pakern
is
zero
inflated
poisson
(e.g.
models
for
addicts)

12. What
determines
choice
between
corporate
community
investments?
Money
is
expected!
CCI
of
financial
resources
(dona:ons)
highly
ins:tu:onalised
…
…investment
choice
of
human
resources
(volunteering)
more
associated
with
internal
factors
(e.g
size,
industry,
peer
group)
LOVE 0 MONEY 2

13. LOVE 0 MONEY 2
• What
decisions
are
made
about
corporate
community
investment?
• What
determines
choice
between
corporate
community
investments
of
different
types?
• How
do
philanthropic
prac:ces
disseminate?

14. Iden:fy
prac:ces
of
leading
firms
BitC
award
winners:
Pla:num,
Gold,
Silver
e.g.
BHP
BILLITON
PLC
BRITISH
AMERICAN
TOBACCO
P.L.C.
BRITISH
SKY
BROADCASTING
GROUP
PLC
CENTRICA
PLC
IMPERIAL
TOBACCO
GROUP
PLC
MARKS
AND
SPENCER
GROUP
P.L.C.
NATIONAL
GRID
PLC
NORTHUMBRIAN
WATER
GROUP
PLC
PREMIER
FARNELL
PLC
SCOTTISH
AND
SOUTHERN
ENERGY
PLC
UNILEVER
PLC
…
DON
Benchmark
Level
of
dona:on
per
head
VOL
Benchmark
Level
of
policy
commitment

15. 0%#
10%#
20%#
30%#
40%#
50%#
60%#
70%#
80%#
90%#
100%#
0%# 10%# 20%# 30%# 40%# 50%# 60%# 70%# 80%# 90%# 100%#
%"who"have"dopted"financial"dona1on"benchmark"in"field"
%"who"have"dopted"employee"volunteering"benchmark"in"field"
Extrac3ve_2001#
Extrac3ve_2005#
Extrac3ve_2009#
Finance_2001#
Finance_2005#
Finance_2009#
Manufacture_2001#
Manufacture_2005#
Manufacture_2009#
Retail_2001#
Retail_2005#
Retail_2009#
Service_2001#
Service_2005#
Service_2009#
Wholesale_2001#
Wholesale_2005#
Wholesale_2009#
FINANCE***
Complementary
Early
adopters
WHOLESALE
&
RETAIL
Subs:tu:onal
Late
adopters
EXTRACTIVE
??
SERVICE
&
MANUFACTURE
Complementary
Lower
adop:on
Level
of
adop7on
volunteering
prac7ces
-­‐>
Level
of
adop7on
dona7on
prac7ces-­‐>

16. Dissemina:on
of
prac:ces
DON
2009
DON
2005
DON
2001
VOL
2009
VOL
2005
VOL
2001
Star:ng
condi:ons
2001
FACTORS
2005
FACTORS
2009
FACTORS
Organisa:onal
(and
Internal)
Ins:tu:onal
(and
External)

17. Dissemina:on
of
prac:ces
DON
2009
DON
2005
DON
2001
VOL
2009
VOL
2005
VOL
2001
Standardised
coeffs,
only
significant
paths
p<0.20
shown
+IVE***
+IVE***
CCI
BALANCED
BIN
RUN
6.0.0
Chi
0.678*,
df=3,
p=.8783
RMSEA=0.000
CI
90%
0.000
0.0550
Prob.
RMSEA
<=
.05
0.941
CFI
1.000
Dona:ons
prac:ces
Volunteering
prac:ces
+IVE***
+IVE***
+IVE**
NS
NS
Autoregressive
Conclusions
• Dona:ons
highly
dependent
on
past
(R2
=0.73)
• Volunteering
less
so
(R2=0.39)
• Dona:ons
ini:ally
lead
volunteering
prac:ces
• Once
volunteering
established
its
evolu:on
is
somewhat
independent
with
only
weak
correla:on
between
ac:vi:es
• Volunteering
does
not
influence
on
dona:ons

18. 2001
FACTORS
2005
FACTORS
2009
FACTORS
Finance
sector
leads
prac:ces
DON
2009
DON
2005
DON
2001
VOL
2009
VOL
2005
VOL
2001
Standardised
coeffs,
only
significant
paths
p<0.20
shown
FINANCE
LONDON
HQ
+IVE*
Organisa:onal
Constants
WHOLESALE
SERVICE
+IVE
#
+IVE***
-­‐-­‐IVE
(NS)
+IVE
(NS)
Financial
sector
leads
CCI
strategies
in
UK
Other
star:ng
condi:ons
age,
ownership,
exposure
to
overseas
markets
fail
to
be
significant
<0.20.
Other
industries
fail
to
be
significant
as
star:ng
condi:on.

19. Employee
limited
influence
on
dona:ons
DON
2009
DON
2005
DON
2001
VOL
2009
VOL
2005
VOL
2001
EMPLOYEES’01
EMPLOYEES’05
EMPLOYEES’09
-­‐IVE
#
Note)
Employees
correlated
with
Coercive
Visibility
***
Organisa:onal
Variables
-­‐IVE
#
Dona:ons
per
head
ini:ally
grows
then
appears
capped
with
size

20. Profit
early
influence
on
dona:ons
DON
2009
DON
2005
DON
2001
VOL
2009
VOL
2005
VOL
2001
+IVE***
PROFIT
‘01
PROFIT
‘05
PROFIT
‘09
+IVE*
Note)
Employees
correlated
with
Coercive
Visibility
***
Organisa:onal
Variables
Profit
is
ini:ally
important
for
dona:ons
but
reduces
in
significance

21. Media
visibility
early
influence
on
dona:ons
DON
2009
DON
2005
DON
2001
VOL
2009
VOL
2005
VOL
2001
VISIBILITY’01
VISIBILITY’05
VISIBILITY’09
+IVE*
Note)
Employees
correlated
with
Coercive
Visibility
***
Coercive
factors
appear
to
have
an
ini:al
effect
in
2001
on
dona:ons,
but
have
not
been
seen
to
influence
adop:on
standards
since
then.
Volunteering
appears
to
be
‘immune’
to
coercive
influence
Coercive
Variables
+IVE
(NS)
Media
visibility
has
been
significant
influence
on
dona:ons
but
has
no
influence
on
volunteering

22. Membership
of
BitC
is
catalyst
DON
2009
DON
2005
DON
2001
VOL
2009
VOL
2005
VOL
2001
BITC
’01
BITC’05
BITC’09
+0.246**
Note)
BITC
membership
in
2001
is
posi:vely
correlated
with
both
Employees
&
Coercive
Visibility
***
Norma:ve
effects
appear
to
have
only
weak
effects
and
affect
volunteering
to
a
limited
to
early
development
of
the
field.
Norma:ve
Variables
+0.263**

23. How
do
philanthropic
prac:ces
disseminate?
Money
spent
first!
Previous
dona:on
strongest
predictor
of
all
future
prac:ces
Finance
sector
as
role
model
BitC
as
influencer
LOVE 0 MONEY 3

24. LOVE 0 MONEY 3
THANK
YOU