Corporate cultural involvment as a research category specifying procultural business initiatives

Katarzyna Kopeć (Tishner European University in Krakow) CORPORATE CULTURAL INVOLVEMENT (CCI) AS

A RESEARCH CATEGORY SPECIFYING PRO-

CULTURAL BUSINESS INITIATIVES

Keywords: corporate social responsibility, culture, cultural funding, cultural policy, business.

Summary: The starting point of this research is the concept of corporate social responsibility, which is the basis for pro-social actions of companies. For the purpose of this article, a special narrowing has been made from social responsibility to the realm of culture. The aim of the article is to create a test category, which would determine a directory of pro-cultural action performed at the initiative of business within the concept of social responsibility. To achieve the objective, a brief presentation of a term corporate social responsibility will take place, and then the author will explain the concept of corporate cultural responsibility. Finally, in the last part, there is a personal test category, namely corporate cultural involvement.

Private support for culture1 is essential for the development of this sphere, despite the dominating tradition of the public funding of culture in Poland (and in Europe). The public authorities responsible for the formulation and implementation of cultural policy in European countries realise a considerable importance for private support of culture, even though they do not form a significant part in comparison to public expenditure on culture. Cultural policy in Poland also takes business engagement in this process into consideration, at least after 1989. The official, currently effective documents - National Strategy for the Development of Culture for years 2007-2013 [see: Narodowa Strategia Rozwoju Kultury na lata 2007-2013, www, p. 82, 108, 113, 117], Supplement to the National Strategy of Culture for years 2004-2020 [see: Uzupełnienie Narodowej Strategii Kultury na lata 20042020,, www. 69, p. 76, p. 89] stress the importance of incorporating business in promoting culture.

But keep in mind that supporting culture by entrepreneurs in Poland has – and will probably continue to have – a complementary, not alternative function.

The attention in this article has been devoted to the issue of involving private business entities in culture support. Examining trends, conditioning and a scale of involvement of private sector funds in supporting culture are in Poland (and in Europe as well) very irregular, fragmented and difficult.

This is mainly because there is no obligation to report this information to public authorities. There is no reliable, solid monitoring of culture support or pro-cultural activeness lead by companies, because, in fact, there are no adequate tools allowing such research. Often, a research on supporting culture by business is limited to an analysis of the sponsorship activity, while the whole spectrum of opportunities to engage in culture by business is overlooked. The existence of this research gap indicates that there is a need for creating innovative research tools to help us better understand the phenomenon.

The starting point for our research consideration is the concept of corporate social responsibility (CSR), which today forms the basis for pro-social activity in business. For the need of 1

The author uses the term "involving in" or "supporting" culture by business. Available reports or studies that are mainly dedicated to the sponsorship of culture (financial sponsorship) apply the wording "financing culture" by business or private sector. While describing funding for culture, one highlights only the financial role of business in initiating cultural projects. But understanding a wider view is essential - cooperating culture and business is not always based on financial support (even though it is definitely a major support) but also on nonfinancial one.

69

this article, the scale of socially responsible actions undertaken by the companies was narrowed to the realm of culture. The involvement of companies in the field of culture is widely understood-it is connected both with purely artistic actions (all kinds of art) and education (e.g. art education) or business cooperation with organisations of culture through supporting (both financially and nonfinancially) all sorts of projects, events or organizations functioning in the field of culture.

The aim of the article is to create a test category, which would determine a directory of procultural action performed at the initiative of business within the concept of corporate social responsibility. This proposal can facilitate an investigation of this area and comparison of the obtained research results. It may also result in bringing the role of culture in the promotional activity of an enterprise into focus.

In order to achieve this objective, a short presentation of the term corporate social responsibility will be given. By narrowing the research area to the realm of culture, attention will be focused on corporate cultural responsibility (CCR), and then on the new research category, which is corporate cultural involvement (CCI).

The concept of corporate social responsibility The turn of 21st century has brought a dynamic increase in the popularity of the CSR concept. Since then, it has been widely recognized both in the business world, science, and among wide groups of stakeholders, including consumers. The explosion of interest in social responsibility has led to a noticeable increase not only in the number of definitions of CSR and related concepts, but also in the practices of social responsibility in accordance with the requirements of numerous CSR standards and guidelines, good practice of CSR, socially responsible investment, codes of ethics, etc.

One of the latest definitions of CSR is offered by International Organization for Standardization within ISO 26000, the framework adopted in 2010, that defines social responsibility as "the responsibility of the organization for the impact of its decisions and activities (products, services, processes) on society and the environment" [Makuch, 2011, p. 20], through transparent and ethical behaviour that contributes to sustainable development, health and social welfare and considers the expectations of stakeholders.

The analysis of subject literature allows us to establish that this concept is extremely complex, multifaceted, and heterogeneous and it cannot be precisely defined. Consensus on the final, accepted by all, version of the definition of CSR seems impossible. Infinite number of possible definitions has its flaws, but also advantages. Among the faults it is important to include the difficulty in comparing the results of numerous studies in the area of social responsibility, because each test focuses on somewhat different aspects of social responsibility. The benefits include a considerable flexibility of the concept of CSR and, consequently, the ability to analyse this phenomenon in an interdisciplinary way. What is more, adapting new ideas to the concept of corporate social responsibility is related to the evolution of the social needs and contributes to the greater use of this concept in strategic activities of enterprises.

The wave of the popularity of this concept among both theoreticians and managers highlights the arguments "for" and "against" in a discussion about social responsibility [see. McCabe, 1992].

Literature is full of this type of analyses, and therefore the article will only focus on the occasionally taken considerations around the ambiguity in defining the term CSR. They are associated with two interpretations of the term – instrumental and normative, in which a main role is occupied by moral motivation, which means contrasting socially responsible management with profit of an enterprise [see: Stanny, 2011, p. 259-274].

Instrumental versions of explanatory theories of the conception that we consider give corporate social responsibility a supporting character, and indicate that businesses use CSR to customize their activity to a dynamically changing environment in which stakeholders play a decisive part. Such tactics limits the possible risks from the environment in which enterprises operate, leading to achieving their main economic objectives, namely, profit maximisation.

70

On the other hand, the second group of theories, which is rather normative, underlines the ethical validity of social responsibility. Its importance is expressed in integrating expectations of various groups of stakeholders in the purpose of the company, which in turn meets with criticism for overly idealistic approach to the enterprise management, or for "favouring stakeholder at the expense of shareholding, which exacerbates classic problems with corporate governance" [ibid. p. 271].

What could this mean for the current understanding of the idea of CSR? The above distinction locates the source of the difficulty in understanding corporate social responsibility, which leads to problems in practicing it. Many currently popular definitions of CSR include mainly normative interpretations of this term, hence a sense of confusion and blurred purpose which a company aims to fulfil.

Culture vs. the concept of corporate social responsibility The concept of corporate social responsibility can be analysed according to the subject criterion, which describes what the subject matter of corporate social responsibility is. It can be, for example, the environment, culture, social area. The emphasis is often placed on the responsibility of companies in the social and environmental dimensions which is clearly connected to the objectives of the protection of the natural environment using available tools (e.g. the definition of the EU Green Paper or ISO 26000). Some definitions provide us with even the third dimension (e.g. the guidelines of Global Reporting Initiative). Since the fact that an adjective 'social' in a subjective meaning can be widely understood, many particular projects in areas such as education, social assistance, health care, sport and culture may be included in the 'social' framework. It is not a finite collection of cases which may be classified as social action undertaken in the framework of corporate social responsibility. However, if we assume that one of the elements of CSR may be culture, it should be determined how to name this area precisely.

Initially, corporate social responsibility was not associated with activities aiming at supporting culture and art because they do not fit in the area of generally understood concept of corporate social responsibility. However, in 1975, William Frederick in "Business and Society. Public Strategy, Public Policy, Ethics" differentiated a cultural sphere in the area of the following actions of social responsibility that engage business: economic growth, education, employment and trainings, human rights and equal opportunities, infrastructure development, transport system improvement, preservation of environment, culture and art (supporting cultural institutions), healthcare [Frederick, 1988, p. 33].

The need to voice the concern for culture within corporate social responsibility has been recognised by the Western academia which study interactions of business and culture. The outcome of their attention was a proposal of the term corporate cultural responsibility (CCR). Beate Hentschel and Michael Hutter are the ones who introduced this term. It emphasises the element of concern for culture, and accounts for a more broadly defined concept of corporate social responsibility. The term does not have a commonly used translation into Polish (in the work of Agata Podczaska and Kamila Kujawska-Krakowiak a translation of this term appears as odpowiedzialność biznesu za kulturę [Podczaska, Kujawska-Krakowiak, 2007, p. 65-67]). This term was coined during research on the interaction between business and culture carried out by two centres: Siemens Arts Program and the University of Witten/Herdecke in Germany between 2002 and 2006 [Kulturkreis der deutschen Wirtschaft im BDI e.V., www]. Researchers and the authors of this term, Beate Hentschel and Michael Hutter, argue that this concept is an innovative way to build competitive advantage of businesses. According to the authors of the study, corporate social responsibility in a broader context as well as corporate cultural responsibility positively influence the process of building long-term competitiveness on the market; have an impact on business innovation and sustainable economic growth. In the above research, the analysis was devoted to the activity of German companies in supporting and running cultural projects and the level of the adaptation of corporate social

71

responsibility within the strategy of the company. The analysis allowed a distinction of a subcategory of corporate social responsibility which is business responsibility in the cultural sphere of CCR [Ibid].

The literature highlights the fact that corporate social responsibility challenges an enterprise to fulfil an important role in the economy, which is connected not only with satisfying the material needs, but also with the participation in cultural development of the society. According to Agata Podczaska and Kamila Kujawska-Krakowiak, corporate cultural responsibility "manifests itself in the minds of the ones investing in culture, art and education, and in a sense of collective responsibility for cultural heritage" [Podczaska, Kujawska-Krakowiak, 2007, p. 65].

Corporate cultural involvement) The author of this article believes that the direction of the studies undertaken by the German researchers is interesting. Unfortunately, there is no continuity on this topic in the literature, resulting in the low degree of considering culture a part of the concept of corporate social responsibility both among businesses, and cultural or social organizations. Moreover, the translation of the term CCR as odpowiedzialność biznesu za kulturę contains inaccuracies which attach wrong connotations to it.

There are doubts about the term "responsibility". A company may be responsible for the environmental or social sphere (not for an entire sphere, but for a sector or an area in which there are relationships between company and stakeholders; in this case it concerns for example ecology or employment). Responsibility for the environment and social spheres is related to two elementary activities - taking desired actions and avoiding harmful ones. It can be assumed that there is a possibility of a negative influence on these spheres by business, therefore, they should restrain from such actions. The requirement to refrain from harmful activities, such as those unethical in the social sphere or destructive to the environment, causes that category "responsibility" is adequate for the case of these spheres. Responsibility in connection to the environmental or social category is then relevant.

According to the author of this article, the literal translation of the first part of the discussed term "responsibility" is not a satisfactory solution, because it suggests: a. taking or evading responsibility for something or in a particular area, b. fulfilling or avoiding imposed (by whom?) responsibility.

In case of culture, it is not possible to talk about taking responsibility because there is no possibility of harmful actions in relation to culture. In this case, we talk about just the first element performing "good", positive, desirable actions. What is more, these activities are voluntary.

A company cannot take responsibility for culture, which the translation of "responsibility for" as odpowiedzialność za incorrectly suggests. Business entities are not responsible for culture, because their goal is to generate profit, whose part they can voluntarily spend for example on culture. They are not, in any way, responsible for shaping cultural policy, or for strategic and comprehensive influence on cultural education, perception of cultural projects, creation of cultural offer, etc. They can only, by their commitment, contribute to their development.

In addition, taking into account the definition of CSR from the ISO 26000 given at the beginning of the article, a question can be phrased of how the company is responsible for the impact of their decisions and actions on the sphere of culture? Can a company exert a direct influence on this factor? Of course a distant relationship can be noticed e.g. an impact of pay policy on shaping employees' participation in culture. Such a way of reasoning, however, raises numerous doubts considering the terminology.

It should be noted that a more adequate formula in relation to certain pro-social activities (culture, but also transport, health, infrastructure) would be the term "involvement" since it is a narrower category than "responsibility".

At this point, it is suggested to use the exact approach to the area semantically described by the German scholars as corporate cultural responsibility (CCR). The word "involvement" rather than "responsibility" more precisely reflects the meaning of the actions undertaken in the field of culture.

72

For this reason, the author offers a modification in the term "corporate cultural responsibility" to a more adequate "corporate cultural involvement" (CCI) whose tenor also in Polish would more clearly reflect the meaning of actions undertaken by enterprises in the field of culture i.e. "involvement of business in the cultural sphere". The term CCI forms an organizational approach which is based on programme and/or cultural project management within an enterprise. Such wording will not be subject to ambiguity, as it is in the case of the term "corporate cultural responsibility."

Final conclusions CSR is a more and more commonly used concept, which seeks promotion of the cooperation between business and society. This collaboration includes social, environmental and cultural issues.

This subarea of cooperation including pro-cultural activities that are undertaken by business is analysed in this text.

A new research area has been offered - corporate cultural involvement, whose base is the concept of corporate cultural responsibility created by Beate Hentschel and Michael Huttera. This term includes voluntary, pro-social business activities in the cultural sphere. In the framework of these actions, we can enumerate different instruments that can be used by an entrepreneur supporting culture [see: Kopeć, 2012, p. 122-183].

Supporting culture within the framework of corporate social responsibility is complementary in comparison with financing culture by the public sector. Companies commit themselves to a wide range of pro-cultural projects (a term commitment is here important), nevertheless, their actions do not involve taking responsibility for the culture as a whole (even in the public sector such a possibility seems dubious). The term corporate cultural involvement seems to be more precisely definable and describes reality in a more adequate way, which is favouring to new research perspectives.

Literature Frederick W.C., Davis K., Post J.E., 1988, Business and Society. Corporate Strategy, Public Policy, Ethics, McGraw-Hill Publishing Company, Nowy Jork – Toronto.

Kopeć K., 2012, Pozabudżetowe finansowanie kultury w ramach koncepcji społecznej odpowiedzialności przedsiębiorstw, praca doktorska, Wydział Zarządzania i Komunikacji Społecznej Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego, Kraków.

Kulturkreis der deutschen Wirtschaft im BDI e.V., http://www.corporate-cultural-responsibility.de/ [odczyt: 29.09.2013].

Makuch Ł., 2011, Normy i standardy społecznej odpowiedzialności biznesu (CSR). Przewodnik po kluczowych standardach społecznej odpowiedzialności biznesu oraz relacjach i współzależnościach pomiędzy nimi zachodzących, http://spolecznieodpowiedzialni.pl/files/file/vs6y70yawb8g8tthdifwzajn4jlxof.pdf [odczyt: 29.09.2013].

McCabe B., 1992, Are Corporations Socially Responsible? Is Corporate Social Responsibility Desirable?, „Bond Law Review”, vol. 4, issue 1, article 1, http://epublications.bond.edu.au/blr/vol4/iss1/1/ [odczyt: 29.09.2013].

Narodowa Strategia Rozwoju Kultury na lata 2007–2013, Ministerstwo Kultury i Dziedzictwa Narodowego, http://bip.mkidn.gov.pl/media/docs/Narodowa_Strategia_Rozwoju_Kultury.pdf [odczyt: 29.09.2013].

Podczaska A., Kujawska-Krakowiak K., 2007, Sponsoring kultury i sztuki w praktyce. Istota sponsoringu, aspekty prawne, case studies, Commitment to Europe – Arts & Business, Warszawa.

Stanny D., 2011, Odpowiedzialność społeczna w zarządzaniu, [w:] Odpowiedzialność społeczna w innowacyjnej gospodarce. Skrypt dla studentów Międzywydziałowych Interdyscyplinarnych Studiów Doktoranckich, P. Kawalec, A. Błachut (red.), Wydawnictwo KUL, Lublin.

73

Uzupełnienie Narodowej Strategii Kultury na lata 2004–2020, Ministerstwo Kultury i Dziedzictwa Narodowego, http://bip.mkidn.gov.pl/media/docs/050617nsrk-uzupelnienie.pdf [odczyt: 29.09.2013].

Stanny D., Odpowiedzialność społeczna w zarządzaniu, w: „Odpowiedzialność społeczna w innowacyjnej gospodarce. Skrypt dla studentów Międzywydziałowych Interdyscyplinarnych Studiów Doktoranckich”, Kawalec P., Błachut A., (red.), Wydawnictwo KUL, Lublin 2011.

Uzupełnienie Narodowej Strategii Kultury na lata 2004-2020, Ministerstwo Kultury i Dziedzictwa Narodowego, http://bip.mkidn.gov.pl/media/docs/050617nsrk-uzupelnienie.pdf (dostęp: 29.09.2013)

Katarzyna Kopeć PhD – in 2012 gained her PhD at Faculty of Management and Social Communication of the Jagiellonian University in Krakow with her thesis devoted to non-budgetary culture funding in the concept of corporate social responsibility. She graduated from the faculty of Culture Management at the Jagiellonian University and University of Applied Science Zittau/Görlitz (under patronage of UNESCO and Institut für kulturelle Infrastruktur Sachsen). She is a scholarship winner of the U.S. Department State "International Visitor Leadership Program." A translator and and an editor of many publications, a culture manager, an academic lecturer (Jagiellonian University, Krakow Ignatianum Academy), a trainer (certificate issued by Heuresis certified Trainers and Management Consultants). She currently works as an Assistant Professor at Tishner European University in Krakow.

Research interests: business-culture interaction, privatization of the cultural, financing models, corporate social responsibility.

Zaangażowanie biznesu w sferze kultury (corporate cultural involvement) jako kategoria badawcza określająca działania prokulturalne firm Słowa kluczowe: społeczna odpowiedzialność biznesu, corporate social responsibility, kultura, finansowanie kultury, polityka kulturalna, biznes Streszczenie: Punktem wyjścia do podjętych rozważań badawczych jest koncepcja społecznej odpowiedzialności biznesu (ang. corporate social responsibility, CSR), stanowiąca podstawę działalności prospołecznej firm. Na potrzeby artykułu dokonano szczególnego zawężenia obszaru działań społecznie odpowiedzialnych do sfery kultury. Celem artykułu jest stworzenie kategorii badawczej, która określałaby katalog działań prokulturalnych podejmowanych z inicjatywy biznesu w ramach koncepcji społecznej odpowiedzialności. Dla osiągnięcia celu dokonana zostanie krótka prezentacja terminu „społeczna odpowiedzialność biznesu”, następnie autorka wyjaśni koncepcję odpowiedzialności biznesu za kulturę (ang. corporate cultural responsibility, CCR). W ostatniej części artykułu przedstawiona zostanie autorska kategoria badawcza, jaką jest zaangażowanie biznesu w sferze kultury (ang. corporate cultural involvement, CCI).

Katarzyna Kopeć – w 2012 r. obroniła na Wydziale Zarządzania i Komunikacji Społecznej Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego pracę doktorską, która poświęcona była pozabudżetowemu finansowaniu kultury w ramach koncepcji społecznej odpowiedzialności przedsiębiorstw. Jest absolwentką zarządzania kulturą Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego i Wyższej Szkoły Zittau/Görlitz w Niemczech (studia pod patronatem UNESCO i Institut für kulturelle Infrastruktur Sachsen).

Stypendystka programu Departamentu Stanu USA „International Visitor Leadership Program”.

Tłumaczka i redaktorka wielu publikacji, menedżerka kultury, wykładowca akademicki (Uniwersytet

74

Jagielloński, Akademia Ignatianum w Krakowie), trenerka (certyfikat wydany przez Heuresis Certyfikowani Trenerzy i Konsultanci Zarządzania sp. z o.o.). Obecnie pracuje jako adiunkt w Wyższej Szkole Europejskiej im. ks. Józefa Tischnera w Krakowie.

Zainteresowania badawcze: interakcje biznes – kultura, prywatyzacja sektora kultury, modele finansowania kultury, społeczna odpowiedzialność biznesu.

75