Guidelines_for_Corporatevol_5_no1.pdf: 102 downloads, before Oct. 1, 2020

Bormann, Tammy

Woods, Susan

English

DigitalCommons@ILR

Cornell University ILR School 
DigitalCommons@ILR 
Newsletters ILR Collection 
February 1999 
The Network Newsletter, Volume 5 Number 1 
Tammy Bormann 
The National Conference 
Susan Woods 
Cornell University, sew13@cornell.edu 
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/newsletters 
Thank you for downloading an article from DigitalCommons@ILR. 
Support this valuable resource today! 
This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the ILR Collection at DigitalCommons@ILR. It has been 
accepted for inclusion in Newsletters by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@ILR. For more 
information, please contact catherwood-dig@cornell.edu. 
If you have a disability and are having trouble accessing information on this website or need materials in an 
alternate format, contact web-accessibility@cornell.edu for assistance. 
The Network Newsletter, Volume 5 Number 1 
Keywords 
ILR, Cornell University, commitment, diversity, learning, corporate-community initiatives, outreach, 
contributions, internships, initiatives, resources, build skills 
Comments 
http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/newsletters/6 
This article is available at DigitalCommons@ILR: https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/newsletters/6 
Volume 5 Number 1 February 1999
A J o i n t Pr o j e c t of Co r n e l l Un i v e r s i t y I L R an d Th e Na t i o n a l Co n f e r e n c e f o r Co m m u n i t y an d J u s t i c e 
Change not Charity
Guidelines for Corporate-Community Giving Initiatives
What is it that distinguishes those corporate-
community initiatives that build respect and
opportunity across diverse communities from those
that patronize less empowered communities and
circumscribe real change?
Network participants from private sector, public sector and
not-for profit organizations who gathered in Atlanta, GA
for the 1998 Fall Forum of The Workplace Diversity
Network grappled with this question.  After exchanging
experiences and perceptions, Forum participants arrived at
the following guidelines for corporate-community
initiatives.  Comments and responses are welcome.
Corporate-Community initiatives should be:
 Legitimate and genuine
Corporate-community initiatives, especially to diverse or
less empowered communities, should reflect internal
organizational change, not charity.  In other words,
outreach, contributions, internships, and other initiatives
designed to breakdown discriminatory barriers, open
opportunity and promote social change externally should
correspond to internal organizational values and priorities
as well.  If no effort is made internally to dismantle the
organizational barriers which limit access and opportunity,
then external initiatives designed to reach out to diverse
communities are neither legitimate nor genuine.  Such
efforts are often viewed as patronizing.  Likewise the
corporate participants who represent the corporation in
such initiatives should share a genuine sense of personal
commitment to the philosophy and values of overcoming
prejudice and bias, a commitment built upon thoughtful
self-reflection and awareness.
 Holistic
Donating resources to community-based organizations,
schools, or neighborhood projects to build skills and
transfer knowledge should be followed-though with
opportunity for access and recruitment.  It is disingenuous
for a corporation to promote community-based initiatives
designed to break down barriers of institutionalized
racism, sexism and bias yet remain exclusive in its own
internal hiring, professional development and promotion
practices.  A corporation's external initiatives should be
consistent with its internal policy.
 Designed in partnership with the community
Respectful corporate-community initiatives recognize the
independent voice of the community being addressed and
work in collaboration with that community on the
initiative's design and delivery.  Collaborative partnership
provides a vehicle to acknowledge the interests and
concerns of the community and of the corporation.
Working through collaborative partnership to design
corporate-community initiatives increases the likelihood
of creating projects that are understood, that achieve
articulated goals, and that build genuine commitment for
desired change.
The Workplace Diversity Network is a joint project of The National Conference for Community and Justice, NCCJ,
a leading human relations organization founded over 70 years ago to fight bias, bigotry and racism and Cornell
University School of Industrial and Labor Relations, known for its expertise in human resources, employment and
labor relations and dispute resolution and The National Conference for Community and Justice.  Now in it's fifth
year, The Network promotes Òdiversity learningÓ across organizations by linking diversity leaders and practitioners
with one another and with leading resources in the diversity field.  To learn more, visit our web site, on-line at:
www.ilr.cornell.edu/depts/wdn
T h e N e t w o r k N e w s l e t t e r 
1999©The Workplace Diversity Network
n s H l
Volume 5 Number 1 February 1999
Corporate-Community Giving Initiatives
Do They Foster "True Generosity" Or "False Generosity"?
By:  Tracy M. Fredericks, National Program Specialist, The National Conference for Community and Justice
I was invited to share my thoughts on the topic of corporate-
community giving, perhaps because I had such a strong
reaction to the groupÕs dialogue regarding corporate-
community giving initiatives during the Atlanta Fall Forum.
My intention in this brief article is to share my experiences as
a recipient of these community initiatives and as a
professional who assists corporations in determining how
best to collaborate with communities similar to the one in
which I grew up. In this article, I refer largely to urban, inner-
city communities where the majority of community members
are poor or working poor people of color.
Once a year when I was growing up in the late 1970Õs, my
parents drove my sisters and me down from the Bronx to the
Manhattan flagship store of a major discount retailer to shop
for our school clothing.  As a matter of fact, many parents in
my community took their children to shop at this store, as did
many poor and working poor families because the company
provided credit to working poor families.  Because the storeÕs
customers came from all five boroughs of New York, its
community base was very large. The company was known in
the community for sponsoring parades, kidÕs theater, arts and
crafts classes for young people.  Moreover, the company
encouraged employees to volunteer their time with
community centers and social service agencies.
Despite the number of community-oriented services this
company provided, I do not have positive memories about its
corporate giving efforts.   As I think back to those days, I
remember that the store never held a community event
outside of Manhattan, even though most of its customers
came from the other boroughs.  When employees volunteered
their time in my community, they never asked us what kind
of assistance we needed.  Instead, they told us what we
needed and what they were going to give us to fill those
needs.  I also recall several volunteers openly expressing pity
for us.  Consequently, my family and the rest of our
community became very suspicious of these volunteers and
their motives.
This example is a very simple one.  There are communities
where corporations are dumping environmental waste;
conducting business and ignoring the destitute environment
in which they are situated; and hiring employees who
commute for hours to work while the employment potential
of local community members is ignored. The retail chain of
my childhood memories never considered creating a program
to help the people who shopped in their stores learn to take
care of themselves economically.  The company could have
shared its formidable marketing and business skills to teach
community members how to create small, non-competing
businesses like small grocery stores, newspaper stands and
local restaurants.
I imagine that some readers are saying, ÒBut that was the
1970Õs; things are different now.Ó  In response I would say
that there are a few corporations using innovative community
programs to support inner-city economic development;
however, in my opinion, many companies are not.  I believe
the only noticeable change in corporate giving since my
childhood is that corporations now have a specific division or
department dedicated to corporate-community relationships!
Why do I question the validity of these efforts? Many
corporate-community programs still cater to relatively high
real estate areas.  Moreover, I believe many corporate
volunteers are working in inner city communities in order to
say they have Ògiven to charity.Ó  Most importantly,
however, I believe many corporate-community initiatives are
designed to function as social welfare programs rather than
genuine efforts to develop strategic economic programs to
revitalize oppressed communities.  In his book, Pedagogy of
the Oppressed, Paulo Freire called this Òfalse generosity.Ó
I believe that effective, meaningful corporate-community
initiatives must provide community members with
educational opportunities in economic development, urban
planning, and community organizing so they develop the
skills to grow and manage their own communities when the
designated program is completed.  Moreover, I believe that
those individuals who design corporate-community initiatives
for inner-city communities must be willing and ready to
address issues of classism and racism as they relate to inner-
city social and economic development. Without the courage
to confront these realities, corporations will contribute Òfalse
generosity.Ó
Corporations need to reevaluate the motives and practices of
their current corporate-community giving efforts.  An honest
and rigorous assessment, I suggest, will result in corporate-
community initiatives that are viewed as organizational
business initiatives, not as charity.  When corporate-
community initiatives are devoted to creating healthy,
sustainable communities, corporations can focus their efforts
on identifying the existing and potential competitive
advantages of inner-city communities to sustain profitable
small businesses; nurture self-esteem and independence
among community members; and develop a viable base of
employees and customers. In my estimation, this is a
corporate-community relationship that benefits both the
corporation and the community in meaningful ways.
Positive changes take time and patience. Corporations must
be willing to invest the money, time and effort to understand
the needs and strengths of the communities they wish to
serve and nurture. Then, and only then, will corporate giving
achieve Òtrue generosity.Ó     ns Hl


The Network Newsletter, Volume 5 Number 1

eCommons@Cornell

https://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1005&amp;context=newsletters

The Network Newsletter, Volume 5 Number 1

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

DigitalCommons@ILR

eCommons@Cornell