October 16, 2019

CSRWire.com The Corporate Social Responsibility Newswire

news by category

CSRwire Talkback

| join the conversation

“Translating” CSR Effectively: Four Takeaways for Practitioners

Listening carefully and crafting the message to meet your audience where they are is the key to expanding the CSR message beyond the circle of the converted.

Submitted by: Rahul Mitra

Posted: Apr 15, 2014 – 09:45 AM EST

Tags: csr, sustainability, organizational structure, communication, language, environment, conservatives, climate change


By Rahul Mitra

At a recent talk I gave on sustainable organizing, someone in the audience asked me – predictably enough – that given the preponderance of cultural, structural and moral obstacles both in the U.S. and worldwide, what hope did I have for meaningful systemic change?

My response hinged around the very communicative concept of translation.

Going Back to Basics

I don’t mean translation in the sense of “dumbing down” the complicated scientific facts of climate change, environmental degradation, and corporate social responsibility (CSR) strategy for an undifferentiated, supposedly homogeneous “lay audience.”

Nor do I mean translation in terms of selectively divulging some information, but keeping other key issues and decisions away from the public sphere (for whatever reason), as several companies, think tanks and even governmentsdictionary do at times.

Instead, I’m going back to basics.

According to Merriam-Webster, the very first meaning under the term “to translate” reads: “to change words from one language into another language,” and that is precisely what I’m talking about.

To Re-invigorate the Message, First Get the Code

Translation involves not merely tailoring a message in a particular way, but re-invigorating and revising that message through linguistic conventions and tools that are relevant in different contexts.

Translating CSR, then, is about understanding that we are dealing with different audiences who are interconnected through various media tools, organizing practices and policy impacts but nevertheless utilize different interpretive repertoires to make sense of their world.

As a colleague of mine puts it, everyone comes to the table with their own suitcase of “stuff” with which they understand reality; for me, their suitcase might well consist of a “voice-activated lock” that is articulated in a specific code or language. Of course, I do not mean actual languages, like Hindi, Chinese or Russian, but particular cultural, professional and policy frames and procedures of understanding that stakeholders live by.

Communicating CSR effectively, to achieve meaningful organizing and engagement, depends on knowing what that language is, and translating CSR in its terms.

Going Beyond Talking Dolphin with Dolphins

This perspective of translation surfaces repeatedly in my research with practitioners of environmental sustainability and CSR. Time and again, dolphinsmy research participants highlight the importance of “talking Dolphin with dolphins, and Sheep with sheep,” as one person noted.

Interestingly, when I ask them to explain what they mean by this, most fall back on the commonplace clichés we know all too well (i.e., simplifying information or selecting the right information to divulge). Yet, when they elaborate what it is they do in their everyday work with different stakeholders (e.g., employees, supervisors, top management, activists, government officials, media persons), they describe the complicated processes of decoding and encoding language that is translation. They are not merely “breaking down” information, but creating new possibilities of CSR through “new” languages.

The Example of Environmental Evangelicalism

In response to the audience member at my talk, I used the example of environmental evangelicalism (EE). While mainstream U.S. discourse on environmentalism and corporate responsibility is sharply polarized, with those avowing socially conservative and evangelical doctrines often aligned against these issues, EE proponents use the very “language” of cultural/religious doctrine to argue for responsibility.

The Evangelical Environmental Network's website, for instance, states: “We believe that creation care is truly a matter of life and that pollution harms the vulnerable, especially children and the unborn. We believe the body of Christ should be an example of what God’s people can do in the world to solve some of the great challenges of our time.”

Although recent scholarship has noted the interesting rhetorical features of “green evangelicalism,” as well as the correlation of evangelical attitudes with awareness of global warming, we should further probe the EE movement as a case of Evangelical-Environmental-Networkskillful translation at work.

Framing Sustainability to Conservatives

One of my research participants, a sustainability consultant who is also a self-confessed environmental evangelical, says that he could never have accomplished much had he not realized early on the need to “speak the language” of the people he sought to influence. In his case, the audience was a group of religiously conservative, moneyed decision-makers in the oil-and-gas industry of the American Southwest.

Speaking “their” language, however, does not mean selling out his commitment to environmental sustainability, nor being deceptive or even “dumbing down” — strategies that would never have worked, because people are simply not stupid.

Rather, he framed CSR in terms that could be interpreted (and subsequently, valued) by his target audience without causing major moral or cognitive dissonance. He shared two of his main frames with me: on the one hand, the “stewardship” frame that emphasized interconnections among God, man and environment (see also the EEN website); and on the other hand, “mainstreaming” CSR so that it becomes commonsense for the business’ continued growth and prosperity (e.g., reducing clean-up costs).

Four Ways to Frame the Sustainability Message

While these are but a few of the translating tools my research has identified, the four main takeaways for CSR practitioners seem to be:

  • Always think of the translating activities that must be going on, either behind the scenes or on-stage, for the different stakeholders you must engage.
  • Realize that how you translate for/with one set of stakeholders is not necessarily how you would translate for/with the rest.
  • Also realize that translation is not a one-way game, or an antagonistic process; in order to be effective, you must engage in dialogue with the concerned parties, so that you can figure out just what “voice code” unlocks that “suitcase.”
  • And finally, understand that translation is not a goal in itself, but just a crucial “step” towards the greater objective. In other words, it is not enough to merely “get your message across”; you should then use the newly re-constructed meanings about CSR in different contexts and ways, to further enhance its implementation.

The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed by CSRwire contributors do not necessarily reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of CSRwire.

Search The Blog



Issuers of news releases and not csrwire are solely responsible for the accuracy of the content