Social responsibility and the labour market
‘Green employers’ attract higher calibre candidates. Fact or urban myth? Richard Boothman ruminates on whether there is any evidence for this and comes up with some practicalities for improving your credentials as an employer of choice.
I often advise clients that one of the benefits of ‘going green’ or becoming a more sustainable organisation is to attract better people to work for them. However, I have never tested this idea in practice and none of my clients have ever told me that candidates for a new role were better after they began to publicise their environmental credentials. So, I wondered if this idea stood up to scrutiny?
Unsurprisingly, the evidence to support the idea that better quality recruits are attracted to those organisations exhibiting sustainable characteristics is not easy to find. My work is usually with regular businesses: architect practices; leisure centres; tourism businesses; and office suppliers, who are doing their best to embed good environmental practice into everything they do. When recruiting, they are not looking for people with environmental qualifications or experience, so does advertising their environmental credentials help these companies to attract better candidates?
In an article written in July 2009, Heather McInroy, the programme manager for the National Business Travel Network cites ‘a recent survey by YouGov’ in which it was claimed that 92% of young graduates would prefer to work for companies with good environmental practices1. This is a staggeringly high percentage but, if the conclusion is valid, it is a good argument to persuade organisations who wish to recruit graduates to ‘go green’.
An organisation will often include its environmental aims under the banner of corporate social responsibility (CSR). CSR encompasses employment and social aspirations and achievements as well as environmental ones so any benefits from a good CSR policy cannot be claimed wholly for environmental improvements. The telecoms company BT is one organisation that attempts to measure the effect of different policies on recruitment. In 2006, it claimed its commitment to CSR led to direct benefits in attracting, motivating and retaining good people. Thirty percent of recent recruits identified the company’s CSR stance as a reason for joining the company2.
Allen & York, who specialise in recruiting for the environmental sector, state that a company’s CSR initiatives should be communicated clearly at all stages of the recruitment process3. This demonstrates to candidates the depth of the company’s commitment to their employees, the environment and social initiatives. Similarly, they claim that regular communication of CSR initiatives internally also helps to retain existing employees, preserving a level of engagement.
Allen & York also agreed that a strong commitment to CSR was a huge benefit when seeking to attract quality talent and quoted a 2006 MORI survey which found that 58% of employees in the UK thought the social and environmental responsibilities of their organisation were important. They used Marks & Spencer and John Lewis Partnership as examples. They both have strong CSR brands aimed at engaging new and current employees as well as customers. Interestingly, Marks & Spencer, whose Plan A programme has moved well beyond CSR, do not mention Plan A on the recruitment pages of their website.
Perhaps the philosophy driving this has not yet penetrated the HR department, despite it becoming all pervasive in other areas. If so, does this suggest that Marks & Spencer does not see this philosophy as important when recruiting the right people or just that the different parts of the company have not yet become ‘joined up’?
Given that John Lewis Partnership is an employee owned company, you would expect their environmental and social credentials to be prominent on the recruitment pages of their website . Although they do not specifically mention the environment or CSR, the pages clearly convey the ethos of fairness, sharing and responsibility for which the company has built a reputation.
The multinational oil company, Royal Dutch Shell also recognises the link between recruitment and their environmental programme with clear pathways from the careers pages of their website to the wealth of sustainability information they also publish. As a multi-national oil company, they are probably not the employer of choice for environmental activists (or even most people with some environmental awareness) but if you were seeking a job in this sector and had to choose between the major oil companies, perhaps a stronger commitment to the environment would be a deciding factor – even some ‘oil men’ have a conscience.
Employee preferences
The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) looked at this issue in their 2008 Labour Market Outlook survey4. Forty seven per cent of the 757 CIPD members who responded to that survey believed that employees preferred to work for an organisation with a strong environmental policy and 46% of respondents agreed that potential recruits would prefer to work for such an organisation. Interestingly, 39% believed that an environmental policy was a more important recruitment and retention tool for younger workers. An Australian survey published by Insync Surveys in August 20085, How Green Are We Anyway, agreed that the group of workers with the lowest expectations of their employer’s environmental performance was those over 54 years old. It also concluded that a workforce dominated by 25 to 34 year olds would hold their employers to a higher standard of environmental performance than all other age groups, even the youngest.
The CIPD advises that the best graduates will scrutinise in depth the profiles of their potential employers. So, it is insufficient to state in recruitment material that you subscribe to good environmental policies; you will have to demonstrate them.
Effect of the recession
Much of the data referred to here is relatively old and was compiled while the economic outlook was much more benign. In the current market, it is possible that most job-seekers, especially the younger ones, may just be pleased to be offered a job. They will, perhaps, be less bothered by potential employers with a poor environmental record than they may have been in a more buoyant job market.
Does this help me in terms of the advice I offer my clients? At least I now have some evidence to support my contention that improving your environmental credentials can help to attract better people to the organisation. While I would not advocate this being a key driver in making a decision to improve the environmental performance of your business – there are other, more compelling reasons to do this – it is definitely a factor to be considered.
With the UK slowly coming out of recession and as small and medium-sized businesses begin to recruit again, it would be helpful to gather some more up to date information on this subject.
Richard Boothman
Richard Boothman is principal consultant at ideostone, an environmental consultancy; and an associate lecturer with the Open University specialising in undergraduate environmental and business courses. He supports several environmental organisations and talks to school students about the benefits of studying geography, on behalf of the Royal Geographical Society (with IBG). Ideostone helps small and medium-sized businesses to understand their environmental impact and establish environmental management systems.
[1] McInroy, H., 2009. Flexible working and strong green credentials are essential to attract talent.
[2] www.corporate-eye.com/blog/2008/01/conveying-corporate-culture/
[3] Allen & York, 2009. CSR as a tool for employee engagement.
[4] CIPD, 2007. Labour Market Outlook, Quarterly report, Summer 2007.
[5] Insync Surveys Pty Ltd, 2008. How Green Are We Anyway?
