Corporate social responsibility: The invisible costs of doing business

The industry would do well to keep the well-being of its target market in mind.

KARACHI:

The cellular industry has seen a great decade of progress in Pakistan. Growth has been stellar, new players have been coming in regularly and this industry has had the distinction of posting healthy growth even in times of economic depression and advertising in mass media when no one else was willing to.

The telecom industry has been among the most resilient and impervious to economic speed-bumps and not only has it been one of the largest contributors to the national exchequer by way of taxes but has also been one of the primary destinations of foreign direct investment in the country.

And as many agree, the key to success in the fast paced and competitive market, one has to stay connected at all times.

The world may not have become a village or any smaller geographically but it has become closer, because of the ease with which people can now connect. The importance of cellular connectivity may not be appreciated as much in an urban environment where people have access to other options like land lines, wifi based apps, internet based social media and smartphone telephony apps that can work off wifi. But in a country like Pakistan where there are large areas still not accessible through the fixed-lines, cellular connectivity can be a lifesaver, literally. So when it comes to a developing economy like Pakistan, with a predominantly rural population, cellular service has been just that, literally a service.

But I do think there can be too much of a good thing, and I also think that even the best of things, if over-dosed on, can be more of a curse and no longer a blessing. The mad rush to gain consumers at all cost may have been sound and effective marketing strategy and there is no question that it did result in unprecedented sales and growth in the subscriber base but this is where we enter murky ground. Is business at all cost always the best way to go forward, or should corporations start to take responsibility for their actions and also worry about the downstream impact, and not just the bottom line?

After all, an industrialist can say that his objective is to create the best product possible, to create jobs, to contribute taxes and to grow the economy. If as a result he is polluting the environment then that is not his problem. If his industry is releasing effluent into the water, he should be absolved of the responsibility.

But why do we feel that pollution is just physical. The downstream impact of a product can be cultural as well. The questions that have been raised about certain marketing practices and some packages offered may or may not be valid. But it is incumbent about the industry to respect their market, to respect the consumer and answer these complaints. A standoffish attitude will just not do. See, that is the problem with information technology and connectivity. It is impossible to claim plausible deniability. The issue is abstract. It is hard to define where one person’s freedom ends and another’s starts. It is also hard to gauge what is offensive to one and not to another. But in the public domain, a service provider has to ensure that all voices, which become loud enough, are heard, and it is an investment in the future to ensure that the answer is satisfactory and logical.

So the debate on the night packages cannot be ignored. I am sure it will bode well for the industry to come across as one that as one that cares about its target market, beyond just providing good service or good connectivity.

Published in The Express Tribune, January 21^st, 2013.

Like Business on Facebook to stay informed and join in the conversation.