A curriculum framework for the professional development of corporate social responsibility practitioners in South Africa

(1)

A curriculum framework for the professional development of

corporate social responsibility practitioners in South Africa

Christopher Paul Andrew McCreanor

Dissertation presented for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

Department of Curriculum Studies Faculty of Education Stellenbosch University

Promoters: Professor E.M. Bitzer (Stellenbosch) and

Professor P.G.W. Jansen (VU University Amsterdam)

(2)

I, Christopher Paul Andrew McCreanor, declare that the entire body of work contained in this research assignment is my own, original work; that I am the sole author thereof (save to the extent explicitly otherwise stated), that reproduction and publication thereof by Stellenbosch University will not infringe any third party rights and that I have not previously in its entirety or in part submitted it for obtaining any qualification.

CPA McCreanor 22 February 2016

15550435

(3)

My mother

I would like to dedicate this thesis deeply from my heart with love and faith to my mother Meisie McCreanor who has spent endless hours supporting me. Who laid me at the feet of God and asked for wisdom, insight and courage to continue on this amazing journey. Words cannot express how grateful I am to my mother who have always encouraged me with her endless prayers. “… Ek bid vir jou my kind, want die Here seën jou met insig en wysheid.” Your prayers for me have sustained me thus far.

The AIDS orphans of this world

My journey in corporate social responsibility started many years back when I was asked to arrange a Christmas party for a charity organisation who aims to help mothers and children who are infected and affected by HIV and AIDS. I jumped in, like any true corporate social responsibility practitioner, with excitement and enthusiasm, not knowing that this Christmas party would change my life forever by sending me on a trajectory of great personal growth and development to make a change towards social transformation. I would like to dedicate this work to the first little angels I have met along my journey. You have opened my heart and soul in so many ways. You were the catalysts in my quest to want to know more and to make a difference in this world.

This thesis is dedicated to you, for your brave fights and battles you had to endure just to survive and stay alive as an HIV/AID orphan! Your battle and story will never be forgotten, the endless onslaughts of secondary infections, pneumonia and the final battle against the primary central nervous system, lymphoma. May your spirit soldier on!

(4)

This thesis is the end of a five-year journey of exploring, discovering, learning and growing. The journey covered rough terrain and encountered many challenging events and situations. I never could have embarked or finished this journey without the amazing people I have had as support over the past five years.

I would like to express my special appreciation and thanks to my advisor, Professor E.M. Bitzer. You have been a remarkable advisor to me. I would like to thank you for encouraging my research and for allowing me to grow as a social and educational researcher. Your advice on research as well as my career has been priceless. There were incredible, life-changing experiences and there were times I wanted to give up and just walk away. In those moments, you were calm and collected, and gave me wonderful advice to keep on going.

It is with great gratitude that I thank Professor P.G.W. Jansen from the VU University Amsterdam. Professor Jansen, you have seen the potential in my abilities when I was awarded the NRF Desmond Tutu Doctoral Scholarship – Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. It is almost impossible to express my sincere gratitude for your assistance and support during my visits to Amsterdam.

A special thanks to my family. Thanks also to my partner and soul mate, Gareth Kilian, who supported me through the difficult times and with my decision to resign from my full-time executive corporate position to pursue a career in CSR education and training. Thank you also for your help with the calculations and critique of my work. My two brothers, Xavier and Victor McCreanor, you will never understand to what extent your phone calls, messages and visits encouraged and supported me.

I would also like to thank all of my friends who supported me in writing. You have sustained my love tanks and encouraged me to strive towards my goal. Finally, I would like to express appreciation to my wonderful friend Anthony Dale who spent hours on the phone with me and was always my support in the moments when there was no one to talk to. Anthony, you are a man of great insight and wisdom. Thank you for being there with your guidance, support, straight talk and honesty!

(5)

This study explored the possibilities of developing a curriculum framework for the professional development of corporate social responsibility practitioners in South Africa.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) encourages a vision of business responsibility and accountability that extends beyond shareholders and investors to include other key stakeholders. Corporations in South Africa find themselves in a unique position to contribute to social innovation and transformation through strategic corporate social responsibility strategies. For this to happen, corporate social responsibility needs to become more mainstream as forward-thinking companies entrench corporate social responsibility into the core of their strategic business operations to create value for business as well as society. The South African government’s role as the exclusive social change agent and macro socio-economic problem solver is rapidly weakening and becoming less substantial as businesses are taking on increased sustainability and social transformation responsibilities. Businesses are seen as catalysts for social transformation, and corporate social practitioners in South Africa are viewed as the change agents responsible for managing the social projects that help advance the communities in which they operate. This is a responsibility that is taken seriously. However, relevant literature on corporate social responsibility indicates that industry thought leaders are aware of and do acknowledge that there is a critical skills deficit in the corporate social responsibility sector. The corporate social responsibility sector is often criticised as a disordered poverty photography project environment with dismal reporting standards and even lower standards for measuring the longitudinal impact of projects aimed at social change and upliftment. This mixed-method study was undertaken in three distinct phases aimed at the development of a curriculum framework for the professional development of entry-level to mid-career corporate social responsibility practitioners in the South African context. The research involved a multi-phased, sequential explanatory mixed-method study within a pragmatic knowledge paradigm. The first phase of the research project comprised quantitative and qualitative data to explore the roles and functions assigned to corporate social responsibility practitioners, and the most effectual and proficient competencies required by corporate social responsibility practitioners. This was achieved by using a questionnaire to collect primary data provided by the collective insight of corporate social responsibility experts and then using focus group interviews to review the proposed first draft of the corporate social responsibility competency framework to gain a deeper understanding of the proposed competencies. Qualitative data were thus obtained from a group of experts by subjecting them to a series of questionnaires, focus-group interviews and controlled opinion feedback.

The second phase of this research involved ranking and further exploring the competencies identified in the first phase of the study in order to gain a better understanding of these competencies and to inform competency definitions. In this investigative follow-up phase, the competencies were explored with practitioners through an iterative e-mail questionnaire typically associated with the classic Delphi

(6)

method. The Delphi consensus process was followed which involved the formulation and classification of a hierarchical competency framework using the competencies identified in Phases 1 and 2 of the data collection process. The competency framework identified and classified competencies into a hierarchical framework with eight high-level factors, 22 dimensions at the competency level and 100 components at the behavioural level. A panel of three academics and 15 experts validated the conceptual competency framework.

The third and final phase of the research aimed at validating the proposed conceptual competency framework through a self-administered online questionnaire. The quantitative strand of the questionnaire aimed to validate the conceptual framework. This was followed up with telephonic interviews. The aim of the final empirical phase of the study was not only to generate expert agreement, but also to fill in the gaps and to identify expert opinion on the most critical competencies required to be a successful corporate social practitioner.

The study culminated in the development of a validated curriculum framework for the professional development of corporate social responsibility practitioners in South Africa, which is compatible with the requirements of the Higher Education Qualifications Sub-framework, the Occupational Qualifications Sub-framework and the South African Qualifications Authority. This research presents findings reported in the form of a curriculum framework which may serve as a guideline for curriculum designers and policy makers when considering the design, development and implementation of an entry-level to mid-career corporate social responsibility practitioner programme or qualification in this country.

Key words

Broad-based Black Economic Empowerment Competency framework

Corporate social investment Corporate social responsibility CSI competency framework CSR practitioner Curriculum development Curriculum framework Mixed-method study CSI practitioner CSR competency framework Delphi

(7)

Higher Education Qualifications Occupational Qualifications

(8)

Declaration ii

Dedication iii

Acknowledgements iv

Abstract v

List of tables xix

List of figures xx

List of acronyms and abbreviations xxi

CHAPTER 1 ORIENTATION TO THE STUDY 1

1.1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.2 ORIENTATION TO THE STUDY AND THE PROBLEM STATEMENT 1

1.2.1 International CSR education 1

1.2.2 South African CSR / CSI practitioners 2

1.2.3 The gap in CSR education in South Africa 3

1.2.4 South African Qualifications Framework for CSR 4

1.3 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY 6

1.3.1 Potential contribution to knowledge 6

1.3.2 Statement of the problem 7

1.3.3 Methodology 7

1.3.3.1 Phase 1 – Exploration of CSR practitioners’ functions and roles 8

1.3.3.2 Phase 2 – Exploration of CSR competency hierarchy 9

1.3.3.3 Phase 3 – Review and validation of a CSR curriculum framework 10

1.3.4 Generating data 11

1.3.5 Source data 11

1.3.6 Criteria for inclusion 11

1.3.7 Ethical considerations 11

1.4 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY 11

1.5 KEY CONCEPTS USED IN THE STUDY 12

1.5.1 Broad-based black economic empowerment 12

1.5.2 Business in society 12 1.5.3 Competence 12 1.5.4 Corporation 13 1.5.5 Corporate accountability 13 1.5.6 Corporate citizenship 13 1.5.7 Corporate governance 13

1.5.8 Corporate (social) responsibility 13

1.5.9 Corporate social investment 14

(9)

1.5.11 King Report 14

1.5.12 South African Qualifications Framework 15

1.5.13 South African Qualifications Authority 15

1.5.14 Professional development 15

1.6 STRUCTURE OF THE THESIS 15

CHAPTER 2 THE CONCEPT OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY IN CONTEXT 17

2.1 INTRODUCTION 17

2.2 CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF CSR 17

2.2.1 First social and environmental concerns 17

2.2.2 Beginning of the modern CSR movement 18

2.2.3 The birth of the key term “social responsibility” 19

2.2.4 The 1960s as an era of accepting social responsiveness 20

2.2.5 Critics and proponents of CSR 21

2.2.6 The evolution of CSR theory 22

2.2.7 Alternative CSR trends 23

2.3 DEFINING CSR IN THIS STUDY 23

2.3.1 Development of CSR definitions 24

2.3.2 CSR defined 26

2.4 DIMENSIONS, PRINCIPLES AND SCOPE OF CSR 30

2.4.1 The dimensions of CSR 30

2.4.2 The multidimensional nature of CSR – guiding principles 33

2.4.3 The scope of CSR 38

2.4.4 Dimensions and scope of CSR in South Africa 39

2.5 DIMENSIONS, PRINCIPLES AND SCOPE OF CSR IN SOUTH AFRICA 40

2.5.2 CSR development in South Africa 42

2.5.3 An era of disinvestment from South Africa 43

2.5.4 CSR versus CSI in South Africa 47

2.6 IMPACT OF THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK ON CSR IN SOUTH AFRICA 48

2.6.1 The South African Constitution 48

2.6.2 Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) 49

2.6.3 Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (BBBEE) 51

2.6.4 Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment post 2013 54

2.6.5 The role and impact of industry charters on CSR in South Africa 56

2.6.6 Moving CSR to a strategic shared value space 58

2.6.7 Good corporate governance and the stakeholder model 61

2.6.8 Triple bottom line (TBL) 62

2.7 STAKEHOLDER THEORY AS CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

MANAGEMENT CONCEPT 66

(10)

2.7.1.1 The stakeholder theory is descriptive – how businesses behave 69 2.7.1.2 The stakeholder theory is instrumental – how behaviour affects performance 69 2.7.1.3 The stakeholder theory is normative – how business should behave 69 2.7.1.4 The stakeholder theory is managerial – how business should be managed 70 2.7.2 From corporate social responsibility to company stakeholder responsibility 72 2.8 THE EDUCATIONAL LANDSCAPE OF CSR AND CSI TRAINING IN SOUTH AFRICA 74 2.8.1 CSR curriculum trends at public higher education institutions 75 2.8.1.1 University of KwaZulu-Natal: School of Management, IT and Governance 75

2.8.1.2 Rhodes Business School 76

2.8.1.3 University of Cape Town: Graduate School of Business 77 2.8.1.4 University of Pretoria: Gordon Institute of Business Science 78 2.8.1.5 Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University: NMMU Business School 79

2.8.1.6 Milpark Business School 79

2.8.1.7 University of Stellenbosch Business School 80

2.8.1.8 North-West University: Bench Marks Centre for CSR 81

2.8.2 Overarching themes of CSR programmes 82

2.8.3 Didactic innovation 83

2.8.4 Curriculum trends at private CSR education institutions 84

2.8.4.1 The Institute for Corporate Social Development 84

2.8.4.2 Next Generation 85

2.8.4.3 Inyathelo 86

2.8.4.4 CSRlibrary 87

2.9 CONCLUSION 87

CHAPTER 3 CURRICULUM: THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES 89

3.1 INTRODUCTION 89

3.2 CONCEPT OF CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 89

3.2.1 The term “curriculum” 89

3.2.1.1 Prescriptive view of curriculum definitions 90

3.2.1.2 Descriptive view of curriculum definitions 91

3.2.1.3 Curriculum as goal and objectives 93

3.2.1.4 Curriculum as content 94

3.2.1.5 Curriculum as plan 94

3.2.1.6 Curriculum as documents 95

3.2.1.7 Curriculum as experience 95

3.2.2 Common concepts and issues related to the curriculum 97

3.2.3 Curriculum theories 99

3.3 CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 102

3.3.1 Curriculum development defined 102

(11)

3.3.2.1 John Franklin Bobbitt 104

3.3.2.2 Ralph Tyler 106

3.2.2.3 Hilda Taba 110

3.3.2.4 John Dewey 112

3.3.2.5 Lawrence Stenhouse 114

3.3.3 Curriculum process development model 117

3.3.3.1 Curriculum initiation phase 119

3.3.3.2 Curriculum planning phase 120

3.3.3.3 Curriculum development phase 120

3.3.3.4 Curriculum testing phase 121

3.3.3.5 Curriculum implementation phase 121

3.3.3.5 Curriculum evaluation 122

3.4 SKILLS, KNOWLEDGE, BEHAVIOURS AND THE SOUTH AFRICAN NATIONAL

QUALIFICATIONS FRAMEWORK 123

3.4.1 Historical overview and aims of the NQF 123

3.4.2 National Qualifications Framework 125

3.4.3 Competence 127

3.4.4 Applied competence 128

3.4.5 NQF level descriptors 129

3.4.6 Level descriptor categories 131

3.5 CONCLUSION 132

CHAPTER 4 CURRICULUM GROUNDING 133

4.1 INTRODUCTION 133

4.2 CURRICULUM GROUNDING 133

4.2.1 Critical reflection on the pedagogy of the oppressed 135

4.2.2 Critical Theory in education 138

4.2.3 A critical theorist approach to curriculum construction 139

4.2.3.1 Fundamental principles of Critical Theory 139

4.2.3.2 Criticism of CSR curricula and education 140

4.2.3.3 Education for transformation 141

4.3 CURRICULUM FRAMEWORK 142

4.3.1 A preliminary CSR curriculum framework 145

4.3.1.1 Dimension 1 and Dimension 2: CSR practitioner and business 147

4.3.1.2 Dimension 3: Stakeholder management 148

4.3.1.3 Dimension 4: People, profit and planet 148

4.3.1.4 Dimension 5: Legislation 148

4.3.1.5 Dimension 6: Curriculum design and development 149

4.3.1.6 Dimension 7: Business, DOE, SAQA and Quality Councils 149

(12)

CHAPTER 5 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 151

5.2 PURPOSE OF THIS RESEARCH 151

5.3 RESEARCH QUESTION 152

5.4 RESEARCH PARADIGM 153

5.5 RESEARCH APPROACH 154

5.6 RESEARCH DESIGN 154

5.6.1 Mixed-method research design 155

5.6.2 The Delphi questionnaires 157

5.6.2.1 Delphi from an educational perspective 157

5.6.2.2 Delphi methodology and characteristics 157

5.6.2.3 Delphi process 158

5.6.2.4 A: First-round Delphi 159

5.6.2.5 B: Second-round Delphi 159

5.6.2.6 The importance of consensus 159

5.6.2.7 Strengths and limitations of the Delphi method 160

5.6.3 Phase 1 162

5.6.3 Phase 2 162

5.6.3 Phase 3 162

5.7 DATA COLLECTION 163

5.7.1 Data collection design 163

5.7.2 Sampling 165

5.7.2.1 Phase 1 sampling strategy 167

5.7.3 Questionnaires to generate quantitative data 172

5.7.3.1 Motivation for the use of questionnaires 172

5.7.3.2 Questionnaire design 173

5.7.3.3 Question structure and bias 173

5.7.3.4 Sequence of questions 175

5.7.3.6 Piloting 177

5.7.3.7 Completion of the questionnaire 177

5.7.4 Telephonic interviews 178

5.7.4.1 Motivation for the use of telephonic interviews 179

5.7.4.2 Interview questions 179

5.7.4.3 Conducting and transcribing of interviews 180

5.7.5 Focus group interviews 180

5.7.5.1 Motivation for the use of focus groups 181

(13)

5.8.1 Reliability of the questionnaire data 181

5.8.2 Reliability of the focus group data 182

5.8.3 Reliability of the interview data 182

5.9 VALIDITY OF THE INSTRUMENTS 182

5.9.1 Validity of the questionnaires 183

5.9.2 Validity of the focus groups and interviews 183

5.10 DATA-ANALYSIS PROCESS 184

5.10.1 Qualitative data management and analysis 184

5.10.2 Quantitative data management and analysis 186

5.11 DATA TRIANGULATION 186

5.12 ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS 187

5.13 CONCLUSION 188

CHAPTER 6 TOWARDS A CSR CURRICULUM FRAMEWORK: RESULTS, FINDINGS AND

DISCUSSION OF PHASE 1 AND PHASE 2 190

6.2 PHASE 1: PARTICIPANT DEMOGRAPHICS 191

6.2.1 Phase 1 participants 191

6.2.1.1 Phase 1: Strand 1 questionnaire respondents 191

6.2.1.2 Phase 1: Strand 2 focus group participants 192

6.3 PHASE 1: QUESTIONNAIRE AND FOCUS GROUP ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION 194

6.3.1 CSR practitioner education and development 194

6.3.1.1 Professional membership 194

6.3.1.2 Continuous professional development (CPD) 194

6.3.1.3 Prefered learning and development strategy 195

6.3.1.4 Access to CSR learning and development 196

6.3.1.5 CSR learning and development opportunities 196

6.3.2 Core drivers of CSR 197

6.3.3 Functions attributed to the role of CSR 198

6.3.3.1 CSR role functions within current CSR role 198

6.3.4 International CSR competencies 201

6.4 PHASE 1: PROPOSED FIRST DRAFT CSR COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK 203

6.4.1 First draft CSR competency framework 203

6.4.1.1 Top five competencies in current CSR role 206

6.4.1.2 Top five competencies for specialist CSR training 210

6.4.1.3 Top five priorities (goals) managed within current CSR role 212 6.4.1.4 Top five areas for CSR performance measure in current CSR role 216

6.4.1.5 Top five areas of CPD in current CSR role 217

6.4.2 First draft CSR competency framework 219

(14)

6.6.1 Phase 2 participants 224

6.6.1.1 Phase 2: Strand 1 Delphi questionnaire respondents 224

6.6.1.2 Phase 2: Strand 2 focus group participants 224

6.7 PHASE 2: DELPHI AND FOCUS GROUP ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION 225

6.7.1 Delphi 225

6.7.1.1 Reaching consensus 225

6.7.1.2 Testing consensus: hypothesis 225

6.7.1.3 Testing consensus: critical and confidence limit 226

6.8 PHASE 2: DELPHI ROUND 1 AND ROUND 2 RESULTS 226

6.8.1 Adaptability 228

6.8.2 Administration 228

6.8.3 Analytical reasoning 229

6.8.4 BBBEE 229

6.8.5 Budgets and reporting 229

6.8.6 Business acumen 229

6.8.7 Change leadership 229

6.8.8 Coaching and mentoring 229

6.8.9 Communication skills 230 6.8.10 Communications and PR 230 6.8.11 Computer literacy 230 6.8.12 Data analysis 230 6.8.13 Decision making 230 6.8.14 Drive 231

6.8.15 Financial accounting and reporting 231

6.8.16 Integrity 231

6.8.17 Knowledge and understanding of community needs 231

6.8.18 Knowledge and understanding of CSR/CSI best practice 231 6.8.19 Knowledge and understanding of sustainable development 231

6.8.20 Leadership 232

6.8.21 Legislative acumen 232

6.8.22 Managing change 232

6.8.23 Marketing and sales 232

6.8.24 Monitoring and evaluation 232

6.8.25 Negotiation skills 232

6.8.26 Networking 233

6.8.27 Organisational and environmental awareness 233

6.8.28 People management 233

(15)

6.8.30 Planning and organising 233 6.8.31 Presentation skills 233 6.8.32 Problem solving 233 6.8.33 Project management 234 6.8.34 Report writing 234 6.8.35 Research 234 6.8.36 Resource management 234 6.8.37 Stakeholder management 234

6.8.38 Strategy implementation and management 234

6.8.39 Team leadership 235

6.8.40 Teamwork 235

6.8.41 Technical expertise 235

6.8.42 Training and development 235

6.8.43 Visioning and strategic direction 235

6.9 PHASE 2: DISCUSSION OF DELPHI RESULTS 235

6.9.1 The significance of the ratings obtained through the Delphi process 236 6.10 PHASE 2: PROPOSED SECOND DRAFT CSR COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK 238

6.10.1.1 Conceptual framework 241

6.10.1.2 CSR competency framework design and development steps 241

6.10.1.3 Competence 242

6.10.1.4 Competencies 242

6.10.1.5 CSR competency framework structure 243

6.11 PHASE 2: PROPOSED SECOND DRAFT CSR COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK 244

6.11.1 Strategic Leadership and Strategy Formulation 245

6.11.2 Supportive and co-operative relationships 246

6.11.3 Interconnecting and Presenting 247

6.11.4 CSR literacy, analysing and interpreting 249

6.11.5 Creating and Conceptualising 251

6.11.6 Organising and executing CSR/CSI initiatives 253

6.11.7 Adopting and Coping 255

6.11.8 Enterprising and Performing 256

6.12 CONCLUSION 258

CHAPTER 7 TOWARDS A CSR CURRICULUM FRAMEWORK: PHASE 3 FINDINGS AND

DISCUSSION 259

7.2 PHASE 3: DATA PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION 259

7.3.1 Respondents (n = 40) 259

(16)

7.3.1.2 Participants in the telephone interviews (n=25) 261 7.4 PHASE 3: QUESTIONNAIRE AND TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS ANALYSIS AND

DISCUSSION 262

7.4.1 Self-administered questionnaire 262

7.4.1.1 Reaching agreement on Tier 3 CSR competency definition validity 263 7.4.1.2 Testing Tier-3 CSR competency validity: hypothesis 263

7.5 CSR COMPETENCIES: EIGHT TIER-3 COMPETENCY DESCRIPTORS 263

7.5.1 Strategic leadership and strategy formulation 264

7.5.3 Interconnecting and presenting 267

7.5.5 Creating and conceptualising 269

7.5.7 Adapting and coping 271

7.5.8 Enterprising and performing 272

7.5.9 Eight Tier-3 competency CSR descriptors – conclusion 274 7.6 PHASE 3: FINDINGS FROM TELEPHONE INTERVIEWS AND ITS DISCUSSION 274

7.6.1 Telephone interviews (n=25) 274

7.6.1.1 Reaching agreement on Tier-1 CSR competency definition validity 277 7.6.1.2 Testing Tier-1 CSR competency validity: Hypothesis 277

7.7 CSR COMPETENCIES: 100 TIER 1 COMPETENCIES 277

7.7.1 Strategic leadership and strategy formulation 278

7.7.1.1 Tier-1 CSR competency: Critical 278

7.7.3 Interconnecting and presenting 281

7.7.5 Creating and conceptualising 287

7.7.7 Adapting and coping 294

7.7.8 Enterprising and performing 296

7.7.9 Tier-1 CSR competencies: Exclusions 298

(17)

7.8 CONCLUSION 300 CHAPTER 8 A PROPOSED CURRICULUM FRAMEWORK FOR CSR PRACTITIONERS:

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS 301

8.2 SYNTHESIS OF THE STUDY 301

8.2.1 The aim of the study 301

8.2.2 The research questions 302

8.3 SUMMARY OF MAIN FINDINGS 303

8.3.1 Need for CSR education 303

8.3.2 Curriculum framework development 303

8.3.3 Competency framework 304

8.3.4 Philosophical grounding 304

8.4 FACTUAL CONCLUSIONS 305

8.4.1 CSR practitioner roles and development 305

8.4.2 CSR professional profiles 305

8.4.3 Competency framework 305

8.4.4 CSR best practice framework 306

8.4.5 Missed opportunities 306

8.5 CONCEPTUAL CONCLUSIONS 307

8.5.1 Conceptual curriculum framework 307

8.5.2 CSR practitioner self-discovery 309

8.5.3 Business 309

8.5.4 TBL: people, profit and planet 310

8.5.5 Legislative frameworks 310

8.5.6 Critical Tier-1 and priority competencies 310

8.6 IMPLICATIONS EMERGING FROM THE STUDY 312

8.6.1 Practical implications 312

8.6.1.1 Establish a CSR industry body 312

8.6.1.2 Curriculum designers and policy makers 313

8.6.1.3 Employer and business 313

8.6.1.4 CSR practitioners 313

8.6.2 Theoretical implications 314

8.7 POSSIBLE DIRECTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH 314

8.8 STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS STUDY 315

8.9 CONCLUDING REMARKS 316

REFERENCES 317

ADDENDUM 1: E-MAIL INVITATION TO PARTICIPATE IN THE SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE 349 ADDENDUM 1.1: PERFORM SUPPORT FUNCTIONS FOR CORPORATE SOCIAL

(18)

ADDENDUM 1.2: PERFORM SUPPORT FUNCTIONS FOR MEDIA LIAISON, PUBLICITY

CAMPAIGNS AND CORPORATE SOCIAL INVESTMENT PROGRAMMES 356

ADDENDUM 1.3: USE THE PRINCIPLES OF EMPLOYMENT EQUITY TO RELATE CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY TO ORGANISATIONAL TRANSFORMATION 363

ADDENDUM 2: SNOWBALLING INVITATION TEMPLATE 369

ADDENDUM 3: FOLLOW-UP E-MAIL FOR RESPONDENTS WHO DID NOT COMPLETE THE

QUESTIONNAIRE 371

ADDENDUM 4: PHASE 3 E-MAIL NOTIFICATION TO PARTICIPATE IN QUESTIONNAIRE 372

ADDENDUM 5: CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN RESEARCH SURVEY 374

ADDENDUM 6: CSR PRACTITIONER SURVEY - SOUTH AFRICA 379

ADDENDUM 7: CSR/CSI COMPETENCY SURVEY – DELPHI SURVEY ROUND I 394

ADDENDUM 7.1: DRAFT CSR COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK 405

ADDENDUM 8: CSR/CSI COMPETENCY SURVEY – DELPHI SURVEY ROUND II 415 ADDENDUM 9: SOUTH AFRICAN CSR/CSI PRACTITIONER COMPETENCY FRAMEWORK

VALIDATION SURVEY 418

ADDENDUM 10: TELEPHONIC INTERVIEW GUIDE 425

ADDENDUM 11: TELEPHONIC INTERVIEW INFORMATION E-MAIL 433

ADDENDUM 12: ETHICAL CLEARANCE APPROVAL NOTICE - HS661/2011A 434

ADDENDUM 13: ETHICAL CLEARANCE APPROVAL NOTICE -

DESC/MCCREANOR/MAY2015/3 436

ADDENDUM 14: POLICY FOR RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH CONDUCT AT STELLENBOSCH

UNIVERSITY 438

ADDENDUM 15: LANGUAGE EDITING 448

ANNEXURE 1: SINGAPORE STATEMENT ON RESEARCH INTEGRITY 449

ANNEXURE 2: ORGANOGRAM: STRUCTURES SUPPORTING THE PROMOTION OF

RESPONSIBLE RESEARCH AT STELLENBOSCH UNIVERSITY 451

ANNEXURE 3: STELLENBOSCH UNIVERSITY RELATED POLICIES, PROCEDURES AND

GUIDELINES 452

(19)

Table 2.1: Some CSR definitions 28 Table 2.2: Five CSR dimensions, their coding scheme and sample phrases 33

Table 2.3: The evolution of BBBEE in South Africa 50

Table 2.4: Elements and weighting of generic BBBEE scorecard 52

Table 2.5: 2013 BBBEE Codes of Good Practice Indicators 54

Table 2.6: King Report: Governing stakeholder relationships 73

Table 3.1: Prescriptive curriculum 91

Table 3.2: Descriptive curriculum 92

Table 3.3: Five concurrent curricula 97

Table 3.4: Curriculum theories according to the domain of inquiry 100

Table 3.5: The Tyler Rationale 107

Table 3.6: Review of generic curriculum development phases 118 Table 3.7: NQF and sub-frameworks and qualification types 126

Table 3.8: Competence definitions 127

Table 3.9: NQF level descriptor categories 130

Table 3.10: Level descriptor categories 132

Table 5.1: Levels and stages of expertise 170

Table 6.1: Focus group participants’ job titles 193

Table 6.2: Preferred mode of learning 196

Table 6.3: Core drivers of CSR as influencing the CSR role 198 Table 6.4: UK competencies identified as relevant to SA (n=144) 202 Table 6.5: CSR competencies via line-by-line coding results 204

Table 6.6: First draft CSR competencies framework 220

Table 6.7: Focus group participants’ demographics 224

Table 6.8: Delphi questionnaire results: CSR competencies 227 Table 6.9: Core CSR competencies with a total collective agreement score of 100% 236 Table 6.10: Lower-ranking CSR competencies with a total collective agreement score

between 91% and 96% 237

Table 6.11: CSR competencies excluded from first-draft CSR competency framework 238

Table 6.12: Top tier CSR competencies descriptors 244

Table 7.1: Telephonic interview participants’ job titles (n = 25?) 262 Table 7.2: Validation data of the eight Tier-3 competency descriptors (n=40) 264

Table 7.3: Tier-1 CSR competency exclusion 299

(20)

Figure 1.1: Phase 1 of generating data 10

Figure 2.1: The definition of CSR according to ISO 26000 27

Figure 2.2: Carroll's CSR pyramid from 1991 31

Figure 2.3: Dimensions of CSR according to the EFQM 35

Figure 2.4: ISO 26000 Social Responsibility’s Seven Core Subjects 37

Figure 2.5: Carroll’s adapted CSR pyramid 40

Figure 2.6: DTI Balanced Scorecard 53

Figure 2.7: The role of business in society: An evolving approach 59

Figure 2.8: Assessment criteria for the JSE SRI Index 64

Figure 2.9: JSE SRI Index social indicators for training and development 65 Figure 2.10: A stakeholder model as derived from stakeholder theory 71

Figure 3.1 SAQA Top-down curriculum-making process 105

Figure 3.2: Tyler’s curriculum development rationale 109

Figure 3.3: Curriculum theorists’ contribution to curriculum design 116

Figure 3.4: Process model for curriculum development 117

Figure 4.1: A preliminary theoretical framework for curriculum development for CSR

practitioners in the South African context 146

Figure 5.1: Research design framework 161

Figure 6.1: Role function of the CSR practitioner (n=170) 199 Figure 6.2: Top ten competencies for current role functioning of the CSR practitioner (n=88) 207 Figure 6.3: Top ten competencies for specialist CSR training (n=88) 211 Figure 6.4: Top ten priorities (goals) managed within current CSR role (n=83) 212 Figure 6.5: Top ten performance measure competencies in current CSR role (n=) 216 Figure 6.6: Top ten CPD competencies in current CSR role (n=) 218 Figure 6.7: CSR competence framework: Second draft competency framework 240 Figure 6.8: CSR competency framework three-tiered structure 243

Figure 7.1: Draft CSR competency framework 276

Figure 7.2: Critical Tier-1 competencies for strategic leadership and strategy formulation 278 Figure 7.3: Critical Tier-1 competencies for supportive and co-operative relationships 280 Figure 7.4: Critical Tier-1 competencies for interconnecting and presenting 281 Figure 7.5: Critical Tier-1 competencies for interconnecting and presenting 284 Figure 7.6: Critical Tier-1 competencies for creating and conceptualising 288 Figure 7.7: Critical Tier-1 competencies for organising and executing CSR/CSI initiatives 290 Figure 7.8: Critical Tier-1 competencies for adapting and coping 294 Figure 7.5: Critical Tier-1 competencies for enterprising and performing 296 Figure 8.1: Proposed CSR practitioner curriculum framework 308

(21)

ANC African National Congress

BBBEE broad-based black economic empowerment BEE black economic empowerment

BMF Bench Marks Foundation (North-West University) BMS Bench Marks Centre for CSR (North-West University) BSR Business for Social Responsibility

CBiS Centre for Business in Society (USB-ED)

CECP Committee Encouraging Corporate Philanthropy

CFP corporate financial performance

CHE Council on Higher Education CoAL Coal of Africa

COSATU Congress of South African Trade Unions CPD continuous professional development CSI corporate social investment

CSR corporate social responsibility

DHET Department of Higher Education and Training DTI Department of Trade and Industry

EABiS European Academy of Business in Society

EC European Commission

ECR economic responsibilities

EE employment equity

EFQM European Foundation for Quality Management EQ emotional intelligence

ESG environmental, social and governance (standards) ETR ethical responsibilities

EU European Union

FET Further Education and Training (institutions)

GEAR Growth, Employment and Redistribution Programme GIBS Gordon Institute of Business Science

GRI Global Reporting Initiative

GRLI Globally Responsible Leadership Initiative GSB Graduate School of Business (UCT)

GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenheid HEQF Higher Education Qualifications Framework

HEQSF Higher Education Qualifications Sub-Framework

(22)

ICCSR International Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility ICSD Institute for Corporate Social Development

IoDSA Board of Directors of Southern Africa

ISO International Organization for Standardization

JET Joint Education Trust

JSE Johannesburg Stock Exchange L&D Learning and Development

MBA Master of Business Administration MBS Milpark Business School

NBI National Business Initiative

NGO non-governmental organisation

NLRD National Learners’ Records Database NMMU Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University NPAT Net Profit After Tax

NQF National Qualifications Framework NWU North-West University

OAU Organisation of African Unity

PDBA Postgraduate Diploma in Business Administration (NMMU) PHR philanthropic responsibilities

PMBOK Project Management Body of Knowledge PR public relations

PRME Principles for Responsible Management Education (UN) QC Quality Councils

QCTO Quality Council for Trades and Occupations RBS Rhodes Business School

RDP Reconstruction and Development Programme ROI Return on Investment

SADC Southern African Development Community

SAHECEF South African Higher Education Community Engagement Forum SAI Social Accountability International

SAQA South African Qualifications Authority SDL Skills Development Levy

SGBs Standards Generating Bodies (SAQA) SIL Social Innovation Lab (UCT GSB) SLP short learning programme (NMMU) SR social responsibility

SRI socially responsible investment TBL triple bottom line

(23)

TPSD Transnet Programme in Sustainable Development UCF Universal Competency Framework

UCT University of Cape Town

UF Urban Foundation

UK United Kingdom

UKZN University of KwaZulu-Natal

UN United Nations

UNGC United Nations Global Compact US Unit Standard (in SAQA)

USB University of Stellenbosch Business School USB-ED USB Executive Development (Pty) Ltd

WBCSD World Business Council for Sustainable Development

(24)

CSI is now a R7 billion-strong profession. A lot of lessons have been learnt and mistakes have been made. The same problems have been in the CSI arena for the last ten years because there has been major resistance to learning from each other. These problems should not be happening in an arena that is maturing into its own profession. How do we draw the learnings [sic] into a profession where newcomers can learn those lessons quickly and not make the same mistakes?

Bridgit Evans, CEO, GreaterGood Group (Evans, 2012) 1.1 INTRODUCTION

Until recently, it seemed that the focus of corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate social investment (CSI) specifically evolved around defining the content and context of CSR, and best practice from a global and national perspective. However, this study focused on the development of a CSR and/or CSI curriculum framework for the educational development of CSR practitioners in the South African context. It is evident from an analysis of registered CSR and CSI qualifications at the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) that very little or no focus has been placed on the professional development of CSR and/or CSI practitioners in South Africa.

In this introductory chapter, the context for this research is explained with an overview and discussion of the problem statement and objectives, which aim to serve as the orientation to the design of a curriculum framework for the development of CSR and/or CSI practitioners in South Africa. The rationale behind this study can be traced to the historical development of the main concept of CSR and CSI in the South African context through an overview of relevant literature. Some of the main concepts used in the study are also clarified in this chapter. The nature and form of the study are explained and the chapter outline is provided towards the end of this chapter.

1.2 ORIENTATION TO THE STUDY AND THE PROBLEM STATEMENT 1.2.1 International CSR education

CSR has been an important topic of debate in corporate and academic circles in North America for a number of years (Asongu, 2007; Carroll, 1999; Visser, 2012; Visser, Matten, Pohl & Tolhurst, 2010). The debate in Europe has gained extraordinary drive and has surpassed the concept and construct of CSR in practice. CSR is now losing momentum as a concept because of the instrumental ways in which it has been used in business practice (Crane, McWilliams, Matten, Moon & Siegel, 2008; Martinez, 2014; Matten & Moon, 2004; Moon, 2004; Orlitzky & Moon, 2008). In spite of these authors’ views, the integration of CSR into the curricula of business schools and universities is still current and one of the most significant topics in the global educational world. Orlitzky and Moon

(25)

(2008) noted that CSR has become more ingrained in European institutions of higher education, and argued that this indicates an evolution of CSR as a field of study.

Business scandals like the Enron bankruptcy catastrophe and the more recent underlying causes of the global financial collapse of 2007 once again highlighted the importance of ethics and CSR at curriculum level within business schools and universities. Various international and local universities and business schools participate in efforts of the World Business School Council of Sustainable Business (WBSCSB), the Globally Responsible Leadership Initiative (GRLI), and the United Nations (UN) backed Principles for Responsible Management Education (PRME), which bring together experts in various fields to determine the role of business in creating a sustainable future. A total of eight South African universities and business schools have signed up for the PRME codes and have to some extent committed to these codes. These principles do not address the development of practitioners, but focus on the CSR responsibilities of individual institutions.

The European Strategy for Sustainable Development (EUR-Lex, 2009) also recognised the important role that education and training systems should play in order to achieve the objectives of CSR. Education and training should, according to the final report submitted by GHK Consulting in association with the Danish Technology Institute Technopolis, contribute to all three critical axes of sustainable development: social, economic and environmental dimensions (GHK Consulting, 2008). Likewise, the Lisbon Agenda and the Education and Training 2010 work programme provided a coherent framework for Education for Sustainable Development at European level (Ertl, 2006). However, there is an information gap on how the concept of education for sustainable development has been translated into practices at Member States level. The United Kingdom (UK) government has recently launched a CSR Academy to report on the growth and spread of skills and competencies for the practice of CSR (Matten & Moon, 2004).

1.2.2 South African CSR / CSI practitioners

It is evident from research literature on educational (Matten & Moon, 2004; Moon, 2004; Orlitzky & Moon, 2008) that the European Union (EU) has placed strong emphasis on the importance of CSR education. The South African landscape is in stark contrast to the EU CSR development landscape. CSR practitioners in the South African context are suspended in an operational landscape marked by various CSR or CSI models. Njenga and Smit (2007), who completed extensive research on the CSI practitioner field in South Africa, argued that this field will not change unless CSI models are based on well-informed conceptualised frameworks. They further noted that they had received very poor responses from practitioners on two important fields of enquiry influencing CSI practice, i.e. principles and abstract context.

It is important to define the term “CSR practitioner” in the context of this study. The CSR practitioner role is not exclusive to CSR, but may include and/or require individuals to operate within the fields of Human Resources (HR), Employment Equity (EE), Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment

(26)

(BBBEE), Learning and Development (L&D), Marketing, Corporate Social Investment (CSI)1_or Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit, 2009). Njenga and Smit (2007) concurred with this observation and identified four types of CSI practitioners during their research for a guidebook for CSI practitioners in South Africa.

Milton Friedman, one of the most well-known and respected American economists of his time and recipient of the world-acclaimed Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics, could not have been more wrong in his critical thoughts on CSR. Friedman’s dogma of making as much money for one’s stakeholders as possible is no longer valid (Friedman, 1970). Corporations are expected, and are under tremendous pressure, to look after the bottom line as well as be moral business citizens (Kotler & Lee, 2005). Corporations could never survive without looking after their triple bottom line, referring to John Elkington’s notion that companies should have three bottom lines or accounts, namely a profit and loss account, a “people account” and a “planet account” (Elkington, 1997). Sam Seepi, senior manager at BHP Billiton Development Trust, also rejected Friedman’s doctrine by stating that the adoption of triple-bottom-line accounting practices, and the voluntary involvement in initiatives such as the Johannesburg Stock Exchange’s Socially Responsible Investment Index (JSE SRI Index, 2014), is changing South African organisations’ approach to CSI (De Bruin, 2006; Irwin, 2003). 1.2.3 The gap in CSR education in South Africa

CSR is not a new phenomenon, but the global interpretation of this phenomenon and South African legislation have changed the landscape of CSR within its own context (Irwin, 2003; Ndhlovu, 2011). This change is evident in business as well as on an academic level. It presents various challenges in terms of implementing CSR strategies effectively and efficiently on an operational level. Ideally, the implementation of CSR strategies has to comply with the spirit as well as the letter of the law. There is, however, very little guidance in the form of learning and development programmes for CSR practitioners focused on bona fide operational practice to ensure effective and efficient CSR strategies across industries. Additionally, sound CSR practices are complicated by a lack of competent CSR practitioners. Njenga and Smit (2007:7) concurred with this argument that there seems to be a lack of competent CSR practitioners, and referred to the fact that CSR practitioners often come from previously disadvantaged backgrounds and are therefore isolated from power within business. Not only is there a power barrier, but they also find themselves without resources within corporations. Njenga and Smit (2007:8) argued that CSR practitioners should acquire the necessary competence to promote solid organisational, administration and management skills in CSR structures.

1 Corporate Social Investment (CSI) in South Africa has emerged as a facet of CSR. CSI is seen as a “unique” South African phenomenon (Skinner, C. & Mersham, G. 2008. Corporate social responsibility in South Africa: Emerging trends.

(27)

A CSR conference in 2006 made it clear that there are insufficient skilled and knowledgeable practitioners in the CSR field, not only in South Africa, but globally (Njenga & Smit, 2007). This was mainly due to unclear and indefinable curriculum frameworks for the design, development and implementation of CSR practitioner curricula. Njenga and Smit (2007) said that, based on one of their surveys, CSI(R) practitioners, who are seen as the stewards of CSI(R) awareness and the promotion of best practice towards social investment, are discouraged and more often than not feel frustrated, cynical and disempowered (Njenga & Smit, 2007). It became clear from their survey data that the feeling of disempowerment can be contributed to a scarcity of adequate skills and knowledge in the field of CSI (Njenga & Smit, 2007).

Njenga and Smit’s (2007) findings from 2006 and 2007 regarding the lack of CSR knowledge and skills were re-affirmed by findings from an African study on CSR practice in sub-Saharan Africa by the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenheid (GTZ) in South Africa. Zusammenarbeit (GTZ, 2009:107) found that three major drivers contributed to struggling CSR practitioners in the South African context. The first driver was lack of capacity and experience in the field of CSR. This included the lack of standards, curricula and accreditation of CSR practitioners as well as a lack of skills or tools for external stakeholder engagement. Secondly, CSR practitioners were not sufficiently supported by top management and, lastly, the CSR function and CSR projects (project identification, implementation, evaluation and reporting) were not properly managed. The lack of skilled CSR practitioners in South Africa has not improved since 2006. In a critical evaluation and analysis of the 2012 CSI Matters Conference video footage (hosted by CSI Matters2 – initiated and managed by Trialogue South Africa3), it was found that South Africa’s CSR practitioners, according to Bridgit Evans, CEO of the GreaterGood Group4_{, are making the same mistakes they made ten years ago.} They are also struggling with learning and, more importantly, learning from each other. The following relevant question has therefore been asked: “How do we draw the learnings into a profession where newcomers can learn those lessons quickly and not make the same mistakes?” (Evans, 2012). 1.2.4 South African Qualifications Framework for CSR

A search for CSR and CSI registered qualifications on the South African Qualifications Authority’s (SAQA’s) National Qualifications Framework (NQF) resulted in no registered (full) qualifications for Corporate Social Investment and/or Corporate Social Responsibility. However, three separate Unit

2 _{CSI Matters is a corporate social investment communication and collaboration hub, open to contributions and} conversations from all members of the CSI and development sectors.

3 _{Trialogue is a consulting, publishing and research organisation specialising in the areas of sustainable business and} corporate social investment (CSI). It publishes annual industry handbooks, produces customised client reports, and offers specialist consulting services in both focus areas.

4 _{The GreaterGood Group develops the sector for social change by facilitating the full spectrum of giving and social} investment in South Africa. GreaterGood South Africa is a public service organisation connecting givers with good causes and activating the public to give responsibly.

(28)

Standards (US) were registered for CSI as well as CSR at a career entry level and were nested within non-CSR related qualifications.

The first US (335837) on SAQA’s website: “Perform support functions for corporate social investment programmes” (SAQA, 2010a) is in Field 03: Business, Commerce and Management Studies on NQF level 4 (see Addendum 1.1: Perform support functions for corporate social investment programmes). The second US (115414): “Perform support functions for media liaison, publicity campaigns and corporate social investment programmes” according to SAQA is in Field 03: Business, Commerce and Management Studies on NQF level 4 (SAQA, 2010b) (see Addendum 1.2: Perform support functions for media liaison, publicity campaigns and corporate social investment programmes). The third and only US with reference to CSR specifically is the following US (116919) on SAQA’s website: “Use the principles of employment equity to relate corporate social responsibility to organisational transformation” (SAQA, 2010c) in Field 03: Business, Commerce and Management studies on NQF level 5 (see Addendum 1.3: Use the principles of employment equity to relate corporate social responsibility to organisational transformation).

It is clear that, against the background of the framework for South African qualifications, an adequate approach to CSR curriculum development and/or skills development does not exist. In addition, the development of competent CSR practitioners within the South African context seems minimal, if not non-existent. According to CSI(R) industry leaders such as Nick Rockey (MD, Trialogue), Gail Campbell (CEO, Zennex Foundation) and Bridgit Evans (CEO, GreaterGood), South African CSR practitioners find themselves in a deserted educational minefield.

In an effort to address the lack of educational frameworks for CSR practitioners, Rockey proposed a concept of “communities in practice” to enable practitioners to get together with like-minded people from a particular field in order to develop and share experience. Campbell offered her insight and suggested that CSR practitioners start small to create forums in order to value knowledge as much as they (the CSR practitioners) value funding.

Evans stated that “collaboration for learning is so important and needs to be taken more seriously” (Evans, 2012). Yet, none of these proposals from CSR industry leaders has been taken up by CSR practitioners. Neither have they delivered success in promoting and/or designing a recognised CSR practitioner development framework (curriculum) within the South African context.

One may further argue that there is a knowledge gap in well-researched and defined priority skills, knowledge and behavioural components of successful CSR practitioners, leading to a gargantuan gap in the development of a generally acceptable national curriculum framework for CSR practitioners (Njenga & Smit, 2007:3). This study therefore aimed to identify and define priority skills, knowledge and behavioural components for the development of a curriculum framework to address such gaps in the South African context.

(29)

1.3 PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

This section introduces the focus of the study and considers its potential value. 1.3.1 Potential contribution to knowledge

The study intends to make perceptible contributions to several areas of CSR education research in the South African context. A primary contribution of this thesis could be to divert scholars’ attention from theoretical to empirical approaches in the analysis of CSR best practice in the design and development of curriculum frameworks for CSR practitioners. By conceptualising and contextualising CSR through the lens of an educational development construct, the study potentially takes an important step towards making CSR and CSI curriculum research more practical.

The study also potentially contributes to CSR literature by analysing practitioners’ skills, knowledge and behaviours (competencies) required for adopting CSR best practices. This is contrary to views that practitioners engage in CSR best practice to enhance the economic as well as socio-economic performance of organisations or due to altruism in wanting to correct the injustices of the past. This thesis aims to provide evidence that the true reasons are more often adverse and reactive than confident in implementation of sustainable CSR and CSI best practice while creating shared value. Exploring the true reasons why CSR practitioners engage in CSR best practice seems to be a potentially important contribution as it highlights that external pressures have more influence on the practitioners’ sense making and decision making than suggested by the most prominent approach to CSR. Notably, this thesis adds to the CSR and CSI knowledge base by demonstrating that the development of CSR practitioners and subsequently best practice in CSR and CSI cannot be guaranteed through curriculum design and development from a unilateral (business) and/or academic perspective. This thesis also aims to advance knowledge by demonstrating that a multilateral stakeholder approach to the design and development of a curriculum framework for CSR and CSI practitioners in the South African context may be the best approach in an effort to agree on the dimensions of a curriculum framework for CSR and CSI curriculum design.

The study further may contribute to knowledge by exploring the context of the implementation of CSR practices and the competencies required as catalysts in this process. While the literature indicates that CSR and CSI education exists in a global perspective, literature suggests that educational opportunities in South Africa are negligible. Although this study acknowledges that CSR- and CSI-related development opportunities exist in both the formal and informal educational sectors, it argues that CSR and CSI education offered is not enough to develop entry-level and mid-career CSR and CSI practitioners’ competencies.

In this way, this study potentially advances knowledge regarding the conditions necessary to facilitate the design and development of a curriculum framework as well as CSR and CSI competencies, and therefore the implementation of sustainable CSR best practices. Finally, the

(30)

study may contribute to CSR literature by identifying the elements of skills, knowledge and behaviours required to inform the design and development of a curriculum framework.

1.3.2 Statement of the problem

It can it be assumed that there will be knowledge, skills and behavioural gaps in the development of future CSR practitioners if there is no framework for the design and development of a CSR practitioner curriculum. In the absence of a curriculum framework for the development of CSR practitioners, uncertainty will prevail in terms of the skills, knowledge and behavioural components to be included in such a curriculum framework. An equally important hurdle to overcome is to determine who should inform the curriculum framework. In the absence of substantial information to support the design and development of a widely accepted or national curriculum, a CSR practitioner curriculum framework seems to be in urgent need of development. This is thus an attempt to meet the needs of stakeholders (CSR practitioners, organisations and higher education institutions) if the purpose of the original intentions of BBBEE in South Africa is to be properly served.

All of these questions seemed relevant to the problem at hand. However, for the purpose of this study, one primary research question emerged, constituting the focus of the study:

What constitutes a curriculum framework for the professional development of CSR practitioners in South Africa?

The following subsidiary research questions supported the main research question:  What are the most common functions attributed to the role of the CSR practitioner?

 Which functions can possibly be grouped together in the CSR practitioner’s portfolio as functional building blocks?

 Which elements of skills, knowledge and behaviour are required to effectively manage the CSR function within South African organisations and within the parameters of South African legislation and industry-specific codes and standards?

 What is the hierarchy of significance of the above elements for the CSR practitioner?

1.3.3 Methodology

To address the research question at hand, the study involved a multi-phased, sequential explanatory mixed-method research methodology within a pragmatic research paradigm. According to Creswell and Clark (2011), the sequential explanatory design is used to explain quantitative results based on follow-up qualitative data. The approach to the study was initially deductive in nature as an existing model was tested in the South African business context. However, the study shifted to an inductive approach as a curriculum framework, which did not exist in South Africa during the study period, was attempted. The research plan involved five goals:

To identify the most common competencies that may potentially contribute to the success of CSR practitioners.

(31)

To investigate which CSR competencies can possibly be grouped together in a practitioner’s portfolio as functional building blocks.

To investigate which elements of skills, knowledge and behaviour (competencies) are required for effectively managing the South African CSR function.

To investigate the hierarchy of significance of identified CSR competencies for CSR practitioners.

To suggest a possible curriculum framework for the development of CSR practitioners in South Africa.

The execution of the empirical part of this inquiry was divided in to three phases and each phase had two distinct strands with specific objectives. The objectives for each phase were linked to the research question and each phase was guided by the subsidiary research questions, which aimed at answering the main research question. The research was thus planned to involve at least three phases and the data collection and analysis of each phase involved answering the following questions:

Phase 1:

 Strand 1: What are the most common functions attributed to the role of the CSR practitioner?  Strand 2: Which elements of skills, knowledge and behaviour are required for effectively managing the CSR function within South African organisations and within the parameters of South African legislation, including industry-specific codes and standards?

Phase 2:

 Strand 1: What is the hierarchy of significance of the above elements for the CSR practitioner?  Strand 2: Which functions can possibly be grouped together in the CSR practitioner’s portfolio

as functional building blocks? Phase 3:

 Strand 1: What is the hierarchy of significance of the competencies for the CSR practitioner?  Strand 2: Which validated competencies should be included in a proposed competency

framework?

1.3.3.1 Phase 1 – Exploration of CSR practitioners’ functions and roles

The first strand in this phase of the research project comprised of a quantitative exploration of the specific roles and functions assigned to CSR practitioners and the most effectual and proficient competencies required by CSR practitioners in the South African context (Figure 1.1). This was done

(32)

by using a survey to collect primary data provided by the collective insight of experts5_{within the field} of CSR. The second strand of phase one of this research project compromised of a qualitative exploration of the quantitative data collected during Strand 1 of Phase 1. This was done by using focus groups to review the proposed first draft CSR competency framework to give a deeper understanding of the proposed CSR competencies. Qualitative data was generated from a group of experts by subjecting them to a series of questionnaires, in-depth focus-group interviews and controlled opinion feedback (Dalkey & Helmer, 1963)

1.3.3.2 Phase 2 – Exploration of CSR competency hierarchy

In the first strand of Phase 2 a Delphi exercise approach was used to identify and refine the main roles, functions, critical skills, knowledge and behavioural components (Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill, 2009). In Delphi research, experts participate in several rounds of questions that require thoughtful and detailed responses. Panellists work toward consensus by sharing reasoned opinions and reconsidering the opinions with regard to comments, objections and arguments offered by other experts (Facione, 1990).

Dalkey, Brown and Cochran (1969) used the Delphi technique in an experimental study of group opinion in 1969 and argued that the Delphi technique is a method of eliciting group judgments. Dalkey (1967) described three broad features of the Delphi methodology:

Anonymous response – opinions of members of the group are obtained by formal questionnaire;

Iteration and control feedback – interaction is affected by systematic exercise conducted in several iterations, with carefully controlled feedback between rounds; and

Statistical group response – the group opinion is defined as an appropriate aggregate of individual opinions on the final round.

In this study, the Delphi technique involved six steps to generate and select critical skills, knowledge and behavioural components.

(33)

Figure 1.1: Phase 1 of generating data

The findings from the data analysis during the first strand of Phase 2 (see 1.3.3.2) were explored using mainly qualitative data (Creswell & Clark, 2011:208).

1.3.3.3 Phase 3 – Review and validation of a CSR curriculum framework

The aim of Phase 1 and 2 was to develop and define the first and second draft competency frameworks towards the development of a curriculum framework. This framework was further developed, tested and validated with representatives of the CSR industry in Phase 3 of the inquiry. Telephone interviews were used in Strand 2 of Phase 3 in order to probe significant results by exploring aspects of the CSR practitioners’ roles, functions, critical skills, knowledge and behavioural gaps as identified in the first step of Phase 1 with a selected panel of CSR experts from the CSR industry. Statistical hypothesis testing was utilised to either accept or reject the competencies identified, testing whether the CSR competency definitions are valid and should or should not be included in the final CSR competency framework.

The purpose of a follow-up with qualitative data in Phase 3 was to better understand and clearly define the roles, functions, critical skills, knowledge and behavioural components identified. The data analysis resulting from the first two phases was also applied in the formulation of the questions for

(34)

the telephone interviews in Strand 2 of Phase 3 in order to develop a curriculum framework for a CSR practitioner skills programme.

1.3.4 Generating data

All the companies listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange’s Socially Responsible Investment (SRI) Index were approached to participate in the study on a voluntary basis. This was done to ensure that all companies would have an equal opportunity of being selected on a random basis for the study. All the companies were approached on a national level to ensure that the responses would represent general CSR curriculum requirements. Purposeful sampling was used for the qualitative data phase of the study in order to select individuals based on their experience in the field of CSR. 1.3.5 Source data

Participating companies were required to complete questionnaires (surveys) with informed consent from the relevant organisational leaders. Each company was requested to appoint a contact person who liaised closely with the researcher to enable the companies to complete the online surveys. Collected data was processed and information was stored on a secure server to ensure the safekeeping of all the relevant information.

1.3.6 Criteria for inclusion

The criteria for participant and company inclusion in the study were as follows:

 The 82 companies listed in the JSE’s Socially Responsible Investment (SRI) Index in 2014;  CEOs or senior managers from the listed companies to represent the CSR needs of

organisations;

 Practitioners from the listed companies to represent the CSR needs of practitioners.

The demographic details of participating role players, from which it may be possible to ascertain the identity of the role players, were collected using a standardised online data collection form while maintaining the anonymity of the survey participants.

1.3.7 Ethical considerations

CSR and CSI practitioners involved in this study were requested to voluntarily participate and given a choice in terms of any disclosure and participation. The ethical considerations applied in this study will be discussed in detail in Chapter 5 (cf. 5.12).

1.4 LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY