Social performance: key lessons from recent experiences within Shell

Abstract

PurposeSeeks to summarize the findings of research undertaken by the Shell Group to better understand the business relevance, parameters, status and tools and approaches to manage social performance.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is based on four detailed case studies that combined qualitative and quantitative research methodologies and included distinct operational, business and socio‐economic contexts. The paper seeks to build theory around the concept of social performance.FindingsKey findings include that: there exists a strong business case for social performance; good social performance is fundamentally concerned with the identification and management of core business impacts; social issues can be identified and managed in a systematic manner; and The Shell Group is developing and implementing a range of tools and approaches to assist effective management of social issues.Research limitations/implicationsThe research is based on a limited number of cases from within Shell; further validation of findings could be achieved through similar research in other industrial sectors.Practical implicationsResearch has highlighted the business case for social performance, key “ingredients” of social performance and provides a specific framework and tools for more effective management of social issues.Originality/valueFirst time such research has been undertaken within the Shell Group and perhaps similar companies. Paper should be of potential interest value to practitioners (e.g. social performance and CSR managers), academics, policy makers and non‐governmental organizations.

Making sense of corporate social responsibility in international business: experiences from Shell

“…Stakeholder engagement is crucial to: (i) a better understanding of the distribution of impacts; (ii) a focus on those who would otherwise not benefit; and (iii) ensuring that interventions are welcome and appropriate. From a Shell perspective, stakeholder engagement helps operations achieve business objectives and is also the key mechanism to ensure that Shell employees themselves have a realistic understanding of the social consequences of their activities (Fossgard-Moser 2005). The latter explains that stakeholder engagement makes business sense, especially regarding Shell employees.…”

“…Because of cases such as the Oman case, Shell wants to engage with key stakeholders as early as possible, including direct neighbours ('fenceline communities') in order to prevent possible escalations. Engaging stakeholders enables Shell to understand the concerns, priorities and expectations of different groups (Fossgard-Moser 2005). As such, a continuous engagement process helps to assess Shell's impacts and work on strategies to avoid and mitigate negative impacts, as well as deliver benefits to local communities and broader societies throughout the life cycle of a project.…”

Linking strategic logistics change to labor rights

“…Markley and Davis (2007) propose several competitive advantages, such as stakeholder ratings and profitability, which can be achieved through the creation of a sustainable supply chain. A company's social responsibility can improve the raising of capital, since several investors today promote ethically and socially responsible organizations (Carter and Jennings, 2002b; Fossgard‐Moser, 2005). CSR, or the absence of social responsibility, can also have a large influence on a business's reputation, goodwill and trademarks (Schiebel and Pochtrager, 2003).…”

Civil Society and Project Development in Russia: The status and potential of Social Impact Assessment

“…The Sustainable Livelihoods Approach presumes that communities are multidimensional, and community development is not limited to enhancing the level of income or standard of living (Gutierrez-Monteset et al, 2009;. Another model -Asset Based Community Development -stresses the need to build on a community's capacities or 'assets' rather than to focus on its problems (Kretzmann and McKnight 1993a, 1993b, 2005Haines, 2009;INRC, 2016). It does not provide any specific assets framework -the assets and community development priorities and options are defined by each community for itself ).…”

“…Based Community Development (ABCD) seeks to build on a community's capacities or assets rather than focus on its problems (Kretzmann and McKnight 1993a, 1993b, 2005INRC, 2016). ABCD elaborates the different assets within a community, including those related to individuals, associations and institutions INRC, 2016).…”