Minggu, 24 November 2013
Tanggung jawab Sosial Perusahaan atau Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) adalah suatu konsep bahwa organisasi, khususnya (namun bukan hanya) perusahaan adalah memiliki berbagai bentuk tanggung jawab terhadap seluruh pemangku kepentingannya, yang di antaranya adalah konsumen, karyawan, pemegang saham, komunitas dan lingkungan dalam segala aspek operasional perusahaan yang mencakup aspek ekonomi, sosial, dan lingkungan.
Suatu perusahaan sekarang ini sudah dituntut untuk menerapkan CSR sebagai bagian dari kegiatan perusahaannya. hal ini dilakukan sebagai wujud konstribusinya terhadap lingkungan dan sekitarnya baik itu dalam level internal maupun eksternal perusahaan. Seperti dilansir dari majalah Forbes, Jumat (4/10/2013), berikut ini 10 perusahaan dengan CSR terbaik di dunia, diantaranya :
1. Microsoft, dengan score 72,97
2. Walt Disney, 72,83
3. Google, 72,71
4. BMW, 72,14
5. Daimler, 70,65
6. Sony, 69,49
7. Intel, 69,32
8. Volkswagen, 69,29
9. Apple, 69,21
10. Nestle, 69.
Kamis, 21 November 2013
In 2005, Guidant Corporation, a maker of medical cardiac devices, revealed that many of its defibrillators had an electrical defect that might cause them to fail when needed to interrupt an erratic and possibly fatal heart rhythm. Guidant was forced to recall more than 100,000 implantable heart devices, including three models of defibrillators with similar electrical flaws that were tied to at least seven patient deaths.
One of the most troubling aspects of the recall came into view when it was revealed that Guidant had known about the electrical problem for at least 3 years after two physicians in Minneapolis, Dr. Maron and Dr. Hauser, told the company about the problem and urged Guidant to alert physicians about the device defect so they could check their patients and implants new models. Guidant made no effort to communicate the problem to physicians nationwide, or to the Food and drug Administration (FDA) that has a clear procedure for when a company should make a legal written declaration about known problems with a medical product. When the company failed to act on their message and take their advice the physicians contacted other physicians and The New York Times. The resulting story and outcry quickly forced Guidant to reveal the problem with its devices and communicate the problem to physicians nationwide.
In the ensuing investigation, as panel of medical experts came to conclusion that Guidant had deliberately kept its faulty cardiac devices on the market without considering the medical impact and had knowingly failed to alert doctors and patients when the devices started to malfunction. Once legal proceeding were started against the company, internal documents further revealed that a consultant to Guidant had informed the company’s top executives that he believed it had a clear ethical obligation to inform physicians about heart device defects and he urged the company to begin a recall process informing them that their decision to withhold such data was highly questionable. He also noted that Guidant had a clear conflict of interest that would naturally lead it (and other companies) to disclose product failures only when absolutely necessary. So, if a tragedy occurred—which it did—Guidant’s actions would be viewed in the worst possible light possible; it is always in a company’s best interest to expose its dirty laundry.