Awareness Trainings - Draft #1

Awareness Trainings
on Corporate Cultural Responsibility
Slides’ Content - Draft #1

PART 1 : WHY TO ENGAGE WITH CCR
I/I Glossary
« Culture »
1/ UNESCO 2001’s Universal Declaration For Cultural Diversity:
« Culture is a complex whole which includes knowledge, beliefs, arts, morals, laws, customs, and
any other capabilities and habits acquired by humans as members of a society. »
« Culture is about distinctive marks, spirituals and materials, intellectuals and emotional, which
characterize a group of people ».
« Culture is mainly about values, beliefs, behaviors, and customs. »
2/ « Values »:
Norms and traditions which influence attitudes and behaviours in society. There are different types
of values such as ethical or moral values, religious and political values, and social and cultural
values. Individual values are normally related to personality, needs, experiences, and
understanding of the social context, whereas collective are determined by the social, religious and
political norms of a particular society.
3/ « Intangible Cultural Heritage »
Practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills – as well as the instruments, objects,
artefacts and cultural spaces associated therewith – that communities, groups and, in some cases,
individuals recognize as part of their cultural heritage. This intangible cultural heritage, transmitted
from generation to generation, is constantly recreated by communities and groups in response to
their environment, their interaction with nature and their history, and provides them with a sense of
identity and continuity, thus promoting respect for cultural diversity and human creativity. For the
purposes of this Convention, consideration will be given solely to such intangible cultural heritage
as is compatible with existing international human rights instruments, as well as with the
requirements of mutual respect among communities, groups and individuals, and of sustainable
development.

4/ Cultural Specificities
Culture comprises multiple constituents, such as its material and subjective forms. Material culture
refers to elements such as clothing, food, housing, tools, and machines, as well as objects such as
goods, services, technology, and the methods people employ to share them (Cohen, 2009).
Subjective culture instead refers to a group’s characteristic perceptions of the social environment,
which represents the « how and why we behave in certain ways, how we perceive reality, what we
believe to be true, what we build and create, and what we accept as good and desirable » (Westby,
1993). This subjective part also includes « ideas about how to make the elements of material
culture (e.g., how do we build a house), how to live properly, how to behave in relation to objects
and people » (Triandis, 2002).
In terms of scope, cultures may seem very broad, as in examples of national identity (Uruguayans,
Danes), or they may be more delimited, as exemplified by ethnic minorities (we count 54 ethnic
minorities in Europe, or some 105 million people, including the Basques of northern Spain and
southern France, the Sami of northern Scandinavia, and Ashkenazi Jews in France and Germany,
for example) or cultures specific to common interests and beliefs that bind different participants or
stakeholders (contemporary urban, punk, or hippie cultures).
5/ Culture and Society: Links and Differences
Original’s Holistic Approach of Culture
We consider cultures as a huge collective, societal and territorial issue of our globalized world.
We believe that an approach of culture and identity only considered in their individual aspects is
not relevant when engaging with cultural sustainability and responsibility: even if cultures are living
through individuals, individuals are also living through cultures, peoples and societies.
We consider cultures « through their locality and moment » as well as intangible values constituting
the distinctive achievements of human groups. Cultures have intrinsic value, linked to components
of a good and happy life and the ability to foster individual well-being (Musschenga, 1998).
« Cultural diversity » has different meanings itself: a cultural diversity among individuals inside
societies is not a cultural diversity among the societies and the peoples inside the open-world.
Diversity has become a global, societal and collective issue (among people and societies), and is
not only an individual issue (inside societies).

Culture as a Human Resource
Social Capital - (Bourdieu / Putnam): social institutions, values, customs, interactions, and
relationships that construct a « social unit ». It is believed that a society can only prosper through
sustainable social cohesion: in other words, our social ties form a vital element of the fabric of our
communities and peoples.
Intangible Capital - in economics, the term is used to describe the intangible assets and values
that are the key drivers of economic growth and competition. The concept also represents the
intellectual capital and the collective knowledge of an organization such as a society or a company.
« Cultural Capital » - (Bourdieu): a person's education (knowledge and intellectual skills. .
Embodied Cultural Capital - a knowledge that is consciously acquired and the passively
inherited, by socialization to culture and traditions. Unlike property, cultural capital is not
transmissible, but is acquired over time, and becomes a person's habitus (character and
way of thinking), which, in turn, becomes more receptive to similar cultural influences.
Cultures Today
Globalization: process of international integration which occurs as a result of transnational and
transcultural integration of human and non-human activities through interchange and exchange of
worldviews, people, products, ideas and cultures. It is facilitated through a greater access to
information, sophisticated means of communication and transportation, increased trade,
transaction, migration, and the increased movement of people and capital. The worldwide
movement towards the integration of economic, trade, financial and communication activities has
enabled greater interconnectedness and interdependence.
Global Village (McLuhan): the term suggests that through the development of technology the
world has become more like one village. The almost instant movement of information across the
globe has brought together different political and social actors and consequently raised the human
awareness and therefore responsibility to events occurring across the globe. McLuhan viewed the
internet as an extension of consciousness, as news events are spread instantly. The term « global
village » reflects the effects that increased interconnectedness and global sociological structures
have within the context of culture and identity.
Global Culture or the « One-World Culture »: the phenomenon that the inhabitants of the world
will eventually lose their distinctive identities and cultures, leaving behind one global culture. In
other words, people around the world will subscribe to the same values, traditions, and customs.
The socioeconomic evidence underpinning this thesis is the worldwide consumption of the same
goods and services together with the exponential use of Information and Communication
Technologies. The biological argument standing behind this idea is the cumulative cultural
adaptation of human beings, the characteristics which allowed human kind to evolve and produce
technologies suitable to different environments.

I/II Analogy with Environmental Issues
Cultures as a Resource.
Cultures have to be considered like the natural resources. Cultures are a need, a necessity, a
crucial capital for the humans: we are humans because we are cultural, and we are cultural
because other peoples are culturally different than us.
Globalization and its risks of standardization is highlighting the importance of cultures as well as
this process highlighted the importance of the natural ressources.
The territorial aspect of cultures has to be preserved and highlighted because it represents a
capital which helps individuals to develop, blossom and foster social link. This way, the creation of
new « supra » or « infra » cultures and communities can lead to the implosion of the traditional
social basis if not taken responsibly.
Evolution of the Natural Species / of the Societies.
The evolution, in nature, is about adapting to the environment (Darwin): the natural species which
have been sustainable are the ones that were able to adapt to new contexts.
The change, in societies, is also about adapting, and/or reacting, to a social environment, and both
logics are leading to the sustainability of the species and societies.
Since humans are « cultural animals », the social and collective changes also depend on universal
rules such as cycles of « action - reaction » and awareness on the errors made in the past. In other
words, collective memory helps groups of humans to take a step back on their situation, take the
good decisions and so evolve: heritage is a precious capital for evolution (Polybe).
The evolution of societies is not universal and uniform, but the logic of evolution is: this kind of
analogy can help to anticipate and analyze how people, peoples and societies will adapt to
globalization.

Interdependency among Natural Species / among Cultures.
In Nature, there is interdependency between species (case of the food chain cycles): if bees
disapear, humans disappear, and so humans need to preserve the biodiversity in order to be
sustainable themselves.
It is exactly the same with cultures: cultural (bio)diversity has to be preserved, because no culture
can live by itself. When a culture disappears, another chance for the sustainable development of
the humankind disappears.
A world without differences is a dangerous acultural grouping for the humankind, because a
culturally standardized world is a confined society, and an isolated society is not a sustainable
society in the long term.
Sustainability of the Natural Species / of the Humankind.
UNESCO 2001’s Declaration for Cultural Diversity : « Culture takes diverse forms across time
and space. This diversity is embodied in the uniqueness and plurality of the identities of the groups
and societies making up humankind. As a source of exchange, innovation and creativity, cultural
diversity is as necessary for humankind as biodiversity is for nature. In this sense, it is the common
heritage of humanity and should be recognized and affirmed for the benefit of present and future
generations. »
Parents need different genetic heritage in order to have viable children. Some communities of the
Amazon are sharing men and women amongst themselves because they precisely need the
« otherness » in order to be sustainable (Levy Strauss).
This way, universality can be dangerous too: a world formed by the same genetic heritage is an
incestuous and degenerated world, and an incestuous world is formed by humans condemned to
slowly disappear. It is the same with cultures: « a world formed by the same cultural heritage is a
humankind condemned to disappear » (UNESCO former Director of the Intangible Heritage’s
Cécile Duvelle).
While globalization, standardization and individualization can make all of us the same,
humankind’s sustainability will require cultural sustainability.

I/III Cultures and Sustainable Development
« Sustainable Development »: development that meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.
Cultural Exchanges in a Globalized Context:
Exchanging is, first, about sharing and mixing. But exchanging also implies having something to
exchange. So, what if we all become the same global individuals without any collective
membership? While living in our open-world the question is not about how to exchange anymore,
but about the consequences of these exchanges: if the current political closures can jeopardize the
exchange, too much exchange can also kill the exchange.
The consequences of the current tendencies on withdrawal can lead to isolated societies.
However, the context has changed, and global exchanges have never been this important: our
globalized world is also becoming an uniform and unique society de facto: economically, politically,
psychologically and culturally.
An untamed globalization as well as a non-responsible open-world can lead to cultural loss and
identity disorientation everywhere, and that’s why our generation has now to enjoy the open-world
(« meet its present needs ») by allowing the next generations to enjoy it too (« meet its future
needs »).
Nowadays, the sustainability of the human exchanges is paradoxically about preserving the
cultures and the identities that are being weakened by a world of unfettered interactions: the
cultural sustainability of the peoples and the territories is not about the preservation of the past, but
much more about the sustainable development of the future. Globalization has come, and the risk
is today huge, and concrete, for the sustainability of the humanity. So, why make the human life
sustainable if there is not humanity anymore?

Cultural Sustainability
Cultural sustainability is about the sustainability of human places, roots, values and ways of life:
societal’s sustainability with a social dimension.
Cultural (bio)diversity has to be preserved equally, and for the same reasons, than environmental
biodiversity: culture is now the fourth pillar of sustainability (« Culture in, for and as Sustainable
Development », 2015, Dessein).
Cultural sustainability necessarily implies a global and responsible vision of the future, based on
intangible human basic needs, and which highlights the interdependency among people, peoples
and societies.
Cultures are also part of the « Circles of Sustainability » process, which is a way of developing an
interpretative description of the sustainability of a region and its immediate hinterland. Here
sustainability is indeed understood in relation to local, national, and global processes in its
ecological, economic, political and cultural form. The seven perspectives of the cultural domain of
the Circles of Sustainability are: identity and engagement, creativity and recreation, memory and
projection, beliefs and ideas, gender and generations, enquiry and learning, and health and
wellbeing.
Cultures and Human Development
We are considered as humans (Homo Sapiens Sapiens) not only because of our large brain, but
also because of our social life and the different cultures ruling it.
Cultural differences among territories and communities are indeed an historical element of
comparison with other life and thinking models. Comparison helps you to relativize on your own
situation because comparison creates awareness on the state of your society: the other one allows
you to exist by yourself.
The Age of Explorations until the XVIIIth century leaded to the emergence of the « historical
awareness » of the European peoples. By discovering the New World, Europeans became aware
that they were part of a past, a present and a future. Decades later, in 1789, happened the first
people’s revolution in France: to be aware that we can fashion our own future depends, by
definition, on the possibility to compare with other situations.
I am aware that I am and of what I am because I am aware that the other one is.
This way, cultures are not only something hype and cool for travelling hipsters. Cultures are not
only about colored hats, paintings on bodies and traditional dances. Cultural differences among
peoples are a necessity for a sustainable evolution of the humanity. Cultures purely and solely are
the strongest driving force towards the sustainable development of the Homo Sapiens Sapiens.

I/IV Let’s Be Human Trackers
Human Pathways
Globalization is having strong consequences on people, such as the current tendencies on
withdrawal that might lead to isolated societies. However, our globalized world is also becoming an
uniform and isolated society de facto: economically, politically, psychologically and culturally.
Groups of people who share amongst themselves intangible values inside the same societies,
territories and communities are the essence of humankind. Humans have always needed
immaterial values to make their life relevant: these things you cannot pay, these things you cannot
explain, these things you can only feel, whatever you call them spirituality, animality, romanticism,
affectio societatis or madness.
The Original’s logo is a human digital print that represents the DNA, identity, authenticity of each of
us. We indeed consider ourselves as « humans » not only because of our individuality, but
because of our humanity and our « culturality ».
A « track » is a collective pathway created by humans with or without purpose: the habits and
customs of walking create pathes as well as pathes create the habits and customs of walking. In
other words, a path is a collective tool which helps us to walk safely when going somewhere: we
can choice the pathes we walk in, but we never are, by definition, the only one to take the same
path.
At Original’s, we consider the cultural background as a path, because it also represents a collective
human tool that guides us in our life.

How can we Define a « Human Tracker » ?
A human tracker promotes cultural sustainability, human multilateral development and global
peace. A human tracker find balanced solution in order to avoid two dangerous, neither
sustainable, tracks for the next generations:
- a globalization leading to the worship of individualism and creating loneliness as well as identity
loss: a human tracker does not want to create Homo Globalis who only share amongst themselves
their own individuality and their impossibility to become socialized persons.
- a radical defense of the peoples and communities’ specificities through reject, hatred and lack of
understanding.
A human tracker knows that nomad people need settled people, and settled people need nomad
people: interdependency and balanced vision are keys for a human tracker. This way, while
borders are at stake today, a human tracker highlights the fact that borders also represent the
otherness, because borders precisely builded the « otherness »: a human tracker defends borders
because he precisely defends the otherness, and not because he rejects the otherness.
A human tracker is aware of the human ethics, responsibilities and necessities of our generation.
A human tracker makes sustainable the different pathes humanity can take in the future.
A human tracker commits for a global sustainabilty: why make human life sustainable if there is no
humanity anymore ?
Responsible Attitude on Globalization
Whatever we think about globalization, globalization is here. Have a responsible attitude respect to
this process is firstly to take a step back on it in order to undestand it. Eradicating the exchanges
among people is as dangerous as having a blissful vision of these exchanges. Modernity has
always been about people and peoples making choices, and globalization is nowadays too often
presented as a process we would have to adapt to without any choice possible.
Everytime, in the history of humankind, it has been said people had « no choice » and had to adapt
to their situation promised dark times. The true evolution is the one that gives itself the choice. The
true evolution is the one that allows you to surpass your field of vision. And nobody else than the
« other » can helps you to make your own choices.

I/V « Post-Globalized » Context
Globalization’s Outcomes
Globalization, from an economic perspective, refers to the inexorable integration of markets,
nation-states, and technologies to a degree never witnessed before—in a way that is enabling
individuals, corporations and nation states to reach around the world farther, faster, deeper and
cheaper than ever before.
However our world, no matter how open it might be open today, is, and will ever be, a closed
world: we still don’t live on Mars, and our planet cannot be enlarged. By opening it, globalization
paradoxically closed our world: the destruction of its internal borders highlighted that we are now
all economically, politically and culturally interdependent and that we are all members of the same
close society de facto. Our world is now a closed open-space.
Also, identity is not a personal issue anymore. Identity is slowly becoming a collective, cultural and
shared concern of our open-world: globalization is creating to new issues and new concerns such
as the loss of identity and the sustainability of the cultures. The world has entered in a postglobalized
context, formed by citizens feeling increasingly close to their local or national identity.
Globalization is leading to another disenchantment of the world, with the destruction of the sacred
aura of local values, identities and specificities. What seemed obvious before has now become an
option, another kind of life model you can choose, or not. Here is the paradox of the globalized
human beings: when humanity becomes global, humanity loses its sense.
But the history of humanity is all about cycles. When globally assumed, rationalism and
materialism automatically lead to the rise of immaterial values. When globally established,
individualism and globalism automatically lead to the rise of local communities and collective
identities. The human spirit needs what he cannot access or what he could lose, and at the precise
moment people are increasingly feeling that they are losing their identity worldwide.

Cultural Convergence ?
The globalized cultural convergence hypothesis is best illustrated from a corporate perspective, in
the common admission that there are few high streets in the cities of Europe, Asia or North
America now without the ubiquitous McDonald’s, KFC, Starbucks, and Gap stores. And although
much attention has focused on American multinationals, European Stores such as Benetton, H&M,
Tesco and others have also contributed to this progressive erosion of differences (Crane and
Matten, 2007).
Also, globalization generates new or altered cultural forms through processes of creolization,
metissage, and emerging syncretism as well as « cultural hybridization ». In this sense, adopting a
cultural object or practice can never mean the same thing to the adopting culture as it did in the
original culture, and true cultural homogenization is, so, virtually impossible.
But homogenization is creating reactions: resilience, resurgence, and reaffirmation of some lasting
differences in cultural values arise across civilizations, largely as a result of globalization and its
resultant political, economic, and social tensions. In this sense, the current « cultural
balkanization », or cultural fragmentation, is part of the same reality that produces globalization.

I/VI New Needs and Expectations
How Globalization is Shaping the Consumers of the Future
Globalization is shaking up everything, including the people expectations. When you are part of a
closed society, the values and culture you share with the other members of this society are not
questionned neither challenged. However, when you are part of a global society, your own values
and culture become a real issue because they are not self-evident anymore. By opening societies
to the « other », globalization created new needs and concerns: people desire authenticity when
the world becomes aseptic, people need communities when the world is individualistic, people
need identities and cultures when the world becomes standardized. In other words, people need
humanity when the world becomes deshumanized.
A brand, in order to remain a brand, has to be different from the other brands, by spreading its own
identity and its own message. Through the brands, consumers have always been seeking
themselves as individuals. But now the question is: are people increasingly asking for their
individual identity or for the identity of their people ? Times have changed, and consumers of the
today’s world are increasingly seeking themselves as members of their societies: the next
generations will seek themselves, together as a people, in the products they buy. And that could
change a lot of things for the brands.
Globalization is also challenging our perception of the facts and their consequences. Everything,
including marketing, has now to be considered from a globalized point of view. Liberalism allowed
us to get what we want, when we want. Globalization is now permitting us to get it wherever we
want: globalized consumers can now reach everything, everywhere, at everytime. The satisfaction
of our needs is, indeed, the biggest achievement of these two processes. And this is a great
opportunity for our generation. But what about the next ones? Global and easy consumerism,
indeed, is slowly jeopardizing the main driving force of consumption: the need. You do not need
something you can easily have: our open world gives us everything, but paradoxically, nothing.
Globalization could lead to a « non-sense » consumption without any value nor sustainability. The
consumer of the future will have another perception of the need.

Post-Globalized Stakeholders
The consumer of the future is not an individual anymore, but a part of a whole society. The
consumer of the future will be proudly part of his tribe, and companies will have to deal with it: from
shaping and spreading a consumer’s identity to receiving and integrating the consumer’s identity.
In the Southern countries, consumers are increasingly rejecting western goods and foreign
companies in the name of independance and sovereignty: globalization has just arrived in those
territories, and the consequences are already serious. In the Northern countries, lower-middle
class consumers are very concerned by the loss of their identity: they fear globalization, and they
claim it. Also, the « Millennials » use to look for ethics and authenticity: they love to take off their
shoes in a tibetan restaurant or spend 45 hours in a old train in order to go fishing in the home of a
« true » siberian old guy. These are the consumers of the future, this is the spirit of the « postglobalized
» world we are entering in.

I/VII The Global Companies of the Future
Public Policies Dimension
Given that problems faced by individuals, Nations and the international community are
becoming progressively complex, and pose ever greater risks and opportunities for
business, the private sector will play an important role in policies’ production and
innovation. Business leaders will have to progressively take care of the public good, such
as the sustainability of the cultures and heritages and the promotion of the social links.
In other words, the ability to identify and prioritize these public goods and issues, and then
determine the best strategies for addressing them, either individually or collectively, will be
an increasingly important mark of good business leadership in the years ahead: its
objective is not replacing, but complementing the ability to remain competitive, productive
and profitable.
There is also a sense of complementarity by integrating different public policy dimensions
into the implementation of processes and projects. Inevitably, this leads to the question of
governance: given that private sector increasingly contributes to shape global governance
frameworks, norms and standards, the challenge for responsible companies is also to
ensure that they engage with governments in an accountable manner.
The times have changed: in our globalized and individualized world, the proper guardians
of the public interest are also the companies, which are accountable to all citizens. It’s time
for corporate sector to take part in public policies in order to tackle strategically important
cultural issues contributing to the achievement of a peaceful, stable and sustainable
environment.
Glocalization of the Global Strategy - Definition
- Taking into consideration the local territories, communities, ways of life and ways of thinking.
- Adopting a multilateral strategy in terms of management, marketing and CSR.

Why Glocalized Companies are Sustainable Companies
When local issues and ethics become essential, responsible and glocalized companies become
sustainable organizations.
Also, the inclusion of global companies into local specificities is a way to get closer to the new
needs of the stakeholders: a culturally responsible marketing is a new wave of reconciliation
between the consumer and its brand, through a responsible vision that takes into consideration the
collectives and not only the individualities. « This is not the McDonald’s of everyone, this is not my
McDonald’s neither, this is our McDonald’s, from here, the McDonald’s of our own » will be soon
the kind of expectations.
Furthermore, the time of blockchain logics amongst individuals has come: closed distribution
circuits are raising. Consumers are becoming collaborative « sharers » who increasingly mistrust
the traditional third parties that were the brands until today: companies will have to prove they can
also favor the collectives and the identities in order to be trusted again and to be sustainable
themselves.
The time has come when everyone is concerned by his identity. Be sure that businesses which
commit for the sustainability of the humankind will be sustainable themselves.
Good news for a World lacking precisely, and cruelly, of social binder.
It’s time for big firms to be considered as the new main X factors of the « live together » of the
societies and communities.

I/VIII Corporate Cultural Responsibility
The CSR of the Future
While the efficiency of national public policies is decreasing and the « Y » Millennial generation’s
expectations are raising, ethical commitments become a necessary value for the sustainability of
the common good and the business itself.
CSR is a positive vision of the role of corporations in society that rejects the existence of a conflict
between the benefits and the social concerns for companies. CSR policies are not a specific part of
the organization charts anymore. CSR policies are not a precise engagement anymore. CSR is
now a business strategy as well as a societal commitment.
When asked about the future of business responsibility, Lockheed Martin’s CEO highlighted the
current evolution « from the footprint of the carbon emissions to the human handprint of the human
impact of business on people ».
Today, CSR is not only about westernized values and expectations: southern people will have to be
satisfied too: the CSR of the future is a multilateral and glocalized CSR.
In a world of interdependencies common good is more than ever at stake, and we believe that
cultural ethics are also going to drive the next wave of innovation and growth in the global
economy.
CCR background
(ISO) 26000 guidelines for social responsibility make an explicit, somewhat trailblazing case for
formally integrating cultural concerns into CSR-related policies, with a call to all corporations to
promote cultural activities and respect and value local cultures, cultural traditions, and heritages in
the settings in which corporations function.
We notice a (national) cultural backgrounds influence and orient conceptions and understandings
of corporate responsibilities (Freeman and Hasnaoui, 2010; Kim and Kim, 2010; Waldman, 2006;
Wang and Juslin, 2009).
CSR efficiency is now about adapting CSR policies and ethics programs to different cultural
settings to accommodate legitimate cultural differences (Arthaud-Day, 2005; Husted and Allen,
2006; Logsdon and Wood, 2002).
However, culture is not only as a contextual variable to consider when developing proficient
business activities but rather a societal constituent that may be subject to the impacts of business
activities, as well as an end in itself: CCR is about to pay much closer attention to how
organizations alter and even create their (human) environments.

CCR’s Philosophy
CCR is much more a global philosophy for corporate than an image’s issue only: CCR is fully
integrated with business strategy and is not separating business and ethics. To become a
« culturally responsible » company is a strategic commitment whose goal is foreseeing the next
stakeholder’ expectations and the next regulation context of our globalized World.
Cultural Responsibility is an innovative vision of the future, a responsible pathway for
societies, companies and consumers, which can become the first ever public policy privately
implemented.
CCR is about:
- companies respecting and promoting the local cultures under their influence.
- considering the stakeholders on their collectiveness and not only on their individuality.
Several sectors and levels can be covered, at different runs and scales.
CCR is not:
CCR is not a culturally relativist approach but much more an holistic one.
CCR is not a cultural sponsoring such as the buildup of art collections, cultural provisions for
employees, sponsoring of art and culture as well as patronage, only. However, when arts promote
cultural sustainability, corporate use and founding of artists can also be a CCR policy (ex: the links
between chinese « Han » traditional values and the work of some contemporary chinese artists).
CCR is:
CCR pertains to the actions of the corporation and its managers that go beyond legal requirements
(even if cultural preservation’s legislation are already being thinked in Southern countries) and
contribute to culturally related societal welfare.
CCR relates to the way corporations and their managers address the cultural specificities of
different groups that may be affected by their activities, at transnational, national, regional, or local
levels. It comprises an acknowledgment of the potential impact of corporate activities and their
outcomes on extant cultures in both remote and nearby settings, and this acknowledgment leads to
subsequent corporate decisions and initiatives that attempt to ensure respect for and foster cultural
richness and dignity.
CCR implicates a reasonable understanding of the culture’s historical development, contemporary
circumstances and local, regional and national orientation, to participate actively in the cultural life
of the community, the region and the nation as a creator, expediter, participant, spectator, audience
member and citizen, to respect the laws, mores, customs and traditions of the culture, to endeavor
to change in positive and constructive ways those laws, mores, customs and traditions which
should be changed for reasons of moral integrity or human conscience, as well as to and respect
the rights, privileges, freedoms, values and beliefs of others (Schafer, 1996).
The CCR notion must walk a fine line between cultural imperialism and relativism.

CCR’s Implementation Issues
The lack of clear definition of culture results in a huge challenge of understanding impacts on, and
of, culture. (read here the Finnish cultural policies’ specialist Häyrynen).
Also, despite the massive cultural influence of corporations in our complex and globalized world,
the cultural responsibilities of corporations appear less clearly established and, in practice, subject
to greater disregard. Why?
- companies are not aware of the cultural issue yet: they believe that cultures and their support
and enrichment do not represent « the business of business ».
- companies have not the expertise to deal with the complexity of any corporate cultural impact.
- the persistence of a postcolonial tendency for strong culture-centrism.
CCR is all about dealing with multilateralism and subjectivity: the conceptions of culture at the
heart of our CCR understanding may vary, the motives for supporting and preserving cultures are
potentially diverse and often contested, corporate influences on cultures operate at various levels
and are difficult to grasp fully, the extent of the potential impact is highly contextual and industry
dependent, the normative foundations underlying CCR are debatable, the extent and boundaries of
cultural responsibilities of corporate actors remain controversial and hazy, and the potential
constraints and opportunities for corporate practices related to the adoption and implementation of
CCR policies are significant but poorly identified.
Today, the goal of companies is to integrate CCR concerns into corporate strategy and day-to-day
business activities.

I/IX CCR: Advantages
Cultures and Business: Current Context and Future Issues
A lot of crisis today have a cultural background and are connected to the dysfunctional purposes of
business and market, while short-termism, economic globalization and costs cutting are leading to
a decreasing trust and commitment for workers and to a lower macroeconomic demand in the EU
as unemployment increases.
Some of the biggest firms in the world such as Airbnb have recently been criticized for « spreading
the same sterile aesthetic across the world » and are facing today a bad image of « cultural
threateners ». Cultural costs can be huge for corporations in a world where collective identities are
increasingly at stake. In this way, intangible actions, costs and profits will be key in a glocalized
context when culture and identities are becoming one of the biggest concerns for consumers
worldwide.
Risk Avoider
- CCR facilitates the relationships with the stakeholders: while off-shore manufacturing sites and
overseas supply chains are some of the biggest issues of today’s business, CCR will be crucial
when it is time to build strong long-term relations with workers, consumers and local communities.
- CCR can avoid future worse conditions for the company, by pacifying an identity tense context
worldwide: CCR is a social valve which helps business to avoid a real and tangible
« deglobalization ».
- A culturally responsible business is more responsive to the demands and challenges of
markets and societies: CCR sets out to optimise competitiveness as well as securing legitimacy
and beneficial relationships with key stakeholders by constantly adapting the company’s value
proposition through its portfolio of products and services, brand positioning and communications.
- CCR pays attention to the long term shifts in the political and social environment on which
the company depends for its resources.

Value Creator
- Cultures are a factor of team expression, cohesion, imagination and mediation.
- CCR can help companies to strengthen their corporate image and humanize their impact.
- By anticipating the needs of the supply chain actors of a post-globalized world, CCR can help
decision-makers to create value from the uncertainty of the new global context
- CCR is a global corporate philosophy that can lead to better relations with stakeholders, better
efficiency for workers and better talented employees attraction.
- CCR considers cultures as a very powerful concept for business: by transforming priceless things
such as heritage, identity and collectiveness into concrete issues, globalization is making them
valuable too.
Ventajas de las políticas culturales (to be developed in english)
1/ Las políticas culturales contribuyen a la creación, a la potenciación y al mantenimiento de las
identidades colectivas y del sentido de pertenencia comunitaria. Así, se desarrollan imaginarios y
referentes comunes que se reflejan en la existencia de una ética compartida y en la protección de
unos valores comunes aceptados. Con todas las precauciones y limitaciones al respecto, el
retorno social de las políticas culturales puede facilitar la vida en comunidad y la inclusión de
personas inmigradas en las diferentes comunidades de acogida. Las narraciones colectivas
presentes en la comunidad (muchas veces vinculadas a un pasado común) pueden resultar lo
suficientemente flexibles como para invitar a implicarse a quienes llegan, preservando la libertad
del individuo para entrar y salir de los límites del colectivo.
Return On Investment (ROI) for companies:
Ejercer en un entorno (global y local) sano, estable, durable y pacificado.
2/ Las políticas culturales promueven la generación y la aceptación de normas y valores
compartidos, que, a la vez, permiten la consolidación de los vínculos necesarios para el desarrollo
de las comunidades. Estos procesos se traducen en una reducción significativa del aislamiento
social y en una mejora de la cohesión social. Las políticas culturales generan un cambio
significativo de actitud en la reinterpretación del paisaje, que se entiende como construcción
cultural y, por lo tanto, colectiva. De esta manera, aumenta la conciencia colectiva y la
preocupación por la sostenibilidad.
ROI for companies:
Crear y valorizar una mejor cohesión de grupo: mejor eficiencia de los equipos en el desarollo de
todo otro tipos de acciones y proyectos (mejores resultados cuando se trabaja en grupo con
cohesión).

3/ Las políticas culturales fomentan el desarrollo de comunidades culturales (artistas, gestores,
usuarios, público, etc.) con un alto grado de implicación ciudadana, lo que se traduce en el
aumento de la participación y la acción colectiva (trabajo en redes etc.). Da más confianza en la
actuación gubernamental y puede conseguir la implicación de la ciudadanía y la
corresponsabilidad en la gestión pública. Por otra parte, las políticas culturales evidencian la
necesidad de las sociedades de actuar de forma colectiva. Así, la participación ciudadana se
entiende como motor de la democracia interna.
ROI for companies:
Mas grande implicación y participación de los trabajadores, con mas confianza en su empresa.
Valorización de una ciudadanía y democracía interna basada en valores comunes culturales.
4/ Las políticas culturales pueden fomentar una idea de democracia más abierta y accesible que
permite afrontar los conflictos sociales dentro de un marco simbólico.
ROI for companies:
CCR as risk (and future costs) avoider and relations pacificator with all the stakeholders (suppliers,
workers, communities, consumers).
5/ El retorno social de las políticas culturales está directamente vinculado al desarrollo autónomo
de los individuos y a la promoción de su creatividad para interpretar, entender y hacer entender a
los demás el mundo que los rodea. Implica la formación de personas capacitadas para responder
a un mundo en constante transformación a través de procesos de innovación social y económica.
ROI for companies:
Respeto y promoción de valores subjetivas e intangibles como elemento central de la creatividad
interna. Desarollo de mecanismos que permiten captar las capacidades de los équipos para
implementar nuevas ideas (productos, servicios y modelos) a partir de la implementación de
actividades culturales. Aumento de las capacidades para interpretar y responder al contexto de
transformación social.

PART 2 : HOW TO ENGAGE WITH CCR
II/I Cultural Mapping for Corporate
Definition
Cultural mapping is used to describe the use of research methods, tools, and techniques to
identify, describe, portray, promote, and analyze particular regions or places and their cultures in
order to engage future actions. Cultural mapping underlines the local stories, practices,
relationships, memories, and rituals which are relevant for the stakeholders in question.
Its purpose is investigating, highlighting, promoting, preserving or creating an identity profile of a
group of people: the process of mapping by itself draws attention to the existence and importance
of cultural resources. The results point out problems to be solved or strengths to build upon.
Objectives
The main objective of cultural mapping is to objectively define the culture of the stakeholders, by
listing relevant factors of, and for, the people in question.
This way, cultural mapping is about creating an efficient methodology when dealing with intangible
specificities.
Even if pre-established toolkits for CIA can be irrelevant when dealing with intangible issues, it’s
still better to have a full set of general Cultural Mapping Guidelines based on the kind of
stakeholders, of cultures, of business sector and of context.
Usual Process
1: screening, scoping and notifying the affected people and area about the proposed development.
2: collection of data in order to identify and describe the cultural resources, practices and beliefs
located within the relevant area (the historical period to be studied in a CIA is recommended as
being the initial presence in the area of the particular group whose cultural practices and features
are being assessed).
3: study the specific ways of life and thinking of the stakeholders and the places.
4: based on the studies’ conclusions, develop a list of relevant cultural components, goals and
indicators for the company.

II/II Cultural Mapping Guidelines: How to Process
1/ What to list ?
Context of the culture in question:
- national context:
1/ southern countries: culture as an independancy issue (against the western influence)
- ways of life, identity pride, pre-colonization and after independances history, language etc. -
2/ northern countries: culture/identity as a political issue (people’s sovereignty concern)
= tread carefully
- aesthetics, symbolic, artists, social models, etc. -
- local context:
2/ regions (infra-national) - language, architecture, arts and crafts etc.
2/ cities: urbanism is crucial - architecture, aesthetic, symbolic, history etc.
- indigenous context:
Very specific aspects (culture is much closer to environmental and territorial issues)

II/III Cultural Mapping for Corporate: How to Process
2/ How to list ?
Cultural Audits for Corporate
Specific process, based in bottom-up approach and participatory processes.
1/ Internal Surveys Objectives:
- Determine the values which are relevant and important for the stakeholders:
= Question the stakeholders basing in a pre-established list of cultural factors (result of the cultural
mapping) in order to determine more precisely the specific relevant cultural aspects.
- Determine the stakeholders’ cultural issues with the company activity (positive - negative):
= Situation Before / After the company establishment: what has changed?
- Determine how could the company improve its cultural impact on the stakeholders:
2/ Internal Surveys Guidelines:
…
Cultural Data Collection and Use
…

II/ IV Environmental Impact Assessment, Social Impact Assessment and
Cultural Impact Assessment
Impact Assessment: Background
- Late 60’s: establishment of the practice of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA).
- 2000 ’s: Social impact assessment (SIA) was defined in 2003, in a set of international principles,
as « the process of analyzing, monitoring and managing the intended and unintended social
consequences, both positive and negative, of planned interventions (policies, programs, plans,
projects) and any social change processes invoked by those interventions » (Vanclay 2003).
Impacts are changes that are suppose to have environmental, political, cultural, economic or social
significance. As it is known, changes can lead to a positive or negative situation. Change can
therefore affect the environment, community groups, traditions, human health and well-being,
desired sustainable objectives, or a combination of these.
IAs are used to predict the future, in order to assist decision makers to conceptualize what might
happen (on people, consumers, stakeholders, workers, the company itself etc.) if an intervention,
such as a new policy or action, is implemented by a company.
CIA’s Definition:
Culture has a fundamental role in human well-being, and thus considerations of culture and of
related impacts are vital.
CIA is a new topic: a significant international campaign is underway to ensure that culture is
included as a goal in the UN’s post-2015 global development framework and sustainable
development goals.
A CIA will generally address the impacts, both beneficial and adverse, of a proposed development
that may affect, for example, the values, belief systems, customary laws, language(s),
customs, economy, relationships with the local environment and particular species, social
organization and traditions of the affected community.

II/V Cultural Impact
Corporate Cultural Influence (negative and positive)
For years, corporations have already taken this reality into consideration in their development and
commercialization strategies. The development of corporate activities and their outcomes, which
include the design, production, and marketing of products and services, thus constitutes a
« culture-making process in which ideas, values, norms and beliefs are symbolically expressed in
the environment to create new cultural forms and meanings » (Low, 1988).
However, globalized brands are brands and thus spread their own identity all around the world: the
brands, companies and their activity have nowadays a huge influence on people’s cultures and
identities, while governments’ influence on citizens is decreasing.
This way, the values corporate are spreading all around our open-world have to be dealt with a
huge responsibility.
Beyond the easily identifiable cultural impacts of business on local and indigenous communities,
other instances should think more broadly the way products and services and their marketing
reflect and convey cultural elements of the corporate home culture (Aaker, 1997; de Mooij, 2005).
To a large extent, Apple, Walt Disney, and Nike reflect so-called American values and globally
export the symbols of an American way of life (McDonald’s opened nearly 1,200 restaurants in
2011, and it welcomes clients every day in more than 33,000 outlets, from Moldova to Morocco to
Western Samoa).
Lacoste and L’Oreal symbolize and spread certain aspects of the French way of life.
Samsung and LG Electronics convey a South Korean–specific, harmony-driven, cultural
background.
These corporations communicate specific values to people and groups at various levels, whether
they want to or not, who are exposed to, and potentially influenced by, implicit and explicit cultural
underpinnings. Among a wealth of examples, social psychology studies highlight the significant
impact that big social media corporations have had in shaping a culturally « brave new
world » (Heath, 2012). Marketing studies further show that corporate food marketing to children
influences their typically culture-specific food-related beliefs, preferences, and behaviors (Hastings,
2003; Livingstone, 2005).
This way, cultural underpinnings must be, nowadays, clearly acknowledged as linked to corporate
activities and to their outcomes (products, services), since brands are spreading symbolic
meanings that go beyond the functional utility of the products or services (Belk, 1988 Berger and
Heath, 2007; Clarke, 2002).
Today, corporations represent more than ever—whether by contributing to cultural convergence,
persistence, or cross-vergence processes, and whether they are active in cultural industries or not
— virtually inescapably powerful culture shapers at both global and local levels. This way, they
should be aware that being a culture shaper in an identity loss (and tense) context gives you a
huge responsibility on people.

Dealing with Cultures Today
This is the debate for the past 30 years: should companies ride the globalization wave, relying on
the premise that cultural convergence across the globe will trigger the convergence of
stakeholders’ needs and preferences (to be met with global marketing and organizational
strategies), or should they cater to the diversity of local, hybridized stakeholder beliefs and
preferences (addressed through multi-domestic, tailored marketing and organizational strategies)?
Corporations are not self-sufficient and fully independent entities. They exist only through the
commitment and cooperation of society, and so they are members of society, with obligations and
constraints, as well as privileges. Furthermore, the every day more glocalized and post-globalized
context should make the companies think again their global strategy by adapting to the « arising
consciousness for one’s own cultural characteristics » (Breidenbach and Zukrigl, 2005).
Relevant Examples 1
(potential cultural actions, costs and issues for companies)
1/ Emblematic examples occur when the cultural foundations of local groups are intrinsically
connected with the land they inhabit: the effects of dispossession clearly create political and social
chaos in many indigenous communities (Alfred, 2009):
Example 1: Dongria Kondh community in Orissa, eastern India (Bedi, 2013; Rhoades, 2013). The
community is convinced that its cultural foundations and associated way of life will be destroyed if
the British corporation Vedanta Resources, operating through a subsidiary named Sterlite
Industries India Ltd., receives further legal authorization to exploit the sacred Nyamgiri Mountain to
mine for bauxite. The Dongria Kondh risk losing their livelihood, their cultural identity, and the
sanctity of the mountain, which represents the physical manifestation of their god.
Example 2: in the mining sector, the installation of mining corporations and the massive
development of their activities in Papua New Guinea since the 1970s has inevitably distorted the
cultural landscape. Beyond the direct cultural destruction, as evoked in the previous section, more
indirect cultural impacts result from the development of corporate activities around certain
communities.
Example 3: the Quechua Indians in Peru vigorously oppose the commercial exploitation of their
traditional knowledge, which is foundational to their culture, by corporate actors, but they can do
little about it. Similarly, the Maori in New Zealand believe that even when their knowledge is
publicly disclosed, there is no automatic right to use it; that right must be determined collectively.

Relevant Examples 2
2/ However identity loss, and so CCR, is nowadays a concern for every cultures and peoples:
Example 1: the pressure exerted on local furniture businesses, after the arrival of IKEA stores,
may lead to a loss of local cultures and their specificities in the highly culturally laden home
furnishing market. In addition, IKEA’s philosophy, price-driven strategy, and explicit encouragement
of frequent redecorating may be contributing to cultural homogenization (IKEA currently sells
furniture in 38 countries), excessive consumerism, and the emergence of a « waste » culture that
undermines extant values and beliefs (Bailly, 2009; Matchan, 2005).
Example 2: typically, corporations recognize cultural differences and their instrumental or intrinsic
value and endeavor to develop and demonstrate respect and support for the cultural specificities of
the settings in which they operate. They also engage in continual self-assessments of their cultural
awareness, ongoing cultural knowledge improvement processes, and attention to cultural
dynamics, which underlie and can be affected by their activities and consequences. Thus, they
tend to address and limit their potentially negative impacts and alterations of extant cultures
purposefully; they even may contribute to the preservation and enrichment of existing cultures.
Example 3: more corporations have made CCR-related public commitments; for example, the
French corporation L’Oreal asserts that it « relies on the diversity of its teams to ensure that
international development respects local cultures » (L’Oreal, 2010).
Example 4: the Japanese corporation NGK, involved in the manufacture and sale of spark plugs
and new ceramics, claims that it respects « the cultures and the customs of local communities
where [we] do business and strive to manage [our] activities throughout the world in such a way as
to promote and contribute to the development of local communities » (NGK, 2011).
Example 5: cultural respect also is a moving target. The Danish pharmaceutical corporation Novo
Nordisk explicitly acknowledges that globalization processes require the corporation « to respect
local cultures » but at the same time « pose leadership challenges for companies as they seek to
take advantage of globalization while dealing with the dilemmas that are an inherent part of a
global marketplace ». Novo Nordisk asserts that to engage in cultural prowess, corporations must
develop clear policies and practices that specify its responses to potential dilemmas and
contradictions, in collaboration with stakeholders at various levels.

II/VI Cultural Impact Assessment - Objectives
CIA Philosophy
In general, CIA is regarded as a forward-looking (anticipation) tool that proactively assists decisionmakers
to mitigate or avoid negative effects, and enhance positive effects pertaining to: values and
beliefs, ideas and ideologies, morals and manners, customs and traditions and other material and
non-material environments, or a combination of these.
Given the effect that all the projects can have on cultural life, it is likely that CIA could be first of all
considered as a process to be applied to all policy and programme making.
It is clear that CIA is closely connected to other dimensions of corporate action, and could
coordinate to most of them (ex: the cultural dimension of development, of the well-being, of the
social commitments etc.)
Assessing and analizing the links between the local culture, society, business and
stakeholders
CIA guidelines already exist for indigenous people. They are focused on traditional knowledge,
commonly held values, history, spiritual practices, language, traditional dances and songs, place
names and meanings, spiritual sites and cultural landscapes, traditional land use, values
associated with the land, cultural transmission, land ownership structures, beliefs, ancestry, and
organisational structures as well as oral, visual and written communication forms (stories, art).
However, guidelines are lacking when assessing corporate cultural impact on « usual »
stakeholders (consumers, employees and working teams, communities, supplies, etc.).
CIA includes cultural studies, cultural policy, sociology and anthropology: this way, a previous
cultural mapping is required when assessing the (potential / current cultural) impact of a company
(good or bad) on specific peoples and territories.
CIA has to underline recommendations for types of data required to ensure relevant indicators,
suggestions for assessing impact in the absence of relevant research, factors to consider when
determining cultural impact significance and strategies to mitigate cultural impact as well as
enhance cultural resilience.

II/VII Cultural Impact Assessment - Methodology
CIA’s Potential Difficulties
If culture is defined through the values and norms of specific groups of people, assessment of
cultural impact is, by definition, fraught: seemingly similar cultural phenomena or institutions can
have a totally different meaning for different groups of people.
Data collection suggests that qualitative approaches can provide valuable data, particularly of oral
histories and other knowledge, but they are also limited in that they can be difficult, timeconsuming
and often perceived as anecdotal, and therefore not scientific. However, quantitative
data used for CIA have also different limitations, as it does not represent concerns of all
stakeholders, take account of oral educational models or consider dysfunction models of culture.
Misinterpretation of cultural realities is possible, especially when analyses are based on settler
values.
CIA thus requires cultural sensitivity from the policy makers such as the executive teams
(Nakamura).
This way, CIA needs useful and defined measurements for statistical analyses (Häyrynen) because
it has the potential to wrongly homogenize cultural impact occurring in different circumstances. CIA
can lead to an imposition of ideas that are based on majority norms or other hegemonic values,
and its results might include inappropriate assumptions of cause-effect relationships.

Eight steps for an effective CIA:
• Determine project type: choose an intervention, knowing the stage in the project cycle. This
intervention can be a new policy, project, plan or any change from the company.
• Identify cultural values: this step should seek to examine the principles of characterization
of the cultural values. They are divided into historical, social, symbolic, aesthetic and
spiritual. ( = Cultural Mapping)
• Identify CIA variables: this step should take into consideration the variables that are related
to cultural life (verbal expressions, tangible expressions, values systems, beliefs, etc.),
cultural institutions and organizations, and cultural resources and infrastructures. ( =
Cultural Mapping)
• Data collection: here internal participation and audits are crucial. Participatory techniques
ranging from, advisory groups, community forums, interviews, participation-observation,
questionnaires and surveys should be used. ( = Cultural Mapping)
• Plans for gaps in data: no CIA collects all the required data. In this situation, CIA should
honestly identify gaps in its database information and subsequently develop further
strategies.
• Impact prediction: in this stage, it is important to focus on the tangible and quantitative data,
analyze multiple attributes, and create hypothesis workshops, etc.
• Evaluate significance: evaluate the projects potential impact, in terms of it affect on nature,
magnitude, duration, etc.
• Identification of how to mitigate the negative effects or how to enhance the positive ones: in
this last stage the creation of good indicators, not only quantitative but also qualitative ones
are essential.

II/VIII What is a Culturally Responsible Supply Chain ?
CCR Implementation for Stakeholders
Culturally Responsible Offshoring and Outsourcing
1/ Suppliers - Workers
« When basic working conditions are getting satisfied,
automatically comes the time of the intangible values’ expectations »
(Maslow’s hierarchy of needs).
- Current Context:
Companies are already committed with their workers on social issues:
human rights / workers, women and childs rights / healthcare etc.
However, the fact that life standards are getting better for the abroad workers is precisely leading
to the rise of new immaterial expectations such as the respect of their culture.
Workers are increasingly respected as individuals, but are they also respected in their common
identity / culture ?
- Objectives:
Attractivity : the goal of the workers’ culture appropriating the places of work is to lead to the
company appropriating and involving its workers and attracting the potential workers.
Efficiency : Involve the workers, strengthen the teams cohesion and reduce the tensions.
Responsibility : strengthen the image of the firm in the country of outsourcing as well as in the
countries of sales.
- Workers Expectations:
- because globalization is making them aware of who they are, overseas workers are going to need
companies to really care of them, and not only, through CSR policies, of westernized people’s
expectations for them.
- be a worker of an authentic and human scaled company.
- feel attracted by the global organization of the company.
- feel themselves, as individuals and as a group, into their company.

2/ Communities - Territories
How to responsibly be part of the human places of your influence.
Current Context:
The companies are increasingly involved in the life of the local communities.
Through their communities’ policies, companies want to avoid an hostile environment in the areas
of establishment.
Social and economic development is still a major issue for local communities in the southern
countries, but cultural expectations are also growing in the northern ones.
Again, CSR policies in developing countries and transition economies are increasingly criticized
and accused to only satisfy the expectations and the points of view of the westernized CSR’s
policymakers themselves, and not the needs of the communities in question.
In the Western countries, regional cultures and specificities in the national states are becoming an
important issue too.
Objectives:
Efficiency (in the implementation of the current projects) : the current involvement of the companies
within the communities could be more efficient and respectful if cultural aspects were taken into
consideration.
New corporate commitments : the cultural commitments on local communities as another specific
kind of company’s projects and funding.
Responsibility : restore a potential negative local cultural impact through precise projects and
actions.
Respect : promote another way of « development », less westernized than the current one: CSR
has to be glocalized through its projects, visions, values and approaches. The goal is to implement
authentic CSR policies against the superfical, artificial and westernized visions of the competition.
Communities and Territories Expectations:
- Be sustainable.
- Have their intangible heritage respected.
- Be considered as a whole.

II/ Culturally Responsible Management
To be a full part of a company should not lead to the lapse of your cultural customs.
Current Context:
Global companies, in order to attract the skilled employees of the XXI th century, have now to
spread a responsible global vision of business and society.
While national governments’ influence on human issues is decreasing, companies are today selling
products, services and also a vision of the world.
Objectives:
Attractivity : make the firm closer to its employees in order to make the employees feel closer to
their firm. It’s time for employees to be part of a company which is also part of them.
Glocalization of the management strategies : each oversea’s branch of the company needs to have
its own identity based on the culture of their territory in order to be culturally responsible and
attractive.
Efficiency : CCR as a factor of cohesion, peace and efficiency of the working teams.
Employees expectations:
- feel themselves in the firm’s vision and organization.
- work in and for a committed firm: do good themselves through the activity of their firm.
- feel like a united team that share something in common.
- be involved in the design of the branch’s organization.

III/ Culturally Responsible Marketing
When identity becomes an issue, to consider consumers on their collectiveness and on their
society becomes a valuable sales argument.
Context:
This new global context is leading to new issues, and these new issues (identity loss) are leading
to new expectations (sustainability of the cultures).
Goals:
- what is the companies’ cultural impact on consumers, and how to improve it?
- how to better catch the consumer of a post-globalized context?

II/IX Key Cultural Indicators: Generalities
Clasificación de los indicadores culturales
(to be developed in english)
Inclusión de industrias culturales en las estrategias globales de desarrollo de la empresa: uso y
valoración de obras de arte y espacios arquitectónicos patrimoniales locales.
Actividades culturales organizadas por la empresa.
Empleados participan en actividades culturales colectivas (cantidad de horas dedicadas):
percepción de la participación en actividades culturales como beneficio personal y colectivo.
Atractivo de las empresas culturalmente responsable para los trabajadores calificados y los
consumidores.
Vitalidad cultural de las comunidades locales bajo la influencia de las dichas empresas.
Tendencias potencialmente nocivas en la utilización de indicadores en la evaluación de
políticas culturales
Énfasis desproporcionado en la evaluación de los objetivos a través de los efectos cuantificables,
en detrimento de la medición de aspectos que no pueden cuantificarse. Ejemplo: utilización de
estadísticas descontextualizadas como indicadores culturales.
Tendencia a evaluar los efectos de una política a corto plazo, cuando, en realidad, sus resultados
sólo pueden ser contemplados en un período amplio.
Dificultad para desarrollar indicadores capaces de evaluar los objetivos de las políticas en su
complejidad.
Utilización de indicadores de tipo racional instrumental que comportan patrones de interpretación y
significados que se desvían de los objetivos políticos.

Indices culturales (to be developed)
Índice sobre el grado de respeto cultural de las actividades empresariales: retorno social que
generan las políticas culturales en relación con la creación, la potenciación y el
mantenimiento de las identidades colectivas y del sentido de pertenencia comunitaria, así
como con la recreación de vínculos sociales en espacios compartidos.
Índice de porcentaje de personas (dentro y fuera de la empresa) que perciben la cultura como
beneficio personal: percepción de las personas sobre el retorno social de las políticas culturales (si
se perciben los beneficios de la acción cultural, no tanto en clave de outcome material directo, sino
respecto a la autonomía y la promoción de la creatividad de las personas.).
Índice de presencia de la innovación cultural en las empresas: comó las políticas empresariales
han incorporado, entre sus objetivos, la cultura como una innovación no sólo en términos
económicos, sino también en cuanto a las capacidades de dar respuestas a nuevas necesidades
derivadas del cambio de contexto social.
Índice de desarollo de procesos democráticos e inclusivos de descentralización de las políticas
culturales de las empresas.
Índice sobre la revitalización (además de la preservación) de las tradiciones y el patrimonio natural
y cultural de las comunidades locales.

PART 3 : ADAPTATION TO THE CLIENT’S
SPECIFIC NEEDS
Sector of the Client
(context / issues / objectives / implementation)
Energy
- Important off-shore branches.
- Negative image in operating countries (communities) as well as in marketing countries
(consumers).
- Strong competition with renewable and sustainable energies’ sector.
- Rise of the needs of independency for the operating and marketing countries (energetic /
political / cultural).
- Rise of religious and identity tensions in the operating countries.
- Uncertainty of the regional geopolitical context.
- Drop of raw energy stocks.
- Respect and fulfill the needs of the off-shore communities (and not only the expectations of the
westernized people).
- Glocalize the points of view on CSR’s policies.
- Avoid the cultural risks / costs: be culturally responsible in the operating countries.
- Renew the sector’s activities in order to be sustainable brands while raw energy stocks are
decreasing.
- Engage with a global sustainability when the renewable energies’ sector are only engaged with
the environmental sustainability: why make human life sustainable if there is no humanity
anymore ?
- Promote the collective identity of the employees / suppliers / communities.
- Funding on heritage preservation’s projects.

Tourism
- Transforming sector with the rise of new uberized platforms (Airbnb etc.).
- Rise of the influence of this tourism 2.0 on places and local cultures.
- Sector facing the first critics about the long-term consequences of Airbnb’s model of tourism:
standardization of the interior designs and creation of neighborhood only formed by renting flats
(Paris, Barcelona etc.) .
- This sector will face the paradoxical consequences of the open-world: standardization of the
places and ways of life because of mass tourism, mass consumption and population movements.
- Some places are becoming artificial and are loosing their identity: in the long run, they will loose
their touristic attractiveness.
- Responsible tourism: highlight the culture, specificity, identity and heritage of the visited places.
- Make sustainable the identity of the places in order to be sustainable themselves.
- Fight against artificiality and standardization.
- Promote authenticity: the added value of our future aseptic and rational world.
- Preserve the tangible (architecture etc.) and intangible (ways of life) specificities of the territories.
- Respect the traveller, the travel and the travelled.

NewTechs
- Rising sector.
- Monopoly situations (Apple - Twitter - Facebook - Instagram).
- The main actors of this sector are increasing their influence on people’s lifestyles.
- Accused to create loneliness and to disconnect people from real life.
- The main brands of the sector could be soon accused of westernization and standardization of
the ways of life as well as of promotion of individualism.
- The major influence NewTechs have on people will be soon translated into a big responsibility.
- While the robots become everyday more humans, the humans are becoming robots.
- Fight against loneliness and promote collectiveness: « we really connect again the people ».
- Promote the plurality of the ways of thinking (different kind of artificial intelligence for example).
- Adopt multilateral and glocalized strategies.
- Make the virtual sector an ethical sector: the augmented reality to serve collectiveness and
differences (and not loneliness and standardization).
- Re-humanize this market.
- Implementation of internal R&D policies about ethical and responsible NewTechs.
Manufactured products
(to be developed)

Others
Post-globalized and glocalized context: the current world is still open but formed by people
increasingly mistrusting globalization and increasingly close to their cultures.
- The people’s specificities are becoming a major issue.
- Uncertain future (geopolitical / political / cultural / economical).
- Risks of economic withdrawal.
- We notice a cause/effect pattern: a wild and irresponsible globalization is creating sovereignty
worldwide.
- A sustainable globalization will be a processus humanely responsible and respectful of the
people’s specificities.
- Pacify the relations with the stakeholders: adapt the outsourcing strategies to the new context.
- Pacify the relations with the governments: avoid the process of closing economic borders by
engaging with the respect of the cultures of the places and the countries.
- Stop representing a wild globalization and the standardization of the world.
- Have a culturally responsible supply chain.
- Have a culturally responsible outsourcing (management / local communities / advertising
campaigns).
- Adapt the inside / outside design of the sale points to the local cultures.
- Engage for a culturally responsible marketing: the products sold respect the culture of the
territories of sale.

Summary
- Post-Globalized context.
- Global and local uncertainty.
- Long term consequences of the current globalization (cultural / economical / geopolitical /
psychological).
- Pacify the relations with the stakeholders.
- Glocalize the CSR’s strategies.
- Respect the local cultures and identities.
- Consider the stakeholders on their collectives and not only on their individuality.
- Funding / Promotion / R&D.
- Fully glocalized brands: respect and adapt to the local specificites.