Awareness Trainings - Draft #1

More documents

Recommendations

Info

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.
Page 1 and 2: Awareness Trainings on Corporate Cu
Page 3 and 4: 4/ Cultural Specificities Culture c
Page 5 and 6: I/II Analogy with Environmental Iss
Page 7 and 8: I/III Cultures and Sustainable Deve
Page 9 and 10: I/IV Let’s Be Human Trackers Huma
Page 11 and 12: I/V « Post-Globalized » Context G
Page 13 and 14: I/VI New Needs and Expectations How
Page 15 and 16: I/VII The Global Companies of the F
Page 17 and 18: I/VIII Corporate Cultural Responsib
Page 19 and 20: CCR’s Implementation Issues The l
Page 21 and 22: Value Creator - Cultures are a fact
Page 23 and 24: PART 2 : HOW TO ENGAGE WITH CCR II/
Page 25: II/III Cultural Mapping for Corpora
Page 29 and 30: Relevant Examples 2 2/ However iden
Page 31 and 32: II/VII Cultural Impact Assessment -
Page 33 and 34: II/VIII What is a Culturally Respon
Page 35 and 36: II/ Culturally Responsible Manageme
Page 37 and 38: II/IX Key Cultural Indicators: Gene
Page 39 and 40: PART 3 : ADAPTATION TO THE CLIENT
Page 41 and 42: NewTechs - Rising sector. - Monopol
Page 43: Summary - Post-Globalized context.

Awareness Trainings - Draft #1

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?