Your CSR is Boring — You Are Picking the Wrong Fights

Your CSR activ­it­ies are boring.

Zzz. Wait, what? Did any­one say “cor­por­ate social responsibility”?

CSR is when brands con­trib­ute to the great­er good of soci­ety — even though they tech­nic­ally don’t have to do it. 

Typical examples could be:

Planting rain­forest in the Amazon.
Drilling for fresh water in Africa.
Donating funds to dis­aster relief.

All good causes, for sure. 

But, as PR pro­fes­sion­als, we know this too well: get­ting pub­lic recog­ni­tion for CSR activ­it­ies is challenging. 

Where’s all that sweet goodwill?

When 1,000 People Agree With You

As a com­pany serving the great­er good through vari­ous CSR activ­it­ies, in the­ory, you should be reap­ing at least some busi­ness rewards for doing good.

A glob­al brand could alloc­ate mil­lions of dol­lars for good causes without earn­ing so much as a headline. 

But pub­li­city is one thing. What about goodwill?

Most people find CSR activ­it­ies to be both import­ant and noble. Commendable, even. 

But inter­est­ing? Not so much.

Imagine going out on a busy street to ask 1,000 by-pass­ers what they think about sav­ing the rain­forest. It’s not unthink­able that you would col­lect 1,000 “yes, that’s import­ant” answers.

In short: People favour your CSR endeav­our, which makes it unin­ter­est­ing from a media perspective.

It’s coun­ter­in­tu­it­ive, but people engage less with major­ity positions.

Enter: The Conversion Theory

In sci­entif­ic lit­er­at­ure, less engage­ment for major­ity pos­i­tions is known as the Conversion Theory. 

The social psy­cho­lo­gist Serge Moscovici found that we become more engaged if we belong to a mis­rep­res­en­ted minor­ity.

If 99,9% of your peers think that the rain­forest is worth sav­ing and you agree, you don’t feel you belong to a wronged minor­ity and are less likely to engage.

But most CSR issues tend to be backed by “mor­al” majorities.

Planting rain­forest in the Amazon.
Drilling for fresh water in Africa.
Donating funds to dis­aster relief.

Sorry. People engage with less intens­ity in major­ity positions.

Regarding the PR effect, the con­ver­sion the­ory is why CSR activ­it­ies work best when a brand finds an intel­li­gent minor­ity to liaise with — against a stu­pid majority. 

Spin Academy | Online PR Courses

The Conversion Theory: The Powerful Minority

The dis­pro­por­tion­al power of minor­it­ies is known as the con­ver­sion the­ory. ¹Conversion the­ory of minor­ity influ­ence. (2021, February 12). In Wikipedia. https://​en​.wiki​pe​dia​.org/​w​i​k​i​/​C​o​n​v​e​r​s​i​o​n​_​t​h​e​o​r​y​_​o​f​_​m​i​n​o​r​i​t​y​_​i​n​f​l​u​e​nce

How does it work?

The social cost of hold­ing a dif­fer­ent view than the major­ity is high. This increased cost explains why minor­it­ies often hold their opin­ions more firmly. It takes determ­in­a­tion to go against the norm. ²Moscovici, S. (1980). Toward a the­ory of con­ver­sion beha­viour. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 209 – 239. New York: Academic Press

In con­trast, many major­ity mem­bers don’t hold their opin­ions so firmly. They might belong to the major­ity for no oth­er reas­on than that every­one else seems to be. ³Chryssochoou, X. and Volpato, C. (2004). Social Influence and the Power of Minorities: An Analysis of the Communist Manifesto, Social Justice Research, 17, 4, 357 – 388

“In groups, the minor­ity can have a dis­pro­por­tion­ate effect, con­vert­ing many ‘major­ity’ mem­bers to their own cause. This is because many major­ity group mem­bers are not strong believ­ers in its cause. They may be simply going along because it seems easi­er or that there is no real altern­at­ive. They may also have become dis­il­lu­sioned with the group pur­pose, pro­cess, or lead­er­ship and are seek­ing a viable altern­at­ive.”
Source: Changingminds​.org ⁴Conversion Theory. (2023). Changingminds​.org. https://​chan​ging​minds​.org/​e​x​p​l​a​n​a​t​i​o​n​s​/​t​h​e​o​r​i​e​s​/​c​o​n​v​e​r​s​i​o​n​_​t​h​e​o​r​y​.​htm

According to con­ver­sion the­ory, while major­it­ies often claim norm­at­ive social influ­ence, minor­it­ies strive for eth­ic­al high ground. 

Given the power of norm­at­ive social influ­ence, minor­it­ies must stick togeth­er in tight-knit in-groups that can verb­al­ise the same mes­sage repeatedly.

Learn more: Conversion Theory: The Disproportionate Influence of Minorities

💡 Subscribe and get a free ebook on how to get bet­ter PR ideas.

How To Make Your CSR Less Boring

Brands are gen­er­ally per­ceived as both power­ful and wealthy.

To be accep­ted as the under­dog, the brand must be vul­ner­able to deserve pub­lic acknowledgement.

1. There must be a clearly defined enemy; the more potent the enemy, the more interesting the story.

If you want people to side with your brand act­ively, they need to know who and what you’re up against — and that the brand is put­ting itself at risk by tak­ing this position.

From a PR per­spect­ive, com­pan­ies cut­ting down rain­forests are weak. And tak­ing a stand on behalf of the rain­forest is risk-free for the brand.

Is there a clearly defined enemy backed by a stu­pid major­ity?
Does a smart minor­ity back you in tak­ing down this enemy?

2. There must be obstacles and stakes to keep the brand accountable, and the audience engaged.

CSR, too, obeys the fun­da­ment­al laws of storytelling; you need a strong enemy and must also accept a hero’s journey. 

You can’t expect people to trust or respect you if you don’t harm your brand for what it believes in. 

There must be some­thing “at risk,” some­thing tan­gible for the brand’s bot­tom line. The brand must make enemies.

What’s at stake for your com­pany?
In what way is the out­come for your busi­ness uncertain?

PR Resource: The Stupid Majority