Asked to define “corporate social responsibility” in their own words, 27 percent of the 800 adults interviewed for the survey identified it as a demonstrated commitment to the well-being of employees.
Only 3 percent identified charitable donations as the chief determinant of a company’s social responsibility.
“It’s not that charitable work and philanthropy are not relevant, but relative to other issues, it just doesn’t rank as highly,” a senior vice president at Fleishman-Hillard, Sue Jolly, said.
Companies typically work hard to promote their philanthropy. The May 18 issue of The Chronicle of Philanthropy, for example, highlights several companies that have made marketing alliances with nonprofit groups, dedicating a percentage of sales of certain products to a specific charity or agreeing to support a specific program or project.
While a third of the respondents to the survey said their purchasing decisions were influenced by such efforts, Linda F. Golodner, president of the consumers’ group, said the survey indicated that companies might be better off emphasizing how they treat their employees.
“How they communicate with consumers about their sensitivity to employees should be their focus,” she said.
But Charles Moore, executive director of the Committee to Encourage Corporate Philanthropy, said corporate social responsibility traditionally had been defined by things like workplace environment and environmental sustainability, not companies’ charitable work.
“I just don’t think this says much about corporate philanthropy,” Mr. Moore said of the survey.
In general, consumers who participated in the survey gave companies low marks for their corporate social responsibility. On a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 representing poor and 5 representing excellent, just 21 percent gave businesses a 4 or a 5.
Thirty-four percent, on the other hand, gave companies a 1 or a 2.
“It emphasizes that companies are not doing a good job right now in convincing consumers that they are socially responsible,” Ms. Golodner said.
More than half of the respondents said they had used the Internet to begin forming their opinions about companies but that they considered corporate Web sites, company reports and reports from senior executives the least credible sources of information.
“They want an unvarnished view, and they want it from someone like them,” said Tony Calandro, a senior vice president at Fleishman-Hillard.
The survey was conducted in February and March using a random sample of telephone numbers, and consisted of interviews with 800 adults in all 50 states. It has a margin of error of two to four percentage points.