CSR And Volunteer Management

Generative AI systems are increasingly evaluated for their social impact, but there's no standardized approach yet. This paper from June 2023 presents a framework for evaluating the social impact of generative AI systems, catering to researchers and developers, third-party auditors and red-teamers, and policymakers. Social impact is defined by the authors "as the effect of a system on people and communities along any timeline with a focus on marginalization, and active, harm that can be evaluated." The framework defines 7 categories of social impact: - bias, stereotypes, and representational harms; - cultural values and sensitive content; - disparate performance; - privacy and data protection; - financial costs; - environmental costs; - data and content moderation labor costs. E.g., the paper explains that safeguarding personal information and privacy relies on proper handling of training data, methods, and security measures. The paper stresses that there is great potential for more comprehensive privacy evaluations of GenAI systems: - Addressing the issue of memorization of training examples. - Ensure that only lawfully obtained data is shared with third parties. - Prioritize individual consent and choices. GenAI systems are harder to evaluate without clear documentation, systems for obtaining consent (e.g., opt-out mechanisms), and appropriate technical and process controls. Rules for leveraging end-user data for training purposes are often unclear, and the immense size of training datasets makes scrutiny increasingly difficult. Therefore, privacy risk assessments should go beyond proxies, focusing on memorization, data sharing, and security controls, and require extensive audits of processes and governance. 5 overarching categories for evaluation in society are suggested: - trustworthiness and autonomy; - inequality, marginalization, and violence; - concentration of authority; - labor and creativity; - ecosystem and environment. Each category includes subcategories and recommendations for mitigating harm. E.g., the category of trustworthiness and autonomy includes "Personal Privacy and Sense of Self". The authors emphasize that the impacts and harms from the violation of privacy are difficult to enumerate and evaluate. Mitigation first should determine who is responsible for an individual’s privacy, but requires both individual and collective action. The paper points out that technical methods to preserve privacy in a GenAI system, as seen in privacy-preserving approaches to language modeling, cannot guarantee full protection. Improving common practices and better global regulation for collecting training data can help. By Irene Solaiman, Zeerak Talat, William Agnew, Lama Ahmad, Dylan Baker, Su Lin Blodgett, Hal Daumé III, Jesse Dodge, Ellie Evans, Sara Hooker, Yacine Jernite, Alexandra Sasha Luccioni, Alberto Lusoli, Margaret Mitchell, Jessica Newman, Marie-Therese Png, Andrew Strait, Apostol Vassilev

The 2024 Global Renewables Status Report has just been released by REN21. This annual publication provides a summary of global developments & trends in #renewableenergy. A further module of this report is due to be released in September too that specifically looks at economic and #socialvalue creation. 2 key things stood out to me in the status report this year, and both relate to the critical #socialimpact aspects of the energy transition: 1. Equity challenges - especially the disadvantages for low-income countries where the cost of capital for renewable energy projects is reaching as high as 10%, compared with less than 4% in high-income countries 2. The gap between policy ambition and implementation - "Worldwide, an estimated 3,000 GW of renewable energy projects remained underdeveloped as of 2023 due to inadequate grid infrastructure, insufficient financing, and permitting delays. These are major bottlenecks that risk derailing the energy transition". With respect to permitting delays, it has been recognised now that as the rush & intensity around renewable energy projects has increased, so has incidences of community opposition to some projects in host locations. This is a contributing factor to the delay & cost trends and is both symptom of too much in the energy space being led by the private sector and insufficient, timely government decision making in the public interest. Permitting & approvals is an area where I'm of the view a change in regulatory approval processes to involve earlier social impact assessment, including rapid social screening and social value projection of projects, would be beneficial and can be done well in advance of environmental impact assessments and other technical studies that need to take longer. I'm not talking about the proponent-serving social licence type considerations or throwing money at community benefit funds to win over local communities (or score high on a tender process). The emphasis instead needs to go towards understanding which renewable energy projects will create the most social value holistically in context (with benefits for people & communities including workers, suppliers and energy end users, and across the project lifecycle) and then prioritise those for implementation. The ultimate "S" question is not "how do we get public acceptance for the project?" but "is this project going to create a net positive value?". Good social performance & value creation potential does not always mean a project will have social licence at the time it is proposed too. Some projects without social licence at a particular point in time should still be supported to proceed if they are in the public interest. Early social impact assessment (to understand social risks and benefit opportunities) can help work out which projects those are so efforts can focus there and not be wasted elsewhere. What do you think? What else would help speed up the transition and get better social outcomes?

Corporate volunteering can be so much more. In a world where employees are drowning in meaningless tasks, purpose has become the oxygen mask they're desperately reaching for. Yet most companies hand them plastic replicas - a few one-off events, forced team activities, and CSR initiatives that feel more like compliance than connection. The data doesn't lie. 86% of employees say volunteering builds loyalty. Purpose-driven organizations see 40% higher retention. These aren't just numbers. They're the silent screams of a workforce starving for meaning while feasting on paychecks. I've seen it firsthand at U&I. 65,000 volunteers. 21,000 social impact projects. 150,000 beneficiaries. But these statistics hide the real story – the marketing executive who found her voice while teaching a child to read. The tech lead who built more than a playground; he rebuilt his sense of worth. The finance team that calculated impact beyond spreadsheets. Most CSR programs fail spectacularly. They're designed like corporate events but expected to deliver human transformation. They're planned by exhausted internal teams who are already juggling seventeen priorities. They're measured by attendance, not by hearts shifted. This is why companies struggle. Not because they don't care. But because caring effectively is harder than it looks. The solution isn't another volunteering day. It's a volunteering culture. One that flows from strategy to execution to measurement. One that works for teams of 10 or 10,000. One that fits into 10 minutes or stretches across two days. U&I has built this engine across 40+ cities. With 200+ NGO partners. Through STEM toolkits and elder-care kits. Through sustainability walls and memory games. Not as random activities, but as carefully designed experiences that align with your company's soul. The most powerful moment isn't when employees show up. It's when they forget they're at a "session." When the line between giving and receiving blurs. When purpose stops being a poster on the wall and starts being the reason they show up on Monday. Your employees don't need another team lunch. They need to matter. And in a world where connection has become a luxury, volunteering isn't just nice to have. It's the bridge between what your company does and why it exists. The question isn't whether you can afford a volunteering program. It's whether you can afford a workforce that's forgotten why they work.

Ready to leave a lasting legacy? It's time to weave pro bono work into the fabric of your Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) program! Here's how to make it happen: • Define your impact areas and objectives • Appoint a dedicated program leader • Build a diverse, passionate team • Establish clear KPIs for success • Measure and report progress regularly The benefits? • Enhanced company reputation and customer loyalty • Attraction and retention of top talent • New opportunities for growth and innovation • Meaningful contribution to social and environmental causes 💡 Pro tip: Align your CSR program with your overall corporate strategy to ensure its sustainability and impact. Matija D., CEO at Koncepted Inc., shares: "Designing for nonprofits goes beyond supporting a good cause; it is a way of uniting your internal design squad with meaningful goals and enrich team culture." I'm curious: How have you integrated pro bono work into your CSR efforts? What impact has it had on your team and company culture? Share your experiences below. #TechForGood #CSR #ProBonoImpact --- This post is part of a series "10 Tested Ways to Engage
in Impactful Pro-Bono Projects". Follow me for more insights!

Don’t rush into CSR. Build the brand first and then build impact that lasts. I met a young founder who had recently launched a brand and said he wanted to do his first brand campaign linked to CSR. The intent is admirable. But this timing is off - I had made the mistake at MyGlamm. Very early on, just a few months into our launch, we did a campaign with the incredible Lisa Haydon. It encouraged women to glare back if anyone stared at them. Here is what I learnt. CSR impact without brand reach gets ignored, or worse, can sometimes also be called performative. Signature CSR programs that truly move the needle need focus, budget, and years. A simple press release and a small campaign will not make any impact. If you are a young brand, pour 90% of energy first into PMF, retention, and customer love. Let your brand campaigns be about that. And as you think about CSR: Step 1: first bake micro integrity into your product experience (clear sourcing, fair policies, small opt-in givebacks). Step 2: Then as your brand reach increases, you can name one cause that’s native to your business, and then you can fund/measure it Step 3: Launch a branded signature program which you’ll stick with for years and not just a single campaign. I think if you get the sequence right, then you will be able to build a CSR that will truly have an impact and will also carry your brand farther. And just remember if you are not ready to sustain, dont rush into starting it.

𝐃𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐖𝐞𝐥𝐥 𝐛𝐲 𝐃𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐆𝐨𝐨𝐝: 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐨𝐰𝐞𝐫 𝐨𝐟 𝐂𝐨𝐫𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐒𝐨𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐄𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐬 Can your company 𝘥𝘰 𝘸𝘦𝘭𝘭 𝘣𝘺 𝘥𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘨𝘰𝘰𝘥? 𝘈𝘣𝘴𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘵𝘦𝘭𝘺. According to the 2024 𝘓𝘙𝘕 𝘉𝘦𝘯𝘤𝘩𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘬 𝘰𝘧 𝘌𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘊𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦 𝘙𝘦𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵, companies with strong ethical cultures outperform others by 50 percent not only in profit, also in customer satisfaction, employee loyalty, innovation, and growth. Corporate social responsibility is not a press release or a one-time donation. It is a long-term commitment to operating in a way that benefits both people and the planet. Think of Patagonia, which carefully vets its supply chain to prevent child labor and unsafe working conditions. Or Ben & Jerry’s, which donates 7.5 𝘱𝘦𝘳𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘪𝘵𝘴 𝘱𝘳𝘦𝘵𝘢𝘹 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘧𝘪𝘵𝘴 to philanthropic initiatives. Both prove that ethics and performance can move together in the same direction. In my latest Forbes article, I share 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘦𝘦 𝘸𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘣𝘶𝘪𝘭𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘢 𝘴𝘰𝘤𝘪𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘱𝘰𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘤𝘶𝘭𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦: ✔️ 𝐅𝐢𝐧𝐝 𝐚 𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 that aligns with your mission and stakeholders. ✔️ 𝐏𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐡 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐠𝐨𝐚𝐥𝐬 so you stay accountable. ✔️ 𝐒𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐥𝐭𝐬 to build trust and transparency. 𝘌𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘭 𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘶𝘤𝘵 𝘤𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘵𝘦𝘴 𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘦𝘢𝘮𝘴, 𝘭𝘰𝘺𝘢𝘭 𝘤𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘳𝘴, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘪𝘯𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘦 𝘨𝘳𝘰𝘸𝘵𝘩. Doing well by doing good is not a slogan, it is a strategy for long-term success. How is your organization integrating social responsibility into its business strategy? Share your thoughts below 👇 Read more in my Forbes  Magazine article: https://lnkd.in/g4JcJhHq #Leadership #CSR #BusinessEthics #Sustainability #ForbesBusinessCouncil #TiltTheRoom Forbes Business Council Paul Hawken Rob Chesnut Josh Linkner Jeff DeGraff

Roadmap to Social Impact. Your step-by-step guide to planning, measuring and communicating social impact! I. Situation 1. Social impact measurement must move from good intentions and compliance to evidence, learning and action. 2. It proves value, improves programs, guides resources and strengthens stakeholder confidence. 3. Its strategic task is linking activities to vision, values, decisions and lasting change. II. Purpose and Systems Lens 1. Start with the problem, intended outcomes, audience and reason for measuring. 2. Use problem analysis and systems thinking to surface root causes, equity, assumptions and leverage points. 3. Name positionality, finance incentives and unintended consequences before methods harden. III. People, Planning and Legitimacy 1. Evaluation needs leadership, learning culture, resources and visible use of results. 2. Stakeholder analysis maps influence, interest, resistance, needs and engagement level. 3. Lived experience, Indigenous cultural safety, data sovereignty, ethics and budget determine legitimacy. IV. Program Design and Measurement Architecture 1. Theory of change explains why change should happen; program logic shows inputs to impact. 2. Evaluation questions set the path: process, outcomes, impact, economic, realist, developmental or systems. 3. Frameworks convert purpose into indicators, data sources, timing, governance, analysis and translation. V. Evidence, Analysis and Credibility 1. Mixed methods balance scale, context and confidence. 2. Evidence quality depends on validity, reliability, relevance, triangulation, ethics and bias control. 3. Contribution claims often outperform attribution claims in complex systems. VI. Conclusion 1. Measure what matters, for whom, why and how findings will be used. 2. Translate findings into the “so what” through reports, dashboards, stories, workshops and action plans. 3. Impact compounds when evaluation is embedded into capability, decisions, learning and responsible AI use. Make sure to check out these great resources by Centre for Social Impact here: https://lnkd.in/dkaz8YnM —— Stay Ahead of Transformative Innovation Follow The Futuring Alliance for regular insights, foresight, and practical tools to help your organization thrive in times of change. We support leaders across industries in turning future-focused ideas into real-world impact—through collaboration, innovation, and bold action. Let’s shape what’s next—together. #innovation #transformativeinnovation #foresight #futures #impact #socialimpact #systems #systemschange 

"Foundation models are increasingly central to high-stakes AI systems, and governance frameworks now depend on evaluations to assess their risks and capabilities. Although general capability evaluations are widespread, social impact assessments covering bias, fairness, privacy, environmental costs, and labor practices remain uneven across the AI ecosystem. To characterize this landscape, we conduct the first comprehensive analysis of both first-party and third-party social impact evaluation reporting across a wide range of model developers. Our study examines 186 first-party release reports and 183 post-release evaluation sources, and complements this quantitative analysis with interviews of model developers. We find a clear division of evaluation labor: first-party reporting is sparse, often superficial, and has declined over time in key areas such as environmental impact and bias, while third-party evaluators including academic researchers, nonprofits, and independent organizations provide broader and more rigorous coverage of bias, harmful content, and performance disparities. However, this complementarity has limits. Only model developers can authoritatively report on data provenance, content moderation labor, financial costs, and training infrastructure, yet interviews reveal that these disclosures are often deprioritized unless tied to product adoption or regulatory compliance. Our findings indicate that current evaluation practices leave major gaps in assessing AI’s societal impacts, highlighting the urgent need for policies that promote developer transparency, strengthen independent evaluation ecosystems, and create shared infrastructure to aggregate and compare third-party evaluations in a consistent and accessible way." Anka Reuel, Avijit Ghosh, PhD Jenny Chim

Supply Chain ESG Assessment Framework ⬇️ For many companies, the most significant environmental and social impacts sit outside direct operations. They are embedded in raw materials, manufacturing, transport, subcontracting, product use, and disposal. Yet supply chain assessments often remain too narrow, focused on first-tier suppliers, policy reviews, and periodic audits. A stronger assessment needs to answer three questions: Where are the most material risks and impacts concentrated? How effectively are suppliers and business partners managing them? Where do weak controls, limited visibility, or capability gaps create exposure? The framework below organizes that assessment across three dimensions. Environmental analysis looks at emissions, resource use, pollution, and lifecycle hotspots. Social analysis examines human rights, wages, working hours, safety, and worker voice. Governance analysis focuses on supplier mapping, ownership visibility, due diligence, escalation, and corrective action. The quality of the assessment also depends on its principles. Material risk prioritization, tiered supplier coverage, verifiable evidence, and supplier capacity building help move the process beyond a compliance checklist. The goal is not to evaluate every supplier in the same way. It is to identify where the company has the greatest exposure, where intervention can create the most meaningful improvement, and where stronger supplier relationships are required. Better supply chain ESG management starts with clearer visibility, sharper prioritization, and stronger follow-through.

I said I’m building in public — and here’s the first behind-the-scenes truth. After I defined the problem and mapped the features for my AI product, I paused. - Before data. - Before models. - Before prompts. I conducted an Ethics Impact Assessment. I asked myself: - Who could this harm? - Where could bias creep in? - Do I even need AI here? That step doesn’t show up in demos — but it protects real people. This is what I’ll be sharing in public: not just what I build… but how I decide what deserves to exist. This is how I was trained at Google — not to build fast, but to build with intention. I didn’t leave Big Tech to move faster. I left to build better & responsibly. For anyone vibe-coding and wondering what EIA means: An Ethics Impact Assessment is a structured way to ask: “If we introduce AI into this product or feature, who could be harmed, how, and what responsibility do we carry?” It goes beyond technical feasibility and forces you to examine: - Human impact - Bias & fairness risks - Privacy & consent - Power imbalance - Transparency & accountability - Whether AI is even necessary It’s the moral equivalent of a Google-grade standard AI product PRD AI ethics, governance and privacy aren't optional- they're the foundation of responsible AI So tell me — would you rather ship fast, or ship something you’re proud to defend in public? #aiethics #datagovernance #dataprivacy #responsibleai #buildinpublic