O BOTICARIO BUSINESS CASE*

A Leadership Model for Crafting a Company with Soul

Introduction O Boticario, a Brazilian-owned company in the cosmetics, perfumes and personal care industry, has long evinced a strategy of investing voluntarily in Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiatives as a way to contribute to local and national sustainable development initiatives. O Boticario has successfully integrated its CSR initiatives into the company’s business model, strategies and marketing efforts since its inception while still becoming a profitable enterprise. In 2002, O Boticario became a signatory of the Global Compact, the United Nations-led program designed to mobilize business leadership’s commitment to, and promotion of an initial set of nine universal principles in the areas of human rights, labor and the environment.1 The company joined because it viewed participation as a natural path to confirm and to reassert commitment to its social responsibility values, and to do so as it managed the changes needed to position itself in the global marketplace.

This paper examines the enabling and constraining factors affecting O Boticario’s efforts to articulate and pursue its CSR agenda while still sustaining profitability. We consider key external environmental factors, with a special focus on the Brazilian context, and key internal corporate characteristics, with a special focus on leadership modeling. We begin with a brief overview of the CSR movement, with particular focus on the Brazilian context, offering factors from the external environment of the firm that serve to both enable and constrain corporate responsiveness to social issues. We follow with a profile of the company, investigating internal drivers of O Boticario’s CSR initiatives as well as potential constraints to their successful implementation. Examples of the company’s CSR initiatives are presented and results are assessed. The study concludes with an assessment of the challenges the company faces in its efforts to balance commitment to social responsibility with for-profit goals. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): Brief Overview CSR, as pointed out by Wilson (2003: 2), is a broad and dialectical concept that can be traced back to the time of ancient Greece and “… deals with the role of business in society. Its basic premise is that corporate managers have an ethical obligation to consider and address the needs of society, not just to act solely in the interests of the shareholders or their own self-interest”. In the 20th century, the study of CSR can be traced back to the work of Kapp (1950), an economist whose discourse on the externalities of business and their attendant costs to society paved the way for others to challenge the assumptions underlying the neoclassical economic model of corporate behavior. The CSR concept started to attract increased attention with the work of Bowen (1953) whose book, Social Responsibilities of the Businessman focused on the obligations of business toward the expectations of the very society that permitted its existence and conferred on it legitimacy. * Information for this case comes from primary and secondary sources. Secondary sources include publicly available data both external and internal to O Boticario. Primary sources include interviews conducted by the authors with O Boticario’s Top Management Team (TMT) in August of 2004 and a two phase interview process with the company’s relevant stakeholders conducted in August 2004 and in May 2005. Relevant stakeholders identified in this case include the government officials in the municipality of Sao Jose dos Pinhais in Curitiba, State of Parana, where the main manufacturing site is located; employees, suppliers and franchisees.. 1 The UN Global Compact added a tenth principle addressing corruption in the summer of 2004.

2

Between the time of Bowen’s book publication and today, the concept of CSR has received wide attention and undergone vigorous debate among participants representing many sectors of society, including the academic, governmental, business and civil society sectors. Debate has concerned itself with the tension between CSR and profits as well as with the intensity and focus of CSR activities (cf. Bendell and Kearins, 2004). By the 1980s, the discussion emphasized how CSR looks in practice, that is, the corporate social performance (CSP) of firms as modeled by Carroll (1979) and further developed by Strand (1983). Researchers became interested in this three-tiered CSP construct that described at one level the social responsibility or guiding principles of society that are relevant to the firm’s strategic process, as well as CSP’s other two components: social issues management and social responsiveness. Social issues management relates to the need for firms to identify key stakeholders, the issues they generate requiring firm attention, their interest in firm decision-making, and their power to affect the firm’s success in achieving goals. Social responsiveness describes the firm’s strategic posture with respect to a broad range of stakeholder concerns and was described by Frederick (1978: 6, republished in1994) as “the capacity of a corporation to respond to social pressures”. In the 1990s, this examination of CSR in practice evolved into the adoption of the term corporate citizenship (Waddock, 2004), and accountability for corporate action became publicly transparent in the form of various ratings and screens utilized by stakeholders in deciding which firms would get their dollars, votes, or public support. With this trend, firms are increasingly engaged in corporate social performance reporting (Lyon, 2004) including the triple bottom line (TBL) approach (cf., Colman, 2005; Elkington, 1998; Smith and Durcan, 2004), which some criticize as ineffective in achieving the goals of social and environmental reporting and performance (eg., Norman and MacDonald, 2004). As firms search for an ethical and sustainable equilibrium between the socio-economic and environmental solutions related and relevant to their business, it is incumbent on researchers of the CSR/CSP phenomenon to explore the environmental factors that impinge upon the firm’s capacity to respond to social issues of the day emanating from the social and economic context in which it operates, as well as its internal ability to effect an appropriate response as dictated by its resources and facilitated by its organizational culture. In the following section we point to those environmental elements affecting one company’s social responsiveness in the operating environment of Brazil Key External Factors: CSR and the Brazilian Context External environments of business operations may simultaneously enable and constrain the individual firm’s CSR efforts. Legal, political, regulatory, social and cultural mandates prescribe behaviors that may work to effect positive change in the direction of CSR, and may also mitigate the effective implementation of CSR initiatives. The external environment in which O Boticario operates poses many social, political and economic challenges. According to Campos (2004: 3), “… corporate participation in social development programs has been mandated by law as a way to mitigate the social and economic problems afflicting the Brazilian population. For example, Brazilian companies are required to: (a) contribute to Social Security; (b) pay the Unemployment Savings Fund (FGTS); (c) finance the nations Occupational Accident Insurance program; and (d) fill job quotas for the disabled and other disadvantaged cross-sections of the Brazilian populace”. This type of corporate participation is perceived as restrictive because it only covers the 60% of Brazilians who belong to the formal sector of the economy, while the 40% constituting the informal sector is excluded from these legal and regulatory protections. The inability of the government to improve the social disparity dilemma in Brazil is perceived as one of the reasons for the private sector to get involved in practicing CSR. According to the “Consumer Perception Research” report by Instituto Ethos on this issue “… This can be attributed to the current Brazilian social context, since a large portion of the Brazilian population excluded [from the economic wealth], is

3

significant and makes the problem of difficult solution. Thus, enormous “carencias” or gaps and social inequalities that exist in the country make CSR even more relevant. The Brazilian society expects that companies exercise a new role in the process of its development: that they become agents of a new ethical culture, players in the social change and builders of a better society as well” (Instituto Ethos, 2002). Puppim (2002) points out that Brazil's social problems have an impact beyond economic development concerns. He asserts that they inhibit implementation of a “sustainable development culture” despite gains in the environmental movement since the U.N. Conference on Environment and Development that took place in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. While these challenges persist in Brazilian society, they also represent an opportunity for companies to distinguish themselves in the CSR realm as evidenced by the leadership role firms assumed in addressing environmental concerns in the past decade, with companies beginning to “establish environmental departments and invest considerable sums in environmental projects internally and externally" (Puppim, 2002). Regulation is not enough to ensure that local communities are protected from environmental, human rights, employee and consumer abuses, however. Regulation that is not accompanied by proper enforcement mechanisms and rule of law is listless in attaching itself to real and responsible change for social betterment. Companies operating in lax environments must supplement scant regulatory requirements with voluntary action for the moral good. International standards further assist in this regard, to “ensure that the gap is closed between the new socially responsible rhetoric of business and the often grim reality faced by those communities affected by their actions” (Pendleton, 2004). In Brazil, as in most of Latin America, CSR is at an early stage. This point is made clearly by Peinado-Vara (2004:1) who states that "while available evidence on the progress in mainstreaming corporate social responsibility in the region is mixed, a general notion is that CSR is a growing movement, but still in its infancy.” He adds “there is a need to improve the institutional capacity of governments and the investment climate, and also to adapt the CSR agenda to the specific characteristics of each country". However, the bulk of Latin American CSR reporting is concentrated in the region’s largest economies, including Brazil, Chile, Argentina and Mexico (KPMG, 2005) and tends to follow the guidelines established by the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). Moreover, and according to O Boticario’s Director of Social Responsibility, “compared to all the Latin American countries and many of the European Union members such as Portugal, Spain and its newest members, Brazil boasts many benchmarking cases in CSR”. The CSR movement in Brazil has also been strengthened with the establishment of non- governmental organizations (NGOs) and the interests from research institutes in the 1990s that serve to “promote voluntary corporate social action” (Cappellin and Giuliani, 2005). Examples of NGO’s include the following: Instituto Brasileiro de Analises Sociais e Economicas (IBASE), Instituto Ethos de Empresas e Responsabilidade Social, Fundacao Abrinq pelos Direitors da Crianca, and Fundacao para o Premio Nacional da Qualidade. Each of these NGOs introduced dimensions towards valuing companies for their best practices, and some work in strategic alliances with government or firms to achieve mutually desirable outcomes (Choi et al, 2005). An example of a research institute is Instituto de Pequisas Econômicas Aplicadas (IPEA). Moreover, business entities in Brazil are fast embracing the CSR cause creating institutional pressures for conformance. As Jennings and Zandbergen, (1995) suggest, mimetic forces will play more of a role than normative forces or coercive forces in firms’ adoption of sustainability concepts and practices. This bandwagon effect in Brazil, and in Latin America more generally, is especially notable in locally headquartered, private companies rather than for local subsidiaries of publicly traded multinationals (KPMG, 2005). These companies identify with their local communities and promote CSR even in the face of typically weak governmental incentives. Peinado-Vara (2004: 2) explains: "There is a long tradition of corporate philanthropy in Latin

4

America and the Caribbean, where the private sector has had an overly paternalistic view of its role in society". Examples of businesses in Brazil that evidence this trend include companies such as Natura, Suzano Papel e Celulose, Bradesco, BOVESPA -- the first stock exchange to become a signatory of the U.N. Global Compact -- and O Boticario, which is the subject case of this paper, among others. However, corporate philanthropy has given way to more concrete and longer-term developmental efforts more recently. According to O Boticario’s Director of Corporate Social Responsibility, the CSR movement in Brazil “has evolved from philanthropy to private social investment. The former, normally understood as paternalistic donation of financial resources in the United States, Europe and Latin America, is interpreted differently, technically speaking, in Brazil. Thus, the evolution to the latter, private social investment, encouraged by GIFE (Grupo de Institutos Fundações e Empresas), which has to do with a planned and monitored use of private resources for public purposes in order to address the causes and not the consequences of the societal problems”. The importance of CSR in Brazil is a reflection of the attention given to the issue in the global business environment. Such attention has translated into creation of the Dow Jones Sustainability Index in the United States, social accountability standards such as SA 8000 and AA 1000, social reporting standards such as those recommended by GRI, and global principles such as the U.N. Global Compact Principles. Global standards are the purveyors of practices and dialogue related to CSR to emergent economies where such practices are still evolving. However, and as asserted above, Brazil has its own CSR history with noted improvements in social performance indicators over the past two decades (Cappellin and Giuliani, 2005). Further, Brazil remains one of the leaders in Latin America as witnessed by the adoption of codes of conduct in large numbers by Brazilian firms, in most cases far outpacing their neighbors on the continent2. Globalization has arguably facilitated this trend, as diffusion of principles is made possible through open markets and democratization of information and technology (cf. Friedman, 2000). The new and evolving social mandate exerts pressures on Brazilian firms to take up the slack that government cannot address, and may serve as a source of sustainable competitive advantage to those firms whose efforts in this sphere are effective and felt in their communities. Such efforts require a sustained commitment of resources sometimes beyond the financial wherewithal of incumbent firms. However, given resource capabilities, Brazilian firms are beginning to recognize the value, in terms of cost reductions, risk reduction, and reputation advantages, of allocating slack resources to CSR ends (Cappellin and Giuliani, 2005). The next section examines internal drivers for CSR implementation at the level of the firm illustrated by the case of O Boticario. Key Internal Factors: O Boticario’s CSR agenda Background. O Boticario was established in 1977 as a simple pharmacy, dedicated to blending and selling made-to-order prescriptions to end users. In 1982, it expanded into one of the “largest perfume and cosmetics franchise networks of the sector in the country with about 2,100 stores, around 50 being company-owned” (Gazeta Mercantil, 2002). Today, O Boticario has approximately 2,300 franchisees, operations in 23 countries and 27 international partnerships. As a privately-held Brazilian company, its social investments are dedicated to the communities in which it operates, and it views such investment as an important part of the role it plays as a Brazilian business.

2 Inter-American Development Bank reported in March 2004 that of the 42 cases of companies adopting the SA8000, Brazilian cases numbered 39. In terms of GRI, Brazil made up nearly half of the cases of adoption of its measures in Latin America (5 cases out of a total of 11).

5

In 2004, the company was in the process of completing a large scale restructuring and reorganization. It formed a holding company, The K & G Group, in 2003, where O Boticario constitutes one of the business units in the Group. Under this new corporate structure a Corporate Social Responsibility Department has been created as part of the holding company to guide and to oversee the entire Group’s corporate governance. The responsibility of this Department, according to its Director, is to organize and disseminate corporate social responsibility policies, to collect and monitor indicators, and to coordinate the improvements planned throughout all functional/operational areas of the corporation. Global Compact’s Millenium Goals are transmitted to all-corporate employees through the publication “Essencia da Noticia” and to its franchise network through the “Boti News”. The goal is to integrate all the business units under the Group’s umbrella of corporate social responsibility policy, reflecting the aims of its corporate culture crafted through its leadership. A Council of Social Responsibility, directly linked to the Presidency of the Group, has been created to ensure that checks and balances are in place. This particular structure ensures the longevity of its private social investments, and the salience of social goals even in the face of financial uncertainty, thus solidifying the company’s commitment to CSR. Major Internal Drivers for CSR. Integrating CSR into a firm’s core business strategy is touted as an effective means of implementing universal principles into accountable and measurable practices that reduce risk and improve corporate reputation (Burke and Logsdon, 1996; Fombrun, 2005; Werther and Chandler, 2005). As a Global Compact signatory, O Boticario has a vested interest in assuring that the principles to which it has committed are reflected in the firm’s operational activities. Its social investment activities have been a long-held tenet of the firm’s top management team. Thus, major drivers for CSR initiatives and their implementation at O Boticario have been the leadership of the firm that stipulates to a strategic plan and an organizational culture that together foster social responsibility and require firm members to be constantly vigilant about the their role in society. It has been clear to the President of O Boticario, Mr. Miguel Krigsner, that the moment the business becomes successful is the moment to get involved with giving back to the society. In his own words, “to be recognized only for [the business], it is excellent from the commercial aspect, but I think it is insufficient that a company like ours not to be involved with aspects that probably are decisive aspects to take Brazil to the next developmental platform” (Interview). The establishment of O Boticario Foundation for Nature Protection in 1990 evidences this point. This was the first high profile step the company took to launch its social responsibility initiatives. This is an example of “private social investment” in Brazil, which differs from philanthropy and after tax social investment. “O Boticario Foundation has turned the ideas related to nature into reality, as well as the vision that preserving the environment for future generations is fundamental.”3 The role of O Boticario Foundation was essential to drive O Boticario to implement the President’s personal values to be incorporated into the company’s strategic planning and business model. In 2002, the company introduced the CSR policy, which was endorsed by the Board. With this, the entire organization began to have a better understanding of the social responsibility currency that had been embraced by only a handful of organizational members up until that point. Therefore, discussions by the group of CSR established previously in 2001 resulted in the first company-wide policy for private social investment for environment and social responsibility. The policy stated that 1% of the company’s budget from net sales were to be designated for its private 3 Miguel Krigsner in O Boticario 27 Years, Almanaque de bordo da TAM de fev/2003 a jan/2004p.20

6

social investments. Out of this amount, 80% would be allocated to the Foundation. It is important to note that this type of donation is completely voluntary and does not receive any fiscal incentive in Brazil. The funding policy was established precisely to ensure that the Foundation would be able to have a continuous and long term planning horizon. The Foundation has become an entity not only highly recognized in Brazil but also in the international arena. Its credibility has won it contributions from other sources such as the voluntary contributions by almost 60% of O Boticario’s franchisees. Other sources of funding include other foundations, such as the Interamerican Foundation (IAF). In addition, the company realized in 2002 that CSR initiatives were not only a good company strategy but would generate enormous value to the company. Thus, the CSR movement flourished in the company since then, enforced by the revised vision and value statements 4

Since then, issues related to CSR and private social investment became legitimized internally and began to receive special attention by the top management team, making it easier to internalize the concepts across the organization. For example, O Boticario created in 2002 a Supplier Development Program with the purpose of assuring quality of the suppliers through an approach that emphasized development as opposed to elimination of a supplier in the case where the supplier did not meet the qualifications and did not satisfy the value proposition required by O Boticario. Items related to environmental management, employing child labor, and worker safety are among the values listed on the suppliers’ checklist. The evaluation is done item by item on the checklist and for each input. Due to the impossibility of visiting all suppliers in loco to conduct the evaluation, the suppliers are asked to conduct an auto evaluation that includes the social responsibility aspect. In addition to the company President, another top management team member, the Director of Human Resources and Social Responsibility, was instrumental in the incorporation of CSR into the management model of the firm. Without her advocacy, O Boticario’s business model would have remained unchanged from the time when the understanding of social responsibility was that it was nothing more than philanthropy. Today, the thought process is far more proactive and far-reaching, as reflected in an interview with O Boticario’s Director on Planning. He indicated that he now has to give consideration to both profitability and the need to assess the social and environmental impacts of strategic planning decisions. Diffusion of CSR as Part of Management Practice. The company’s recent restructuring explained earlier that created the Corporate Social Responsibility Department to oversee the entire company’s corporate governance and social programs is managed with an eye to addressing both internal (O Boticario itself) and external (other enterprises of the K & G Group besides O Boticario) units on social responsibility issues. The importance of this diffusion of the leadership’s vision for CSR cannot be overstated. As the corporate responsibility movement has taken hold over the last few decades, the challenge to firms has been in communicating their formal values and translating global principles to stakeholders through public statements and deeds. Corporate social reporting has been one effective tool for such communication, with a focus on continuous improvement that engages everyone in the firm, not merely the top management team (Lyon, 2004). For such efforts to yield positive results, a corporate culture that encourages positive social performance needs to be created. We have seen an example of how O Boticario executes this kind of result with one group of stakeholders, its supplier network. Further

4 See “About O Boticario”, www.boticariocom/portal/us/sobreotobicario/valores.asp

7

efforts must include training and learning, rewards and recognition, some of which the company has already embarked upon.

As the top management team at O Boticario has realized, institutionalizing social responsibility can be a slow process, one that might take up to five years or more to implement, and one that could face pockets of resistance within the organization. The top management team had the opportunity to embrace the social responsibility concept in a dedicated three-day retreat. Employees also need the time to direct their attention to the principles that underlie a social responsibility plan so that they might build their commitment to it, discuss it freely, and understand the implications of policies they are about to undertake. It should be noted that while the initial social responsibility definition adopted by O Boticario came from the Ethos Institute, there is an expectation that as the company matures and expands into a holding structure, it will redefine social responsibility according to its own philosophical orientation. Limiting/Constraining Factors. O Boticario’s success does not come unconditionally. The company faces many challenges. One of them has to do with its succession plan. The company President, Miguel Krigsner has been instrumental in creating a corporate culture that may or may not prevail in the future, depending on future leadership of the company. Brazilian workers’ attitudes are framed by the leader’s example, thus making it imperative that a succession process be in place to ensure the continuity of leader-inspired moral values once the leader is gone (www.csmworld.org/public/csr_brazil.htm). The challenge for O Boticario is to ensure the lasting effect of values advanced by the President’s vision. The President has a strong right hand in the person of the Director of Human Resources who demonstrates her agreement with the President’s vision. However, both the internal and the external environments contain elements beyond anyone’s direct control. Further, it is important to sustaining the company’s values that all of the top management team embrace the social responsibility ideals. Related to succession, there have been concerns expressed internally about the differences between the current President and his likely successor, who is the second partner in the K&G Group. These differences most probably relate to education disciplines in which the two were trained and to approaches to the business, with the President demonstrating a values-based approach, and his partner demonstrating a more pragmatic approach. However, this likely successor is generally perceived as a benevolent leader and insiders interviewed acknowledge that this challenge is expected to be overcome, since he is being coached by the President and other key executives to become a strategic thinker. Little by little, they are seeing him embracing the concept of social responsibility and even including this in his public presentations. A third challenge is the inclusion of social responsibility as part of the value for all the businesses of the K&G Group. This is seen as a step that will require a longer period of time, perhaps 3 to 4 years at least, given that the Corporate Social Responsibility Department itself is still in the midst of being restructured. A fourth challenge is related to employee social performance measurement and commensurate reward structures. Corporate social performance indicators have been established for the firm as a whole through its Social Balance Scorecard, but there remains some work to be accomplished in the area of employee rewards and recognition for social performance, including reprisals attached to conduct or behaviors that violate the company’s values and mission. A fifth challenge relates to communication and management of public perception. O Boticario needs to better communicate internally to all levels different aspects related to its CSR program

8

and externally to its key stakeholders so it can be seen as a company that is promoting CSR not only for marketing purposes, but for the good of the communities in which it operates. Final Remarks Incorporation of the concept of social responsibility allowed O Boticario to expand its actions in CSR. The focus went beyond environmental protection with the creation of the Foundation. In addition to the protection of natural resources and dissemination of information on conservation needs, O Boticario has expanded its actions to include the needs of its stakeholders. These include the shareholders, the suppliers, the franchisees, the consumers, the employees and their families and the community where the main manufacturing site is presently located. These actions characterize an approach to social responsibility known as holistic management practice. The results of these initiatives are reflected in the company’s Social Balance report, which includes internal social indicators, external social indicators and environmental indicators in quantitative forms. Success is reflective of a strong leadership model, the continuation of which depends largely on a carefully planned succession. External factors that contribute to the company’s CSR successes include the globalization trend, which facilitates the proliferation of global standards used for measurement and practice, and that encourages companies to invest in CSR as a means of remaining competitive and achieving reputation benefits. Local and global associations and NGOs have further promoted the voluntary actions of local firms. The Brazilian context is one that offers promise for CSR momentum, as it has served as the site for the recent 2005 meeting of the World Social Forum, and hosted the International Conference on Anti-Corruption in 2005, the subject of Global Compact’s most recently added tenth principle. Brazil has assumed a leadership position in the Americas as a country that might impel other countries in the region to achieve global goals for social responsibility and accountability. Nonetheless, elements of the external environment can also work at cross-purposes with the best efforts of firms like O Boticario. Corruption remains an issue in Brazil as in other parts of Latin America, regulatory systems remain weak or weakly enforced, concern for the environment is still in its nascent stages, and critical dialogue with relevant stakeholders is not a formal part of the business culture. In addition, efforts at deregulation have been accompanied by a “decline in labour standards and rights” (Cappellin and Giuliani, 2005). These elements contribute to a tenuous relationship between business and society in Brazil that calls for improvements and attention at a macro level, with the state playing a more active role in sustainable economic development. It has been an eye-opening experience for the researchers working on this case study to see CSR in action. It has been rewarding to be part of a case study for which the subject company practices good citizenship. Yet, we recognize, as do the company leaders, that the task is unfinished, and goals yet unrealized seek final accomplishment as O Boticario’s vision advances. Further research in the field needs to be conducted with many other Brazilian companies to supplement and inform this research, and follow up research with O Boticario itself incorporating the stakeholders’ viewpoints is anticipated to track progress toward those very goals.

9

References

Anonymous (2002) ‘Cosmetics and Personal Care’, Gazeta Mercantil, International Special Edition (November 18): 11. Bendell, J., and K. Kearins (2004) ‘World Review’ The Journal of Corporate Citizenship (Sheffield) Summer, Issue 14: 6-12. Bowen, H. R. (1953), Social Responsibilities of the Businessman, New York: Harper & Row. Burke, L., and J. M. Logsdon (1996), ‘How Corporate Social Responsibility Pays Off’, Long Range Planning 29(4): 495-502. Campos, R. (2004) ‘Corporate Brazil Makes a Diferente’ News Bulletin, Brazilian-American Chamber of Commerce, Inc., Vol. 39/no 7 (September-October 2004): 3. Cappellin, P. and G. M. Giuliani (2005) ‘The Political Economy of Corporate Responsibility in Brazil: Social and Environmental Dimensions’, UNRISD Technology, Business and Society Programme Paper 14, January 26, 2005. Carroll, A. B. (1979), ‘A Three-dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Social Performance’, Academy of Management Review 4: 497-505. Choi, C. J., P. Cheng, J. Kim, and T. Eldomiaty (2005), ‘Dual Responsibilities of NGOs: Market and Institutional Responsibilities and Ethics’ The Journal of Corporate Citizenship 17(Spring): 26-29. Colman, R. (2005), ‘Corporate Social Responsibility – Where do we Really Stand?’ CMA Management 78(9): 28-31. Elkington, J. (1998). Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business, Gabriola Island, BC, Canada: New Society Publishers. Fombrun, C. J. (2005), ‘Building Corporate Reputation through CSR Initiatives: Evolving Standards’, Corporate Reputation Review 8(1): 7-11. Frederick, W. C. (1978). ‘From CSR1 to CSR2: The Maturing of Business-and-society Thought’ Working Paper no. 279, Graduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh. Republished in 1994, in Business and Society 33(2): 150-164. Friedman, T. (2000) The Lexus and the Olive Tree, New York: Anchor Books. Husted, B.W. (2003) ‘Governance Choices for Corporate Social Responsibility: To Contribute, Collaborate or Internalize?’ Long Range Planning 36: 481-498. Instituto Ethos de Responsabilidade Social Empresarial, Pesquisa de Percepcao do Consumidor Brasileiro Sao Paulo, 2002. Jennings, P. D. and P. A. Zandbergen (1995), ‘Ecologically Sustainable Organizations: An Institutional Approach’, Academy of Management Review, 20(4): 1015-1052.

10

Kapp, K. W. (1950), The Social Costs of Private Enterprise, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. KPMG (2005) ‘KPMG International Survery of Corporate Responsibility Reporting 2005’, University of Amsterdam and KPMG Global Sustainability Services, web site: www.kpmg.com/Rut2000_prod/Documents/9/Survey2005.pdf (downloaded June 20, 2005). Lyon, D. (2004) ‘How Can You Help Organizations Change to Meet the Corporate Responsibility Agenda?’ Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 11(3): 133-139. Martin, R. L. (2003) ‘The Virtue Matrix: Calculating the Return on Corporate Responsibility’, Harvard Business Review on Corporate Responsibility (Cambridge, USA: Harvard Business School Publishing): 83-103. Norman, W. and C. MacDonald (2004), ‘Getting to the Bottom of ‘Triple Bottom Line’’ Business Ethics Quarterly 14(2): 243-262. Peinado-Vara, E. (2004), ‘Corporate Social Responsibility in Latin America and the Caribbean’, Inter-American Development Bank, 2004. Pendleton, A. (2004) ‘The Real Face of Corporate Social Responsibility’ Consumer Policy Review 14(3): 77-82. Peterson, D. K. (2004) ‘The Relationship Between Perceptions of Corporate Citizenship and Organizational Commitment’, Business & Society, 43(3): 296-319. Puppim, J. A. (2002). ‘Entendendo as Respostas Empresariais aos Desafios Socio-ambientais no Brasil: Dois Estudos de Caso’, Revista Portuguesa de Gestao, 1(1): 55-69. Ryan, L. V. (2005) ‘Corporate Governance and Business Ethics in North America: The State of the Art’, Business & Society 44(1): 40-73. Schwartz, M. S., and A.B. Carroll (2003) ‘Corporate Social Responsibility: A Three-Domain Approach’, Business Ethics Quarterly 13(4): 503-530. Smith, P. F., and S. Durcan (2004), ‘Creating Business Relevant CSR Reports’, Corporate Responsibility Management (Oct/Nov), 1(2): 30-33. Strand, R. (1983). ‘A Systems Paradigm of Organizational Adaptations to the Social Environment’, Academy of Management Review 8: 90-96. Thomas, T., J.R. Jr. Schermerhorn, and J. W. Dienhart (2004) ‘Strategic Leadership of Ethical Behavior in Business’, Academy of Management Executive 18(2): 56-66. Waddock, S. (2004), ‘Editorial’, The Journal of Corporate Citizenship 16: 3-5. Werther, W. B., Jr., and D. Chandler (2005) ‘Strategic Corporate Responsibility as a Global Brand Insurance’, Business Horizons 48(4): 317-323.

11

Wilson, M. (2003) ‘Corporate Sustainability: What Is It and Where Does It Come From?’ Ivey Business Journal, (March/April 2003): 1-5. www.csmworld.org/public/csr_brazil.htm (downloaded June 7, 2005), ‘Corporate Social Responsibility Indicators: A Study from Brazil’.

12

People Interviewed Joselita Drugovich Andriguetto Diretora Geral (Director-General) Prefeitura de Sao Jose dos Pinhais Secretaria Municipal de Promocao Social Rua Izabel A. Redentora, 2005 83030-720 Sao Jose dos Pinhais-Parana, Brazil Phone/Fax: 282 4450/283 3704 Email: semps_ejp@yahoo.com.br Lourival Louir Berti (Eloi) Secretario Municipal de Promocao Social (Municipal Secretary of Social Promotion) Prefeitura Municipal de Sao Jose dos Pinhais Secretaria Municipal de Promocao Social Rua Norberto de Brito, 1435 Centro 83005-290 Sao Jose dos Pinhais Phone: 41 381 5974 Email: semp_sjp@yahoo.com.br Elmo Macedo Brugnolo Gerente de Controladoria (Controller Manager) O Boticario Av. Rui Barbosa 3450 – Afonso Pena 83065-260 Sao Jose dos Pinhais, Parana, Brazil Phone: 41 381 7540 Fax: 41 381 7001 Email: elmo@boticario.com.br Cicero Fornecedor (Supplier) Michel Carlos Godoi Gerente de Planejamento Empresarial (Manager of Planning) O Boticario Av. Rui Barbosa 3450 Afonso Pena 83065-260 Sao Jose dos Pinhais, Parana, Brazil Phone: 41 381 7378 Marcia Valeria Goncalvez Vaz Coordenadora de RH (Human Resource Coordinator) Av. Rui Barbosa 3450 – Afonso Pena 83065-260 Sao Jose dos Pinhais, Parana, Brazil Phone: 41 981 7055 Fax: Email: marciagv@boticario.com.br Daniel Knopfholz Consultor Comercial Internacional (International Business Consultant) Jornalista

13

Miguel Gellert Krigsner President (President) O Boticario Av. Rui Barbosa 3450, Afonso Pena 83055-900 Sao Jose dos Pinhais, Parana, Brazil Phone: 41 381 7210 Fax: 41 382 3309 Email: krigsner@boticario.com.br www.boticario.com Miguel Srediuk Milano Director (Director, O Boticario Foundation for Nature Protection) Fundacao O Boticario de Protecao a Natureza Director (Director, Corporate Social Responsibility Corporate Social Responsibility Department Rua Goncalves Dias 225, Batel 80240-340 Curitiba, Parana, Brazil Phone: 41 340 2652 Fax: 41 340 2635 Email: milano@fundacaoboticario.org.br www.fundacaoboticario.org.br Maria de Lourdes Nunes Gerente Tecnico-administrativa (Technical-Administrative Manager) Fundacao O Boticario de Protecao a Natureza Rua Goncalves Dias, 225, Batel 80240-340 Curitiba-Parana, Brazil Phone: 41 340 2651 Fax: 41 340 2635 Email: malu@fundacaoboticario.org.br www.fundacaoboticario.org.br Luiz Carlos Ribeiro da Silva Desenvolvimento de Fornecedores (Supplier Development) Av. Rui Barbosa 3450, Afonso Pena 83065-260 Sao Jose dos Pinhais, Parana, Brazil Phone: 41 381 7299 Fax: 41 381 7479 Email: luizs@boticario.com.br www.boticario.com Joao Rocco Junior Franqueado de Sao Jose dos Pinhais (Franchisee at Sao Jose dos Pinhais) Luiz Carlos Setim Mayor Sao Jose dos Pinhais City Hall 1101 Passos de Oliveira St 83030-720 Sao Jose dos Pinhais, Parana, Brazil Phone: 0021 5541 381 6801 Fax: 0021 5541 381 6834 Email: sjp@pow.com.br

14

Roselis Buhrer Simbalista Secretaria Municipal de Promocao Social Representando a Comunidade (Community Representative at the Sao Jose dos Pinhais’ Municipal Secretariat of Social Promotion) Roseli de Fatima Taques Auxiliar de Operacoes (Operations Auxiliary) 2o grau completo Keid Waleria Gerente de loja (Aerofarma – Manager of Store located at Shopping Estacao) Maria Carolina Zani Diretora de RH (Director, Human Resources) Av. Rui Barbosa, 3450 83055-900 Sao Jose dos Pinhais, Parana, Brazil Phone: 41 381 7435 Fax: 41 382 2431 Email: carol@boticario.com.br www.boticario.com

15

Global Compact Learning Forum

O BOTICARIO Business Case

Case Development Team (by surname alphabetical order):

Norman de Paula Arruda Filho, Director ISAE/FGV

Rua Visconde de Guarapuava 2943, Curitiba, Parana, 80010-100, Brazil Phone: 41 3321-7801; Fax: 41 3321-7849 Email: Norman@fgvpr.br, www.fgvpr.br

Hsu O’Keefe, Ph.D. Adjunct Professor of International Management

Lubin School of Business, Pace University 1 Pace Plaza, 4th floor, New York, NY 10038, USA

Phone: 212 618-6548; Fax: 212618-6482,Email: hokeefe@pace.edu, www.pace.edu Adjunct Professor of International Economics and International Business, Fairleigh Dickinson University

285 Madison Ave., Madison, NJ 07940, USA Phone: 973 989 0661; Fax: 973 989 1441; Email: hokeefe@fdu.edu, www.fdu.edu

16

Linda M. Sama, Ph.D. Director, Center for International Business Development

Associate Professor of Management Lubin School of Business, Pace University

1 Pace Plaza, Room 456 , New York, NY 10038, USA Phone:212 618-6543; Fax: 212 618-6410; Email: Lsama@pace.edu, www.pace.edu

Cintia Takada

Coordinator, Social Responsibility Center ISAE/FGV

Rua Visconde de Guarapuava 2943, Curitiba, Parana, 80010-100, Brazil Phone: 41 3321-7803; Fax: 41 3321-7849

Email: cintia@fgvpr.br, www.fgvpr.br

Submitted to the United Nations Global Compact Learning Forum October 2005