Corporate social responsibility 2005-2010

BBK 65.050.2

Zinchenko A.G., Saprykina M.A. Corporate social responsibility 2005-2010: status and development prospective. – K.: “Farbovaniy lyst”, 2010 – 56 p.

An analytic report of Centre for CSR Development is based on results of survey among 600 top-managers in Ukraine conducted in April-June, 2010 within the framework of the National CSR Development Agenda Project. The survey was partly supported by Global Compact Network Ukraine, Royal Norwegian Embassy in Ukraine, and companies: Kyivstar, Microsoft Ukraine and DTEK. The report analyzes changes in perception of corporate social responsibility, intensity and priorities of its implementation, responsible corporate practices, obstacles and prospective of CSR development in Ukraine. In addition, report demonstrates CSR performance of the company depending on its size, forms of ownership, sector and region company operates in – these characteristics give the overall picture of corporate social responsibility development in Ukraine during 2005-2010, major current and future trends. Survey results can be useful for different stakeholders (such as public authorities, business companies, research institutions and universities, public and non-governmental organizations) to promote CSR in Ukrainian society.

BBK 65.050.2

© Zinchenko A.G., Saprykina M.A.© Centre for CSR Development, 2010

This publication is prepared by Centre for CSR Development within the project “Ukraine National Initiatives to Enhance Reforms (UNITER)” which is financed by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and is implemented by Pact Inc. Preparation of the publication is possible with the sincere support of the American people that was given by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Content of the publication is an exclusive responsibility of Centre for CSR Development and does not necessarily represent the views of USAID, Pact or U.S. Government. Reproduction and exploitation of any part of this publication in any format, including graphic, electronic, copying or exploitation in any other way without the reference to the original source is prohibited.

1

ANALYTICAL REPORT BASED ON THE RESULTS OF THE REVIEW

CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY 2005-2010:

STATUS AND DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVE

2

INTRODUCTION

Ukraine’s transition to a stable economic development, its integration into the European and global

communities, require new practices of cooperation between the state and business, as well as business

and society, which would make it possible to enhance the mutual responsibility of all those participating

in social life and to produce a new environment for the future stable development of the state and society,

taking into account the widest possible interests.

Today, the «corporate social responsibility» (CSR) concept is widely implemented in the economically

most developed countries of the world. It is perceived as “a concept under which companies integrate

social and environmental matters into their commercial activities and their cooperation with the

interested parties on a voluntary basis”. Thus, CSR is a voluntary activity of private and public companies

aimed at following the high standards of operational and manufacturing activities, social standards and

quality of work with personnel, minimizing harmful impact on the environment, etc in order to level the

existing economic and social disparities, create trustful relations between business, society and the state.

At present, social corporate responsibility of businesses is a common rule followed by most large,

medium-sized and small companies around the world.

CSR in Ukraine is at the formative stage. The most active entities in this area include, first and foremost,

the representative offices of foreign companies, which introduce new global practices, principles, and

standards to Ukrainian society, as well as the largest Ukrainian companies.

With the purpose of analyzing CSR in Ukraine over the period of 2005-2010 and determining

the development perspective of the concept in the future, the Centre of CSR Development initiated a

representative review «Corporate Social Responsibility: Status and Development Perspective», which will

make it possible to determine the present CSR condition and development perspective, problems and

methods of resolving them.

The Centre of CSR Development hopes that the results of the review will lay foundations for preparing

the National CSR Strategy in Ukraine and used to promote the CSR concept in Ukrainian society by

various stakeholders: public authorities, business companies, research institutions and universities, non-

governmental and international organizations.

Sincerely yours, Maryna Saprykina, Centre of CSR Development

3

ABOUT THE REVIEW

The two year long project “Development of the National Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

Agenda” under the auspices of the “Let Us Unite for Reforms” Program (UNITER), PACT. Inc., stipulates

creation of a favorable environment in Ukraine for social responsibility development. For this purpose, it

is necessary to understand today’s environment in Ukraine, as well as the encouraging and constraining

factors which have had an impact on CSR development between 2005 to 2010.

The project’s objectives include raising awareness of CSR at the national and regional levels; developing

organizations in CSR implementation; and developing the national corporate social responsibility

development strategy for the period 2011-2015. Seventeen main activities are planned under the project:

one of the key activities is a representative survey of CSR awareness.

In this review, we used an analytical report of the 2005 survey, which was ordered by the UN System

Coordinator Office in Ukraine, covering the latest trends in the social responsibility of businesses and

application of the results as a basis for promoting the social responsibility concept in the Ukrainian

business environment.

This analytical report was also based on other surveys conducted by the Centre of CSR Development,

for example, those dedicated to the CSR development among small and medium-sized businesses. At the

same time, it is distinguished by a higher insight into social responsibility based on the new ISO 26000

international social responsibility management standard. Furthermore, the relevant current events taking

place in Ukraine have been reflected in the responses, namely: development of the National CSR Strategy,

the national social responsibility standard, etc.

This report presents an analysis of the social responsibility understanding, intensity, social responsibility

implementation priorities and corporate practices, incentives, obstacles, and the CSR development

perspective in Ukraine. The report also analyzes the specific features depending on the size of businesses,

ownership forms, sectors of the economy and the region. All of this shapes a general image of social

responsibility development in Ukraine over the period from 2005 to 2010, its trends and its future.

Acknowledgments:

The report is based on the results of a survey of 600 companies in Ukraine conducted by the Ukrainian

Marketing Group, which surveyed the social responsibility development in 20051.

This report has been prepared by the “Corporate Social Responsibility Development” Centre (Maryna

Saprykina and Alla Zinchenko). It has been edited by Maryna Saprykina. The authors are grateful to all the

staff of the Centre of CSR Development and the Global Compact Office in Ukraine for providing the 2005

questionnaire sample.

Financial support was provided by the “Let Us Unite for Reforms” Program (UNITER), PACT, Inc.,

Kyivstar, Microsoft Ukraine, and DTEK, to which we are sincerely grateful.

1 Survey “Social Responsibility among Ukrainian Businesses: Survey Results”, Kyiv, 2005, 52 p., KIT publishing house.

4

UN Global Compact since its foundation in 2000 has become the world’s largest initiative in the area

of corporate sustainability. With over 7 700 corporate participants from more than 130 countries, Global

Compact successfully continues to further stimulate companies and organizations all over the world to

embrace, support and enact 10 universal principles in the areas of human rights, environment, labour

relations and anti-corruption.

In order to root Global Compact values and principles within different national contexts, the initiative

operates through Local Networks. Global Compact Network Ukraine was established with the help of

the United Nations Office in Ukraine in 2006. Since then the Network assists Ukrainian businesses and

other social actors in the challenge to apply the Global Compact principles and has established the biggest

policy platform for corporate social responsibility in the country. Global Compact Network Ukraine

facilitates the ongoing journey of Ukrainian businesses in developing unique solutions to the social and

environmental issues.

Ukrainian Global Compact Network provides its members with a number of engagement opportunities

such as learning and capacity building events; COP guidance; informational and communication support;

opportunity to influence public policy in the area of CSR and further develop innovative and creative

solutions in social and environmental challenges.

The important part of the journey towards sustainable future is research which has always been a

priority for Global Compact Network Ukraine. Partnership in the survey at hand reflected this strategic

goal and provided an opportunity to benchmark the developments in the CSR landscape of the country

since 2005, when the first CSR survey commissioned by the United Nations in Ukraine was conducted. The

results of the survey presented in this report will provide an insight into the current state of CSR awareness

and engagement in Ukraine, which Global Compact Network Ukraine has been and will further promote

and enhance in line with the core philosophy of the initiative “thinking globally and acting locally”.

Global Compact Network Ukraine

5

Kyivstar

Successful and long-term business

is possible in a stable and harmonious

society only. Kyivstar has realized this

obvious axiom since the very beginning

of our activities. For this reason, a

responsible and careful attitude to the

principles of doing our business and

the needs of society has become a rule

of our activities and is now a system and

balanced work in the area of corporate

social responsibility of Kyivstar and

promotion of socially responsible

approach to doing business in Ukraine.

The results of the Corporate Social

Responsibility 2005-2010: Status and

Development Perspective survey have

attested to positive achievements in

realizing CSR by Ukrainian businesses.

This can be evidenced by the fact

that large companies have become

increasingly aware of CSR. We hope that

the next 5 years will be more efficient in

promoting the concepts and practices

of socially responsible business in

Ukraine.

Zhanna Revnova,

Corporate Relation

Department Director

DTEK aspires to be a leader in both business and relations with society. We

are confident that corporate social responsibility is an integral component

of the Company’s sustainable development. We are also aware how

important the dialogue between business, society, and the government

is. This dialogue will help us all better realize the world we would like to live in and the world

our children and grandchildren will live in. We believe that the “Corporate Social Responsibility

2005-2010: Status and Development Perspective” analytical report is an important basis for

promoting a positive dialogue and cooperation between business, the government, and society

for the future stable development.

Victoria Grib,

CSR manager, DTEK

Microsoft Ukraine has been working on

programs of corporate social responsibility

since 2003 - from the very beginning of its

operation in Ukraine. We work to overcome

computer illiteracy, provide high-quality

technical education in the country, promote

the development of innovation; we were

the first who has addressed the problem

of children’s safety online. Over the years

many companies working on the Ukrainian

market realized the need to conduct

business responsibly and to undertake the

voluntary commitment to develop a society

in which we all operate. This survey was

intended to show how different companies

from all areas of business in Ukraine have

changed the attitude to CSR; what they’ve

already done in this area and what they’re

still going to do.

Microsoft Ukraine has supported the

survey because we see the value of CSR which

is so engrained into our own corporate

culture. We believe it’s a fundamental pillar

of business, and we welcome the trend

of increased CSR development among

companies in Ukraine.

Courtney Zukoski,

Director of Academic and CSR Programs,

Microsoft Ukraine

6

7

CONTENT

METHODOLOGY 9

1. UNDERSTANDING SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY 131.1. SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AWARENESS LEVEL 13

1.2. UNDERSTANDING THE TERM “SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY” 14

1.3. ROLE OF BUSINESS IN RESOLVING SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS OF SOCIETY 16

1.4. CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ROLE IN BUSINESS PRACTICES 17

Conclusions 1 19

2. INTENSITY AND PRIORITIES OF SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY IMPLEMENTATION 202.1. IMPLEMENTATION OF SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE EVENTS 20

2.2. SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY MEASURES 21

2.3. REGULARITY OF SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE PRACTICES 22

2.4. FACTORS ENCOURAGING COMPANIES TO IMPLEMENT SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE PRACTICES 23

2.5. OBSTACLES FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY IMPLEMENTATION 25

Conclusions 2 27

3. SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY PRACTICES 283.1. ORGANIZATIONAL MANAGEMENT 28

3.1.1. Company Openness 28

3.1.2. Company’s Mission, Values, and Codes of Conduct 29

3.1.3. Social Responsibility Strategy and Financing 29

3.1.4. Anti-Corruption Measures 30

3.2. HUMAN RIGHTS AND LABOUR PRACTICES 31

3.2.1. Contribution to Associations of Companies’ Personnel 32

3.2.3. Program of Balance between Family and Work 34

3.3. RESPONSIBILITY TO THE COMMUNITY 35

3.4. ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY 37

3.5. CONSUMER TREATMENT 39

3.6. TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE COMPANIES’ STAKEHOLDER INTEREST. DIALOGUE

WITH STAKEHOLDERS 41

3.7. SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY IMPLEMENTATION EFFICIENCY 43

Conclusions 3 45

4. SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY IMPLEMENTATION PERSPECTIVES 47Conclusions 4 51

5. CONCLUSIONS 52

LIST OF TABLES AND DIAGRAMS 56

8

9

METHODOLOGY

This Report has been prepared according to the results of the survey of 600 companies in Ukraine

(senior management or managers of the relevant departments) by using the individual interview method.

Almost half of the surveyed respondents (49.5%) were company managers. Respondents possessed at least

70% of information (survey requirements) about each of the following areas: the company’s relations with

the community, the environmental aspects of the company’s activities, and the company’s performance

in the corporate social responsibility (CSR) area, which permitted us to derive more unbiased data about

each of the questions.

The survey’s key objective included revealing changes in the corporate social responsibility development

trends at the present stage of the country’s development. The survey’s goals included finding out how

CSR is perceived and implemented by the companies operating in Ukraine, how managers assess the

incentives and the largest obstacles in implementing CSR programs, and identifying CSR development

perspectives in Ukraine.

The Ukrainian Marketing Group, an international research company, was selected to conduct the

survey based on tender results; it carried out the survey of the social responsibility development in 2005

. The analysts of the “Corporate Social Responsibility Development” Centre have analyzed the survey

results.

Company representatives were polled in April and May 2010, using the 2005 survey methods, which

makes it possible to compare the main trends of the social responsibility development.

Selection criteria

The selection design (structure and conformity to the sectoral distribution, the size of the companies

and the region) has been developed on the basis of the 2005 survey parameters. The survey has been

conducted according to the quota selection, whose formation was based on the following criteria:

1. Sectoral (industry) distribution: 10 sectors of the economy:

10 sectors of the economy

•� agriculture�(namely�agriculture,�fish�farms,�farms,�forestry�companies,�grain�depots,�etc);�•� consumption�goods�manufacture�(food�products,�textile�products,�home�electronics�and�

devices,�car�making,�furniture,�household�chemicals�manufacturing,�and�production�of�other�goods);�

•� industrial�manufacture�of�industrial�purpose�products�(iron-and-steel�industry,�mineral�extraction,�chemical�industry,�coal�and�other�products,�not�belonging�to�consumer�goods);�

•� construction:�any�activities�related�to�the�construction�or�reconstruction�of�buildings�(except�office�and�apartment�decoration,�manufacturing�and�sale�of�building�materials);�

•� financial�services,�banking�activities�(banks,�credit�societies,�insurers,�pawn�offices,�money�transfer,�and�other�services);�

•� trade,�commerce�(wholesale�and�retail�trade,�goods�sale,�car�sale,�other�equipment�and�goods�sale,�ticket�sale);�

•� transport�(transport�companies,�car�fleets,�taxi,�railway,�transport�forwarding�companies,�transport�service�provision);�

•� communication�(telephone,�mobile,�mail,�Internet,�special�communication,�etc);•� �household�public�utility�services�(repair,�dry-cleaning,�workshops,�other�profitable�companies�

providing�services�to�the�population,�except�local�building-utilities�administrator�offices);�•� other�services�(media,�consulting,�legal,�marketing,�travel�services,�paid�education,�paid�medical�

services,�etc,�except�commerce).�

2 Survey .

10

2. Cities or regions when surveying the agricultural sector companies. The survey has been conducted

in the six most economically developed regions of Ukraine (Kyiv, Kharkiv, Lviv, Dnipropetrovsk, Donetsk,

and Odesa), which were selected to participate in the 2005 survey.

3. Company size: three groups including small, medium-sized, and large companies. Based on the size,

the groups were identified in the course of conducting the 2005 survey according to the headcount criteria.

Thus, small companies have been defined as companies employing less than 50 employees, medium-sized

companies employ 50 to 250 employees, and large companies employ over 250 people. The report has

also distinguished two categories of large companies: those employing 251 to 500 people and those with

a headcount of more than 500 employees, in order to make a deeper analysis of variation in the groups

based on the size.

Classification of companies by the sectors of the economy and regions reflects classification of

companies according to the data of the State Statistics Committee for 20043. Within each sector of the

economy, the entire number of companies has been classified into three equal groups based on the size:

large, medium-sized, and small companies. According to the ownership type, the quota was established

in 2005: 92% are private companies and 8% are public companies. The selection parameters are shown in

Table 1.

Table 1. Selection Parameters

Sectors of the economy %

Agriculture 8,2

Consumption goods manufacture 12,3

Industrial manufacture of industrial purpose products 8,8

Construction 8,5

Financial and banking services 8,5

Commerce 17,3

Transport 7,7

Communication 7,7

Household and public utility services 12,0

Other services (media, consulting, tourism, catering, hotel business, legal services, etc) 9,0

Region

Kyiv 21,5

Lviv 14,5

Dnipropetrovsk 13,3

Donetsk 19,7

Odesa 15,0

Kharkiv 16,0

Company size

Under 50 employees 37,0

From 50 to 250 employees 33,3

From 251 to 500 employees 20,0

Over 500 employees 9,7

Survey questionnaire

The questionnaire included groups of questions, answers to which permitted us to study changes that

have happened for the last five years:

• in the degree of social responsibility awareness;

• understanding of the social responsibility essence;

3 Survey “Social Responsibility among Ukrainian Businesses: Survey Results”, Kyiv, 2005, 52 p., KIT publishing house.

11

• implementation of CSR policies and practices in relations with personnel; community; in

organizational management; in relations with consumers; and the environmental responsibility of

companies.

The questionnaire also included questions about the limits, incentives and perspectives of social

responsibility development in Ukraine. In the course of the survey, the 2005 questionnaire has been

modified and amended, taking into account the present level of the social responsibility perception. Thus,

for example, the question “Has your company provided any charity assistance for the last three years?” has

been replaced with: “Has your company made any social investments for the last five years?” Equally, the

question “Did your company develop a plan (or a strategy) of social events in 2005?” is now: “Does your

company have a social responsibility strategy?”

The 2010 questionnaire also included the following additional questions:

• What forms of personnel associations exist in your company?

• Do women and men have equal working conditions in your company?

• What practices for work and family balance are implemented in your company?

• Has your company prepared social (non-financial) reports for the last five years?

• Does your company take into account the interests of the following parties when developing and

implementing the social responsibility policy: government authorities, business organizations,

trade unions and other associations of employees, consumers, non-governmental organizations,

research organizations and education institutions?

Selection error and shortcomings

The shortcomings of this survey have been inherited from the 2005 survey and are related to the

selection design. Selection has been based on the 2005 survey parameters; for this reason, it covers only

the six most industrial cities/regions of Ukraine. In what regards social responsibility programs/events

are being implemented in other parts of the country we can only make assumptions. Besides, the quota

selection is not representative of the general group (six regions). In 2010, we surveyed representatives

from 600 companies in the country. The representative data have been derived after weighing. The

selection error for the representative data derived after weighing indicators is not higher than 4%. The

selection error is not determined for the quota selection as it is not a random selection.

It should be also emphasized that, unlike the more favourable environment of 2005, the 2010 survey

has been conducted in the aftermath of the 2008 – 2009 financial and economic crisis in Ukraine, which

has had a great impact on the social responsibility policy and implementation practices, in particular for

small and medium-sized businesses.

Data analysis

The data analysis has been based on the weighed data (questions included for the first time in the 2010

questionnaire as compared to 2005 have been weighed according to the 2009 statistical data). For this

reason, the average data in terms of the specific parameters do not coincide with the data presented in

the general selection. The questionnaire also included questions with answers supporting more than one

proposed variants; so the total percentage amount exceeds 100% for most data shown in the report and

the tables (see the Annex).

It should be noted that the proposed report must be seen as the first summary of changes happening

in the main trends of the corporate social responsibility as compared to 2005 (quality changes), and not

the quantity image of the social responsibility development in the country.

12

13

1. UNDERSTANDING SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

1.1. SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AWARENESS LEVEL

As compared to 2005, in general the social responsibility awareness level has not changed in the

country for the last five years.

According to researchers, the factors which

have had an impact on these indicators include:

the 2008 – 2009 financial and economic crisis in

Ukraine; the commercialization of relationships

between media companies concerning the CSR

press-release placement between 2005 and 2010;

individual understanding of “social responsibility”

by the respondents.

However, during the last five years important changes have happened on social responsibility

awareness depending on the size of companies, the location of companies, and the field of their activities.

While in 2005 researchers revealed no dependence of the social responsibility awareness level on the size

of companies (small companies: 78.1%, medium-sized companies: 78.5%, and large companies: 79.2%), in

2010 there can be seen a direct dependence: the larger a company is, the higher awareness level it has (see

Table 1.1.).

Table 1.1. Social Responsibility Awareness of Companies in Terms of the Company Size,

% (N=600)

Under 50 employees

From 50to 250

employees

From 251 to 500

employees

Over 500 employees

Total

Heard of the concept of socia responsibility of businesses

75 86,9 91,8 98,1 76,3

Never heard of the concept of social responsibility of businesses

25 13,1 8,2 1,9 23,7

Regional aspect

There has remained a large gap of the level of awareness between the regions for the last few years

(see Table 1.2.). As compared to 2005, the awareness level has changed depending on the location of a

company: thus, while in 2005 it was the lowest in Lviv and Lviv regions, it has become one of the highest

in 2010. Odesa and Odesa regions are characterized by a high level of awareness as well.

Table 1.2. Social Responsibility Awareness Depending on the Region,

% (N=600)

RegionHeard of the concept of social

responsibility of businesses

2005 2010

Kyiv and Kyiv Region 90,7 71,3

Lviv and Lviv Region 62,9 94,7

Dnipropetrovsk and Dnipropetrovsk Region 77,1 72,7

Donetsk and Donetsk Region 61,5 75,8

Odesa and Odesa Region 72,6 95,5

Kharkiv and Kharkiv Region 73,6 66,1

Most�respondents�(in�2005:�78.1%,�in�2010:�76.3%)�heard�about�the�concept�of�social�responsibility�of�businesses�against�21.9%,�to�which�this�concept�was�unknown�in�2005,�and�23.7%�in�2010�respectively.

14

Line of business of companies

The highest social responsibility awareness level is typical of companies involved in construction,

communication, companies belonging to the media category, companies providing consulting, legal,

catering, and hotel services. The least aware companies operate in the field of industrial and consumer

goods manufacturing and commerce.

Ownership type

Just as in 2005, a company’s ownership type has no impact on the actual level of the social responsibility

awareness of companies. State-owned and joint-stock companies are slightly ahead of private companies.

1.2. UNDERSTANDING THE TERM “SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY”

The social responsibility of a company is normally seen as providing charity assistance to the

community; development of the company’s personnel; fair business practices; compliance with and

protection of human rights. Implementation of the reporting principles and practices, transparency and

ethical conduct, implementation of environmental projects and participation in regional development

projects are least associated with social responsibility.

Figure 1.1. Classification of Respondents’ Answers to the Question

“What does the social responsibility of businesses mean?”, %, N =600.

Regional aspect

In 2010, as compared to 2005, there are important regional differences between the understanding

of social responsibility. More than half of companies located in Donetsk referred all the proposed

The�social�responsibility�awareness�level�has�not�practically�changed�in�comparison�with�2005:�-� the�number�of�companies,�for�which�social�responsibility�means�charity�assistance�provided�to�

the�community�and�development�of�their�personnel,�has�remained�quite�high�for�the�last�five�years;�

-� in�2005�and�in�2010,�one�third�of�companies�associate�implementation�of�environmental�projects�and�participation�in��regional�development�projects�with�social�responsibility;�

-� the�lowest�number�of�companies�both�in�2005�and�2010�associate�social�responsibility�with�the�company’s�transparency.�

0 10 20 30 40 50

Implementation of the reporting principlesand practices, transparency, and ethical conduct

Participation in the regional development programs

Implementation of environmental projects

Principles of the ethical and responsible attitudeto consumers used in the company's policy

This approach has no sense at all

This approach is onlyfor companies willing

to promote it

This approach mustbe implemented by every company

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40Businesses mustsecure profitsfor their ownersand pay taxes only

Businesses musttake an active rolein resolving socialand environmentalproblems of societyand community life

Absolutelyagree

Rather agreeNeither agreenor disagree

Rather agree Absolutelydisagree

0

20

40

60

80

100

KharkivRegion

OdesaRegion

DonetskRegion

Dnipropet�rovsk Region

LvivRegion

KyivRegion

42,3

30,7

30,5

24,5

53,3

5,6

41,1

No

Yes

No

Yes

67,3

32,7

0 20 40 60 80

Measures to protect natural resources

Investment of resources in the community's life

Taking measures to curb emissions into the environment

Implementation of waste use and recycling programs

Implementation of reporting principles and practices

Charity assistance provided to the community

Non�use when cooperating with the government authorities

Application of fair competition and ethics principles

Protection of the rights of employees to the freedom of association

Application of ethical consumer treatment principles

Introduction of energy saving technologies

Non�discrimination in labour practices

Implementation of labour condition improvement programs

Consumer health protection and safety

Non�use of forced labour

Non�use of child labour

Development of the company's personnel, its training 80,9

80,7

78

71,3

66,1

58,8

42,1

37,4

36,1

34,8

32,4

32

31,4

29,6

23,9

16,6

14,8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

We comply with the laws of Ukraine

It is required by the foreign partner

It is demanded by the trade union

Because it is necessary to compensate for the damage caused

For religious reasons

Because it is covered by the media and improves our image

Because it is demanded by the local government agencies

Our competitor does so

This contributes to the sales growth

Because it is our principle, inner incentive

For moral reasons

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

We cover travel expenses

We have a crediting system, etc.

We offer an opportunity to visit entertainment houses

We offer health insurance

We have a program of balance between work and family

We offer additional financial, etc incentives

We comply with the laws

We pay for overtime work

We hold professional/career training

We have a non�discrimination policy

We regularly increase salaries and wages and pay bonuses

We pay official salaries and wages only

The gender is not important for uswhen hiring new employees

We offer flexible working hours

We pay salaries and wages in due time

0 10 20 30 40

We help our veterans

Charity assistance

There is a receiving room for citizens

We support small businesses in the area

We sponsor sports and cultural events

We sponsor an orphan asylum (a school, etc)

Partnership Agreement with the Community

Financial assistance to the local authoritiesin program implementation

We contribute to the environmental projects in the region

We employ the disabled in the region

It does not help yet, but plans to do it in the future

Program of job creation in the region

Territory development assistance

It takes no part

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Preferential credits

My conscience

The state to which I pay taxes

Closer cooperation with non�profit organizations

Public recognition from the government and community

Availability of a bank of social programs or information bank

More coverage of social responsibility practices in the media

Improvement of the consumerand community trust and loyalty level

Proposals of the local authorities to businessesabout social development programs

Positive examples of implementation in the world

Administrative pressure reduction by the local authorities

Preferential taxation for companies implementingsocial responsibility

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Difficult to answer

Inexistent or weak social demand

Lack of time

Inexistence of governmentaland non�governmental organizations

Impossibility to control the use of funds

Poor experience, undeveloped mechanism of implementation

Imperfect regulations

Tax pressure

Insufficient information about the principles ofand approaches to implementation

Lack of funds

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Because we were disappointed by past attempts

Because it wastes time and money

Because it is not encouraged by the government(for example, there are no benefits)

Because this does not stimulate business development

Because this is a function of the government, not businesses

Because we have never thought about social responsibility

Because we cannot afford it

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Difficult to answer

Internal mail, Intranet where employeescan express their opinion

Regular anonymous polls of employees

From the trade union

From the company’s management,the hierarchy from the lowest to the highest degree

Decisions are made in a centralized wayand are not discussed

From rumours

Employees express their opinions personally,it is not systematic

By discussing decisions with the personnel

0 10 20 30 40 50

We pay a tax for polluting the environment

We have no impact on the environment

Difficult to answer

Water, forest, land, and other naturaresources protection measures

Curbing emmissions into the environment

Green office, paper recycling program implementation

Energy saving technology implementation

Waste use, sorting, and rcycling programs

Implemented no environmnetal practices

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

International organizations

Research (specialized) institutions

Non�governmental (non�profit) organizations

Orphan asylum director

PR or advertising agencies

The media

Business partners

Local government authorities

We develop and implement them on our own

0 10 20 30 40 50

We survey consumers

Monitoring

We keep a public receiving room

We hold trainings for consumers

We have a hot line (contact centre) for consumers

We have a feedback page on our website

We openly declare about our responsibility in the media

Difficult to answer

We have a clearly developed system for handling complaints

Training of the personnel on consumer service

We provide true information and advertisements to consumers

We maintain the company's product quality

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Offering to young fathers a leave to carefor their children

Supporting employees in caring for their children

Distant work

Shortened working day/week

Flexible working hours

Supporting employees in caringfor sick family members

No practices are implemented

61,3

52,1

37,9

19,2

18,9

8,8

8,4

5,6

3,7

0,8

0,1

61,4

15,9

11,0

3,9

3,8

0,1

0,0

62,9

45,5

42,5

42,3

39,9

37,6

33,4

32,4

26,4

19,9

19,6

11,4

10,2

6,9

0,0

63,7

30,9

15,9

6,7

5,1

4,5

2,6

2,3

0,6

21,4

18,5

59,1

12,4

3,8

27,7

7,6

42,1

30,5

18,7

16,2

8,6

8,3

8,1

6,4

5,5

3,8

0,7

0,1

0,0

0,0

50,1

26,6

25,9

14,0

8,5

7,9

5,2

1,0

0,0

53,0

42,1

35,0

20,5

13,8

10,4

8,8

7,1

6,6

0,1

0,1

0,1

77,4

29,6

8,0

5,9

2,2

1,4

0,5

0,4

0,2

76,9

38,5

35,0

25,5

22,7

21,9

21,2

21,0

6,2

1,0

0,5

0,0

72,4

38,5

33,4

30,7

28,0

24,4

17,8

16,1

11,5

0,0

These practices are implemented

on a regular basis

Several times every half a year

Every half a year

Several times a year

Once a year

Rarer

55,0

4,8

5,7

8,9

16,5

9,2

15

components of social responsibility to social responsibility (I don’t understand this sentence), which

can attest to a high level of awareness and an insight into social responsibility. For example, the social

responsibility component (such as implementation of reporting, transparency, and ethical conduct

principles and practices) was chosen by a number of Donetsk region companies, which is 2.5 times higher

than in general for the selection. At the same time, we could state that social responsibility is superficially

perceived/understood by the companies located in the Odesa region, because the number of companies in

the region, which equated implementation of environmental projects, implementation of the principles

of ethical and responsible attitude to consumers in the company’s policy, development of the company’s

personnel, and participation in the regional development programs to social responsibility, was several

times lower than in general for the selection. This can be explained by the regional specifics and the

economic status of the regions. Companies incorporated into large financial and industrial groups are

located in the Donetsk region; their policies and practices (including social responsibility policies and

practices) have a large impact on other companies operating in the region.

Company size

The 2005 and 2010 survey results also show differing understanding of social responsibility depending

on the company size. Thus, as companies grow in size, the number of companies increases for whom

social responsibility includes components such as implementation of reporting, transparency and ethical

conduct principles and practices; implementation of the principles of ethical and responsible attitude to

consumers in the company’s policy’; implementation of environmental projects; and participation in the

regional development programs. This attests again to a gap between large companies and medium-sized

and small companies4 in the way they understand and implement social responsibility.

Ownership types

The analysis of answers given by Ukrainian companies about the main components of social

responsibility has revealed no important differences in terms of ownership types, except two components:

1. the number of state-owned companies believing that fair business practices are a component of

the social responsibility concept is 1.5 times lower than the number of companies with other ownership

types.

2. the number of state-owned companies, for which implementation of environmental projects is part

of the company’s social responsibility, is twice lower than the number of joint-stock companies.

It should be underlined that, in comparison with 2005, the number of state-owned companies,

believing that implementation of environmental projects is part of social responsibility, dropped to a

large extent: from 78.2% in 2005 to 27.8% in 2010.

Field of activities

Based on the results of the data obtained, a conclusion about the impact of the specifics of the field of

activities on the social responsibility understanding can be made. Thus, the largest number of companies,

for which implementation of environmental projects is part of social responsibility, operate in the sector

of industrial consumption, product manufacture and finance.

Fair business practices are considered to be a component of social responsibility by primarily companies

involved in commerce, provision of household and public utility services, probably in large part due to the

competitiveness of the markets for these products. The largest number of companies providing consulting,

legal, and travel services, the media, companies involved in the catering and hotel business, as compared

to companies operating in other fields, believe that care for personnel is part of social responsibility:

recruitment and retention of the personnel is the most important objective for this category of businesses,

because people have an impact on the success of their business.

4 “Corporate Social Responsibility among Small and Medium-Sized Businesses” expert survey conducted by the Centre of CSR Development

16

1.3. ROLE OF BUSINESS IN RESOLVING SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL

PROBLEMS OF SOCIETY

The attitude of companies to social responsibility has a direct impact on the social responsibility policy

implementation. The survey results recorded important changes in the attitude of Ukrainian companies

to an understanding that they have to take an active part in resolving social and environmental problems,

and not rely on the government alone.

Thus, the number of respondents who agree with the statement that “businesses should take an active part

in resolving social and environmental problems of society and life of the community” (answers “absolutely

agree” and “rather agree” in total) is higher (68.1%) than the number of those believing that “businesses must

only secure a profit for their owners and pay taxes” (answers “absolutely agree” and “rather agree” in total)

(49.1%) (Figure 1.2.). It should be emphasized that the number of respondents absolutely agreeing with the

statement that businesses must take an active part

in resolving social and environmental problems of

society is twice higher than the number of those

absolutely agreeing that businesses should pay

taxes and secure profits for their owners (29.2%

against 14.9%).

Ownership type

There is no significant difference in the attitude to the role of businesses in resolving social and

environmental problems based on the ownership type. The number of state-owned and joint-stock

companies supporting an active role of businesses in resolving community social and environmental

problems is somewhat higher than the respective number of private companies. In this case, it should be

noted that the number of joint-stock companies absolutely agreeing with this decision exceeds twofold

the number of state-owned companies (45.1% against 21.2% respectively). The number of state-owned

and joint-stock companies, which do not support the statement that businesses must secure profits for

their owners and pay taxes only, is higher (41% and 40.5% respectively) than the number of respondents

who agree with this statement (28.9% and 36.3% respectively).

Figure 1.2. Classification of Answers to the Question «To what extent do you agree with the following

statement about the role of businesses in social life?»

As�compared�to�2005,�the�number�of�companies�believing�that�businesses�should�take�an�active�part�in�resolving�social�and�environmental�problems�has�increased�twofold�(32.7%�in�2005).�

0 10 20 30 40 50







to promote it


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Absolutelyagree



0

20

40

60

80

100

KharkivRegion

OdesaRegion

DonetskRegion


LvivRegion

KyivRegion

42,3

30,7

30,5

24,5

53,3

5,6

41,1

No

Yes

No

Yes

67,3

32,7

0 20 40 60 80


















80,7

78

71,3

66,1

58,8

42,1

37,4

36,1

34,8

32,4

32

31,4

29,6

23,9

16,6

14,8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60











For moral reasons

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
















0 10 20 30 40


Charity assistance












It takes no part

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70


My conscience











0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Difficult to answer


Lack of time





Tax pressure


Lack of funds

0 10 20 30 40 50 60








0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Difficult to answer






From rumours



0 10 20 30 40 50



Difficult to answer







0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80






The media

Business partners



0 10 20 30 40 50

We survey consumers

Monitoring






Difficult to answer





0 10 20 30 40 50 60



Distant work





61,3

52,1

37,9

19,2

18,9

8,8

8,4

5,6

3,7

0,8

0,1

61,4

15,9

11,0

3,9

3,8

0,1

0,0

62,9

45,5

42,5

42,3

39,9

37,6

33,4

32,4

26,4

19,9

19,6

11,4

10,2

6,9

0,0

63,7

30,9

15,9

6,7

5,1

4,5

2,6

2,3

0,6

21,4

18,5

59,1

12,4

3,8

27,7

7,6

42,1

30,5

18,7

16,2

8,6

8,3

8,1

6,4

5,5

3,8

0,7

0,1

0,0

0,0

50,1

26,6

25,9

14,0

8,5

7,9

5,2

1,0

0,0

53,0

42,1

35,0

20,5

13,8

10,4

8,8

7,1

6,6

0,1

0,1

0,1

77,4

29,6

8,0

5,9

2,2

1,4

0,5

0,4

0,2

76,9

38,5

35,0

25,5

22,7

21,9

21,2

21,0

6,2

1,0

0,5

0,0

72,4

38,5

33,4

30,7

28,0

24,4

17,8

16,1

11,5

0,0


on a regular basis


Every half a year


Once a year

Rarer

55,0

4,8

5,7

8,9

16,5

9,2

17

Company size

The number of large companies believing that businesses should be active in resolving the said problems

is lower than the number of small and medium-sized companies.

Regional aspect

The numbers supporting the idea of business participation to resolve social and environmental

problems within society is higher in the Donetsk Region and lower in the Lviv Region. Most companies

believing that businesses should secure profits for their owners and pay taxes are located in Lviv and

Odesa regions. In our opinion, it is related to the economic specifics of the region, because Lviv and Odesa

have more small and medium-sized companies and less large companies.

Field of activities

A specific group of companies (providing legal and travel services, involved in the catering and hotel

business, manufacturing industrial purpose products, communication and agricultural companies,

the media) is more inclined to believe that businesses should take an active part in resolving social and

environmental problems of society, unlike transport companies, which tend to support the idea that

businesses must secure profits for their owners and pay taxes.

1.4. CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY ROLE

IN BUSINESS PRACTICES

The attitude of companies to implementing social responsibility policies and practices has not changed

over the last five years.

Slightly more than half of respondents (53.3%) pointed out that the social responsibility policy and

practices must be implemented by every company (53.9% in 2005), and a smaller percentage of them

(41.1%) is certain that social responsibility is only for companies willing to promote it (41.7% in 2005).

Only 5.6% of companies believe that companies should not promote social responsibility at all (4.4% in

2005) (Figure 1.3).

Figure 1.3. Classification of Respondents’ Answers to the Question

“It is believed that a business is socially responsible when it is responsible for the impact of its decisions

and activities on society and the environment and constributes to the sustainable development of society.

What is your attitude to this?”, % (N=600)

0 10 20 30 40 50







to promote it


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Absolutelyagree



0

20

40

60

80

100

KharkivRegion

OdesaRegion

DonetskRegion


LvivRegion

KyivRegion

42,3

30,7

30,5

24,5

53,3

5,6

41,1

No

Yes

No

Yes

67,3

32,7

0 20 40 60 80


















80,7

78

71,3

66,1

58,8

42,1

37,4

36,1

34,8

32,4

32

31,4

29,6

23,9

16,6

14,8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60











For moral reasons

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
















0 10 20 30 40


Charity assistance












It takes no part

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70


My conscience











0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Difficult to answer


Lack of time





Tax pressure


Lack of funds

0 10 20 30 40 50 60








0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Difficult to answer






From rumours



0 10 20 30 40 50



Difficult to answer







0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80






The media

Business partners



0 10 20 30 40 50

We survey consumers

Monitoring






Difficult to answer





0 10 20 30 40 50 60



Distant work





61,3

52,1

37,9

19,2

18,9

8,8

8,4

5,6

3,7

0,8

0,1

61,4

15,9

11,0

3,9

3,8

0,1

0,0

62,9

45,5

42,5

42,3

39,9

37,6

33,4

32,4

26,4

19,9

19,6

11,4

10,2

6,9

0,0

63,7

30,9

15,9

6,7

5,1

4,5

2,6

2,3

0,6

21,4

18,5

59,1

12,4

3,8

27,7

7,6

42,1

30,5

18,7

16,2

8,6

8,3

8,1

6,4

5,5

3,8

0,7

0,1

0,0

0,0

50,1

26,6

25,9

14,0

8,5

7,9

5,2

1,0

0,0

53,0

42,1

35,0

20,5

13,8

10,4

8,8

7,1

6,6

0,1

0,1

0,1

77,4

29,6

8,0

5,9

2,2

1,4

0,5

0,4

0,2

76,9

38,5

35,0

25,5

22,7

21,9

21,2

21,0

6,2

1,0

0,5

0,0

72,4

38,5

33,4

30,7

28,0

24,4

17,8

16,1

11,5

0,0


on a regular basis


Every half a year


Once a year

Rarer

55,0

4,8

5,7

8,9

16,5

9,2

18

Ownership type

Compared to 2005, the number of state-owned companies supporting active approaches for a socially

responsible business dropped significantly from 90.6% in 2005 to 51.1% in 2010 and, accordingly, the

number of those believing that social responsibility is only for companies willing to promote it increased

from 8% in 2005 to 48.9% in 2010. The reasons behind this are the financial and economic crisis, and

implementation of charity projects instead of corporate social responsibility projects, which have not

affected the financial performance indicators of companies and, therefore, failed to interest management.

In 2010, the number of joint-stock companies believing that every company should incorporate social

responsibility into its activities grew to 74.9% from 62.1% in 2005. According to experts, it can be related

to the requirement of the shareholders.

Company size

There is no significant difference in the attitude of various size companies to implementation of social

responsibility policies and practices. Marginal changes, as compared to 2005, have been seen among

companies employing over 500 people. The number of such companies believing that implementation of

social responsibility is a duty of every company dropped from 73.7% in 2005 to 60.4% in 2010.

Field of activities

Manufacturing and industrial purpose products companies as well as communication companies

tend to believe more than others that implementation of social responsibility should be a duty of every

company. In contrast, consumer goods and transport companies are more inclined to believe that this

approach must be implemented only by the companies willing to do it.

Regional aspect

Most companies located in the Donetsk region believe that social responsibility practices and policies

must be implemented by every company. Most companies operating in the Lviv and Odesa regions claim

this approach is only for the companies willing to do it. It is an interesting fact that every fifth company in

Lviv shares the idea that implementation of social responsibility makes no sense at all.

19

CONCLUSIONS:

1. 1. Important changes have happened in

the social responsibility awareness level over the

last five years, depending on the company size,

the company location region, and the field of the

company activities. The 2010 survey shows a

direct dependence: the larger a company is, the

higher also its awareness level.

2. Most companies believe that social

responsibility includes charity assistance

provided to the community, development of

the company’s personnel and fair business

practices. Just as in 2005, only one third of

companies associate implementation of

environmental projects and participation

in regional development projects with social

responsibility. Both in 2005 and 2010, the

lowest number of companies believes that the

company’s transparency is an aspect of social

responsibility.

3. The number of companies believing

that businesses should take an active part in

resolving social and environmental problems

has increased twofold in comparison with 2005.

This may lead to the following conclusions:

firstly, the social responsibility concept has

become recognized by Ukrainian companies;

secondly, the government has been engaging

businesses more actively in resolving social and

environmental problems of communities.

4. Half of Ukrainian companies believe

that social responsibility policies and practices

should be promoted by every company.

20

2. INTENSITY AND PRIORITIES OF SOCIALRESPONSIBILITY IMPLEMENTATION

2.1. IMPLEMENTATION OF SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE EVENTS

Most respondents (67.3%) hold socially responsible events (see Figure 2.1). As compared to 2005,

their number has somewhat dropped: in 2005, 75.8% of companies promoted social responsibility. The

financial crisis may be one of the causes of this result, as well as the fact that most companies take measures

mentioned above without realizing that they are part of the social responsibility policy.

Figure 2.1. Analysis of Answers to the Question “Does your company take measures,

which may be referred to as socially responsible ones? Socially responsible measures

are defined as the company’s voluntary (at its own initiative only) care about social

(welfare of the personnel and community) and environmental projects”

Company size

In contrast to the trend recorded in 2005 when the company size played a crucial role in implementing

social responsibility, no significant difference in implementing social responsibility can be seen in 2010 in

terms of the company size and ownership type.

Figure 2.2. Social Responsibility Implementation, by regions, % (N=600)

0 10 20 30 40 50







to promote it


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Absolutelyagree



0

20

40

60

80

100

KharkivRegion

OdesaRegion

DonetskRegion


LvivRegion

KyivRegion

42,3

30,7

30,5

24,5

53,3

5,6

41,1

No

Yes

No

Yes

67,3

32,7

0 20 40 60 80


















80,7

78

71,3

66,1

58,8

42,1

37,4

36,1

34,8

32,4

32

31,4

29,6

23,9

16,6

14,8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60











For moral reasons

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
















0 10 20 30 40


Charity assistance












It takes no part

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70


My conscience











0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Difficult to answer


Lack of time





Tax pressure


Lack of funds

0 10 20 30 40 50 60








0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Difficult to answer






From rumours



0 10 20 30 40 50



Difficult to answer







0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80






The media

Business partners



0 10 20 30 40 50

We survey consumers

Monitoring






Difficult to answer





0 10 20 30 40 50 60



Distant work





61,3

52,1

37,9

19,2

18,9

8,8

8,4

5,6

3,7

0,8

0,1

61,4

15,9

11,0

3,9

3,8

0,1

0,0

62,9

45,5

42,5

42,3

39,9

37,6

33,4

32,4

26,4

19,9

19,6

11,4

10,2

6,9

0,0

63,7

30,9

15,9

6,7

5,1

4,5

2,6

2,3

0,6

21,4

18,5

59,1

12,4

3,8

27,7

7,6

42,1

30,5

18,7

16,2

8,6

8,3

8,1

6,4

5,5

3,8

0,7

0,1

0,0

0,0

50,1

26,6

25,9

14,0

8,5

7,9

5,2

1,0

0,0

53,0

42,1

35,0

20,5

13,8

10,4

8,8

7,1

6,6

0,1

0,1

0,1

77,4

29,6

8,0

5,9

2,2

1,4

0,5

0,4

0,2

76,9

38,5

35,0

25,5

22,7

21,9

21,2

21,0

6,2

1,0

0,5

0,0

72,4

38,5

33,4

30,7

28,0

24,4

17,8

16,1

11,5

0,0


on a regular basis


Every half a year


Once a year

Rarer

55,0

4,8

5,7

8,9

16,5

9,2

0 10 20 30 40 50







to promote it


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Absolutelyagree



0

20

40

60

80

100

KharkivRegion

OdesaRegion

DonetskRegion


LvivRegion

KyivRegion

42,3

30,7

30,5

24,5

53,3

5,6

41,1

No

Yes

No

Yes

67,3

32,7

0 20 40 60 80


















80,7

78

71,3

66,1

58,8

42,1

37,4

36,1

34,8

32,4

32

31,4

29,6

23,9

16,6

14,8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60











For moral reasons

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
















0 10 20 30 40


Charity assistance












It takes no part

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70


My conscience











0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Difficult to answer


Lack of time





Tax pressure


Lack of funds

0 10 20 30 40 50 60








0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Difficult to answer






From rumours



0 10 20 30 40 50



Difficult to answer







0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80






The media

Business partners



0 10 20 30 40 50

We survey consumers

Monitoring






Difficult to answer





0 10 20 30 40 50 60



Distant work





61,3

52,1

37,9

19,2

18,9

8,8

8,4

5,6

3,7

0,8

0,1

61,4

15,9

11,0

3,9

3,8

0,1

0,0

62,9

45,5

42,5

42,3

39,9

37,6

33,4

32,4

26,4

19,9

19,6

11,4

10,2

6,9

0,0

63,7

30,9

15,9

6,7

5,1

4,5

2,6

2,3

0,6

21,4

18,5

59,1

12,4

3,8

27,7

7,6

42,1

30,5

18,7

16,2

8,6

8,3

8,1

6,4

5,5

3,8

0,7

0,1

0,0

0,0

50,1

26,6

25,9

14,0

8,5

7,9

5,2

1,0

0,0

53,0

42,1

35,0

20,5

13,8

10,4

8,8

7,1

6,6

0,1

0,1

0,1

77,4

29,6

8,0

5,9

2,2

1,4

0,5

0,4

0,2

76,9

38,5

35,0

25,5

22,7

21,9

21,2

21,0

6,2

1,0

0,5

0,0

72,4

38,5

33,4

30,7

28,0

24,4

17,8

16,1

11,5

0,0


on a regular basis


Every half a year


Once a year

Rarer

55,0

4,8

5,7

8,9

16,5

9,2

21

Regional aspect

From the regional aspect prospective, companies located in Odesa and Donetsk are leaders in

incorporating social responsibility policies into their activities, while companies operating in Lviv lag

behind (see Fig. 2.2.).

Field of activities

Leaders in implementing social responsibility are: communication companies and companies involved

in hotel business, consulting companies, the media, etc. The lowest number of businesses implementing

social responsibility includes transport companies, agricultural companies, and companies manufacturing

industrial purpose products. In our opinion, this can be explained by the dynamic nature of business of

the first category of companies.

2.2. SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY MEASURES

Most social responsibility measures implemented by companies were in labour practices (measures

to develop personnel, refusal to use forced and child labour, absence of discrimination, introduction of

labour conditions and improvement programs) and consumer healthcare and safety measures (see Fig.

2.3). The least popular measures among Ukrainian companies include protection of natural resources and

cooperation with the community.

Figure 2.3. Classification of Answers to the Question “Which of the social responsibility measures does

your company implement?” (N=404)

0 10 20 30 40 50







to promote it


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Absolutelyagree



0

20

40

60

80

100

KharkivRegion

OdesaRegion

DonetskRegion


LvivRegion

KyivRegion

42,3

30,7

30,5

24,5

53,3

5,6

41,1

No

Yes

No

Yes

67,3

32,7

0 20 40 60 80


















80,7

78

71,3

66,1

58,8

42,1

37,4

36,1

34,8

32,4

32

31,4

29,6

23,9

16,6

14,8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60











For moral reasons

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
















0 10 20 30 40


Charity assistance












It takes no part

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70


My conscience











0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Difficult to answer


Lack of time





Tax pressure


Lack of funds

0 10 20 30 40 50 60








0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Difficult to answer






From rumours



0 10 20 30 40 50



Difficult to answer







0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80






The media

Business partners



0 10 20 30 40 50

We survey consumers

Monitoring






Difficult to answer





0 10 20 30 40 50 60



Distant work





61,3

52,1

37,9

19,2

18,9

8,8

8,4

5,6

3,7

0,8

0,1

61,4

15,9

11,0

3,9

3,8

0,1

0,0

62,9

45,5

42,5

42,3

39,9

37,6

33,4

32,4

26,4

19,9

19,6

11,4

10,2

6,9

0,0

63,7

30,9

15,9

6,7

5,1

4,5

2,6

2,3

0,6

21,4

18,5

59,1

12,4

3,8

27,7

7,6

42,1

30,5

18,7

16,2

8,6

8,3

8,1

6,4

5,5

3,8

0,7

0,1

0,0

0,0

50,1

26,6

25,9

14,0

8,5

7,9

5,2

1,0

0,0

53,0

42,1

35,0

20,5

13,8

10,4

8,8

7,1

6,6

0,1

0,1

0,1

77,4

29,6

8,0

5,9

2,2

1,4

0,5

0,4

0,2

76,9

38,5

35,0

25,5

22,7

21,9

21,2

21,0

6,2

1,0

0,5

0,0

72,4

38,5

33,4

30,7

28,0

24,4

17,8

16,1

11,5

0,0


on a regular basis


Every half a year


Once a year

Rarer

55,0

4,8

5,7

8,9

16,5

9,2

0 10 20 30 40 50







to promote it


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Absolutelyagree



0

20

40

60

80

100

KharkivRegion

OdesaRegion

DonetskRegion


LvivRegion

KyivRegion

42,3

30,7

30,5

24,5

53,3

5,6

41,1

No

Yes

No

Yes

67,3

32,7

0 20 40 60 80


















80,7

78

71,3

66,1

58,8

42,1

37,4

36,1

34,8

32,4

32

31,4

29,6

23,9

16,6

14,8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60











For moral reasons

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
















0 10 20 30 40


Charity assistance












It takes no part

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70


My conscience











0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Difficult to answer


Lack of time





Tax pressure


Lack of funds

0 10 20 30 40 50 60








0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Difficult to answer






From rumours



0 10 20 30 40 50



Difficult to answer







0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80






The media

Business partners



0 10 20 30 40 50

We survey consumers

Monitoring






Difficult to answer





0 10 20 30 40 50 60



Distant work





61,3

52,1

37,9

19,2

18,9

8,8

8,4

5,6

3,7

0,8

0,1

61,4

15,9

11,0

3,9

3,8

0,1

0,0

62,9

45,5

42,5

42,3

39,9

37,6

33,4

32,4

26,4

19,9

19,6

11,4

10,2

6,9

0,0

63,7

30,9

15,9

6,7

5,1

4,5

2,6

2,3

0,6

21,4

18,5

59,1

12,4

3,8

27,7

7,6

42,1

30,5

18,7

16,2

8,6

8,3

8,1

6,4

5,5

3,8

0,7

0,1

0,0

0,0

50,1

26,6

25,9

14,0

8,5

7,9

5,2

1,0

0,0

53,0

42,1

35,0

20,5

13,8

10,4

8,8

7,1

6,6

0,1

0,1

0,1

77,4

29,6

8,0

5,9

2,2

1,4

0,5

0,4

0,2

76,9

38,5

35,0

25,5

22,7

21,9

21,2

21,0

6,2

1,0

0,5

0,0

72,4

38,5

33,4

30,7

28,0

24,4

17,8

16,1

11,5

0,0


on a regular basis


Every half a year


Once a year

Rarer

55,0

4,8

5,7

8,9

16,5

9,2

22

Company size

The larger a company is, the more frequently it implements the following socially responsible practices:

protection of the right of its employees to the freedom of association and collective negotiations; reduction

of emissions into the environment; measures to protect natural resources and investment of its resources

into the community’s life. In contrast, more small companies than large companies implement consumer

healthcare and safety practices.

Ownership type

There are some differences in implementing various measures depending on the company ownership

type. The number of state-owned and joint-stock companies implementing measures in renewing

natural resources is twice higher than the number of private companies. More state-owned companies

as compared to companies with other ownership types invest resources into infrastructure development

and other social programs aimed at improving the community’s life, as well as implementing reporting

principles and practices in their activities. At the same time, less state-owned companies than companies

with other ownership types implement principles such as practicing ethical and responsible attitudes

toward consumers, the principles of fair competition and ethical attitudes to competitors.

Regional aspect

Different regions are characterized by significant differences in the way companies implement socially

responsible practices. Thus, a higher number of companies in the Lviv, Dnipropetrovsk, and Donetsk

regions, than in general for the selection, implement all the enumerated social responsibility practices.

For some, their activity is even several times higher than in other regions, while companies in the Odesa

and Kyiv regions implement social responsibility practices to a lower extent than in general.

2.3. REGULARITY OF SOCIALLY RESPONSIBLE PRACTICES

Slightly more than half of the surveyed Ukrainian companies (55%) implement socially responsible

practices on their own; almost every tenth company (9%) does it several times a year. The rest of Ukrainian

companies do it now and then (see Fig. 2.4.).

Figure 2.4. How often does your company implement practices which can be referred to as socially

responsible ones? (N=404)

0 10 20 30 40 50







to promote it


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Absolutelyagree



0

20

40

60

80

100

KharkivRegion

OdesaRegion

DonetskRegion


LvivRegion

KyivRegion

42,3

30,7

30,5

24,5

53,3

5,6

41,1

No

Yes

No

Yes

67,3

32,7

0 20 40 60 80


















80,7

78

71,3

66,1

58,8

42,1

37,4

36,1

34,8

32,4

32

31,4

29,6

23,9

16,6

14,8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60











For moral reasons

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
















0 10 20 30 40


Charity assistance












It takes no part

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70


My conscience











0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Difficult to answer


Lack of time





Tax pressure


Lack of funds

0 10 20 30 40 50 60








0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Difficult to answer






From rumours



0 10 20 30 40 50



Difficult to answer







0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80






The media

Business partners



0 10 20 30 40 50

We survey consumers

Monitoring






Difficult to answer





0 10 20 30 40 50 60



Distant work





61,3

52,1

37,9

19,2

18,9

8,8

8,4

5,6

3,7

0,8

0,1

61,4

15,9

11,0

3,9

3,8

0,1

0,0

62,9

45,5

42,5

42,3

39,9

37,6

33,4

32,4

26,4

19,9

19,6

11,4

10,2

6,9

0,0

63,7

30,9

15,9

6,7

5,1

4,5

2,6

2,3

0,6

21,4

18,5

59,1

12,4

3,8

27,7

7,6

42,1

30,5

18,7

16,2

8,6

8,3

8,1

6,4

5,5

3,8

0,7

0,1

0,0

0,0

50,1

26,6

25,9

14,0

8,5

7,9

5,2

1,0

0,0

53,0

42,1

35,0

20,5

13,8

10,4

8,8

7,1

6,6

0,1

0,1

0,1

77,4

29,6

8,0

5,9

2,2

1,4

0,5

0,4

0,2

76,9

38,5

35,0

25,5

22,7

21,9

21,2

21,0

6,2

1,0

0,5

0,0

72,4

38,5

33,4

30,7

28,0

24,4

17,8

16,1

11,5

0,0


on a regular basis


Every half a year


Once a year

Rarer

55,0

4,8

5,7

8,9

16,5

9,2

23

Regional aspect

Social responsibility is most intensively

implemented by companies located in the

Donetsk and Lviv regions, and least intensively

in Kyiv and Dnipropetrovsk regions.

Field of activities

There are differences in the intensity of implementation of social responsibility practices by companies

from different sectors. Most agricultural companies, companies manufacturing consumer goods and

industrial purpose products, implement socially responsible practices on a regular basis. At the same time,

more than half of the companies providing banking and financial services implement socially responsible

practices once a year and rarer: only 17% of companies in this sector do it on a regular basis.

Companies providing household and public utility services implement social responsibility practices

to quite a low extent. Thus, the number of companies implementing social responsibility practices on a

regular basis is equal to the number of companies in this sector implementing them several times a year.

2.4. FACTORS ENCOURAGING COMPANIES TO IMPLEMENT SOCIALLY

RESPONSIBLE PRACTICES

The main factors encouraging companies to implement socially responsible practices primarily

include inner convictions: moral reasons and inner incentives. However, factors such as company’s sales

growth, emulation of the actions of competitors, and demand of the local government agencies are quite

important as well (see Fig. 2.5.).

Figure 2.5. Respondents’ Answers to the Question “What factors encourage your company to

implement socially responsible practices (tick as appropriate)?”

0 10 20 30 40 50







to promote it


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Absolutelyagree



0

20

40

60

80

100

KharkivRegion

OdesaRegion

DonetskRegion


LvivRegion

KyivRegion

42,3

30,7

30,5

24,5

53,3

5,6

41,1

No

Yes

No

Yes

67,3

32,7

0 20 40 60 80


















80,7

78

71,3

66,1

58,8

42,1

37,4

36,1

34,8

32,4

32

31,4

29,6

23,9

16,6

14,8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60











For moral reasons

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
















0 10 20 30 40


Charity assistance












It takes no part

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70


My conscience











0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Difficult to answer


Lack of time





Tax pressure


Lack of funds

0 10 20 30 40 50 60








0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Difficult to answer






From rumours



0 10 20 30 40 50



Difficult to answer







0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80






The media

Business partners



0 10 20 30 40 50

We survey consumers

Monitoring






Difficult to answer





0 10 20 30 40 50 60



Distant work





61,3

52,1

37,9

19,2

18,9

8,8

8,4

5,6

3,7

0,8

0,1

61,4

15,9

11,0

3,9

3,8

0,1

0,0

62,9

45,5

42,5

42,3

39,9

37,6

33,4

32,4

26,4

19,9

19,6

11,4

10,2

6,9

0,0

63,7

30,9

15,9

6,7

5,1

4,5

2,6

2,3

0,6

21,4

18,5

59,1

12,4

3,8

27,7

7,6

42,1

30,5

18,7

16,2

8,6

8,3

8,1

6,4

5,5

3,8

0,7

0,1

0,0

0,0

50,1

26,6

25,9

14,0

8,5

7,9

5,2

1,0

0,0

53,0

42,1

35,0

20,5

13,8

10,4

8,8

7,1

6,6

0,1

0,1

0,1

77,4

29,6

8,0

5,9

2,2

1,4

0,5

0,4

0,2

76,9

38,5

35,0

25,5

22,7

21,9

21,2

21,0

6,2

1,0

0,5

0,0

72,4

38,5

33,4

30,7

28,0

24,4

17,8

16,1

11,5

0,0


on a regular basis


Every half a year


Once a year

Rarer

55,0

4,8

5,7

8,9

16,5

9,2

In�comparison�with�2005,�the�number�of�companies�regularly�implementing�socially�responsible�practices�has�grown�(in�2005,�only�31.3%�of�companies�did�it�on�a�regular�basis).

0 10 20 30 40 50







to promote it


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Absolutelyagree



0

20

40

60

80

100

KharkivRegion

OdesaRegion

DonetskRegion


LvivRegion

KyivRegion

42,3

30,7

30,5

24,5

53,3

5,6

41,1

No

Yes

No

Yes

67,3

32,7

0 20 40 60 80


















80,7

78

71,3

66,1

58,8

42,1

37,4

36,1

34,8

32,4

32

31,4

29,6

23,9

16,6

14,8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60











For moral reasons

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
















0 10 20 30 40


Charity assistance












It takes no part

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70


My conscience











0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Difficult to answer


Lack of time





Tax pressure


Lack of funds

0 10 20 30 40 50 60








0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Difficult to answer






From rumours



0 10 20 30 40 50



Difficult to answer







0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80






The media

Business partners



0 10 20 30 40 50

We survey consumers

Monitoring






Difficult to answer





0 10 20 30 40 50 60



Distant work





61,3

52,1

37,9

19,2

18,9

8,8

8,4

5,6

3,7

0,8

0,1

61,4

15,9

11,0

3,9

3,8

0,1

0,0

62,9

45,5

42,5

42,3

39,9

37,6

33,4

32,4

26,4

19,9

19,6

11,4

10,2

6,9

0,0

63,7

30,9

15,9

6,7

5,1

4,5

2,6

2,3

0,6

21,4

18,5

59,1

12,4

3,8

27,7

7,6

42,1

30,5

18,7

16,2

8,6

8,3

8,1

6,4

5,5

3,8

0,7

0,1

0,0

0,0

50,1

26,6

25,9

14,0

8,5

7,9

5,2

1,0

0,0

53,0

42,1

35,0

20,5

13,8

10,4

8,8

7,1

6,6

0,1

0,1

0,1

77,4

29,6

8,0

5,9

2,2

1,4

0,5

0,4

0,2

76,9

38,5

35,0

25,5

22,7

21,9

21,2

21,0

6,2

1,0

0,5

0,0

72,4

38,5

33,4

30,7

28,0

24,4

17,8

16,1

11,5

0,0


on a regular basis


Every half a year


Once a year

Rarer

55,0

4,8

5,7

8,9

16,5

9,2

24

As compared to 2005, factors for companies have not changed. Thus, in 2005 moral reasons were the

key factor for 71.8% of companies, inner incentive for 57.4%, the company’s sales growth for 22.8%, and

demand of the local government agencies for 21%. It is interesting that the number of companies, for which

emulation of the competitors’ actions became one of the factors of social responsibility implementation,

had nearly doubled (from 9.9% in 2005 to 19% in 2010).

Field of activities

Classification of answers by the field of activities has revealed quite significant differences in factors

encouraging companies from various sectors to implement social responsibility practices:

• moral reasons are typical of most companies in the fields of transport, finance, construction, and

commerce. This factor has the lowest value for companies providing accommodation, catering,

travel, consulting, and legal services, the media and communication companies.

• inner incentive is typical of most companies manufacturing industrial products, construction

companies, transport companies, companies providing household and public utility services, and

companies providing accommodation, catering, travel, consulting, legal services and the media.

The lowest number of companies, for which social responsibility is an inner incentive and a

principle of operation, is concentrated in the field of financial and banking services and in the

sector of consumer goods manufacturing.

• religious reasons are one of the factors of corporate social responsibility implementation for every

fourth commercial company and every tenth transport company.

Over one third of construction companies and every fifth company manufacturing industrial products

emphasized that social responsibility implementation is caused by the need to compensate for the

damage caused to the environment or by the company’s products. This factor plays a role in the cases of

agricultural companies and transport companies as well.

The group of important factors encouraging companies to implement social responsibility includes

those that contribute to an increase in the competitive advantages of companies: contribution to the sales

growth. Thus, more than half of companies providing accommodation, catering, travel, consulting, and

legal services, the media, and one third of agricultural companies, companies manufacturing consumer

and industrial goods, commercial companies pointed out that this factor has an impact on social

responsibility program/practice implementation.

Competition factor is important for companies manufacturing consumer goods, agricultural and

transport companies.

One of the factors encouraging every fifth agricultural company to implement social responsibility

practices is the media coverage of their social responsibility practices, which improves the company’s

image in general.

Demand from interested parties (stakeholders) plays an important role in implementing social

responsibility: ie requirements of the parent company, foreign partners, demands of the trade unions

and local government authorities. Requirements of the parent company are important in implementing

social responsibility for one third of communication companies, nearly every fourth transport company

and companies providing financial services; requirements of foreign partners for every tenth transport

company; demand of the trade unions for almost one third of communication companies and one

fourth of companies manufacturing industrial products; demand of the local government authorities

for over half of agricultural companies and one third of transport companies.

Company size

The company size has a certain impact on the priority of factors for social responsibility implementation.

Thus, the larger a company is, the lower the weight of factors such as moral reasons and sales volume

growth, but the higher the weight of factors such as demand by the trade unions, local government

25

authorities, requirements of foreign partners, coverage in the media and improvement of the company’s

image, and the need to compensate for the damage caused to the environment.

However, while in 2005 the competition factor was more important for large companies, in 2010 it

plays a more important motivational role for small and medium-sized companies. In 2010, factors such

as the sales volume growth has become more important for small companies than for large and medium-

sized companies, while in 2005 it was equally important for SMEs.

Ownership type

The company ownership type has an impact on the factor priority.

For state-owned companies, the most important factors are demands of the trade unions and local

government authorities. Compensation of the damage caused by the company’s activities or products has

no impact on motivation of state-owned companies at all.

For private companies, the most important are factors such as the sales volume growth, competition

and religion, and the least important is demand of the trade unions.

For joint-stock companies, the important motivational factors include the coverage of their social

responsibility practices by the media, which shapes the company’s positive image, and understanding of

the need to compensate the damage caused to the environment by the company’s activities or products.

Regional aspects

For companies located in the Kharkiv region, the important role in implementing social responsibility

is played by the demands of local government authorities; for companies in the Kyiv region important

factors include religious reasons and the sales volume growth; for Donetsk companies factors such as

competition and image, demands of the trade unions and of the parent company, and sales volume

growth are important. Competition is the most important factor for companies operating in the Odesa

region.

2.5. OBSTACLES FOR SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY IMPLEMENTATION

Almost one third (32.7%) of surveyed Ukrainian companies declared that they implement no social

responsibility practices. For most of them (61.4%), social responsibility programs/practices are not

relevant due to lack of financial resources (see Fig. 2.6.).

Lack of resources is the main factor why social responsibility practices are not implemented by:

• small companies;

• companies located in the Lviv region;

• companies providing financial services, manufacturing industrial products, providing household

and public utility services, and communication companies;

• the majority of state-owned companies (90.2%).

16% of respondents stated that they implement no social responsibility practices and have never

considered implementing social responsibility programs/practices. Every tenth company (11%), which

implements no social responsibility practices, believes this is a duty of the government, not businesses.

The following companies have never considered implementing social responsibility programs/

practices:

• every fourth construction company and every fifth company in the commerce and transport

sectors;

• 43.3% of companies located in Odesa and Odesa region, and almost every fourth company located

in Kyiv and Kyiv region (24.7%);

• primarily joint-stock companies (21.7%).

26

Every fourth joint-stock company (25.4%) and every fourth company providing accommodation,

catering, travel, consulting, and legal services, the media (27.7%), half of large companies employing over

500 people (56%), and 42% of companies located in Dnipropetrovsk and Dnipropetrovsk region believe

that this is a duty of the government, not businesses.

Figure 2.6. Why social responsibility programs/practices are not relevant for your company

at the moment? N=196.

For almost every fifth joint-stock company and most large companies located in Donetsk and Donetsk

region, the main obstacle is a belief that social responsibility implementation does not stimulate business

development.

Lack of government encouragement is an obstacle for a marginal number of companies, primarily

for large companies, construction companies, and companies located in Dnipropetrovsk and the

Dnipropetrovsk region, Kharkiv and the Kharkiv region.

It is encouraging to find out that only a small number of Ukrainian companies (within error) showed

absolute rejection of social responsibility (selected answers “Because it is a waste of time and money” and

“Because this is not a real activity, but just a marketing trick or money laundering”) or were disappointed

by the past attempts to implement social responsibility.

0 10 20 30 40 50







to promote it


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Absolutelyagree



0

20

40

60

80

100

KharkivRegion

OdesaRegion

DonetskRegion


LvivRegion

KyivRegion

42,3

30,7

30,5

24,5

53,3

5,6

41,1

No

Yes

No

Yes

67,3

32,7

0 20 40 60 80


















80,7

78

71,3

66,1

58,8

42,1

37,4

36,1

34,8

32,4

32

31,4

29,6

23,9

16,6

14,8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60











For moral reasons

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
















0 10 20 30 40


Charity assistance












It takes no part

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70


My conscience











0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Difficult to answer


Lack of time





Tax pressure


Lack of funds

0 10 20 30 40 50 60








0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Difficult to answer






From rumours



0 10 20 30 40 50



Difficult to answer







0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80






The media

Business partners



0 10 20 30 40 50

We survey consumers

Monitoring






Difficult to answer





0 10 20 30 40 50 60



Distant work





61,3

52,1

37,9

19,2

18,9

8,8

8,4

5,6

3,7

0,8

0,1

61,4

15,9

11,0

3,9

3,8

0,1

0,0

62,9

45,5

42,5

42,3

39,9

37,6

33,4

32,4

26,4

19,9

19,6

11,4

10,2

6,9

0,0

63,7

30,9

15,9

6,7

5,1

4,5

2,6

2,3

0,6

21,4

18,5

59,1

12,4

3,8

27,7

7,6

42,1

30,5

18,7

16,2

8,6

8,3

8,1

6,4

5,5

3,8

0,7

0,1

0,0

0,0

50,1

26,6

25,9

14,0

8,5

7,9

5,2

1,0

0,0

53,0

42,1

35,0

20,5

13,8

10,4

8,8

7,1

6,6

0,1

0,1

0,1

77,4

29,6

8,0

5,9

2,2

1,4

0,5

0,4

0,2

76,9

38,5

35,0

25,5

22,7

21,9

21,2

21,0

6,2

1,0

0,5

0,0

72,4

38,5

33,4

30,7

28,0

24,4

17,8

16,1

11,5

0,0


on a regular basis


Every half a year


Once a year

Rarer

55,0

4,8

5,7

8,9

16,5

9,2

27

CONCLUSIONS:

1. The intensity of socially responsible

practice implementation for the last five years

has grown from 31.3% of companies which did

it regularly in 2005 to 55% in 2010.

2. While in 2005 socially responsible

practices were implemented primarily by large

companies, in 2010 there is no significant

difference in implementing social responsibility

and intensity of social responsibility practice

depending on the company size.

3. The main factors encouraging companies

to implement socially responsible practices

include, first and foremost, moral reasons and

inner incentives. However, factors, such as the

company’s sales growth, emulation of actions

of competitors, and demands of the local

government authorities, are quite important.

As compared to 2005, the factor priority for

companies has not changed, but the number

of companies for which the competition factor

became quite important has doubled.

4. As in 2005, the social responsibility policy

of Ukrainian companies is focused primarily

on the company’s personnel and consumers.

Most social responsibility practices can be

referred to as labour practices: measures to

develop the company’s personnel, refusal to use

forced and child labour, non-discrimination,

implementation of labour condition

improvement programs, and consumer

healthcare and safety measures. Measures

relating to the protection of natural resources

and cooperation with the community are the

least important for Ukrainian companies.

5. Nearly one third of Ukrainian

companies pointed out that they implement

no social responsibility. For most of them, social

responsibility programs/practices are not

relevant due to lack of resources, and every

tenth company, which stated that it implements

no social responsibility practices, believes

that this is a function of the government, and

not businesses. Only a marginal number of

Ukrainian companies (within error) showed

absolute rejection of social responsibility.

28

3. SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY PRACTICES

3.1. ORGANIZATIONAL MANAGEMENT

Organizational management is one of the key aspects of social responsibility. Organizational

management is based on the principles and practices of transparency, reporting, compliance with

regulations, ethical conduct, and taking into account the interests of stakeholders. Transparency in

organizational management is considered to be timely and unbiased informing about the organization’s

decisions and actions.

3.1.1.Company Openness

The 2010 survey has demonstrated that Ukrainian companies are closed to the public: for more than half

of companies (59.8%), detailed information about the company’s operations is designed for in-house use

only. The largest number of companies, which do not disclose information about their performance, are

private companies and joint-stock companies manufacturing consumer products, as well as public utility

companies. In terms of regional classification, the highest number of companies «closed» to the public is

located in the Kyiv and Kharkiv regions. 13% of companies have been unable to give a clear answer about

their existing sources of informing the public about the company’s activities.

The most popular methods of disclosing information to the public by Ukrainian companies include web

pages (15%), the company’s printed publications, press-releases (13%), professional publications and the

media (11.6%). The least popular methods include participation in TV programs (3.5%), press conferences

and meetings with the community (3.4%).

The largest number of companies using various methods to disclose information are located in the

Donetsk region; in terms of industry classification, these are communication companies and companies

manufacturing industrial products.

The number of large companies using various methods of providing information about their activities

is higher than the number of small and medium-sized companies (Table 34), because normally they have

more resources.

The situation with information openness for the public has not really changed since 2005: the prime

ways of information disclosure include the in-house channels (the company’s publications, web pages); and

the number of companies, for which the information about their activities is designed for the in-house use

only, has even slightly grown (40.6% in 2005).

Preparation of non-financial reports is one of the instruments of openness and accountability of

organizations in terms of social responsibility. As compared to 2005, the situation with such reporting

has not changed to a large extent. According to the survey results, almost every fifth company in Ukraine

prepares a non-financial report as an independent document or as part of the company’s general report (see

Table 3.1.1.). In 2005, 25.9% of companies prepared social reports. When analyzing this answer, researchers

would like to point out how respondents define non-financial or social reports. It could be assumed that a

non-financial report for respondents is not only a separate report and part of the company’s general report,

but also generalization of the companies’ social and environmental reports.

According to the respondents’ answers, leaders in social reporting include large companies and state-

owned companies. In terms of industry classification, leaders in social reporting are construction companies,

communication companies, and companies providing legal, consulting, catering, accommodation, travel

services, and the media. In terms of regional classification, the highest number of companies preparing

social reports is concentrated in the Kyiv and Dnipropetrovsk regions.

29

Table 3.1.1. Classification of Respondents’ Answers to the Question “Has your company prepared

a social (non-financial) report for the last 5 years?” (N=600)

Yes No

The company prepares and publishes a separate report 7,6 92,4

The social report became part of the company’s regular report 11,8 88,2

3.1.2. Company’s Mission, Values, and Codes of Conduct

The number of companies having an approved mission, codes of conduct, etc, is quite low. As

compared to 2005, the number of such companies has dropped nearly twofold. In 2010, only 28.4% of

Ukrainian companies have approved values and codes of conduct, 42% of respondents are planning to

do it (in 2005: 49.7% and 32.9% respectively). The number of companies having values and approved

codes of conduct is higher than among the companies implementing social responsibility policies

(38.6%) in comparison with companies not implementing them (7.2%).

The approved values and codes of conduct are normally developed by large companies, state-

owned companies, communication companies, and companies located in the Donetsk region. In

terms of industry classification, the lowest number of companies with declared codes of conduct are

those that manufacture consumer goods.

3.1.3. Social Responsibility Strategy and Financing

29.6% companies have a social responsibility strategy. This indicator is somewhat higher (38.5%)

among companies, which declared implementation of social responsibility policies. Social responsibility

strategies have been developed primarily by large companies, state-owned companies, communication

companies, transport companies, and companies operating in the Donetsk region (Table 46-49).

The number of companies having a social responsibility strategy practically remains the same: in 2005,

one third of companies (36.9%) had strategic plans for social responsibility practices, in 2002, the number

was 25.7%.

In 2010, almost every fifth company (17.0%) has a special budget or a budget item for implementing

social responsibility programs/practices (Table 3.1.2.).

Table 3.1.2. Classification of Answers to the Question

“Has your company had a special budget (or a budget item) for implementing social

responsibility programs/practices for the last 5 years?”

Yes No Difficult to answer

2005 14,3 69,5 16,2

2006 15,0 69,6 15,5

2007 13,4 71,3 15,3

2008 14,8 70,3 14,9

2009 16,4 71,8 11,8

2010 17,0 69,7 13,3

The number of Ukrainian companies having a budget for implementing social responsibility programs/

practices has hardly changed for the last 5 years, and slightly grew over the period between 2008 and early

2010 (see Table 3.1.3.).

30

Table 3.1.3. Classification of Answers to the Question “How has the budget (budget item)

designed for implementing social responsibility programs/practices changed

for the last 5 years?”

Increased Has not changed Decreased Difficult to answer

2005 4,2 47,1 1,1 47,6

2006 5,5 46,0 0,8 47,7

2007 6,4 43,7 3,2 46,7

2008 5,5 41,0 9,2 44,3

2009 5,4 39,3 12,8 42,9

2010 3,5 40,6 12,8 43,2

In 2010, mostly agricultural, industrial, transport, and communication companies have special

budgets for implementing social responsibility programs/practices. Almost half of companies located

in the Odesa region have special budgets in 2010.

In 2010, a reduction in the special budget for implementing social responsibility programs/practices

has been recorded mainly in companies providing legal, consulting, accommodation, catering, travel

services, the media and agricultural companies.

Just as in 2005, social responsibility practices and programs have been developed directly by the

company’s manager in most Ukrainian companies (82.2%) (75.5% in 2005). In every tenth company

(10.4%), they have been developed by managers of the business area and deputy directors. No special

departments or special positions of employees have been introduced.

The role of a company director as developer of social responsibility programs increases as the

company’s size decreases, which is caused, on the one hand, by a small number of employees and the

administrative staff, accordingly.

In large companies, social responsibility programs are developed by the public relations department,

the human resources department and deputy directors.

Managers are the main developers of social responsibility programs in state-owned and private

companies to a larger extent than in joint-stock companies.

Joint-stock companies are characterized by an increasing role of deputy directors and public

relations departments developing social responsibility programs.

Special departments or new appropriate positions are, according to the survey results, introduced

in a small number of communication companies and companies manufacturing industrial products,

medium-sized and large companies, and companies located in the Donetsk region.

3.1.4. Anti-Corruption Measures

Almost half of Ukrainian companies (46%) acknowledge that sometimes (total answers

“sometimes”, “very rarely”) they have to offer unofficial payments to various government officials

to “settle a business problem”. A large number of Ukrainian companies (39%) believe that they have

to do it often, and only 15% of them stated that they never do it. The survey showed that companies,

which answered that they promote no social responsibility (56.7%), have been faced with the practice

of offering unofficial payments to government officials to a larger extent than companies which

declared social responsibility implementation (30.2%).

According to the survey, large companies have normally never been faced with bribes (unofficial

payments to government officials). The number of such companies is nearly twofold higher than the

respective number of small companies.

31

The industry classification shows that almost one third of the financial sector companies have never

offered unofficial payments to government officials; however, more than half of transport companies,

companies manufacturing consumer goods and agricultural companies have often practiced it.

Almost half of Ukrainian companies (49%) have no clear stand on the issue of corporate anti-

corruption policies. Nearly every third (32%) company is not ready to give away part of its profits

for the efficient fight of corruption. Every fourth company (19%) is ready to give away part of its

profits to efficiently fight corruption. The highest number of companies, which are ready to give

away 3-5% of their profits to efficiently fight corruption, are in the construction sector and in the

Donetsk region. No significant differences can be seen here in terms of the company size and the

ownership type.

The majority of Ukrainian companies are not ready for the social responsibility certification

procedure. The number of companies ready to be certified in case of development of the national

social responsibility standard is twofold lower than the number of companies unready to be

certified (15.7% against 41.5% respectively). 42.9% of Ukrainian companies have no conviction

on this issue.

3.2. HUMAN RIGHTS AND LABOUR PRACTICES

According to the survey results, every fourth company (26.4%) has no special practices for its own

employees, but strictly follows the labour laws. Three-quarters of the surveyed Ukrainian companies

implement various socially responsible practices for their personnel (Figure 3.2.1.):

• 63% of respondents never retain salaries and wages,

• 45.5% of companies provide flexible working hours to their employees,

• 42.5% of companies pay official salaries and wages only;

• 40% of respondents regularly increase salaries and wages,

• 42.5% of companies follow the non-discrimination principles (directly or indirectly),

• 32.4% of companies pay for overtime work,

• nearly every fifth surveyed Ukrainian company (19.6%) has its own program of balance between

family and work,

• 19.9% of companies offer additional financial, material, and other incentives to their personnel

for achieving the set goals.

The commonly used labour practices in Ukrainian companies include health insurance of

the personnel (11% of respondents said they use it in their relations with the personnel), offering

employees an opportunity to attend entertainment or sports events (10%), own crediting systems and

financial support offered to pay for accommodation, education, and other high expenses incurred by

the company’s personnel (6.9%).

Only one third of companies (33.4%) hold professional training for their personnel. As compared

to 2005, the priority of socially responsible practices in respect to personnel has remained the same:

measures to pay for work, regulation of the working hours, and non-discrimination in employment.

Company size

There are differences in practices applied in respect to employees by different companies. Large

ones use the following forms of support more often than other companies: health insurance and health

improvement financing; an opportunity to visit entertainment and sports houses (gyms, swimming

pools, clubs, cinemas, etc); additional financial, material, and other incentives for achieving the set goals.

Undoubtedly, this is related to the greater financial resources that large companies possess.

32

Figure 3.2.1. Companies’ Socially Responsible Practices (N=600)

Ownership type

In implementing socially responsible practices in respect to their personnel, state-owned companies

offer their employee’s health insurance, partially or fully financed, more often than companies with

other ownership types, and twice as many state-owned companies pay official salaries and wages to their

employees. Researchers believe this can be explained by the size of companies and activities of trade unions.

3.2.1. Contribution to Associations of Companies’ Personnel

Social responsibility in respect to employees also means contributing to associations of the companies’

personnel and engaging them in the process of discussing and making important decisions related to

the company’s development. Ukrainian companies do not pay great attention to this aspect of social

responsibility. According to the survey’s results, more than two-thirds of the surveyed companies in

Ukraine have no associations of employees. Every tenth company only (10.7%) has a trade union and

almost every fifth company (17.3%) has a labour council. From the regional perspective, companies

located in the Dnipropetrovsk and Donetsk regions have the largest number of trade unions, which is

related to the economic specifics of these regions. Labour councils as forms of employee associations

operate in every fifth company located in the Kharkiv, Donetsk, Kyiv and Dnipropetrovsk regions.

In terms of economic sectors, the largest number of companies having no employee associations are

companies providing legal, consulting, catering, accommodation, travel services, the media, commercial

companies, and companies manufacturing consumer goods. The largest number of companies having

trade unions and labour councils are concentrated in the transport and communication sectors. One

third of this sector’s companies have trade unions, and every fifth company has labour councils. A high

level of employee associations is typical of companies manufacturing industrial products and providing

financial services.

0 10 20 30 40 50







to promote it


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Absolutelyagree



0

20

40

60

80

100

KharkivRegion

OdesaRegion

DonetskRegion


LvivRegion

KyivRegion

42,3

30,7

30,5

24,5

53,3

5,6

41,1

No

Yes

No

Yes

67,3

32,7

0 20 40 60 80


















80,7

78

71,3

66,1

58,8

42,1

37,4

36,1

34,8

32,4

32

31,4

29,6

23,9

16,6

14,8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60











For moral reasons

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
















0 10 20 30 40


Charity assistance












It takes no part

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70


My conscience











0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Difficult to answer


Lack of time





Tax pressure


Lack of funds

0 10 20 30 40 50 60








0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Difficult to answer






From rumours



0 10 20 30 40 50



Difficult to answer







0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80






The media

Business partners



0 10 20 30 40 50

We survey consumers

Monitoring






Difficult to answer





0 10 20 30 40 50 60



Distant work





61,3

52,1

37,9

19,2

18,9

8,8

8,4

5,6

3,7

0,8

0,1

61,4

15,9

11,0

3,9

3,8

0,1

0,0

62,9

45,5

42,5

42,3

39,9

37,6

33,4

32,4

26,4

19,9

19,6

11,4

10,2

6,9

0,0

63,7

30,9

15,9

6,7

5,1

4,5

2,6

2,3

0,6

21,4

18,5

59,1

12,4

3,8

27,7

7,6

42,1

30,5

18,7

16,2

8,6

8,3

8,1

6,4

5,5

3,8

0,7

0,1

0,0

0,0

50,1

26,6

25,9

14,0

8,5

7,9

5,2

1,0

0,0

53,0

42,1

35,0

20,5

13,8

10,4

8,8

7,1

6,6

0,1

0,1

0,1

77,4

29,6

8,0

5,9

2,2

1,4

0,5

0,4

0,2

76,9

38,5

35,0

25,5

22,7

21,9

21,2

21,0

6,2

1,0

0,5

0,0

72,4

38,5

33,4

30,7

28,0

24,4

17,8

16,1

11,5

0,0


on a regular basis


Every half a year


Once a year

Rarer

55,0

4,8

5,7

8,9

16,5

9,2

33

Taking into account the employees’ opinion

Most respondents (63.7%) look for employees opinions on important company decisions through

discussions with their personnel; almost one third of the surveyed companies (30.9%) has a ‘practice’

when their employees express their opinions, but this practice is not systematic (Fig. 3.2.2.). Rumours are

a common method of obtaining information about the employees’ opinion regarding the decisions made

by the company: 15.9% of companies find out employees’ opinion through rumours.

The procedure of discussing decisions with personnel is typical of small and medium-sized companies.

Large companies use other methods of obtaining information about the employees’ opinion: the company’s

trade unions, in-house press, intranet, management. In state-owned companies, information is normally

gathered through trade unions, the in-house press, and the intranet. Employees express their opinions

personally twice more often in joint-stock and private companies than in state-owned companies. Trade

unions and management are also methods of gathering information typical of joint-stock companies.

Figure 3.2.2. How do you know your employees’ opinion about the important decisions made by the

company and the company’s activities in general? (N=600)

Regional aspects

Companies in the Donetsk region use more often than companies in other regions the following

methods of information gathering about the employees’ opinion: trade unions, regular anonymous

polls of the company’s employees and management. Rumours as a method of information gathering

is more typical of companies in the Odesa and Kyiv regions. Companies located in Dnipropetrovsk, as

compared to companies in other regions, more often use the centralized system of decision making

under which decisions are not discussed. Employees express their opinion personally most often in

Kyiv, Kharkiv and Donetsk.

3.2.3. Program of Balance between Family and Work

Although only 20% of Ukrainian companies have a program of balance between family and work (see

Fig. 3.2.3.), 76% of companies implement their own practices (Fig. 3.2.3.). The most common practice

of balance between family and work is offering flexible working hours (59.1%). Flexible working hours

are normally offered to employees by companies providing public utility, legal, consulting, catering,

accommodation, travel services and the media. In terms of regional classification, these are companies

located in Lviv.

0 10 20 30 40 50







to promote it


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Absolutelyagree



0

20

40

60

80

100

KharkivRegion

OdesaRegion

DonetskRegion


LvivRegion

KyivRegion

42,3

30,7

30,5

24,5

53,3

5,6

41,1

No

Yes

No

Yes

67,3

32,7

0 20 40 60 80


















80,7

78

71,3

66,1

58,8

42,1

37,4

36,1

34,8

32,4

32

31,4

29,6

23,9

16,6

14,8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60











For moral reasons

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
















0 10 20 30 40


Charity assistance












It takes no part

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70


My conscience











0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Difficult to answer


Lack of time





Tax pressure


Lack of funds

0 10 20 30 40 50 60








0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Difficult to answer






From rumours



0 10 20 30 40 50



Difficult to answer







0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80






The media

Business partners



0 10 20 30 40 50

We survey consumers

Monitoring






Difficult to answer





0 10 20 30 40 50 60



Distant work





61,3

52,1

37,9

19,2

18,9

8,8

8,4

5,6

3,7

0,8

0,1

61,4

15,9

11,0

3,9

3,8

0,1

0,0

62,9

45,5

42,5

42,3

39,9

37,6

33,4

32,4

26,4

19,9

19,6

11,4

10,2

6,9

0,0

63,7

30,9

15,9

6,7

5,1

4,5

2,6

2,3

0,6

21,4

18,5

59,1

12,4

3,8

27,7

7,6

42,1

30,5

18,7

16,2

8,6

8,3

8,1

6,4

5,5

3,8

0,7

0,1

0,0

0,0

50,1

26,6

25,9

14,0

8,5

7,9

5,2

1,0

0,0

53,0

42,1

35,0

20,5

13,8

10,4

8,8

7,1

6,6

0,1

0,1

0,1

77,4

29,6

8,0

5,9

2,2

1,4

0,5

0,4

0,2

76,9

38,5

35,0

25,5

22,7

21,9

21,2

21,0

6,2

1,0

0,5

0,0

72,4

38,5

33,4

30,7

28,0

24,4

17,8

16,1

11,5

0,0


on a regular basis


Every half a year


Once a year

Rarer

55,0

4,8

5,7

8,9

16,5

9,2

34

Every fourth company (27.7%) supports its personnel in caring for their children. They include primarily

agricultural companies and financial services companies; in terms of regional classification, these are

companies located in Kyiv, Donetsk and Odesa.

Figure 3.2.3. Classification of Answers to the Question “What practices of balance between family and

work are implemented by your company?

Every fifth company (18.5%) supports its employees in caring for sick family members. They include

mainly those companies manufacturing industrial products usually located in Donetsk.

The least common practices of balance between family and work include shortened working days/

weeks (12.4%), leave offered to young fathers to care for their children (7.4%) and distant work practices

(3.8%).

The survey results show that there have been cases of gender discrimination in Ukraine when

employing, paying and promoting employees (Table 3.2.1.)

Table 3.2.1. Classification of Answers to the Question “Does your company provide equal terms for

men and women?” (N=600)

Yes No Difficult to answer

In hiring 87,1 7,0 5,9

In paying for work 91,1 3,3 5,6

In the career growth 82,9 3,6 13,5

Most companies operating in the agriculture and construction sectors, as compared to the selection

in general, provide equal terms for men and women when hiring them, which, in our opinion, is caused

by the specific operations of these companies; transport and communication companies, agricultural

companies when paying for work: agricultural companies, companies manufacturing industrial products,

and commercial companies in the career growth.

3.3. RESPONSIBILITY TO THE COMMUNITY

Although most Ukrainian companies believe that charitable assistance to the community is an

aspect of social responsibility (Fig. 1.1.), only one third of companies (37.5%) make social investments

in the community. Social investments of half of them (50%) have not changed for the last five years;

social investments of 46% of them have decreased, and social investments of 4% of them have

0 10 20 30 40 50







to promote it


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Absolutelyagree



0

20

40

60

80

100

KharkivRegion

OdesaRegion

DonetskRegion


LvivRegion

KyivRegion

42,3

30,7

30,5

24,5

53,3

5,6

41,1

No

Yes

No

Yes

67,3

32,7

0 20 40 60 80


















80,7

78

71,3

66,1

58,8

42,1

37,4

36,1

34,8

32,4

32

31,4

29,6

23,9

16,6

14,8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60











For moral reasons

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
















0 10 20 30 40


Charity assistance












It takes no part

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70


My conscience











0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Difficult to answer


Lack of time





Tax pressure


Lack of funds

0 10 20 30 40 50 60








0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Difficult to answer






From rumours



0 10 20 30 40 50



Difficult to answer







0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80






The media

Business partners



0 10 20 30 40 50

We survey consumers

Monitoring






Difficult to answer





0 10 20 30 40 50 60



Distant work





61,3

52,1

37,9

19,2

18,9

8,8

8,4

5,6

3,7

0,8

0,1

61,4

15,9

11,0

3,9

3,8

0,1

0,0

62,9

45,5

42,5

42,3

39,9

37,6

33,4

32,4

26,4

19,9

19,6

11,4

10,2

6,9

0,0

63,7

30,9

15,9

6,7

5,1

4,5

2,6

2,3

0,6

21,4

18,5

59,1

12,4

3,8

27,7

7,6

42,1

30,5

18,7

16,2

8,6

8,3

8,1

6,4

5,5

3,8

0,7

0,1

0,0

0,0

50,1

26,6

25,9

14,0

8,5

7,9

5,2

1,0

0,0

53,0

42,1

35,0

20,5

13,8

10,4

8,8

7,1

6,6

0,1

0,1

0,1

77,4

29,6

8,0

5,9

2,2

1,4

0,5

0,4

0,2

76,9

38,5

35,0

25,5

22,7

21,9

21,2

21,0

6,2

1,0

0,5

0,0

72,4

38,5

33,4

30,7

28,0

24,4

17,8

16,1

11,5

0,0


on a regular basis


Every half a year


Once a year

Rarer

55,0

4,8

5,7

8,9

16,5

9,2

35

increased. As compared to 2005, the number of companies making social investments have dropped.

According to the 2005 survey results, 60.3% of companies provided charity assistance. Obviously, this

fall can be explained by the financial and economic crisis in the country and, perhaps, rethinking/

redistribution of resources for implementing the different aspects of the social responsibility policies

of companies.

Most often social investments are made by large companies and companies located in Donetsk,

Kharkiv and Odesa. In terms of the field of activities, they include primarily construction companies,

communication companies, and companies providing legal, consulting, accommodation, catering,

travel services, and the media. There is no significant difference in the way social investments are

made by companies with different ownership types.

The surveyed companies believe (by priority) that healthcare, assistance to children and education are

the most important sectors for social investments.

As compared to 2005, the social investment priority areas have changed to some extent. Thus,

healthcare has occupied the first position, education moved to the third position instead of assistance

to the disabled, the elderly and the disadvantaged. Obviously, accumulation of non-resolved problems

in the healthcare and education system resulted in a focus on these areas by the nation’s companies

as well.

Most of the surveyed Ukrainian companies provide no assistance to the region (the community) where

the company, its branch office or representative office is located (42% provides no assistance; 16% of

companies provide no assistance, but plan to do it in the future). As compared to 2005, the number of

companies assisting the region (the community) where the company, its branch office or representative

office is located dropped from 66.7% in 2005 to 42% in 2010.

No assistance is provided to the region (the community), where the company, its branch office or

representative office is located, usually by small companies, private and joint-stock companies, and

companies answering that they did not implement social responsibility (79.3% against 24% of companies

implementing social responsibility).

42% of Ukrainian companies said that they provide various assistance to the region where they are

located. In 2010, the common practices of assistance provided to the region (the community) among

companies in 2010 include:

• assistance in the territory development (30.5%),

• job creation programs (18.7%)

• employing the disabled (8.6%),

• contribution to environmental program implementation (8.3%)

• financial assistance to local government authorities in resolving social problems (8.1%) (Fig. 3.3.1).

As compared to 2005, the common types of assistance provided to the community has remained

territory development and job creation programs. In comparison with 2005, the number of companies

providing financial support in resolving the problems of the region has dropped threefold (28.0%

in 2005); the number of companies contributing to environmental project implementation (18.5%

in 2005), sponsoring sports and cultural events (17.1% in 2005), and employing the disabled in the

region (14.6% in 2005) has fallen twofold; the number of companies sponsoring orphan asylums

(schools, sports clubs, etc) (20.2% in 2005) has dropped almost fivefold.

Company size

There are significant differences in the way assistance is provided to the community by companies

with the different size and ownership type. As in 2005, large companies take a more active role in regional

development than small companies.

36

Figure 3.3.1. How does your company helps develop the regions (communities) where it is located or

has its branch and representative offices? (N=600)

Ownership type

While in 2005 most state-owned companies (64.2%) provided financial assistance to local authorities,

in 2010 their number (6.3%) has dropped significantly and become much smaller than the respective

number of private and joint-stock companies.

In 2010, joint-stock companies provide financial assistance to the local authorities more often than

companies with other ownership types and have programs of job creation in the region.

However, the number of state-owned companies, involved in territory development, sponsoring

sports and cultural events, contributing to the environmental project implementation, is higher than the

number of private and joint-stock companies providing such assistance.

Regional aspects

Practically all the companies in Donetsk provide various types of assistance to the local community;

the least active companies providing such assistance are located in Lviv and Kyiv.

There are differences in the way assistance is provided depending on where companies are located.

Thus, financial assistance is provided to local authorities by companies in Kharkiv and Donetsk; companies

in Donetsk have job creation programs; companies in Donetsk and Odesa create jobs for the disabled;

companies in Donetsk contribute to environmental projects; companies in Dnipropetrovsk sponsor

sports and cultural events; most companies in Donetsk, Kharkiv and Dnipropetrovsk develop the territory

where they are located.

3.4. ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY

Environmental responsibility is one of the least popular aspects of social responsibility among Ukrainian

companies. According to the survey’s results, half of national companies implement no environmental

protection practices (Fig. 3.4.1.).

0 10 20 30 40 50







to promote it


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Absolutelyagree



0

20

40

60

80

100

KharkivRegion

OdesaRegion

DonetskRegion


LvivRegion

KyivRegion

42,3

30,7

30,5

24,5

53,3

5,6

41,1

No

Yes

No

Yes

67,3

32,7

0 20 40 60 80


















80,7

78

71,3

66,1

58,8

42,1

37,4

36,1

34,8

32,4

32

31,4

29,6

23,9

16,6

14,8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60











For moral reasons

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
















0 10 20 30 40


Charity assistance












It takes no part

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70


My conscience











0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Difficult to answer


Lack of time





Tax pressure


Lack of funds

0 10 20 30 40 50 60








0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Difficult to answer






From rumours



0 10 20 30 40 50



Difficult to answer







0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80






The media

Business partners



0 10 20 30 40 50

We survey consumers

Monitoring






Difficult to answer





0 10 20 30 40 50 60



Distant work





61,3

52,1

37,9

19,2

18,9

8,8

8,4

5,6

3,7

0,8

0,1

61,4

15,9

11,0

3,9

3,8

0,1

0,0

62,9

45,5

42,5

42,3

39,9

37,6

33,4

32,4

26,4

19,9

19,6

11,4

10,2

6,9

0,0

63,7

30,9

15,9

6,7

5,1

4,5

2,6

2,3

0,6

21,4

18,5

59,1

12,4

3,8

27,7

7,6

42,1

30,5

18,7

16,2

8,6

8,3

8,1

6,4

5,5

3,8

0,7

0,1

0,0

0,0

50,1

26,6

25,9

14,0

8,5

7,9

5,2

1,0

0,0

53,0

42,1

35,0

20,5

13,8

10,4

8,8

7,1

6,6

0,1

0,1

0,1

77,4

29,6

8,0

5,9

2,2

1,4

0,5

0,4

0,2

76,9

38,5

35,0

25,5

22,7

21,9

21,2

21,0

6,2

1,0

0,5

0,0

72,4

38,5

33,4

30,7

28,0

24,4

17,8

16,1

11,5

0,0


on a regular basis


Every half a year


Once a year

Rarer

55,0

4,8

5,7

8,9

16,5

9,2

37

They include primarily small and medium-sized companies and private companies, including those

that provide financial, legal, consulting, catering, hotel and travel services, the media, commercial,

construction and transport companies.

From the regional classification perspective, the largest number of companies not implementing any

environmental practices are located in Lviv, Odesa and Kyiv.

The number of companies implementing no social responsibility policies totals 80.4% as compared to

the companies declaring implementation of social responsibility practices (35.3%).

In comparison with 2005, the number of companies implementing environmnetally responsible

practices (52% in 2005) and the priority of implementing environmental responsibility practices have

not changed; however, the number of companies implementing them has dropped to a large extent.

The most common environmnetal responsibility practices in 2010 include promotion of energy

saving technologies (for 26% of companies) and programs of waste sorting and recycling (for 26% of

companies). It should be noted that the number of companies introducing energy saving technologies

and waste recycling programs has dropped by 1.5 times as compared to 2005 (42.8% and 40.5% in 2005

respectively).

Figure 3.4.1. In what areas has your company implemented environmentally responsible practices?

(N=600)

The least common practices still include measures aimed at protecting water/forest/land, and other

natural resources and measures aimed at curbing emissions into the environment. However, the number

of companies implementing them has dropped fivefold in comparison with 2005 (in 2005, practices of

reduction in emissions into the environment were implemented by 35.4%; 8.5% in 2010; protection of

water/forest/land, and other natural resources: 25.6% and 7.9% of companies respectively).

Reduction in the number of companies continuing to implement environmental protection practices

can be explained by the fact that their implementation requires large investments in modernizing the

existing technologies and equipment, and most companies had no such resources due to the financial

and economic crisis.

Company size

Large and medium-sized companies reduce emissions into the environment, introduce energy saving

technologies, protect water/forest/land, and other natural resources more often than small companies.

Green office programs are more typical of large companies employing over 500 people and small

companies.

0 10 20 30 40 50







to promote it


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Absolutelyagree



0

20

40

60

80

100

KharkivRegion

OdesaRegion

DonetskRegion


LvivRegion

KyivRegion

42,3

30,7

30,5

24,5

53,3

5,6

41,1

No

Yes

No

Yes

67,3

32,7

0 20 40 60 80


















80,7

78

71,3

66,1

58,8

42,1

37,4

36,1

34,8

32,4

32

31,4

29,6

23,9

16,6

14,8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60











For moral reasons

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
















0 10 20 30 40


Charity assistance












It takes no part

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70


My conscience











0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Difficult to answer


Lack of time





Tax pressure


Lack of funds

0 10 20 30 40 50 60








0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Difficult to answer






From rumours



0 10 20 30 40 50



Difficult to answer







0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80






The media

Business partners



0 10 20 30 40 50

We survey consumers

Monitoring






Difficult to answer





0 10 20 30 40 50 60



Distant work





61,3

52,1

37,9

19,2

18,9

8,8

8,4

5,6

3,7

0,8

0,1

61,4

15,9

11,0

3,9

3,8

0,1

0,0

62,9

45,5

42,5

42,3

39,9

37,6

33,4

32,4

26,4

19,9

19,6

11,4

10,2

6,9

0,0

63,7

30,9

15,9

6,7

5,1

4,5

2,6

2,3

0,6

21,4

18,5

59,1

12,4

3,8

27,7

7,6

42,1

30,5

18,7

16,2

8,6

8,3

8,1

6,4

5,5

3,8

0,7

0,1

0,0

0,0

50,1

26,6

25,9

14,0

8,5

7,9

5,2

1,0

0,0

53,0

42,1

35,0

20,5

13,8

10,4

8,8

7,1

6,6

0,1

0,1

0,1

77,4

29,6

8,0

5,9

2,2

1,4

0,5

0,4

0,2

76,9

38,5

35,0

25,5

22,7

21,9

21,2

21,0

6,2

1,0

0,5

0,0

72,4

38,5

33,4

30,7

28,0

24,4

17,8

16,1

11,5

0,0


on a regular basis


Every half a year


Once a year

Rarer

55,0

4,8

5,7

8,9

16,5

9,2

38

Форма власності

The number of state-owned companies implementing energy saving technologies is higher than the

number of companies with other ownership types.

Joint-stock companies implement measures to reduce emissions into the environment more often

than companies with other ownership types.

The number of state-owned and joint-stock companies protecting water/forest/land and other natural

resources is threefold higher than the number of private companies doing it.

Regional aspects

The regional classification showed that companies located in the Donetsk region are more active in

implementing various environmentally responsible practices: they introduce energy saving technologies,

implement waste recycling programs, and take measures to protect water/forest/land and other natural

resources.

The highest number of companies implementing green office programs is located in the Dnipropetrovsk

region.

Field of activities

Measures to reduce emissions into the environment are primarily taken by transport companies;

energy saving technologies are introduced by companies manufacturing consumer goods; waste recycling

programs are implemented by companies manufacturing industrial products; measures to protect natural

resources are taken by agricultural companies; green office programs are implemented by companies

providing legal, consulting, catering, accommodation, travel services, and the media. Financial institutions,

despite the fact that they were leaders in understanding and attributing environmental practices to CSR,

are not leaders in implementing these practices.

Taking into account the consequences of the industrial impact on the environment

In our opinion, quite a small number of companies implementing environmental responsibility

practices can be explained by the need for investments and the fact that companies do not consider the

consequences of the impact of the company’s production or products on the environment. Half of the

representatives of Ukrainian companies (51%) have no clear answer about the way their companies take

into account the possible consequences of the impact of the manufacturer’s performance or products on

the environment. The majority of companies taking account of such consequences do it by measuring

energy and water consumption (38.5%) and 14% of them study public opinion.

Ukrainian companies have no clear answer about their response when a product or manufacturing

process has an adverse effect on the environment, if this aspect is not provided for by the environmental

laws. Thus, 58% of respondents believe that in this case companies will invest funds to remove this effect,

while 42% of them believe they won’t. Companies manufacturing industrial products, construction

companies, and businesses located in Dnipropetrovsk and Donetsk plan to invest funds to remove

(overcome) the adverse effect on the environment.

No significant changes can be traced in comparison with 2005: the number of companies that will

make investments to remove it practically remains the same (62.3% in 2005).

3.5. CONSUMER TREATMENT

One of the key elements of social responsibility is the consumer treatment (Fig. 3.5.1.). The survey results

have shown that for the last few years almost half of Ukrainian companies (from 47% in 2005 to 45% in

2010) have paid great attention to their relations with consumers (total answers “very often” and “often”).

39

However, almost every fourth company (25% in 2005 and 23% in 2009) has never considered the social

responsibility issue in their relations with clients. They include primarily companies not implementing

social responsibility in their activities (63.7% in 2005 and 60.6% in 2009). Only a marginal number of

companies declaring social responsibility implementation (10% in 2005 and 6.2% in 2009) have never

considered the social responsibility issue in their relations with clients.

Approximately one third of companies (27% in 2005 and 31% in 2009) occasionally considered the

issue of their relations with consumers and clients (see Table 3.5.1.).

Figure 3.5.1. What measures does your company take to enhance its responsibility to consumers?

(N=600)

Table 3.5.1. Classification of Answers to the Question “How often has your company considered the issue

of social responsibility in respect to clients or business partners for the last 5 years?” (N=60)

Very often Often Sometimes Never

2005 7,3 39,9 27,5 25,3

2006 9,2 40,1 28,2 22,5

2007 7,7 38,1 33,6 20,7

2008 7,2 38,5 34,6 19,7

2009 6,9 38,5 31,4 23,2

Social responsibility in respect to clients or business partners is often considered by companies providing

legal, consulting, catering, accommodation, travel services, the media, construction companies, and state-

owned companies.

As compared to 2005, the priority of measures aimed at enhancing responsibility to customers has not

changed to a large extent (Fig. 3.5.1.).

Product quality improvement has remained the main practice implemented by companies. However, it

should be noted that the number of such companies dropped from 83.9% in 2005 to 53% in 2010. Every third

company, just like in 2005 (37.3%), holds trainings for the personnel on consumer service. In 2010, slightly

less than half of companies attributed provision of true information and advertisements to consumers (42%)

to their responsibility to consumers. Every fifth company (20%) has a clearly developed system of complaint

handling.

0 10 20 30 40 50







to promote it


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Absolutelyagree



0

20

40

60

80

100

KharkivRegion

OdesaRegion

DonetskRegion


LvivRegion

KyivRegion

42,3

30,7

30,5

24,5

53,3

5,6

41,1

No

Yes

No

Yes

67,3

32,7

0 20 40 60 80


















80,7

78

71,3

66,1

58,8

42,1

37,4

36,1

34,8

32,4

32

31,4

29,6

23,9

16,6

14,8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60











For moral reasons

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
















0 10 20 30 40


Charity assistance












It takes no part

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70


My conscience











0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Difficult to answer


Lack of time





Tax pressure


Lack of funds

0 10 20 30 40 50 60








0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Difficult to answer






From rumours



0 10 20 30 40 50



Difficult to answer







0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80






The media

Business partners



0 10 20 30 40 50

We survey consumers

Monitoring






Difficult to answer





0 10 20 30 40 50 60



Distant work





61,3

52,1

37,9

19,2

18,9

8,8

8,4

5,6

3,7

0,8

0,1

61,4

15,9

11,0

3,9

3,8

0,1

0,0

62,9

45,5

42,5

42,3

39,9

37,6

33,4

32,4

26,4

19,9

19,6

11,4

10,2

6,9

0,0

63,7

30,9

15,9

6,7

5,1

4,5

2,6

2,3

0,6

21,4

18,5

59,1

12,4

3,8

27,7

7,6

42,1

30,5

18,7

16,2

8,6

8,3

8,1

6,4

5,5

3,8

0,7

0,1

0,0

0,0

50,1

26,6

25,9

14,0

8,5

7,9

5,2

1,0

0,0

53,0

42,1

35,0

20,5

13,8

10,4

8,8

7,1

6,6

0,1

0,1

0,1

77,4

29,6

8,0

5,9

2,2

1,4

0,5

0,4

0,2

76,9

38,5

35,0

25,5

22,7

21,9

21,2

21,0

6,2

1,0

0,5

0,0

72,4

38,5

33,4

30,7

28,0

24,4

17,8

16,1

11,5

0,0


on a regular basis


Every half a year


Once a year

Rarer

55,0

4,8

5,7

8,9

16,5

9,2

40

Company size

Large companies take various measures to improve their social responsibility to consumers; however,

as the company’s size grows, the number of companies providing fair information and advertisements to

consumers drops.

Field of activities

Personnel training dedicated to consumer services are held more often by communication companies

and companies providing legal, consulting, catering, accommodation, travel services and the media;

product quality is maintained by commercial companies and companies manufacturing consumer goods;

fair information and advertisements are provided by industrial companies, and companies providing

legal, consulting, catering, accommodation, travel and media services.

Regional aspects

Product quality is more cared for by companies in Dnipropetrovsk and Donetsk; training for the

personnel held by companies in Dnipropetrovsk and Odesa; and fair information and advertisements are

provided by companies located in Donetsk.

Ownership type

State-owned companies, more often than companies with other ownership types, have a clearly

developed system of complaint handling, a hot line for consumers, and openly declare their responsibility

to and care for consumers in the media.

Private and joint-stock companies support their product quality more often than state-owned

companies.

The number of private companies holding training for personnel on consumer services is somewhat

higher than the respective number of state-owned and joint-stock companies.

3.6. TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE COMPANIES’ STAKEHOLDER INTEREST.

DIALOGUE WITH STAKEHOLDERS

Taking account of the stakeholder interest when developing and implementing social responsibility

policies remains quite low in Ukraine (Table 3.6.1.). Companies often take into account the interests of

consumers and government authorities and rarely of non-governmental and research organizations, as

well as educational institutions.

Table 3.6.1. Classification of Answers to the Question “Does your company take account of the

following stakeholders’ interest when developing and implementing social responsibility policies?” (N=600)

Yes No

Government authorities 57,0 43,0

Commercial organizations/business organizations 20,4 79,6

Trade unions and other employee associations 27,9 72,1

Consumers 81,8 18,2

Non-governmental organizations 12,3 87,7

Research organizations, educational institutions 16,7 83,3

The main source of ideas for developing and implementing social responsibility programs/practices

for the majority of Ukrainian businesses (71%) is the company’s management. In every fourth Ukrainian

41

company (27.5%), proposals relating to the development and implementation of social responsibility

programs/practices are made by the company’s employees. The national companies receive less

proposals or ideas from the local government authorities (18%), the public (13%), and business partners

(5%). Occasional information is the source of ideas about social responsibility (the media) for every tenth

Ukrainian company (10%).

Company sizeа

For small and medium-sized companies, the main sources of ideas, apart from the company’s

management, include the company’s employees.

The public, local government authorities, company departments, and the media are the sources of

information for large companies employing over 500 persons.

A marginal number of medium-sized companies named business partners as sources of ideas.

Форма власності

The number of state-owned and joint-stock companies, for which the main sources of information

for the development and implementation of social responsibility include the public, local government

authorities, the company’s employees and departments, is higher than the number of private companies.

Regional aspects

The industry and regional classification has shown the following differences:

• non-financial organizations are the main source of ideas primarily for construction companies

and companies located in Dnipropetrovsk;

• the public: for agricultural companies, commercial companies, and companies located in

Donetsk ;

• local government authorities: for agricultural companies, companies providing household and

public community services, communication companies, and companies located in Donetsk,

Kharkiv and Lviv ;

• company employees: for companies providing legal, consulting, catering, accommodation, travel

services, the media, and businesses located in Odesa;

• company departments and occasional information: for companies manufacturing industrial

products and businesses located in Donetsk ;

• business partners: for companies manufacturing industrial products and businesses located in

Kharkiv and Kyiv .

Normally, when social responsibility programs/practices are developed and implemented, businesses

co-operate with the main source of ideas. Most Ukrainian companies (77%) develop and implement

social responsibility programs/practices on their own. These are normally small and medium-sized

businesses, private and joint-stock companies. The highest number of businesses developing social

responsibility programs and practices on their own are concentrated in sectors such as manufacture of

industrial products, finance, and transport in Lviv, Odesa and Kyiv.

Just as in 2005, local government authorities are the main external partners of Ukrainian companies

in developing social responsibility programs/practices (29.6%). 8% of Ukrainian businesses co-

operate with business partners. The level of cooperation with other stakeholders: non-governmental

organizations, the media, research (specialized) institutions, is quite low (Fig. 3.6.1).

A higher number of large companies, as compared to small and medium-sized companies, and a

larger number of state-owned companies, in comparison with private and joint-stock companies, co-

operate with public authorities. The local public authorities are the main partner mostly for agricultural

companies, public utility companies, and communication companies. The highest percentage of

businesses cooperating with the government authorities are located in the Lviv and Kharkiv regions.

42

The larger a company is, the more often it co-operates with business partners, research institutions,

PR or advertising agencies and international organizations. State-owned companies more often, as

compared to private and joint-stock companies, co-operate with research, non-governmental, and

international organizations, while joint-stock companies co-operate with business partners and the

media.

Figure 3.6.1. Whom do you co-operate with when developing social

responsibility programs/practices?

The industry and regional classification has also shown a various level of cooperation. Thus,

construction companies, companies manufacturing industrial products co-operate with business partners

more often than businesses in other sectors of the economy.

Agricultural companies co-operate with the media, non-governmental and research organizations

more often than with other companies. A high percentage of businesses in Donetsk co-operate with the

media when developing social responsibility programs/practices, while companies located in Lviv co-

operate with business partners.

3.7. SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY IMPLEMENTATION EFFICIENCY

Assessing the impact of social responsibility programs/practices, respondents have given the following

answers:

• 62% of Ukrainian companies believe that they are really useful for society, communities,

• 70%: improvement of the personnel’s attitude to the company;

• 53%: improvement of the company’s reputation;

• 48%: improvement of the company’s economic indicators (total answers “rather yes” and “yes”).

Only 13% of companies experienced an easier IPO procedure (only large companies are interested in

the IPO), 26% improved their relations with investors, and 30% facilitated implementation of innovations.

72.5% of companies declaring implementation of social responsibility emphasized improvement of

the company’s reputation, 64% stressed improvement of economic indicators, 79.4% underlined the real

utility for society, 86.7% emphasized improvement of the employees’ attitude to the company and 41.3%

pointed out the innovation imperative.

0 10 20 30 40 50







to promote it


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Absolutelyagree



0

20

40

60

80

100

KharkivRegion

OdesaRegion

DonetskRegion


LvivRegion

KyivRegion

42,3

30,7

30,5

24,5

53,3

5,6

41,1

No

Yes

No

Yes

67,3

32,7

0 20 40 60 80


















80,7

78

71,3

66,1

58,8

42,1

37,4

36,1

34,8

32,4

32

31,4

29,6

23,9

16,6

14,8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60











For moral reasons

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
















0 10 20 30 40


Charity assistance












It takes no part

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70


My conscience











0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Difficult to answer


Lack of time





Tax pressure


Lack of funds

0 10 20 30 40 50 60








0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Difficult to answer






From rumours



0 10 20 30 40 50



Difficult to answer







0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80






The media

Business partners



0 10 20 30 40 50

We survey consumers

Monitoring






Difficult to answer





0 10 20 30 40 50 60



Distant work





61,3

52,1

37,9

19,2

18,9

8,8

8,4

5,6

3,7

0,8

0,1

61,4

15,9

11,0

3,9

3,8

0,1

0,0

62,9

45,5

42,5

42,3

39,9

37,6

33,4

32,4

26,4

19,9

19,6

11,4

10,2

6,9

0,0

63,7

30,9

15,9

6,7

5,1

4,5

2,6

2,3

0,6

21,4

18,5

59,1

12,4

3,8

27,7

7,6

42,1

30,5

18,7

16,2

8,6

8,3

8,1

6,4

5,5

3,8

0,7

0,1

0,0

0,0

50,1

26,6

25,9

14,0

8,5

7,9

5,2

1,0

0,0

53,0

42,1

35,0

20,5

13,8

10,4

8,8

7,1

6,6

0,1

0,1

0,1

77,4

29,6

8,0

5,9

2,2

1,4

0,5

0,4

0,2

76,9

38,5

35,0

25,5

22,7

21,9

21,2

21,0

6,2

1,0

0,5

0,0

72,4

38,5

33,4

30,7

28,0

24,4

17,8

16,1

11,5

0,0


on a regular basis


Every half a year


Once a year

Rarer

55,0

4,8

5,7

8,9

16,5

9,2

43

Company sizeа

Large companies, in particular those employing over 500 people, more often than small and medium-

sized companies experienced a positive impact of implementing social responsibility programs/practices

on the economic indicator improvement, the company’s reputation improvement, an easier IPO

procedure and improvement of relations with investors.

Ownership type

Joint-stock companies more often than companies with other ownership types emphasized a positive

impact on indicators such as the real utility for society, improvement of the employees’ attitude to the

company, improvement of relations with investors and a facilitated IPO procedure.

Field of activities

Companies manufacturing consumer goods, providing legal, consulting, catering, hotel services, and

construction companies believe that implementation of social responsibility programs are really useful

for society.

Construction companies emphasize social responsibility programs that improve relations with

investors, implement innovations and facilitate IPO procedures.

The highest number of communication companies, companies manufacturing industrial products,

construction companies, and companies providing consulting, legal, catering, hotel services, and the

media emphasize improved employee attitude towards the company as a result of implementing social

responsibility programs.

A higher number of companies manufacturing industrial products than others point to economic

indicator improvement.

Reputation improvement was experienced primarily by communication companies, companies

manufacturing industrial products, and those providing consulting, legal, catering, hotel services, as

well as the media.

Regional aspects

Businesses located in Donetsk, Odesa and Dnipropetrovsk more often than companies in other regions,

emphasize real utility for society as a result of implementing social responsibility programs; businesses in

Odesa, Kharkiv and Donetsk underline improved employee attitude.

Companies in Donetsk, more often than companies located in other regions, emphasize an impact

of socially responsible activities on the economic indicator improvement, reputation improvement,

improvement of relations with investors, implementation of innovations and a facilitated IPO

procedure.

Researchers believe that it can be explained

by the fact that 84% of Ukrainian companies

do not trace the results of implementing social

responsibility programs/practices. Only half of

them (43%) plan to conduct monitoring and

assessment. Only 14% of Ukrainian companies

perform random assessment of the results of implementing social responsibility programs/practices.

These are usually small companies, companies manufacturing industrial products, companies providing

consulting, legal, catering, hotel services, and the media, communication companies, state-owned and

joint-stock companies, located in Kharkiv and Donetsk.

Over 2/3 Ukrainian companies believe that social responsibility practices have an impact on the

company’s ability to recruit and retain the best employees (77%), form a positive image and improve

reputation (76%), and create advantages (64%). Half of respondents believe that social responsibility

From�20%�to�30%�of�Ukrainian�companies�were�unable�to�give�a�clear�answer�about�the�results�of�implementing�social�responsibility�programs/practices.

44

practices influence improvement of relations with the authorities (54%), the local community and non-

governmental organizations (51%), improve the financial indicators in the future (50%), and contribute to

the company’s long-term sustainability (48%). Slightly more than one third of companies believe that social

responsibility increases or leads to new sales markets, helps establish relations with key business partners

(40%), enhances the company’s investment attraction (38%), helps find new partners (37%), and attract

investments (37%).

As compared to 2005, the rating of the key aspects of the companies’ performance impacted by social

responsibility has practically not changed. Both in 2005 and 2010, most companies emphasized that

implementation of social responsibility has an impact on the company’s ability to find and retain the best

employees (77% in 2010 and 72.4% in 2005), form a positive image and improve reputation (76% in 2010

and 77.8% in 2005). In 2005, the third result of social responsibility implementation was improvement of co-

operation with the government authorities (61.6%); in 2010, this factor moved down to the fourth position

(54%), and the third position was occupied by the creation of competitive advantages (64%).

Company size

More large companies, than small and medium-sized companies, pointed out to an impact on such

aspects as contribution to the company’s long-term sustainability, establishment of relations with the local

community and non-governmental organizations, establishment of relations with the public authorities,

finding new partners and innovation implementation.

Field of activities

An impact of social responsibility policies on an increased or new sales market was emphasized by the

largest number of companies providing financial services; on the company’s financial indicator improvement

by companies providing consulting, legal, catering, hotel services and the media; on the improvement

of relations with business partners by agricultural products; on improvement of relations with public

authorities by communication companies; on improvement of relations with the local community and

non-governmental organizations by companies operating in the financial sector; on finding new partners

by agricultural companies; on the innovation implementation by agricultural companies, companies

manufacturing industrial products and construction companies.

45

CONCLUSIONS:

1. Labour practices are the common area of

social responsibility for Ukrainian companies:

three-quarters of the surveyed companies im-

plement various socially responsible practices

aimed at their own personnel. The priority of

socially responsible practices for the company’s

own personnel has remained the same since

2005: labour compensation practices, regula-

tion of the working hours and non-discrimina-

tion in employment.

2. Only one third of companies make social

investments in the community development; a

higher percentage of businesses provide diverse

assistance to the region where they operate. The

common types of assistance, as compared to

2005, still include territory development and

job creation programs; however, the number

of companies providing financial assistance to

the public authorities in resolving problems of

the region has dropped threefold; the number of

businesses contributing to environmental pro-

ject implementation and sponsoring sports and

cultural events has fallen twofold. Large compa-

nies are leaders in implementing programs of

assistance to the region where they operate.

3. Environmental protection is the least pop-

ular area of social responsibility. The common

practices among companies implementing en-

vironmental responsibility include energy sav-

ing technology implementation, waste sorting

and recycling programs. Large companies im-

plement various environmentally responsible

practices more often than small and medium-

sized companies.

4. Product quality improvement has re-

mained the key social responsibility practice of

large companies, in respect to consumers and

partners. However, as the companies grew in

size, the number of those providing fair informa-

tion and advertisements to consumers reduces.

5. The 2010 survey results show that, simi-

lar to 2005, social responsibility failed to be-

come part of the strategic management of most

Ukrainian companies: only a marginal number

of companies have a social responsibility strat-

egy; no separate functional social responsibility

departments have started to be formed; compa-

nies have no clear mechanism of controlling im-

plementation of social responsibility programs/

practices. Only one fifth of companies has a spe-

cial budget and prepares a social (non-finan-

cial) report.

6. Most Ukrainian companies believe that

social responsibility programs/practices are

useful for society and the region, have an impact

on the employee attitude to the company, im-

prove the company’s reputation and economic

indicators. Over two-thirds of Ukrainian busi-

nesses believe that social responsibility prac-

tices affect the company’s ability to recruit and

retain the best employees, form a positive image

and improve its reputation, create competitive

advantages.

7. The survey results have shown that

Ukrainian companies understand and perceive

more and more social responsibility as a tool for

the companies’ competitiveness improvement.

8. The level of information openness of com-

panies for the public continues to be low, as well

as the level of co-operation of Ukrainian com-

panies with other organizations in developing

and implementing social responsibility pro-

grams/practices. For most companies, informa-

tion about the company is designed for in-house

use only. The number of companies using exter-

nal channels of information (TV programs, pub-

lications in the media) is lower than the number

of those using internal information channels

(in-house press, webpage).

46

9. The level of co-operation with key groups

of stakeholders is quite low. Companies usually

take into account the interest of consumers and

the public authorities, and in rare cases the in-

terests of non-governmental and research or-

ganizations, as well as educational institutions.

In most cases, entities develop and implement

such programs on their own, normally taking

account consumers and the local government

authorities alone. As in 2005, the key external

partners in developing and implementing social

responsibility programs are the public authori-

ties.

10. Most Ukrainian companies do not trace

the results of implementing social responsibility

programs/practices, and only half of them plan

to perform monitoring and assessment.

47

4. SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY IMPLEMENTATION PERSPECTIVES

The majority of Ukrainian companies (76.5%) believe that preferential taxation for companies

implementing social responsibility may stimulate the company’s social responsibility development (Fig.

4.1.).

Over two thirds of companies (38.5%) believe that reduction of the administrative pressure by the

local government authorities will stimulate implementation of social responsibility.

An important incentive for implementing social responsibility for every third Ukrainian company

(35%) is a positive example of implementing social responsibility programs/practices in the world.

For almost every fourth and fifth company in the country, the incentives for implementing programs

and practices will include proposals to businesses of the local government authorities about the regional

development programs (25%), improvement of the consumer and community’s trust and loyalty in

general (23%), more intensive coverage of social responsibility practices in the media (22%), public

acknowledgement by the authorities and the community (21%), availability of a bank of social programs

or a bank of information in the region (21%) (it should be noted that this factor is more important

for companies not implementing social responsibility (25.2%) than for companies implementing it

(19.3%)).

For the last five years, the rating of the key incentives for implementing social responsibility has

not changed. As compared to 2005, the number of companies believing that the key incentives

for implementing social responsibility is preferential taxation (74.1%) and proposals of the local

authorities about the region’s social development programs (22%) has practically not changed. 2010

has seen a reduction in the number of companies stating that the incentive to implement social

responsibility for them will be reduction in the administrative pressure by the public authorities

(from 51.4% in 2005 to 38.5%). One of the key factors of implementing social responsibility for

companies in 2010 is presentation of the positive examples of social responsibility implementation

in the world.

Figure 4.1. What or who can stimulate social responsibility of your business?

0 10 20 30 40 50







to promote it


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Absolutelyagree



0

20

40

60

80

100

KharkivRegion

OdesaRegion

DonetskRegion


LvivRegion

KyivRegion

42,3

30,7

30,5

24,5

53,3

5,6

41,1

No

Yes

No

Yes

67,3

32,7

0 20 40 60 80


















80,7

78

71,3

66,1

58,8

42,1

37,4

36,1

34,8

32,4

32

31,4

29,6

23,9

16,6

14,8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60











For moral reasons

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
















0 10 20 30 40


Charity assistance












It takes no part

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70


My conscience











0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Difficult to answer


Lack of time





Tax pressure


Lack of funds

0 10 20 30 40 50 60








0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Difficult to answer






From rumours



0 10 20 30 40 50



Difficult to answer







0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80






The media

Business partners



0 10 20 30 40 50

We survey consumers

Monitoring






Difficult to answer





0 10 20 30 40 50 60



Distant work





61,3

52,1

37,9

19,2

18,9

8,8

8,4

5,6

3,7

0,8

0,1

61,4

15,9

11,0

3,9

3,8

0,1

0,0

62,9

45,5

42,5

42,3

39,9

37,6

33,4

32,4

26,4

19,9

19,6

11,4

10,2

6,9

0,0

63,7

30,9

15,9

6,7

5,1

4,5

2,6

2,3

0,6

21,4

18,5

59,1

12,4

3,8

27,7

7,6

42,1

30,5

18,7

16,2

8,6

8,3

8,1

6,4

5,5

3,8

0,7

0,1

0,0

0,0

50,1

26,6

25,9

14,0

8,5

7,9

5,2

1,0

0,0

53,0

42,1

35,0

20,5

13,8

10,4

8,8

7,1

6,6

0,1

0,1

0,1

77,4

29,6

8,0

5,9

2,2

1,4

0,5

0,4

0,2

76,9

38,5

35,0

25,5

22,7

21,9

21,2

21,0

6,2

1,0

0,5

0,0

72,4

38,5

33,4

30,7

28,0

24,4

17,8

16,1

11,5

0,0


on a regular basis


Every half a year


Once a year

Rarer

55,0

4,8

5,7

8,9

16,5

9,2

48

Company sizeа

Medium-sized companies, more often than small and large companies, regard preferential

taxation as the key incentive; for small companies, incentives consist in the positive practices of social

responsibility implementation and their global reputation, while large companies see an incentive in the

acknowledgment from authorities and the community.

Ownership type

Joint-stock companies pay greater attention to incentives such as public acknowledgment by

the authorities and the community, more coverage of social responsibility practices in the media, and

availability of a bank of social programs or an information bank in the region.

It should also be noted that an incentive such as the improvement of consumer and community

trust and loyalty in general is less important for state-owned companies than for private and joint-stock

companies

Regional aspects

Improvement of the consumer and community trust and loyalty in general is an incentive for almost a

threefold higher number of companies located in Donetsk than for the selection in general.

For most companies in Lviv and Kharkiv, the key incentive may be the administrative pressure

reduction by the local authorities; for companies located in Kyiv incentives include coverage of social

responsibility practices in the media, proposals of the local authorities to businesses about the region’s

social development programs, and availability of a bank of social programs or an information bank in the

region.

Field of activities

Preferential taxation is an incentive for companies manufacturing consumer goods. For this

sector’s companies, important incentives also include better coverage of social responsibility

practices in the media and public acknowledgment by the authorities and the community in

general: these factors were chosen by twice as many companies than for the selection in general.

The administrative pressure reduction is the main incentive for implementing social responsibility

for transport companies.

Obstacles for social responsibility implementation

Lack of resources is the main obstacle for implementing social responsibility programs/practices for

27% of Ukrainian companies; the tax pressure for one third of companies (33%); imperfect regulations

for 31% of companies. For 28% of Ukrainian companies, the key obstacles include lack of information

(38.5%) and experience (28%) in the process of implementing social responsibility programs/practices,

inexistence of governmental and non-governmental organizations for assistance (18%). Every tenth

surveyed company (11%) emphasized the main obstacle consists in a lack of or weak social interest

(Fig. 4.2.).

As the company grows in size, the value of the following factors decreases: lack of funds, unavailable

information about the principles of and approaches to social responsibility implementation, and the tax

pressure.

Regional aspects

Depending on the region where the company is located, there can be seen the following differences:

Lack of funds is the key obstacle for companies in Lviv, Kharkiv and Kyiv.

For those located in Kharkiv, Odesa and Kyiv, the tax pressure is the main obstacle preventing them from

implementing social responsibility.

49

Figure 4.2. Answer to the Question “What obstacles are the most serious ones for your company in

implementing social responsibility programs/practices?” (N=283)

As compared to 2005, the main obstacle in implementing social responsibility is the same: lack of

financial resources. However, a number of companies for which the financial factor is the most important,

increased from 55% in 2005 to 72.4% in 2010.

Companies operating in Donetsk, despite their high level and intensity of social responsibility program/

practice implementation, do lack experience, information about the principles of and approaches to

implementing social responsibility, mechanisms for controlling how the allocated funds are used, and

access to governmental and non-governmental organizations which would provide assistance.

Lack of time became an obstacle for companies located in Dnipropetrovsk and Odesa; imperfect

regulations for companies operating in Dnipropetrovsk and Kharkiv.

Ownership types

Marginal changes can be seen in factors such as a lack of funds, which is more important for state-

owned companies, and the group of factors which could be referred to as a lack of knowledge and

experience in implementing social responsibility: poor experience, undeveloped mechanisms of social

responsibility implementation, inexistence of governmental and non-governmental organizations that

could provide assistance, impossibility of controlling the allocated funds: all of these are more important

for joint-stock companies than state-owned and private companies.

Field of activities

Lack of funds is a key obstacle for implementing social responsibility for transport companies. Tax

pressure for commercial companies; insufficient information and poor experience in implementing

social responsibility for companies manufacturing consumer goods.

Imperfect regulations become the key obstacle for half of companies manufacturing industrial

products.

The inexistence of governmental and non-governmental organizations, which could provide

assistance, was emphasized by twice as many companies of the communication and financial sectors than

for the selection in general.

Twice as many companies providing consulting, legal, catering, accommodation, travel and media

services, than for the selection in general, believe that the main obstacle for implementing social

responsibility consists in an absence of social demand.

0 10 20 30 40 50







to promote it


0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35



Absolutelyagree



0

20

40

60

80

100

KharkivRegion

OdesaRegion

DonetskRegion


LvivRegion

KyivRegion

42,3

30,7

30,5

24,5

53,3

5,6

41,1

No

Yes

No

Yes

67,3

32,7

0 20 40 60 80


















80,7

78

71,3

66,1

58,8

42,1

37,4

36,1

34,8

32,4

32

31,4

29,6

23,9

16,6

14,8

0 10 20 30 40 50 60











For moral reasons

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
















0 10 20 30 40


Charity assistance












It takes no part

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70


My conscience











0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Difficult to answer


Lack of time





Tax pressure


Lack of funds

0 10 20 30 40 50 60








0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Difficult to answer






From rumours



0 10 20 30 40 50



Difficult to answer







0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80






The media

Business partners



0 10 20 30 40 50

We survey consumers

Monitoring






Difficult to answer





0 10 20 30 40 50 60



Distant work





61,3

52,1

37,9

19,2

18,9

8,8

8,4

5,6

3,7

0,8

0,1

61,4

15,9

11,0

3,9

3,8

0,1

0,0

62,9

45,5

42,5

42,3

39,9

37,6

33,4

32,4

26,4

19,9

19,6

11,4

10,2

6,9

0,0

63,7

30,9

15,9

6,7

5,1

4,5

2,6

2,3

0,6

21,4

18,5

59,1

12,4

3,8

27,7

7,6

42,1

30,5

18,7

16,2

8,6

8,3

8,1

6,4

5,5

3,8

0,7

0,1

0,0

0,0

50,1

26,6

25,9

14,0

8,5

7,9

5,2

1,0

0,0

53,0

42,1

35,0

20,5

13,8

10,4

8,8

7,1

6,6

0,1

0,1

0,1

77,4

29,6

8,0

5,9

2,2

1,4

0,5

0,4

0,2

76,9

38,5

35,0

25,5

22,7

21,9

21,2

21,0

6,2

1,0

0,5

0,0

72,4

38,5

33,4

30,7

28,0

24,4

17,8

16,1

11,5

0,0


on a regular basis


Every half a year


Once a year

Rarer

55,0

4,8

5,7

8,9

16,5

9,2

50

Government role

The number of Ukrainian companies believing that in the near future the government should engage

businesses more actively in resolving social problems, is twice higher than the number of those believing

that the state should resolve social issues on its own, and this needs improvement of the tax discipline and

levy of more taxes (68.7% against 37.3% respectively).

As compared to 2005, the number of those believing that the government should resolve social

problems on its own by improving the tax discipline dropped from 50.8% in 2005 to 37.3% in 2010.

Just as in 2005, there are no significant differences in selecting the different entrepreneurship

strategies. From the regional classification perspective, the “fiscal” strategy is the most popular one in Lviv,

and the “motivating” one is common in Kyiv. In 2010, the “motivating” strategy has also prevailed among

companies in Donetsk. There are some differences in selecting the social responsibility development

strategy depending on the company’s ownership type. Thus, the “fiscal” strategy was chosen by a number

of state-owned companies while the «motivating» one was chosen by joint-stock companies.

Analysis by the sectors of the economy has revealed that the “fiscal” strategy is the most popular

among agricultural and construction companies, while the “motivating” strategy among construction

and communication companies.

Tow-thirds of Ukrainian companies believe that the social responsibility development will need the

following measures in the years to come:

• developing and adopting the National Social Responsibility Development Strategy (74%) (total

answers “absolutely agree” and “rather agree”),

• holding a high-profile informational and educational campaign dedicated to social responsibility

(73%),

• implementing a separate educational program for consumers (71%),

• introducing principles of social responsibility in the activities of the public authorities and local

government agencies (69.7%).

Half of Ukrainian companies believe that in the foreseeable future it will be necessary to introduce a

national rating of socially responsible companies (56%), activate participation of business associations

in implementing social responsibility principles and practices (50.5%), and introduce CSR courses in the

educational programs of high schools (53.4%).

The lowest number of Ukrainian companies believes that it could be reasonable to introduce a separate

CSR position in the entities (29%) (the number of those rejecting this idea is slightly less than 24.9%) and

increase budgets of the organizations for CSR programs/practices (45.8%).

51

CONCLUSIONS:

1. The list of the main incentives and

obstacles for implementing social responsibility

has not changed for the last five years. It should

be noted that there is a growing number of

companies for which factors such as insufficient

information, lack of positive examples of social

responsibility implementation, and the lack of

organizations able to provide assistance are

more important; i.e. the companies’ potential

readiness to implement programs/practices

does exist, all that is needed is external help in

obtaining information and knowledge.

2. For most Ukrainian companies, the key

incentives for implementing social responsibility

include preferential taxation of companies

implementing social responsibility (however,

lack of preferential taxation as the main

obstacle in implementing social responsibility

programs/practices was emphasized by only

3.4% of companies, which are not involved

in implementing social responsibility), the

administrative pressure reduction by the local

government authorities, and presentation of

the positive examples of social responsibility

program/practice implementation in the

world.

3. The main obstacle for implementing

social responsibility programs/practices for

Ukrainian companies is lack of funds, tax

pressure and imperfect regulations. Other

obstacles were mentioned: lack of information

and experience, and the lack of governmental

and non-governmental organizations able to

provide assistance.

4. The number of Ukrainian companies

believing that in the near future the government

should engage businesses more actively in

resolving social problems is twice higher than

the number of those believing that the state

should resolve social issues on its own, and this

needs improvement of the tax discipline and

levy of more taxes. As compared to 2005, the

number of those believing that the government

should resolve social problems on its own by

improving the tax discipline dropped from

50.8% in 2005 to 37.3% in 2010.

5. Two-thirds of Ukrainian companies

believe that in the near future the social

responsibility development will need

development and adoption of the National

Social Responsibility Development Strategy,

holding of a high-profile informational and

educational campaign dedicated to social

responsibility, introduction of the principles of

social responsibility in the activities of the public

authorities and local government agencies.

The lowest number of Ukrainian companies

believes that it could be reasonable to introduce

a separate CSR position in the entities and

increase budgets for CSR programs/practices.

52

5. ВИСНОВКИ

РОЗУМІННЯ СОЦІАЛЬНОЇ ВІДПОВІДАЛЬНОСТІ:

1.�Протягом�останніх�п’яти�років�значні�зміни�

відбулися� на� рівні� поінформованості� про� со-

ціальну� відповідальність� залежно� від� розміру�

підприємств,� регіону� їх� розміщення� та� сфери�

діяльності.�У�дослідженні�2010�року�простежу-

ється�пряма�залежність�—�чим�більше�підпри-

ємство,�тим�вищий�рівень�поінформованості.

2.� Більшість� підприємств� до� соціальної� від-

повідальності� відносять� надання� благодійної�

допомоги� громаді,� розвиток� власного� пер-

соналу�та�чесне�введення�бізнесу.�Як� і�у�2005�

році,� лише� третина� компаній� асоціюють� здій-

снення� екологічних� проектів� та� участь� у� регі-

ональних�проектах�розвитку�із�соціальною�від-

повідальністю.� Найменша� частка� підприємств�

як�у�2005�році,�так�і�у�2010-му,�віднесла�до�со-

ціальної�відповідальності�такий�її�аспект,�як�від-

критість�компанії.��

3.� Підприємства� здебільшого� усвідомлено�

сприймають� соціальну� відповідальність.� Част-

ка� компаній,� які� вважають,� що� бізнес� повинен�

брати�активну�участь�у�вирішенні�соціальних�та�

екологічних� проблем,� у� порівнянні� з� 2005� ро-

ком,� зросла� вдвічі.� Це� може� свідчити� про� два�

моменти:� по-перше,� концепція� соціальної� від-

повідальності� одержує� визнання� з� боку� укра-

їнських� підприємств� і� усвідомлення� немину-

чості� їх� активної� участі� у� вирішенні� соціальних�

і�екологічних�проблем�суспільства,�а�по-друге,�

що�влада�активніше�почала�залучати�бізнес�до�

вирішення� соціальних� та� екологічних� проблем�

громад.�

4.� �Половина�українських�підприємств,�вва-

жає,�що�політика�і�практика�соціальної�відпові-

дальності� повинна� впроваджуватися� кожною�

компанією.�

53

1.� Протягом� останніх� років� інтенсивність�

впровадження� соціально� відповідальних� захо-

дів�зросла�з�31,3�%�компаній,�які�робили�це�по-

стійно,�у�2005�році�до�55�%�у�2010�році.�

2.� Якщо� у� 2005� році� впроваджували� соці-

ально� відповідальні� заходи� переважно� великі�

підприємства,� то� у� 2010-му� суттєвої� різниці� у�

впровадженні� соціальної� відповідальності� та�

інтенсивності� здійснення� заходів� із� соціальної�

відповідальності� залежно� від� розміру� підпри-

ємства�не�простежується.�

3.� Серед� основних� чинників,� які� спонука-

ють�компанії�впроваджувати�соціально�відпо-

відальні�заходи,�на�першому�плані�стоять�мо-

ральні� міркування� та� внутрішнє� спонукання.�

Проте� досить� вагомою� є� частка� таких� фак-

торів,�як:�зростання�продажів�компанії,�копію-

вання�дій�конкурентів�та�запит�з�боку�органів�

місцевої� влади.� У� порівнянні� з� 2005� роком,�

пріоритетність� чинників� для� компаній� не� змі-

нилась,� проте� у� двічі� зросла� частка� компаній,�

для� яких� конкурентний� чинник� став� досить�

вагомим.

4.�Як� і�у�2005�році,�політика�соціальної�від-

повідальності� українських� компаній� спрямо-

вується,� передусім,� на� співробітників� компанії�

та� споживачів.� Переважну� частину� заходів� із�

соціальної� відповідальності� можна� віднести� до�

трудових�практик:�заходи� із�розвитку�власного�

персоналу,�відмова�від�використання�примусо-

вої� та� дитячої� праці,� відсутність� дискримінації,�

впровадження� програм� поліпшення� умов� пра-

ці,� а� також� —� до� заходів� із� захисту� здоров’я� і�

безпеки�споживачів.�Найменш�поширеними�для�

українських�підприємств�є�заходи�щодо�захисту�

природних�ресурсів�та�взаємодії�з�громадою.�

5.�Майже�третина�українських�компаній�за-

значила,�що�вона�не�здійснюють�заходи� із�со-

ціальної� відповідальності.� Для� більшості� з� них�

програми� /� заходи� із� соціальної� відповідаль-

ності� не� є� актуальними� через� брак� коштів,� а�

кожна� десята� компанія,� яка� зазначила,� що� не�

здійснює�заходи�із�соціальної�відповідальності,�

вважає,� що� це� функція� держави,� а� не� бізнесу.�

Лише� незначна� частина� українських� підпри-

ємств� (в� межах� похибки)� продемонструвала�

абсолютне� неприйняття� соціальної� відпові-

дальності.

ІНТЕНСИВНІСТЬ ТА ПРІОРИТЕТИ ВПРОВАДЖЕННЯ СОЦІАЛЬНОЇ ВІДПОВІДАЛЬНОСТІ

54

ПРАКТИКИ СОЦІАЛЬНОЇ ВІДПОВІДАЛЬНОСТІ

1.�Найпоширенішим�напрямком�соціальної�від-

повідальності�для�українських�підприємств�є�тру-

дові�практики�—�три�чверті�опитаних�українських�

компаній� здійснюють� різноманітні� соціально� від-

повідальні� заходи� для� власного� персоналу.� Не-

змінною�з�2005�року�залишилась�пріоритетність�

соціально� відповідальних� заходів� щодо� власних�

працівників:� заходи� з� оплати� праці,� регулювання�

робочого� часу� та� відсутності� дискримінації� при�

прийомі�на�роботу.

2.� Тільки� третина� компаній� здійснює� соціаль-

ні� інвестиції� в� розвиток� громади,� трохи� більша�

частка�підприємств�надає�різноманітну�допомогу�

регіону,� де� розташовані� їх� підприємства.� Найпо-

ширенішими�видами�допомоги�громаді,�у�порів-

нянні�з�2005�роком,�так�і�залишилися�благоустрій�

територій�та�програми�створення�робочих�місць;�

однак�втричі�скоротилася�частка�підприємств,�які�

надають� фінансову� допомогу� владі� у� вирішенні�

проблем�регіону;�вдвічі�—�частка�підприємств,�які�

сприяють�реалізації�екологічних�проектів�та�нада-

ють�спонсорську�допомогу�спортивним�та�куль-

турним� заходам.� Лідерами� у� впровадженні� про-

грам�надання�допомоги�регіону,�де�знаходиться�

підприємство,�є�великі�компанії.

3.� Одним� із� найменш� популярних� напрямків�

соціальної� відповідальності� є� захист� навколиш-

нього� середовища.� Серед� тих� підприємств,� які�

впроваджують� екологічну� відповідальність,� най-

поширенішими� є� практики� впровадження� енер-

гозберігаючих�технологій�та�програми�сортування�

та�утилізації�відходів.�Великі�за�розміром�компанії,�

частіше�за�малі�та�середні,�здійснюють�різноманітні�

заходи�із�екологічної�відповідальності.

4.� Підвищення� якості� продукції� залишилося�

головним� заходом� соціальної� відповідальності�

компаній,� особливо� великих,� щодо� споживачів� і�

партнерів.� Проте� зі� зростанням� розміру� підпри-

ємств� зменшується� частка� тих,� хто� надає� чесну�

інформацію�та�рекламу�для�споживачів.

5.�За�результатами�дослідження�2010�року,�як�

і�в�2005-му,�можна�дійти�висновку�—�соціальна�

відповідальність�ще�не�стала�частиною�стратегіч-

ного� менеджменту� більшості� українських� ком-

паній:� лише� незначна� кількість� підприємств� має�

стратегію� соціальної� відповідальності,� не� роз-

почався� процес� формування� окремих� функціо-

нальних�підрозділів�із�соціальної�відповідальності,�

компанії� не� мають� чіткого� механізму� контролю�

впровадження�програм/заходів�із�соціальної�від-

повідальності.� Лише� п’ята� частина� компаній� має�

спеціальний� бюджет� та� готує� соціальний� (нефі-

нансовий)��звіт.�

6.�Більшість�українських�компаній�вважає,�що�

програми/заходи� із� соціальної� відповідальності�

принесли�дійсну�користь�для�суспільства� і�регіо-

ну,�вплинули�на�поліпшення�ставлення�працівни-

ків�до�компанії,�покращили�репутацію�компанії�та��

поліпшили�її�економічні�показники.�Понад�дві�тре-

тини� українських� підприємств� вважають,� що� за-

ходи� із�соціальної�відповідальності�впливають�на�

можливості� організації� знайти� та� втримати� кра-

щих� працівників,� сформувати� позитивний� імідж� і�

покращити� репутацію,� створити� переваги� перед�

конкурентами.

7.� Результати� дослідження� засвідчили,� що�

українські�компанії�все�більше�розуміють�і�сприй-

мають� соціальну� відповідальність� як� інструмент�

підвищення�конкурентоздатності�підприємства.

8.�Продовжує� існувати�достатньо�низький�рі-

вень� інформаційної� відкритості� для� суспільства�

українських�компаній�та�рівень�їх�співпраці�з�інши-

ми�організаціями�у�розробці�і�впровадженні�про-

грам�/�заходів�із�соціальної�відповідальності.�Для�

більшості�компаній�інформація�про�них�лише�для�

внутрішнього�користування.�Частка�підприємств,�

які� використовують� зовнішні� канали� інформації�

(телепередачі,�публікації�в�ЗМІ)�менша�за��тих,�хто�

використовує� внутрішні� канали� інформації� (вну-

трішня�преса,�веб-сторінка).�

9.� Рівень� співпраці� з� основними� групами�

стейкхолдерів� достатньо� низький.� Найчастіше�

компанії� враховують� інтереси� споживачів� та� ор-

ганів� державної� влади,� найменше� —� недержав-

55

них� та� науково-дослідних� організацій,� навчаль-

них�закладів.�Здебільшого�організації�самостійно�

розробляють�і�впроваджують�такі�програми,�вра-

ховуючи,�переважно,�тільки� інтереси�споживачів�

та� органів� місцевої� влади.� Основним� зовнішнім�

партнером�у�розробці�та�впровадженні�програм�

із�соціальної�відповідальності,�як�і�у�2005�році,�за-

лишаються�органи�влади.

10.�Переважна�більшість�українських�компаній�

не� відслідковує� результатів� впровадження� про-

грам� /� заходів� із� соціальної� � відповідальності,� з�

них� тільки� майже� половина� планує� проводити�

моніторинг�та�оцінку.�

ПЕРСПЕКТИВИ ВПРОВАДЖЕННЯ СОЦІАЛЬНОЇ ВІДПОВІДАЛЬНОСТІ

1.� Перелік� основних� стимулів� та� перешкод� у�

впровадженні� соціальної� відповідальності� про-

тягом�останніх�п’яти�років�не�змінився.�Слід�зау-

важити�зростання�частки�підприємств,�для�яких�

більше� важать� такі� чинники,� як:� недостатність�

інформації,� позитивних� прикладів� впроваджен-

ня�соціальної�відповідальності,�організацій,�які�б�

змогли�надати�таку�допомогу,—�тобто,�потен-

ційна� готовність� підприємств� до� впровадження�

програм/заходів� існує,� необхідна� лише� зовніш-

ня�допомога�в�отриманні�інформації�і�знань.

2.�Для�переважної�більшості�українських�ком-

паній�основними�стимулами�у�впровадженні�со-

ціальної� відповідальності� є� пільгове� оподатку-

вання�підприємств,�які�впроваджують�соціальну�

відповідальність� (однак� відсутність� пільгового�

оподаткування�як�основної�перешкоди�впрова-

дженню� програм/заходів� із� соціальної� відпові-

дальності�окреслили�лише�3,4�%�компаній,�які�не�

займаються�впровадженням�соціальної�відпові-

дальності),�зменшення�адміністративного�тиску�

місцевих� органів� влади� та� ознайомлення� з� по-

зитивними�прикладами�впровадження�програм�

/�заходів�із�соціальної�відповідальності�в�світі.

3.� Головною� перешкодою� у� здійсненні� про-

грам/заходів� із�соціальної�відповідальності� �для�

українських�компаній�є�брак�коштів,�податковий�

тиск� та� недосконалість� нормативно-правової�

бази�щодо�сприяння�реалізації�соціальної�відпо-

відальності.�Також�було�названо�такі�перешкоди,�

як:� недостатність� інформації� і� досвіду� у� процесі�

впровадження� програм/� заходів� із� соціальної�

відповідальності,� відсутність� державних� та� не-

державних�організацій,�які�б�могли�допомогти.

4.� Майже� вдвічі� більша� частка� українських�

підприємств�вважає,�що�в�найближчій�перспек-

тиві� державі� потрібно� стимулювати� залучення�

бізнесу� для� його� активнішого� втручання� у� ви-

рішення� соціальних� проблем,� ніж� тих,� хто� вва-

жає,�що�держава�має�сама�вирішувати�соціальні�

питання,� для� чого� треба� посилити� податкову�

дисципліну� та� залучати� більше� доходів� у� казну.�

У�порівнянні�з�2005�роком,�частка�тих,�хто�вва-

жає,�що�держава��має�сама�вирішувати�соціаль-

ні� проблеми,� посиливши� податкову� дисципліну,�

трохи�зменшилася�з�50,8�%�у�2005�році�до�37,3�

%�у�2010�році.�

5.� На� думку� двох� третин� українських� під-

приємств,� у� найближчі� роки� для� розвитку� со-

ціальної�відповідальності�потрібно�розробити�й�

ухвалити� Національну� стратегію� розвитку� со-

ціальної� відповідальності,� запровадити� окрему�

просвітницьку� програму� для� споживачів,� про-

вести� широку� інформаційно-просвітницьку�

кампанію� з� питань� соціальної� відповідальності,�

впровадити� принципи� соціальної� відповідаль-

ності� в� діяльність� органів� державної� влади� і�

місцевого� самоврядування.� Найменша� частка�

українських� підприємств� вважає� за� доцільне�

запровадити�окрему�посаду�з�КСВ�в�організа-

ціях�та�збільшити�їх�бюджети�на�програми�/�за-

ходи�з�КСВ.��

56

�

ПЕРЕЛІК МАЛЮНКІВ І ТАБЛИЦЬ

Номер Назва Сторінка

Табл. 1. Параметри вибірки. 1

Табл. 1.1. Поінформованість підприємств про соціальну відповідальність в розрізі розміру підприємств. 13

Табл. 1.2. Поінформованість про соціальну відповідальність залежно від регіону. 13

Мал. 1.1.Розподіл відповідей респондентів на запитання «На Ваш погляд, що означає вираз «соціальна відповідальність бізнесу?».

14

Мал.1.2. Розподіл відповідей на запитання «Наскільки Ви згодні з наступним твердженням про роль біз-несу в житті суспільства?»

16

Мал.1.3. Розподіл відповідей респодентів на запитання «Вважається, що бізнес є соціально відповідаль-ним, якщо він несе відповідальність за вплив своїх рішень і діяльності на суспільство і навко-лишнє середовище та сприяє сталому розвитку суспільства. Яке Ваше ставлення до цього?»

17

Мал. 2.1.

Розподіл відповідей на запитання «Чи здійснює Ваша компанія заходи, які можна віднести до соціально відповідальних? Під соціально відповідальними заходами розуміється добровільна (лише за власною ініціативою) турбота підприємства про соціальні (добробут працівників та громади) та екологічні проекти.

20

Мал. 2.2. Впровадження соціальної відповідальності, регіональний розподіл. 20

Мал. 2.3. Розподіл відповідей на запитання «Які з наступних соціально відповідальних заходів здійснює Ваша компанія?»

21

Мал. 2.4. Частота здійснення соціально відповідальних заходів. 22

Мал. 2.5. Розподіл відповідей респондентів на запитання «Які чинники спонукають Вашу компанію здій-снювати соціально відповідальні заходи?»

23

Мал. 2.6. Розподіл відповідей респондентів на запитання: «Чому програми / заходи із соціальної відпо-відальності не є актуальними для Вашої компанії на даний момент?»

26

Табл. 3.1.1. Розподіл відповідей на запитання «Чи робила Ваша компанія соціальний (нефінансовий) звіт протягом останніх 5 років?»

29

Табл. 3.1.2.Розподіл відповідей на запитання «Чи мала Ваша компанія спеціальний бюджет (або статтю в бюджетах за напрямком) для проведення програм / заходів із соціальної відповідальності про-тягом останніх 5 років?»

29

Табл. 3.1.3. Розподіл відповідей на запитання «Як змінився бюджет (стаття в бюджеті), який був призначе-ний на проведення програм / заходів із соціальної відповідальності протягом останніх 5 років?»

30

Мал. 3.2.1. Соціально відповідальні заходи компаній. 32

Мал. 3.2.2. Розподіл відповідей на запитання «Яким чином Ви дізнаєтесь про думку Ваших працівників про важливі рішення, прийняті на підприємстві та діяльність підприємства взагалі?»

33

Мал. 3.2.3.Розподіл відповідей на запитання «Які практики балансу між роботою і сім’єю впроваджуються у Вашій компанії?»

34

Табл. 3.2.1.Розподіл відповідей на запитання «Чи забезпеченні рівні умови на Вашому підприємстві для жінок і чоловіків?»

34

Мал. 3.3.1.Розподіл відповідей на запитання «Як саме Ваша компанія допомагає розвитку регіонів (громад, місцевостей), де вона знаходиться або має свої філіали, представників?»

36

Мал. 3.4.1.Розподіл відповідей на запитання «В яких напрямках Ваша компанія здійснювала екологічно відповідальні заходи?»

37

Мал. 3.5.1.Розподіл відповідей на запитання «Які саме заходи проводить Ваша компанія щодо підвищення своєї відповідальності перед споживачами?»

39

Табл. 3.5.1. Розподіл відповідей на запитання «Як часто у Вашій компанії розглядались питання соціальної відповідальності щодо клієнтів або партнерів по бізнесу протягом останніх 5 років?»

40

Табл. 3.6.1. Розподіл відповідей на запитання «Чи враховує Ваша компанія при розробці та впровадженні політики соціальної відповідальності інтереси таких зацікавлених сторін?»

41

Мал. 3.6.1. Розподіл відповідей на запитання «З ким Ви співпрацюєте, коли розробляєте Ваші програми / заходи із соціальної відповідальності?»

42

Мал. 4.1.Розподіл відповідей на запитання «Що або хто, на Вашу думку, може стимулювати соціальну від-повідальність Вашого бізнесу?»

47

Мал. 4.2.Розподіл відповідей на запитання «Які перешкоди є найсерйознішими при здійснен-ні програм / заходів із соціальної відповідальності Вашої компанією?»

49

Documents

Corporate social responsibility 2005-2010