The flood waters have receded in Srinagar and elsewhere in the Valley, but any relief is offset by the debris and devastation that are being uncovered. It is a tragedy of unimaginable proportions, but it also seemingly had one missing element?the involvement of corporate houses in disaster relief. From media reports, it seemed that it was mainly the army, the National Disaster Management Authority, local volunteers and NGOs which were involved in relief and rescue. Other organisations like the Red Cross and Oxfam did their bit since that is what they were created for, but there was little mention of corporate involvement. Most companies that responded, like Godrej, donated money, while Mahindra & Mahindra probably did the most constructive work. Mahindra Consulting Engineers, in tandem with the state government, has undertaken the development of an eco-friendly village cluster with disaster-resistant dwelling units and associated infrastructure facilities. BSNL, Airtel, Vodafone and Reliance Communications offered free calling facilities, but for a limited period.

Overall, however, corporate involvement was glaringly absent. Admittedly, Kashmir is a difficult state to operate in, but in the face of such a massive disaster, corporate involvement would have sent a positive signal. The world over, reactive corporate social responsibility (CSR) in response to natural disaster brings up complex questions. The high-pressure response required to confront a human tragedy creates a unique set of circumstances far removed from the parameters within which CSR initiatives normally operate. Yet, it is increasingly evident that corporate involvement is not just expected by the public, but has a beneficial impact on the company?s image. In America, companies like Walmart and Home Depot have emergency response managers with the requisite training and background to undertake such CSR efforts. The Disaster Relief Trend Tracker presented the findings of a global study around consumer expectations and disaster relief as a CSR activity. The research, conducted among a demographically representative sample of 10,287 adults in 10 countries, including India, suggests that 87% of the world?s consumers believe companies must play a role in disaster response. The research was done in the wake of destructive events like the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, one of the deadliest in human history.

The report also refers to positive brand messaging for those companies involved in disaster response and suggests that consumers had great faith in companies to respond?it was believed by consumers that they could do so more effectively than government agencies and that they should leverage their ?unique assets? to assist. Yet, it is a difficult road to take, considering the tumult and chaos that characterise the aftermath of a disaster. Corporates need to tread with sensitivity, and motives will always become an issue. There are also CSR reactions to what in business-speak is known as ?bad episodes? where businesses are culpable, such as the Bhopal disaster or the collapse of a garment factory in Bangladesh. Union Carbide was later bought by Dow Chemicals, but its name and brand image were destroyed forever by the Bhopal tragedy. Since then, there has been considerable research into corporate response following natural disasters. The research suggests that private-sector organisations will always have their motivation questioned, but for larger, well-established corporations with a sustained record of responding to such disasters, the benefits are enormous. Jim McGowan was director-general of Queensland Emergency Services. He acknowledges that ?it is hard for corporations to reconcile publicity with purity of intent?, particularly when media coverage spotlights attempts at corporate branding while involved in disaster relief.

Clearly, in today?s globalised world, a firm?s implementation of CSR has acquired a deeper meaning. The concept of CSR ?aims to embrace responsibility for corporate actions and to encourage a positive impact on the environment and stakeholders, including consumers, employees, investors, communities and others?. The business dictionary defines CSR as ?A company?s sense of responsibility towards the community and environment (both ecological and social) in which it operates?. Increasingly, there is pressure from shareholders to know about CSR activities. Most companies in India are still hesitant to highlight their CSR initiatives, but now, with corporate image becoming increasingly important, stakeholders are expecting the organisation to be seen to be doing the right things in terms of acting in the greater interests of society, particularly in the context of massive natural disasters like the one in J&K. Conversely, many companies will be reluctant to act because of the tightrope walk involved; being cautious about not exploiting the human tragedy and knowing that not doing anything can also negatively impact the company image. Indeed, research has shown that there are some companies that unashamedly align their CSR programmes with profit-making strategies. The real dilemma for corporates is whether to act when a natural disaster strikes and there is the greatest need for aid and humanitarian action, or to get involved in post-disaster relief and rehabilitation. Some corporates will only act in areas where they have a significant market presence or where they are headquartered. The bottomline lies in a United Nations-sponsored study which concluded that it was the humanitarian and ethical instincts of the existing CEO or chairman and his/her core team that dictated a company?s response to a natural disaster, and not branding or history or geography.

The writer is Group Editor, Special Projects & Features, The Indian Express