Judging from our conversations with companies across the spectrum, there is a high degree of frustration. The current approach by business, which resembles a fragmented and piecemeal attempt at finding solutions, has not contributed to any meaningful breakthrough in this enormously complex and challenging task of putting education back on track.

After listening to the growing frustration about finding a role for business that delivers significant impact in the educational arena, we agreed to host the upcoming New Orleans summit April 27-29 Meeting the 21^st Century Challenge: A Summit on How Business Can Help Transform U.S. Education.

By now most everyone inside and outside the business community is well acquainted with the precipitous indicators of American education that continue to slide in a downward spiral. The frustration of companies whose economic success and sustainability is directly impacted by educational achievement here in the United States grows more and more palpable each year. There’s also a sense of futility building as we watch the situation unfold. Despite fairly active involvement by the business community, the depth of the dilemma and the challenge continue to grow. Solutions are in short supply, and the fragmented efforts by corporations and others to address educational issues have reached a stage where even seasoned veterans in this area are feeling fatigue, frustration and failure.

And so the summit is a call to the business community to put aside the narrow interests and preconceptions of the problem and re-examine new approaches and new solutions. New Orleans was chosen very purposely, and serves as a great host for this meeting. Having experienced an unimaginable storm and its aftermath, the region has moved through stages of shock, disbelief and despair. Out of this pain has emerged an opportunity for a rebirth of the city. It seems fitting for New Orleans to host a meeting of the corporate community to come together to discuss different perspectives and approaches and create a new dialogue that resets the corporate approach to education.

In this forum the business community will take stock of its successes and failures and give itself a score card on its impact and effectiveness in achieving education success. The business leaders will need to consider what new collaborations could and should look like, collaborations among and between businesses, and collaborations with other sectors. This will be a time to begin reimagining shared leadership, and to create new pathways for concerned and invested folks from the corporate and non-corporate worlds. It will be a time to look at scalable solutions and break away from business as usual.

The April summit presents a unique and timely opportunity for those in corporate America who are working and leading in addressing the challenges of education in their communities and across the country. They will be part of a remarkable group of leaders combining powers from across the country to create new beginnings and breathe a new spirit of revitalization. There is nothing more energizing than the possibility of new beginnings and exciting breakthroughs to solve one of our most challenging social problems.

Click here to learn more about the Business-Education Summit and to register.

The volatile economic climate we’re all facing has been dominant in our minds as we selected keynote speakers and designed the breakout sessions and workshops. Ever the optimist, I favored the Center focusing on the opportunity side of these extraordinary times. The conference, with the theme of “Leading Change, Finding Opportunity”, will examine how business must adjust to the new dynamics created by the economic meltdown.

I believe this moment in history will challenge the soundness of corporate citizenship and test the mettle of those who manage this area. At the conference in San Francisco I’ll be taking measure of how citizenship issues are holding up under the financial pressures of the day. I hope to leave with more evidence of the connection between how a company manages its responsibilities to society and the level of trust, confidence and goodwill it receives in the marketplace.

Integrating corporate citizenship into the core business strategy and managing it well are critical for the successful operation of companies. How this gets communicated is also essential – especially for reputational purposes and stakeholder relationship building.

To signal the importance of communication, the Center launched a competition seeking the best short video that tells a corporate citizenship story. The winner will be announced during the Monday dinner program. We had 25 remarkable entries, all of which met the objective of “communicating for a better world.” Check out all the entries at www.BCCorporateCitizenship.org/filmfestival.

I’m proud to say the conference has weathered the economic storm and we expect close to 400 attendees. We have also heard from many who wanted to attend but couldn’t because of company travel limitations. To share the rich content with those who can’t be there, we will use our web site as a news portal for what’s happening in breakout sessions and keynote speeches and will be posting on our Center blog a few times each day of the conference. You can get these updates and all our blog posts delivered to your email or as an RSS feed. Please consider offering a response to these blog postings so we can get an “outside” perspective.

I’d also like to acknowledge the 25 corporate sponsors who demonstrate their leadership role in corporate citizenship and a commitment to strengthening the field with their support of the conference. The lead sponsor is Intel, convening sponsor The Dow Chemical Company. Other sponsors are: Accenture, Fidelity, Kaiser Permanente, State Street, UPS, Baxter, FedEx, Haley & Aldrich, ING, Levi Strauss & Company, Microsoft, Mohawk Fine Papers, Northrop Grumman, Petro-Canada, Sprint, Target, TransCanada, ARAMARK, CEMEX, CH2M HILL, Toyota, Verizon and Wells Fargo.

Check out our conference guide and see what the conference has to offer.

This is starting to feel a little bit like my visit to Argentina in the spring of 2002, right after the unthinkable happened. One of the most prosperous countries on the globe – a can’t-miss poster child for the glories of globalization that at one time fed much of the world – suddenly imploded. The basic securities and infrastructure of Argentine society, things we take for granted as they did, suddenly collapsed. Banks and banking went under, middle class folks in droves lost their homes, and security at every level disintegrated. Sound familiar? Now, I don’t bring this up to frighten or prophesize Armageddon in the United States. I only seek to provide some perspective on the tenuous times that we currently find ourselves in.

In April of 2002 the U.S. Department of State had asked me to spend a week in Argentina at the request of a number of business, government and university groups that wanted to talk about corporate citizenship. I was somewhat stunned that they wanted to talk about this of all things, given the wide spread chaos erupting across the country that I had read about and seen on the nightly news. But as it turned out, it was an amazing time to look at some of our basic assumptions of society and a great time to talk about the roles of business, government and civil society. But more about that in a bit.

In late 2001 and the early part of 2002, the economic situation in Argentina had deteriorated at an unprecedented speed. By the time I arrived, the peso had gone from 3-to-1 to the dollar in January to 1-to-1 in April. The government had frozen bank deposits triggering the collapse of the baking systems. On the streets long lines of very angry people formed each day hoping to get their money out of the bank. “If I see a banker walking down the street,” one particularly upset man told me, “I will punch him in the mouth.” At night you would see middle-class families, who only a few months before had mortgages, rolling out their beds on the street because they had lost their homes. Mobs from the poorer sections of Buenos Aires were looting the supermarkets. Short of war or natural disaster, you really could not imagine a more chaotic scene.

So what I found in my weeklong series of talks and discussions across the country was a fundamental breakdown of the existing social contract. Government officials were blaming the incompetence and greed of bankers and the narrow self interests of the business community. Businesses were pointing their finger at the chronic corruption that defined government, and the civil society was fed up with both sectors who they felt had no commitment to civil and public life.

Since then I have I returned to Argentina a few times, most recently this past December. Not much has really improved. More than five years later, society remains seriously damaged from the unthinkable eruption and it continues to wander, looking for a return to happier days.

As I reflect on this today while we are in the midst of unprecedented and unscripted times, I can’t help but think: Could the unthinkable happen to us. Could our banking system implode and could the Dow go below 1,000, or even lower? Could the housing crisis turn even darker and the so-called toxic assets really pollute the pond we live in?

The truth is we don’t know. We have great faith that our more sophisticated systems would not allow that, but I have to think that not too deep in the recesses of our minds we ponder the unthinkable from time to time. It is just one of those times when it seems anything is possible.

One positive thing I did walk away with from Argentina is a deep appreciation for the tenuousness of the social contract and a much greater appreciation of leadership at all levels. Just as in Argentina, we are in the midst of redefining the role of business and at the same time redefining the role of government. Despite the strong ideological camps that have defined both Wall Street capitalists and Washington politicians, the roles and responsibilities of government and business are being renegotiated. If this dissolves into protracted finger pointing and years of fruitless ideological battles, we may well descend a lot lower and start to resemble the Argentine environment.

Which brings me to my final and perhaps most important insight from my experience in Argentina. At the end of the day it all comes down to leadership. The ability to create a shared vision – and establish a loud voice for that vision – is at the heart of leadership.  And it was abundantly clear that this was in short supply and continues to be to this day in Argentina.

In the midst of rancor we will need exceptional leadership that does more than lean across the aisle. True leadership will require crossing the rigid boundaries of the sectors to cobble together a shared vision. As citizens we have a set of shared values that might have to be dusted off so we can gain the perspective of what lies ahead and what it will take for the courageous leadership essential to rebuilding from the ruins of the current crisis.

I am ultimately a half-full type of guy and will bet on us pulling through. What do you think of our odds?

This has led me to recall a much earlier time in my life when President Kennedy declared the goal of putting a man on the moon within 10 years. Maybe that is why I was quite taken by an article in a recent issue of the Harvard Business Review by Gary Hamel, one of the more sage management gurus. In the piece, he describes how he brought together a distinguished group of management scholars and business leaders to lay out a road map for reinventing management.

Their immediate goal was to create a list of make or break challenges that should be the focus of energy for management innovators everywhere. He referred to these challenges as “management moon shots” and acknowledged that he was inspired by an exercise by the U.S. National Academy of Engineering that proposed 14 grand engineering challenges such as reverse engineering the human brain. Why shouldn’t managers and scholars commit to equally ambitious goals?

So I immediately thought corporate citizenship professionals should use these extraordinary times to envision our own moon shot. Will there ever be a better time to capitalize on the uprooted markets and the cracks in the foundations of finance and capitalism? How could their be a more perfect time, a more propitious environment where questions are trumping answers and where leadership and vision are in such short supply?

Is this not the best time to think boldly and creatively around the game changing that we have for a long time felt was necessary for a sustainable capitalism and for achieving a just and sustainable world?

What emerged as Hamel’s management moon shots reveals that the time for citizenship is before us. Just look at the first two that were formulated:

• Ensure that the work of management serves a higher purpose. Tomorrow’s management practices must focus on the achievement of socially significant and noble goals.
• Fully embed the ideas of community and citizenship in management systems.

I might have expected these results from a retreat of corporate citizenship practitioners and academics – but from management gurus? What this really tells me is that the underlying essence of corporate citizenship has now become critical to business success. Maybe we have come a lot farther along on our journey than I had thought, or maybe the time has really arrived for citizenship.

In any event these findings suggest several things to me.

1. Integrating and aligning corporate citizenship is critical to the success of business.
   We have talked about this for some time. But while the awareness and understanding of strategic integration has made its way into the literature and rhetoric, it has not been deeply embedded in the frameworks and practices within companies. We need to accelerate our translation of the aspiration and the desire into the planning and implementation of citizenship, and build it into the core of the business. The time has come to lift up citizenship and drive it into the business at a time when others are finally coming around to understanding the value proposition.
2. Branding corporate citizenship
   I am not convinced that most folks, including those in senior management, really understand corporate citizenship – from its value proposition to its usefulness to both business and social goals. We have been aware for some time now about the confusion (Isn’t corporate citizenship an oxymoron? Isn’t it about philanthropy and obeying the law?). Consequently, without a platform of awareness and demonstrated value, it becomes virtually impossible to jump into strategy, value creation and integrating citizenship into the business. So while the opportunity is here to raise citizenship to new heights, there remains significant work to be done on the foundation.
3. Readiness
   I am not convinced that corporate citizenship professionals in most firms are ready to assist management in this moon shot. Too few understand the business. Most have not created effective relationships with key internal stakeholders and have not articulated the vision and voice of leadership that will be necessary for moving into the next circle. Although great strides have been made over the past few years, there is no established game plan for just the occasion that is now emerging. The wind of change is blowing all around us but we’ll never reach the distant shores if we don’t have the savvy to tack and fill the sails of corporate citizenship. What a shame it would be if, as the conditions shift in our favor, we are simply not ready to take advantage of the circumstances.
4. A call to arms
   Now is the time for the corporate citizenship community to come together so we can create our moon shots. In front of us lies a historic opportunity that we may not see again. In short, this is an opportunity to create visionary goals that will inspire, stretch and mobilize us; that will inspire us and pull in the growing crowds of folks from many places who are trying to find new ways to create a more just and humane society. Finding the new balance between economic and social goals and between the success of the company and the success of the society is both the challenge and the opportunity. Are we ready? Anyone out there want to help pull this together?

I will continue to address this theme in future blogs and focus on the new set of challenges that are facing corporate citizenship managers dealing with this volatile and unforgiving business and economic environment. I’ll also be suggesting a few possible moon shots that could launch corporate citizenship into the future.

In the meantime, I would love to know what moon shots you might envision.

My advice to business:

1. get used to more public scrutiny;
2. listen to the sensible folks on Main Street;
3. show a little humility;
4. get to work rebuilding the trust of the public and the economy of the country.

Banks received more than a new infusion of cash today. They’ve been given an opportunity to rebuild public trust. Spared many restrictions, the banks are now in a position to show the country they can lead us out of our economic mess.

If the business sector wants to hold onto its place as the economic engine of our society, it needs to step up and demonstrate it can get the economy going again. Putting the new resources made available today into play is key to stimulating the economy. But it can also serve as a tool for business to rebuild trust if done with more transparency and a willingness to be accountable to taxpayers.

As Secretary Geithner said, the public support being offered to banks is a privilege, not a right, and is extended not for the benefit of the banks but for the benefit of the country. In return for the bailout, it’s fair to say most taxpayers expect these businesses to behave as active and responsible citizens. That means making loans available to businesses that form the backbone of the community, homeowners who keep up the tax base and consumers who are a vital part of a robust economy.

How well the banks perform regarding responsiveness, accountability and transparency in the short term will likely determine how much more government oversight and control will follow. A demonstration that banks are willing to engage in meaningful self regulation will go a long way in the future.

Most importantly, business needs to do what it does best — create jobs and drive the economy.

While many of us are worried about our 401k plans, houses and jobs, something even more fundamental is beginning to find its way into our discourse – the future of capitalism. This somewhat unsettling conversation has begun to bubble up to the surface as we try to understand the roots of the current economic situation and find solutions that stick.

While we throw bailouts, stimulus packages and anything else we think has a chance of reversing fortunes against the wall, we are still left with a sickening feeling that the darkness of the current downturn may not lend itself to any quick fix. 

In fact, the banking crisis, the Bernie Madoff ponzi schemes, sub-prime mortgages and toxic assets might be only manifestations of something larger, more systemic, and more problematic than anything we have even imagined. We saw a glimpse of what this might be in the meltdown in Iceland last month. But in truth we are still absorbing the reality of what is unfolding in front of us and holding out hope – but not much beyond that.

Most of us are either too young or not quite old enough to have a good perspective on the global economy and the forces of globalization that have shaped and characterized the world we know.

The freeing of markets has unleashed many unintended consequences not envisioned by the architects of global capitalism. Key issues ranging from the growing inequality gap, persistent poverty and negative consequences of loose regulation to environmental degradation  and chronic corruption are increasing the call for a  re-examination of the current state of capitalism and challenging us to create a version that can better address these issues and build in different trade-offs.

While many have prospered over the past two decades through global capitalism – more than a quarter of a billion people pulled out of poverty in China in the past decade – too many are sinking further and further into persistent poverty.

There are in effect a series of cracks appearing in the foundation of capitalism, cracks that need to be seriously examined. Perhaps, as Bill Gates suggested last year at Davos, it is time for creative capitalism. We need new approaches that can build on the aspects of capitalism that have worked so well, while finding new ways to offset the downsides that have opened up the fissures in our society.

Fareed Zakaria penned a very interesting and provocative piece last month in Newsweek – “Can Capitalism be Saved” - that generated a great deal of comment and reaction. In looking over the landscape Zakaria, like many others, observed radically new and by some measure troubling developments.

Banks and automobile manufacturing are being bailed out by the government. New interventions into the housing industry portend a much increased government role than capitalism as we have known it would have ever tolerated. Credit markets are broken and trust in the financial and banking systems are about as low as they can go. Even the nationalization of banks has become a viable option in some quarters. Look out, here comes socialism.

But one of the benefits of the crisis is that it allows a more open and honest examination of the social and economic systems that underpin our societies. And the very nature of capitalism should be the subject of much discussion, since the underlying principles and assumptions of capitalism are being turned on their head. By some measures the very notion of government bailing out the private sector is contrary to the basic concept of capitalism, and from other perspectives signals its end.

The current crisis has brought government and its role back to the top of the agenda. While waves of globalization had kept government in a subservient role, the new environment prompts calls for government to lead and legislate the way forward. The political system seems to be where the muscle and the answers are coming from, and that is not something we have seen in capitalism in theory or in practice for quite some time.

So how can we begin to understand what led us to this point in time and what will lead us to the next iteration, modification or even new paradigm of capitalism?

Opinions and theories abound. Perhaps it has been more about the excessively weak role of government than it has been about the corporate sector. On the other hand, have we been witnessing the evolution of an extreme capitalism over the past decade that is now undergoing a long overdue correction? Does capitalism need a few tweaks or a radical overhaul?

Under any scenario some things are clear.

The extremes of capitalism will be tamed and modified primarily through additional internal and external oversight. Externally, some form of oversight will have to emerge to address the excesses that have led to the current meltdown. The coming debates in Congress, unlike the rush to Sarbanes-Oxley to quickly fix what was termed the bad apples of Enron, will have to open up a more complex dialogue. Hopefully this will result in new oversight mechanisms and governance principals that will not depress and snuff out the amazing innovation that capitalism brings to the table, but is able to create better incentives and brakes to insure a more sustainable model.    

Internally, business must adapt more quickly and more pro-actively to the twin forces of transparency and accountability. The public and media focus on excessive compensation, bonuses, corporate jets and the like speaks to the fact that too many business leaders are blind to the new operating environment and the new expectations of business as citizen. The culture of self is now bumping headlong into the demands of society.

Boards and executive suites have to become more open and engaged with key stakeholders and not excessively focused on the single metric of profit. In addition, business must be more agile in incorporating the new measures of reputation, authenticity and accountability into their operating models. Value creation and sustaining business in the 21^st century require a very different governance and business model, one that creates effective relationships and works closely with a range of key stakeholders, creates a transparency and accountability that speaks to the values of the company, and develops new standards and metrics of business success.

There is little doubt some form of capitalism will emerge from this work out – after all, what’s the alternative? Capitalism, for all its weaknesses and defects, still is better in the long run than other economic systems.

It is increasingly clear, however, that capitalism as we know it in the United States is neither viable nor sustainable in its current form. We are headed into a long overdue re-examination of what is working and what is not, and moving toward a new iteration.

The question is whether it will be the creative capitalism that Bill Gates envisioned, or some new conceptualization that brings a more even sense of justice and equity, and a new form that will create a true model of sustainability. 

Time to get engaged in the debate.

This call to the nation is also a call to American business. The price and promise of citizenship is at the heart of the reconfiguration of business that is currently playing itself out in the midst of the most critical economic crisis in several generations.

The concept of business having responsibilities to society has been going through its own transformation for the past 10 years. Indeed, a great deal of rethinking and recalibrating corporate responsibility has been taking place, positioning citizenship at the heart of the enterprise. As Lee Scott, the chief of Walmart, said this month speaking to the National Retail Federation: “Let me be clear about this point. There is no conflict between delivering value to shareholders and helping solve bigger societal problems.”

But just as President Obama is challenging all of us as citizens, the private sector has to take this challenge seriously both as a key component of business success in the 21^st century and as a citizen responsible for doing its part creating a sustainable society. As Lee Scott emphasizes, the two are not mutually exclusive and in fact are intricately entwined with each other.

So what are the implications of the price and the promise of citizenship?

For too long we have been aware of the price that business has paid by not taking citizenship seriously, and especially by not seeing it as a critical component of sustainable business. The plummeting loss of trust in business – sparked by obsessive attention to profits and short-term gains, disregard of environmental standards and excessive executive compensation – built a reputation that dispelled any notion of meaningful citizenship. The attempt to use charitable contributions and visible community involvement in the midst of core misbehavior and callousness was laid bare by Enron, among others. So the price for ignoring citizenship has become quite clear in recent times.

Today’s price for companies will mean a more significant engagement and involvement that will clearly manifest to all stakeholders that business contributions to society will be deeds and not words, leadership and not follower-ship, and active and visible engagement, not simply checks and boosterism.

It will require a significantly deeper engagement of the tough social problems that Mr. Scott referenced, from education to health care; from creating an energy independent and sustainable country, to insuring affordable health care for all. It will require putting brands aside and holding hands together in a new spirit of collective leadership and citizenship.

The price of citizenship will be to create a new capitalism that values business and social sustainability in the same breath. The hardcore measure of profits will have to be tempered by progress in citizenship, and a new belief that one feeds the other.

The price of citizenship will be to create new measures of business success, to find new ways to use the total assets of a company to address social problems. The price of citizenship will be to reinvent citizenship within the firm, embed it throughout the business in its relationships with stakeholders, its products and services, and in the very processes of conducting business. 

While paying the price will involve more than the cost of a simple makeover, the value of citizenship’s promise will far outweigh its price.

Just start with your employees. It is clear that most employees are looking to be part of an enterprise that has meaning beyond its profits. The Cone Millennial Cause Study found that about 75 percent of those entering and moving up into today’s work force want to work for a company “that cares about how it impacts and contributes to society.”

Growing evidence from the consumer movement and the green revolution clearly point to a new set of expectations of a company’s citizenship that not only cares about social and environmental issues, but walks the talk in terms of its practices and its products. Companies are judged less by how they minimize any harm from their footprint of their operations, and more by the lasting handprint they leave through positive contributions to communities and society.

Indeed, the promise of corporate citizenship is bright. Despite the current doldrums resulting from our collapsing economic system, there is little doubt that whatever the way out is, and whenever it is, the role of business will have to look quite different than that of the previous decade.

The spectacle of Bernie Madoff can no longer be the prevailing face of business, and the aspirations of Lee Scott and others will find a much more promising set of results for both business and society. The vision and voices of a new capitalism will find a much more engaged business and a greatly energized employee base. Luckily we have had a beginning base forming over the past decade with new innovations in social entrepreneurship, collaborative business partnerships, and many examples of companies using their innovation to spark breakthroughs and major contributions to the larger society.

Sometimes it takes a crisis such as the one in which we are deeply mired to find and articulate the promise of the new day. But the seeds of change are spread across a wide spectrum, and the desire to create a new society is no less real for President Obama than it is for our corporate leaders.

Now is the time to lead, innovate, commit and create. This is the promise of America and American capitalism.

Let citizenship thrive!

As I reflect I think of how corporate citizenship is playing out. Frankly, with Gazprom, it seems they are being driven by self-interest and political clout. That is very different than what is motivating the Russian oil executives I met at the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development training center.

It was most interesting to see what brought these executives to explore the scope and nature of global corporate citizenship, and the unique context of corporate citizenship in Russia, particularly given the issues of governance, corruption and the evolution of the economy and society after the breakup of the Soviet Union.

Getting some insights into the unique Russian context that is driving and shaping their interest in corporate citizenship helped me once again appreciate the importance of context in setting the stage for corporate citizenship. Too often we overlook the context within that provides the drive and incentives for citizenship, but which is critical in determining the path citizenship plays within a country

In the case of Russia, citizenship is coming along rather late compared to other parts of the globe.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, issues of deep corruption and immature institutions and infrastructure have brought huge challenges to Russian companies in adopting and implementing the global standards that are emerging around corporate responsibility.

Clearly a Russian oil company such as LUKOIL, a major powerhouse within Russia, is quickly becoming a major global player, operating in more than 30 countries. However, with little national corporate citizenship culture or tradition, the oil executives’ journey to Italy was a step in understanding ways by which they can become more grounded in corporate citizenship and begin to develop the competencies and skills necessary for driving this into their businesses.

What made the meeting most interesting for me was the interchange that took place between representatives from European corporate responsibility organizations, a few international groups such as the U.N. and the International Labor Organizations, and myself holding up the American version of corporate responsibility. As the session stretched on, all of us become quite engaged in discussing the differences between the “European” model and the “American” model. As the discussion continued, it became even clearer there was not really any clear-cut European model carved out of proclamations from Brussels by the European Union. Rather, there was the Italian model, the English model, the German model, etc.

While model may be a stretch, it is clear that the context that defines corporate citizenship is very much influenced by local and national conditions, culture and configurations that exist in every setting.

In the Philippines, for example, it would be difficult to understand corporate citizenship without factoring in the deep religious life that underlies their culture. Likewise, it would be impossible to understand corporate citizenship in China without factoring in the strong role of the state.

So this experience got me thinking about how critical context is in truly understanding citizenship in any given environment. In fact, context will more often define citizenship and differentiate it from how we might experience citizenship in other contexts.

This holds true for country context as well as company context. Consequently, we can begin to understand context from at least two major frames:

• Country context which is shaped by culture, laws, social contract and values;
• Company context which is understood by materiality and corporate values, history and traditions.

Each of these is important to understand since they go a long way in defining and determining the nature of how corporate citizenship is understood and practiced. There is no one-size-fits-all, and although we can talk about general characteristics, elements and even metrics of corporate citizenship, at the end of the day much of this boils down to context.

So let’s return to the session in Italy with the Russian oil executives. From an American perspective it reminded me of a version of our turn of the 20th century where welfare capitalism ruled in the United States.

In Russia, providing social goods to employees and communities is the defining feature, probably reflecting some of the characteristics and residuals of the communist state which was the order of the day up until very recently.

There seemed to be somewhat of a consensus that the Russian “model” lies somewhere between the U.S. and the European situation. Here country differences are more likely defined by the configuration of the social contract – the role of government, and the role of civil society. While the weight of the government would push it more toward the Europeans, the community relations nudged it closer to the American. The unique challenge at the country level is how a company connects globally, integrates locally and executes internationally.

At the company level one might argue that context is everything. Anyone who has left one company to work for another immediately understands the concept of corporate culture, values, traditions and history, and the role they play in defining everyday life and behavior. Citizenship cannot be developed unless these things are understood and incorporated into effective strategy.

Perhaps more important for context is the issues management function, which requires a materiality filter to surface the risks and opportunities that will shape the corporate citizenship strategy. So many variables need to be calculated from community issues, broader social trends, particular historical issues, stance of media, nature of relationship with key stakeholders, issue readiness, fit with business – just to name a few. The more these factors and issues are understood, the more likely it is that the approach and strategy of citizenship will be aligned and relevant to the business.

Context takes time to understand and sharp skills to refine it into key issues, risks and opportunities. Many corporate citizenship efforts fail because they gloss over this often time-consuming process in a rush to develop programs and communicate visible activities. There is no shortcut to investing in issues management, stakeholder relationships, and using issues management to assess and frame citizenship for the company.

The financial meltdown of 2008 will be remembered for the seismic changes it created.  The socio-economic and political structures in the world as we knew them have all shifted and this requires business to reexamine the role it plays in the large civic arena. As we try to comprehend these changes, there’s not a minute to spare in reassessing the handprint a company leaves on society.

Full civic engagement by a company involves five critical components: people, products, philanthropy, public policy, and presence. Like a hand, these five elements provide strength and value when working together. 

So often a company leads its community engagement story with what it is donating to whom, and how many volunteers are doing great things in the neighborhoods. This is the people and philanthropy part of the handprint.  These things are important and contribute wonderful value but are they the most effective way for business to be truly engaged. Do they demonstrate the real value of a company and what it can contribute to society and to its own business? In light of the tremendous energy and influence of business in the 21^st century, current engagement activities are too often unimaginative, stale, outmoded and not tied to the innovation that is at the heart of business.

The dynamic forces of globalization, rapidly changing political and economic forces, and even shifting societal norms and expectations have all contributed to a very different operating environment for corporate citizenship. Business today is much more aware that it is embedded in a web of social and environmental communities and stakeholders that are critical for its success as a business. Concern from the corporate sector is growing about the soundness and viability of societal systems such as education and healthcare. This is the public policy part of the handprint.  

This broadening stakeholder engagement poses new risks but creating effective relations and strategies can minimize their cost to the business. At the same time, business today is increasingly aware of opportunities for using corporate citizenship as a competitive advantage in increasing market share, introducing new products and services – “green is green,” says GE – and adding to brand value and reputation. This is the product part of the handprint.

Consequently companies must rethink and transform their engagement strategy to insure that it is strategic, effective, and tied to their overall business strategy. A more vibrant civic engagement will strengthen existing elements, make innovation a driving force and signal to communities, stakeholders and societies that it is an authentic relationship. It will demonstrate a company is bringing to bear its financial assets, its people and their knowledge, and its unique resources and innovation in equal measure when working to address civic issues ranging from education and a sustainable environment to community and economic development.

This new handprint of business must be a lasting impression-and a consistent presence-rather than a fleeting influence. This handprint will be evidence of a company’s conscious effort to make a difference for the better.

Opening up a new sense of civic engagement could not come at a more opportune time. With trust in business at an all time low, CEO compensation defining corporate reputations, and rising expectations of the corporate role reaching impossibly burdening levels, a real transformation is called for. This handprint also can bring a longed for leadership in the civic arena at a time when community life and institutional relevancy are struggling to become relevant in a 21^st century world.

Let’s step back and bring a group of business together to create a new vision and some new approaches to civic engagement. It is long overdue and will be widely welcomed and appreciated. Not to mention that the real promise of capitalism can finally be viewed by the active handprint of thousands of businesses in working together for a more sustainable and ennobling society.

We can’t always choose whether or not to leave a footprint but the kind of handprint we make is our choice. What kind of handprint is your company making?

It was only a very few months ago that things could not have been rosier, and there finally seemed to be a significant breakthrough in the Sisyphean task of the past decade. Even the Economist in January admitted it might have been too harsh in viewing the corporate responsibility movement as a flash in the pan.

But how quickly things can change. A whole new meaning of climate change has been introduced into the public dialogue. Instead of a focus on the environment, a very different and much more powerful climate change conversation has been thrust upon us, one that may in fact be reshaping capitalism as we know it.

Despite the shock and awe of the financial meltdown, viewed from another angle these developments might in fact serve as a great opportunity for corporate citizenship.

It is clear the failure of an unregulated financial system that almost brought the house down will no doubt be followed by aggressive legislation and regulation as an antidote to calm the fears. Already there have been discussions by congressional leaders and others about using this new window to mandate new measures to address climate change, implement safeguards for food, toys and prescription drugs from China, and expand health care insurance mandates.

This sudden jolt to our business and to our society and the destructive trail it is leaving can be seen as a damning indictment of business holding onto an excessive free market model and not listening to the growing voices of other stakeholders that have been getting stronger over the past few years. The rise of the green consumer, social investing and the incipient wave of new expectations from millennial employees have been largely ignored or not taken seriously. Even Bill Gates’ call for a creative capitalism to address the cracks that are beginning to appear in the foundation was not widely embraced.

A crossroad for capitalism and corporate citizenship

So here we are at a crossroad for capitalism and corporate citizenship. The trust in a self-regulating system has been lost and the role of lobbying by the business community has been put in a very different light.

However, equally dangerous might be a swing of the pendulum too far toward regulation and mandates. We know already that regulations can serve as a disastrous drag on innovation and markets.

No one can comply themselves to excellence, whether in a particular business or in a company’s citizenship.

Whatever solutions that are brought forward cannot preserve the current laissez faire system, nor can they result in overregulation that could kill the entrepreneurial spirit that has brought so much prosperity around the world.

Gates’ call at Davos for a new form of capitalism in effect recognizes this bind, and serves as a clarion call for a new approach where the issues of all stakeholders can be factored into a more inclusive and transparent process. This new approach will also understand and address the flaws of the current model that not only overlooked but perhaps inadvertently exacerbated key issues of inequality, poverty and environmental degradation.

So where do we go from here?

At the very least it is time for a very active dialogue in the business community, and between the business community and those of government and civil society.

The events of the past few weeks are humbling reminders that we need to broaden the dialogue, consider alternative forms of capitalism and together develop a new vision and consensus for our society. This will require a new leadership with a more active vision and voice. The Chambers of Commerce and many of the K Street operations cannot continue to represent the narrow self interests of business. This is an old and decrepit form of engagement that has to be transformed if business is going to regain any semblance of trust from its stakeholders.

Business has to find a new form of engagement with society. It needs to create a new form of global capitalism that reflects blended values with a new respect for the role of government in providing a stronger oversight that its citizens can trust will ensure their interests are protected.

At the same time those in the corporate citizenship arena have to widen their lens to guarantee that the real issues of citizenship – trust, authenticity, genuine engagement of stakeholders and an integrated and accountable citizenship – are baked into the very core of business.

Restoring faith to damaged and disillusioned employees, customers, suppliers and communities is an extremely difficult and challenging task. Just look at the crisis of the sexual abuse scandals that shook the Catholic Church to understand just how difficult turning this around will be. Whatever mechanisms we ultimately employ, we know they will have to be guided by active leadership, and infused with basic virtues such as humility, authenticity and accountability.

We are presented with a great opportunity not only for corporate citizenship to deepen its value and contribution to the business, but for business to increase the value of capitalism to realize its potential to create a just and sustainable world.