Wired Workforce Networked CSR Final

Wired Workforce, Networked CSR
Employee Involvement in the Age of Social Media

Authors:
Howard Greenstein, Adjunct Lecturer, NYU Heyman Center for Philanthropy and Fundraising,
and President, the Harbrooke Group, Inc.
Tom Watson, President, CauseWired Group
A Special Report Sponsored by the JK Group

Reviewed by Doug White, Academic Director, Heyman Center for Philanthropy and Fundraising
at New York University
(CC) 2011 BY THE JK GROUP – SOME RIGHTS RESERVED

THIS PAPER IS LICENSED UNDER A CREATIVE COMMONS ATTRIBUTION-‐NONCOMMERCIAL-‐SHAREALIKE 3.0 UNPORTED LICENSE

Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................... 3
Goals for This White Paper ................................................................................................................................................. 4
Emerging Social Media Trends ......................................................................................................................................... 4
2. CORPORATE CASE STUDIES .................................................................................................................................................. 6
Kaiser Permanente ................................................................................................................................................................. 6
Microsoft ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 8
Pfizer .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 10
UnitedHealth Group ............................................................................................................................................................ 11
Western Union ....................................................................................................................................................................... 12
Yahoo! ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 13
IMPORTANT PUBLIC CAMPAIGNS ......................................................................................................................................... 14
PEPSICO .................................................................................................................................................................................... 14
JP Morgan Chase ................................................................................................................................................................... 16
American Express ................................................................................................................................................................. 16
3. COME GATHER ‘ROUND PEOPLE: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................... 18
The Socially Wired Workforce ........................................................................................................................................ 18
Social Media Wave in Employee Involvement Programs? ................................................................................. 20
Conclusions: What Do We Know? .................................................................................................................................. 22
The Final Score ...................................................................................................................................................................... 24
JK GROUP STATEMENT ........................................................................................................................................................... 25
THE CONVERSATION ............................................................................................................................................................... 25
METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................................................ 25
RESOURCES AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................................................................. 25
Reference Section: ................................................................................................................................................................ 25
Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................................................................. 27
About JK Group ...................................................................................................................................................................... 27
About NYU Heyman Center for Philanthropy and Fundraising ....................................................................... 28
About the Authors ................................................................................................................................................................ 29

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 2 APRIL 29, 2011

1. Introduction and Executive Summary

The terms have changed over the last decade. Corporate philanthropy has broadened into corporate social
responsibility. Companies across the Fortune 500 and the small and mid-‐sized markets moved to introduce a
greater sense of supporting the social commons in their operations. Employee giving has also broadened and
changed dramatically since the turn of the Millennium. Traditional workplace giving campaigns are still raising
funds for nonprofit causes, of course. But the disintermediation of digital information widely available over the
Internet opened up employee involvement in causes, even in company-‐led initiatives. More and more, executive
management came to realize that employees expected choice and access in their giving and volunteering. And as
individual employees, regional and retail teams, and entire divisions began to take more charge of their company-‐
endorsed social action, they began to share.
Sharing is at the heart of social media, as online users in 2011 are rarely one click away from being able to
communicate their interests and passions with their networks of friends and contacts. With one button they can
encourage connection to a cause, share direct news of a campaign, recruit donations for a walk-‐a-‐thon, or mobilize
people for a volunteer event. The rise of Facebook, with its special treatment of the Causes application has done
much to increase passive participation and awareness, if not encourage donations and actions. Twitter campaigns
raised attention and funds for organizations. And new platforms like Kiva, DonorsChoose, GlobalGiving and many
others experimented with new and often successful models of philanthropy and involvement.
Additionally, recent data show that social media and volunteering are highly correlated. A national survey by the
Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project found that 75% of all American adults are active in some
kind of voluntary group or organization but Internet users are more likely than others to be active: 80% of Internet
users participate in groups, compared with 56% of non-‐Internet users. And social media users are even more likely
to be active: 82% of social network users and 85% of Twitter users are group participants. Of those in groups, 22%
work with charitable or volunteer organizations and the Internet users report higher levels of active group
participation. Specifically, Internet users report higher rates of charitable donations, volunteering, attending
meetings and events, and taking leadership roles. [Pew, 2011]
Companies have also learned to use the power of the social web to get their messages out, from major corporate
participants like Pepsi, American Express and Chase who have actively encouraged their customers to vote on
donations via social networks, to smaller efforts using the internal corporate networks to encourage participation
and giving. As the professionals in the marketing and communications functions of companies adopt this method
of web communications, the giving and CSR personnel will begin to see where it fits in their arsenal of tools.
Companies have begun to understand that their work and their social responsibility go hand-‐in-‐hand. Additionally,
their philanthropic donations are still a major part of the contributions made outside the company; that giving is
the result of both direct corporate donations and employee-‐directed funds. Employee campaigns are typically still
encouraged by internal company campaigns that utilize lobby or coffee-‐room signs and email notices, floor/store
captains, and management encouragement. However, as noted in the report below, we see these “traditional”
methods of engagement changing.

Goals for This White Paper
The purpose of this report is to place a marker in this continuum of change, and provide an actionable account of
trends and best practices to corporate social change officers and executives. With its publication, we hope this
white paper will:
§ Inform and encourage practitioners and company leaders adapting to the changing communications
landscape in CSR work.
§ Encourage actions and experimentation – including new pilots, different strategies, and new ideas.
§ Provide best practices, stories from the field, and usable resources to professionals.
§ Consider appropriate directions and strategies for CSR professionals to consider.
§ Warn of potential pitfalls, challenges, and cautions in adapting to social media in CSR.

The research for this report came from several sources: interviews with key change-‐makers at companies in
various stages of social media integration; news reports; analysis and publications from trusted research
organizations; and the authors’ own observations.
Emerging Social Media Trends
• Companies are more comfortable using Social Media tools internally, but they’re waiting for external
adoption by marketing:
o Internal programs for employee involvement are increasingly socially wired using a variety of
tools and platforms to encourage employees and manage to collaborate, both locally and
globally. Companies want to be able to do more storytelling to show community involvement.
o Externally transparent social media programs for employee involvement are still the exception
rather than the rule.
o Consumer brand companies are the early adopters of public social media networks for
community involvement and employee engagement, especially those that embrace social media
for consumer marketing and branding.
o Few companies are actively engaging their customers or social media “fans” or followers to tell
them how to use their CSR and philanthropy dollars, even though their marketing and
communications strategies make use of the tools. Notable exceptions include companies like JP
Morgan Chase, Pepsi and American Express, which use social media across both marketing and
giving channels (though not necessarily in tandem).
o Corporate community involvement officers are enthusiastic about future adoption of more public
forms of social media -‐ in concert with companywide adoption for marketing and branding.
• Employees seek choice and appreciate democratic participation:

o Employees have more control and greater choices of causes to support in corporate community
involvement programs when social media is in the mix, whether the programs are internally or
externally focused. This usually involves decentralizing some responsibility from corporate

headquarters to teams of workers, including regional management in the field and can lead to a
great sense of long-‐term community involvement.
o Many socially enabled programs rely on democratic components to power involvement: voting,
contests, transparent nomination processes, and open campaigns to encourage participation.
These encourage more “ownership” of community programs, and lead to better stories and
sharing among employees.
• Leadership is required to ensure continued participation in campaigns, since employee participation is
decreasing:
o Personal management participation -‐ aka leadership -‐ is seen as a crucial element of success,
even in pure “crowdsourced” employee engagement programs. When senior people are
involved, vocal and active participation increases and the impact is seen on both fundraising and
volunteering, as well as in softer benefits like morale and internal communications.
o Employee participation is decreasing. There has been a steady decrease in the number of eligible
employees participating in the annual fund raising drive (despite some of the “hot spots” in this
report). Younger employees participate less, and campaign managers are struggling to find ways
to make the campaign more appealing to their newer employees. Research finds traditional
workplace campaign isn’t as appealing to younger employees.
• Both social media and traditional communications methods are used in employee giving campaigns and
external outreach to communities:
o Facebook and Twitter are rarely adopted for employee engagement due to corporate concerns in
several key areas, including legal liability, marketing control, public relations, and human
resources. Blogs are rare but deployed in some instances.
o “Old school” corporate communications still hold prominence in employee involvement
campaigns over social media -‐ corporate intranets, newsletters (print and online), and
office/store bulletin boards remain vital communications tools in the chain of promotion.
o Technology used includes many and varied platforms. Some companies are adapting software
made for other purposes, including Microsoft and Yahoo.
o The role of video is growing (Microsoft case study, Kaiser Permanente case study). However,
there is a lack of feedback and companies are not evaluating whether the giving is affected by
video either in a positive or negative way.
• Formal feedback loops for Social Media are the exception rather than the rule:
o Specific quantitative analysis of employee giving and involvement is relatively rare.
o Focus tends to stay on top-‐line results like total of funds raised and number of employees
involved, so the formal linkage to social media-‐driven success is still hard to come by.


2. Corporate Case Studies
The following case studies were created by interviewing the people and teams responsible for the efforts analyzed.
The authors sought diversity in industry, location, and company size.
Kaiser Permanente
Denver, Colorado
Goals: Kaiser Permanente is a nonprofit Healthcare System that provides health care and health insurance.
According to Steve Krizman, Senior Director of integrated communications for KP Colorado, community benefit is
“interwoven into everything we do.”
Short Story: Kaiser Permanente is using social media efforts on Facebook as well as a blog and connections with
local traditional media to serve the community and make their expertise known.
Tactics: Kaiser Permanente, a nonprofit health system in Colorado (and other states) recently started an initiative
via a “Fan Page” on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/KPColorado.
The fan page serves several purposes, including getting people into conversations about good health. For instance,
Kaiser donated money to the City of Denver bike-‐share program, which lets people borrow bikes and commute. In
addition to providing funding, Kaiser Permanente uses the Facebook page to support and encourage the use of the

program. They asked people to share stories about their most memorable bike experience, and the people with
the best stories got free bike helmets. Their intent and goal, according to Krizman, is to “create a groundswell
about this healthy commute. It is not only for marketing Kaiser Permanente, but we make it clear to prospects that
we are an organization that cares about total health of our community and we highlight the quality of our
clinicians.”
The Kaiser Permanente Colorado Facebook fan page grew to 780 followers over an 18-‐month period. “We post
two to three items to the page each week, and nearly every one generates “likes” or comments, which means the
post is exposed to each fan’s social network. This magnifies the reach of news releases and content we post
elsewhere online.”
Kaiser Permanente’s other initiative involved creating a health information campaign online, on TV and in print
called “Elevate Your Health Colorado.” A partnership between the Denver Post, CBS4, and Kaiser Permanente, the
campaign features patient stories, online videos and physician blogs.
The goal is to provide important health information to the public and to promote the top-‐notch care Kaiser
Permanente physicians provide. Kaiser Permanente runs the www.elevateyourhealthco.com website and provides
stories and video from their own staff and an agency. KP also buys TV and print ads that drive people to website
with stories. Their partnership enables a community benefit rate for ads on the CBS4 and in the Post.
Additionally, Kaiser
Permanente encourages
its 6,000 employees to get
the word out about the
“Elevate Your Health” site
and the Facebook page by
asking the employees to
promote these properties
with their friends and
family. They are in the
process of distributing a
corporate social media
policy so employees know
how to communicate.
Krizman notes: “For the

Elevate Health site, we
can measure the visits and
time on site, which is
same as on a non-‐social
site, but we can also measure engagement. We look at how many people write comments or ask questions of
physicians, and try to judge the quality of interaction. We ask, ‘how does it drive messages about the quality of
care?’”
The feedback becomes more rich and detailed than just running in print ads, which they hope people saw. “In
print, TV or online, we can have call to action. But the call to action online has higher response rate.”

Microsoft
Redmond, WA
Goals: Microsoft’s Employee Engagement program’s goal is to help support the passions of its employees, whether
through matching gifts of up to $12,000 per employee, per year, or $17 per hour paid to the nonprofit with which
the employee volunteers. They support employees and help create lasting relationships between employees and
their community. Internally the programs assist with recruiting and retaining employees as well as improving
morale.
Short Story: Re-‐use of Microsoft technology originally used for an ad campaign yielded interest for the employee
engagement programs, specifically during the giving campaign.
Tactics: Microsoft’s internal employee giving site “Give” has been run as an internal Microsoft SharePoint site with
integrated links out to JK Group’s EasyMatch vendor portal. Traditionally, the site had lots of information, but was
not a “feel good site.” It was more about disseminating information than inspiring their employees to get involved
and participate in the programs. Then Microsoft had its first ever layoffs in 2009, just two weeks prior to the start
of the giving campaign, and there was announcement of further cost cutting measures. The team decided that
instead of their informational site they needed an inspirational site where employees could tell their own stories of
community involvement – more of a grassroots effort. They created a warm feeling, inspirational site replacing
much of the text and heavy navigation with images, warm color tones, easy buttons, and direct links to tools from
the JK Group.
Original Informational site, before redesign:

For the end-‐of-‐year 2009 campaign the giving team created a video wall idea. They borrowed the code from the
“I’m a PC” consumer campaign, which uses Silverlight technology to show video clips. They repurposed this ‘code’
to create a video wall where employees could post videos, pictures and type in their stories of community
involvement. The site allows any employee to search and view their colleague’s stories and text descriptions,
which can include links to the nonprofits that employee is passionate about.

Post-‐redesign, with video wall image:

During the first year of use, the Microsoft team saw about 100 stories uploaded. Now they are up to 250 videos
and stories on wall. Most employees create the videos themselves, but several executives created their stories in
professional studios that are built on the Microsoft campus.
Employees fill out a simple form, upload video or pictures, and type in a story as well. The community affairs
“Give” team gets a list of videos to review and publish. Once approved, the videos and pictures are automatically
compressed and converted into a usable format and stored on a server for display on the video wall. Each story has
its own dedicated link, so employees are able to add a small picture icon to their auto signature within Outlook
email and link to their story. This way, anyone who they email internally is able to click on the internal link to view
the personal story pages, pictures, and videos – thus empowering employees to promote their video and giving
efforts to each other without effort.
For 2010, the team added the ability to search by area of interest. “We found this was an outlet for employees
wanting to share their stories and promote their favorite nonprofits,” said Kevin Espirito, senior mananger for
Microsoft Community Affairs. “Employees that had an area of interest, say ‘animals, or environment,’ could search
and pull up employee stories on these topics. We also enabled employees to search for causes supported by peers
in their group, by creating a filter “by manager” or “by team leader” as well as an open search that scans the
written summary text of the stories.”
Espirito also noted that anecdotally they had heard several different stories where employees saw videos and took
action. One east coast employee posted a story about a cancer research nonprofit he supported, and the video
mentioned a specific child who had to travel for treatments. Someone from the Zune music player team saw the
video and offered to send that child a music-‐filled Zune for travel, and also asked a friend on the Xbox team to
donate an Xbox for the child to use at home while convalescing.
“One other thing we did find,” said Espirito, “was that as we share how we are using technology internally with
nonprofits and they are hearing about the video wall from employees and others in the industry, it is now
something thing that the nonprofits ask of Microsoft employees involved with their organizations – ‘please make a
video to help promote our cause with other Microsoft employees.’”

As of April, 2011, Microsoft has packaged the video wall for free use by nonprofits. They can put it on their own
websites and have supporters contribute videos or have the ability to upload videos and stories they want viewed
from the story wall placed on their website. The software bundle is distributed for free via Npower
(http://www.npower.org/). The software is currently built on Microsoft’s .NET platform, but they’re also building it
out for open source technologies, and looking at putting it on Windows Azure (cloud hosting services) so it can be
hosted off premises by a nonprofit. They are also exploring how they can help other companies use this technology
(as well as the customized SharePoint) in the hopes of scaling good through the use of technology.
Pfizer
New York, NY
Goals: As a member of today’s rapidly changing global community, Pfizer is striving to adapt to the evolving needs
of society and contribute to the overall health and wellness of our world. More information:
http://www.pfizer.com/responsibility/
Short Story: Without relying on public social media platforms, Pfizer has nonetheless implemented effective
programs that are both internal and “social” in its use of technology and the creation of peer-‐to-‐peer networks.
Tactics: “We don’t (explicitly) use social media to promote employee engagement,” explained Dezarie Mayers,
senior manager for corporate responsibility. However, Pfizer’s volunteer initiative -‐ called VOL.UNTEERZ -‐ is highly
networked and has used the socially-‐connected on line contest structure to increase employee engagement. The
program is essentially a volunteers challenge -‐ “the opportunity for colleagues to share volunteer projects with the
rest of us,” according to Mayers -‐ and employees can propose and vote up projects.
“The emphasis is on volume and impact -‐ actual employee initiative -‐ and doing great work around the world,”
Mayers explained. Pfizer’s employees nominated 668 projects from 41 countries within a five-‐week period in
2010.“We are stunned and excited at the same time,” said Mayers. Pfizer has offices in 93 countries and operates
in 150, so the program quickly gained wide participation.
There were over 22,000 votes using an internal system provided by Spigot Software (a human resources platform);
employees read submissions and voted. The most successful projects had active teams seeking votes and executive
leadership mattered quite a bit.
The winner (with 700 votes) was a nutritional program in the Philippines that provides food for indigent students
at an elementary school, helping to house and feed them. The victory showed a social approach, with employees
sharing the opportunity. The program was considered a big success at Pfizer with a high participation rate, low
campaign cost, and real social impact. It was so successful that Pfizer extended the winners pool to the top 25
projects (it only planned on 15 originally) and each received $1,500. There were 15 awards made in the U.S. and
Puerto Rico and 10 overseas, including Ireland, Philippines, Australia, Brazil, France, India and Pakistan.
The internal social contest is also important in context of Pfizer’s recently-‐launched volunteers network in which
the aim is to encourage volunteerism around the world, beginning with eight countries -‐ Australia, Canada,
Philippines, India, Ireland, Puerto Rico, Russia, and the U.S. -‐ or about 50% of the company population. Pfizer tracks
volunteer work online through JK Group’s Integrated Volunteer Management System (IVMS) software. The pilot
phase featured 121 projects from 126 employees and involved 1,600 employees through the site.

UnitedHealth Group
Minneapolis, MN
Goals: To help people achieve the goal of living healthier lives, UnitedHealth Group believes it is necessary to be
active citizens of our communities, nation, and world. Through its foundations, volunteerism, community
involvement, and commitment to the environment, the company endeavors to positively impact people’s health
and communities. More information: http://www.unitedhealthgroup.com/main/socialresponsibility.aspx
Short Story: As the leader in a highly-‐regulated industry, UnitedHealth Group has been careful in the adoption of
social media, but has used internal social networks to great effect with employees across its large, multinational
workforce.
Tactics: Employee engagement for a diverse worldwide workforce of 87,000 people is important to UnitedHealth
Group, and internal digital and socially-‐networked tools and techniques are increasingly important to the
company’s efforts. The company has seen a steady increase over the past seven years in its United Giving Program.
“We’re committed to growing the program and documenting results through our giving partner platform,” said
Alisson Ptak, Program Manager, Social Responsibility. Last year saw an 11-‐percent increase to a total of $13.9
million pledged.
The company works with VolunteerMatch on employee involvement, in a program that includes both company-‐
sponsored and non-‐sponsored volunteer opportunities, as well as team and individual efforts. “Our goal for 2010
was 145,000 volunteer hours and we hit that in late October,” said Ptak, who said the company had cleared
200,000 volunteer hours for the full year “and we’re really proud of that.”
UnitedHealth Group runs all the programs through its intranet site; individuals can find information on corporate
philanthropy, employee giving, volunteerism, guidelines, and policies. On the philanthropy side, the company
works with nine giving partners and more than 7,300 member agencies -‐ and UnitedHealth Group matches pledges
to these organizations dollar for dollar.
Social media integration has been a small but important part of the effort. In 2010, the theme for the giving
campaign was “Get into Giving” and the company held an employee video and photo contest for employees “to
tell us why you get into giving.” Peers voted on employee videos and winners from across the company received
$250 for their favorite giving partner, with $1,000 for the overall winner. The contest ran through the company’s
intranet site “and we got a great response,” said Ptak. More than 30,000 “like” votes were recorded from the
company’s employees.
“For an employee giving campaign we were thrilled with employee response,” said Ptak. “We got eight times the
normal traffic to our internal giving site and people shared the videos all over the company. The submissions were
really awesome.”

Western Union
Englewood, Colorado
Goals: The Western Union Foundation supports initiatives to empower people through access to education and by
fostering economic opportunity. More information: http://foundation.westernunion.com/
Short Story: Western Union uses a range of social tools from blogs to Facebook to promote employee giving and
engagement in campaigns that are both internally and externally focused, and which lead to more exposure for
Western Union’s corporate social responsibility.
Tactics: Western Union is using social media to communicate its corporate social responsibility work, as well as
cause-‐related and Foundation programs, via regular updates on Facebook and other online sites and social media
networks. “We are using the web and social media to actively incent consumer engagement in charitable
programs,” explained Carolyn Cavicchio, director of stakeholder engagement for Western Union Foundation. “For
example, we are encouraging Facebook visitors to take part in and tell their friends about a campaign to support
Mercy Corps, our leading NGO partner. The Western Union Foundation will match all gifts for Mercy Corps’s work
in Haiti dollar-‐for-‐dollar up to $500,000, for a total fund-‐raising goal of $1 million. Donations can be made online,
via text-‐to-‐give on mobile phones, or in-‐person at participating US Western Union agent locations.”
Western Union also used social media extensively in its year-‐end “50 Days of Giving” Facebook campaign in 2010.
The company encouraged both consumers and employees to log in on a daily basis and vote for one of five
charities. Each charity received a grant of $20,000 to participate, and the winning charity received an additional
$150,000. This built on the success of a 2008 Facebook campaign, which reached Western Union’s traditional
consumers across borders as well as mass-‐market audiences – generating millions of media impressions, driving
172,248 visitors and helping to spark the charity voting trend. The Red Cross was the “winner” of that campaign.
Employees are encouraged to participate. “We

promote employee engagement in a number of
ways,” explained Cavicchio. “For example, for
“50 Days of Giving” we sent internal emails to
our global employee base, and also posted
messages on our Intranet, educating employees
about the program and encouraging them to
both vote as well as share the campaign
message with their own Facebook friends. We
also posted signage all around our office about
the campaign and held a holiday event -‐ with
music, games, and prizes -‐ when the campaign
launched.”
Western Union also holds “Foundation Fridays”

on the company intranet, which features a
photo from one of the Foundation’s grantees
and a quick blurb about the work it is funding. A

“Community” tab in the weekly company-‐wide e-‐newsletter that features more in-‐depth stories of grantees.
Western Union has also just added both a blogging and an online “communities” function to the intranet, so that
employees can “gather” around issues of interest; this was used during the 2010 employee giving campaign, for
employees to share their reasons for participating and to encourage others to give.
Yahoo!
Sunnyvale, CA
Goals: The goal at Yahoo! for Good is to empower people to make a positive impact by leveraging our audience,
our products, and our employees. More information: http://forgood.yahoo.com
Short Story: Yahoo! uses its huge online audience to spread news of good things in the world, and to encourage
the growth of good deeds.
Tactics: The Yahoo! For Good group is part of Yahoo!’s Corporate Marketing team. According to Connie Chan,
Manager of Yahoo! for Good, one initiative they have is reporting on elements of “good in the news” and pushing
that content to Yahoo! landing pages, like the Home page, with millions of viewers per day. One member of their
team is focused on surfacing more “For Good” content, since content is a huge part of what Yahoo! does. This
effort drives engagement, is good for advertisers and is compelling to Yahoo!’s customers.
For the “How Good Grows” campaign, http://kindness.yahoo.com the goal is to challenge Yahoo! users to create a
ripple of kindness by doing a good act, then sharing it online. By showing what they are doing that is “good and
kind” it will be inspiring their friends to do something else good. This effort is centered on trying to increase the
amount of good in the world with a goal to spread goodwill and kindness. This campaign is more individual
focused, because anyone can contribute without being part of a charity.
During 2009 the company

had more than 300,000
updates for acts of
kindness. However, in 2010,
that number dropped (as
expected) to only 93,000
updates. The difference was
that in 2009 the team
integrated this campaign
into Yahoo Mail, with its
millions of users, but were
not able to get that
positioning in 2010. The
lesson they learned is
simple. “Go where people
already are, rather than
trying to drive them to a
destination,” according to
Chan. However, she stated
that her goal for the campaign revolves more around Yahoo!’s reputation rather than raw numbers. They were
able to obtain lots of positive public relations mentions, and able to get a lot of viral impressions, including over 10

million exposures via Twitter. While internally, Yahoo!’s CMO is an unofficial executive sponsor, this campaign
doesn’t have an “official” corporate sponsor.
Yahoo! also has a Yahoo! employee-‐run foundation. All money donated to the foundation and all volunteer events
sponsored are run by Yahoo! employees, with $2 million a year given to community organizations that are
championed by employees. Employees can donate a minimum of $50, and then may champion a grant for their
cause for up to $40,000. All grants and organizations are vetted, and a group of employee volunteers pick the
recipients of the grants.
One benefit of this foundation is program and leadership growth. From a recent research study by Adam Grant at
Wharton, the foundation discovered that involved employees develop skills and join new projects – which they
may not have been able to do with the skills from their current positions. For example, one of the employee
foundation board members in New York works with the sales organization. When his managers found out about
his involvement, he was asked to create a volunteer program with sales team members and clients, which was
successful. His professional skill set grew from his foundation work.
Important Public Campaigns

We also studied three well-‐branded public-‐facing campaigns of note to study their use of social media and
implications for employee involvement.
PEPSICO
Purchase, NY
Goals: The Pepsi Refresh Project is a brand marketing initiative from Pepsi to help the beverage side of the
business achieve brand health objectives. It aligns with Pepsico’s “Performance with Purpose” initiative and is
driven by the philosophy that in future the company can build up business, perform effectively and yet be a
positive organization with a positive role in society. The goals are not mutually exclusive. Along with strong
financial performance and business performance, PepsiCo also focuses on human sustainability, environmental
sustainability and talent sustainability. The company is investing in sustainable growth in a way that also
acknowledges its role in society and the world at large.
Short Story: Pepsi uses its marketing muscle across multiple consumer engagement channels (TV, print, digital,
web, and social) to encourage submission of projects that will “Refresh the World” and allows its customers and
fans to vote on where it spends over $20 million per year.

Tactics: In 2010, Pepsi very publicly launched its “Refresh Project” through their website at
http://RefreshEverything.com. It is important to note that “the Refresh Project is not a corporate philanthropy or
CSR effort, it is a brand marketing effort,” said Shiv Singh, head of digital for PepsiCo Beverages America. “We are
bringing the worlds of brand marketing, digital marketing and cause or purpose driven marketing together to
achieve brand objectives. If you go back 1.5 years and think about where country was, we were in an economic
crisis; it was a depressing
time in America for many
reasons. We landed on the
premise that Pepsi is about
refreshing the world and
Pepsi is fun and light. We saw
with the crisis that people
wanted to make a difference
in their world, and they felt
that they could. When we
aligned with those values of
making a difference and ‘can
do’ it benefits our consumers,
it builds brand loyalty and it
drives our business forward.”
Pepsi announced it would award more than $20 million dollars in 2010 to ideas that will move the world forward,
including $1.3 million a month to the ideas Americans select as the best in open online voting. Pepsi will fund ideas
that will move the world forward in six categories: health, arts & culture, food & shelter, the planet,
neighborhoods and education.
Pepsi is partnering with several groups to help it run the program. GOOD, a for-‐profit collaboration linking people,
businesses and nonprofits, will develop criteria for the projects and help people craft their ideas. Other groups will
help administer the program’s grants, among other functions. Pepsi also worked with traditional agency Chait,
digital agency Huge, PR firms Weber Shandwick, Edelman, Undercurrent and a few other agencies to execute the
campaigns.
The Refresh Project worked by allowing individuals and organizations to submit proposals for specific projects in
areas listed above. The categories have been modified in 2011 to include new categories arts & music,
communities, education, and a new rotating category called the Pepsi Challenge and removed health-‐related and
advocacy causes. Groups accepted are allowed to compete and have their efforts voted upon by fans via Pepsi’s
Refresh Everything Facebook application and at RefreshEverything.com.
In 2011, Pepsi will give out more than a million dollars in grants each month, with 60 grants ranging from $5,000 to
$50,000. The number of overall grants awarded each month will almost double compared to last year, while Pepsi
is introducing four grant tiers: $5K, $10K, $25K and $50K. Pepsi is also amending the submission process by
accepting project entries during a five-‐day period at the beginning of each month. Each month, 1,500 new ideas
will be randomly selected for voting, increasing the number of ideas posted to the site. Staying true to the
democratic process, ideas with the most consumer votes will be funded. From May through December, voting
opens on the first of each month, and 60 monthly grantees will be announced beginning in June.

Singh said: “In 2010 we gave out $1.3 million per month to fund the ideas that have the most votes that make a
difference in people’s community, and then we play a role in helping them come to life. These are large sums of
money. With that, unfortunately, there are always a few people who try to game the system to win grants. We’ve
seen a few occasions where people have tried to hack the system or get additional votes. When we found this out -‐
we rescinded grants and gave them to the next group on the leader board. We’ve had 87 million votes, an
immense amount of traffic, comments, engagement and interactions. The hacking was really small, so I’ve come
away with an incredible faith in humanity that there are so few trying to cheat.”
Pepsi has also decided to roll out the program to Europe starting in 2011. “At Pepsi we are looking at global
conversations, borderless brands, and topics that are global in nature,” said Bonin Bough, global director of digital
& social media at PepsiCo told the author at the SXSW conference in March 2011. “If you look at our big
participation in Social Media Week, in four countries, we want to have conversations from a global perspective.
We are looking at changing the world, so we have to look at the entire world.” This campaign is one of the most
visible public efforts by a major global firm to tie corporate giving to a public-‐facing campaign linked to social
media.
Other campaigns (not interviewed for this report):
JP Morgan Chase
New York, NY
The Chase Community Giving effort was one of the largest online contests, open to more than 500,000 charities at
the outset in late 2009. More than one million people joined Chase’s Community Giving Facebook page and
received five votes per day to apply to five different nonprofits. The top 100 vote-‐getters received $25,000 in
donation, and were eligible for the final round, where the four runners-‐up got $100,000 and the winner
organization received $1 million in a donation.
Chase’s decision to make the contest a “popular vote” and to remove the online tallies hours before the end of the
contest caused critics to question the format of the online contest and brand it a marketing vehicle for the bank
instead of a fair way to distribute funds. Several critics noted the need for nonprofits to beg for votes from their
constituencies, including one Chicago Tribute editorial that claimed, “it turns theaters into on-‐line hucksters, which
lacks dignity and turns off many real artists.” Noted social media and nonprofit writer Beth Kanter reported on
these questions and the many voices crying “foul.” Kanter notes in a follow up blog post “It’s unclear how much
damage this has done to their brand, if at all -‐ and if damage could have been reduced if they were more
responsive earlier on…If anything, it provides lots of learning which is the heart of success of social media and
potential for constructive discussion and debate about social media, online giving, transparency, and more.”
American Express
New York, NY
Another large-‐scale public social media-‐based campaign is the American Express Members Project. Officially, “it is
an innovative initiative that enables people to get involved and to take part, their way. In partnership with Take
Part (http://takepart.com), a digital media company and social action network, Members Project provides the
opportunity for everyone to be part of a community that’s passionate about making a difference in the world.”

This giveaway format campaign began in 2007. Initially, projects were submitted and voted on only by American
Express card members, but some rules have changed in 2010. The top initial submissions are vetted by a
committee of inside experts and by members of the philanthropy community. The public votes on the top choices.
Organizations are encouraged to activate their fans via their own social and marketing channels, and to send them
to a Facebook app and a website created by Take Part to vote for their submission. The top four runner-‐up
entrants each received $200,000 and the winner got $1 million. American Express notes that it facilitated over $4.2
million in donations including donations of its membership rewards points and direct donations from card
members in 2010. The project portrays American Express in a positive light, and makes card-‐holders feel as if they
have more than just a credit card – they feel they have a say in the philanthropic donations by the company.
The Challenge of Challenges
The challenges Chase, American Express and Pepsi have faced due to holding contests are a tough nut for some to
swallow. On the one hand, here are companies handing out millions of dollars to causes, and encouraging their
communities (including employees) to direct that giving. Organizations that normally might be overlooked can
receive $5,000 or $25,000 that may make a huge positive impact on their operating budgets.
On the other hand, many nonprofits resent having to “jump through hoops” and ask their entire support base to
vote daily in contests, potentially using up good will and attention on a contest they may not win.
As Forge (forgenow.org) founder Kjerstin Erickson noted on a post about the “Dark Side of Online Voting Contests,
“Each time, it takes a considerable amount of effort to notify, encourage, and thank our network for taking action
on our behalf. More importantly, though, each time we ask our network to vote we use a valuable asset (the time
and attention of our network) that we could have used for something else. That is, each request for a vote
(whether fulfilled or not) represents an opportunity cost to the organization doing the asking.”
Writer Geoff Livingston adds “In actuality, there are many losers who expend a tremendous amount of effort that
don’t walk away with a dollar, who have exhausted their donor base with solicitations for votes, and who have lost
time that could have been spent on mission based activity or fundraising.”
For companies, there is a potential reputation risk as well. During the recent Japan earthquake and tsunami
response, Microsoft’s Bing search property offered to donate $1 for every person on Twitter who re-‐tweeted their
message describing how to help, up to $100,000. The company was quickly criticized for making the donation
“about them” instead of about relief. Hours later, Microsoft apologized and donated the $100,000 without any
preconditions. In contrast, Apple Computer provided donation links on their popular iTunes music store, but made
no public announcements of donations. Merely by facilitating donations, the company was publicly lauded.
PepsiCo’s Singh offers this advice for other companies thinking of taking on similar efforts: “One key piece of
advice, and we’ve see this with the American Express Members Project, is that these are long-‐term relationship-‐
building efforts. They’re strongest when they’re thought of as multi-‐year efforts. We’ve had success and benefit
with year one, but every year we have multiplying benefit, as this is a commitment not a campaign. We have to
think about pacing without consumer. The way our consumer’s media consumption habits are, we need to align
with their value system, it makes no sense to do stuff not in sync with them. Programs like this are like a
symphony, it takes very large internal teams, executive support at highest levels, and very strong external
partners, getting the right partners are key.”

3. Come Gather ‘Round People: Discussion and Conclusions

The present now
Will later be past
The order is rapidly fadin’
And the first one now will later be last
For the times they are a-‐changin’
Bob Dylan, 1963
By giving people the power to share, we’re making the world more transparent.
Mark Zuckerberg, 2010
Companies face a choice. It’s the same choice faced by governments and by organizations of all shapes and sizes.
Indeed, it’s the same choice faced by every human with an Internet connection. That choice is whether to share, or
to opt out of the social graph.
Simple enough, and most people -‐ even if they opt out -‐ now recognize the power of Facebook, Twitter, blogs and
wireless apps of endless variety to shape both the marketplace and the social commons.
Yet for companies, the social media choice presents nothing like a simple A/B switch. The question isn’t so much
“do we do Twitter?” or “do we launch a Facebook page?” but rather how much control a company is willing to
yield to its consumers, to the crowd, to the wired world at large. Billions are spent to create, build, manage, tweak
and promote that most fragile of corporate assets: the brand. Yet social media inherently means ceding some
control to anyone with a smartphone and a few minutes to kill on Twitter.
To take that question farther inside companies -‐ to the workforce itself and how a company encourages its own
good citizenship, as we have chosen to do with this white paper -‐ presents another level of challenge for the
corporation in the age of social media. More than anyone else, an employee carries an organization’s reputation
with them in the world, virtual and otherwise. And the challenge -‐ and opportunity -‐ of social media for employee
engagement is quite real.
We asked Carol Cone, the widely acknowledged “mother of cause marketing” and managing director of brand and
corporate citizenship at Edelman to consider social media and employee engagement as we started work on this
paper. Carol’s advice was right on: “Brands are built from the inside out: thus employee engagement is critical to
grow compelling and powerful brands and corporations. Social media will continue to grow in its use by savvy
companies who understand their employees’ desire involvement in relevant social/environmental issues to their
organizations.”
The Socially Wired Workforce
The companies we interviewed for this report vary in size and sector; some are very active in using social media for
their brands and marketing, while others are understandably more cautious. Yet there was one factor that united
the viewpoints of everyone we spoke to: companies are well aware that their employees are using social media

and that efforts to empower employees in volunteering, philanthropy, and corporate social responsibility efforts
must take that into consideration -‐ now, or in the near future.
Indeed, the corporate community involvement and social responsibility officers we spoke to are themselves a well-‐
connected, networked group of professionals. And they realize that their companies’ socially networked
employees are vital to the overall corporate strategy.
How important?
Well, according to recent research, very important. In short, companies factor in their employees almost above all
other considerations in defining giving and community involvement programs. A 2009 study by McKinsey in
partnership with the Committee Encouraging Corporate Philanthropy surveyed more than 700 U.S. C-‐suite leaders.
Not surprisingly, 77% of those surveyed formally encourage employee volunteering and 41% will match employee
charitable contributions.
Here’s where it gets interesting. Asked what stakeholders the company specifically addressed with its corporate
philanthropy, the largest response was “employees” -‐ 88% said they addressed their workforce with company
philanthropic goals, more than the communities they serve. And in tracking business goals related to corporate
philanthropy, employees were second only to enhancing overall company reputation -‐ 62% of executives said
building employee leadership was a business goal of CSR and 57% said employee retention and recruitment were
legitimate business goals related to corporate philanthropy.
And it’s important to note that corporate employees naturally flock to social tools to help get their work done. A
landmark 2008 report from the Pew Internet & American Life Project identified the new “Networked Worker” and
found that the overwhelming belief that the Internet, email, cell phones and instant messaging have “improved
their ability to do their job” (80%), “improved their ability to share ideas with co-‐workers” (73%) and “allowed
them more flexibility in the hours they work” (58%). In addition, 80% of reported that these tech tools have
expanded the number of people they communicate with.
Corporate leaders are coming to understand quickly that today’s workforces, particularly the Millennials born after
1980, have a view of work that includes doing something positive for society. “Millennials are fascinating for how
they work (collaboratively); what they believe (that they can make the world a better place); and how they are
living (immersed in causes),” wrote author Allison Fine in the Chronicle of Philanthropy two years ago. “And,” she
added, “their signature characteristic is their digital fluency.”
Younger workers are uniquely comfortable using a wide variety of social-‐media tools. This mirrors the view
inwards, from consumers and customers towards products and services. In the Good Purpose study, an Edelman
annual global research report that explores consumer attitudes around social purpose and their commitment to
specific social issues and their expectations of brands and corporations, 64% of the 7,000 adults surveyed said
believe it is no longer enough for corporations to give money; they must integrate good causes into their everyday
business.
Carol Cone calls this trend “the rise of the citizen consumer.” For the purposes of this report, we’d posit the rise of
the “citizen employee.”
Further, the more wired people are, the more socially conscious and active they seem to be. A 2011 national
survey by the Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project found that 75% of all American adults are
active in some kind of voluntary group or organization, and Internet users are more likely than others to be active:

80% of Internet users participate in groups, compared with 56% of non-‐Internet users. Moreover, social media
users are even more likely to be active: 82% of social network users and 85% of Twitter users are group
participants.
“One of the striking things in these data is how purposeful people are as they become active with groups,” noted
Kristen Purcell, the research director at Pew Internet and co-‐author of the report. “Many enjoy the social
dimensions of involvement, but what they really want is to have impact. Most have felt proud of a group they
belong to in the past year and just under half say they accomplished something they couldn’t have accomplished
on their own.”
Social Media Wave in Employee Involvement Programs?
Let’s take stock. Connected employees. Check. Consumers and employees who value companies that give
something back. Check. Wide acceptance of social media in society. Check. So is there a strong connection? Are
companies using social media widely and effectively to encourage employee giving and community involvement?
Our verdict: it’s coming, but it’s not there yet.
According a study by Weber Shandwick and KRC Research, seven in ten executives says social media has been used
in their company’s CSR efforts, and six in ten say it has had a positive effect. But a 2010 study by UK-‐based social
media research firm SMI on how 287 of the most sustainable companies are communicating their actions through
social media found a mixed bag: “While a few companies excel in social media CSR communications, fewer than
half of nearly 300 North American and European companies currently considered sustainability leaders in their
fields are using social media to communicate their corporate and social responsibility accomplishments.” And
while a whopping 85 percent use social media as “some part of their general communications portfolio,” a mere 22
percent have social media communications dedicated to sustainability and CSR issues, according to the study.
And there are other challenges, according to exclusive research by the JK Group, which manages nearly 110
employee giving campaigns for its clients. [Note: JK is the corporate sponsor of this white paper]. JK’s work with
these clients confirms two key trends:
Employee participation is decreasing.
There has been a steady decrease in the number of eligible employees participating in the annual fund raising
drive. Gone are the days when employee participation rates were in the 80 percent range. Current employee
giving statistics indicate that it is far more likely to see less than 50 percent of employees participating than the
previous higher participation rates. In many companies it is far less than 50 percent of the eligible employees
participating. (Participation is being defined as the number of employees who make a financial contribution.)
The current participation rates among JK clients ranges from a high of 75 percent to a low of 3 percent. Two
independent studies by outside consulting firms document this trend. For example, a 2010 survey conducted by
The Consulting Network, a national management consulting firm specializing in corporate social responsibility and
employee engagement, found the average employee participation rate among its benchmark sample of nearly 75
clients was 42 percent, according to a survey of 60 national companies by The Consulting Network in April, 2010.
JK Group has identified some key factors among its clients that can impact employee participation. Companies with
higher participation rates tend to offer a broader range of giving options. They have expanded the campaign
beyond the traditional United Way as the only featured charity partner model. A recent study found that more

than 75 percent of companies offering a workplace-‐giving program now allow employees to contribute to any
charitable organization regardless of affiliation with United Way or other umbrella federation organization.
Several companies have implemented a match of employee donations as a strategy to increase employee
participation. Nearly 40 percent of companies now match payroll contributions made by employees through the
annual giving campaign.
Some observers of this trend suggest that the higher participation rates of the past might have been the result of
pressure to give rather than a truly voluntary approach and the lower rates of today are more reflective of
employee satisfaction. Others suggest that the giving campaign is lacking relevance and is not changing with the
times to make it an appealing option for supporting charitable causes. Regardless of the perspective, companies
are concerned about this lack of employee participation and are looking for strategies and tactics to help
invigorate the annual giving campaign.
Younger employees aren’t participating.
Another trend in employee giving campaigns is that younger employees aren’t participating. This is probably a
significant reason contributing to the decrease in employee participation.
JK Group has documented that current increases in revenue from the employee giving campaign is a result of an
increase in the average gift, not in the number of new donors to the campaign. In other words, current donors are
giving more while the campaign isn’t attracting a new donor base.
Anecdotally, campaign managers are telling JK Group that they struggle with finding ways to make the campaign
more appealing to their newer employees. Younger employees remain philanthropically minded and do give to
charities, but it appears they are seeking other opportunities to fulfill their charitable interests. Many contribute
outside the workplace, often giving online directly to charity. Some choose to volunteer their time.
Generations, like people, have personalities. The Millennials, those between 18-‐29 years of age, have begun to
express their personality. A study conducted by Pew Research Center in 2010 found 61 percent of the Millennials
participating in the study say their generation has a unique and distinctive identity. In response to an open-‐ended
follow-‐up question, 24 percent say it’s their use of technology that makes them distinctive from other generations.
Focus groups conducted by The Consulting Network among younger employees (age 20-‐35) in April 2009 found the
traditional workplace campaign isn’t as appealing to younger employees. This doesn’t mean they aren’t giving to
charity. Quite the contrary, they have favorable attitudes towards charitable giving and they identify one of their
top priorities as helping others in need. They are giving to charity but are seeking different tools and venues for
making their gifts.
The focus group found three key components of the traditional campaign that aren’t attractive to this younger
generation.
The paper pledge form and printed brochures are relics to them. They grew up with the Internet and much prefer
to receive information electronically or online.
CEO endorsement is not as important to them as what their peers are supporting. They would rather receive an
endorsement from a peer than a senior company official. They don’t want the company telling them what charities
they should contribute to. This generation is much more interested in doing their own charitable research and
identifying issues and causes they think are relevant and worthy of their personal support.

Payroll deduction, the staple of workplace giving, may not be as important to them as it was to their peers. In fact,
they perceive payroll deductions as locking them in and taking the spontaneity out of charitable giving. They prefer
to make one-‐time gifts.
“While the annual giving campaign has seen an evolution from a strictly paper campaign supporting United Way to
putting up a Web site where employees can make a contribution to a broad range of charitable organizations, we
haven’t made the campaign relevant to a broader audience,” says Stephen Greenhalgh, director, program analytics
and research, the JK Group. “We’ve been successful in putting a paper form online and directing employees to a
website where they can make a charitable contribution. We haven’t been as successful in evolving the way we
communicate and engage the younger generation. The campaign is so different from how employees
communicate and engage in other aspects of their lives.”
“Employees are increasingly aware of the opportunities to participate and give outside of their workplace,” says
Gary Carr, CEO of Carr Systems, Inc. and a former regional director for the United Way. “Some may feel that their
company environments may be holding them back. As an example, look at the Susan G. Komen Foundation’s
events. They are one of the more creative, interesting and forward thinking nonprofits. An opportunity to
participate in a Komen event has components of online, active engagement, experience and giving. Compare that
to a workplace giving campaign, there is usually just an option to donate. Corporate culture and leadership will
make a difference in giving, and there is an experiential gap needs to be closed.”
Carr also noted “social media in a workplace giving campaign doesn’t mean you need to run it on Facebook or
externally. Companies can use their intranets and internal capabilities to connect employees -‐ there could be a
“Wall” for a campaign inside the company firewall. Many companies have an active intranet space, but there is no
use of these tools for CSR purposes. We still see traditional campaigns managed by traditional program mangers
who don’t always see the opportunities to use these technologies.”
And that fits the evolving workforce. Millennials embrace multiple modes of self-‐expression. The 2010 Pew study
found that three-‐quarters have created a profile on a social networking site. One-‐in-‐five have posted a video of
themselves online. They are seeking these same opportunities in their charitable giving activities. In our view, they
want a workplace giving program that incorporates events and a social component allows collaboration and
dialogue among peers and offers tools that make giving fun easy and convenient.
Conclusions: What Do We Know?
So what does the corporate experience thus far in employee involvement and social media tell us? Based on our
interviews with CSR executives at major companies and JK’s experience -‐ as well as research and discussions with
other practitioners -‐ we offer these conclusions:
1. Companies are more comfortable using social media tools internally, but they’re waiting for external
adoption by marketing before moving ahead to use them in CSR type efforts.
2. Employees seek choice and appreciate democratic participation.
3. Leadership is required to ensure continued participation in campaigns, since employee participation is
decreasing.
4. Both social media and traditional communications methods are used in employee giving campaigns and
external outreach to communities.
5. Formal feedback loops for social media are the exception rather than the rule.

What We Can Recommend
There are different levels of commitment available for companies looking to test the social media waters.
Employers don’t need to give access to Facebook in order to use social media in an internal corporate giving
effort.
• Microsoft’s “Video Wall” effort showed an appropriate use of video clips, combined with email to alert
other employees to the causes they could support. UnitedHealth Group had a similar effort with photos
and videos.
• Pfizer’s use of voting and peer solicitation showed the power of employees asking each other to support
causes, without a central “social network.”
• “Traditional” social networks are not always needed. The Kaiser Permanente blog is used in a way in
which social compliments and extends traditional media outreach.
Companies must examine their comfort level with social media and exposing efforts outside the company.
• Each company is different and will have different levels of familiarity and acceptance of the use of social
media tools for CSR efforts.
• Pfizer’s employee voting was done within the bounds of their corporate network, and so was Microsoft’s,
while Western Union used external sites to increase employee excitement, allow sharing and promotion
by employees of the good works being done, and engage with external partners. Yahoo!’s campaign was
primarily external, though they are arguably a media company.
• Companies in regulated industries may have a knee-‐jerk reaction to avoid social media, but as we’ve seen
by the three health care firms represented, there are ways to use social tools without raising the ire of the
regulators or compliance committees.
Involve partners to improve reach and effectiveness of campaigns.
• Kaiser Permanente’s efforts with local TV and newspaper firms broadened the reach of the campaign and
enabled communication exposure the company could not have achieved alone.
• Western Union’s campaign directly appealed to the public in addition to employees for voting around
their “50 Days of Giving” campaign.
• Microsoft’s internal video efforts have generated interest from nonprofit partners in their region and
have created requests to employee supporters for participation.
• Yahoo!’s “For Good” team partnered with their top-‐viewed website for exposure for their campaign.
Seek ways that social good can be done in the context of the core business.
• Pepsi’s Refresh Everything campaign is a groundbreaking effort in that it is primarily a marketing
campaign, not run by the CSR or philanthropy teams, and yet it is directly parallel to the kinds of shared
value and marketplace links noted as the goals of many CSR campaigns.
• Microsoft’s efforts repurpose already-‐created software to enable employee empowerment.
• Western Union accepts donations for its efforts at their locations worldwide.

Finally, consider opening the corporate wall to external networks, and enable employees to be powerful
ambassadors for the CSR efforts.
• Western Union, Kaiser Permanente, and Yahoo! have all done outward facing efforts that let employees
share campaigns, information, and their pride in their company with their friends, families and followers
on social networks and over other Internet channels.
• Pepsi, Chase and American Express’ campaigns are clearly forward thinking, exposing the companies not
only to positive feedback but to difficult questions and situations that involve them in conversations with
stakeholders and ultimately lead to more community connections and involvement.
The Final Score
Social media is becoming a core part of people’s everyday online experience. With more than 250 million people
participating on Facebook every single day, and social connection features becoming part of news, business and
entertainment websites across the board, the trend is difficult to ignore. The trend for employees to “take the
technology they like to work” started back when IT departments got requests to sync Palm Pilots and personal
Blackberry devices in the late 1990s. Social media will be no different. Employees, rather than sneaking off to have
a smoke, will pull out their smart phones and check their network if it is blocked on the corporate network – taking
extra time and productivity away since the keyboard and screen is smaller, and the connection is slower.
Employees will also see corporate marketing efforts on social media, and wonder why those tools are not available
to them in the context of their work. Microsoft, IBM’s Lotus unit, SalesForce.com and other major purveyors of
corporate software are already including Twitter and Facebook-‐like functionality to their enterprise software
suites.
We’ve seen the power of using technology tools for internal employee engagement via the case studies from
Pfizer, Microsoft, and UnitedHealth Group. Engaged employees, especially Millenials, will be happier and more
loyal employees. We’ve also seen the ability to promote change externally, even without “standard” social
networks from Kaiser Permanente. Western Union’s external efforts appeal to their entire customer base, and
Pepsi’s non-‐CSR brand campaign is nothing short of groundbreaking.
Take this paper as an initial look at the range of possibilities for using social media tools as a way to engage internal
and external stakeholders in the Corporate Social Responsibility efforts of your company. It is a marker at a time of
change in the field. We urge you to seek ways to take a small step towards engaging the power of the crowd to
promote your CSR agenda.

JK Group Statement
JK Group commissioned this white paper on the impact of social media on corporate philanthropy to identify
opportunities for reaching out and engaging this younger generation. The future of workplace giving will depend
on our ability to engage and capture the interests of new employees entering the workforce. Participation will not
increase until we’ve identified new strategies and tools and revolutionize the way we engage employees in
charitable activities.
The Conversation
JK Group will remain an active participant in the discussion of social media and its impact on corporate
philanthropic programs. We will be incorporating this discussion into our learning and educational programs as
well as identifying specific opportunities to dialogue with our clients. Data from these conversations and identified
best practices will be shared.
Methodology
The case studies presented above were sourced directly from company representatives knowledgeable and
directly responsible for the efforts documented. They typically resided in corporate areas (philanthropy, corporate
communications or marketing) that ran the campaigns. All statistics and quotes attributed to those representatives
have been fact-‐checked and verified.
Additional quotes obtained from industry experts were similarly sourced and verified.
All third party research was cited directly in the text or is linked or cited in the reference section below.
Resources and Acknowledgments

Reference Section:
Bauerlein, Valerie, “Pepsi Hits 'Refresh' on Donor Project”, Wall St. Journal, Jan. 30, 2011,
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704832704576114171399171138.html
Business’s Social Contract: Capturing the Corporate Philanthropy Opportunity, Committee Encouraging Corporate
Philanthropy, McKinsey & Co. http://www.corporatephilanthropy.org/research/thought-‐leadership/research-‐
reports/businesss-‐social-‐contract.html
Chan, Stephanie P., “Bing gets flamed on Twitter over Japan earthquake campaign” The Seattle Times, March 14,
2011, http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/microsoftpri0/2014493218_microsoftgetsbacklash.html
“Chase and Facebook Announce 100 Small and Local Charities to Receive $25,000 Each From Chase Community
Giving,” December 16, 2009,
http://investor.shareholder.com/jpmorganchase/releasedetail.cfm?releaseid=430809
Citizens Engage! Edelman goodpurpose® Study 2010
http://www.goodpurposecommunity.com/Pages/globalstudy.aspx [PDF format]
Custom Communications, UK, “Social Media CSR -‐ The Good, the Bad & the Ugly”
www.slideshare.net/socialmediainfluence/the-‐good-‐the-‐bad-‐the-‐ugly-‐a-‐short-‐history-‐of-‐social-‐media-‐csr

Erickson, Kjerstin, “The Dark Side of Online Voting Contests,” SocialEdge.org, December 15, 2009,
http://www.socialedge.org/blogs/forging-‐ahead/archive/2009/12/15/the-‐dark-‐side-‐of-‐online-‐voting-‐contests
“Invisible Children Wins $1 Million In Chase Community Giving Contest On Facebook,” Huffington Post, Updated
March 24, 2010, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/22/chase-‐community-‐giving-‐co_n_433689.html
Jones, Chris, “Don’t Put Arts Support Up for a Popularity Vote,” Chicago Tribune, June 30, 2010,
http://leisureblogs.chicagotribune.com/the_theater_loop/2010/06/dont-‐put-‐arts-‐support-‐up-‐for-‐a-‐popularity-‐
vote.html
Kanter, Beth, “Charities Cry Foul on Chase Facebook Charitable Giving Contest”, Dec 19, 2009,
http://beth.typepad.com/beths_blog/2009/12/charities-‐cry-‐foul-‐on-‐chase-‐facebook-‐charitable-‐giving-‐
contest.html
Kanter, Beth, “Deconstructing An Angry Crowd: What Can We Learn?,” Dec. 23, 2009,
http://beth.typepad.com/beths_blog/2009/12/should-‐online-‐contests-‐be-‐redesigned-‐or-‐just-‐go-‐away.html
Kleiman, Kelly, “What’s Wrong With Chase Community Giving?” Huffington Post, July 21, 2010,
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kelly-‐kleiman/whats-‐wrong-‐with-‐chase-‐co_b_653492.html
Livingston, Geoff, “Can the Contest Craze Sustain Itself?”, May 10, 2010,
http://geofflivingston.com/2010/05/10/can-‐the-‐contest-‐craze-‐sustain-‐itself/
Livingston, Geoff, “Free eGuide on Cause Marketing via Social Media,” October 5, 2010,
http://geofflivingston.com/2010/10/05/free-‐eguide-‐on-‐cause-‐marketing-‐via-‐social-‐media/
Madden, Mary, and Jones, Sydney, “Networked Workers,” The Pew Internet & American Life Project, September
24, 2008 http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2008/Networked-‐Workers.aspx
Massey, Paul, “The Role of CrowdSourcing in Social Media,” http://impact.webershandwick.com/?q=role-‐
crowdsourcing-‐social-‐media (Also references: http://www.slideshare.net/wssocialimpact/crowdsourcing-‐social-‐
impact-‐in-‐csr and http://www.scribd.com/doc/48493696/Crowdsourcing-‐and-‐Social-‐Impact-‐Fast-‐Facts)
“Members Project® Announces Final Round of Winners to Receive Total of $1 Million in Funding from American
Express,” American Express Company, March 4, 2011,
http://about.americanexpress.com/news/pr/2011/mp_winners.aspx
“Pepsi Taps Consumers to Shake Up Refresh Project in 2011”, https://www.pepsico.com/PressRelease/Pepsi-‐Taps-‐
Consumers-‐to-‐Shake-‐Up-‐Refresh-‐Project-‐in-‐201101312011.html
“Pepsi Refresh Project Opens Online Site for Idea Submissions,” http://www.pepsico.com/PressRelease/Pepsi-‐
Refresh-‐Project-‐Opens-‐Online-‐Site-‐for-‐Idea-‐Submissions01132010.html
Pew Social Trends Staff, “Millennials: Confident. Connected. Open to Change,” Pew Research Center, February
24, 2010, http://pewsocialtrends.org/2010/02/24/millennials-‐confident-‐connected-‐open-‐to-‐change/
Porter, Michael E, and Kramer, Mark R., “Strategy & Society: The Link between Competitive Advantage and
Corporate Social Responsibility,” Harvard Business Review December 2006.

Rainie, Lee, Purcell, Kristen, and Smith, Aaron, Social Side of the Internet Study 2011, Pew Internet and American
Life Project, http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2011/The-‐Social-‐Side-‐of-‐the-‐Internet.aspx
R Freeman, Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach (Pitman Series in Business and Public Policy), Pitman
Publishing , January 1984.
Social Media Influcence (Agency), “The Social Media Sustainability Index,”

http://socialmediainfluence.com/2010/11/16/the-‐social-‐media-‐sustainability-‐index/
Strom, Stephanie, “Charities Criticize Online Fund-‐Raising Contest by Chase,” New York Times, December 18, 2009,
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/19/us/19charity.html?_r=4
Acknowledgements
• Carol Cone and Edelman
• Weber Shandwick
• Pew Internet and American Life Project
• Allison Fine
• Beth Kanter
• Geoff Livingston
• Gary Carr
• The Consulting Network
• All the companies and named representatives listed in our case studies
About JK Group
Since our founding in 1989, JK Group’s mission has been to provide its clients with an active partnership that
incorporates the most comprehensive, technologically advanced and cost-‐effective solutions for corporate
philanthropy programs. JK Group offers a complete suite of solutions including employee giving campaigns,
matching gifts, volunteer grant programs, volunteer event management, administration of corporate/foundation
grants, sponsorships and in-‐kind donations, international programs and disaster relief efforts. As a result, we’ve
grown to become the leading provider of corporate philanthropic solutions, whose client base includes nearly half
of the Fortune 100 companies.
The depth and breadth of our client base and resulting data and expertise enables JK Group to offer the latest
research in trends and best practices and information on the ever-‐changing business of corporate philanthropy. JK
Group offers a variety of learning events where corporate practitioners can come together to discuss issues critical
to the success of their philanthropic programs. We regularly publish white papers on topics ranging from program
tips to technologies.

About NYU Heyman Center for Philanthropy and Fundraising
The George H. Heyman, Jr., Center for Philanthropy and Fundraising at New York University, the nation’s
preeminent educator of fundraisers and grantmakers, offers professional programs to help students gain a solid
foundation in the field while building their own fundraising philosophy and framework through advanced study of
the history and theory of philanthropy. Since its inception in 1999, the Heyman Center has educated more than
4,000 practitioners, executives, and volunteers from hundreds of nonprofits, corporations, and foundations.

About the Authors
Howard Greenstein is a marketing technology strategist and president of the Harbrooke Group. He has been
involved in cutting edge technology applications including online communities and social media for over fifteen
years. Howard’s years of experience in the technology world, combined with his background as an executive coach,
help him bridge the gap between business needs and technology requirements, allowing him to facilitate difficult
business conversations and focus on the required results of any project. Harbrooke nonprofit clients have included
AJLI and New York Road Runners.
His nonprofit experience includes work as the director of operations for the Twin Towers Fund, the third largest
9/11 related charity serving the families of the rescue workers killed at the World Trade Center on September 11,
2001. Greenstein served as an administrator at NYU’s School of Continuing and Professional Studies, and continues
to lecture in both the Heyman Center for Philanthropy and Fundraising, and the Masters of Integrated Marketing
program.
He is currently a blogger for Inc. Magazine, writing the weekly Startup Toolkit column
(http://www.inc.com/howard-‐greenstein), sits on the Board of Directors of Social Media Club
(http://socialmediaclub.org) and is president of the NYC Chapter. Howard earned a B.S. from Cornell University,
and a Masters of Professional Studies from NYU’s world-‐renowned Interactive Telecommunications Program (ITP).
He is also a frequent speaker, panelist and moderator on Social Media and Web 2.0 topics. Find out more at
http://harbrooke.com/
Tom Watson is the president and founder of CauseWired, a boutique consulting firm advising clients on the social
commons: nonprofits, foundations and companies. Tom is a journalist, author, media critic, entrepreneur and
consultant who has worked at the confluence of media technology and social change for more than a 15 years. He
is the author of CauseWired: Plugging In, Getting Involved, Changing the World (Wiley, 2008 ) a best-‐selling book
that chronicles the rise of online social activism. During his long career as journalist, Tom has written for The New
York Times, The Daily Beast, Huffington Post, techPresident.com, Social Edge, Industry Standard, Inside, Worth and
Contribute magazines, among many other publications. Before launching CauseWired, Tom served for nine years
as chief strategy officer of Changing Our World, Inc., the international philanthropic services company he helped to
found. Tom is the publisher of onPhilanthropy.com, CauseWired’s extensive online resource for philanthropy
professionals. Before joining the philanthropy sector, Tom was co-‐founder of @NY, the pioneering Internet news
and information service that chronicled the rise of New York’s Silicon Alley new media scene in the 1990s. Early in
his career, Tom was the executive editor of The Riverdale Press, a Pulitzer Prize-‐winning newspaper in the Bronx,
where he covered politics and won more than a dozen state and national awards for excellence in journalism. Tom
Watson is a frequent speaker and commentator on trends and issues related to media, technology and society.
Find out more at http://causewired.com/

Wired Workforce Networked CSR Final

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Wired Workforce Networked CSR Final

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Wired Workforce, Networked CSR

Employee Involvement in the Age of Social Media

Tom Watson, President, CauseWired Group

A Special Report Sponsored by the JK Group

(CC) 2011 BY THE JK GROUP – SOME RIGHTS RESERVED

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 2 APRIL 29, 2011

1. Introduction and Executive Summary

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 3 APRIL 29, 2011

Goals for This White Paper

Emerging Social Media Trends

• Employees seek choice and appreciate democratic participation:

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 4 APRIL 29, 2011

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 5 APRIL 29, 2011

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 6 APRIL 29, 2011

Krizman notes: “For the

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 7 APRIL 29, 2011

Original Informational site, before redesign:

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 8 APRIL 29, 2011

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 9 APRIL 29, 2011

New York, NY

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 10 APRIL 29, 2011

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 11 APRIL 29, 2011

Employees are encouraged to participate. “We

Western Union also holds “Foundation Fridays”

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 12 APRIL 29, 2011

During 2009 the company

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 13 APRIL 29, 2011

Important Public Campaigns

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 14 APRIL 29, 2011

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 15 APRIL 29, 2011

Other campaigns (not interviewed for this report):

New York, NY

New York, NY

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 16 APRIL 29, 2011

The Challenge of Challenges

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 17 APRIL 29, 2011

Bob Dylan, 1963

The Socially Wired Workforce

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 18 APRIL 29, 2011

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 19 APRIL 29, 2011

Social Media Wave in Employee Involvement Programs?

Our verdict: it’s coming, but it’s not there yet.

Employee participation is decreasing.

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 20 APRIL 29, 2011

Younger employees aren’t participating.

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 21 APRIL 29, 2011

Conclusions: What Do We Know?

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 22 APRIL 29, 2011

Involve partners to improve reach and effectiveness of campaigns.

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 23 APRIL 29, 2011

The Final Score

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 24 APRIL 29, 2011

Resources and Acknowledgments

Citizens Engage! Edelman goodpurpose® Study 2010

http://www.goodpurposecommunity.com/Pages/globalstudy.aspx [PDF format]

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 25 APRIL 29, 2011

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 26 APRIL 29, 2011

Social Media Influcence (Agency), “The Social Media Sustainability Index,”

• Carol Cone and Edelman

• Pew Internet and American Life Project

• The Consulting Network

About JK Group

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 27 APRIL 29, 2011

WIRED WORKFORCE, NETWORKED CSR PAGE 28 APRIL 29, 2011