The following particulars of the bank’s CSR activities have been obtained with permission by one of the researchers (a bank employee). The bank has a national footprint with consumer access in many formal residential settlements throughout South Africa. This bank has an integrated reporting policy on CSR, which highlights an overall citizenship agenda as a primary objective of every CSR activity, and, in doing so, recognises that CSR enhances the firm’s relevance to communities whose loyalty in the long term defines the bank’s viability. This seeks to position the bank as a corporate citizen within participatory systems of bank and society seeing beyond only financial returns. The bank’s CSR compliance encompasses and acknowledges what is covered by both South African legal requirements (Institute of Directors Southern Africa 2009) and the UN global compact sustainability agendas through a wide umbrella of CSR activities. The bank has attempted to manage CSR risk by defining standard methodologies for internal and external stakeholder engagement, heightening awareness of their business’s ethical culture and of a need to continually improve project service levels to clients and communities. CSR values are upheld by a dedicated team of CSR managers. The bank currently has two options for CSR project implementation. Option 1 ensures the quality of a project by ensuring an appropriately competent external business partner with specialised project knowledge to facilitate maximum value creation. This is often carried out by forming partnerships with the South African government or reputable not-for-profit (NPO) organisations. The bank also considers this a risk management strategy, as access to specialist staff and resources through these partnerships brings with it a degree of risk reduction, as both external partner types generally have their own well-developed project management and risk management processes to add to those of the bank’s project management structures. The bank actively manages CSR value creation in option 1. Option 2 is projects driven solely by bank employees. This second option receives no CSR project management or risk guidelines, or checks of employee capabilities. The only criterion set by the bank is strict adherence to a process to access project funding from the CSR managers to ensure that public and private shareholder funding is released for genuine community CSR activities.

A qualitative research methodology was applied and primary data gathered from specific participants involved (Table 2). A qualitative approach allowed for discussion of the projects with individual participants, useful in establishing project priorities and learning about practical implementation (Tustin et al. 2005:182). The two CSR community projects took a similar implementation time (one year).

In both projects, the employees themselves identified the communities with whom they wanted to work. Project 1, which went to local High school 1, conducted a needs analysis with the principal and vice-principal, and the researchers realised that the school was lacking some basic requirements needed for a comfortable learning environment. Project 1 delivered to this needs analysis as follows: renovation of toilets; lights fitted in classrooms; establishment of a school vegetable garden; teaching interventions of mathematics, accounting, introductory computer training and science for Grades 11 and 12 for the period of the project. Outcomes set by Project 2 were without prior consultation with the school, undertaking to teach children at High school 2 how to save money and to turn a dilapidated classroom into a library. The role of bank CSR managers was to ensure collection of evidence that supported that both schools were registered as public secondary educational institutions with the Department of Higher Education of South Africa before releasing bank funds.

Responses from one-on-one, open-ended, semi-structured interviews were gathered from specifically selected participants, all highly involved in each project. The participants were three senior CSR managers, three key project employee team members from each of two projects, the school principal, the vice-principal and a teacher for Project 1 as well as the school principal, the vice-principal and a teacher for Project 2. These face-to-face, in-depth interviews averaged 50 min each. Each interview was recorded with a voice recorder, then transcribed verbatim and reviewed by the researcher. Bank employees and managers were interviewed in their bank offices, whereas the school participants were interviewed at their schools.

This primary data analysis was based on the use of qualitative thematic content analysis to interrogate interview transcripts where categorisation of participant findings was derived in relation to the three project management themes – pre-implementation engagement, project execution and value creation (Elo et al. 2014:2). Data transcription and analysis began as soon as the first interview had taken place helping in directing the next interviewer–interviewee conversation richness by constantly improving interview interactions (Corbin & Strauss 1990:6). Because a substantial body of knowledge exists on project management and on the purpose of CSR, plus the fact that the employees’ CSR volunteering experiences have been influenced by the bank’s financial risk management policy but no other bank CSR policies, inductive reasoning is argued as appropriate (Elo & Kyngäs 2008:109). Open-coding of primary data first identified variables related to EV CSR project management. Then, open codes were grouped by affinity under each of the three theme descriptors (Corbin & Strauss 1990:12–13), using the background of how to create project value formed by the literature review (Flick 2009:178). The degree to which each team’s CSR intervention was successful was ascertained through comparison of the three stages in each project – stakeholder engagement, project execution and value creation.

Reliability refers to the extent to which the techniques applied in data collection or the analysis thereof will yield consistent results (Babbie & Mouton 2004:119; Saunders, Lewis & Thornhill 2007:149). In this research, a point of reliability was that research design ensured reviewing the firm’s EV CSR project management, using participant perspectives against the background of academic secondary research pertaining to EVs, project management and CSR projects. Only one of the researchers conducted all interviews, helping moderate different interviewer bias thus providing a second point of consistency in data gathering and reliability. The third point of reliability was the depth of understanding gained from EV CSR project management by targeting key role players in two similar CSR projects. With regard to research validity, Saunders et al. (2007:150) state that ‘validity is concerned with findings – with the sole purpose of establishing whether the findings are really about what they appear to be about’. The findings needed to establish how the bank’s EV CSR projects were managed and therefore needed the views of CSR managers who controlled bank funding, thus shareholder funding. The findings also needed the views of EVs who were leaders in their CSR projects and deemed managers in project success. Finally, the views of the school principals were needed who hoped for value for their high school and community from the project (Babbie & Mouton 2004:122). From this triangulation, a distillation of perspectives and characteristics of CSR could be drawn (Flick 2009:444).

Ethics approval for the MComm study was received from the Faculty of Management ethics committee University of Johannesburg. Additionally, the retail bank issued V.C.P. with a letter giving permission to conduct the study as long as anonymity of the bank was retained. The bank approval trail is listed in V.C.P. Mcomm appendices as Appendix 1.

Table 2 draws attention to the difference in team size and managerial skills. Project 2 was at a disadvantage immediately having no management training. Yet, CSR managers, supposedly skilled at understanding project management, released funds to this project. Literature suggests that both teams need the firm to have established CSR support processes but Project 2 in particular needed skilled help, which it did not get and which the statements that follow indicate was not part of the current EV CSR project management support from the bank.

Question 1 asked: ‘At what stage did employees become involved in their CSR project?’ seeking to understand how project needs had been established. All senior CSR managers gave similar responses, indicating that employees were expected to identify their own projects and plan their delivery to the community. A CSR manager response is recorded here as an example.

Senior CSR manager 1, project 1, male, said:

The same question was then put to the bank employees involved in the projects. Sample responses are presented.

Project 1’s employee 3, female, said:

Project 2 employee perspectives appeared similar to those expressed in Project 1 in that team members indicated they felt they had been actively involved in their project.

Project 2’s employee 2, male, noted:

So there was seemingly little difference between the two project teams as to their initial actions to initiate a CSR project and their commitment from inception of each project.

The same question was then put to Project 1’s school principal, female, who said:

However, the response from Project 2’s school principal, female, was:

Several points of disengagement and engagement are apparent. From the senior managers’ perspective, their own degree of involvement with employees was knowingly limited (‘not spoon-fed’, ‘think for themselves’) although they were the appointed CSR management experts. These senior managers in interviews showed little inclination to be involved on a regular basis with either project’s employees. The CSR managers at no point met the community members. Akpan (2008:500) argues that firms do indeed not always involve all stakeholders at the strategic planning stage – in this study, the CSR heads were neither at Project 1 or 2 employee internal CSR meetings nor at EV community meetings; they also did not want report back from these meetings. It is concerning that the CSR managers did not realise their own role in the creation of value from both projects. Poolthong and Mandhachitara (2009) suggest that some banks judge their CSR success only by how much available CSR funding was spent. This seems borne out by this bank’s senior CSR managers’ approving funding but not requiring other detail as to how the employees managed the planning and implementation of each project. This managerial attitude suggested EV CSR as being not as important as other aspects of the business as noted by Raman et al. (2012).

Employee involvement was another important activity from an optimised planning perspective. Firstly, both teams noted that they, as team members, had been committed to their team and their project from the project inception meeting. Project 1 then interfaced with the community to find out what needs their project should address. Conversely, Project 2 skipped this engagement link, deciding for the community what deliverables would be useful. The school principal in Project 2 was well aware that she had not been consulted and this might have been a risk if the school had not been so grateful for any sort of intervention. Conflict between Project 2 employees and their school could conceivably have arisen during project execution because no co-creation of outcomes had been undertaken. This finding agrees with that of Bhattacharya, Korschun, and Sen (2006) who state that it is vital for all relevant stakeholders to be part of CSR initiatives from inception for project maximised value creation.

Project 1 set project objectives after communicating with the school, whereas Project 2 did not. Literature notes advantages to communication and information flow between stakeholders in many aspects of a project. After an engagement process, all stakeholders should feel satisfied and accountable for project outcomes (Crain & Abrahams 2008; Vachani & Post 2012). Bank CSR managers who allocate funding assume that employee teams have the skills to manage a project, creating substantial risk when there is an under-skilled EV team. Raman et al. (2012) point out that CSR should be considered a strategic ‘must have’ by the entire leadership of a corporation to really add value. The bank acknowledges the importance of CSR corroborated by the fact that there are senior managers with the title of CSR manager who have the mandate to dispense financial budgets for EV CSR. There is also an active bank campaign to encourage employees to volunteer for CSR projects – yet, the findings suggest that there is a discontinuity in what the CSR managers believe is their role in support of these employees and indeed the bank. This supports the view held by Campbell (2007) and Raman et al. (2012) that this South African bank like much other organisations researched may see CSR EV projects as a ‘nice to have’ by senior leadership rather than a ‘must have’. The bank did have a clearly stated policy on risk management in CSR implementation when working with NPOs and government, with many risk mitigation opportunities. Yet, CSR managers offered only a financial management oversight with EV projects – projects which could be considered high risk, not only in terms of not applying funds properly but also in unknowingly creating friction between the community and the bank (brand identity risk).

An interesting final finding in Theme 1 was the perspective of the team members individually. They drew the researchers’ attention to the fact that each team had what could be referred to as a ‘we commit’ stage at their first initiation of project meetings. This is an important concept that should be considered in how a CSR EV team forms internal support links before performing.

Question 2 reviewed how well the existing bank CSR process for releasing resources for a community initiative served the projects. The research instructed participants to: ‘Examine the existing CSR funding process (a flowchart provided by the CSR managers) and comment on the process’. The senior CSR managers all noted problems by employees in fulfilling the funding access criteria. An example being the response of senior CSR manager 3, project 2, male:

The same question was then put to the bank employees for both projects.

Project 1’s employee 1, male, said:

Project 2’s employee 2, male, noted:

The teams established project timelines, but the required CSR internal process held up both projects. The teams felt compelled to honour their agreed timelines with the community. They felt a sense of frustration at the process, which corroborated the findings by Bhattacharya et al. (2006) that the employee does indeed feel accountable for project delivery. The teams built the bank’s brand with the community on their own determination to deliver; yet, the CSR managers showed little cognisance of this project-community dedication. Terblanche (2014:4) notes that ‘interactions between people everywhere in the firm is the new locus of value creation’. This view suggests that, without a bank’s framework for EV CSR being more than just a process for financial compliance, the complete value of such initiatives may remain largely untapped. The senior CSR managers indicated that they were well aware of the procedural hurdles, yet the inflexible process was applied. Varajão et al. (2014) draw attention to the value of resolving conflict that exists over how bank funding is released, because not serving their internal customer – the employee – actually results in harming the bank’s external customer relationship and perhaps future bank viability (Pearce & Robinson 2011).

Finally, the projects’ implementation from the community perspective is worth considering. Project 1’s school principal, female, said:

Project 2’s school principal, female, noted:

Both teams built the reputation of the bank with the community through their dedication even with the challenges faced.

The third question requested stakeholders to define how the CSR projects added value to the bank. The research used the Porter’s value chain diagram (Porter 2001:52) to give all participants a similar definition for what the question was trying to establish.

Here the findings show that the bank’s CSR managers did understand the type of value EV projects could generate across the organisation, yet they failed to manage in a manner that supports optimised value creation. Several responses from participants are presented to show the understanding of participants of the diversity of value that could be created.

Senior CSR manager 1, project 1, male, was quite clear on the value of EV CSR from a marketing perspective:

Senior CSR manager 2, project 2, male, suggested other valued outcomes:

Senior CSR manager 3, project 2, male, added:

Project team members demonstrated similar understanding of value creation and a value chain.

Project 1’s employee 3, female, stated:

Project 1’s employee 2, male, said:

The responses from Project 2 participants were as supportive of the value of CSR efforts for the community and the bank as those of Project 1 employees.

Project 2’s employee 3, male, said:

Project 2’s employee 2, male, said:

The school principals were not shown the value chain, but were asked what they considered of value from the projects.

Project 1’s principal, female, noted:

Project 2’s school principal, female, said:

Senior managers and employees from both projects indicated that value creation from a CSR activity appeared in many places in a value chain. Yet, under Themes 1 and 2, CSR managers indicated how little they did to support an EV project other than deliver financial resources if all paperwork criteria had been fulfilled. Senior managers were clearly aware from their responses of how a CSR project could impact on the bank’s future performance. Pandi-Perumal et al. (2015:14) note that limited support for some projects may arise from an institutional lack of understanding of how certain project types (in this case EV projects) contribute in terms of value, but in this bank it seems the CSR managers were well versed in understanding the potential for added value across the organisation from EV CSR activities.