NATO and the Corporate Social Responsibility NATO made tremendous efforts to enhance the communication with member

nations publics. Today the organization is on Facebook, Twitter and even YouTube. We have a Secretary Generals video blog and the making of the last Strategic Concept was based on an extensive communication exercise with the allied publics. But communication is not enough. A shift toward communion is needed. And communion is firstly about involvement. Therefore, by adopting and implementing a concept like the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), NATO could turn they into we. There is a broad theory behind the CSR concept, but basically, the CSR Programs are initiatives to voluntarily contribute to the communitys general good. Starting from Philip Kotler and Nancy Lee views on the issue1, I would like to point out a few allied ongoing initiatives which could be seen and promoted under CSR aegis - programs such as Cause Promotion, Corporate Social Marketing and Socially Responsible Business Practices. The first example is about bringing into publics attention a good cause and to mobilize the support for it. For fitting Cause Promotion into the NATO framework, I was thinking at the need to develop among the public a certain cyber social responsibility. Unlike the conventional space, in cyberspace every one of us has a role to play. For example my computer and my specific knowledge and skills could become an offensive or defensive cyber capability. Therefore, in the debate regarding NATOs role in the cyberspace, a particular importance must be attached to allied users education through competitions, dialogue and even support in ensuring a basic protection to personal computers. Lets not forget the challenge of botnets2 and the idea that behind a Distributed Denial-of-Service attack could be also a bunch of unwilling users. By adopting this approach in the case of the first example, NATO would create a sense of cyber-solidarity with the allied publics, pointing out that the organization is fighting shoulder by shoulder with the individual users, beyond promoting the concept of cyber defence, quite strange for a person unacquainted with IT issues. The Corporate Social Marketing envisions the changes of a behavior (either change a negative behavior or adopt a positive one) and for this second example I have in mind the Building Integrity Initiative3. The pledge for integrity must be pushed beyond identifying good practices (including the creation of a compendium on the issue) and offering advice on practical measures. NATO must involve also in the national implementation of the practical measures for building integrity, at least in terms of monitoring the state of affairs, as in the usability and deployability initiatives4. We cannot talk about NATO as a business, but we can update Alliances way of doing business. Here comes my third example, the Socially Responsible Business Practices, and for that purpose I would mention the allied efforts for turning NATO green. These initiatives would have to move beyond NATOs Science for Peace and Security Programme up to changes in the allied fuel policy and the results must be publicly shared. The allied publics have to be aware that NATO is trying to reduce its fossil fuel footprint - either we are speaking
1

Philip Kotler, Nancy Lee - Corporate Social Responsibility: Doing the Most Good for Your Company and Your Cause, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Pub., 2004. 2 A botnet or robot network is a group of computers running a computer application controlled and manipulated only by the owner or the software source. (http://www.tech-faq.com/botnet.html, accessed at February 17, 2012) 3 http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_68368.htm, accessed at February 17, 2012. 4 http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_50087.htm, accessed at February 17, 2012. 1

of solar power and biofuels based on algae or of hybrid vehicles - the Alliance rallying in this way to the global efforts in preserving a friendly environment for the generations to come. Last but not least, the problem of CSR costs must be addressed. Even though I cannot precisely estimate the impact of the three above-mentioned initiatives (or of the campaigns needed to promote them), an empirical analysis would emphasize the following advantages: - by increasing allied users awareness on the flaws of the cyber environment, a cyber attack would require much more sophisticated methods and implicitly much more resources to invest by the adversary (a kind of deterrence in terms of costs); - by limiting or deterring the spread of corruption in the defence sector, there will be more money to invest in this area and the money available will be efficiently spent; - by turning the Alliance into a green organization, NATO would reduce its fuel addiction, and implicitly the costs of ensuring sufficient, stable and low-priced flows of fossil energy. Im not pledging for the CSR as being the unique solution for encouraging NATO ownership and identification among its member nations and their publics, but as a potential way of tackling these issues. But the main idea is that NATO must take a new kind of responsibility toward the allied publics. Social responsibility.