Stakeholders in the Information Society

As mentioned earlier social responsibility should be a proactive action rather than a reactive action. Those involved must consider and act upon the interests of all stakeholders. The identification of stakeholders is therefore an essential element of proactive social responsibility. Many would argue that shareholders or owners or investors are the primary stakeholders in a business and that their welfare should be maximized, but at what cost and to whom? The traditional view of stakeholders is not sufficient, as consideration tends to be restricted to primary users, developers, decision makers, financiers, and legal experts. It is essential to adopt a wider perspective that includes those directly and indirectly affected by the move to the Information Society. This broadening is essential as it includes not only traditional stakeholders viewed from the widely accepted business perspective, but also social actors who Schot (2001) defines as "those who experience the effects of evolving technologies but [traditionally] are not actively involved in the development of technologies. They can be consumers, citizens, employees, companies, social groups, etc." This broader stakeholder consideration encourages IT professionals to be more sensitive about the systems they design and implement.

However, it is not just IT professionals who have a role to play in promoting social responsibility in the Information Society. It must include all those with some responsibility for IT systems. Johnson (2000) suggests responsibility for technology must start with those who created it, but that users of the technology have a shared responsibility for the consequences. This remains true for information technology. However, there is a wider group of people responsible for IT systems. These can be subdivided into people who commission the systems, people who develop the systems, people who operate the systems, people who use the systems, people who make overall policies under which the systems are developed and operated, and people who actively promote the systems. Each of these subgroups has a role to play in ensuring that systems are beneficial to society.

Participation of Senior Executives

The strategic vision of an organization is driven by its senior executives. This is true of all types and all sizes of organization. It is therefore imperative that senior executives are actively supportive of social responsibility within all areas of operation. There is concerning evidence that this might not be so for IT.

In April 2001, Synstar International, a leading pan-European provider of IT and business availability services, published a survey titled, "Information Technology: Does the Board Understand the Importance of IT Yet?" The survey investigated the changing role of the IT manager in the UK, Germany, and Benelux across the retail, banking, insurance, and automotive market sectors. Three questions in this survey of IT managers and directors are relevant to the issue of social responsibility.

• Question 4b: The board makes decisions without considering the IT implications—agree or disagree?

• Questions 5: What is the average IT literacy of your company's board of directors?

• Question 7: What are the reasons why IT managers/directors are rarely on the board?

Responses to these questions are shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Percentage of IT Managers and Directors Agreeing

	Q4b—Board not consider IT	Q5—Board has poor or very poor IT literacy	Q7—Main reason: Board thinks IT peripheral to business	Q7—Main reason: Board does not value or understand IT
Overall	37%	23%	22%	22%
UK	42%	19%	12%	28%
Germany	36%	28%	28%	8%
Benelux	28%	18%	32%	38%
Retail	39%	25%	23%	29%
Banking	34%	17%	24%	20%
Insurance	36%	21%	23%	16%
Automotive	40%	28%	18%	20%

Overall, 37% of IT managers and directors reported that the board makes decisions without considering the IT implications. The UK (42%) and the automotive sector (40%) were the worst. This, coupled with the belief of about a quarter that their boards had poor or very poor IT literacy, is very concerning. Even more so when 22% responded that the reason why there is not an IT representative on the board is because either the board considers IT peripheral to its business, or the board does not value or understand IT.

These findings suggest that the private sector has some fundamental issues to address if social responsibility related to IT is going to be realized. DeHann (2000) points out, "When social responsibility is a strategic initiative, it is embedded in all aspects of the company's operations." It is therefore concerning that IT companies have little strategic focus on social responsibility. For example, Foley and Jayawardhena (2001) report, "Interviewees acknowledged the growing impact of the Internet on society, but for most (72%) this had little impact on their corporate social responsibility strategies. Indeed, only 15% of IT businesses are currently involved in Internet access projects with local community groups and only four are supporting projects to help households or individuals to have Internet access from home." Without due consideration and support at the board level, responsible computing within organizations is unlikely to become an accepted common value. It will mean that critical events will always dictate action based upon efficient and effective expediency rather than social benefit. This seems unacceptable.