The Importance of Corporate Social Responsibility (csr) and E-harmony

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is the social responsibility for a company to make based upon the “right” thing to do versus the legal actions that they have to do. In other words, CSR is a decision making process that business owners make from all ends to decide what they should do against what they are required to do by law. It’s a moral issue often involving their customers’ mass satisfaction and demand for changes in how a company works. CSR can also be a decision based off its employees and their satisfaction with the company as well. An example of a customer based CSR issue might be a demand for a food product to make something that is “gluten-free” for its customers that are experiencing gluten intolerance. An example of an employee based CSR matter might concern minimum wage, in which a company does not have to pay its cashier’s more than what’s required in minimum wage, but feels it needs to, to satisfy its employees.

A Case Study: E-Harmony's Approach to CSR

There are pros and cons to using a CSR model and it all depends on how it is utilized. A good example of a company’s decision to practice CSR would be E-Harmony. E-Harmony was originally founded in the year 2000, by Dr. Neil Clark Warren, a psychologist and a Christian theologian. Warren’s original idea as the site’s CEO was to use his patented matchmaking algorithm system to connect Christian couples and serve as a convenient way for like minded individuals to date and then get married. Over the period of a decade, Warren broadened the website and was a proclaimed Evangelist, but did not encourage “Christian only” relationships. Upon spending up to $700 million dollars in advertising, Warren claims that his site has produced results with over 560,000 customers getting married after using E-Harmony (Levy, 2012).

The Discrimination Lawsuit: A Turning Point

The CSR issue within Warren’s website was noticed by individuals who were gay. One person could not login or register an account with E-Harmony and proceed to search for a date with someone of the same sex. The option of “I am a male looking for a …” was only open to “female” and vice versa. In 2005 the company was sued for the discrimination of same-sex couples. Because of Warren’s presumed past with the website being a “Christian couple” based matchmaking site, individuals assumed that Warren was strict on his policies, enforcing a heterosexual agenda. It was a fact that as a customer one could not choose the option of “seeking” a same-sex partner on the website, and when this lawsuit was brought to light, E-Harmony lost 350,000 already said customers because of it. Warren stated that these people alone, fled because of the principle of the matter. As his own public relations representative, Warren also covered himself with the rebuttal that he was not “anti-gay” but that his patented algorithm program was not catered for homosexual relationships, to which he described as “…a different [type] of match.” (O’Brien, 2016)

Creating Compatible Partners: A Compromise?

In 2009 as a result of a demand for equality amongst E-Harmony daters for same-sex relationships, Warren created a separate website, “Compatible Partners”. This website was the begrudging decision by Warren after pressure from his customer base and his employees posing a real Corporate Social Responsibility problem. Although Warren says he is not “anti-gay”, up until the lawsuit for homosexual discrimination he had no intention changing E-Harmony’s dating options. In fact, Warren refused despite numerous inquiries, to change E-Harmony’s profile options from matching a man with a woman, which in turn hurt his company. Instead of changing E-Harmony’s policies to cater to all types of couples, Warren continued to stay within his original boundaries and standpoint with the issue, and made a separate website, instead. This is believed to have segregated the matter even further, and also highlights the suggestion that despite his words, his actions speak for themselves. In an interview in 2013, Warren suggests that gay marriage and equality laws have damaged his life and his company. He talks about hate mail and devout Christians who would throw death threats at him or come to his home because they opposed his gay matchmaking website “Compatible Partners” (Hallowell, 2013).

A Reflection on Failed CSR

In this situation Warren failed to uphold CSR. His own stubbornness with his personal religion and beliefs were of a greater value to him than that of a changing environment surrounding him in American society. In lieu of his lack of integrity to customer demand, he lost a fair amount of customers off principles alone. The website “Compatible Partners” was not sufficient for gay singles as it was a result of something Warren never really wanted to do in the first place. In the event that he was sued for homosexual discrimination, it not only turned his supporting LGBT customers away, but it maddened proclaimed, heterosexual, Christian customers as well. In this situation Warren failed to please both types of customers and lost an impacting amount of clients. Because of the banter of his personal standpoint on gay marriages and his past in delving deep into the Evangelist Christian community, Warren has made himself a bigot and a hypocrite to heterosexuals and homosexuals.

The Missed Opportunity for Change

Personally, I believe that Warren could have avoided a drop in customers by looking beyond his personal beliefs and offering E-Harmony to be a website for both heterosexual and homosexual couples. I think he had a second opportunity to do so after the lawsuit in 2005, and failed to make it official because he still did not want to change the foundation of his original Christian ideals for the website. He made his situation worse by making a separate website, after he had already claimed that homosexual algorithms were “different” and therefore excused his will to change the policies of the E-Harmony website.

The Broader Implications of CSR

I think CSR is important because it involves making changes as the world changes around you. From a moral standpoint, CEO’s need to remain as flexible to change as their lower level management, and understand that while they may not want to change certain aspects, that it is not just about themselves alone, anymore. In the long run a company will benefit both with morale increase and possibly financial gain as well by practicing CSR.