It was a Christmas celebration with a difference showcasing the talents, skills and resources of a group of young, differently-abled persons and from an underprivileged background.

The talents and skills were so exceptional that it moved Merril J. Fernando, the pioneering Ceylon Tea specialist, to tears even though he is a regular visitor to the MJF Centre for under-privileged women and children at Moratuwa. “Every time I visit here I am moved to tears. Why are we the lucky ones (able to lead a normal life) and they, so unlucky?” he asked, adding: “Why can’t businesses share their wealth and time to end poverty, deprivation and social chaos in Sri Lanka?”

The annual Christmas celebration of the centre last week brought both underprivileged children and disadvantaged children, who despite their disabilities turned in an amazing performance in song, dance, playing instruments and other skills. The audience, made up of parents of the children, invitees and officials of Dilmah, were amazed at the skills of a group of children who were born different but displayed everyday skills helped by a group of dedicated volunteers at the centre.

To our readers, this would appear an unusual editorial comment in the business pages of a newspaper. Maybe; maybe not. For, what the MJF Charitable Foundation has shown over many years of silent, selfless work to alleviate poverty in the country is that Sri Lankans with means are made of sterner stuff than only be seen as getting wealthier at others’ expense.

And the examples from individuals and groups like MJF and Dilmah (and there are quite a few in Sri Lanka who believe in charity and empowering the needy without any fuss) show that a combined effort by the government, business and the public could make a huge difference in narrowing the gap between the rich and the poor, create more jobs and build a philosophy of shared wealth.
In the new business environment, corporate social responsibility (CSR) is the buzzword. Annual reports are filled with pages of ‘achievements’ of companies ‘doing good’. While millions of rupees are spent on these projects there is a fair component of volunteerism too from company employees, which is a positive development.

Yet how many chairpersons, managing directors, CEOs and top management spend time with less fortunate societies, apart from writing a blank cheque? How many companies associate CSR with tax concessions? On the flipside there are quite a few companies and individuals who ‘do good’ simply on the premise that sharing one’s wealth will enable the have-nots to be more productive citizens, and in doing so help the economy and the country at large.

There was a time in fact in the aftermath of the 2004 tsunami when top executives from many US and UK-based multinational companies flew to Sri Lanka and spent time working with tsunami-affected communities to rebuild their lives. This was social service by corporate executives at its best, spending in fact their time and own money.

Understandably businesses are accountable to their shareholders and must justify spending large sums of money on social service. While companies first need to serve the interests of shareholders, the interest of the community (particularly as a current and future client/consumer) is also essential to a company’s very existence.

Thus convincing shareholders that helping communities with sincere intentions, shouldn’t be a ‘hard sell’.

‘Doing good’,a phrase commonly used in the new era of social service, has different dimensions compared to the past when philanthropy and social service by businesspersons were often linked to one’s faith as meritorious deeds or seeking merit. There was also a category of individuals who shared their wealth because they simply cared. This group is far and few today with the accent on social service shifting to the more organised CSR by companies. That again is because business have organised into professionally, managed units against small (limited focus) individual, family-run businesses, many decades back, as the nation progressed.

Another development in ‘doing good’ is the advent of social entrepreneurs and social business, which was part of a discussion in Colombo this week.

The concept of social businesses is becoming a strong reality among NGOs due to reduced international aid. Dulan de Silva, a Sri Lankan proponent of social businesses, says the difference between a social business and a business is that investors do not seek a profit or a return on their investment and secondly that it is undertaken to solve burning social issues.

Returning to the Dilmah example of lifting the spirits of the underprivileged and the differently-abled, businesses and wealthy individuals can transform society by not only sharing wealth but also spending time with these communities. Developing social business units structured on the lines discussed earlier, in an organisation is a good start and New Year resolution for 2014.

The icing on the cake of the admirable, and often breathtaking performances at Moratuwa last Sunday came when a young chap with down-syndrome walked up to the stage, gave a stately salute to Merrill J. Fernando, and proceeded to give a perfectly, normal speech, oozing with confidence, adding a few jokes and proving that he is an able and productive citizen, if given just half a chance that normal people have!