A0153 Corporate Social Responsibility/AL 2012

Founded: 21 Feb, 2012

A discussion area where you will change opinions about what it means to be "socially responsible". People and organisations should have special sensitivity towards social, cultural, economic, and environmental issues. The discussion concentrates on Nokia, Finnair and Nordea and their recents personnel policy.

Administrators:

Members

Campaigns

Group's call of contents

Log in or Sign up to join this group.

Only by joining you can add contents to campaigns

Would you like to comment?

Log in or Sign up

Comments

(28 Feb 2012)
Technological changes in the workplace, some workers do not need to operate in the workplace. This situation is called technological unemployment.
Unemployment is formed together with the developing technology to increase efficiency. Bands of manufacturing robots, testing systems, which simulate processes such as.
For example,
• Logitech has announced that they laid off 600 employees.
• Intel announced that close its manufacturing facility in the Philippines which its provide 1800 employees income.
• Sony explained their “restructuring “ plan. As a result of thıs plan they announced the dismissal of many people.
• Sega announced the dismissal of the 30 people.
As can be seen all of these examples, the development of technology is caused increasing unemployment. They claım that the technology works more effectively and efficiently. Additionally technology reduced the product costs.
(04 Mar 2012)
I think that the financial crisis is part reason for increasing unemployment ´cause in Finland it is usual to lay of people when financial things are going badly and when it gets better some hier workforse back and some dont. Some just manage with those people they have and make them do the work load of many people. I think that is a bad polici in corporations. People get more stressed and they get tired more easily cause they have to do so much work.
(04 Mar 2012)
In many cases employees are laid off because company does not make enough profit. So the reason is not that company does not afford to keep the employees or they don´t have work for everyone. The reason is that is cheaper to buy expensive equipments which can replace many employees as possible to get more profits. Where is the social responsibility in this kind of actions?
(05 Mar 2012)
And to continue Kuokkanen's subject, it might become even more expensive in this kind of a situation, if there are some major disasters or something that stops the operations in company. Long power blackout could cause major damage to profits/operations, if there are no backup plans (ups, enough reserve workforce if machines do not work etc.) Machines cannot do everything people can (although vice versa) and machines must be replaced/updated some day, which causes waste, at least some amount.
(26 Feb 2012)
Different organizations are coming forward for recovering the environmental loss. Finnair has already shown impressive examples in this field. They launched a reforestation programme in Madagaskar. Furthermore they made a handsome donation of 50000 euro for the Indian children who are deprived of clean drinking water. More organizations can contribute on this regard. For instance, Bangladesh is a potential victim of climate change as it is a low lying country as like as Maldives. In addition, currently it is facing frequent natural disaster. Another terrible catastrophe is river erosion that turns thousands of people into climate refugees. Multinational corporations can help arranging coastal forestation. Obviously, by this forestation, these lands will be much more protected from these calamities. Again, they can rehabilitate those misfortune landless population.
(26 Feb 2012)
I was thinking, that Nordea has those "e-lasku" and virtual bank statements and everything, but still they send every time paperpost like "You can pick up your new card now" and "You have got this much study loan last year". And every time whit new bankcard they give me that booklet about therms of use, even if I had got that same card last ten years - and I don't know anybody who really read that everything. Why they dont send also everything like that to my online bank? I don't need those papers, and it would also save environment.
(05 Mar 2012)
I have encountered the same thing/problem. I also asked from my bank clerk tha why are they sending those terms etc. everytime e.g. insurance updates and only one sentence is different or added. Answer was "it is just a custom that we are used to". I find this careless habit, because they send so much paper and I have no space to keep them or I make more rubbish. Another company also sent post in which were 2 papers containing text on one side of paprr. On other paper they said that they are trying to save paper as much as possible, but still cannot print on two sides. Ironic I'd say.
(04 Mar 2012)
It would be a good thing if more people would use e-lasku and virtual statements etc. But unforetunatly lots of people (oldpeople) still doesnt know how to use the internet and that is a problem in this. I think that in 20 years when all of those old people has past away it is different but until then we just must wait. One option would be education in internet things to old people.
(04 Mar 2012)
There are lots of services which can be provided on the internet instead of the "old way". Problem is, like VSoderholm said, the old people who can´t use even the email or very basic operations in the internet. Of course there are people who are not able to use internet in daily basis.
These kind of examples like Nordea are plenty. And usually the problem is with big, usually governmental institutions like KELA or Finnish Tax Administration. Everything is done in the hard way and always with paper. Is it possible with the modern technology to use e-tax card instead of old paper cards for example?
And I think that most funny way to save paper is to use this automatic phrase at the end of your email where is suggested NOT to print unnecessary emails when this phrase takes more than one sheet of paper. It´s not once or twice that I have printed this totally useless page.
(26 Feb 2012)
This is so true. It is unbelievable how much paper is wasted for things like these which 99% of people never read. Like some other people already said, it would be so much easier if they would send all this information via internet. Sure I understand that not all people use the internet and that some just want everything on paper but they could do some innovating in this field. For example when you are a new customer they could ask you if you would want all the information to your e-mail or something like that. They could even make an own ‘Nordea e-mail’ for every customer. Even that would not be that big thing and it would be much more ecological.
(26 Feb 2012)
Haha, this is so true, it's unbelievable how much paper is used to send this relatively meaningless information. I take the advertisements and other non important paper waste to the garbage about ones a month and i can barely carry it, it weights so much. If people use the e-bank they could receive all the information via internet. It would save nature a lot.
(26 Feb 2012)
I agree with you. But I also think that it's important to have "the paper version option" too for those people who don't use the internet. For example some older people don't know how to use the internet so it's good that they can have the information on a paper.
(26 Feb 2012)
I agree! It's the same with most offices, some of them even send you, for example, a letter online and then the same letter comes as a paper version few days later. Also Nordea has got all the information that they send out with the new cards on their website. In a country where nearly all other business, taxes, flight bookings, shopping etc. is done via computer why can't all the mail that the bank wants to send you be sent to you're secure internet banking account. We want to save the planet, the animals, the children and so on but at the same time avoid any human contact and send an e-mail instead. Where's the sense in that?
(26 Feb 2012)
And also KELA! Even if I do my applications in internet service, every time they send papers to me, and tell how much they will pay to me.
(26 Feb 2012)
I also agree with you. It really is a waste of paper to send the information on paper, when it could be send in the internet. I think that they could put all the information on the web bank or just send e-mails to people.
(26 Feb 2012)
There is just some groups in people that doesn´t have Internet to use. Like old people. Most of them doesn´t probably know how to use bank services in Internet. So I think there needs to be choice for everybody.
(26 Feb 2012)
Yes I think so too. I would like to get everything to my virtual bank, but it should also be possible to have infomations "old fasion way".
(26 Feb 2012)
That is so true, there always be choice for those people who cannot use or who haven't afford to computer. But all of us who can use nettiposti and e-lasku should do that.
(26 Feb 2012)
Yes we should. Maybe I have to strat consider using it too.. ;D
(26 Feb 2012)
Me too, and I have to admit that at firts I wasn't fan of it, but I realise that is important act to do.
(26 Feb 2012)
I have been thinking this also! It is weird that they have two ways for sending post. Why they don´t send everything in same way. I know some other companies too that send same paper to your “netposti” and you also get it to your home in paper. It is terrible waste of paper and also time of the person who have to send those papers and posts. I think that Nordea for example should have some register for their clients that would tell the post-send-way, so one only receives post from them only in one way.
(26 Feb 2012)
I agree with you. It would be much more effective if we could transfer into more virtual living. Nordea could send e-mail about all of the new notices which come to netbank(for example about new card, etc.). That way it would be more effective and quicker. It would decrease working hours and that way increase productivity.
(26 Feb 2012)
MHA1121 Team 2

In year 2011 Finnair flew first international flight with biofuel. Finnair has planned that after 3-5 years biofuel could be taken into regular flights and that way the company could decrease their carbon footprint. We think that it is good thing to use biofuels, because it is ecofriendly and slows climate change. Also Finnair has created a page dedicated to introducing biofuel.

First Finnair decided to fly only once in a week using biofuels. We suggest and hope that the amount of the use of biofuel during flights would increase. Unfortunately the price of biofuel is nearly two times as high as normal fuel due to the fact that there’s only one company that produces biofuels, Neste Oil. If even one other oil company started producing biofuel, maybe the price of it would lower because of market competition.

..continues...
(28 Feb 2012)
I am quiete disagree, because the production of bioful impacts on populations, concerning prices of cereals. For exemple, many people from Central America faced daily by starvation, because of that. I prefer continue to produce normal fuel, with bad impacts on the earth, but we bring work, jobs and salary
(26 Feb 2012)
Finnair should check the materials they are using in their flights if there is some materials that aren´t necessary or if there are some to recycle. Finnair could choose materials which can be energy waste and could try to recycle more also in the land offices.
I totally agree with your comment. Big companies like Finnair needs companies that produces biofuel. Finnair already do much for the better world, but companys the biggest ecological foot print still comes from using fuel. They can't make it smaller without new produsers or by raising ticket prices too high for a regular consumer.
(26 Feb 2012)
Here is many good ideas for all the companys. After reading all the proposals I find that before this course many of as haven't been thinking about social responsibility things. It good that we have to do these tasks becuse it putting as to think these things. Or I don't know if some of you have but I don't.
In many places you can read about social responsibility things but I don't even bother to read all of it. So we should develop some new way to get informatioin to the people so that put people to pay attention to these things.
(26 Feb 2012)
I noticed while reading all these comments here that quite many of us haven't been thinking of being socially responsible and didn't know that these big companies have all kinds of environmental friendly programs. It's true that the information is available but we just don't understand to look for it. So mvarelius I really do agree with you that maybe these companies and schools as well should come up with something that really makes us look up for environmental stuff and make us require environmental friendly products too!
(26 Feb 2012)
You're right, for example I hadn't really paid attention to social responsibility when booking a flight or buying a phone. If more people started to think about these things we could really change the world. You can have the info, if you really want it, but it may take a while to look for it. Companies should really start to advertise their social responsibilities for a better appearance. It wouldn't hurt anybody.
(26 Feb 2012)
I agree with you. I haven´t been thinking these things either. The subject have always being interesting but I just haven´t bothered to search more information. If companies would tell more about their environmental ways, it would lift up people knowledge about social responsibility. And maybe people would start to pay attention to this kind of things more. And also in every school should have course like this, that makes one to think more..
(26 Feb 2012)
Team 7, MHA 1123 (Ruokolainen, Vainikka)

Our team discussed about Finnair's food serving, and those unpractical foilo boxes they use, whitch are unfriendly for the nature. Since other aircompanies, for example Blue1, have already figured out to use paper made boxes, we were suprised that Finnair hasn't started to use those too. Paper made boxes would be more eco-friendly, since those would decompose in the end, and customers would get more better image about company.
(26 Feb 2012)
MHA 1121 Team 9 Grönholm, Kimambo, Lehti, Räikkönen
We totally agree in this one. It's unbelievable that a company of this magnitude hasn't done something as simple as this. It is a small step for the company but would give a good impression to the customers if they would have recyclable food boxes and it would do good to the nature also. If u imagine the amount of food boxes is used by Finnair every year, the amount of the foil waste is massive. Small steps like this makes a big different.
(26 Feb 2012)
I understand that aluminum foil is a good material and box to use, but unless it is really well recycled to material again the waste and burden on the enviroment is relatively large compared to the size of the issue. I think that aluminum, with tin, are metals that require a lot of energy to make and therefore burden the enviroment even more, when it is not recycled and therefore needed to make more of it.
I is a relatively large thing to change even such a small thing as lunch box in a large company like Finnair, and can also cost more,. but if the general way of thinking from top to bottom in the corporation configuration could be changed, the company could start making a name for it self by being enviromental friendly in general,. I believe that things like that would speak for them selves and bring the invested money back by positive feedback and image.
(26 Feb 2012)
Those airlines environment policy may be reflected in to for example their food packing materials of course. But that kind of eco-friendliness has still quite minor effect in to airlines pollution. I think that those paper made boxes that Blue1 is using are only way advertising their airline by utilizing of eco-friendliness. All airlines should publicly inform all details on their environmental policy and their also should commit in to sustainable environment protection programs.
Team 7, MHA 1123 (Ruokolainen, Vainikka)

It´s funny to notice how easy it is to develope thing like that. Many companys` habbits and ways to produce their services and productions could be fixed very easily to more social responsible way. That´s why companys should know better their part of supporting social responsibility
(26 Feb 2012)
I agree with you. I think that it is strange that a company as big as Finnair haven't started to use more eco-friendly packages. But on the other hand, folio is also a recyclable material. The image of the company would get better if it would start using paper boxes and paper would be easier material to recycle.
(26 Feb 2012)
I partly agree with your team, but I guess the food will heat up more quickly in those folio boxes and the food will last warm longer. The paper boxes would still of course be better for the nature, because they "disappear" naturally. But the folio boxes can also be recycled, if Finnair wants so. Folio can be reused as well...
Team 3, MHA1121

Team 6 wrote about recyclin old mobilephones and some idea also came up to my mind.
I agree that recycling is very important. It is good that old, unuseful phones and pieces goes to the right places. But I also started to think about that how often old phones are not unuseful and broken but they are that old that companies can not sell them anymore. Why should we only separate the pieces of old phones? The companies, in this case Nokia could collect old phones that are still usefull and send them to the poor areas for example to the Africa.

I saw this kind of program in Ireland. People got the small plastic bag inside the normal newspapers and on the back there was a text like "Do you have old phone that you dont use? Why you dont gife it to the african poors?" And with that bag everyone could sent own old phone to the company and there they sent phones to Africa.

I think this kind of program would also work here in Finland.
(26 Feb 2012)
This would be awesome! I have lots of old phones that could be still in use but they have some minor misfunction. And i know that all of my friends has them also. They would give lots of joy to young people for example in Africa and they could be really useful also. Great idea in my opinion. And great imago boost for Nokia also.
(26 Feb 2012)
Team 7, MHA 1123 (Ruokolainen, Vainikka)

That would be really great idea for Nokia to use as campaing mode. Their status would raise among customers, it wouldn't require too much of resources, when thinking the size of that company, and it really would help people in developing countrys. I believe it could work in Finland too, as it did in Ireland.
That is a clever idea! In my opinion mobileindustry has became little grazy, new mobilemodels are created all the time and mobile has to include as much different services as possible. It is useful to have a good mobile, but i´ve been wondering is all the development necessary. Sometimes it could be more usefull to develope something that is really necessary such as ways to support social responsibility.
(26 Feb 2012)
But Nokia is also marketing their new phones with the idea that you only need one device instead of many. I mean that you can have your gps, internet and phone all in one. There is also pretty good information on Nokia website how they've been made and with what materials. They give tips on how to conserve energy when using your mobile phone. They are also in co-operation in a program on investigating solar(energy)charging. So I really think that they are taking a lot more into consideration than just developing new mobile phone models.
(26 Feb 2012)
Last year I was buying a new phone because my old one didn't work so well and I went to Elisa store. They offered 20 euros' refund from my old phone and I asked where does it end up. Customer servant answered that it might end up to some developing country if it's working well.

YLE published an article couple years ago concerning about mobile phones' questionable recycling in online stores. There was said that recycling phones properly is expensive and there's no certainty that the those companies are recycling the phones appropriately. In the same article, there was mentioned about Nokia's research about people's mobile phone recycling habits and the results showed that only four percent of the mobile phone owners are recycling their old phones.

I think that team 3's idea is good. Everybody doesn't have enough money to buy a new phone in some countries and approximately 60 percent of people has many old (and maybe working) phones at home..
Nokia has a recycling programme that is quite easy to find on their web pages, but it is a bit different that our idea above. They ask people to recycle their pnones, because 100% of materials can be used again for example for new seats to the park.
So, Nokia collect old phones help with 6000 places in Finlad, but only for using them for new products, not for sharing to poors guys.
On the same page is also said that before you recycle your phone ask from your friends do they ned it. That is good, but I am wondering how well does that work?
(26 Feb 2012)
(MHA 1123 Team 1/ Saukkonen, Raskinen, Venäläinen)
We inspected Finnairs web sites. It was good to notice that they emphasized green values and eco-friendliness there. For example they have reduced emissions 22 % per seat between 1999 and 2009. We think that it is important to reduce pollution in air travelling. although it is difficult to get people to buy more expensive flights. Our development idea is that finnair could invent some inducements for travelling people in order to get them avoid low-cost airline flights. Usually low-cost airline planes fly only the most popular routes. That is why one might need to use several flights instead of one. Usually direct flight may cost more than several flights that low-cost airline offers. Flying straight to direction will decrease pollution and save enviroment.
(26 Feb 2012)
I have recognized that people don't think about pollution and environment when traveling. Usually only the price and quality are the ones that matter. I think if would be could idea to connect eco-friendliness with quality. That way people are more willing to pay more for the flight, because they know that it is for greater good.
(26 Feb 2012)
(MHA 1121 Team 1 / Haapalahti, Koivula, Lehtomäki, Sahlberg)
Our team's opinion is that it would be great if most of the people would travel with airlines which fly straight to the destination. In the end it would be impossible to implement. Customers are more aware of the different prices and cheaper airlines. And if people would travel only with airlines like Finnair, would it reduce customers from smaller airlines. So the situation is very complicated. Of course customer can decide whether he/she will travel with more environmental friendly airline.
(26 Feb 2012)
MHA 1121 Team 9 Grönholm, Kimambo, Lehti, Räikkönen

After reading other student’s opinions about social responsibility on different organizations’ web pages, it was seen that people have not had much knowledge about these organizations’ CSR-programmes before this course. The reason for that is probably that these organizations haven’t been very active in marketing social responsibility and our group thought that such big organizations as Finnair, Nordea and Nokia should be more active in giving information about such things. We chose to develop a new idea for Finnair as they have been on news about negative issues lately and as they have very interesting thoughts about social responsibility.

We think that putting more effort on marketing CSR would help both, the organization and customers. Now when there is a small part of Finnair’s web page that includes information about social responsibility, most of the customers do not even recognize it. As Finnair considers the environmental is
(26 Feb 2012)



MHA 1121 Team 9 Grönholm, Kimambo, Lehti, Räikkönen


continues
...environmental issues in their every day actions, they should also market those things to their customers. That way the organization would get more good publicity as a socially responsible organization and at the same time customers would get knowledge about environmental issues. Finnair could get even more clients if they started a campaign about their socially responsible actions.
(26 Feb 2012)
You have a good point there, but I beg to differ a bit. After all, flying is by far the most polluting and environmentally harmful way of travelling. People choose it because it's also the fastest and sometimes the easiest option. Should one put more weight on the environmental aspect of his travelling, he'll probably choose trains or buses.

This is why speed and comfortability are number one priorities in airlines' marketing. Campaigning for environmental sustainability isn't a bad thing, quite the contrary, but it does not appeal to customers as much.

If you buy a TV, you probably care more about the quality of the image and sound than the fact that 22% less emissions were produced in the production of that TV compared to other TV's. Promoting that information to customers does not bring any significant advantage to the company and is therefore not prioritized.

Campaigning for other aspects of CSR than eco-friendliness, on the other hand, could be effective as you mentioned.
(26 Feb 2012)
MHA 1123 Team 6/ Ruohio, Toropainen, Vuorinen, Nurminen

It is good that Finnair is social responsible and they have pollution calculator on their website. With it a customer may choose a flight that cause less pollution. Finnair has many other eco-friendly innovations too but still air traveling is the most pollutant way of traveling. Our idea is that Finnair should have more direct flights because they pollute much less than indirect flights. People often choose to flight wrong direction first because it is cheaper than direct flight but if they had a choice to flight direct with the same price there would be less pollution.
(26 Feb 2012)
Team 3, MHA1121 (Alatalo, Hemmi, Kronberg, Moisio, Toikka)

We think that you have a good point there. It is great that Finnair has done much to be more eco-friendly but there is still much to do. It is true that people should choose the most ecological way but that is a very big challenge in times like these where there are so many other cheaper options. Finnair should find a way why people would rather pay a little more. One possibility could be to become even more ecological and then make some promo about it.
MHA 1123 Team 5 Mäkinen, Rosengren, Toivonen, Virtanen 2nd idea

Finnair's social responsibility is very broad. It reaches into society and internationality. Workplace should be a decent working environment, as well as flexible and secure. Thus woke up the idea of ​​an employee in and around the network into account. This is true by all the organizations, but between work and home brought together, would be a good healer of social responsibility. Employees take care of education and job satisfaction to increase. Good to be focused on some of the resources in the employee's own support networks.
(26 Feb 2012)
MHA 1123 Team 2 Haque, Rieppo, Stylman, Viitanen

We have been considering Nordea’s social responsibility. Nordea has been laying off a lot people last few years. They are still laying off people because they want to ensure their strong position in the markets. They argue on their webpage that they want to ensure good customer relationships.
They justify shutting down most of their offices in small cities by saying that it improves their customer service. But instead for example they have left out some of the services they used to have in their offices, but are now only doable online or something, and now people have longer distances into their offices and there are more customers in each office. That means waiting even longer for the service. We know that it is beneficial for the company to shut down some services and lay off people, but it certainly doesn’t help the customer service and it is frustrating to run errands in their offices.
(26 Feb 2012)
MHA1121 Team 2

Well this is logical continuum because people have started to use more and more services in the internet. Especially internet bank services are very much used because it can make transaction so much easier and quicker. But we still are very concerned about elderly people because they use bank services very much but they have difficulties to adapt to modern technology. How can we ensure their services if we only think about development?
(26 Feb 2012)
MHA1121 Team 6 Nordman, Laine, Joutsen, Bunyoo

We thing that you got a very good point there. Lots of banks have been reduced of their services on these days. We also thing that is pretty Hippocratic action from Nordea to say that they would like to improve their customer service when at the same time they are laying off that many people and shutting down of that much agency's. Of course we should remember that the economic situation of the world is unstable at the moment but they should really thing do they always have to decrease their of expenditures by laying off people or is there any other way to spare some money?
(26 Feb 2012)
(MHA1123 Team 1 Saukkonen, Raskinen, Venäläinen)
We agree that it is harmfull to centralize business in bigger cities. It will cause unemployment in small towns and as team 2 said it will increase the waiting time to get service.In metropolitan area one can see it already.
(26 Feb 2012)
I agree that the centralization of the business is bad. It could also make kind of a vicious circle. When one organization moves its business to a bigger city some others might do that do if they feel that it isn´t profitable to stay in smaller area. So it is important to the communities that services like banks stays there.
(26 Feb 2012)
I must admit that your comments made me look at those web sites from a different aspect. It’s truly too easy to promise and convince people by saying those things. Nowadays too many people read everything behind purple glasses, just like I did. After re-reading pages again I found out for example that they keep saying and promising same things many times. Also after checking some more sources I found some quite contradictory information too compared to the information that was written in Nokia’s web sites.
(26 Feb 2012)
I agree with you. I think it is important to be critical when reading these kind of web pages. Many of the promises are made for positive publicity and no actions are taken to actually fulfill them.
(26 Feb 2012)
I concur your point of view. I saw also that there were some contradictories written on their web site. And it is so easy to promise and say something than execute achievements. The promises and speeches about how responsible environment and social practices are integrated into everything they do, how can we be sure that they REALLY execute their promises?
(26 Feb 2012)
Social responsibily, do european Banks have any responsibility. If we look at the situation in Creece it is very hard to imagine any kind of social responsibility in relation to Greece banks and the EU' actions in protecting those banks. In the market economy we have this strange idea that some banks and corporations are too big to fall. If we keep on doing business like this then the flod gates are opened for more disasters.
(26 Feb 2012)
This perhaps goes a bit off-topic, but I personally think that banks are the least socially responsible institutions one can find. The modern day fractional banking reserve system and the distortion of value is so fundamentally flawed that I find it difficult to wrap my head around it. When the majority of current financial problems and monetary crises can be tracked down to irresponsible loaning from federal and international central banks, I find it ironic when bankers try to identify themselves as socially responsible by insignificant "green" actions. The closest allegory I can imagine for it would be a gunsmith saying that he's building peace by guns.
(26 Feb 2012)
You're absolutely right in your comment. When it comes to financial crises, i would also like to highlight the social responsibility of the institutions that give credit ratings, or A-ratings to banks. I wonder have they done their work according to plans and in good will when Lehmann Bros. rating at the time when it collapsed was AAA? The ratings, especially in the USA are a joke..
(25 Feb 2012)
It has been very interesting to read these comments and ideas here in massidea. But don´t you find it odd that we all agree that the big companies are doing a lot of good social responsible work and yet not many of us thinks that it is enough. Like some team here said most of the companies are doing something for the environment and that is great. Nokia Nordea and Finnair are also doing a lot more, helping with crisis, working together with UNICEF ets but still we all feel that they should do more. I don´t know why is that but maybe it is because these three are able to do a lot of good things. And I don´t think it is just these companies. Think about all the famous artists, actors etc. Its great that so many people around the world are trying to help others like we all with our ideas here. It is just that there is still so much that needs to be done so many people who need help, so many countries in crisis and so many employees working in bad conditions. But we all can do someting.
(26 Feb 2012)
I think you've got a point there. As I went through Finnair, Nordea and Nokia's web sites I also noticed that they all really invest in green values and eco-friendliness and are doing their part for the environment. I think that the reason why we don't think that that is enough is because of their big sizes. They all are big companies and we expect them to do more. But we shouldn't only focus on companies. I mean, everyone can do something, like you said! We all can help our planet.
(26 Feb 2012)
I think it is good that people requires more social responsible actions from companies. If no one requires responsible actions companies do not have so much reason to reach for better future. After all demand from customers is most significant thing for company.
(25 Feb 2012)
MHA 1121 Team 6 (Joutsen, Laine, Nordman & Bunyoo)

Today environmental issues have become more important to people than they have ever been. Recycling is one off the biggest things that has an effect on our environment. And also it's one of the easiest ways for everyone to do their part in securing our living environment

Our groups proposal to Nokia company is for them to establish recycling system for the old and used mobile phones. People could bring their phones to be reused in exchange for a small amount of money. By recycling the old phones and other parts, like chargers, the amount of unnecessary waste could be reused significantly. This kind of system would surely bring more respect for the company. And what could be more important than protecting the diversity of our nature.
(26 Feb 2012)
I think this idea is very useful except recycling components like those in mobile phones would be quite expensive I think. Because technology evolves constantly there are very few parts to use immediately if any. So they should tear those in to tiny pieces before they are able to use those.
(26 Feb 2012)
I agree with you. It is an excellent idea. Additionally, Nokia can do more inspirational activities like patronization. It can arrange or sponsor events occasionally for raising environmental awareness. As a result, people will be aware through entertainment.
MHA 1123 Team 6/ Ruohio, Toropainen, Vuorinen, Nurminen

We think that Team 6's idea could work and it would be good for the environment and it would also make Nokia look better. It has been done before but it was just a campaign(?) so maybe Nokia could develop a permanent system? They could also try to do more recyclable phones so it would pay itself back in the future when people would bring their phones back.
(26 Feb 2012)
Nokia has a reputation of making phones that last longer than phones from many other manufacturers, which is a good reputation. They should hold on to it and make phones that last. I had a phone, one of the first that had a camera in it for 5 years in use, and that is a long time for a phone. However sometimes is it better for a company not to over stretch it seld and therefore I believe, nokia just should do business and cooperation with other companies who actually are concentrating on recycling phones,. one such company is kännykkärahaksi :https://www.kierratakannykka.fi/yrityksemme/
you just send them your old phone and they will pay for it what its worth and if its useable sell it again after maintenance. I think this is just the kind of company that the world needs more of.
(25 Feb 2012)
I agree with you. I think that some time ago there was this campaing where people could return their old phones and they got some money or voucher for that. I am not sure but I think it was Nokia´s campaing and it was published in radio. But that was only for some time. I agree that there should be this kind of possibility you suggested adn it should be very easy. Not that you have to a lot or to go to sertain store but to be able to do it easily. After all, you can take your old batteries and leave them in the bus in the box or in most of the department stores etc. If Nokia would create system easy to use, I am sure that people would recycle more.
(26 Feb 2012)
I agree that it would be very beneficial for both the environment and Nokia to recycle more old phones. Luckily many stores pay a little amount of money if you return your old phone when bying a new one, which is really good! However the recycling process should be made more accessible for people. Most of the people have spare phones at home which they don't need or don't know what to do with. Nokia should organise a campaing or something to get the old phones from people.
(26 Feb 2012)
i remember that Elisa has some phone change weeks or something.. But I think that it could work, phone cellers could give some refund from old phones, because i think that nobody won't left their old phones in the store for free. i have many old phones at home, and if opportunities are to keep it or give it away for free, i will keep it. but if i buy a new expencive phone, it would be nice to get some refound, maybe only couple euros or something and leave old phone there. i guess that nokia will need those phones more than I. they can maybe re-use some pieces of phone or something. i don't know is that possible or worthwhile, but it would help to recycle phones.
(26 Feb 2012)
The phone change is a great idea because that way the phones can be recycled in an organic way. I think the refound money is good because it motivates people to give up their old phones. From my own experience the the old mobile phones are just left in the closet and not re-utilized.
The phone companies could encourage people to recycle the phones more. A little amount of money would be a good way to do that!
(25 Feb 2012)
MHA1121 Team 4 Alve, Toivanen, Mouhu, Hiljander

Our idea involves the well-being of the employees. Nokia is moving more and more manufacturing to Asia and Eastern Europe. Economically this makes sense. The production rates are lower and employees work for less. However in today’s society it is important for consumers to know where their items come from. Just like all other companies Nokia promises that no for example child or forced labor or underpaid employees work in their factories. Even though we think it is great that Nokia is taking such responsibility when it comes to its employees, we think it would be great if the customers of Nokia could have some proof of this. Nokia could dedicate an entire website for this purpose. On this website they could list the factories, contact information, affirmation of the factories license,… Nokia is such a big and important part of Finland’s image and economical and social life that it is important that information about their social respons
(26 Feb 2012)
MHA 1121 Team 9 Grönholm, Kimambo, Lehti, Räikkönen
This was a great idea you've come up with. We Team9 think that big organization like Nokia should provide more information on how do they deal with environment friendly. It's said that environment can be affected by organization's activities. And the effects of organization's activities can take place in different forms, example utilization of natural resources as a part of its production process, big organization like Nokia should put information on their site. Another issue is transformation of landscape due to raw material extraction or waste product storage, enrichment of the local community through the employment opportunities. Nokia import raw materials from Asia, Africa and other part of the world, how do they deal with environment issues/distractions from those areas??
(26 Feb 2012)
I think its only fair if such a big companies like Nokia would take care all of its employees no matter if they in Nokia or one of its subcontractor. Because such big companies more money than some countries so they should make their part in welfare society
(26 Feb 2012)
Our opinion of this topic is that it is exemplary action that Nokia takes such a big responsibility of their employees. On the other hand it is originally Finnish company and it would make sense to keep their factories near origin country and provide employment in Finland.
MHA 1123 Team 5 Mäkinen, Rosengren, Toivonen, Virtanen

Team 5 idea is based on companies outsourcing. When companies have outsourced employees, they have transferred employees to work in similar companies. When the company outsources services the employee who already has the experience and the education for the job can be moved to the new company. Our groups idea is that companies could cooperate and incase of layoffs. They could create a system where the layoff person can be transferred or gain easier opportunities when applying for a new job. And the companies could before the layoff, plan what kind of workplace these layoff person are going to go. The companies could take responsibility by trying to ensure that the layoff person has a job in the future. It takes less working hours and effort when the companies decide the next working place in the beginning of the contract.
(25 Feb 2012)
Our team MHA1121 Team 4 Alve, Toivanen, Mouhu, Hiljander
agrees with you team 5. It would be exellent if the companies could work together and when some company has to lay off people they could at the same time give these cooperated companies more information of the people they have lay off. this way the person who will be fired will have a good change to get new job with good recomendations and doesn´t have to worrie about job. If the companies cooperate not only the fired employees will gain but the companies as well. To recruit a employee it is hard work and takes a lot of time and effort. But as the team 5 said with cooperation they all save some time. The company which lays off people doesn´t have to worrie about laid off personell and the new company gets professional personel with good recomendations. Very good idea team 5.
(25 Feb 2012)
MHA1123 Team 3 (Hasan, Riikonen, Suhonen, Villanen)

Our team's new developing idea is that companies should work together with for example towns and employment agencies. Together they could develop some kind of programme that would help people who have been unemployed for a long time and people who have been excluded from society to get back to working life. It could include for example retraining for a totally new job or then just help to get back to what they already have some experience from. This could be a good idea because lately there has been a lot of discussion about young people getting excluded from the society. This might not work with jobs that require special knowledge or skills but for example in the service sector it could be possible.
(26 Feb 2012)
I think that this is a good idea! Nowadays there's a lot of social exclusion from the society and it's very alarming. The social exclusion creates different kinds of problems to the society. The excluded people may have problems with alcohol and drugs etc. It's important to prevent these problems and get people back to working life as soon as possible.
(26 Feb 2012)
I think that is very interesting idea! I have never thought that there could be programme like that. If there would be any possibilities to put this idea to action it really might reduce unemployment. It think it would create safe and reliable image of company which is in this programme. Employees would have some kind of guarantee of their jobs if they would know that it might be easier to get new job if something happens to their current job.
(26 Feb 2012)
MHA 1121 Team 9 Grönholm, Kimambo, Lehti, Räikkönen

"Together they could develop some kind of programme that would help people who have been unemployed for a long time and people who have been excluded from society to get back to working life."
Many municipality have programs like this in fact and are working together with the local large employees to find new jobs and plans for the workers futures. How ever, many times when you hear that a company, like Nokia or Nordea are laying off workers the decicion has allready been made before consulting the workers or the local municipality.
(26 Feb 2012)
MHA 1121 Team 9 Grönholm, Kimambo, Lehti, Räikkönen

continues We in group 9 think that more discussion is needed even before any decicions have been made. If a company, its part or some manufacturing site is not doing so good and it would have to downzise, it would be good to take the workers and the local autorities as well as subcontractors in to the discussion to find alternative sollutions and to inform the people involved, layed off etc. as soon as possible. It is not allways possible for a company to find work for the workers in the same field or are aor company, but the over all idea of taking care of the employee should be more comprehensive and sincere.
(25 Feb 2012)
That's true that it's worth to pay more for the tickets because you will get better service and fly safely. According to, Yle.fi, Finnair is the safest airline in Europe and the second safest in the world, last year. I think that we should be proud of it.

Because I've been working to Finnair Group I can tell you that they treat them pretty well. They have their own trade union and the salary good. Still people want more and more salary, which is understandable. However, we have think in terms of firm, too. Then be happy that we a job!
(26 Feb 2012)
I have used a fev different airlanes around the world, and i think that finnair is best so far. not only because the staff speaks finnish, but they are allways friendly and service is always goog, it looks like they actually care about customers. i have seen some stewardesses in other airlanes who are so mean looking and acts like they doesnt care. in finnair, i have never seen this. i think that it couse of finnair treats their employees so well that they like to be there. that i've heard.
I'm also ready to pay little more for the tickets if i get good service and safty feeling during the flight.
(25 Feb 2012)
As many students have mentioned here, it’s true that Nokia and Finnair have been on news about their layoffs, financial problems and other negative issues. I don’t think that these negative things are an opposite of their social responsibility programmes. If they have financial problems, they will have to fire employees but at the same time they can carry out their CSR-programmes. It is important that in these difficult situations they first give help to their employees and put their effort on them. I agree with other students that what we hear in news is usually the negative issues. At the same time I don’t think that to any company social responsibility is something they do when things are good, but it’s part of their thinking through good and bad times. At least that is the way it should be.
(26 Feb 2012)
MHA 1121 Team 1: Haapalahti, Koivula, Lehtomäki, Sahlberg

We as team agree with you on that! Recruiting new employees and laying off old ones are parts of normal business activity based on the rules of supply and demand. Basically, this has nothing to do with CSR itself - how the company conducts these changes in their workforce, however, is a matter of responsibility. According to comments below, Finnair, for example, has made some poor choices in recent years and has thus had its share of negative news coverage, but the reverse side of this of doesn't get as much daylight. Finnair puts much effort on responsible recruiting processes, but how come this is not regarded as positive responsibility?
(24 Feb 2012)
MHA1123 Team4(Hossan,Rissanen,Söderström,Winqvist)
Our team’s developing idea is that Nokia should concentrate more funding & effort to developing new innovative ways of making ecofriendly and “green” mobile phones. It’s already something they are concentrating on but this could even be used as a marketing strategy. If Nokia were to develop new environmentally friendly ways of producing phones that were more energy efficient which would save electricity, they could promote themselves with this. This could raise their economic situation by bringing more customers, because the world’s population is slowly but surely understanding the importance of social responsibility & seeing reason behind the developing of environmentally friendly methods of producing. If Nokia could improve their placement on the market, they might be able to hire more people, for example some of those people they’ve had to lay off recently, and keep those employees whose future employment is at stake at the moment.
(26 Feb 2012)
(MHA 1121 Team 1 / Haapalahti, Koivula, Lehtomäki, Sahlberg)

Also in our group opinion is that it would be the best way to grow up to better over their competitors. For making those "green" mobilephones, Nokia has already on some their phones very interesting games. One example is Climate mission ( this is hyperlink that you would know it better. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WRSacs14HEA&feature=related )

It is ecologically themed games while discovering how to reduce your own ecological footprint. Is it a waste of time to develop this kind of games or is it really important to spend lot of money to develop game that is making millions of people aware about the environment issues and support it?
(25 Feb 2012)
MHA1123 Team 2 (Haque, Rieppo, Stylman, Viitanen)
We think that this idea by team 4 is a good one. It might not be something that Nokia could pull off right now, but it could be something they should start focusing on and in the future ecofriendly mobile phones might be something people would be interested in. Marketing their products as ecofriendly phones could give Nokia an advantage against their rivals. Some people are willing to sacrifice other qualities in a procuct if the product is produced in environmentally friendly way or if it saves electricity or is good for environment in some other way.
(24 Feb 2012)
Finnair's co-operating with Unicef, and Nokia's actions in South-Africa and the fact that they are supporting WWF and IUCN(International Union of Conservation of Nature) are good examples of taking care of social enviroment. Also Finnair's green landings, and shortests ways between Asia and Europe, and Nokia's idea of planing the pruduct's whole lifespan, shows that they try to consider the nature, and Nordea obviously tries to catch up with these actions, but!

They don't consider their own employees, based on laying offs and news during last years. I don't believe that pilots or factory workers would be striking, if they would consider their status in the corporation as statisfying. It is good that these corporations are carrying their weight of better planet's future, but they really should also take a minute for their own people.
(26 Feb 2012)
I agree that employee's welfare is also very important and it's true that it sometimes seems that companies only focus on green values instead of people who work for them. But when it comes to striking I think that some groups of employees find that opportunitity too easy to use. They know that that is an easy way to make a statement and that can affect to many people's lives. Instead of strikinf they should find another way to make things better.
(24 Feb 2012)
I agree with you. Social responsibility doesn't mean only taking care of the environmental issues, but also taking care of the employees and the community. If they keep laying off people, it will have a negative impact on the community. It's good that they're trying to take care of the social environment but it seems like it's almost a trick to fool the media and people to forget about the layoffs and other negative stuff. And you're also right about striking, why strike if everything's fine?
(24 Feb 2012)
Nokia believes that the global climate change is one of the biggest challenges in the world right now. On their they're saying that they are willing to do everything they can to help the problem. For example they are trying to improve their energy efficiency, reduce their emissions and not waste natural resources by using smaller packages or using materials that promote sustainable development and are ethically mined.
Nokia is also supporting society based projects that are affecting education, income and health. As an example they use South Africa where kids are using their mobile phones to learn mathematics or how Nokia Data Gathering is helping to fight deceases like dengue-fever in Amazon, but at the same time Nokia is laying off thousands of people in Finland. It makes these "goals" of theirs look a little less trustworthy and wrongly prioritized.
(25 Feb 2012)
I have to disagree with you saying that their "goals" look wrongly prioritized because they lay off people in Finland. I think that their social responsibility goals and programs they have are part of the image they want the world to have about the company. Those programs are supposed to boost their sales. Nokia isn't doing those things for fun, they do the things they do because it's useful for them in some way. And what is the main reason a company exists? To make profit. Companies are supposed to do whatever it takes to make profit, otherwise the company won't survive. If making profit means they have to lay off people in Finland because it's not efficient for them to have a factory here where it's expensive, they should close the factory, even if it means laying off thousends of people. So in my opinion their social responsibility programs and goals have nothing to do with the lay offs in Finland.
(24 Feb 2012)
MHA 1123 Team 4 / Hossan, Rissanen, Söderström, Winqvist

Our group also explored Nokia's socaial responsibility methods and we think that Nokia has some great ways to actualizing them, e.g the educational way that you mentioned. It might be very efficient for a big and well-known company such as Nokia to make those improvements in all sectors of their business. Nokia is a modern/western-world company which has a great impact on the poeple who live in developed countries. Therefore Nokia (among other social responsible companies) could be a great role model, showing example and leading the way towards a much more environmental and social responsible world!
(25 Feb 2012)
I must say that for some reason when I read about the math project in South Africa, the thing JViitanen mentioned above too, it crossed my mind if this could be again one thing to spread the knowledge about Nokia and like to promote the brand at the same time. When people at the early age satart to use their products and get used to them they might be more likely to by Nokia’s phones in the future too. Also people around the student like their families and friends will be more aware of the company and this project could increase the appreciation of Nokia and interest of investors too. This may not all be a bad thing but just made me a bit suspicious.
(24 Feb 2012)
Based on Nordeas website it seems that they also try to act in a socially responsible way just like Nokia and Finnair. Nordea has published a CSR report for 4 years now and is a member of CSR Europe. Nordea has received LEED Green Building Certification and is a member of Green Building Councils. They are also trying to do some smaller things for the enviornment, like using increasingly virtual meetings instead of travelling.Their goal is to reduct travelling by 30% by the year 2016. I think this kind of action send a good message to other organizations and consumers.

Nordea promotes that they work sustainably by making responsible investments and against financial crimes. It says on the website that Nordea cares for employees and values safety at work and gender equality. This all look good in the paper but somehow it sound like just empty rethoric.
(26 Feb 2012)
Nordea advertises lot of that how they advance suistanable development and care about nature. According Nordea's websites they are taking into account social and political risks concerning environment.I agree that it remain to be seen if acts stays only for talks.
(24 Feb 2012)
I think it's a great thing that some companies take advantage of the ever developing technology. As you mentioned that Nordea is using virtual conferences instead of traveling it's a wonderful thing and helps many people who are involved.

Besides the decreasing impact on the environment from e.g flying, the person attending the meeting don't have to sacrifice time or money in the actual traveling for just a few hours of discussion. That valuable time (and money) can then be invested in other beneficial things.

That is one way of corporal social responsibility that must be copied by many other companies!
(24 Feb 2012)
Even though I knew many big organizations have taken part on different environmental programmes, it was a bit of a surprise for me to see how much they have actually considered social responsibility on their web pages. Comparing Nokia, Finnair and Nordea, it was very interesting to see how they all have connected social responsibility issues to their own industry. Nokia presented their ideas of social responsibility on mobile phone market, Nordea presented their ideas concerning economical issues and Finnair showed how they can act socially responsible in travelling business. It was good that they did not try to affect on everything but they had really considered the little things they could affect on in their own businesses. For me Nokia’s thoughts about social responsibility were the most believable and the ones I could understand the best. It was very easy to find their social responsibility ideas on their web page and I believe the matters were that kind they can really put effort
(26 Feb 2012)
You got very good points there indeed. Why companies do not advertise more their acts on a social responsible or about their environmental friendliness? It would a good for their image because in this way they would get a positive visibility. Also in that way people could get more information on about those companies without to going research those companies’ websites.
(25 Feb 2012)
I was also a bit suprised of that how much those companies have actually considered social responsibility on their web pages. I think it is very good that Finnair, Nokia and Nordea acts in a socially responsible way and they really want to take care of for example children and ebvironment. It is a bit sad that we usually hear just bad news even though for example Nokia has done also a lot of good things.
(26 Feb 2012)
I agree with you. I think that positive things should be shown more in the media so that people know Finnair's, Nokia's and Nordea's responsible actions. Companies act very environmental friendly way, but to get to know all this information you need to read their websites and I think that quite a few people are that interested in these things. I also didn't know much of these companies responsible actions before I visited their websites during this exam.
(23 Feb 2012)
Finnair's environmentally friendly is the way of acting social responsible, they were able to reduce emission by 22% per seat within ten years and their objective is reach 41% year 2017. Within the same period of time they were able to reduce fuel consumption by around 0.8 liters per 100 kilometers and per seat.
(23 Feb 2012)
For those employees who are at the highest risk of loosing their job have an excellent skills and good education. Nokia act social responsible by finding out the new path for those who are affected by transformation/layoffs, to make sure that they get quick re-employed. Finding a new jobs withing a company is the best way of retaining the talented and skilled people, Nokia helps their layoffs people to find new opportunities withing and outside Nokia.
(23 Feb 2012)
It's good that the big Finnish companies are socially responsible and share knowledge in their webpages, how to improve sustainable development and have a smaller effect on the environment by using their services. For example Finnair's emission calculator is a good way to give the passengers information about how much emissions their traveling produces and how to reduce them.
(23 Feb 2012)
I agree with you SRytkonen that it's awesome that the biggest companies here are doing their part on social responsibility. There are many people around the world who know nothing but Nokia/Finnair/etc about Finland. Thus it's very important that they are giving the right impression of the companies and at the same time the right impression of Finland as well. Though there's still a lot of work to be done I think these companies are on the right path. Especially flying is polluting a lot so it is very important to try to lessen the emissions which I truly believe they do.

(23 Feb 2012)
The knowledge that is shared on their webpages are their number one advance in the competition. I find that the pages are very easy to use and the information is there. This way they give the impression to the customer that they care and are concerned about the environment and the employees. It is important that the companys are very open but the of course the webpages are very onesided. I couldn't find information about the lay offs in Finnairs pages as this would be bad information. They only talk about how greatly they take care of their workforce. I think they should also be a bit more open about the things that are not the best.
(23 Feb 2012)
I agree with SPesonen, these websites (Nokia, Nordea & Finnair) all promote how these companies are putting so much effort into working towards a more environmentally friendly and socially responsible future. I'm not saying they're not actually doing this, but like said before, there's nothing on these setbacks like layoffs. The fact that these companies would admit and report also their more negative happenings, would bring a more realistic and approachable aspect.
(24 Feb 2012)
I also agree with SPesonen and PSuhonen too, and the fact is that it's bad publicity to showcase the "bad stuff" like layoffs and such on the webpage. It's true you can't actually find this negative stuff on their webpages, but of course the news pages and media have this information and don't hesitate to report it, and that makes the companies feel even more untrustworthy as the information's there, they just don't seem to want to admit it.
(26 Feb 2012)
Isn't it obvious that the companies can't promote their disadvantages on their websites. That's where people go to buy their products or get more information and they have mostly desided to use that company by the time they are there. If you are going to make a deal with someone and he or she is about to signature are you going to ask him/her one last time "Are you sure?", I doubt it.
(26 Feb 2012)
Yes, but still, if for example a company has had to lay off people, they could have some kind of explanation about this on their page. Not in the way of "we're evil, we fire people" but just something to show that they are sorry that they had to lay these people off and that they admit it's something they've had to do due to something. At least to me, that would show that the company is taking responsibility of its actions and not just trying to silver frame all the ugly things by only promoting the good stuff on their pages.
(23 Feb 2012)
MHA 1121 Team 1: Haapalahti, Koivula, Lehtomäki, Sahlberg

We chose Nordea to our subject, because they have layed off a lot people in recent years. In the webpage of Nordea it is said that they always work in humane way. Still Nordea is laying off people because they wan't to ensure good customer relationships and their strong position in the markets.
Why do they argue that laying off people will make their customers relationships better? Nordea has shut down their offices in some smaller cities and they justify it by saying that it improves their customers services. We feel that it is not benefit of the customers to shut down the offices. Some old people for example may have to travel to another region to get the service they need.

Services centralization seems to be fashion nowadays. People in smaller cities are being afflicted by cutting these kind of services that they need in everyday life.
(24 Feb 2012)
MHA 1123 Team 4 (Hossan, Rissanen, Söderström, Winqvist)

Our team also thinks that this is a very important topic. It's insane to remove offices from smaller towns and cities, and to just expect that people will follow to where ever the big office is situated. It's outrageous to force especially elderly people to travel tens of kilometers to the nearest bank. What Nordea should do in our opinion, is to start co-operating with other banks and the banks should in union start new small offices in smaller cities that would provide at least the basic bank services. This would be more environmentally responsible as instead of eg. 3 separate small banks there would be 1 bank that could share their heating, electricity and other necessities.
(24 Feb 2012)
MHA1123 Team 3 (Hasan, Riikonen, Suhonen, Villanen) While we think that this co-operation is a good idea, the main point of corporate is to make profit and we think that co-operation with other banks could be too competitive. Itella Posti struggles with decreasing number of sent mail, their operational precondition has been weakened and there has been news about closing down post offices. It could be a good idea to co-operate with Itella Posti and this way ensure that people in smaller areas could get all the basic services.
(24 Feb 2012)
MHA 1123 Team 2 (Haque, Rieppo, Stylman, Viitanen)
We thought that team4’s idea is great! Nordea can’t be completely social responsibility if it discriminates against older people who live in the countryside and who can’t use Internet. Some banks should cooperate and have little banks together in the smaller cities. Their customers will be more pleased and banks would be more social responsibility.
(23 Feb 2012)
MHA1123 team3 (Villanen, Suhonen, Riikonen, Hasan): We agree with the fact that shutting offices down in smaller cities is not improving their customer service. 'Big' offices in bigger cities aren't such a good option either, cause the lines keep growing and there's that issue with distances. Especially older people can find it hard to even get to these "new, improved" offices. Then there's the issue of internet/phone service; even though we're living in the 21st century, you can't say for sure that everyone has a computer or know's how to use the internet. Also the phone services are always busy and you pay lots of money just waiting for a customer servant who in the end has to redirect you to someone else.
(24 Feb 2012)
MHA 1121 Team 5 / Asiala, Inkinen, Niemi,Visakova

There is said in Nordea's websites that "Nordea's e-services make your banking easier". At the same time, there's news about shutting down offices, just because Nordea's customers are using the real offices' services only for discussing about their banking issues and getting advice.

Although it is good that Nordea is thinking in a social responsible way and trying to reduce its paper consumption, there is still no reason to minimize the real face-to-face service in smaller cities. There can always be problems with reaching service via internet or phone, as team 3 said previously. Where's the easy part then?
(24 Feb 2012)
MHA1123 Team 5 (Mäkinen, Rosengren, Toivonen, Virtanen)

The news about Nordea in laying off people and shutting down the offices are unpleasant and sad. In the same time these news are just common for today`s atmosphere. It`s almost funny how Nordea, for example, tries to guarantee for the media and customers how they are working always humane way and how “laying off people will make their customer relationships better”. I think these statements are nonsense, but part of the game, of course.
An organization is on purpose to make profit. Always! In the field of social responsibility, every “player” has to do something for it, if they want to “stay alive” and keep on doing business. One example of following social responsibility-rules is an article about Nordea`s attendance on Earth Hour. Earth Hour is a worldwide event, with the idea of switching off the lights for one hour. And this is done for the lighter future. Our team thinks that one hour is not much in the long run. It`s almost
(24 Feb 2012)
MHA1123 Team 5 (Mäkinen, Rosengren, Toivonen, Virtanen)

continues....

nothing!
The point here is to pay attention for social responsibility and how it`s fulfilled. The biggest problem is, from our viewpoint, that the acts for social responsibility is done for the sake of social responsibility-system and the reputation. It shouldn`t be like that. The starting point should be the earth, sustainable development and better society. When every single human and organization does the best he can, it`s enough. But it`s a long distance there.
(23 Feb 2012)
MHA 1121 Team 8 Eskelinen, Katainen, Latvala

We chose Nokia to be our subject. Nokia uses plastic material in phones and it’s not very environmental friendly. We think that in the future should be developed hard plastic into something that could be recycled. Nokia has a recycling program for phones, but it doesn’t cover plastic. Nokia is constantly searching for new ideas for develop recycling, reusing, transporting and repairing. It is said in Nokia’s websites that they take care of their staff, their health, safety and wellness.
(26 Feb 2012)
Team 3, MHA1121 (Alatalo, Hemmi, Kronberg, Moisio, Toikka)

We also think that it is great that Nokia has the recycling program and that they try so hard to be as ecological as possible. But it is just like that you say, the plastic waste is a big problem. Nevertheless we think that it’s very hard to find some other material which can be used in the same way and is as light as plastic. To be honest I think that there would be some more ecological alternative but plastic is much cheaper.
(24 Feb 2012)
MHA1123/Team5 Mäkinen, Toivonen, Rosengren, Virtanen

Nokia says on their website that "every single device is made of the environmental in mind" we think that is great but is that realle entirely true? we think it's fantastic that when you are buying new phone you can download every phones "Eco profile" There is very detail information how the phone is made and what materials have been used. You can also see energy efficiency from there. These are small things but I think that small things also matter. We consumers can think more what we are buying and if we want to consider environmental matters Nokia has made it absolutely easy for us!

Nokia still uses plastic materials too but they are definitely on their way for more and more environmental friendly business. From 30 to 26 are the most environmetally friendly phone manufactured by Nokia!
(23 Feb 2012)
MHA1121 Team7/ Lammi, Norja & Eklund
We would like to comment on your recycling idea. Where did you find out that Nokia’s recycling program doesn’t cover plastic? With few clicks on the Nokia CSR-page we found that “100% of the materials in Nokia appliances are recyclable and materials can then be made into for example music and kitchen appliances and even park benches”( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0Zz8m47lW8 ). They also have a application on their page for finding the closest recycling centre to you.
This is very interesting subject to think. Because when you are thinking making plastic, as a "normal" human, on enviromental ways it could be not so easy thing to do. Okay, I am not "plastic professor" but it sounds expensive and long process. But it is good that Nokia has seen the problem on this material thing. The Nokia have clear target and purpose, but it takes time to achieve the desired results of the case on this issue.
(23 Feb 2012)
There are over 1,3 milliard people using Nokia phones all over the world so Nokia can influence in big amount of people. Because Nokia has a unique state in the world, they also can influence on people’s social responsibility. On Nokia web pages you can see that social responsibility is one of the most important values for the company. Social responsibility has an effect on Nokia’s way of producing and the company’s aim is to work in a way that minimalizes environmental effect. Nokia promises that their ways of action support sustainable development. Nokia has also published that the company supports environmental organizations like WWF and IUCN with their environmental projects.

It’s not self-evident that one company works as socially responsible way as Nokia. Big companies can learn much from Nokia and their aspiration of being one of the leading companies in reducing negative environmental effects.

(24 Feb 2012)
I agree with the fact that Nokia is environmentally aware. The information on the web sites is expansive. To be socially respnsible is a must nowadays. That`s why other producers offer similar information, for example Apple has brilliant and self-critic data on their sites.
The today`s situation of Nokia is kind of bad. People are fired, the factorys are moved to the third world and the most important, Apple is doing the business better. Nokia lead the development in the 1990s but after that Apple has risen and override Nokia`s selection with innovations. And the story continues.
I think Nokia should stop copying the products from Apple and sit down and think the strategy. My solution is to take the well implemented social responsibility and turn it to a brand. I mean I`m dead sure that I didin`t know about Nokia`s awarness. That`s why it should be told to everyone via advertisement and products itself. This could make Nokia to try even harder for social responsibility, as well.
(24 Feb 2012)
I don't really agree with Toivonen on this, since Nokia, like pretty much every other organization in the world, is promoting themselves as "socially and environmentaly responsible". They are spending money on this promotion, by giving out mobile phones and constructing systems to help people in third world countries, but in order to do this they have to fire people in Finland for example. Now is that socially responsible behavior?
(25 Feb 2012)
I am also a bit critical when I read these articles from the websites of big international companies. It was however good to read about their dedication to reduce company’s ecological footprint and invests in recycling and energy efficiency as e.g. teams 8, 5 and 7 were discussing earlier. The calculations of the environment impacts were nice surprise and interesting to read about too. It is good to hear that Nokia is paying that much attention to this matter although today it might be more like necessity for most big companies than just their own will. Yes these invests can have an effect for example here in Finland but I think that to survive in these markets Nokia doesn’t have much choices but to be more international and move to the countries where it is more efficient to produce mobile phones.
(26 Feb 2012)
I must admit that your comments made me look at those web sites from a different aspect. It’s truly too easy to promise and convince people by saying those things. Nowadays too many people read everything behind purple glasses, just like I did. After re-reading pages again I found out for example that they keep saying and promising same things many times. Also after checking some more sources I found some quite contradictory information too compared to the information that was written in Nokia’s web sites.
I agree you, HKonki, that at first look Nokia seems to be taking care of its employees and environment but I also noticed that maybe they are just talking pretty words. I don't think Nokia is the only one, most big companies are telling on their web sites all kinds of programmes and charity work they're doing but I'm not sure if they have really changed much? Of course it's better to do little things than nothing but I just feel all that matters to big companies is money, not f.e. employees.
(23 Feb 2012)
MHA1121 Team7/ Lammi, Norja & Eklund
After we browsed trough Finnair's Corporate Responsibility report, we had bitter aftertaste when it comes to the company's personnel policy. Finnair highlights on the front page of their CSR-pages that they are "a trustworthy, equal and fair employer." Sounds good, but the press history tells a different story. Outsourcing has been in fashion in Finnair. Few years ago they outsourced their two major profit sectors, Finnair Northport Ground handling and Finnair Cargo, without even telling the staff in advance that negotiations were underway. This struck heavily to the ground handling staff which immediately went on strike which then affected on thousands of travelers. Our Teams idea is that Finnair management should be more open both in external and internal communication. Employees must have a constant awareness if their jobs are on the line. Also cutting incentive programs among long term employees when outsourcing from from one....
(26 Feb 2012)
MHA1121 team 2

Like in every company, fluent internal communication improves well-being as well as motivation at work. Also the fact that an employee is satisfied with their work increases production. We think that every job seems different whether you ask the management or employees. It's also quite interesting on what basis a company claims that they're trustworthy, equal etc. Our suggestion is that Finnair should have some kind of an anonymous feedback system within the company. That way they could get the facts right.
(23 Feb 2012)
MHA1123 TEAM8/Pesonen,Rytkönen,Sandvik & Varelius
We agree with you that Finnair isn't standing behind their words. We mean that they are the opposite being " a thrustworthy, equal and fair employer". But this idea of yours that Finnair's management should be more open both in external and internal communication. It sounds like a good idea, but how are they supposed to do it? Do you just mean that companies like Finnair should tell more open about it? We think it's a good idea to inform about changes in good time before the the employees become unemployed and in our own Massidea we thougt that if they really are laying off people that they could have a system with other companies that are alike so that the people that are being layed off could find a job faster when they already have the knowledge of doing the work.
If we talk about small company, there these external and internal management are not so good organized. Because in small companies they do not take care of the daily basics things like human resources (I have first hand experience). But middle size companies like Sokotel or S-ketju, those are very good organized. Example job orientation planns and well beig at work. My opinion is that when the company/organization is so big as a Finnair, the things are goin to get out of hands more easily. Because the managers are at different levels and they have a lot of work. So it is kind of understandable that the meanings do not achieve the reason.
(23 Feb 2012)
You're right, Sanna. The bigger company the more work you have to do in managing . As an employee of the big company I can say that you have to know the risks and the benefits of working in this kind of company before applying for a job. So it is pity that sometimes the information doesn't work as it should. Still you have choices to get a new job if you're not satisfied with that. But believe me or not, you will face such problem in any company. So I prefer the the big one!
(23 Feb 2012)
You're right! Therefore I reckon it is good that Finnair is conducting a cleaning program that concerns their middle-management, which basically means that they self have noticed that their organization structure isn't working. There's too much bureaucracy between departments- the management and the employees. Also Finnair, like any other airline, is a conglomerate organization with loads of different jobs. The flipside of this is that it also unequals jobs, which brings tension between employees and especially with unions. Finnairs last CEO left the company because he couldn't stand the constant arguing with a vast variety of unions, there were no cohesion between co-workers. Also I think that Finnair is a bit of outdated when it comes to their organization model, there simply are too many profit units, and probably just one makes profit. Airline business is a tough playground, and I think we can agree that airlines are pretty hard companies to manage.
(23 Feb 2012)
MHA 1121 Team 8 Eskelinen, Katainen, Latvala

We think that Finnair is very challenging place to work. Employees must feel a lot of presure from the management. It propably is very stressful that employee doesn´t know what is going to happen in the future. Next week in their jobs everything could be upside down.
(23 Feb 2012)
...organization to another is not good when it comes to the moral, motivation and atmosphere among employees.
(23 Feb 2012)
MHA1121 Team 5 / Niemi, Asiala, Inkinen, Visakova

Our team found some interesting material on Finnairs website about their corporate responsibility. Finnair already gives the opportunity for Plus One customers to donate their bonus points to charity (University Children's Hospitals and the Baltic sea action group). This got our team thinking if this oppurtunity could be for everyone who uses Finnairs services and not just for those who have the Plus One customership.

For example, Finnair could arange different kind of charity campaigns where the regular customers could donate part of the ticket's price to a charity organization they wish. Customers could either choose the charity organization by themselves or depending on where they fly, the donations would go to destination's organization....
(25 Feb 2012)
MHA1121 Team 4 Alve, Hiljander, Mouhu, Toivanen

Our team also think that your idea is very good. It would be good if regular customers could donate part of the ticket`s price to a charity organization they wish. Then everyone would have the opportunity to be involved in doing a good job.The donation does not have to be large, even a small amount of money could help.
(23 Feb 2012)
MHA 1121 Team 8 Eskelinen, Katainen, Latvala

Our team thinks that this is very good idea. Everyone should have the possibility to be a part of this charity project. Although it is great that Finnair has joined this kind of project. Always have to start from beginning to achieve something.
(23 Feb 2012)
....If you take a flight from Helsinki to Riga, for instance, you could donate a certain amount for the Baltic sea action group and if on the other hand you took a flight from Brazil to USA, you could donate the amount for WWF.
(23 Feb 2012)
MHA1121 Team7/ Lammi, Norja & Eklund
What you guys are suggesting is a good idea but maybe a bit far fetched. First of all it could be hard to manage such a big sector of different charity organizations, so why not co-operate with few major ones? UNICEF is already an annual partner: every passenger can donate few extra coins into a collection envelope in their seat pocket which are collected by flight-attendants. Maybe this tactic could be implemented into one or two other charities, so the donation chain is wider but at the time easier to handle.
(24 Feb 2012)
I agree with the envelope idea. The charity idea itself is great, but taking a part of the ticket price to charity would just cause an increase in the ticket prices. That would cause Finnair to lose customers--> even higher ticket prices, or even bigger problems with the company. But as I said, the idea of the envelope or something like that, where every passenger could give an amount of cash of their own liking for one of a few big charity organizations could work.
(26 Feb 2012)
They wouldn't have to raise the prices much! Even one euro would make a difference. Also, I'm quite sure it doesn't make a difference for the customer whether the ticket costs 250€ or 251€.
(23 Feb 2012)
MHA1121 Team8/Rytkönen, Pesonen, Sandvik, Varelius
This envelope is a well working idea as it gives one the opportunity to give away coins and do something good. Some airlines do use it already. It could be developed a little further and advertised for expample in those magazines in front of every seat or already in the website. This way every passanger will hear about this envelope and is able to participate.
(26 Feb 2012)
The thing is that Finnair is already using the envelope, every year the collection lasts about two or three weeks. If I remember correctly, they also advertised it at the airport and also in the planes PA-system when making announcements so it's made very clear to the passengers that they are having a collection going on. But sure, extra marketing for good cause is always welcomed.
(23 Feb 2012)
The Finnairs action is great in my opinion. It is great that they are doing their own share of environmental actions. I think it is ok that they have a bit higher prices but a better quality.
They aim to be very eco-friendly and I feel that is very vital for them. These issues can give the consumers added value for Finnairs services. Who would not want to be eco-friedly when flying?

I do not know how the workers are treated at Finnair but I assume that much better than in cheap flight companies. There has been a lot of discussion about the those. I think that Finnair has really invested on their staffs education and they are all the time trying to make their customer service even better. They are co-operating with some HR-companies and trying to make their policies even better.
Honour for Finnair!
(26 Feb 2012)
I agree with you that it is important that flying can be done in a more eco-friendly way then before. But what comes to the well-being of their employees compared to cheap flight companies I don't really feel the same. I actually completely understand why Finnair's employees strike. The feeling that somebody's breathing in your neck all the time and you have to be scared that you get fired. I don't think that a feeling like that would be nice. I wouldn't want to work there after I've read and heard all these things about how they treat their employees. I think that the employees are the most important part of a business. They are the ones that are providing the actual customer service and they are the connection to get a customer to fly with Finnair again. And that means money to the company when the customer gets good service and wants to come back. I think that Finnair should show that their employees actually are important, not just write it on their internet page.
(23 Feb 2012)
The Social Responsibility and Customer Service of Finnair

It's great that Finnair is looking for a socially resonsible image and tries to operate in consent with sustainable development, especially concerning the environment.

I think that an important part of social responsibility for a company in the service-sector is good customer management. In this area Finnair has a lot to improve regarding customer service.

To contact Finnair, you have to fill in a feedback form on their website. Sending the feedback you get an automatic reply, without anyone reviewing your case. When calling Finnair they have separate numbers for ordinary customers and for Finnair plus, Finnair plus gold, Finnair plus platinum members, which puts the customers in an unfair position. In addition calling costs 3,15 euros.

After-sales is a part of responsible business, and this example shows that Finnair failed to meet the expectations on this part.
(23 Feb 2012)
I read that Nordea was the first to write the UN:s responsible investment principles in the Nordic Countries, I think that is positive. I still feel a bit weird when it comes to Nordea, because I read that they have had some kind of relationships to Russian investors. The issue was very unclear to me, because it was a shock news in Finland. It seemed like the thing could not bare a daylight.

I was looking very closely to Nordeas webpage but I didn't find anything that would have impressed me. It is great that they support Finnish art and culture. It just feels that everyone does that nowadays. I begin to think that do they support because they truly want or just because it is socially acceptable?

Nordea has had very large laying off-talks. Their target was to decrease their staff. Altogether 2000 people and in Finland 500-600 (in the years of 2011-2012). Seems quite a lot and I hope that the staff is treated right!

(22 Feb 2012)
Reading the Nokia website, it’s clear that the company understands the state of our earth and wants to do its part to help. From decreasing package material to studying the life cycle of a product in purpose of improving it and to co-operation with globally known nature organisations. It shows there’s lots of areas where a company can work towards greener future. In addition to the environmental-friendliness Nokia has created phone applications that help improve the learning of children in Africa and increase trade in rural areas in India. The well-being of this earth starts with nature but you cannot forget the well-being of the people. Technology can be a great solution when helping f.e. the children in distant locations with education.

However as a Finn, it’s hard not to bypass the recent news telling about the layoffs in Salo. Over a thousand people lost their job. In Salo Nokia is the biggest employer so it’s hard to imagine that this layoff wouldn’t have any effect. Companies
(22 Feb 2012)
...run on money, that’s nothing new, but there should be a solution that would help the people who’ve lost their jobs to sustain their standard of living.
(26 Feb 2012)
As said before here companies might not have any choices but to move their businesses to cheaper lands. And Nokia has been facing that for the last years. I have been watching the Salo factory very close for all my life, and the situation there has been very insecure for many years now, so the employees there have been waiting these layoff news and they really were not a surprise but of course it is shocking when you hear that now you will lose your job. I really want to believe that Nokia is trying to do its best to help the people who they have to fire. I know that in the Salo factory Nokia is arranging employment counselling, entrepreneurship counselling and education counselling all under the same roof so it would be as easy as possible for the fired employees to get advice. Nokias goal is that every fired employee would get a new job. That is a hard goal to achieve, partly because a very big part of the fired employees will be middle-aged women who don't have any education at all
(26 Feb 2012)
...or have some kind of education but have been working in Nokia for the last twenty years or so. So Nokia has to work very hard to show that they really care for the people who work there or did work there.
(23 Feb 2012)
I agree with you that Nokia has definitely put an effort concerning environmental health but still it makes me wonder about the well-being of the staff. As you mentioned that Nokia has reduced their staff in Salo it gives me the picture that Nokia doesn't really care about its staff.

However Nokia has made a sustainability report in year 2010. In this report there are multiple pages of how Nokia is taking care of its employees. For example Nokia has plans for training and developing their employees skills. I was wondering if Nokia could do the same, as I already before suggested for Finnair, that they could arrange some channel for their employees for getting better jobs in the future. This channel would help in case of lay offs. Employees could find new jobs easier and also these jobs might be within Nokia. Most important thing for me within an organization is to take care of its employees, without them there would be any organization.
(23 Feb 2012)
I think that when people are fired, the Human resources are in very important role. When for example Nokia is letting go their staff they should really focus on job search-training!
They should make sure that their workers will be able to get a new work. It is true that the workers are the companies asset. I am sure that Nokia has co-operated with some HR-company during the lay offs. That way they are ensuring that everyone will find their place in the future.
(22 Feb 2012)
I already knew something about Finnair’s corporate responsibility and environmental friendliness, but I didn't know that it cooperates also with unicef and that they had a charity collecting over this hygiene knowledge project. Finnair is using environmental friendly travelling also and tries to be even more responsible. Company has reduced emissions from 1999 to 2009 by 22% per seat and its goal is to reduce 19% more until year of 2017. Also from 1999 to 2009 Finnair has reduced its fuel consumption by 0,8 liters per 100 kilometers and tries to reach 0,65 liters per 100 kilometers until the year 2017. Finnair is using green landings which means that the plane use less engine power when approaching the airport. There is also three more ways that finnair uses; eco-friendly routes, recycling and winglets which improves wings aerodynamic properties. All these things prove, that Finnair is really thinking about the future and environmental friendly way.
(25 Feb 2012)
I think it is great Finnair is taking every factor into consideration when it comes to the environment. Finnair Catering is one of Finland’s biggest kitchens and produces therefore a lot of rubbish (like plastic) that is environmentally unfriendly. In 2010 Finnair Catering managed to reduce their consumption of plastic by 36%. This was done by changing the serving complex. They no longer serve warm food on short flights, so the amount of plastic trays and disposable plates and cutlery has reduced drastically.
I know the biggest environmental problem when it comes to airplanes is the fuel, but I think it is great Finnair is also thinking about solutions to problems that are maybe less obvious but just as important.
(24 Feb 2012)
That was quite interesting and it's weird that other flight-companies can't work the same way. Apparently decreasing emissions has no negative impact on anything related to Finnair, but on the contrary, why can't ecological flights become the normal way of the aviation business?

Now that it's proven that decreasing emissions is possible and very beneficial could there be some now rules and regulatioas that insists other aviation companies to act in the same socially responsible way as Finnair does...
(25 Feb 2012)
I agree that it would be good if every flight-companies act in the same socially responsible way as Finnair does. Finnair are continuously reducing their emissions and their objective is to reach a reduction of 41% between 1999 and 2017. It would be good if every flight-companies would do some goals to cutting their emissions like Finnair has done. I think that every flight-companies should take its cue from Finnair and act in a socially responsible way.
(22 Feb 2012)
Finnair is indeed working with many organizations and takes its social reaponsibility seriously but like HSahlberg said the staff might see their respansibility diffent way. It is true that Finnair is working with Uniceff and for exemple was the first Finnish company to sign United Nation´s Women Empowerment Principles to help equality and women´s status in companies and work in general but somehow it seems that all the good work that Finnair is doing happens abroad. Like HSahlberg mentioned Finnair every year and sometimes even more often reduces staff. It is great that people in crisis get help, like in Japan but doesn´t social responsible mean also that company should take care of its workers. Probably there are a lot of employees who want to work for Finnair but it must be stressfull to be affraid for your job most of the time.
(22 Feb 2012)
Finnair has definitely put a huge effort for social responsibility, they even have a website for it! Finnair wants to reduce emissions by 44% until the year 2017. Finnair points out that renewing the fleets they will achieve this reduction. Finnair is looking forward to use biofuels when the biofuels get international certification. Finnair seems to be interested in staff’s well-being. Finnair offers training to their staff and last year they even carried out a project to improve interaction between employees and supervisors. So this is how Finnair sees it on their website. My opinion is that Finnair is definitely looking into the future because they have clear vision how they are going to reduce the emissions. The thing that I was wondering was the staff. Every year I have read from newspapers and Internet that Finnair is reducing staff members. Probably Finnair could organize some channel to the staff that they could get some other job easier if they will get fired from Finnair?
(23 Feb 2012)
That emission reduce policy is a nice objective for Finnair, but sadly what I found out when searching Finnair was that nowadays they fly more and more with empty seats in the plane. That means that the emissions for one customer grow significantly and well as the expences. The flight business is a area that is under a clear change with more and more cheaper flightcompanies coming out. It is nice that Finnair has made this kind of policies but I'm wondering how well they are implemented in practise.

But I'm impressed too that they have thought about these things so deeply in Finnair, and that they ae proud to be socially responcible, I just want to see it really happen.
I have also heard from many people that Finnair has been flying a lot with almost empty planes. I agree that Finnair has really done things to improve their social responsibility but I think this is one thing they should take account too. It sounds ridiculous that they're flying with only a few passenger.

Another issue Finnair has, in my opinion, is that they have been cutting a lot of employees. I also heard that they have been keeping their employees on their toes by telling there will be cuts but not telling when or how much which I think is unfair to the employees.
(24 Feb 2012)
I think it is ridiculous that Finnair flies with almost empty planes quite often. Flying is not pro-environmental at all, on the contrary! It is good thing if Finnair wants to reduce emissions with biofuels etc. But my opinion is that the first thing Finnair has to concentrate is to invest flying with full planes. Then they could be more pro-environmental than now.
(25 Feb 2012)
I agree with you that flying with almost empty planes is absolutely the opposite of environmentally friendly activity. Even more than that, it's a complete waste of their resources and not good for their economy. If Finnair wants to make profit someday in the future, they need to get their planes filled a way more than they are these days. Using biofuels and other things like that is a good way to be environmentally friendly but flying with almost empty planes just ruins the whole idea.
(25 Feb 2012)
Finnair`s web sites are pretty extensive. It`s nice to read that some organization puts a high value for our environment. Finnair is very ambitious: it`s for the emissions trading, it has new, low energy planes and it takes the law serously and does even more. In addition it wants to be environmently thinking customer`s first choice and shows up as an conversation starter. You can`t almost ask more.

When Finnair does everything well as it could and even more, they fly with empty planes. The web site says that the routes and schedules are well formed. That`s not true, if the planes are empty but I think the reason is the price. Finnair`s tickets costs always or almost the biggest price. Finnair`s strategy says that awarness in the long run is the base of the business. I think that`s more than true, but it has a big price.

The solution is not to be lower environment friendly. The solution is the Emissions trade and things like that. I think there is acknowledgement for good guy!
(26 Feb 2012)
Of course flying with almost empty planes is really not environmental but I don't know how Finnair could solve this problem without cutting flight ticket prices or reducing the flights. I think that neither is pleasant for the company. After all they have to do something because flying with empty planes is one of the most contaminating and also uneconomic thing Finnair.
(26 Feb 2012)
It`s true that flying with empty planes is not environment friendly. And it`s a fact that it is because of the big prices. My opinion is that the prices shouldn`t be cut for sake of the environment. Finnair is doing a good-good job and their big ticket prices come straight from that. Buying new planes and doing acts for the protection of the Globe are expensive things to do.

So Finnair is doing everything in the right way. Now the other airlines have to be pushed to act the same way. This means higher prices for the consumer, but that`s the only option in the long run. Also emission trade is good tool on the way to better future
(22 Feb 2012)
Finnair has also done its own part to be social responsibility company. It cooperated with Finnish UNICEF. This project’s main idea was add knowledge about hygiene and clean water in India. With help of the project were built water dots and lavatories in the many schools. It raised hygiene level much in these schools.

They had charity collecting in this project and I think it was very well organized. People could have donated any currency they had. In addition people could have donated even their Finnair Plus –points. I think the collecting was very innovative and suitable to Finnair, because it is so international company.
(26 Feb 2012)
I think that Finnair is a great example of how small simple things can make a huge difference in the world. They made it simple and really easy for people to donate, regardless of the nationality or currency, which is great! In addition they informed people about how the donations were being used, where the money was sent and why it was important to donate.
Keeping it simple and easy is usually more beneficial than trying to do everything really special and extraordinary.
(25 Feb 2012)
Exactly, they have organised the donation really well. I've been travelling a lot with Finnair and I've seen that it's working. People gave away their curruncies they have left from their holiday, especially the coins. It's happy to see that people cooperate with the airline because the easier the donation is organised the more money they'll get to UNICEF.
(22 Feb 2012)
MHA1123/Team 8/Rytkönen,Pesonen,Sandvik, Varelius

When companies have outsourced employees, they have transferred employees to work in similar companies. When the company outsources services the employee who already has the experience and the education for the job can be moved to the new company. Our groups idea is that companies could cooperate and incase of layoffs. They could create a system where the layoff person can be transferred or gain easier opportunities when applying for a new job. The companies could take responsibility by trying to ensure that the layoff person has a job in the future. This idea would be socially responsible because then there wouldn’t be so many unemployed persons that the government has to take care of.
(25 Feb 2012)
MHA 1121 Team 6 (Joutsen, Laine, Nordman & Bunyoo)

The idea is really good but we don't think that it is going to work. Just think about it, why the company outsources the services. Because the personel costs are too high. So even if the company has a new job for the layoff people, they will probably paid low wages or they get only short-term contract. Then they will be unemployed again.

(23 Feb 2012)
MHA1121/Team 5 / Niemi, Asiala, Inkinen, Visakova

We don't really agree with this. In our opinion it's not company's job to provide jobs after they have fired a person. There are already inside networks existing inside companies for workers to look for a job. Not a lot of companies have enough time or money to take care of workers they are going to fire. And company's main purpose is not to offer job for people, it's to make profit. Even if the idea sounds fairly nice, I don't think it's very practical.
(23 Feb 2012)
We think that idea itself is good but we are wondering how the companies are going to organize that plan and how they are going to implement the process in real life? Planning that idea could be very long and difficult process for the companies. Time is money and we don’t believe that many company would be happy about this idea... And how about new workers then who are looking for example their first job? How they are going to manage to get any job, if there are always people who have been fired "ahead" of them?
(23 Feb 2012)
This idea might work as a short-term plan, but where this idea goes wrong is that we can't assume that the other companies will welcome every ex-employee with open arms. What if they have to fire people too? They can't take some other companies workers if they have to save in salaries or something.

One of our teachers once told us that there's a company, where the average age of the workers was around 30. That's because the employees never stay in the company for longer than 5 or 6 years. I think it could be possible to use this kind of rotation together with your idea: the point would be to create a similar company to the originals and let the fired employees work there until they find a better place. The would be rotation on the workers. There would always a place for a new employee, since the old ones leave within few years.
(23 Feb 2012)
..And this was a comment of team5 Mäkinen, Rosengren, Toivanen and Virtanen
(22 Feb 2012)
MHA 1123 Team 6/ Ruohio, Toropainen, Vuorinen, Nurminen

We agree of your idea of transferring employees to new jobs. Since all big companies like Nokia are outsourcing thousands of people aiming to reduce their costs they could also take serious responsibility of those unemployed workers. Relocation of workers is very important if company wants to act socially responsibly. If companies would relocate their workers it would make them more humane and seductive. Outsourcings concern thousands of people every year and those workers who stay in the company will have more tasks for them. We don’t consider that as very humanity managing.
(21 Feb 2012)
It is great that big Finnish companies like Nokia act socially responsible because they can be examples for other multicultural companies. Nokia is trying to make sure that there aren’t weak links in their supply chain. They have long and multilateral supply chain because Nokia is global company. They have huge responsibility of many things around the world and they are trying to maintain their values, forecast risks, improve well-being of their employees and treating people everywhere fair and equally. Their objective is to make sure that sustainable development includes to their business. Nokia selects their suppliers strictly and they want their suppliers to act environmentally friendly.
(22 Feb 2012)
Nokia is improving to act more environmentally way in many ways. I find that Nokia Solar Charging –Project is really interesting project. Project is exploring the opportunities how solar energy could be took more advantage. One mission of that is mobile phones could be charged only by using solar energy in future. We will see how this project is going to success but I think the idea is very good anyway.
(26 Feb 2012)
That really is an interesting idea. Sound like very futuristic and ambitious idea. If they manage to get that project work it could save a lot of energy and it might also be very useful way to charge a mobile phone.
(22 Feb 2012)
Nokia Solar Charging idea is very good put it is going to take long time till they gould get it work and people star use products. Nokia has many things that they have to think about becusee they are world-wide company. Nokia have factorys all over the world and they have to think about what is the easiest way to deliver they products all over the world and what is the fastest way and how much transport consuming the nature example. But it is good they think about new ideas to save the world.
Big companys need to try to be social responsibile because they need investors and investors want to get a good reputation when they putting they money some companys. So it is hart to know if the companys really want to make changes or just getting the money for the investors.
(26 Feb 2012)
I agree that new ideas like Solar Charging to phones will take long time to execute but it is vital to have this kind of improvement ideas for future. About companies causes, I think that many of this big companies really want to be social responsible and not just for money. They have quite huge responsibility of nature so they just can't ignore that in their actions. They need a good reputation not only for the investors but the customers as well.
(21 Feb 2012)
Nokia is socially responsible. Suprice but Nokia is really taking care of its workers. This is quite difficult to understand when all the time there are news that Nokia is shutting some factories all over the world. But when studying Nokia´s webpages one could find out how responsible Nokia is. For exemple in Brazil Nokia has started a Nokia Foundation school which has 450 students. Think what that can do to the society. And in Hungary Nokia supports this Komarom area´s schools, hospítal and firedepartment. Nokia also is activ in environment sector. But because most of the news about Nokia is allways lay offs, new phones or shutting factories, how many of us knows about this social responsible acts.
(26 Feb 2012)
I think that it is great that Nokia takes care of its workers and even their families. It is true that the news are full of negative news of Nokia but that is how the media works. Unfortunately the media hardly never tells anything about good things what Nokia has done like for exempla giving money to school. But if you ask me the most important thing is that Nokia actually thinks about things like these and really tries to do good things as much as possible. Sure it would be good if Nokia would get some more credit from the media for doing all this.
(24 Feb 2012)
I don´t think that it is that surprising that we haven´t heard that much about all the good things big corporate´s have done. Main part of all the news in the world are bad. It seems like the good news aren´t newsworthy enough that the journalists would like to write about those and people would read those. That´s kind of sad but it´s the truth.
But it is nice to read about these things now and learn more about the good and socially responsible things that these corporate´s have done.
(26 Feb 2012)
Yes, most of the news today are focusing on bad things and it's unfortunate. But is it the journalists' job to advertise the big companies? I think that companies like Nokia should do their advertising in a way that reveals all the good things they are doing. Instead of advertising only their products, they could also inform the people about their good deeds and this way get more positive attention from people.
(22 Feb 2012)
I was also surprised that Nokia is really putting an effort for being more social responsible. It’s true that news is telling mostly negative issues about Nokia. According to Yle article (published in 9/2011) Nokia outsourced 1200 employees in Finland. Latest news from Nokia was about closing the factory in Salo, where also hundreds of people will lose their job. I agree that these news won’t give picture that Nokia acts responsible way, that is why I was positively surprised after reading their websites. I think that it is great that Nokia is participating for example education in South-Africa and helping Indian farmers with “Nokia-life tools” so that farmers can improve their business. It’s also good that Nokia has department who will control that human rights will come true in every country that Nokia works. I still wonder if this is completely true. One good thing is that Nokia has also participated disaster assistance for example in Haiti and in Japan.

(26 Feb 2012)
I was also very impressed when reading about how Nokia is trying to be socially responsible. However I can't bypass the bad news about layoffs, which are affecting so many peoples lifes in Finland. By now everyone knows that Nokia is firing over a thousand employees in Salo. But what everyone doesn't know is that how big its influences will be for a small town like Salo. For example DHL has a warehouse which only has Nokias stuff in there. They have 124 employees and 50 of them will now get fired. DHL have also had co-operation with Barona HR services and through them over 200 people have a part- time job at the warehouse. Almost everyone who have been working through Barona will now have to try to get a new job. This was only one example how Nokias layoffs affect so many different companies too.
(22 Feb 2012)
I too have heard many news about Nokia outsourcing and layingoff people so it was great to find out about the social responsibility of Nokia in the company's webpage. Because Nokia is a very internationally known company and many people use its cellphones I'm sure it has a great effect with its strategies to improve sustainable development and protect nature. The great effort with the socially responsible strategies and the Nokia sustainability Report send a clear message of the company's goals and achievements. It was interesting to find out about Nokia's role for example in supporting the access to education with Nokia Education Delivery and defending human rights.
(22 Feb 2012)
Closing the Salo factory causing many people to lose their job was indeed bad news for hundreds of people in Finland, like Tvirtanen said. But it was expected to happen and still noone did anything to get along with it, or so I have heard. Nokia must transfer its production to foreign countries to survive beside other big companies like Apple and Samsung. Even though Nokia is socially responsible across the world by giving education and disaster aid it has'nt forgotten where it comes from. There is a summer school sponsored by Nokia where best students get to learn math before high school and every high school student who scores enough points from mathematics matriculation examination will get a grant worth of thousand euros. These are just small efforts but they matter to many Finns. Nowadays Nokia can not be 100% Finnish.