Most African companies doing CSR are doing good. The maternity ward gets funding, the school gets computers, and the community health programme hosts a launch event and issues a press release. The intentions are genuine, and the impact is tangible in individual cases.
The issue arises when a company attempts to develop a sustainability framework. An ESG consultant conducts a materiality assessment and asks, “What links your social investments to your main business?” Often, companies find there isn’t a clear connection. Their CSR initiatives have been pursued opportunistically, based on causes that seemed appealing, felt appropriate, offered tax benefits, or addressed community demands. While each initiative is justifiable on its own, together they lack coherence.
This matters because sustainability, unlike traditional CSR, needs a clear and consistent narrative. IFRS S1 requires companies to explain how social and environmental factors relate to their business model, strategy, and long-term value creation. When investors read a sustainability report, they aren’t just looking for good deeds; they want to know if the company understands how its social efforts support its resilience. A fragmented CSR portfolio makes answering that question convincingly very difficult.
Companies that manage this shift effectively can look back at their social investment history and see a consistent logic, even if it was never explicitly identified. For example, a telecommunications provider that has offered free internet in refugee camps for years wasn’t explicitly running a strategic sustainability initiative; it was simply addressing community needs. However, this effort—providing connectivity to underserved populations at no charge—was the clearest reflection of how the company’s business model could benefit society. When this connection was recognized, it laid the groundwork for a capital mobilization strategy that drew in development finance investment.
The Mastercard Foundation is intentionally structured this way. Its core focus is on financial inclusion, aligning with Mastercard’s primary business of financial transactions. This connection is fundamental, not accidental. Similarly, the Aga Khan Development Network adopts a geographic approach: the Aga Khan Foundation operates within the same countries and communities where the Network’s private-sector entities are active. The philanthropic and commercial components are interconnected, as they were intentionally designed to support and strengthen each other.
Most African companies are not beginning with full integration. However, shifting from CSR to sustainability doesn’t mean dismantling what is already in place. Instead, it involves identifying the underlying connection: the social contribution that best matches the company’s capabilities, relationships, and long-term goals, and expanding on it. The remaining efforts can be phased out or adjusted gradually.
Companies that face difficulties are often those attempting to develop a sustainability framework based on a CSR portfolio without strategic coherence. This framework ends up as merely an additional reporting layer that fails to satisfy regulators, persuade investors, or lead to internal change. Successful companies focus on the tougher initial step, honestly assessing what their business is uniquely capable of contributing, and then crafting social investments that align with that insight.