Across APAC, local firms and multinationals with bases here have a long and proud record of corporate philanthropy and social engagement. In the past decade or so, there has been an increasing emphasis on the 3Ps of People, Planet and Profit, and it has been widely recognised that they can – must – work in harmony.
Covid-pandemic lockdowns concentrated the focus on People. Many corporates saw it as their duty to help do what they could to protect their employees, customers and communities during that time of crisis. Some were simply altruistic, others motivated by the wholly reasonable belief that their profit could not flower in soil that was left untended.
How has this approach developed since the pandemic ended? And what can we learn from those companies for which social engagement is a fundamental element of their strategy, not only of risk management but also of enhanced benefit to reputation and growth?
There is no doubt that 2025 has been challenging to corporate social agendas around the world, with seismic geopolitical tensions, shifting economic concerns, and major changes of direction in the United States that have resulted in some corporates downplaying or even U-turning on former priorities. But what is really going on here in Asia Pacific?
To find the answers to these questions, Katrina Andrews, founder of the Andrews Partnership, which is a global human capital advisory firm, partnered with Simon Buckby, who once wrote about these issues for the Financial Times but these days advises Corporate Affairs Directors across APAC.
AP was able to draw on its deep relationships at a senior level to build and draft a series of case studies. Together, AP and Simon facilitated three roundtables to deepen our current knowledge and insight.
Furthermore, to ensure a fully holistic view, AP utilised its global network to gain input from the US and Europe. Simon drew on his long understanding of the topic and contacts in the sector as well as AP’s data and insights to present the overview. Our report does not claim to be encyclopaedic, but the results do cast surprising new light on who’s doing what, and what we can learn from them.
Many people were happy to give their views on-the-record, though many more preferred to offer their thoughts without attribution because in the nature of these deep-dive conversations they inevitably strayed into personal opinions rather than sticking to official corporate policy. All have added substantially to the thinking in this report, and it is from their contributions we have been able to garner our insights and showcase their successes.
