CSR politics of non‐recognition: Justification fallacies marginalising criticism,society, and environment

Business is frequently criticized for not taking social and environmental responsibility. Large companies respond with CSR activities and some also with formulating justifications for their actions. This could indicate that business opens up to the criticism. I do, however, not observe such openness in the current study, but how companies use “CSR justifications” to fend off criticism. While companies use justifications as tool for creating legitimacy, I distinguish five justification fallacies. These failures in dealing with criticism cause a marginalisation of criticism, society, and environment. The fallacies found are neglecting criticism, shareholder primacy, organisation‐centricity, conflict avoidance, and progressivism. I contribute to the use of Habermasian ethics in the business ethics literature by showing how CSR justifications could play a part in a rational discourse. The concept justification fallacy, and the five fallacies can provide a framework for analysing corporate rhetoric more generally. Managers have fundamental difficulties in handling ethics and do not reflect on their reasons for working with CSR. They should be more careful when formulating justifications. In our situation of increasing affective polarisation, business needs to be more constructive than merely to marginalise criticism.     

The development of a stakeholder-based scale for measuring corporate social responsibility in the banking industry

Research on corporate social responsibility (CSR) has notably increased in recent years and many scales for measuring CSR image have been developed in academic literature. Due to the contextual character recognized in the implementation of CSR strategies, in this paper a new scale based on stakeholder theory is developed to evaluate customers’ perception regarding the CSR performance of their banking service providers. The proposal of reliable measurement tools for evaluating customers’ perception is especially relevant for companies because of their significant role in influencing the design and implementation of corporate strategies. Results demonstrate the reliability and validity of this new scale in two different samples. In the banking industry, CSR includes corporate responsibilities toward customers, shareholders, employees, society, and all legal and ethical requirements of banking institutions. Nevertheless, different kinds of banking institutions have specific CSR images, which reveal different strategic approaches to CSR.     

Corporate Social Responsibility as Subsidiary Co-Responsibility: A Macroeconomic Perspective

Recent discussion on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) mainly focuses on two aspects of CSR: from a technical perspective, CSR aims to improve ethical standards in the organizational decision-making process, and should guarantee that management practices are in accordance with commonly accepted standards of behavior. From a political perspective, CSR describes corporate engagement with ecological and social issues that extend beyond the firm’s economic activities. The latter perspective in particular leaves unclear whether such corporate contributions to solve environmental and societal problems should be seen as voluntary additional services or whether corporations bear specific duties in this field. Based on the tenet of subsidiarity derived from Catholic thought, this article emphasizes that the common interpretation of CSR should be extended by a third perspective that addresses corporations as intermediate actors bearing specific subsidiary co-responsibilities in society.     

Business Under Threat, Technology Under Attack, Ethics Under Fire: The Experience of Google in China

Although not frequently regarded as controversial, digital communications industries continue to be sites of CSR conflicts, particularly internationally. Investigating CSR issues in the digital communications industry is pertinent because in addition to being one of the fastest growing industries, it has created a host of new CSR issues that require further attention. This case study examines an incident in early 2010, when Google Inc. China and the Chinese government reached an impasse that produced a large-scale, transnational conflict that reached a head ostensibly over state-mandated censorship, ultimately prompting Google to withdraw from the mainland Chinese market and redirect its activities to Hong Kong. We track Google’s experience in China, both to explore its strategies and to consider the implications for corporate social responsibility. We situate Google’s drastic decision to withdraw entirely from mainland China in the complex multiplicity of ethical, cultural, and political conflicts that affect this particular case. On a broader level, the incident raises the question of how multinational corporations (MNCs) can achieve corporate growth while negotiating the highly sensitive sociopolitical and institutional environments of foreign nations.     

Communication of Corporate Social Responsibility: A Study of the Views of Management Teams in Large Companies

In light of the many corporate scandals, social and ethical commitment of society has increased considerably, which puts pressure on companies to communicate information related to corporate social responsibility (CSR). The reasons underlying the decision by management teams to engage in ethical communication are scarcely focussed on. Thus, grounded on legitimacy and stakeholder theory, this study analyses the views management teams in large listed companies have on communication of CSR. The focus is on aspects on interest, motives/reasons, users and problems related to corporate communication of CSR information. A questionnaire survey and in-depth interviews confirm that there is a distinct trend shift towards more focus on CSR in corporate communication. Whilst this trend shift started as a reactive approach initiated by the many corporate scandals, the trend shift is now argued to be of a proactive nature focussed at preventing legitimacy concerns to arise. These findings are significant and interesting, implying that we are witnessing a transit period between two legitimacy strategies. Furthermore, the findings suggest that the way respondents argue when it comes to CSR activities coincides with consequentialism or utilitarianism, i.e. companies engage in CSR activities to avoid negative impacts instead of being driven by a will to make a social betterment or acting in accordance with what is fundamentally believed to be right to do. This provides new input to the ongoing debate about business ethics. The findings should alert national and international policy makers to the need both to increase the vigilance and capacity of the regulatory and judicial systems in the CSR context and to increase institutional pressure to enhance CSR adoption and CSR communication. Furthermore, stakeholders need to be careful in assuming that CSR communication is an evidence of a CSR commitment influencing corporate behaviour and increasing business ethics.     

Corporate social responsibilities,consumer trust and corporate reputation: South Korean consumers' perspectives

This study proposes and tests a model of corporate social responsibility (CSR) that specifies relationships among (1) four categories of CSR initiatives as independent variables, (2) three types of consumer trust as mediating variables, and (3) corporate reputation as the dependent variable. Results show that the firm's fulfillment of economic and legal CSR initiatives had a direct positive effect on corporate reputation, whereas neither ethical nor philanthropic CSR initiatives did. In the CSR-trust link, economic performances fostered consumer expertise trust, legal and ethical CSR activities affected integrity trust, and philanthropic CSR activities influenced social benevolence trust in the firm. This study confirms that all three types of trust partially or fully mediate the effect of the four CSR initiatives on corporate reputation. This outcome indicates that CSR activities create and nurture consumers' trust in the company, which will, in turn, bring about consumers' positive or improved perceptions of the firm.     

Business Cases and Corporate Engagement with Sustainability: Differentiating Ethical Motivations

This paper explores links between different ethical motivations and kinds of corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities to distinguish between different types of business cases with regard to sustainability. The design of CSR and corporate sustainability can be based on different ethical foundations and motivations. This paper draws on the framework of Roberts (Organization 10:249–265, 2003) which distinguishes four different ethical management versions of CSR. The first two ethical motivations are driven either by a reactionary concern for the short-term financial interests of the business, or reputational, driven by a narcissistic concern to protect the firm’s image. The third responsible motivation works from the inside-out and seeks to embed social and environmental concerns within the firm’s performance management systems, and the fourth, a collaborative motivation, works to bring the outside in and seeks to go beyond the boundaries of the firm to create a dialogue with those who are vulnerable to the unintended consequences of corporate conduct. Management activities based on these different ethical motivations to CSR and sustainability result in different operational activities for corporations working towards sustainability and thus have very different effects on how the company’s economic performance is influenced. Assuming that corporate managers are concerned about creating business cases for their companies to survive and prosper in the long term, this paper raises the question of how different ethical motivations for designing CSR and corporate sustainability relate to the creation of different business cases. The paper concludes by distinguishing four different kinds of business cases with regard to sustainability: reactionary and reputational business cases of sustainability, and responsible and collaborative business cases for sustainability.     

Media Depictions of CEO Ethics and Stakeholder Support of CSR Initiatives: The Mediating Roles of CSR Motive Attributions and Cynicism

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) functions as a positive signal to stakeholders that a firm is a responsible corporate citizen. However, CSR is increasingly becoming an ambiguous signal of organizational goodwill because many companies engage in CSR purely out of self-interest, rather than genuine altruism. In this paper, we integrate attribution theory with signaling theory to explore how stakeholders react when they receive additional signals that contradict the company’s intended positive CSR signal. Specifically, we argue that morally questionable CEO ethics in the media negatively influences stakeholders’ CSR motive attributions, which in turn results in increased cynicism that ultimately impacts CSR support intentions and behaviors. We find support for our hypotheses in a quasi-experimental study of stakeholder media exposure to different types of CEOs (morally questionable, ethical, and ethics-unknown). Our findings demonstrate that stakeholders consider CEO ethics an important signal of CSR motives, and will shun the CSR initiatives of morally questionable CEOs.     

Little big firms? Corporate social responsibility in small businesses that do not compete against big ones

This article examines the drivers and barriers for corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the Norwegian graduate uniform industry, which is a market devoid of large corporations, consisting entirely of two small businesses. It finds that these small businesses' CSR activities are not particularly well explained by the existing literature on CSR in small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises, which assumes the presence of large competitors. This raises the question of whether small businesses that do not compete against large corporations may actually behave more like ‘little big firms’ when it comes to CSR. The article finds that the two businesses studied are mostly driven by external pressure to improve their social responsibility. Such pressure stems partly from news reports on their activities and partly from increasing competition leading to a situation where the small businesses operating in the market scrutinise each others' activities.     

How Perceived Corporate Social Responsibility Affects Employee Cynicism: The Mediating Role of Organizational Trust

This study examines to what extent perceived corporate social responsibility (CSR) reduces employee cynicism, and whether trust plays a mediating role in the relationship between CSR and employee cynicism. Three distinct contributions beyond the existing literature are offered. First, the relationship between perceived CSR and employee cynicism is explored in greater detail than has previously been the case. Second, trust in the company leaders is positioned as a mediator of the relationship between CSR and employee cynicism. Third, we disaggregate the measure of CSR and explore the links between this and with employee cynicism. Our findings illustrate that the four distinct dimensions of CSR of Carroll (economic, legal, ethical, and discretionary) are indirectly linked to employee cynicism via organizational trust. In general terms, our findings will help company leaders to understand employees’ counterproductive reactions to an organization, the importance of CSR for internal stakeholders, and the need to engage in trust recovery.     

Be bad but (still) look good: Can controversial industries enhance corporate reputation through CSR initiatives?

Even though the link between perceived corporate social responsibility fit (PCSR‐fit) and corporate reputation has received much attention from scholars, this tradition has ignored that the underpinnings of this association vary depending on the particular characteristics of each industry under study. To delve into this matter, we investigate in the increasingly relevant context of controversial industries (CIs) how PCSR‐fit could enhance corporate reputation and which are the mediating mechanisms of this association. Our academic contribution is twofold. First, we find that controversial sectors indeed can increase corporate reputation through CSR activities. However, we find that to achieve this goal, the nature of PCSR‐fit should be different than what extant literature indicates, because companies in these settings should directly focus on avoiding or reducing their inherent controversial harm or impact. Second, we evidence that “CSR initiatives' legitimacy” and “situational skepticism” mediate the PCSR‐fit and corporate reputation relationship in CIs. Therefore, we further unravel the underpinnings of this association to advance what we know on the matter and aid practitioners in this particular context.     

Company reputation and its influence on consumer trust in response to ongoing CSR communication

There is considerable disagreement in academic scholarship and beyond as to whether, in cases of bad reputations, companies will want to communicate corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities because this kind of communication is likely to increase consumers’ skepticism. In this regard, the two empirical studies discussed in this article examine the influence of prior company reputation on consumers’ trust in response to CSR communication in general and the development in response to continuous CSR activities and their ongoing communication by companies as well as by the media in particular. The two studies show that consumers’ trust in companies’ CSR activities increases after a second presentation of information by companies even in instances when companies had prior negative reputations. The second study in particular fills a gap in the literature on underlying mechanisms of consumers’ reactions to CSR communication. The results suggest that companies with prior negative reputations do not need to remain silent about their CSR activities; instead, CSR communication can help improve consumers’ trust in companies. However, the findings of these two studies also suggest that this positive development is short-lived. Consumers’ developing trust in companies’ CSR activities decreases significantly if they are exposed to negative information on these companies.     

An Ethical Framework for the Marketing of Corporate Social Responsibility

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to develop an ethical framework for the marketing of corporate social responsibility. Methods The approach is a conceptual one based on virtue ethics and on the corporate identity literature. Furthermore, empirical research results are used to describe the opportunities and pitfalls of using marketing communication tools in the strategy of building a virtuous corporate brand. Results/conclusions An ethical framework that addresses the paradoxical relation between the consequentialist perspective many proponents of the marketing of CSR adopt, and ethical perspectives which criticize an exclusive profit-oriented approach to CSR. Furthermore, three CSR strategies in relation to the marketing of CSR are discussed. For each CSR strategy it is explored how a corporation could avoid falling into the promise/performance gap.     

The Heterogeneous Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility Activities That Target Different Stakeholders

We aggregate different dimensions of corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities following the stakeholder framework proposed in Clarkson (Acad Manag Rev 20(1), 92–117, 1995) and present consistent evidence that CSR strengths targeting different stakeholders have their unique impact on firm risk and financial performance. Institutional CSR activities that target secondary stakeholders are negatively associated with firm risk, measured by total risk and systematic risk. Technical CSR that target primary stakeholders are positively associated with firm financial performance, measured by Tobin’s Q, ROA, and cash flow returns. Our results, based on a sample of S&P 500 component firms over the period of 1995–2009, are consistent with the risk management view of “altruistic” CSR activities and with the stakeholder salience theory. We also show that the impact of CSR activities on risk varies with the ethical climate, as proved in our subsample analyses on pre- and post-Sarbanes–Oxley periods. Our empirical analyses mitigate possible omitted variables and endogeneity concerns that are often overlooked in previous research. Our findings are robust to alternative CSR measures, to alternative risk and performance measures, and to alternative estimation methods.     

Good Neighbors but Bad Employers: Two Faces of Corporate Social Responsibility Programs

Using two firm-level datasets in Korea, we analyzed the effects of corporate social responsibility (CSR) on employment relations. We propose that participation in corporate social activity may not necessarily reflect an ethical commitment to do “the right thing,” but instead can be associated with mobilizing internal resources to offset the costs imposed by external CSR involvement undertaken because of social pressure. Analysis of the two datasets showed similar results. The results demonstrate that socially responsible actions facilitate employer tendency to use performance-based pay and efficiency-based work practices. We also find that CSR has a negative association with employment growth and increased labor flexibility through contingent employment. These findings shed light on the internal impact of CSR involvement on a firm’s employment policies with respect to resource allocation.     

Responsibility in Paradise? The Adoption of CSR Tools by Companies Domiciled in Tax Havens

In contrast to the recent rise to economic importance of offshore finance centres (OFCs), the topic of taxation has so far created little interest among scholars of corporate social responsibility (CSR). This paper makes two contributions to addressing this lacuna. Applying a range of influential normative theories of ethics, it first offers an ethical evaluation of tax havens. Second, the paper examines what use large firms that are headquartered in two OFCs??Bermuda and the Cayman Islands??make of formal CSR tools. The emerging duplicity in tax haven-based companies professing social responsibility highlights once more the political nature of CSR, where at least some firms and/or industries can successfully limit government power to enact regulation as well as shape the discourse around CSR. The study of CSR in OFC-based firms thus calls into question the usefulness of the often quoted definition of CSR as going beyond the law.     

Political connections and corporate social responsibility: Political incentives in China

To explore the motivations underpinning corporate social responsibility (CSR) decisions in China, a country characterized by extensive government intervention, this paper investigates whether building a good relationship with the government is a political incentive that is driving firms to conduct CSR by examining the effects of political connections on the latter. Our results indicate that politically connected firms exhibit better CSR. However, the effect is considerably more significant for firms with existing political relationships. Additionally, findings show that the effect is more prominent in firms for which political connections are more valuable, namely, non‐state‐owned enterprises, small firms, and firms operating in less market‐oriented cities, indicating that CSR can serve as a differentiation strategy to compete against other bidders. Dividing CSR activities into economic, environmental and social aspects, we find that the social‐based activities are more likely to be driven by political motivations. By categorizing CSR and political connections, this paper not only expands the scope of political CSR and renders the generated results that have been mixed together more distinguishable, but also provides a more precise understanding of the fundamental drivers of CSR in China from the perspective of resource exchange.     

Values,Authenticity, and Responsible Leadership

Of the many ethical corporate marketing practices, many firms use corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication to enhance their corporate image. Yet, consumers, overwhelmed by these more or less well-founded CSR claims, often have trouble identifying truly responsible firms. This confusion encourages ‘greenwashing’ and may make CSR initiatives less effective. On the basis of attribution theory, this study investigates the role of independent sustainability ratings on consumers’ responses to companies’ CSR communication. Experimental results indicate the negative effect of a poor sustainability rating for corporate brand evaluations in the case of CSR communication, because consumers infer less intrinsic motives by the brand. Sustainability ratings thus could act to deter ‘greenwashing’ and encourage virtuous firms to persevere in their CSR practices.     

Fluidity of Regulation-CSR Nexus: The Multinational Corporate Corruption Example

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is a relatively undeveloped concept despite its increasing importance to corporations. One difficulty is the possible inexactness of CSR. Another is the apparent reluctance by regulatory authorities and policy makers to intervene in the area. This is largely a result of inhibitions created by traditional approaches to company law with emphasis on shareholder protection and financial disclosure. The consequence is the stultification of independent development of CSR by tying social issues to financial performance. This attitude might not be unconnected to the theoretical and practical challenges in justifying CSR and defining its scope. The underlying impediment is a factual and theoretical failure to distinguish ‘instrumental’ and ‘pure’ (ethical) CSR. This article demonstrates that ethical CSR highlights the role of regulation, and a principal stance is that regulation is neither incompatible nor irreconcilable with ethical CSR. The article argues that cognizance of the intrinsic moral justification of ‘pure’ CSR is required for delineating the scope of CSR as well as for clarifying the desirability and extent of its regulation. It argues that the dynamic history and visage of multinational corporate corruption illuminates the fluidity of the regulation–CSR relationship. The current and widening backlash against transnational corporate corruption is, arguably, a demonstration of the position that regulation and CSR are not mutually exclusive and absolute concepts. This article submits that recognition and application of this ‘ethical’ and ‘instrumental’ CSR distinction is fundamental to the development of CSR and resolution of connected questions of regulation.