Engaging stakeholders in corporate accountability programmes: A cross‐sectoral analysis of UK and transnational experience

This paper explores the type of stakeholder engagement currently being undertaken by many organisations as part of social and ethical accounting, auditing and reporting (SEAAR) processes. Specifically, the paper seeks to determine the extent to which current corporate practice iteratively promotes stakeholder participation in collaboratively designing accountability programmes, or whether it merely is a new term for canvassing stakeholder opinions. Arnstein's Ladder of Citizen Participation is used as a conceptual model for positioning contemporary methods of stakeholder dialogue. The findings from interviews with representatives from twenty‐nine UK and transnational organisations actively engaged in stakeholder dialogue are presented. This paper concludes that contemporary organisations seem to be seeking to engage with stakeholders in partnerships, yet their attempts still fall short of what Arnstein called Citizen Control, the level of achievement that non‐governmental organisations would like stakeholder engagement to attain.     

Employees' awareness of their impact on corporate reputation

Corporate reputation is critical for cultivating stakeholder relationships and, specifically, for regaining public trust. Corporate reputation results from the firm's interactions with stakeholders, emphasizing the important role employees play in reputation management. However, employees are not necessarily aware of, or prepared for, this extra-role assignment, indicating a gap in research and a managerial challenge. The purpose of the present article is to identify how employees' awareness of their impact on their employers' reputation is influenced by pride, job satisfaction, affective commitment, and perceived corporate reputation. An online survey of employees working for firms ranked in Fortune's America's Most Admired Companies Index provides empirical evidence. The findings underline the prominent effect pride in membership has regarding employees' awareness of their impact on corporate reputation. Study findings further deliver insights into opportunities and risks for managers who wish to use internal reputation building strategies to enhance corporate reputation.     

Moral Discourse and Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting

This paper examines voluntary corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting as a form of moral discourse. It explores how alternative stakeholder perspectives lead to differing perceptions of the process and content of responsible reporting. We contrast traditional stakeholder theory, which views stakeholders as external parties having a social contract with corporations, with an emerging perspective, which views interaction among corporations and constituents as relational in nature. This moves the stakeholder from an external entity to one that is integral to corporate activity. We explore how these alternative stakeholder perspectives give rise to different normative demands for stakeholder engagement, managerial processes, and communication. We discuss models of CSR reporting and accountability: EMAS, the ISO 14000 series, SA8000, AA1000, the Global Reporting Initiative, and the Copenhagen Charter. We explore how these models relate to the stakeholder philosophies and find that they are largely consistent with the traditional atomistic view but fall far short of the demands for moral engagement prescribed by a relational stakeholder perspective. Adopting a relational view requires stakeholder engagement not only in prescribing reporting requirements, but also in discourse relating to core aspects of the corporation such as mission, values, and management systems. Habermas’ theory of communicative action provides guidelines for engaging stakeholders in this moral discourse. MaryAnn Reynolds is an Associate Professor of Accounting in the College of Business and Economics at Western Washington University. Dr. Reynolds teaches intermediate financial accounting and is published in the areas of corporate social, environmental and ethical reporting. Kristi Yuthas is the Swigert Endowed Information Systems Professor in the School of Business Administration at Portland State University. Dr. Yuthas teaches accounting and information systems and is published in the areas of social and ethical impacts of management information systems.     

The legitimacy of accountants' participation in social and ethical accounting, auditing and reporting

This paper discusses the legitimacy of accountants' recent involvement in social and ethical accounting, auditing and reporting (SEAAR). Support for accountants' legitimacy is proposed by highlighting some of the technical skills they offer to the SEAAR process as conceived in AA1000. It is argued that the relevance of these skills is strengthened within a conception of SEAAR which principally perceives it as a risk/stakeholder management process focused primarily on the concerns of corporate management as opposed to those of the wider society. However, the paper moves on to maintain that if we wish to promote a conception of SEAAR primarily focused on accountability to stakeholders (denoted as 'true accountability') as opposed to risk/stakeholder management, then, particularly in the domain of external social audit, the legitimacy of accountants' participation may be disputed. The paper therefore concludes by cautioning against facilitating the unquestioned entry of accountants into the realm of SEAAR.     

企业成长视角的利益相关者利益要求差异研究

企业与利益相关者之间所缔结的综合性社会契约是利益相关者利益要求的根源,综合性社会契约的复杂性造成企业对利益相关者利益要求认知的差异。文章通过实证研究,从企业成长的视角,对不同规模与不同生命周期的企业对利益相关者利益要求的认知差异进行识别与分析。根据研究结果,文章建议社会各方应给予中小型企业与衰退期企业更多关心与关注,以促使其更好地回应利益相关者利益要求,强化其社会责任意识。     

How does social trust affect corporate financial performance? The mediating role of corporate social responsibility

Prior studies assert that social trust may positively influence the economic performance of countries and firms (within those countries). This paper proposes a more nuanced mechanism whereby corporate social responsibility (CSR) mediates the relationship between country-level social trust and firm-level financial performance. Anchored in neo-institutional theory, we theorize that social trust instills norms of trustworthiness and willingness to trust others guiding individual and corporate behaviors. In order to comply with such norms and gain legitimacy, firms in high-trust society are more likely to commit to CSR activities that serve the interests of stakeholders. CSR activities, in turn, can positively influence financial performance by enabling firms to access stakeholders' resources and capabilities and to decrease transactions costs in the stakeholder relationships. We tested our theory by analyzing 9818 firm-year observations across 34 countries, during the 2006 to 2015 period. Our analysis shows the expected CSR mediation in the relationship between social trust and firm-level financial performance. Our findings are robust across different models addressing the concerns of endogeneity, alternative measures, and potential moderators.     

Stakeholders as Citizens? Rethinking Rights, Participation, and Democracy

This paper reviews and analyses the implications of citizenship thinking for building ‘ethical’ institutional arrangements for business. The paper looks at various stakeholder groups whose relation with the company changes quite significantly when one starts to conceptualize it in terms of citizenship. Rather than being simply stakeholders, we could see those groups either as citizens, or as other constituencies participating in the administration of citizenship for others, or in societal governance more broadly. This raises crucial questions about accountability and democracy in stakeholder relations with the corporation. We sketch out the main currents informing and emerging from the citizenship perspective on firm-stakeholder relations; analyze specific stakeholder groups and their particular relevance in the context of a citizenship perspective; and conclude with a discussion of the broader implications in terms of building ethical institutions.     

Achieving quality in social reporting: the role of surveys in stakeholder consultation

More companies are publishing environmental and social reports, but concerns remain about the extent to which these reports reflect a genuine intention of businesses to make themselves accountable for their social and environmental performance or whether they are merely a way of maintaining corporate reputation in the face of external criticism. Dialogue with stakeholders lies at the heart of Corporate Social Responsibility practice. While questionnaire surveys are a main method for consulting large stakeholder groups, little has been written about how the data used in CSR reports are generated. This paper argues that the survey method can be adapted in ways to promote dialogue and hence stakeholder inclusion, without loss of technical rigour. It presents a case study of how one company conducted a large-scale multinational employee survey and identifies key design features of the survey process that were used to enhance the quality of dialogue between the company and its employees. The purpose of stakeholder consultation and dialogue is to find mutually agreed solutions to identified issues of concern. It can only claim to be an ethical business practice if it strives to achieve this overarching purpose.     

Corporate Environmental Disclosure: Contrasting Management's Perceptions with Reality

This paper's purpose is to assess how management's perceptions regarding certain aspects of environmental reporting relate to the firm's actual reporting strategy. Toward that end, we propose a model where a firm's environmental disclosure is conditional upon executive assessments of corporate concerns. The study relies on a survey that was sent to environmental management executives from European and North American multinational firms enquiring about the determinants of corporate environmental disclosure. Responses from these executives were then contrasted with their firms' actual environmental reporting practices, which was measured using a comprehensive multi-criteria grid. Results show that there is a relationship between environmental managers' attitudes toward various stakeholder groups and how those managers respond to the stakeholders via the decision to disclose and the actual disclosures made. Our model provides a perspective as to how a firm responds to the numerous stakeholders to whom it must be accountable. This accountability in turn relates to how the company communicates its actions to society in order to achieve or maintain its social legitimacy.     

Beyond the Manager’s Moral Dilemma: Rethinking the ‘Ideal-Type’ Business Ethics Case

Recent calls in the corporate social reporting (CSRep) literature have emphasized the importance of giving voice to non-managerial stakeholder groups in the social reporting process. The research, presented in this paper, employs recent work in stakeholder theory and CSRep to examine the perceptions of a diverse set of non-managerial stakeholders in the context of a developing country, Bangladesh. A series of semi-structured interviews were conducted with individuals who identify with various non-managerial stakeholder groups. Interviewees generally believed that the motivation and practice of CSRep in Bangladesh is developing in response to pressures from international markets and is producing largely cosmetic responses. Also, they expressed concerns that, given the economic, political, and social conditions in Bangladesh, premature adoption of strict CSRep standards may lead to increased corruption and other unintended consequences. Whilst some of the interviewees sharply criticized the current process of imposing social accounting codes/standards on developing countries which fail to consider the important local socio-economic context, the findings suggest that there is overwhelming support for mandatory externally verified CSRep based on the principles of peoples’ right to know, full disclosure/completeness, and relevance, which are anchored in the broader principles of transparency and stakeholder accountability.     

The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure on Corporate Reputation: A Non-professional Stakeholder Perspective

This paper examines the impact of corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure on corporate reputation as perceived by non-professional stakeholders. Proponents of CSR disclosure argue that CSR disclosure can be considered as a tool for reputation management. We empirically investigate this claim using a reputation index which tracks the general public’s perceptions of corporate reputation over time. In our analysis, we focus on disclosure in stand-alone CSR reports and control for CSR performance. We find that, in contrast to the common belief, stand-alone CSR reports do not influence corporate reputation among non-professional stakeholders. However, we are able to document that stand-alone CSR reports influence corporate reputation among professional stakeholders. We also provide some evidence that transparent CSR disclosure on corporate websites can influence corporate reputation among non-professional stakeholders.     

Corporate social responsibility communication: stakeholder information, response and involvement strategies

While it is generally agreed that companies need to manage their relationships with their stakeholders, the way in which they choose to do so varies considerably. In this paper, it is argued that when companies want to communicate with stakeholders about their CSR initiatives, they need to involve those stakeholders in a two-way communication process, defined as an ongoing iterative sense-giving and sense-making process. The paper also argues that companies need to communicate through carefully crafted and increasingly sophisticated processes. Three CSR communication strategies are developed. Based on empirical illustrations and prior research, the authors argue that managers need to move from 'informing' and 'responding' to 'involving' stakeholders in CSR communication itself. They conclude that managers need to expand the role of stakeholders in corporate CSR communication processes if they want to improve their efforts to build legitimacy, a positive reputation and lasting stakeholder relationships.     

Accounting for the Unaccountable: Biodiversity Reporting and Impression Management

This paper explores the strategies organizations use to demonstrate their accountability for biodiversity and legitimize their impact in this area through the use of techniques of neutralization. Neutralization aims to manage stakeholder impressions on very socially sensitive issues. Based on the content analysis of 148 sustainability reports from mining organizations, the study sheds light on the successful use of rhetoric in reports on non-measurable and potentially unaccountable issues. Specifically, the study shows that mining organizations use four main techniques of neutralization when they explain their impact on biodiversity. When they address stakeholders, they defend their social legitimacy and environmental responsiveness using one of the four techniques: they claim of a net positive or neutral impact on biodiversity, they deny that they have a significant impact, they distance themselves from the impact of their actions, and they play down their responsibilities. The study contributes to the literature on corporate sustainability and accounting for stakeholders. It focuses on under-researched issues such as the management of biodiversity and the tactics used to rationalize negative impacts. The study also bridges the gap between theories about organizational legitimacy, impression management, and techniques of neutralization.     

The Contribution of Environmental and Social Standards Towards Ensuring Legitimacy in Supply Chain Governance

Increasingly, companies implement social and environmental standards as instruments towards corporate social responsibility (CSR) in supply chains. This is based on the assumption that such standards increase legitimacy among stakeholders. Yet, a wide variety of standards with different requirement levels exist and companies might tend to introduce the ones with low exigencies, using them as a legitimacy front. This strategy jeopardizes the reputation of social and environmental standards among stakeholders and their long-term trust in these instruments of CSR, meaning that all expenses for their implementation are of no avail for the companies. Therefore, this paper highlights which criteria are important for the selection, implementation and improvement in order to achieve a company's aim, but also to strengthen the legitimacy of social and environmental standards. This research is based on conceptual thought and some existing empirical research, comparing four different social and environmental standards, revealing weaknesses and strengths. It exposes the basic conditions for the success of such standards among stakeholders and identifies the need for more empirical data.     

The Link Between Social Movements and Corporate Social Initiatives: Toward a Multi-level Theory

This article offers a first step toward a multi-level theory linking social movements to corporate social initiatives. In particular, building on the premise that social movements reflect ideologies that direct behavior inside and outside organizations, this essay identifies mechanisms by which social movements induce firms to engage with social issues. First, social movements are able to influence the expectations that key stakeholders have about firms’ social responsibility, making corporate social initiatives more attractive. Second, through conflict or collaboration, they shape firms’ reputation and legitimacy. And third, social movements’ ideologies manifest inside the corporations by triggering organizational members’ values and affecting managerial cognition. The essay contributes to the literatures on social movements and CSR, extends the understanding of how ideologies are manifested in movement-business interactions, and generates rich opportunities for future research.     

Stakeholders’ Perceptions and Future Scenarios to Improve Corporate Social Responsibility in Hong Kong and Mainland China

Globalisation has accelerated economic development in emerging economies through the outsourcing of their supply chains and at the same time has accelerated the degradation of environmental and social conditions. Society expects corporations to play an essential role in creating economic, environmental and social prosperity beyond their country of origin. In order to regulate outsourcing activities in the supply chain, many multinationals are constantly searching for ways to manage their indirect environmental and social impacts accordingly, as well as to meet their stakeholder expectations. Because expectations of stakeholders vary widely across different regions, this study intends, by engaging with major stakeholders, to identify what are the local and regional supply chain stakeholders’ perceptions and expectations. The findings would help in building consensus, strengthening the implementation and establishing the future corporate social responsibility (CSR) framework. This study collects and analyses data from 21 major stakeholders in Hong Kong and Mainland China. The results indicate that local and regional stakeholders perceive that CSR is fairly significant to largely export-oriented businesses, but it is lagging behind the West due to the fact that most local/regional companies only become involved in CSR when this is a client requirement. They see responsible corporations as meeting the local legislative requirement; going beyond this requirement is unnecessary. A voluntary approach favours multi-party partnership initiatives with pilot trust programmes aimed at managers’ and workers’ capacity building. Most stakeholders favour the proposed regional partnership initiative, supply chain task forces aimed at bringing together relevant organisations and people with different sets of skills. Distinct roles of different organisations are identified to assist suppliers to understand CSR, and only this will bring about long-term sustainable change.     

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.     

Selective Engagement in Corporate Social Responsibility: A Stakeholder Perspective

This paper attempts to understand selective engagement in corporate social responsibility (CSR). CSR involves various issues that can meet demands from multiple stakeholders. A firm can focus on certain CSR issues to satisfy a particular stakeholder while ignoring the demands from other stakeholders, or it can take a more balanced approach to CSR by addressing a wider range of social issues. In this paper, I investigate how stakeholder pressures from three types of primary stakeholders (customer, supplier, and employee) shape selective engagement in CSR. The empirical results based on a representative sample of more than 1,000 small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the early 2000s suggest that firms prioritize their stakeholders based on instrumental considerations. Those stakeholders who have greater power over the focal firm will exert a larger impact on a firm’s CSR engagement. Constrained by limited managerial resources, firms accord attention to a limited range of issues most relevant to salient stakeholders. Specifically, MNCs as major customers pressure the focal firm to assume more responsibility for product quality, as well as on a wider range of social issues; SOEs as both major customers and major suppliers pressure the focal firm to assume more responsibility for employee welfare; employees with higher education pressure the focal firm to assume more responsibility for employee welfare, and for a wider range of social issues. This study contributes to stakeholder theory and research on the CSR of SMEs, and has important implications for CSR practitioners.     

An Empirical Investigation of the Relationship Between Change in Corporate Social Performance and Financial Performance: A Stakeholder Theory Perspective

Stakeholder theory provides a framework for investigating the relationship between corporate social performance (CSP) and corporate financial performance. This relationship is investigated by examining how change in CSP is related to change in financial accounting measures. The findings provide some support for a tenet in stakeholder theory which asserts that the dominant stakeholder group, shareholders, financially benefit when management meets the demands of multiple stakeholders. Specifically, change in CSP was positively associated with growth in sales for the current and subsequent year. This indicates that there are short-term benefits from improving CSP. Return on sales was significantly positively related to change in CSP for the third financial period, indicating that long-term financial benefits may exist when CSP is improved.     

Organizational Governance and Ethical Systems: A Covenantal Approach to Building Trust

American businesses and corporate executives are faced with a serious problem the loss of public confidence. Public criticism, increased government controls, and growing expectations for improved financial performance and accountability have accompanied this decline in trust. Traditional approaches to corporate governance, typified by agency theory and stakeholder theory, have been expensive to direct and have focused on short-term profits and organizational systems that fail to achieve desired results. We explain why the organizational governance theories are fundamentally, inadequate to build trust. We advance a conceptual framework based on stewardship theory characterized by “covenantal relationships” and argue that design of governance mechanisms using a covenantal approach is more effective in building trust in organizations. A covenantal relationship is a specialized form of a relational contract between an employee and his or her organization. We argue that regardless of incentives and control mechanisms carefully designed through contractual mechanisms, in the absence of covenantal relationships it is extremely difficult to build trust within organizations. We propose that organizations are more likely to build trust – both at the organizational level and at the interpersonal level – when they create reinforcing and integrated systems that honor implied duties of “covenantal relationships.”