The legitimacy disconnect: Exploring the why and how of CSR communication

Whilst there is a growing body of research considering corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication, calls have been made to consider the ‘how’ of CSR communication (Maon, Lindgreen, & Swaen, 2010). The challenge with exploring this however, is that communication research has largely been criticised for failing to consider the macro-phenomena impacting communication (Jones, Watson, Gardner, & Gallois, 2004; Lammers & Barbour, 2006). As such, limited attention has been given to who organisations need to indicate their responsiveness to in relation to CSR, and in turn, why they communicate about certain activities in their CSR reports. Without exploring these ideas, and hence, gaining an understanding of the macro-phenomena impacting CSR communication, we limit our understanding of the ‘how’ of CSR communication. As such, this study sought to explore both the why of CSR communication, and in turn, the implications this may have for the how of CSR communication. To do this, this study drew on the notions of institutional theory, legitimacy, and rhetoric, and explored propositions drawn from these concepts to consider the why and how of CSR communication. Extended abstract attached

Exploring CSR communication: Linking institutional pressures, legitimacy, and rhetoric

By presenting an overview of institutional theory, specifically the concepts of organizational fields, institutional pressures, and legitimacy, in addition to classical rhetoric, we have sought to highlight that there are links within the literature between the concepts of institutional theory and legitimacy, and also legitimacy and classical rhetoric. To date however, the three concepts – institutional pressures, legitimacy, and rhetoric – have not been explicitly linked. Through building on the current literature, and using the notion of legitimacy as the axis to connect institutional pressures with rhetoric, we argue that certain rhetorical devices may in fact be used to build and construct legitimacy in relation to the different institutional pressures an organization may face within a field. We believe that this preliminary framework may be useful to the field of CSR communication, whereby it may assist in constructing legitimate CSR communication in response to the various pressures an organization may face in relation to CSR.

CSR communication and legitimacy : an institutional and rhetorical perspective

This study drew on the notions of institutional theory, legitimacy, and rhetoric, and explored propositions drawn from these concepts to consider the why and how of corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication. In doing so, this thesis found that there was often a disconnect between why the organisations were communicating about CSR activities in their reports and how the organisations were communicating about these activities.

Half-truths and dirty secrets: Omissions in CSR communication

This paper introduces the notion of half-truths, a term used to describe the communication of technically truthful information that has been, or has the potential to be, undermined by the omission of key information. By using an illustrative, exemplar case this study shows how an organization’s transparency and credibility in relation to its corporate social responsibility communication can be undermined, despite presenting technically truthful information

Four Aces : Bringing Communication Perspectives to Corporate Social Responsibility

The purpose of this chapter is to address the question of how communication studies can prove its value in relation to corporate social responsibility (CSR). As many disciplines seek to understand CSR, the role of communication has been relatively underexplored despite its prevalence in demonstrating and shaping social responsibility positions and practice. Literature review. The literature review points to what we consider as four aces. Communication studies alert us to (1) how meaning is constructed through communication, something that has implications for the management of organizations as publics hold different views of CSR and expect different things from them; (2) how a dialogue between an organization and its publics should unfold; (3) how practices of transparency can assist organizations to come across as trustworthy actors; and, importantly, (4) how a complexity view is fruitful to grasp the CSR communication process. These four key themes could be instructive for practitioners who want to argue for and demonstrate the usefulness of strategic communication for the management of CSR and bridge meso and macro levels of analysis.

Communicating engagement in corporate social responsibility : a meta-level construal of engagement

Organizations are increasingly seeking stakeholder support through engagement to demonstrate their corporate social responsibility (CSR) credentials. These credentials are in turn used to support claims of legitimacy for organizational operations. This paper uses a process model of antecedents, implementation, and consequences to study the connection between engagement and CSR. CSR reports show organizations perceive engagement in CSR as both communication and activities between organizations and their stakeholders; and as a second, meta-level of communication about that engagement with stakeholders beyond those directly involved, thereby broadening the scope of organizational claims to legitimacy. Understanding what engagement is and how and why it is carried out in CSR provides a framework for understanding engagement in public relations.

Corporate social responsibility and communication

Corporate activities are increasingly scrutinized for their effect on society and the environment. It is unthinkable that a corporation today will declare publicly that its only goal is to make money for its shareholders. Instead, corporations typically claim to balance the needs of society and the environment against the need to make a profit. That is, corporations say they practice corporate social responsibility (CSR). This edited volume explores the complexities of this seemingly simple claim.As such it is an essential resource to complement the latest academic thinking from management and communication research on how corporations communicate about CSR This chapter presents an overview of the book.

The problem of greenwash: Rhetorical elements in communicating environmental CSR practices

The field of rhetoric can be highly useful for researchers to focus on and understand the specific textual strategies used by organizations when communicating about CSR practices. To date however, while there have been studies that consider the use of rhetoric to communicate about environmental practices, there have been few studies that have used a rhetorical analysis to consider both green communication and public response to that communication as a way of understanding public issues with organizational practice. This study seeks to address this gap by using a rhetorical analysis of both environmental communication by organizations, and the claims made by a regulatory body acting on behalf of the public about why that communication was deemed ‘greenwash’ or inappropriate. In doing so, the paper applies a rhetorical analysis to understand the grounds on which environmental communication is deemed not legitimate, and suggests that whilst all three elements of ethos should be considered when communicating a CSR practice, the element of phronesis is the most crucial element, whereby organizations must ensure that they accurately justify any claims in relation to CSR.