Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Communication of Corporate Social Responsibility: United States and European Union Multinational Corporations

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study explores corporate social responsibility (CSR) by conducting a cross-cultural analysis of communication of CSR activities in a total of 16 U.S. and European corporations. Drawing on previous research contrasting two major approaches to CSR initiatives, it was proposed that U.S. companies would tend to communicate about and justify CSR using economic or bottom-line terms and arguments whereas European companies would rely more heavily on language or theories of citizenship, corporate accountability, or moral commitment. Results supported this expectation of difference, with some modification. Specifically, results indicated that EU companies do not value sustainability to the exclusion of financial elements, but instead project sustainability commitments in addition to financial commitments. Further, U.S.-based companies focused more heavily on financial justifications whereas EU-based companies incorporated both financial and sustainability elements in justifying their CSR activities. In addition, wide variance was found in both the prevalence and use of specific CSR-related terminology. Cross-cultural distinctions in this use create implications with regard to measurability and evidence of both strategic and bottom-line impact. Directions for further research are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Active Citizenship Network: 2001, ‹Remarks on the “Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility” Green Paper’, http://www.activecitizenship.net/socialresp/greenpaper.htm (accessed December 15, 2006)

  • Ascolese, M.: 2003, ‹European and U.S. Multinationals Place Different Emphases on Corporate Sustainability’, PricewaterhouseCoopers Press Release

  • Balinger, J.: 2001, ‹Once Again, Nike’s Voice Looms Larger than that of its Workers’, http://www.behindthelabel. org/oped.php?story_id=22 (accessed December 12, 2006)

  • Baudrillard J. (1981) For a Critique of the Political Economy of the Sign Telos, St. Louis

    Google Scholar 

  • Baudrillard J. (1996) The System of Objects Verso, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Bierce, A.: 1906, The Devil’s Dictionary (Dover Publications, reprint 1993, Mineola, NY), previously titled The Cynic’s Word Book, online at http://www. alcyone.com/max/lit/devils/c.html (accessed December 15, 2006)

  • Brum, M. C.: 2003, ‹Governments and Non-Governmental Organizations vis-à-vis Corporate Social Responsibility’, Jus Semper Global Alliance Living Wages North and South Initiative Issue Brief, http://www.jussemper.org/Resources/MCardozoEthicsGovNGOs.pdf (accessed December 15, 2006)

  • Carroll A. B. (1979) A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance. Academy of Management Review 4(4):497–505

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll A. B. (1991) The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility – Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders. Business Horizons 34(4):39–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll A. B. (1998) The Four Faces of Corporate Citizenship. Business and Society Review 100:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Context: 2005a, ‹Corporate Responsibility: A United State?’, http://www.econtext.co.uk (accessed December 15, 2006)

  • Crane A., Matten D. (2005) Business Ethics Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • CSRwire: 2001, ‹Americans are Looking for Good Corporate Citizens’, http://www.csrwire.com/ article.cgi/676.html (accessed December 15, 2006)

  • Economist: (2001) ‹Face Value: Soap-Box Salesman’, 361(8243), 86

  • Estes, F., S. Horne, J. Hoyle and D. Conway: 2004, ‹Varying Approaches to CSR?’, UNC Kenan-Flagler Business School White Papers (UNC, Chapel Hill, NC)

  • European Commission. Directorate-General for Employment and Social Affairs, Industrial Relations and Industrial Change, Unit EMPL/D.1: 2001, Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility, Green Paper (Office for Official Publication of the European Communities, Luxembourg), http://europa.eu.int/comm/employment_social/soc-dial/csr/greenpaper_en.pdf (accessed December 15, 2006)

  • Fortune Magazine: 2005, ‹Global Accountability: The 2005 Accountability Rating’, http://www.fortune.com/ fortune/global500/accountability (accessed December 15, 2006)

  • FTSE International Limited: 2006, FTSE4Good Index Series␣Inclusion Criteria. http://www.ftse.com/Indices/FTSE4Good_Index_Series/Downloads/FTSE4Good_ Inclusion_Criteria_Brochure_Feb_06.pdf (accessed December 15, 2006)

  • Hartman, L., et al. (eds.): 2003, Rising Above Sweatshops: Innovative Management Approaches to Global Labor Challenges (Praeger Books, New York, NY)

  • Hill & Knowlton Inc. (2003) Corporate Reputation Watch Survey. Hill & Knowlton, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • International Institute for Environment and Development: 2001, ‹Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility: IIED Response to the EC Green Paper (IIED, London)’, http://europa. eu.int/comm/employment_social/soc-dial/csr/pdf2/033-ORGNAT_IIED_UK_011221_en.pdf (accessed December 15, 2006)

  • Kang, Y. C. and D. J. Wood: 1995, ‹Before-Profit Social Responsibility-Turning the Economic Paradigm Upside-Down’, In D. Nigh and D. Collins (eds.), Proceedings of the 6th Annual Meeting of the International Association for Business and Society (IABS, Vienna), pp. 408–418

  • Klein, A., et al.: 2005, Accounting for Good: The Global Stakeholder Report 2005. The Second World-Wide Survey on Stakeholder Attitudes to CSR Reporting (Pleon Kohtes Klewes GmbH, Bonn, Germany)

  • Layzer Sherwood E. (2006) Corporate Social Responsibility Reports are on the Rise Ethikos 19(4):13–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Lessem R. (1979) Corporate Social Reporting in Action. Journal of General Management 4(3):27–41

    Google Scholar 

  • Maignan I. (2001) Consumers’ Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibilities: A Cross-Cultural Comparison. Journal of Business Ethics 20(1):57–72

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manohka I. (2004) Corporate Social Responsibility: A New Signifier? An Analysis of Business Ethics and Good Business Practice. Politics 24(1):56–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matten D., Crane A. (2005) Corporate Citizenship: Toward an Extended Theoretical Conceptualization. Academy of Management Review 30(1):166–179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matten, D. and J. Moon: 2006, ‹“Implicit” and “Explicit” CSR: A Conceptual Framework for Understanding CSR in Europe,’ International Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility, ISSN. 1479-5124, paper no. 29-2004, http://www.nottingham.ac.uk/business/ICCSR/research/paperseries.html (accessed December 11, 2006)

  • Morelli M. D., Morelli E. A. (1997) The Lonergan Reader University of Toronto Press, Buffalo, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter M. (1998) On Competition Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. and M. Kramer: 2002, ‹The Competitive Advantage of Corporate Philanthropy’, In Harvard Business School Press (ed.), 2003, Harvard Business Review on Corporate Responsibility (Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, MA), pp. 27–64

  • Porter M., Kramer M. (2006) Strategy & Society: The Link between Competitive Advantage and Corporate Social Responsibility. Harvard Business Review 84(12):78–92

    Google Scholar 

  • SAM Indexes GmbH: 2006, ‹Dow Jones Sustainability Index Euro Stoxx Corporate Sustainability Assessment Criteria’, http://www.sustainability-index.com

  • SustainAbility (2006b) Tomorrow’s Value. SustainAbility, Ltd., London, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Sustainable Investment Institute, European Business School (Institut für Ökologie und Unternehmensführung an der EUROPEAN BUSINESS SCHOOL e.V.): 2006, ‹ESI – Ethibel Sustainability Index,’ http://www.sustainable-investment.org/indizes/9_indize_ print.aspx?mutter=9&index=43 (accessed December 15, 2006)

  • Van Lee, R., et al.: 2004, ‹The Value of Corporate Values’, Strategy + Business Summer, No. 39, 52–65, online edition: http://www.strategy-business.com/article/05206?gko=7869b-1876-9176155

  • Welford R. (2005) Corporate Social Responsibility in Europe, North America and Asia. Journal of Corporate Citizenship 17:33–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Wood D., Logsdon J. (2001) Theorising Business Citizenship. In: Andriof J., McIntosh M. (eds) Perspectives on Corporate Citizenship. Greenleaf, Sheffield, UK, 83–103

    Google Scholar 

  • Zadek, S.: 2005, ‹Global Accountability: Responsibility isn’t a Blame Game’, Fortune Magazine

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management, DePaul University, 1 E. Jackson Blvd., Ste. 7000, Chicago, IL, 60604, U.S.A.

    Laura P. Hartman, Robert S. Rubin & K. Kathy Dhanda

Authors
  1. Laura P. Hartman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Robert S. Rubin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. K. Kathy Dhanda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Laura P. Hartman.

Additional information

Laura P. Hartman is a Professor of Business Ethics and Legal Studies in the Management Department in the College of Commerce at DePaul University, as Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs of the University and as Research Director of DePaul’s Institute for Business and Professional Ethics. She is also an invited professor at INSEAD (France), HEC (France), the University of Melbourne, the Université Paul Cezanne Aix Marseille III and the Grenoble Graduate School of Business. She has been published in, among other journals, Business Ethics Quarterly, Business & Society Review, Business Ethics: A European Review, and the Journal of Business Ethics.

Robert S. Rubin is an Assistant Professor in the Management Department at DePaul University’s Kellstadt Graduate School of Business. He received his PhD in organizational psychology from Saint Louis University. His current research interests include transformational leadership, leader cynicism, social and emotional individual differences, and management education and development.

K. Kathy Dhanda is an Associate Professor at the Department of Management at DePaul University. Her areas of research include sustainable supply chains, environmental networks, marketable permit modeling, sustainable management, and public policy.

Appendices

Appendix A

List of abbreviations used in this article

  • CSR: Corporate Social Responsibility

  • EU: European Union

  • U.S.: United States

  • GRI: Global Reporting Initiatives

  • N100: Top 100 companies in 16 countries

  • G250: Top 250 firms of Fortune 5000

  • S&P 500: Standard and Poor’s Index of 500 companies in the U.S. economy

  • FTSE: Financial Times Stock Exchange

  • FTSE4Good: An index series designed by FTSE to measure the performance of companies that meet globally recognized corporate responsibility standards.

  • ESI: Ethibel Sustainability Index

  • BP: British Petroleum

  • HP: Hewlett Packard

  • J&J: Johnson & Johnson

Appendix B: List of documents and sources used in the analysis

(all documents accessed during spring/summer, 2006)

European reports

U.S. reports

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hartman, L.P., Rubin, R.S. & Dhanda, K.K. The Communication of Corporate Social Responsibility: United States and European Union Multinational Corporations. J Bus Ethics 74, 373–389 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9513-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-007-9513-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation