Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 60, Issue 4, pp 359–376 | Cite as

The Pragmatic and Ethical Barriers to Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure: The Nike Case

Article

Abstract

Numerous studies have documented the demand for information regarding corporations’ relationships to society. Much recent research has demonstrated why stakeholders need this information, and how it benefits both companies and the public. These studies suggest numerous methods by which companies can effectively disclose corporate social responsibility (CSR) information to the public, but in practice, reporting this type of information is fraught with legal and ethical uncertainty often unexplored in most literature. This article represents a fresh analysis of the numerous pragmatic consequences and legal and ethical complications inherent in CSR reporting, using Nike Corporation as a case example. The article discusses the theoretical viewpoints surrounding the ethics of CSR disclosure, and presents the case of Nike and the complications it encountered while advertising CSR information. The article ends with an analysis of CSR auditing as a possible solution to companies seeking to improve the method and transparency of social responsibility reporting.

Keywords

commercial speech free speech corporate social responsibility CSR reporting Nike 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Argenti, P. A., Forman, J. 2002The Power of Corporate Communication: Crafting the Voice and Image of Your BusinessMcGraw-HillNew York, NY197266Google Scholar
  2. Benady, A.: 2002, ‘Nike’s Supreme Fight on Free Speech’, The Times (London), September 23, 4.Google Scholar
  3. Biskupic, J.: 2003, ‘Nike Case: Are Press Releases Free Speech?’, USA Today, January 13, A.02.Google Scholar
  4. Browne, M. N., Haas, F. P. 1974‘Social Responsibility: The Uncertain Hypothesis’MSU Business Topics224751Google Scholar
  5. ‘Bush Administration, ACLU, Organized Labor, Media and European Entities Join Together to Protect First Amendment in Supreme Court Case Involving Nike, Inc.’: 2003, PR Newswire, March 3, 1.Google Scholar
  6. Byrum, R. B. 2003‘Nike’s Speech Fight is Our Own’Advertising Age7422Google Scholar
  7. Campbell, D.: 2003, ‘Nike’s Big Ticking-off: How America’s First Amendment on Free Speech Kept Accurate Corporate Reporting away from Company Spin’, The Guardian, Nov 17, 25.Google Scholar
  8. Companies Fail Social Investors: Most Investors Value Corporate Responsibility, Few are Satisfied: 2001, Investor Relations Business, Aug 6, 1.Google Scholar
  9. Davenport, K. 2000‘Corporate Citizenship: A Stakeholder Approach for Defining Corporate Social Performance and Identifying Measures for Assessing it’Business and Society39210220Google Scholar
  10. Dierickx, C.: 2004, ‘Sarbanes-Oxley Compliance Costs Average $16 Million Per Company’, Business Wire, 1.Google Scholar
  11. Edwards, J. 2002‘Taking it to the Big Guys’Brandweek431823Google Scholar
  12. Emerson, T. 2001‘Swoosh Wars: in an Operation Modeled on the Clinton Campaign Machine, Nike Takes on its Enemies’Newsweek123540MarchGoogle Scholar
  13. Epstein, M. J., Freedman, M. 1994‘Social Disclosure and the Individual Investor’Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal794100Google Scholar
  14. Filios, V. P. 1984‘Corporate Social Responsibility and Public Accountability’Journal of Business Ethics3305314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Filios, V. P. 1986‘Review and Analysis of the Empirical Research in Corporate Social Accounting’Journal of Business Ethics5291307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Florini, A. 2003‘Business and Global Governance’Brookings Review2149Google Scholar
  17. Gelb, D. S., Strawser, J.À 2001‘Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Disclosures: An Alternative Explanation for Increased Disclosure’Journal of Business Ethics33113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Geller, A.: 2004, ‘Law Sparks Wave of Would-be Whistle Blowers’, Telegraph-Herald, November 21, B3.Google Scholar
  19. Gerena-Morales, R.: 2004, ‘The Burden of Compliance Sarbanes-Oxley’s Record-Test Audit Rule is Taxing’, South Florida Sun-Sentinel,November 14, F.1.Google Scholar
  20. Graulich, D. 2002‘Press Release: Write in Haste ... Repent’National Law Journal25D.12Google Scholar
  21. Greenhouse, L.: 2003, ‘Supreme Court to Review Nike Case in Major Look at Free Speech Rights of Companies’, New York Times, January 11, A.12.Google Scholar
  22. Hagerty, J.: 2004, ‘Sarbanes-Oxley is Not a Fact of Business Life’, VARbusiness, November 1568.Google Scholar
  23. Herbert, B. 1996‘Nike’s Pyramid Scheme’New York Times10A.17A.23JuneGoogle Scholar
  24. Jenkins, P. 2004‘German Groups Rue US Listings: Many Dax 30 Companies Eyeing Withdrawal from NYSE’Financial Times1921NovemberGoogle Scholar
  25. Jopson, B. 2004‘Japan Looks to Tighten up Regulations’Financial Times1831NovemberGoogle Scholar
  26. Kilpatrick, J. 2003‘Justices should have Tackled Commercial-speech Case’Deseret News6A09OctoberGoogle Scholar
  27. Lane, C. 2003‘Nike Speech Case Goes to High Court’Washington Post11E.01JanuaryGoogle Scholar
  28. Laurita, S. 2001‘Low Marks for Corporations’PR News571July 16Google Scholar
  29. Linn, A. 2003‘Firms Finding a Little Good will Stretches a Long Way’Rocky Mountain News255.C.OctGoogle Scholar
  30. Mauro, T. 2002‘Let Nike Speak up for Itself ’USA Today14A.15OctoberGoogle Scholar
  31. McAlister, D. T., Ferrell, L. 2002‘The Role of Strategic Philanthropy in Marketing Strategy’European Journal of Marketing36689707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. McCabe, D. M. 2000‘Global Labor and Worksite Standards: A Strategic Ethical Analysis of Shareholder Employee Relations Resolutions’Journal of Business Ethics23101111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Murray, S. 2003‘Communicating CSR Activities: Corporate Messages on Responsibility Call for Sensitivity – but without Transparency, they Lose Credibility’Financial Times294SepetemberGoogle Scholar
  34. ‘Nike Annual Report and Proxy Statements’: 2004, Nikebiz.com: The Inside Story, Accessed January 14, 2004. <http://www.nike.com/nikebiz/nikebiz.jhtml? page=l7>.Google Scholar
  35. ‘Nike vs. Kasky’: 2004, Reclaim Democracy: Restoring Citizen Authority Over Corporations. Accessed January 13, 2004. <http://www.reclaimdemocracy.org/nike/index.html>.Google Scholar
  36. Parloff, R. 2002‘Can we talk?’Fortune146102112Google Scholar
  37. Porter, M. E., Kramer, M. R. 2002‘The Competitive Advantage of Corporate Philanthropy’Harvard Business Review805668PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. PR News: 2004, “Living up to (Corporate Social) Responsibility’, PR News, March 22, 60(12), 1.Google Scholar
  39. Raynard, P. 1998‘Coming Together. A Review of Contemporary Approaches to Social Accounting, Auditing and Reporting in Non-profit Organisations’Journal of Business Ethics1714711480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Reynolds, M. A. 2001‘Greener CPA: An Alternative Vision’Ohio CPA Journal606164Google Scholar
  41. Robertson, D. C., Nicholson, N. 1996‘Expressions of Corporate Social Responsibility in U.K. Firms’Journal of Business Ethics1510951106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Savage, D. G. 2002‘The State; Nike Takes ad Liability Case to High Court’Los Angeles Times15B.6OctoberGoogle Scholar
  43. Schwartz, M. S. 2002‘A Code of Ethics for Corporate Codes of Ethics’Journal of Business Ethics412744CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Scrushy, R. 2004‘Ethics in the Corporate Suites’Chicago Tribune1324NovemberGoogle Scholar
  45. Siegal, N.: 1998, ‘The Last Days of Joe Camel. How a Team of Lawyers Defeated Big Tobacco’, California Lawyer, November.Google Scholar
  46. Sillanpää, M. 1998‘The Body Shop Values Report – Towards Integrated Stakeholder Auditing’Journal of Business Ethics1714431457CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Stoll, M. L. 2002‘The Ethics of Marketing Good Corporate Conduct’Journal of Business Ethics41121129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Stormer, F. 2003‘Making the Shift: Moving from ‘Ethics Pays’ to an Inter-Systems Model of Business’Journal of Business Ethics44279289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tkacik, Ì. 2003‘Just How Far Does First Amendment Protection Go? High Court May Decide to Hear Whether Nike’s PR Statements to Media, Others are Protected’Wall Street Journal10B.1JanuaryGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Organizational Leadership and Strategy, Marriott School of ManagementBrigham Young UniversityProvoU.S.A

Personalised recommendations