Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 88, Issue 1, pp 175–197 | Cite as

The Role of NGOs in CSR: Mutual Perceptions Among Stakeholders

  • Daniel ArenasEmail author
  • Josep M. Lozano
  • Laura Albareda


This paper explores the role of NGOs in corporate social responsibility (CSR) through an analysis of various stakeholders’ perceptions and of NGOs’ self-perceptions. In the course of qualitative research based in Spain, we found that the perceptions of the role of NGOs fall into four categories: recognition of NGOs as drivers of CSR; concerns about their legitimacy; difficulties in the mutual understanding between NGOs and trade unions; the self-confidence of NGOs as important players in CSR. Each of these categories comprises the various elements analysed in the paper. We found some discrepancies between the perception of others and the self-perceptions of NGOs, which explains why their role is often controversial. The research confirms that secondary stakeholders, such as NGOs, are key players in CSR, but their role is still regarded as controversial and their legitimacy contested. Deep-seated misunderstandings and mistrust among various stakeholder groups (particularly between NGOs and trade unions) are a possible hurdle to the integration of social and environmental concerns in business activity and corporate governance in Spain. The study finds that business managers need to take a less firm-centric and a more contextual approach, and look more closely into the relationship with and among stakeholder groups. For NGO managers, the research shows that NGOs are not always aware of the stereotypes they generate and the problems caused mainly by what is seen as ambivalent roles: critic and counsellor, accuser and judge, idealist and fund raiser.


stakeholder engagement CSR NGOs perceptions legitimacy trade unions 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ackoff, R. L.: 1999, Re-creating the Corporation: A Design of Organizations for the 21st Century (Oxford University Press, New York, NY).Google Scholar
  2. Albareda, L., Ysa, T. and J. M. Lozano: 2006, ‹The role of governments in fostering CSR’, in A. Kakabadse and M. Morsing (eds.), Corporate Social Responsibility: Reconciling Aspiration with Application (Palgrave, Houndmills), pp. 112-28.Google Scholar
  3. Antal, A. B. and A. Sobczak: 2007, ‹Corporate Social Responsibility in France: A Mix of National Traditions and International Influences’, Business and Society 46, 9-32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Auberbach, C. F, and L. B. Silverstein: 2003, Qualitative data: An introduction to coding and analysis (New York University Press, New York, NY).Google Scholar
  5. Austin, J. E.: 2000, ‹Strategic Collaboration between Nonprofits and Businesses’, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 29, 69-97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Basu, K. and G. Palazzo: 2008, ‹Corporate Social Responsibility: A Process Model of Sensemaking’, Academy of Management Review 33, 122-136.Google Scholar
  7. Baur, D.: 2006, What Types of Criteria Help Judge the Legitimacy of NGOs as Stakeholder of Corporations? Working Paper, Presented at the Master Class on Corporate Social Responsibility in Lausanne (CH), December 8–9.Google Scholar
  8. Bendell, J.: 2000a, ‹Talking for Change? Reflections on Effective Stakeholder Dialogue’ in J. Andriof, S. Waddock, B. Husted and S. Rahman (eds.), Unfolding Stakeholder Thinking 2: Relationships, Communication, Reporting and Performance (Greenleaf, Sheffield), pp. 53-69.Google Scholar
  9. Bendell, J. (ed.): 2000b, Terms for Endearment. Business, NGOs and Sustainable Development (Greenleaf, Sheffield).Google Scholar
  10. Bendell, J.: 2004, ‹Barricades and Boardrooms. A Contemporary History of the Corporate Accountability Movement’, Technology, Business and Society, Programme Paper 13 (United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, Geneva).Google Scholar
  11. Berger, P. and T. Luckmann: 1966, The Social Construction of Reality. A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge (Anchor Books, New York).Google Scholar
  12. Burchell, J. and J. Cook: 2006, ‹It’s good to talk? Examining attitudes towards corporate social responsibility dialogue and engagement processes’, Business Ethics: A Europen Review 15, 154-170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Calton, J. M. and S. Payne: 2003, ‹Coping With Paradox. Multistakeholder Learning Dialogue as a Pluralist Sensemaking Process for Addressing Messy Problems’, Business and Society 42, 7-42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Campbell, J.: 2007, ‹Why Would Corporations Behave in Socially Responsible Ways? An Institutional Theory of Corporate Social Responsibility’, Academy of Management Review 32, 946-967.Google Scholar
  15. Charkham, J., 1995: Keeping Good Company. A Study of Corporate Governance in Five Countries (Oxford University Press, Oxford).Google Scholar
  16. Charmaz, K., 2000: ‹Grounded theory; Objectivist and constructivist methods’ in Denzin, N. K. and Y. S. Lincoln (eds.), Handbook of qualitative research, 2nd edition (Sage Publications, Thousands Oaks, CA), pp. 509-535.Google Scholar
  17. Crane, A.: 1999. ‹Are You Ethical? Please Tick Yes Or No: On Researching Ethics in Business Organizations’, Journal of Business Ethics 20: 237-248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Crane, A. and D. Livesey: 2003, ‹Are you Talking to Me? – Stakeholder Communication and the Risks and Rewards of Dialogue’ in J. Andriof, S. Waddock, B. Husted and R. S. Sutherland (eds.), Unfolding Stakeholder Thinking 2: Relationships, Communication, Reporting and Performance (Greenleaf Sheffield), pp. 39-52.Google Scholar
  19. Creswell, J. W.: 1998, Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions (Sage Publications, Thousands Oaks CA).Google Scholar
  20. Daboub A. J. and J. M. Calton: 2002, ‹Stakeholder Learning Dialogues: How to Preserve Ethical Responsibility in Networks’, Journal of Business Ethics 41, 85-98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. de Bakker, F. G. A. and F. den Hond: 2008, ‹Introducing the Politics of Stakeholder Influence: A Review Essay’, Business and Society 47, 8-20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. de la Cuesta, M. and C. Valor: 2004, ‹Fostering Corporate Social Responsibility Through Publich Initiative: From the EU to the Spanish Case’, Journal of Business Ethics 55, 275-293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Doh, J. P. and R. T. Guay: 2006, ‹Corporate Social Responsibility, Public Policy, and NGO Activism in Europe and the United States: An Institutional-Stakeholder Perspective’, Journal of Management Studies 43, 47-72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Donaldson, T. and L. E. Preston: 1995, ‹The Stakeholder Theory of the Corporation: Concepts, Evidence and Implications’, Academy of Management Review 20, 65-91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ebrahim, A.: 2003, ‹Accountability in Practice: Mechanisms for NGOs’, World Development 31, 813-829.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Eesley, Ch. and M. Lenox: 2006, ‹Secondary Stakeholders and Firm Self-Regulation’, Strategic Management Journal 27, 765-781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Egels-Zanden, N. and P. Hyllman: 2006, ‹Exploring the Effects of Union-NGO Relationships on Corporate Responsibility: The Case of Swedish Clean Clothes Campaign’, Journal of Business Ethics 64, 303-316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Evan, W. M. and R. E. Freeman: 1988, ‹A Stakeholder Theory of the Modern Corporation: Kantian Capitalism’ in T. L. Beaucaamp and N. Bowie (eds.), Ethical Theory and Business (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ), 97-106.Google Scholar
  29. Frederick W., Davis, D. and J. Post: 1988, Business and Society. Corporate Strategy, Public Policy, Ethics, 6th Edition (McGraw-Hill Publishing, New York, NY).Google Scholar
  30. Freeman, R. E.: 1984, Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach (Pitman, Boston. MA).Google Scholar
  31. Freeman, R. E.: 2000, ‹Business Ethics at the Millennium’, Business Ethics Quarterly 10, 169-180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Glaser, B. G., and A. Strauss: 1967, The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research (Aldine Pub, Chicago, IL).Google Scholar
  33. Goffman, E.: 1959, The Presentation of the Self in Everyday Life (Anchor Books. New York).Google Scholar
  34. Goodstein, J. and A. C. Wicks: 2007, ‹Corporate and Stakeholder Responsibility: Making Business Ethics a Two-Way Conversation’, Business Ethics Quarterly 17, 375-398.Google Scholar
  35. Goulding, C.: 2002, Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide for Management, Business and Market Researchers (Sage, London).Google Scholar
  36. Habermas, J.: 1992, Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action (Polity Press, Cambridge).Google Scholar
  37. Hendry, J.: 2006, ‹Taking Aim at Business: What Factors Lead Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations to Target Particular Firms?’, Business and Society 45, 47-85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Holzer, B.: 2008, ‹Turning Stakeseekers into Stakeholders a Political Coalition Perspective on the Politics of Stakeholder Influence’, Business and Society 47, 50-67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Husted, B. W.: 1998, ‹Organizational Justice and the Management of Stakeholder Relations’, Journal of Business Ethics 17, 643-651.Google Scholar
  40. Isaacs, W.: 1999, Dialogue and the Art of Thinking Together (Doubleday, New York).Google Scholar
  41. Jonker, J. and A. Nijhof: 2006, ‹Looking Through the Eyes of Others: assessing mutual expectations and experiences in order to shape dialogue and collaboration between business and NGOs with respect to CSR’, Coporate Governance. An International Review 14, 456-466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kaptein, M. and R. Van Tulder: 2003, ‹Toward effective stakeholder dialogue’, Business and Society Review 108, 203-224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. King, B.: 2008, ‹A Social Movement Perspective of Stakeholder Collective Action and Influence’, Business and Society 47, 21-49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lozano, J. M.: 2000, Ethics and Organizations: Understanding Business Ethics as a Learning Process (Kluwert, Dordrecht).Google Scholar
  45. MacIntyre, A.: 1984, After Virtue. A Study in Moral Theory. Second Edition (University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, IN).Google Scholar
  46. Matten, D. and J. Moon: 2008, ‹“Implicit” and “Explicit” CSR: A Conceptual Framework For a Comparative Understanding of Corporate Social Responsibility’, Academy of Management Review 33, 404-424.Google Scholar
  47. Maxwell, J. A.: 1992, ‹Understanding and validity in qualitative research’ in A. M. Huberman and M. B. Miles (eds.), The Qualitative Researcher’s Companion (Sage Publications, Thousands Oaks, CA), pp. 37-64.Google Scholar
  48. Melé, D.: 2002, ‹Not Only Stakeholders Interests: The Firm Oriented towards the Common Good’ in S. A. Cortright and M. J. Naughton (eds.), Rethinking the Purpose of Business (University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, IN).Google Scholar
  49. Mitchell, R.K., Agle, B.R. and D. J. Wood: 1997, ‹Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience: Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts’, Academy of Management Review 22, 853-886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Nagel, T.: 1979, Moral Questions (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).Google Scholar
  51. Nanus, B and S. M. Dobbs: 1999, Leaders Who Make a Difference: Essential Strategies for Meeting the Nonprofit Challenge (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA).Google Scholar
  52. Payne, S. L. and J. M. Calton: 2004, ‹Exploring Research Potentials and Applications for Multi-stakeholder Learning Dialogues’, Journal of Business Ethics 55, 71-78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Phillips, R., Freeman, R.E. and A. C. Wicks: 2003, ‹What Stakeholder Theory Is Not’, Business Ethics Quarterly 13, 479-502.Google Scholar
  54. Rasche, A. and D. E. Esser: 2006, ‹From Stakeholder Management to Stakeholder Accountability. Applying Habermasian Discourse Ethics to Accountability Research’, Journal of Business Ethics 65, 251-267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Reynolds, M. and K. Yuthas: 2008, ‹Moral Discourse and Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting’, Journal of Business Ethics 78, 47-64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rondinelli, D.A. and T. London: 2003, ‹How corporations and environmental groups cooperate: Assessing cross-sector alliances and collaborations’, Academy of Management Executive 17, 61-76.Google Scholar
  57. Rowley, T.: 1997, ‹Moving Beyond Dyadic Ties: A Network Theory of Stakeholder Influences’, Academy of Management Review 22, 887-910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Ruggie, J. G.: 2004a, ‹Reconstituting the Global Public Domain –Issues, Actors and Practices’, European Journal of International Relations 10, 499-531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Ruggie, J. G.: 2004b, ‹The Theory and Practice of Learning Networks’ in M. McIntosh, S. Waddock and G. Kell (eds.), Learning To Talk: Corporate Citizenship and the Development of the UN Global Compact (Greenleaf, Sheffield).Google Scholar
  60. Schepers, D.H.: 2006, ‹The Impact of NGO Network Conflict on the Corporate Social Responsibility Strategies of Multinational Corporation’, Business and Society 45, 282-299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Scherer, A.G. and G. Palazzo: 2007, ‹Toward a Political Conception of Corporate Responsibility: Business and Society seen from a Habermasian Perspective’, Academy of Management Review 32, 1096-1120.Google Scholar
  62. Social Enterprise Knowledge Network Research Team: 2004, Social Partnering in Latin America. Lessons Drawn From Collaborations of Businesses and Civil Society Organizations (Harvard University David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
  63. Strauss, A. L. and J. Corbin: 1998, Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory, 2nd Edition (Sage, London).Google Scholar
  64. Teegen, H., Doh, J.P. and S. Vachani: 2004, ‹The importance of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in global governance and value creation: an international business research agenda’, Journal of International Business Studies 35, 463-483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Unerman, J. and M. Bennett: 2004, ‹Increased Stakeholder Dialogue and the Internet: Towards Greater Corporate Accountability or Reinforcing Capitalist Hegemony?’, Accounting, Organizations and Society 29 (7), 685-707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Utting, P.: 2005, ‹Corporate Responsibility and the Movement of Business’, Development in Practices 15, 375-388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Vernis, A., Iglesias, M., Sanz, B. and A. Saz-Carranza: 2006, Nonprofit Organizations: Challenges and Collaboration (Palgrave MacMillan, London).Google Scholar
  68. Waddock, S. and S. Graves: 1997, ‹The Corporate Social performance Financial Performance Link’, Strategic Management Journal 18, 303-319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Weick, K.E.: 1995, Sensemaking in Organizations (Sage Publications, Thousands Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
  70. Wheeler, D., Fabig, H. and R. Boele: 2002, ‹Paradoxes and Dilemmas for Stakeholder Responsive Firms in the Extractive Sector: Lessons from the Case of Shell and the Ogoni’, Journal of Business Ethics 39, 297-318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wheeler D and M. Sillanpää: 1997, The Stakeholder Corporation. A blueprint for maximising stakeholder value (Pitman, London).Google Scholar
  72. Williams, B.: 1982, Moral Luck (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Daniel Arenas
    • 1
    Email author
  • Josep M. Lozano
    • 1
  • Laura Albareda
    • 1
  1. 1.ESADE Business SchoolUniversitat Ramon LlullBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations