Journal of Business Ethics

, Volume 96, Issue 3, pp 339–354 | Cite as

Communication of Corporate Social Responsibility: A Study of the Views of Management Teams in Large Companies



In light of the many corporate scandals, social and ethical commitment of society has increased considerably, which puts pressure on companies to communicate information related to corporate social responsibility (CSR). The reasons underlying the decision by management teams to engage in ethical communication are scarcely focussed on. Thus, grounded on legitimacy and stakeholder theory, this study analyses the views management teams in large listed companies have on communication of CSR. The focus is on aspects on interest, motives/reasons, users and problems related to corporate communication of CSR information. A questionnaire survey and in-depth interviews confirm that there is a distinct trend shift towards more focus on CSR in corporate communication. Whilst this trend shift started as a reactive approach initiated by the many corporate scandals, the trend shift is now argued to be of a proactive nature focussed at preventing legitimacy concerns to arise. These findings are significant and interesting, implying that we are witnessing a transit period between two legitimacy strategies. Furthermore, the findings suggest that the way respondents argue when it comes to CSR activities coincides with consequentialism or utilitarianism, i.e. companies engage in CSR activities to avoid negative impacts instead of being driven by a will to make a social betterment or acting in accordance with what is fundamentally believed to be right to do. This provides new input to the ongoing debate about business ethics. The findings should alert national and international policy makers to the need both to increase the vigilance and capacity of the regulatory and judicial systems in the CSR context and to increase institutional pressure to enhance CSR adoption and CSR communication. Furthermore, stakeholders need to be careful in assuming that CSR communication is an evidence of a CSR commitment influencing corporate behaviour and increasing business ethics.


corporate social responsibility CSR communication legitimacy stakeholders utilitarianism 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. AAA (The American Accounting Association). 1936, Statement on corporate accounting standards, (Ohio, AAA).Google Scholar
  2. Ackerman, R. W. and R. Bauer (eds.): 1976, Corporate Social Responsiveness: The Modern Dilemma. (Reston, Reston, VA).Google Scholar
  3. Adams, C. A., Hill, W-Y. and Roberts, C. B.: 1998, ‘Corporate social reporting practices in western Europe: Legitimating corporate behaviour?’, British Accounting Review, 30, 1-21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Artsberg K. (1992) Normbildning och redovisningsförändring: Värderingar vid val av mätprinciper inom svensk redovisning. Department of Business Administration, Lund University, Lund University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Arvidsson, S.: 2003, Demand and Supply of Information on Intangibles: The Case of Knowledge-Intense Companies. PhD dissertation, Department of Business Administration, Lund University, Sweden.Google Scholar
  6. Arvidsson, S.: 2009, Non-Financial Information and the Annual Report. Working Paper, Department of Business Administration, Lund University, Sweden.Google Scholar
  7. Ashforth, B. E. and Gibbs, B. W.: 1989, ‘The double-edge of organizational legitimation’, Organization Science, 1(2), 177-194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Barth, M. E., Kasznik, R. and McNichols, M. F. (2001) ‘Analyst coverage and intangible assets’, Journal of Accounting Research, 39(1), 1-34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Birth, G., Illia, L., Lurati, F. and Zamparini, A.: 2008, ‘Communicating CSR: Practices among Switzerland’s top 300 companies’, Corporate Communication: An International Journal, 13(2), 182-196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Borglund, T.: 2009, ‘CSR-kommunikation (CSR communication)’, in: T. Borglund., H. De Geer, H. and M. Hallvarsson (Eds.), Värdeskapande CSRHur företag tar socialt ansvar, (Norstedts Akademiska Förlag, Sweden), p. 111-144.Google Scholar
  11. Branco, M. and Rodrigues, L. L.: 2006, ‘Communication of corporate social responsibility by Portuguese banks: A legitimacy theory perspective’,. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 11(3), 232-248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brytting, T.: 2005, Företagsetik [Business Ethics]. (Liber, Sweden).Google Scholar
  13. Bukh, P. N., Nielsen, C., Mouritsen, J. and Gormsen, P.: 2006, ‘Disclosure of information on intellectual capital in Danish IPO prospectuses’, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 18(6), 713-732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. De Geer, H.: 2007, Från svenska modellen till svenskt näringsliv [From the Swedish Model to the Swedish business society] (Ratio, Sweden).Google Scholar
  15. De Geer, H.: 2009, ‘CSR-begreppet och dess utveckling (The CSR-concept and its development)’, in T. Borglund., H. De Geer, H. and M. Hallvarsson (Eds.), Värdeskapande CSRHur företag tar socialt ansvar, (Norstedts Akademiska Förlag, Sweden), p. 13-22.Google Scholar
  16. Deegan, C.: 2002, ‘Introduction – The legitimising effect of social and environmental disclosures – A theoretical foundation’, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15 (3), 282-311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dowling, J. and Pfeffer, J.: 1975, ‘Organizational legitimacy: Social values and organizational behavior’, The Pacific Sociological Review, 18(1), 122-136.Google Scholar
  18. Eccles, R. G., Herz, R. H., Keegan, E. M. and D. M. H. Phillips. (2001) The value reporting revolution: Moving beyond the earnings game, (John Wiley & Sons, New York).Google Scholar
  19. Ellerup Nielsen A., Thomsen C. (2007) ‘Reporting CSR What and how to say it?’. Corporate Communication: An International Journal 12(1):25-40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. European Commission: 2001, Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility (European Commission, Luxembourg).Google Scholar
  21. Fan, Y.: 2005, ‘Ethical branding and corporate reputation’, Corporate Communication: An International Journal, 10(4), 341-350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. FASB (Financial Accounting Standards Board): 2001, Business and Financial Reporting, Challenges from the New Economy (special report). (FASB, New York).Google Scholar
  23. Frankental, P. (2001) ‘Corporate social responsibility – A pr invention?’, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 6(1), 18-23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Frederick, W. C.: 1994, ‘From CSR1 to CSR2: The maturing of business and society though’, Business & Society, 33(2), 150-164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Freeman, R. E.: 1984, Strategic managementA stakeholder approach, (Marshfield, MA: Pitman Publishing).Google Scholar
  26. Friedman, M.: 1970, ‘The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits’, New York Times Magazine, September 13, pp. 33, 122-126.Google Scholar
  27. Friedman, A. L. and S. Miles: 2001, ‘Socially Responsible Investment and Corporate Social and Environmental Reporting in the U.K.: An Exploratory Study’, British Accounting Review 33, 523-548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ghoshal, S.: 2005, ‘Bad management theories are destroying good management practices’, Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(1), 75-91.Google Scholar
  29. Goodman, M. B.: 2009, ‘Introduction: Corporate communication and strategic adaptation’, Corporate Communication: An International Journal, 14(3), 225-233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gray, K. R., Frieder, L. A. and Clark, G. W.: 2005, Corporate scandalsThe many faces of greed, (St. Paul, MN: Paragon House).Google Scholar
  31. Hallvarsson, M.: 2009, Rimliga Ambitioner med CSR? (Reasonable ambitions with CSR?), in T. Borglund., H. De Geer. H. and M. Hallvarsson (Eds.), Värdeskapande CSRHur företag tar socialt ansvar, (Norstedts Akademiska Förlag, Sweden), p. 145-156.Google Scholar
  32. Harding, R.: 2005, ‘Debunking the Social Myth’, Business Strategy Review: Special Report: Corporate Social Responsibility, 16(2), 71-73.Google Scholar
  33. Healy, P. M. and Palepu, K. G. (2001) ‘Information asymmetry, corporate disclosure, and the capital markets: A review of the empirical disclosure literature’, Journal of Accounting and Economics, 31, 405-440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. H&H Webranking: 2008, CSR Spotlight Report (Hallvarsson & Hallvarsson, Stockholm).Google Scholar
  35. Holder-Webb, L., Cohen, J., Nath, L. and Wood, D.: 2008, ‘A survey of governance disclosures among U.S. firms’, Journal of Business Ethics, 83, 543-563.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ihlen, Ø.: 2008, ‘Mapping the environment for corporate social responsibility: Stakeholders, publics and the public sphere’, Corporate Communication: An International Journal, 13(2), 135-146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jensen, M. C. (2001) ‘Value maximisation, stakeholder theory, and the corporate objective function’, European Financial Management, 7(3), 297-317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kennedy, A. A.: 2000, The end of shareholder valueCorporations at the crossroad,. Cambridge, (MA: Perseus Publishing).Google Scholar
  39. KPMG: 2005, KPMG International Survey of Corporate Responsibility Reporting 2005 (KPMG Global Sustainability Services, Amsterdam).Google Scholar
  40. Lantos, G. P. (2001) ‘The boundaries of strategic corporate social responsibility’, Journal of Consumer Market, 18(7), 595-630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Loughran, T., McDonald, B. and Yun, H.: 2009, ‘A wolf in sheep’s clothing: The use of ethics-related terms in 10-K reports’, Journal of Business Ethics, 89, 39-49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Maignan, I., Ferrell, O. C., and Ferrell, L:. 2005, ‘A stakeholder model for implementing social responsibility in marketing’, European Journal of Marketing, 39(9/10), 956-977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Maignan, I., Ferrell, O. C. and Hult, G. T. M.: 1999, ‘Corporate citizenship: Cultural antecedents and business benefits’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(4), 455-469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Margolis, J. D. and Walsh J. P.: 2003, ‘Misery loves companies: Rethinking social initiatives by business’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 48(2), 268-305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. McGuire, J. B., Sundgren, A. and Schneeweis, T.: 1988, Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance, Academy of Management Journal, 31(4), 854-872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Mitchell, R. K., Agle. B. R. and Wood, D. J.: 1997, ‘Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts’, Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853-886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Morsing, M. and Schultz, M.: 2006, ‘Corporate social responsibility communication: Stakeholder information, response and involvement strategies’, Business Ethics: A European Review, 15(4), 323-338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Neu, D., Warsame, D. and Pedwell, K.: 1998, ‘Managing public impression: Environmental disclosures in annual reports’, Accounting, Organizations and Society, 23(3), 265-282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. O’Donovan, G.: 2002, ‘Environmental disclosures in the annual report – Extending the applicability and predictive power of legitimacy theory’, Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15(3), 344-371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Prior, D., Surroca, J. and Tribó, J. A.: 2008, ‘Are socially responsible managers really ethical? Exploring the relationships between earnings management and corporate social responsbility’, Corporate Governance: An International Review, 16(3), 160-177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Sethi, S. P.: 1975, ‘Dimensions of Corporate Social Performance: An Analytical Framework’, California Management Review, 17(1), 58–64.Google Scholar
  52. Social Investment Forum.: 2006, 2006 report in socially responsible investing trends in the United States, (SIF, Washington, D.C).Google Scholar
  53. SOU (2004:46): 2004a, The Swedish Code of Corporate Governance (SOU, Stockholm).Google Scholar
  54. SOU (2004:47): 2004b, Näringslivet och Förtroendet [Business Society and Trust] (SOU, Stockholm).Google Scholar
  55. Sutantoputra, A. W.: 2009, ‘Social disclosure rating system for assessing firms’ CSR reports’, Corporate Communication: An International Journal, 14(1), 34-48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. van Beurden, P. and Gössling, T.: 2008, ‘The worth of values – A literature review on the relation between corporate social and financial performance’, Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 407-427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. van Staden, C. J. and Hooks, J.: 2007, ‘A comprehensive comparison of corporate environmental reporting and responsiveness’, The British Accounting Review, 39, 197-210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Waddock, S. A. and Graves, S. B.: 1997, ‘The corporate social performance – Financial performance link’, Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303-319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Waring, P. and Edwards, T.: 2008, ‘Socially responsible investment: Explaining its uneven development and human resource management consequences’, Corporate Governance: An International Review, 16(3), 135-145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Windell, K.: 2006, Corporate Social Responsibility Under Construction: Ideas, Translations, and Institutional Change. Doctoral Thesis No. 123, Department of Business Studies, Uppsala University, Uppsala.Google Scholar
  61. Woodward, D. Edwards, P., and Birkin, F. (2001) ‘Some evidence on executives’ views of corporate social responsibility’, British Accounting Review, 33, 357-397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Business AdministrationLund School of Economics and Management, Lund UniversityLundSweden

Personalised recommendations