Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On the Discursive Construction of Corporate Social Responsibility in Advertising Agencies

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

Abstract

As the interest in corporate social responsibility (CSR) within advertising industry is growing, this paper explores the discourse on CSR among employees in advertising agencies. Different sensemaking dimensions are taken into account to examine how employees, as one of the key stakeholders involved in the joint meaning construction, make sense of CSR. In addition, this paper studies the legitimation approaches that employees use to address CSR of advertising agencies. The empirical evidence of discursive examples also indicates that there is a linkage between sensemaking and legitimation perspective in CSR discourse analysis and supports the idea that both may be a potential route toward institutionalization of CSR inside organizations or sectors.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alvesson, M., & Karreman, D. (2000). Varieties of discourse: On the study of organizations through discourse analysis. Human Relations, 53(9), 1125–1149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Angus-Leppan, T., Metcalf, L., & Benn, S. (2010). Leadership styles and CSR practice: An examination of sensemaking, institutional drivers and CSR leadership. Journal of Business Ethics, 93(2), 189–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aoki, M. (2011). Linking economic and social-exchange games: From the community norm to CSR. In L. Sacconi & G. Degli Antoni (Eds.), Social capital, corporate social responsibility, economic behaviour and performance (pp. 129–148). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Basu, K., & Palazzo, G. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: A process model of sensemaking. Academy of Management Review, 33(1), 122–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brickson, S. L. (2007). Organizational identity orientation: The genesis of the role of the firm and distinct forms of social value. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 864–888.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burchell, J., & Cook, J. (2006). Assessing the impact of stakeholder dialogue: Changing relationships between NGOs and companies. Journal of Public Affairs, 6(3–4), 210–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cramer, J., van der Heijde, A., & Jonker, J. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: Making sense through thinking and acting. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15(4), 380–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crane, A., Matten, D., & Spence, L. J. (Eds.). (2014). Corporate social responsibility: Readings and cases in a global context. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Du, S., & Vieira, E. T., Jr. (2012). Striving for legitimacy through corporate social responsibility: Insights from oil companies. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(4), 413–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flynn, D., & Du, Y. (2012). A case study of the legitimation process undertaken to gain support for an information system in a Chinese university. European Journal of Information Systems, 21(3), 212–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golob, U., Johansen, T. S., Nielsen, A.-E., & Podnar, K. (2014). Corporate social responsibility as a messy problem: Linking systems and sensemaking perspectives. Systematic Practice and Action Research, 27(4), 363–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golob, U., & Podnar, K. (2014). Critical points of CSR-related stakeholder dialogue in practice. Business Ethics: A European Review, 23(3), 248–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haberberg, A., Gander, J., Rieple, A., Helm, C., & Martin-Castilla, J.-I. (2010). Institutionalizing idealism. Journal of Global Responsibility, 1(2), 366–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hanke, T., & Stark, W. (2009). Strategy development: Conceptual framework on corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(3), 507–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardy, C., Lawrence, T. B., & Grant, D. (2005). Discourse and collaboration: The role of conversations and collective identity. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 58–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardy, C., & Phillips, N. (1998). Strategies of engagement: Lessons from the critical examination of collaboration and conflict in an interorganizational domain. Organization Science, 9(2), 217–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardy, C., & Phillips, N. (1999). No joking matter: Discursive struggled in the Canadian refugee system. Organization Studies, 20(1), 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herzig, C., & Moon, J. (2013). Discourses on corporate social ir/responsibility in the financial sector. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1870–1880.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, S. M. (2012). How managers make sense of CSR: The impact of Eastern philosophy in Japanese owned transnational corporations. In G. P. Prastacos, F. Wang, & K. E. Soderquist (Eds.), Leadership through the classics: Leadership & management in a changing world: Lessons from Ancient East and West philosophy (pp. 487–503). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, G., & Apostolakou, A. (2009). Corporate social responsibility in Western Europe: An institutional mirror or substitute? Journal of Business Ethics, 94(3), 371–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, R. (2011). The sociology of knowledge approach to discourse (SKAD). Human Studies, 34(1), 43–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lefsrud, L. M., & Meyer, R. E. (2012). Science or science fiction? Professionals’ discursive construction of climate change. Organization Studies, 33(11), 1477–1506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leitch, S., & Palmer, I. (2010). Analysing texts in context: Current practices and new protocols for critical discourse analysis in organization studies. Journal of Management Studies, 47(6), 1194–1212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liefooghe, A., & Mackenzie Davey, K. (2010). The language and organization of bullying at work. Administrative Theory and Praxis, 10(1), 71–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morsing, M., Schultz, M., & Nielsen, K. U. (2008). The “Catch 22” of communicating CSR: Findings from a Danish study. Journal of Marketing Communications, 14(2), 97–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nijhof, A., & Jeurissen, R. (2006). Editorial: A sensemaking perspective on corporate social responsibility: Introduction to the special issue. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15(4), 316–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, A., & Shumate, M. (2010). An economic industry and institutional level of analysis of corporate social responsibility communication. Management Communication Quarterly, 24(4), 529–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pater, A., & van Lierop, K. (2006). Sense and sensitivity: The roles of organization and stakeholders in managing corporate social responsibility. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15(4), 339–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, N., Lawrence, T. B., & Hardy, C. (2004). Discourse and institutions. Academy of Management Review, 29(4), 635–652.

    Google Scholar 

  • Powell, S. (2007). Organisational marketing, identity and the creative brand. Journal of Brand Management, 15(1), 41–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raes, A. M. L., Glunk, U., Heijltjes, M. G., & Roe, R. A. (2007). Top management team and middle managers: Making sense of leadership. Small Group Research, 38(3), 360–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schouten, E. M. J., & Remmé, J. (2006). Making sense of corporate social responsibility in international business: Experiences from Shell. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15(4), 365–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, F. (2009). Moral communication and organizational communication: On the narrative construction of “social responsibility”. In Paper presented at the 59th annual ICA (International Communication Association) conference, Chicago, IL.

  • Schultz, F., & Wehmeier, S. (2010). Institutionalization of corporate social responsibility within corporate communications: Combining institutional, sensemaking and communication perspectives. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 15(1), 9–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silberhorn, D., & Warren, R. C. (2007). Defining corporate social responsibility: A view from big companies in Germany and the UK. European Business Review, 19(5), 352–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siltaoja, M. (2009). On the discursive construction of a socially responsible organization. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 25(2), 191–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaara, E., Kleymann, B., & Seristö, H. (2004). Strategies as discursive constructions: The case of airline alliances. Journal of Management Studies, 41(1), 1–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Dijk, T. A. (2001). Multidisciplinary CDA: A plea for diversity. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 95–120). London: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Leeuwen, T. (2007). Legitimation in discourse and communication. Discourse and Communication, 1(1), 91–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verčič, D., & van Ruler, B. (2002). Refleksivni komunikacijski menedžment (Reflective communication management). Teorija in Praksa, 39(5), 739–754.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waller, D. S. (2010). The importance of being earnest. Does doing good do good? How pro bono work may benefit advertising agencies. Journal of Advertising Research, 50(4), 440–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waller, D. S. (2012). A longitudinal study of pro bono activities reported by WPP Group. Social Marketing Quarterly, 18(3), 234–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waller, D. S., & Lanis, R. (2009). Corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure of advertising agencies: An exploratory analysis of six holding companies’ annual reports. Journal of Advertising, 38(1), 109–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Brian Lamb School of Communication, Purdue University, Beering Hall of Liberal Arts & Education Room 2114, 100 N. University Street, West Lafayette, IN, 47907-2098, USA

    Neva Štumberger

  2. Chair for Marketing Communication and Public Relations, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ljubljana, Kardeljeva pl. 5, 1000, Ljubljana, Slovenia

    Urša Golob

Authors
  1. Neva Štumberger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Urša Golob
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Urša Golob.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Štumberger, N., Golob, U. On the Discursive Construction of Corporate Social Responsibility in Advertising Agencies. J Bus Ethics 137, 521–536 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2575-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2575-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation