Skip to main content

Glaubwürdigkeit in der CSR-Kommunikation

Entwicklung eines legitimätsbasierten Ansatzes

Credible CSR communication

Developing a legitimacy-based approach

Publizistik volume 61, pages 413–429 (2016)Cite this article

Zusammenfassung

Glaubwürdigkeit ist ein grundlegendes Konzept der Kommunikationswissenschaft und gilt als zentrale Voraussetzung effektiver Kommunikation. Gerade in der PR und hier im Besonderen bei der Kommunikation über Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) ist glaubwürdiges Kommunizieren von Unternehmen ein Muss, um bei Anspruchsgruppen Gehör zu finden. Die bestehenden Glaubwürdigkeitskonzepte der PR-Forschung eignen sich allerdings nur bedingt, um den spezifischen Anforderungen des ethischen CSR-Konzepts gerecht zu werden. Daher wird hier ein Glaubwürdigkeitskonzept vorgeschlagen, das Sender, Botschaft und Rezipient vereint und das elementare Konzept der Legitimität unternehmerischen Handelns aufgreift. Ausgehend von der politisch-normativen Richtung der CSR wird ein legitimitätsbasiertes Glaubwürdigkeitskonzept entwickelt und diskutiert, das auf der Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns und der vier Geltungsansprüche der idealen Sprechsituation aufbaut. Dieser Ansatz kann normativ verstanden werden, gleichwohl birgt er Potential für die empirische Forschung in der CSR-Kommunikation.

Abstract

Credibility is a central and well-established concept in communication science, particularly in public relations (PR) research. When it comes to the communication about their corporate social responsibilities (CSR), companies are under public scrutiny and should therefore be eager to communicate in a credible fashion with their stakeholders. However, existing concepts of credibility in PR research do not account for the specific demands of ethical CSR theory. Thus, this article develops a concept of credibility that embraces sender, message, and recipient and the central concept of corporate legitimacy at the same time. Based on the political-normative approach to CSR, this concept builds on the theory of communicative action and the validity claims of the ideal speech situation. This novel approach to credibility in CSR communication is normative, but also opens promising paths for future empirical research in the field.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

Literatur

  • Arvidsson, S. (2010). Communication of corporate social responsibility: A study of the views of management teams in large companies. Journal of Business Ethics, 96(3), 339–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentele, G. (1997). Grundlagen der Public Relations. Positionsbestimmung und einige Thesen. In W. Donsbach (Hrsg.), Public Relations in Theorie und Praxis. Grundlagen und Arbeitsweise der Öffentlichkeitsarbeit in verschiedenen Funktionen (S. 21–36). München: Fischer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bentele, G., & Seidenglanz, R. (2008). Trust and Credibility. Prerequisites for Communication Management. In A. Zerfass, van Ruler, B., & Sriramesh, K. (Hrsg.), Public Relations Research (S. 49–62). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.

  • Bentele, G., & Nothhaft, H. (2011). Vertrauen und Glaubwürdigkeit als Grundlage von Corporate Social Responsibility. Die (massen-)mediale Konstruktion von Verantwortung und Verantwortlichkeit. In J. Raupp, S. Jarolimek, & F. Schulz (Hrsg.), Handbuch CSR. Kommunikationswissenschaftliche Grundlagen, disziplinäre Zugänge und methodische Herausforderungen (S. 45–70). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Biedermann, C. (2008). Corporate Citizenship in der Unternehmenskommunikation. In H. Backhaus-Maul, C. Biedermann, S. Nährich, & J. Polterauer (Hrsg.), Corporate Citizenship in Deutschland (S. 353–370). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bremser, F. (2012). Die unsägliche Augenwischerei der Deutschen Bank. Financial Times Deutschland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burkart, R. (2012). Verständigungsorientierte Öffentlichkeitsarbeit. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Burkart, R., & Russmann, U. (2010). Journalism, democracy and the role of doubts: An analysis of political campaign communication in Austria. Studies in Communication Sciences, 10, 11–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (2015). Corporate social responsibility: The centerpiece of competing and complementary frameworks. Organizational Dynamics, 44, 87–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castelló, I., Morsing, M., & Schultz, F. (2013). Communicative dynamics and the polyphony of corporate social responsibility in the network society. Journal of Business Ethics, 118, 683–694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, L., & Jacobson, T. (2010). Measuring participation as communicative action: A case study of citizen involvement in and assessment of a city’s smoking cessation policy-making process. Journal of Communication, 60, 660–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chappell, Z. (2012). Deliberative democracy. A critical introduction. Basingstone: Palgrave MacMillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Claasen, C., & Roloff, J. (2012). The link between responsibility and legitimacy: the case of De Beers in Namibia. Journal of Business Ethics, 107, 379–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coombs, W. T. (1992). The failure of the task force on food assistance: A case study of the role of legitimacy in issue management. Journal of Public Relations Research, 4, 101–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coombs, W. T., & Holladay, S. J. (2013). The pseudo-panopticon: the illusion created by CSR-related transparency and the internet. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 18, 212–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crane, A., Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). The emergence of corporate citizenship: historical development and alternative perspectives. In A. G. Scherer & G. Palazzo (Hrsg.), Handbook of research on global corporate citizenship (S. 25–49). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cukier, W., Bauer, R., & Middleton, C. (2004). Applying Habermas’ validity claims as a standard for critical discourse analysis. In B. Kaplan,  D. P. Truex III, D. Wastell, D. A. Wood-Harper, & D. I. DeGross (Hrsg.) Information systems research (S. 233–258). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dando, N., & Swift, T. (2003). Transparency and assurance minding the credibility gap. Journal of Business Ethics, 44, 195–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T., & Dunfee, T. W. (1999). Ties that bind. Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2010). Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12, 8–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ernst, H., & Schnoor, A. (2000). Einflussfaktoren auf die Glaubwürdigkeit kundenorientierter Produkt-Vorankündigungen: Ein signaltheoretischer Ansatz. Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft, 70, 1331–1350.

    Google Scholar 

  • Europäische Union – EU (2014). Richtlinie 2013/34/EU im Hinblick auf die Angabe nichtfinanzieller und die Diversität betreffender Informationen durch bestimmte große Unternehmen und Gruppen. Brüssel: Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union L 330/1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fifka, M. S. (2013). Corporate responsibility reporting and its determinants in comparative perspective – a review of the empirical literature and a meta-analysis. Business Strategy and the Environment, 22, 1–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, B. (2012, 22. März). Nachhaltigkeitsberichte halten oft nicht, was sie versprechen. Tages-Anzeiger.

  • Forester, J. (1992). Critical ethnography. On fieldwork in a Habermasian way. In M. Alvesson & H. Willmott (Hrsg.), Critical management studies (S. 46–65). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun, C. (1996). Reputation. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

  • Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Parmar, B. L., & De Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Garriga, E., & Melé, D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theories: mapping the territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1–2), 51–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gatti, L., & Seele, P. (2014). Evidence for the prevalence of the sustainability concept in european corporate responsibility reporting. Sustainability Science, 9, 89–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golob, U., & Podnar, K. (2011). Corporate social responsibility communication and dialogue. In O. Ihlen, J. L. Bartlett & S. May (Hrsg.), The handbook of communication and corporate social responsibility (S. 231–251). Chichester: Wiley & Sons.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1981). Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Bd. 1. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1992). Faktizität und Geltung. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, R., & Kühnen, M. (2013). Determinants of sustainability reporting: a review of results, trends, theory, and opportunities in an expanding field of research. Journal of Cleaner Production, 59, 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haigh, M. M., & Brubaker, P. (2010). Examining how image restoration strategy impacts perceptions of corporate social responsibility, organization-public relationships, and source credibility. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 15, 453–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heath, R. L. (2006). Onward into more fog: Thoughts on public relations’ research directions. Journal of Public Relations Research, 18, 93–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffjann, O. (2011). Vertrauen in Public Relations. Publizistik, 56, 65–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hooghiemstra, R. (2000). Corporate communication and impression management – new perspectives why companies engage in corporate social reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, 27, 55–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopey, D. (2012). Chevron assessing damage of Washington Co. well leak. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (28. Februar).

  • Hovland, C. I., & Weiss, W. (1951). The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 15, 635–650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jackob, N. (2008). Credibility effects. In W. Donsbach (Hrsg.), International encyclopedia of communication (S. 1044–1047). Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johansen, T. S., & Nielsen, A. E. (2011). Strategic stakeholder dialogues: a discursive perspective on relationship building. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 16, 204–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, J. (1993). Is talk really cheap? Prompting conversation between critical theory and rational choice. American Political Science Review, 87, 74–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koch, T., & Zerback, T. (2015). Das Wiederholungsparadoxon. Warum die Wiederholung einer Aussage ihre Glaubwürdigkeit zugleich erhöht und senkt. Publizistik, 58, 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lafferty, B. A. (2007). The relevance of fit in a cause–brand alliance when consumers evaluate corporate credibility. Journal of Business Research, 60, 447–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S. Y., & Carroll, C. E. (2011). The emergence, variation, and evolution of corporate social responsibility in the public sphere, 1980–2004: The exposure of firms to public debate. Journal of Business Ethics, 104, 115–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lock, I., & Seele, P. (2015). Analyzing sector-specific CSR reporting: social and environmental disclosure to investors in the chemicals and banking and insurance industry. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 22, 113–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lock, I., & Seele, P. (2016). The credibility of CSR (corporate social responsibility) reports in Europe. Evidence from a quantitative content analysis in 11 countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 122, 186–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. (2000). Vertrauen: Ein Mechanismus der Reduktion sozialer Komplexität. Stuttgart: Lucius & Lucius.

    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 

  • Melican, D. B., & Dixon, T. L. (2008). News on the net credibility, selective exposure, and racial prejudice. Communication Research, 35, 151–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mena, S., & Palazzo, G. (2012). Input and output legitimacy of multi-stakeholder initiatives. Business Ethics Quarterly, 22, 527–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miles, M. P., Munilla, L. S., & Darroch, J. (2006). The role of strategic conversations with stakeholders in the formation of corporate social responsibility strategy. Journal of Business Ethics, 69, 195–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milne, M. J., & Gray, R. (2013). W(h)ither ecology? The triple bottom line, the global reporting initiative, and corporate sustainability reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, 118, 13–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morsing, M., & Schultz, M. (2006). Corporate social responsibility communication: stakeholder information, response and involvement strategies. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15, 323–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newell, S. J., & Goldsmith, R. E. (2001). The development of a scale to measure perceived corporate credibility. Journal of Business Research, 52, 235–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ohanian, R. (1990). Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers’ perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. Journal of Advertising, 19, 39–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ohanian, R. (1991). The impact of celebrity spokes persons’ perceived image on consumer’s intention to purchase. Journal of Advertising Research, 31, 46–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palazzo, G., & Scherer, A. G. (2006). Corporate legitimacy as deliberation: A communicative framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 66, 71–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrini, F. (2005). Building a European portrait of corporate social responsibility reporting. European Management Journal, 23, 611–627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84, 78–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raupp, J. (2011). Die Legitimation von Unternehmen in öffentlichen Diskursen. In J. Raupp, S. Jarolimek, & F. Schulz (Hrsg.), Handbuch CSR. Kommunikationswissenschaftliche Grundlagen, disziplinäre Zugänge und methodische Herausforderungen (S. 97–110). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, M., & Yuthas, K. (2008). Moral discourse and corporate social responsibility reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, 78, 47–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Röttger, U., Preusse, J., & Schmitt, J. (2014). Grundlagen der Public Relations. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rouner, D. (2008). Credibility of content. In W. Donsbach (Hrsg.), International encyclopedia of communication (S. 1039–1044). Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. (2007). Toward a political conception of corporate responsibility: Business and society seen from a Habermasian perspective. Academy of Management Review, 32, 1096–1120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, A. G., Palazzo, G., & Seidl, D. (2013). Managing legitimacy in complex and heterogeneous environments: Sustainable development in a globalized world. Journal of Management Studies, 50(2), 259–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, A., & Donsbach, W. (2012). „Grüne“ Werbung als Instrument für „schwarze“ Zahlen. Publizistik, 57, 75–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schöneborn, D., & Sandhu, S. (2013). When birds of different feather flock together: the emerging debate on „organization as communication“ in the German-speaking countries. Management Communication Quarterly, 27, 303–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, F., Morsing, M., & Castelló, I. (2013). The construction of corporate social responsibility in network societies: A communication view. Journal of Business Ethics, 115, 681–692.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, M. S., & Carroll, A. B. (2003). Corporate social responsibility: A three-domain approach. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13, 503–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seele, P., & Lock, I. (2015). Instrumental and/or deliberative? A typology of CSR communication tools. Journal of Business Ethics, 131, 401–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38, 225–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slater, M. D., & Rouner, D. (1996). How message evaluation and source attributes may influence credibility assessment and belief change. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 73, 974–991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stamm, K., & Dube, R. (1994). The relationship of attitudinal components to trust in media. Communication Research, 21, 105–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20, 571–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Marrewijk, M. (2003). Concepts and definitions of CSR and corporate sustainability: Between agency and communion. Journal of Business Ethics, 44, 95–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Volkswagen (2014). Nachhaltigkeitsbericht 2014. Wolfsburg: Volkswagen AG.

    Google Scholar 

  • Volkswagen (2015). Volkswagen ist nachhaltigster Automobilkonzern der Welt. http://www.volkswagenag.com/content/vwcorp/info_center/de/news/2015/09/sustain.html. Zugegriffen: 18. Nov. 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S., & Goggins, B. K. (2011). The paradoxes of communicating corporate social responsibility. In O. Ihlen, J. L. Bartlett & S. May (Hrsg.), The handbook of communication and corporate social responsibility (S. 23–43). Chichester: Wiley and Blackwell.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Wan Saiful, W.-J. (2006). Defining corporate social responsibility. Journal of Public Affairs, 6, 176–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P., & Drolet, A. (2005). Age-related differences in response to emotional advertisements. Journal of Consumer Research, 32, 343–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wirth, W., Matthes, J., Schemer, C., & Stämpfli, I. (2009). Glaubwürdigkeitsverlust durch programmintegrierte Werbung? Publizistik, 54, 64–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, I. M. (2004). Responsibility and global labor justice. Journal of Political Philosophy, 12, 365–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zerfaß, A. (2004). Unternehmensführung und Öffentlichkeitsarbeit, Grundlegung einer Theorie der Unternehmenskommunikation und Public Relations (2. Aufl.). Wiesbaden: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zinkin, M. (1998). Habermas on intelligibility. The Southern Journal of Philosophy, 36, 453–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Marketing and Communication Management, Università della Svizzera Italiana, Via G. Buffi, 13, 6900, Lugano, Schweiz

    Irina Lock

Authors
  1. Irina Lock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Irina Lock.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lock, I. Glaubwürdigkeit in der CSR-Kommunikation. Publizistik 61, 413–429 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11616-016-0300-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11616-016-0300-x

Schlüsselwörter

  • Glaubwürdigkeit
  • Public Relations
  • Corporate Social Responsibility
  • Legitimität
  • Habermas

Keywords

  • Credibility
  • Public relations
  • Corporate social responsibility
  • Legitimacy
  • Habermas