This paper presents the findings of a qualitative field study undertaken with senior managers responsible for their firm's corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities to explore the interaction between a firm's reputation for CSR and the actions of its industry peers; the actions of its industry; and the actions of other firms in its local geographic community. Examining this phenomenon from an institutional perspective, we seek to explain how and why CSR norms become institutionalized both within and across industries. Specifically, we develop a model to explain the diffusion of CSR norms; a process that we argue results in slowly ratcheting expectations over time. We propose that firms in sensitive industries face and respond to higher stakeholder expectations for CSR. In response, elite firms operating in the same geographic community across a range of industries take cues from the firms operating in industries with higher expectations for CSR. Thus, norms for CSR are established among the elite firms within a geographic community rather than within industries. These norms are then diffused within industries through mimetic forces. This creates a cycle whereby the general diffusion of these norms creates a new expectations gap for firms in high visibility industries. Their subsequent response will launch another cycle and, over time, raise expectations for CSR for all firms in the geographic region regardless of industry.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Bansal, P. (2005) ‘Evolving sustainability: A longitudinal study of corporate sustainable development’, Strategic Management Review, 26, 197–218.
Bansal, P. and Roth, K. (2000) ‘Why companies go green: A model of ecological responsiveness’, Academy of Management Journal, 43 (4), 717–736.
Barnett, M.L. (2006a) ‘Waves of collectivizing: A dynamic model of competition and cooperation over the life of an industry’, Corporate Reputation Review, 8 (4), 272–292.
Barnett, M.L. (2006b) ‘Finding a working balance between competitive and communal strategies’, Journal of Management Studies, 43, 1753–1773.
Barnett, M.L. (2007) ‘Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social responsibility’, Academy of Management Review, 32 (3), 794–816.
Barnett, W.P. and Hansen, M.T. (1996) ‘The Red Queen in organizational evolution’, Strategic Management Journal, 17, 139–157.
Berger, I.E., Cunningham, P.H. and Drumwright, M.E. (2004) ‘Social alliances: Company-nonprofit collaboration’, California Management Review, 47 (1), 58–90.
Brown, T.J. and Dacin, P.A. (1997) ‘The company and the product: Corporate associations and consumer product responses’, Journal of Marketing, 61, 68–84.
Deephouse, D.L. (1999) ‘To be different, or to be the same? It's a question (and theory) of strategic balance’, Strategic Management Journal, 20 (2), 147–166.
DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W. (1983) ‘The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields’, American Sociological Review, 48 (2), 147–160.
DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W. (1991) ‘Introduction’, in P. J. DiMaggio and W. W. Powell (eds.), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp.1–38.
Fombrun, C.J., Gardberg, N.A. and Barnett, M.L. (2000) ‘Opportunity platforms and safety nets: Corporate citizenship and reputational risk’, Business and Society Review, 105 (1), 85–106.
Fombrun, C.J. and Shanley, M. (1990) ‘What's in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy’, Academy of Management Journal, 33 (2), 233–258.
Forman, J. and Argenti, P.A. (2005) ‘How corporate communication influences strategy implementation, reputation and the corporate brand: An exploratory qualitative study’, Corporate Reputation Review, 8 (3), 245–264.
Friedkin, N.E. (1984) ‘Structural cohesion and equivalence explanations of social homogeneity’, Sociological Methods & Research, 12, 235–261.
Galaskiewicz, J. (1997) ‘An urban grants economy revisited: corporate charitable contributions in the twin cities, 1979–1981, 1987–1989’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 42, 445–471.
Galaskiewicz, J. and Burt, R.S. (1991) ‘Interorganization contagion in corporate philanthropy’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 36, 88–105.
Glaser, B. (1978) Theoretical Sensitivity: Advances in the Methodology of Grounded Theory, The Sociology Press, Mills Valley, CA.
Glaser, B. and Strauss, A. (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research, Aldine de Gruyter, Hawthorne, NY.
Godfrey, P.C. (2005) ‘The relationship between corporate philanthropy and shareholder wealth: A risk management perspective’, Academy of Management Review, 30 (4), 777–798.
Greenwood, R. and Suddaby, R. (2006) ‘Institutional entrepreneurship in mature fields: The big five accounting firms’, Academy of Management Journal, 49, 27–48.
Hess, D., Rogovsky, N. and Dunfee, T.W. (2002) ‘The next wave of corporate community involvement: Corporate social initiatives’, California Management Review, 44 (2), 110–125.
Hoffman, A.J. (1999) ‘Institutional evolution and change: Environmentalism and the U.S. chemical industry’, Academy of Management Journal, 42 (4), 351–371.
Hoffman, A.J. (2001) From Heresy to Dogma: An Institutional History of Corporate Environmentalism (Expanded Edition), Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.
Husted, B.W. (2000) ‘A contingency theory of corporate social performance’, Business & Society, 39 (1), 24–48.
King, A., Lenox, M. and Barnett, M.L. (2002) ‘Strategic responses to the reputations commons problem’, in A. J. Hoffman and M. J. Ventresca (eds.), Organizations, Policy, and The Natural Environment: Institutional and Strategic Perspectives, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA, pp.393–406.
King, A.A. and Lenox, M.J. (2000) ‘Industry self-regulation without sanctions: The chemical industry's responsible care program’, Academy of Management Journal, 43, 698–716.
Lawrence, T. (1999) ‘Institutional strategy’, Journal of Management, 25 (2), 161–188.
Lawrence, T. and Suddaby, R. (2006) ‘Institutions and institutional work’, in C. Hardy, S. R. Clegg, T. Lawrence and W. Nord (eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Organization Studies, 2nd edn., Sage Publication Ltd., London, pp.215–254.
Lewis, S. (2003) ‘Reputation and corporate responsibility’, Journal of Communication Management, 7 (4), 356–364.
Mahon, J.F. and Wartick, S.L. (2003) ‘Dealing with stakeholders: How reputation, credibility and framing influence the game’, Corporate Reputation Review, 6 (1), 19–35.
Marquis, C., Glynn, M.A. and Davis, G.F. (2007) ‘Community isomorphism and corporate social action’, Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 925–945.
Meyer, J.W. and Rowan, B. (1977) ‘Institutional organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony’, American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–363.
Peloza, J. (2006) ‘Using corporate social responsibility as insurance for financial performance’, California Management Review, 48 (2), 52–72.
Porter, M.E. and Kramer, M.R. (2006) ‘Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility’, Harvard Business Review, 84 (12), 78–92.
Rehbein, K., Waddock, S.A. and Graves, S.B. (2004) ‘Understanding shareholder activism: Which corporations are targeted’, Business & Society, 43 (3), 239–267.
Roberts, P.W. and Dowling, G.R. (2002) ‘Corporate reputation and sustained superior financial performance’, Strategic Management Journal, 23 (12), 1077–1093.
Sabate, J.M.d.l.F. and Puente, E.d.Q. (2003) ‘Empirical analysis of the relationship between corporate reputation and financial performance: A survey of the literature’, Corporate Reputation Review, 6 (2), 161–177.
Schouten, J.W. (1991) ‘Selves in transition: Symbolic consumption in personal rites of passage and identity reconstruction’, Journal of Consumer Research, 17 (4), 412–426.
Scott, R.W. (1991) ‘Unpacking institutional arrangements’, in W. W. Powell and P. J. DiMaggio (eds.), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp.164–182.
Scott, W.R. (1987) ‘The adolescence of institutional theory’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 32 (4), 493–511.
Sherer, P. and Lee, K. (2002) ‘Institutional change in large law firms: A resource dependency and institutional perspective’, Academy of Management Journal, 45, 102–119.
Smith, C.N. (2003) ‘Corporate social responsibility: Whether or how?’, California Management Review, 45 (4), 52–76.
Steets, J. and Weihe, T. (2006) ‘Corporate social responsibility: What we could learn from the past’, Paper presented at the 2nd conference on Corporate Social Responsibility at Humboldt-University, Berlin, 13–15 October.
Turban, D.B. and Greening, D.W. (1997) ‘Corporate social performance and organizational attractiveness to prospective employees’, Academy of Management Journal, 40, 658–673.
Van Valen, L. (1973) ‘A new evolutionary law’, Evolutionary Theory, 1, 1–30.
Wartick, S.L. (2002) ‘Measuring corporate reputation: Definition and data’, Business & Society, 41 (4), 371–386.
Werbel, J.D. and Wortman Jr., M.S. (2000) ‘Strategic philanthropy: Responding to the negative portrayals of social responsibility’, Corporate Reputation Review, 3 (2), 124–136.
Williams, R.J. and Barett, J.D. (2000) ‘Corporate philanthropy, criminal activity, and firm reputation: Is there a link’, Journal of Business Ethics, 26 (4), 341–350.
Zukin, S. and DiMaggio, P.J. (eds.) (1990) ‘Introduction’, in Structures of Capital: The Social Organization of the Economy, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp.1–36.
Zyglidopoulos, S.C. (2003) ‘The issue life-cycle: Implications for reputation for social performance and organizational legitimacy’, Corporate Reputation Review, 6 (1), 70–81.
Order of authorship was randomized and is shared equally. We gratefully acknowledge the valuable insights of three anonymous reviewers and the two editors of this issue. We also recognize support from the Erb Institute for Global Sustainable Enterprise at the University of Michigan and from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.
Initial Interview Guide and Coding
Although the interviews were largely unstructured, and later interviews were guided by earlier ones, the following questions served as the basis for the initial discussions:
— Why does your firm engage in corporate philanthropy or community involvement?
— What responsibilities does your firm have to the community?
— What causes does the firm support?
— How does the firm decide which causes will be supported?
— What kind of causes are considered and why?
— What are your competitors doing with respect to community involvement?
— Who in your opinion is doing a good job in their community involvement? Why?
— Which stakeholders are considered in the decision?
— Do you ever cooperate with other firms in community involvement initiatives?
About this article
Cite this article
Bertels, S., Peloza, J. Running Just to Stand Still? Managing CSR Reputation in an Era of Ratcheting Expectations. Corp Reputation Rev 11, 56–72 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1057/crr.2008.1
- CSR creep
- ratcheting expectations