Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Striving for Legitimacy Through Corporate Social Responsibility: Insights from Oil Companies

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

Abstract

Being a controversial industry, oil companies turn to corporate social responsibility (CSR) as a means to obtain legitimacy. Adopting a case study methodology, this research examines the characteristics of CSR strategies and CSR communication tactics of six oil companies by analyzing their 2011–2012 web site content. We found that all six companies engaged in CSR activities addressing the needs of various stakeholders and had cross-sector partnerships. CSR information on these companies’ web sites was easily accessible, often involving the use of multimedia technologies and sometimes social media platforms. Furthermore, to boost the credibility of their CSR messages, these companies utilized a variety of tactics, such as factual arguments and two-sided messages. In sum, this research unveils the interconnectedness among business strategy, CSR practices, and CSR communication in oil companies’ attempt to gain legitimacy in an environment of controversy. The article ends with a discussion of the theoretical and practical implications of the research findings.

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

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Oil companies have long been criticized for their unscrupulous business practices. In addition to the massive media coverage relating to large-scale disasters like Exxon Valdez oil spill and BP’s oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, media report of oil companies’ unethical and often illegal practices abound. For instance, in February 2011, a court in Ecuador fined Chevron $8.6 billion for polluting the country’s Amazon region, where over 30,000 indigenous people claimed loss of crops and farm animals as well as increased local cancer rates as the result of reckless oil drilling in the rainforest (BBC News 2011; New York Times 2011). Similarly, Exxon Mobil is constantly under the media spotlight for oil spills and human rights violations, among others (Gazette 2011; Oil and Gas Journal 1981); critics and human rights activists have condemned Exxon Mobil for its operations in Indonesia and in Chad (New York Times 2001). Smaller oil companies likes Marathon Oil and Valero Energy also have had their share of negative publicity regarding unethical and controversial practices (e.g., Chemical News & Intelligence 2010; Financial Wire 2007).

  2. Marathon Oil spinned off its refining unit, Marathon Petroleum, in June 2011 and as a result is a much smaller company focusing on oil and gas exploration and production.

  3. Our findings are based on information collected from the corporate websites during the time frame specified. Changes may occur regarding the CSR information on these corporate websites after our data were collected.

  4. Exxon Mobil’s YouTube channel was featured on its corporate main page in September 2011; however, subsequent visits to its website in February and July 2012 showed that the YouTube channel had been removed from the website.

  5. Some statements are, “The world needs more than oil,” “It’s time oil companies get behind the development of renewable energy,” “Oil companies should support the communities they’re part of.” “Oil companies should support small business.” “Fighting AIDS should be corporate policy.” Individuals can click on the button “I Agree” and click on “what Chevron is doing” in that area for further information.

  6. We thank an anonymous reviewer for this insight. Further investigation of these two-sided messages indicated that they were part of a company’s response to crises and the subsequent negative media exposure. For example, Exxon Mobil’s acknowledgement of worker fatalities in 2010 (see Table 2) was a response to several media reports concerning the tragic death of Exxon Mobil workers. Similarly, BP’s messages on employee satisfaction and workplace injuries acknowledged the Deepwater Horizon accident in the Gulf of Mexico, 2010.

  7. To illustrate, when talking about its women’s economic opportunity initiative, Exxon Mobil presented a short video featuring how a real woman and her small business in the Republic of Chad are empowered by its social initiative (http://exxonmobil.com/Corporate/community_women_invest.aspx). Similarly, when describing its human rights initiatives in Myanmar, Chevron presented a touching story, with a picture, of a real woman Ma Kyi Ma, who, thanks to the emergency fund she received from a Chevron-supported nonprofit, was able to travel to a clinic to have her baby safely delivered (http://www.chevron.com/globalissues/humanrights/myanmar/). BP utilized affective stories extensively when talking about its cleanup and restoration efforts in the Gulf of Mexico (http://www.bp.com/sectionbodycopy.do?categoryId=41&contentId=7067505).

References

  • Ashforth, B. E., & Gibbs, B. W. (1990). The double-edge of organizational legitimation. Organization Science, 1, 177–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • BBC News. (2011). US court rules against Chevron in Ecuador oil case. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-14983123. Accessed 10 Oct 2011.

  • Bennett, W., & Edelman, M. (1985). Toward a new political narrative. Journal of Communication, 35, 156–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berger, I. E., Cunningham, P. H., & Drumwright, M. E. (2007). Mainstreaming corporate social responsibility: Developing markets for virtue. California Management Review, 49(4), 132–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2003). Consumer–company identification: A framework for understanding consumers’ relationships with companies. Journal of Marketing, 67(2), 76–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2004). Doing better at doing good: When, why, and how consumers respond to corporate social initiatives. California Management Review, 47(1), 9–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharya, C. B., Sen, S., & Korschun, D. (2008). Using corporate social responsibility to win the war for talent. MIT Sloan Management Review, 49(2), 37–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cai, Y., Jo, H., & Pan, C. (2012). Doing well while doing bad? CSR in controversial industry sectors. Journal of Business Ethics, 108(4), 467–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. L. (2007). Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32, 946–967.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chakravorti, B. (2010). Stakeholder marketing 2.0. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 29(1), 97–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chemical News & Intelligence. (2010). Texas Regulator Fines Valero $186,400 for Air Emission Violations, September 29.

  • Crowley, A. E., & Hoyer, W. D. (1994). An integrative framework for understanding two-sided persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 20(4), 561–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawar, N., & Pillutla, M. M. (2000). Impact of product-harm crises on brand equity: The moderating role of consumer expectations. Journal of Marketing Research, 37(2), 215–226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawkins, J. (2004). Corporate responsibility: The communication challenge. Journal of Communication Management, 9(2), 108–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deighton, J., Romer, D., & McQueen, J. (1989). Using drama to persuade. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(3), 335–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2007). Reaping relational rewards from corporate social responsibility: The role of competitive positioning. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 24(3), 224–241.

    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(1), 8–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2011). Corporate social responsibility and competitive advantage: Overcoming the trust barrier. Management Science, 57(9), 1528–1545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Du, S., Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2008). Exploring the social and business returns of a corporate oral health initiative aimed at disadvantaged Hispanic families. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(3), 483–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theory from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14, 532–550.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellerman, D. (2001). Helping people help themselves: Toward a theory of autonomy-compatible help, Working Paper No. 2693, World Bank, Washington, DC.

  • Escalas, J. E. (2004). Narrative processing: Building consumer connections to brands. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 14(1/2), 168–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Escobar, L. F., & Vredenburg, H. (2011). Multinational oil companies and the adoption of sustainable development: A resource-based and institutional theory interpretation of adoption heterogeneity. Journal of Business Ethics, 98(1), 39–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esrock, S. L., & Leichty, G. B. (1998). Social responsibility and corporate web pages: Self-presentation or agenda-setting? Public Relations Review, 24(3), 305–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Financial Wire. (2007). Marathon oil to pay $1 million fine, August 2.

  • Flyvbjerg, B. (2011). Case study. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp. 301–316). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fortune. (2011). Fortune 500 2011 list: Petroleum refining. http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2011/industries/20/index.html. Accessed 8 Aug 2011.

  • Fortune. (2012). Fortune 500 2012 list: Petroleum refining. http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2012/industries/20/. Accessed 15 June 2012.

  • Frynas, J. G. (2005). The false developmental promise of corporate social responsibility: Evidence from multinational oil companies. International Affairs, 81(3), 581–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gabriel, Y. (2000). Storytelling in organizations: Facts, fictions, and fantasies. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gazette. (2011). Landowners Sue ExxonMobil over Yellowstone River Oil Spill, October 4. http://billingsgazette.com/news/local/article_8ce89c35-c657-5651-bf4f-4b07c6065f7c.html. Accessed 10 Oct 2011.

  • Ghanem, S. (1997). Filling in the tapestry: The second level of agenda setting. In M. McCombs, D. L. Shaw, & D. Weaver (Eds.), Communication and democracy: Exploring the intellectual frontiers in agenda-setting theory (p. 07430). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey, P. C., Merrill, C. B., & Hansen, J. M. (2009). The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: An empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strategic Management Journal, 30(4), 425–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gourville, J. T., & Rangan, K. V. (2004). Valuing the cause marketing relationship. California Management Review, 47(1), 38–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R. (2001). Thirty years of social accounting, reporting and auditing: What (if anything) have we learnt? Business Ethics: A European View, 10(1), 9–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R. (2006). Social, environmental and sustainability reporting and organizational value creation. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 19(6), 793–819.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, R., Kouhy, R., & Lavers, S. (1995). Corporate social and environmental reporting: A review of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosure. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 8(2), 47–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greening, D. W., & Turban, D. B. (2000). Corporate social performance as a competitive advantage in attracting a quality workforce. Business & Society, 39(3), 254–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Handelman, J. M., & Arnold, S. J. (1999). The role of marketing actions with a social dimension: Appeals to the institutional environment. Journal of Marketing, 63(3), 33–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, L., & Kitzinger, J. (1999). The human drama of genetics: Hard and soft media representations of inherited breast cancer. Sociology of Health & Illness, 21(5), 560–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, R. P., Ainscough, T., Shank, T., & Manullang, D. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and socially responsible investing: A global perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(2), 165–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong, H., & Kacperczyk, M. (2009). The price of sin: The effects of social norms on markets. Journal of Financial Economics, 93(1), 15–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Idemudia, U. (2009). Oil extraction and poverty reduction in the Niger Delta: A critical examination of partnership initiatives. Journal of Business Ethics, 90, 91–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kane, G. C., Fichman, R. G., Gallaugher, J., & Glaser, J. (2009). Community relations 2.0. Harvard Business Review, 87(11), 45–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2009). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizon, 53, 59–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, J., & Dawar, N. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and consumers’ attributions and brand evaluations in a product-harm crisis. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 21(3), 203–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korschun, D., & S. Du. (2012). How virtual corporate social responsibility dialogs generate value: A framework and propositions. Journal of Business Research (Forthcoming).

  • Kotler, P., & Lee, N. (2005). Corporate social responsibility: Doing the most good for your company and your cause. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • KPMG. (2011). KPMG international survey of corporate responsibility reporting 2011. http://www.in.kpmg.com/SecureData/aci/Files/corporate-responsibility2011.pdf. Accessed 15 March 2012.

  • Lee, M. Y., Fairhurst, A., & Wesley, S. (2009). Corporate social responsibility: A review of the top 100 US retailers. Corporation Reputation Review, 12(2), 140–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, X., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2006). Corporate social responsibility, customer satisfaction, and market value. Journal of Marketing, 70(October), 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MaHoney, J. T., McGahan, A. M., & Pitelis, C. N. (2009). The interdependence of private and public interests. Organization Science, 20(6), 1034–1052.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maignan, I., & Ferrell, O. C. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and marketing: An integrative framework. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32(1), 3–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maignan, I., & Ralston, D. A. (2002). Corporate social responsibility in Europe and the US: Insights from businesses’ self-presentations. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(3), 497–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mangold, W. G., & Faulds, D. J. (2009). Social media: The new hybrid element of the promotion mix. Business Horizons, 52(4), 357–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moreno, A., & Capriotti, P. (2009). Communicating CSR, citizenship and sustainability on the web. Journal of Communication Management, 13(2), 157–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • New York Times. (2001). Mobil faulted for payments in central Asia, p. 6.

  • New York Times. (2011). Ecuador judge orders Chevron to pay $9 billion. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/world/americas/15ecuador.html. Accessed 12 Oct 2011.

  • Oil and Gas Journal. (1981). Three refiners charged with price violations, November 16, p. 158.

    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 

  • Pechmann, C. (1992). Predicting when two-sided ads will be more effective than one-sided ads: The role of correlational and correspondent inferences. Journal of Marketing Research, 29(November), 441–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peloza, J., & Shang, J. (2011). How can corporate social responsibility activities create value for stakeholders? A systematic view. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(1), 117–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollach, I. (2003). Communicating corporate ethics on the world wide web: A disclosure analysis of selected company web sites. Frankfurt: Peter Lang Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy & society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 89(1/2), 62–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robin, D. P., & Reidenbach, R. E. (1987). Social responsibility, ethics, and marketing strategy: Closing the gap between concepts and application. Journal of Marketing, 51(January), 44–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenfel, L., & Morville, P. (1998). Information architecture for the world wide web. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. (1987). The adolescence of institutional theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32(December), 493–511.

    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(2), 225–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, S., Du, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2009). Building brand relationships through corporate social responsibility. In D. J. Maclnnis, C. W. Park, & J. R. Priester (Eds.), Handbook of brand relationships (pp. 195–211). Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Korschun, D. (2006). The role of corporate social responsibility in strengthening multiple stakeholder relationships: A field experiment. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 158–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Settle, R. B., & Golden, L. L. (1974). Attribution theory and advertiser credibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 11(May), 181–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Laer, T., & de Ruyter, K. (2010). In stories we trust: How narrative apologies provide cover for competitive vulnerability after integrity-violating blog posts. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 27(2), 164–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vickery, S. K., Droge, C., Stank, T. P., Goldsby, T. J., & Markland, R. E. (2004). The performance implications of media richness in a business-to-business service environment: Direct versus indirect effects. Management Science, 50(8), 1106–1119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. (2004). Parallel universes: Companies, academics, and the progress of corporate citizenship. Business and Society Review, 109(1), 5–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, T., Lutz, R. J., & Weitz, B. A. (2009). Corporate hypocrisy: Overcoming the threat of inconsistent corporate social responsibility perceptions. Journal of Marketing, 73(6), 77–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wanderley, L., Lucian, R., Farache, F., & Sousa Filho, J. (2008). CSR information disclosure on the web: A context-based approach analyzing the influence of country of origin and industry sector. Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 369–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woolfson, C., & Beck, M. (2005). Corporate social responsibility failures in the oil industry. New York: Baywood Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, Y., Gurhan-Canli, Z., & Schwarz, N. (2006). The effect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities on companies with bad reputations. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(4), 377–390.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zadek, S. (2004). The path to corporate responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 82(12), 125–132.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their constructive and insightful comments which contributed greatly to this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Simmons College, 300 Fenway, Boston, MA, 02115, USA

    Shuili Du & Edward T. Vieira Jr.

Authors
  1. Shuili Du
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Edward T. Vieira Jr.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shuili Du.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Du, S., Vieira, E.T. Striving for Legitimacy Through Corporate Social Responsibility: Insights from Oil Companies. J Bus Ethics 110, 413–427 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1490-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1490-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation