Corporate social responsibility communication: stakeholder information, response and involvement strategies
Tóm tắt
While it is generally agreed that companies need to manage their relationships with their stakeholders, the way in which they choose to do so varies considerably. In this paper, it is argued that when companies want to communicate with stakeholders about their CSR initiatives, they need to involve those stakeholders in a two‐way communication process, defined as an ongoing iterative sense‐giving and sense‐making process. The paper also argues that companies need to communicate through carefully crafted and increasingly sophisticated processes. Three CSR communication strategies are developed. Based on empirical illustrations and prior research, the authors argue that managers need to move from ‘informing’ and ‘responding’ to ‘involving’ stakeholders in CSR communication itself. They conclude that managers need to expand the role of stakeholders in corporate CSR communication processes if they want to improve their efforts to build legitimacy, a positive reputation and lasting stakeholder relationships.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Andriof J., 2002, Unfolding Stakeholder Thinking: Theory, Responsibility and Engagement, 1
Brown & Williamson Tobacco.2001/2002. ‘Social and Environmental Report 2001/2002’. Printed by Brown & Williamson Tobacco.
Christensen L.T., 2000, The Expressive Organization, 256
Danisco Sustainability Report 2004. Copenhagen: Danisco (http://Danisco.com).
Dyer J.H., 1998, The relational view, Strategic Management Journal, 23, 660
ESRA: European Sustainability Reporting Awards Report 2003. Brussels: ESRA.
Freeman R.E., 1984, Strategic Management. A Stakeholder Approach
Grunig J.E., 1984, Managing Public Relations
Habermas J., 1993, Justification and Application: Remarks on Discourse Ethics
Lingaard T., 2006, Corporate Social Responsibility. Reconciling Aspiration with Application, 86
Matten D., 2004, Corporate Social Responsibility Across Europe, 335
Morgan A., 1999, Eating the Big Fish. How ‘Challenger Brands’ can Compete Against Brand Leaders
Nijhof A. Fisscher O.andHonders H.2006. ‘Sustaining competences for corporate social responsibility: a sensemaking perspective’. Working Paper. University of Twente Enschede.
Novo Nordisk.2002. ‘Sustainability Report’(novonordisk.com).
Novo Nordisk.2003. ‘What Does Being There Mean to You?’ Sustainability Report (novonordisk.com).
Paine L.S., 2001, Value Shift: Why Companies Must Merge Social and Financial Imperatives to Achieve Superior Performance
Pava M.L., 1996, Corporate Responsibility and Financial Performance. The Paradox of Social Cost
Post J.E., 2002, Redefining the Corporation, Stakeholder Management and Organizational Wealth, 10.1515/9781503619692
SAS Sustainability Report 2004. Copenhagen: SAS (http://SAS.com).
Vallentin S., 2001, Pensionsinvesteringer, etik og offentlighed – en systemteoretisk analyse af offentlig meningsdannelse
Van Riel C.B.M., 1995, Principles of Corporate Communication
Weick K., 1979, The Social Psychology of Organizing
Weick K.E., 1995, Sensemaking in Organisations