Hostname: page-component-857557d7f7-ksgrx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-11-24T18:43:20.929Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Authenticity, Power, and Pluralism: A Framework for Understanding Stakeholder Evaluations of Corporate Social Responsibility Activities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2016

Paul F. Skilton  and
Jill M. Purdy
Paul F. Skilton
Affiliation:
Washington State University
Jill M. Purdy
Affiliation:
University Of Washington Tacoma
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

We explore the essential contestedness of corporate social responsibility (CSR) by framing the interplay between CSR activities and stakeholder evaluations as a contest for jurisdiction over what it means to be socially responsible. This contest arises because firms and stakeholders are often guided by incompatible sensemaking systems. To show why context matters we show how stakeholders evaluate the authenticity of CSR activities on the basis of schemas for responsible behavior on one hand and their perceptions of firm identity on the other. This process can generate complex evaluations whose meaning depends on the distribution of power in fields and the extent to which pluralistic sensemaking systems are compatible. By positioning authenticity evaluations within a framework that describes the state of power and pluralism within which they are produced, we are able to present a systematic explanation of how and why stakeholder responses to CSR vary over a range of settings.

Keywords

corporate social responsibilityauthenticitypowerpluralismstakeholders

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Business Ethics Quarterly , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , January 2017 , pp. 99 - 123
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Business Ethics 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Albert, S., & Whetten, D. A. 1985. Organizational identity. In Cummings, L. L. & Staw, B. M. (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior, vol. 7: 263–295. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar
Battilana, J., & Dorado, S. 2010. Building sustainable hybrid organizations: The case of commercial microfinance organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6): 1419–1440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baumann-Pauly, D., Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G., 2016. Managing institutional complexity: A longitudinal study of legitimacy strategies at a sportswear brand company. Journal of Business Ethics, 137(6): 1–21.Google Scholar
Baumann-Pauly, D., Wickert, C., Spence, L. J., & Scherer, A.G., 2013. Organizing corporate social responsibility in small and large firms: Size matters. Journal of Business Ethics, 115(4): 693–705.Google Scholar
Beckman, T., Colwell, A., & Cunningham, P. H. 2009. The emergence of corporate social responsibility in Chile: The importance of authenticity and social networks. Journal of Business Ethics, 86(2): 191–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besharov, M. L., & Smith, W. K. 2014. Multiple institutional logics in organizations: Explaining their varied nature and implications. Academy of Management Review, 39(3): 364–381.Google Scholar
Bitektine, A., & Haack, P. 2015. The “macro” and the “micro” of legitimacy: Toward a multilevel theory of the legitimacy process. Academy of Management Review, 40(1): 49–75.Google Scholar
Bondy, K., Moon, J., & Matten, D. 2012. An institution of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in multi-national corporations (MNCs): Form and implications. Journal of Business Ethics, 111(2): 281–299.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P., 1980. The production of belief: Contribution to an economy of symbolic goods. Media, Culture & Society, 2(3): 261–293.Google Scholar
Burchell, J., & Cook, J., 2013. CSR, co-optation and resistance: The emergence of new agonistic relations between business and civil society. Journal of Business Ethics, 115(11): 741–754.Google Scholar
Clark, C., & Newell, S. 2013. Institutional work and complicit decoupling across the U.S. capital markets: The work of rating agencies, Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(1): 7–36.Google Scholar
Davis, A. 2015. Minimum wage increase proving successful for Ikea stores. Small Business Trends , http://smallbiztrends.com/2015/07/minimum-wage-increase-ikea.html, accessed August 5, 2015.Google Scholar
Dawkins, C., 2015. Agonistic pluralism and stakeholder engagement. Business Ethics Quarterly, 25(1): 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Delmas, M., & Cuerel Burbano, V. 2011. The drivers of greenwashing. California Management Review, 54(1): 64–87.Google Scholar
Devinney, T. M. 2009. Is the socially responsible corporation a myth? The good, bad and ugly of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(2): 44–56.Google Scholar
DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W. W. 1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2): 147–160.Google Scholar
Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. 1995. The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1): 85–91.Google Scholar
Doty, D. H., & Glick, W. H. 1994. Typologies as a unique form of theory building: Toward improved understanding and modeling. Academy of Management Review, 19(2): 230–251.Google Scholar
Driver, M. 2006. Beyond the stalemate of economics versus ethics: Corporate social responsibility and the discourse of the organizational self. Journal of Business Ethics, 66(4): 337–356.Google Scholar
Durand, R., Szostak, B., Jourdan, J., & Thornton, P. H. 2013. Institutional logics as strategic resources. In Lounsbury, M. & Boxenbaum, E. (Eds.), Institutional logics in action, part A: Research in the sociology of organizations, vol. 39a: 165–201. Bingley, UK: Emerald.Google Scholar
Dutton, J. E., & Dukerich, J. M. 1991. Keeping an eye on the mirror: Image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal, 34(3): 517–554.Google Scholar
Epprecht, L. 2013. The real reason why women are leaving Wall Street. The Atlantic , http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/09/the-real-reason-why-women-are-leaving-wall-street/279379/, accessed August 5, 2015.Google Scholar
Ewing, D. R., Allen, C. T., & Ewing, R. L. 2012. Authenticity as meaning validation: An empirical investigation of iconic and indexical cues in a context of “green” products. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 11(5): 381–390.Google Scholar
Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. 2013. Social cognition: From brains to culture. Sage: Newhall.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fligstein, N. & McAdam, D., 2012. A theory of fields. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Parmar, B. L., & De Colle, S. 2010. Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Friedman, A. L., & Miles, S., 2002. Developing stakeholder theory. Journal of Management Studies, 39(1): 1–21.Google Scholar
Frundt, H. J. 2009. Fair bananas! Farmers, workers, and consumers strive to change an industry. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.Google Scholar
Garriga, E., & Melé, D., 2004. Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1-2): 51–71.Google Scholar
Glynn, M. A. 2000. When cymbals become symbols: Conflict over organizational identity within a symphony orchestra. Organization Science, 11(3): 285–298.Google Scholar
Gray, B., Purdy, J. M., & Ansari, S. 2015. From interactions to institutions: Microprocesses of framing and mechanisms for the structuring of institutional fields. Academy of Management Review, 40(1): 115–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grayson, K., & Martinec, R. 2004. Consumer perceptions of iconicity and indexicality and their influence on assessments of authentic market offerings. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(2): 296–312.Google Scholar
Greenwood, R, Raynard, M., Kodieh, F., Micelotta, E. R., & Lounsbury, M. 2011. Institutional complexity and organizational responses. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1): 317–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, B. G., & Whetten, D. A. 2008. Rethinking the relationship between reputation and legitimacy: A social actor conceptualization. Corporate Reputation Review, 11(3): 192–207.Google Scholar
Kovács, B., Carroll, G. R., & Lehman, D. W. 2013. Authenticity and consumer value ratings: Empirical tests from the restaurant domain. Organization Science, 25(2): 458–478.Google Scholar
Kraatz, M. S., & Block, E. S. 2008. Organizational implications of institutional pluralism. In Greenwood, R., Oliver, C., Sahlin, K., & Suddaby, R. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of organizational institutionalism: 840–860. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Lamin, A., & Zaheer, S. 2012. Wall Street vs. Main Street: Firm strategies for defending legitimacy and their impact on different stakeholders. Organization Science, 23(1): 47–66.Google Scholar
Marquis, C., Glynn, M. A., & Davis, G. F. 2007. Community isomorphism and corporate social action. Academy of Management Review, 32(3): 925–945.Google Scholar
Matten, D., & Moon, J. 2008. “Implicit” and “explicit” CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33(2): 404–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacLean, T. L., & Benham, M. 2010. The dangers of decoupling: The relationship between compliance programs, legitimacy perceptions, and institutionalized misconduct. Academy of Management Journal, 53(6): 1499–1520.Google Scholar
Mazutis, D. D., & Slawinski, N. 2015. Reconnecting business and society: Perceptions of authenticity in corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 131(1): 137–150.Google Scholar
McNeil, D. G Jr.. 2010. Virus ravages cassava plants in Africa. New York Times , 159, June 1: D1.Google Scholar
McPherson, C. A., & Sauder, M. 2013. Logics in action: Managing institutional complexity in a drug court. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(2): 165–194.Google Scholar
McShane, L., & Cunningham, P. 2012. To thine own self be true? Employees’ judgments of the authenticity of their organization’s corporate social responsibility program. Journal of Business Ethics, 108(1): 81–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michels, S. 2014. How private tech industry buses became a symbol of the economic divide in San Francisco. PBS Newshour , March 14, http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/how-private-buses-became-a-symbol-of-san-franciscos-divide/. Accessed December 28, 2015.Google Scholar
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. 1997. Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4): 853–896.Google Scholar
Moon, J., Crane, A., & Matten, D. 2005. Can corporations be citizens? Corporate citizenship as a metaphor for business participation in society. Business Ethics Quarterly, 15(3): 429–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, F. 2010. The oncomouse that roared: Hybrid exchange strategies as a source of productive tension at the boundary of overlapping institutions. American Journal of Sociology, 116(2): 341–388.Google Scholar
Okoye, A. 2009. Theorizing corporate social responsibility as an essentially contested concept: Is a definition necessary? Journal of Business Ethics, 89(4): 613–627.Google Scholar
Parguel, B., Benoît-Moreau, F., & Larceneux, F. 2011. How sustainability ratings might deter ‘greenwashing’: A closer look at ethical corporate communication. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(1): 15–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patton, L. 2013. McDonald’s seen overhauling U.S. menu from 145 choices. BloombergBusiness , http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-05-17/mcdonald-s-seen-overhauling-u-s-menu-from-145-choices, accessed August 5, 2015.Google Scholar
Peirce, C. S. 1955. Philosophical writings of Peirce. New York: Dover Publications.Google Scholar
Perez-Batres, L. A., Doh, J. P., Miller, V. V., & Pisani, M. J. 2012. Stakeholder pressures as determinants of CSR strategic choice: Why do firms choose symbolic versus substantive self-regulatory codes of conduct? Journal of Business Ethics, 110(2): 157–172.Google Scholar
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. 2006. Strategy and society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(1/2): 78–92.Google Scholar
Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. 2011. Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 89(1/2): 62–77.Google Scholar
Purdy, J. M., & Gray, B. 2009. Conflicting logics, mechanisms of diffusion, and multilevel dynamics in emerging institutional fields. Academy of Management Journal, 52(2): 355–380.CrossRefGoogle 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(4): 1096–1120.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.Google Scholar
Simon, M. 2013. Clowning around with charity: How McDonald’s exploits philanthropy and targets children. The Huffington Post, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michele-simon/clowning-around-with-charity_b_4174914.html, accessed July 2, 2015.Google Scholar
Smets, M., & Jarzabkowski, P. 2013. Reconstructing institutional complexity in practice: A relational model of institutional work and complexity. Human Relations, 66(10): 1279–1309.Google Scholar
Smets, M., Jarzabkowski, P., Burke, G. T., & Spee, P. 2015. Reinsurance trading in Lloyd’s of London: Balancing conflicting-yet-complementary logics in practice. Academy of Management Journal, 58(3): 932–970.Google Scholar
Stout, L. A. 2012. New thinking on “shareholder primacy”. Accounting, Economics, and Law, 2(2): Article 4. doi: 10.1515/2152-2820.1037.Google Scholar
Tashman, P., & Raelin, J., 2013. Who and what really matters to the firm: Moving stakeholder salience beyond managerial perceptions. Business Ethics Quarterly, 23(4): 591–616.Google Scholar
Thompson, T., & Purdy, J. M. 2016. Practice variation as mechanism for generating institutional complexity: Local experiments in funding social impact business. In Gehman, J., Lounsbury, M., & Greenwood, R. (Eds.) Research in the sociology of organizations, 49/50: 159–202.Google Scholar
Thornton, P. H, Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M. 2012. The institutional logics perspective: A new approach to culture, structure and process. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Varga, S., & Guignon, C. 2014. Authenticity. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2014/entries/authenticity/.Google Scholar
Weick, K. E. 1979. The social psychology of organizing. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Whelan, G. 2013. Corporate constructed and dissent enabling public spheres: Differentiating dissensual from consensual corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 115(4): 755–769.Google Scholar
Wicki, S., & van der Kaaij, J., 2007. Is it true love between the octopus and the frog? How to avoid the authenticity gap. Corporate Reputation Review, 10(4): 312–318.Google Scholar
Yim, F., & Fock, H. 2013. Social responsibility climate as a double-edged sword: how employee-perceived social responsibility climate shapes the meaning of their voluntary work? Journal of Business Ethics, 114(4): 665–674.Google Scholar
Zilber, T. B. 2011. Institutional multiplicity in practice: A tale of two high-tech conferences in Israel. Organization Science, 22(6): 1539–1559.Google Scholar