Bridging diversity management and CSR in online external communication

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to address the need to reconsider online external communication that integrates diversity management (DM) and corporate social responsibility (CSR) by examining the multimodal discursive strategies purposefully employed by organizations to reflect the symbiotic relationship between these two areas of management practice and to communicatively emphasize their corporate commitment. Design/methodology/approach Building on the recently emerged stream of literature linking DM and CSR, and adopting a critical perspective on discourse analysis, this study delves into the multimodal discursive strategies that help bridge DM and CSR in online external communication. The analytical approach proposed is used for the qualitative analysis of 43 web pages selected from Microsoft company’s “Global Diversity and Inclusion” website. Findings Findings highlight the discursive efforts made by the organization to strategically integrate DM and CSR communication into one single framework. The analysis reveals how the coordinates of social practices (social actors and social actions) are purposefully and multimodally recontextualized in the corporate discourse when communicating this integration. Originality/value This study extends the focus of critical discourse analysis from exclusively language to the interplay of different semiotic modes, offering a fine-grained exploration of the multimodal meaning construction performed by organizations in the context of online external communication.

Automated content analysis of cultural diversity perspectives in annual reports (DivPAR): Development, validation, and future research agenda.

“…In this paradigm, diversity management is often viewed as a component of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). By broadcasting their diversity policy and the rationale behind it, organizations aim to improve their image and enhance their reputation as an attractive employer (Elving et al, 2013;Hofhuis et al, 2015;Maier & Ravazzani, 2019;Podsiadlowski & Reichel, 2014). This practice is also referred to as diversity branding or inclusion branding (Edwards & Kelan, 2011;Jonsen et al, 2019).…”

Standardising Fatherhood through Discourse

“…It is important to note that there is no clear and commonly agreed definition of CSR, as the content of the concept will vary between countries and companies and change over time (Hansen/Seierstad 2017). However, the following definition may serve as a basis: a set of organizational initiatives that go beyond economic and legal obligations and extend to the ethical and discretionary responsibilities that society expects businesses to assume (Maier/Ravazzani 2019:271, inspired by Carroll 1979.…”

CSR Communication: The Use of Internet-Based Tools

“…Organizations' websites and Internet-based tools play a potentially significant role in enhancing company interaction with stakeholder; the use of Internet communications by organisations, particularly social media, is growing rapidly (Bochenek & Blili, 2013;Li & Li, 2014;Lodhia & Stone, 2017;Bosetti, 2018;Nelson, 2019). Many scholars provided evidence of a diffuse use of the website for CSR disclosure by companies (Adams & Frost, 2006;Bartkus et al, 2002;Esrock & Leichty, 1998;Maier & Ravazzani, 2019;Moreno & Capriotti, 2009;Siano et al, 2016;Tagesson et al, 2009;Tetrevova et al, 2019;Wanderley et al, 2008;Williams & Wern Pei, 1999). Several researches focused on the on-line reports published by companies (Correa-Garcia et al, 2018;Guillamón-Saorín & Martínez-López, 2013;Hahn & Kühnen, 2013;Jose & Lee, 2007;Junior et al 2014;Lodhia, 2014;Lodhia & Stone, 2017).…”