Corporate heritage in CSR communication: a means to responsible brand image?

Abstract

PurposeThis paper seeks to explore whether corporate heritage as a component in planned communications can be important to foster a responsible corporate brand image among consumers.Design/methodology/approachA research model with three hypotheses was created and tested through linear multiple regression analysis, including 199 brands. The dependent variable, responsible brand image, was obtained from a Swedish consumer survey (n=8,015). The independent variables were measured through content analyses of the brands' webpages.FindingsThe findings support that presence of corporate heritage in corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication is positively related to responsible brand image with consumers. It is notable that the results indicate that corporate heritage identity on its own does not influence positive consumer perception on responsibility, unless it is linked to CSR communication.Research limitations/implicationsPrevious research has indicated the significance of cultural context on what constitutes effective CSR communication. As this study is limited to a Swedish consumer sample, the authors therefore recommend further research including a wider national context in order to validate the findings.Practical implicationsThe study and findings can inspire and inform companies how corporate heritage can be utilised in brand communications to facilitate CSR credibility among consumers.Originality/valueBy introducing history and heritage as a perspective on CSR communication and responsible brand image, the paper adds to the growing literature on corporate heritage identity and branding. The findings also add to the CSR communication literature calling for more knowledge on elements that build effective CSR communication.

Heritage branding orientation: The case of Ach. Brito and the dynamics between corporate and product heritage brands

“…As such, extant work has variously focused on corporate heritage brands (for example, Urde et al, 2007;Balmer, 2009aBalmer, , 2011aHudson, 2011;Hudson and Balmer, 2013;Schroeder et al, 2015) and more recently discussed the notion of corporate heritage identity management (Balmer, 2011b;Balmer, 2014a, 2015;Balmer and Chen, 2015) and corporate heritage communication per se (for example, Balmer, 2013a;Blombäck and Brunninge, 2013;Blombäck and Scandelius, 2013).…”

Explicating corporate heritage, corporate heritage brands and organisational heritage

“… Australia (Byrom and Lehman 2009;Cooper et al 2015a);  China (Balmer and Chen 2015;Schroeder et al 2015);  France (Bargenda 2015);  Finland (Blombäck and Brunninge, 2009;Hakala et al 2011;Hakala et al 2015);  Germany (Wiedmann et al 2011a(Wiedmann et al , 2011b;  Italy (Rindell et al 2015);  New Zealand (Cooper et al 2015a);  Norway (Urde and Greyser, 2015);  Portugal (Rindell et al 2015);  Sweden Brunninge, 2009, 2013;Blombäck and Scandelius 2013;Urde and Greyser, 2015);  United Kingdom (Balmer 2008(Balmer , 2009(Balmer , 2011aBalmer 2014a, 2015);  US (Hudson 2011; Balmer and Hudson 2013).…”

“… strategic brand repositioning and rejuvenation (Balmer 2009;Hudson 2011);  burnishing customer satisfaction (Balmer and Chen, 2015)  monarchical management Balmer 2009Balmer , 2011aBalmer , 2011b  corporate communication and corporate identity management (Blombäck and Brunninge 2009;Balmer 2013);  corporate communication strategies of family businesses and SMEs (Byrom and Lehman 2009;Micelotta and Raynard 2011;Blombäck and Brunninge 2013);  CSR communication (Blombäck and Scandelius 2013);  consumer brand image formation (Wiedmann et al 2011a(Wiedmann et al , 2011b;  its impact on corporate reputation (Wiedmann et al 2013);  consumer nostalgia and emotional brand perceptions (Merchant and Rose 2013);  place branding and name changes (Hakala et al 2015);  luxury brands and the co-creation of brand meaning (Schroeder et al 2015);  a multi-institutional phenomenon amongst a federation of corporate brand stakeholders (Urde and Greyser, 2015).…”

Corporate heritage identity management and the multi-modal implementation of a corporate heritage identity

“…Extant scholarship has identified the genus of corporate heritage institutions ; focused on the generic qualities and characteristics of corporate heritage brands (Urde et al,.2007;Balmer, 2011a;Wiedmann et al, 2011aWiedmann et al, , 2011bBlombäck & Scandelius, 2013;Hudson & Balmer 2013) and, more recently, has conceptualized the existence and characteristics of corporate heritage identities (Balmer, 2011b(Balmer, , 2013. This study has corporate heritage identity as its specific focus and, arguably, is the first empirical study relating to corporate heritage identity.…”