CSR as hypocrisy avoidance: a conceptual framework

Abstract

Purpose The theoretical understanding of CSR is caught on the horns of the dilemma between the ethical and instrumental approaches. The strategic turn in CSR has brought the dilemma to a new head. The purpose of this paper is to develop a novel argumentative strategy to address the dilemma. Design/methodology/approach The paper weaves together the insights from the literatures on sociological institutionalism, organization theory, business ethics and institutional economics to elaborate the distinction between CSR communication and CSR action that is actually undertaken and visible to stakeholders. This distinction is at the core of the “hypocrisy avoidance” approach which puts the above dilemma in a new light. Findings According to the “hypocrisy avoidance” approach, the CSR communication constitutes a competitive arena where corporations are looking for reputational gains. Competitive pressures give rise to an inflationary dynamics of the CSR communication which consequently runs up against credibility problems. These problems are addressed by the real CSR policies which legitimate the corporate employment of the CSR communication as an instrument of competition. Practical implications The theoretical dilemma between the ethical and instrumental approaches manifests itself in the justification of skepticism toward CSR communication. This skepticism, which may be to the detriment of a corporation’s license to operate, may turn out to be a driving force of CSR action. Social implications Despite the charges of corporate hypocrisy, CSR communication may play a role in the alleviation of business-society tensions. This role is however subject to two limitations. First, if CSR communication is used as instrument of competition, it is unlikely to translate into CSR action perfectly. Second, corporations would likely prioritize more visible CSR actions over less visible ones. Originality/value The novel implication of the “hypocrisy avoidance” approach is that CSR actions present credible commitments or “hostages” enabling the productive interaction between corporations and their stakeholders. This implication integrates some of the components of the ethical and instrumental approaches, while drawing inspiration from the institutional economics and institutional ethics literatures.

The limits of transparency: A systems theory view

“…One could perhaps add a further complicating circumstance: The content of messages issued by the corporate senders is possibly loosely coupled to the reality that these messages purport to describe. As discerned by Jauernig and Valentinov (), corporate messages could in principle broadly correspond to corporate reality, as stakeholder theorists tend to assume (Eccles, Ioannou, & Serafeim, ; Freeman, Dmytriyev, & Strand, ), but they can also lag behind reality, as suggested the work on organizational hypocrisy (e.g., Brunsson, ; Cho, Laine, Roberts, & Rodrigue, ) or stay ahead of reality if they present “aspirational talk” (Christensen, Morsing, & Thyssen, ). In view of these difficulties, one may wonder whether corporate communication, or systemic communication more generally, could at all be a reliable instrument for the control of “critical dependencies” problematized by Valentinov's () complexity–sustainability trade‐off.…”

“…If this communication presents “cheap talk” instead of being a reliable instrument, the concerned social systems may employ indirect signaling strategies, such as “credible commitments” in Williamson's () transaction cost economics or “the nondistribution constraint” as a signal of trustworthiness in Hansmann's () theory of the nonprofit sector (cf. Jauernig & Valentinov, in press). These signals are crude but effective and evidently prioritized over direct communication due to its failure to dissolve the opacity and thus precariousness of the respective system‐environment relations.…”

SROI with Assurance Can Help Contributors Distinguish Hypocritical Organizations from Genuine NFPs

“…Because of focuses on this relationship, their research is valuable for accounting scholars. On the other hand, Jauernig and Valentinov (2019) does not adopt statistical anslysis directly, too [10]. Wang and Zhu (2020) are about stakeholders' reactions around profit-oriented entities, though they do not focus on accounting.…”

The Influence of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Social Media on the Strategy Formulation Process

“…Companies that have suffered from CSR communication dilemma are BP and Nestlé [36]. Organisations need to steer a middle course in CSR communications between too much and too little communication [37]. The balance between CSR action and the communications of CSR is an ethical consideration [36].…”

“…There needs to be a balance between CSR talk and CSR action. The importance of CSR communication has received less publicity in articles compared to CSR action [37].…”