How Does It Fit? Exploring the Congruence Between Organizations and Their Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Activities

Abstract

Several studies have focused on the effects of corporate social responsibility (CSR) fit on external stakeholders' evaluations of CSR activities, attitudes towards companies or brands, and behaviors. The results so far have been contradictory. A possible reason may be that the concept of CSR fit is more complicated than previously assumed. Researchers suggest that there may be different types of CSR fit, but so far no empirical research has focused on a typology of CSR fit. This study fills this gap, describing a qualitative content analysis of the congruence between six organizations and their various CSR activities. Ten annual reports and CSR reports were analyzed, and 102 specific CSR activities were identified. The results show that two levels of fit must be distinguished: based on the means for and the intended ends of the CSR activity. Furthermore, six different types of fit were found, focusing on (1) products and services, (2) production processes, (3) environmental impact, (4) employees, (5) suppliers, and (6) geographical location. Considering the above variety of fit possibilities, the findings emphasize the role of CSR communication as a means of creating fit perceptions.

Entrepreneurial Marketing and Airline-Cause Sponsorship Congruence: Passenger Sponsorship Response to US-Based Full-Service Airlines

“…This approach may often require co-creation marketing, that is, two-way communication [52]. Since companies tend to communicate their CSR initiatives through diverse message channels (i.e., CSR report, Corporate website, PR, advertising, point of purchase, media coverage, word-of-mouth; [58]), the corporate approach to innovation and consumer intensity is more likely to be conducive to a natural and constructed fit through sense-making [10].…”

“…However, it is argued that congruence or fit requires what Lafferty et al [68] called "the evolutionary process model," consisting of communication and adaptation phases. By some coincidence, de Jong and van der Meer [10] emphasized the sense-making process between the consumer and the company, where there seems to be some level of concurrent created and natural fit. Hence, when the sponsoring company has the capability to deal with and/or preempt what Johnston [67] called downside risks (i.e., scandals, endorsers' negative publicity, etc.…”

“…Researchers interested in investigating a much bigger picture may also prefer to delve into a range of factors influencing congruence, such as individual/group-(e.g., past experience, knowledge, involvement, arousal, and social alliance), market-(brand equity, clutter, and competitor activities) and management-related factors (e.g., sponsorship policy and activation/leverage). In particular, a longitudinal study of effective sponsorship communication in various contexts such as dimension and types of fit (i.e., [10,108]) may be worth investigating, given the complicated nature of managing congruence. Finally, the gap between attitude and behavior, a frequently mentioned theme, deserves further clarification in the context of sponsorship and CSR in the airline industry.…”

“…Importantly, just as implementing corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives requires sophisticated efforts to acquire legitimacy from consumers (e.g., consumers' attribution, [7,8]), and Pater and Van Lierop [9] suggested a need for more sophisticated communication of CSR messages by corporations (e.g., [10]). de Jong and van der Meer [10] (p. 80) state, "Rather than seeing CSR fit as something that is present or absent, we can see CSR fit as something that takes shape in the communicative actions of organizations . .…”

Management Solutions to Determine the Level of Management Culture Aiming to Implement Corporate Social Responsibility

“…not always directly [4][5][6][7][8][9]. There is even a bigger lack of scientific researches suggesting managerial solutions for organizations aiming to implement corporate social responsibility, which is indirectly analyzed in the works of various authors [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22], and there is a particular lack of researches related to both CSR and management culture [23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30].…”