Multinational Enterprises as “Social Actors”—Constructivist Explanations for Corporate Social Responsibility

Beyond win–win: A syncretic theory on corporate stakeholder engagement in sustainable development

“…For example, individual voluntary citizenship initiatives in the workplace can play an essential role in improving the efficacy and efficiency of environmental management practices within organizations (Boiral, ). This is in line with Hofferberth, Bruhl, Burkart, Fey, and Peltner's () argument that a company's receptiveness to societal expectations is determined by constructionist drivers that may be very different to the systemic pressures experienced “from above.” As Robbins, Hintz, and Moore (, p. 132) note in discussing how to address the conceptual gap between nature and economy, “reconciling the material reality of the environment with the powerful social constructions that influence our thinking is a major challenge.” The study of business strategy and the environment has frequently sought to understand the differences between organizations in progress (or lack of it) toward greater sustainability and the internal and external factors shaping their responses. In the search for insight, researchers have applied theories including institutional theory (e.g., Colwell & Joshi, ; Delmas & Toffel, ), stakeholder theory (e.g., Delmas & Toffel, ; González‐Benito & González‐Benito, ), the resource‐based view (e.g., Borland, Ambrosini, Lindgreen, & Vanhamme, ; Dahlmann & Brammer, ), and ambidexterity (Hahn et al, ).…”

Rhetorical Framing of Organizational Identity: Corporate Social Responsibility in the Modern World Polity

“…As suggested in earlier world polity research on organizations (e.g., Dufays 2005;Drori et al 2006;Mühle 2010;Segerlund 2010;Hofferberth et al 2011; Shamir 2011; Choi 2011), a great deal of corporate behavior can be explained within related cultural and institutional frameworks, offering insights on CSR motivations for organizational actors such as MNCs. From this perspective, organizations assert identities grounded in broader claims and world level societal expectations.…”

Guaranteeing conflict free diamonds: From compliance to norm expansion under the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme

“…Hoffberth et al assert, 'an analysis of corporate rhetoric also bears implications for their actions … there is at least theoretical reason to assume that the way an actor constructs his identity through rhetorical references tells us something about the way he or she acts'. 51 Expanding the scope of the regulatory process to include not only 'conflict' but also 'illicit' diamonds would show renewed compliance to industry commitments to ethically source their diamonds. While industries involved in global enterprises find it increasingly difficult to evade social and public scrutiny, there is not consistency across multinational enterprises in how and when they promote ethical behaviour.…”

“…A growing body of literature attests that corporations are increasingly expected to be 'good citizens' within the international system and contribute to global governance in a variety of ways. 8 This is evidenced by the establishment of the KPCS as a self-regulating oversight mechanism of the diamond industry. 9 Philipp Pattberg distinguished between three approaches to understanding the formation of regimes to govern transnational problems: power-based explanations, interest-based explanations, and knowledge-based explanations.…”