Accountability by design? Exploring design characteristics of corporate social responsibility standards

Abstract

Purpose While corporate social responsibility (CSR) standards are amongst the most widely adopted instruments for supporting firms in becoming more accountable, firms who adopt them frequently fail to comply. In this context, the purpose of this study is to explore to what extent CSR standards are designed for accountability. In the analysis, this paper investigates design characteristics related to accountability across different standard types, namely, principle-based, reporting, certification and process standards. Design/methodology/approach This study reviews the design characteristics of 50 CSR standards in a systematic and comparative fashion. This paper combines qualitative deductive coding with exploratory quantitative analyses methods to elucidate structural variance and patterns of accountability-related design characteristics across the sample. Findings This study finds that the prevalence of design characteristics aimed at fostering accountability varies significantly between different types of standards. This paper identifies three factors related to the specific purpose of any given standard that explain this structural variation in design characteristics, namely, implementability, comparability and measurability. Practical implications Non-compliance limits the effectiveness and legitimacy of CSR standards. The systematic exploration of patterns and structural variation in design characteristics that promote accountability may provide valuable clues for the design of more effective CSR standards in the future. Social implications Better understanding the role of design characteristics of CSR standards is critical to ensure they contribute to greater corporate accountability. Originality/value This study strives to expand the current understanding of the design characteristics of CSR standards beyond individual cases through a systematic exploration of accountability-related design characteristics across a larger sample.

Does job satisfaction mediate the relationship between corporate social responsibility and employee organizational citizenship behavior? Evidence from the hotel industry in Vietnam

“…This choice may not be voluntary by the enterprise but only to comply with the law (for example, in the field of environment) or for the enterprise to voluntarily contribute some resources (for example, people, time, etc.) for the public good or to contribute to the improvement of some condition that is usually outside the scope of the company [21,22]. In other words, there is a strong shift towards an approach to CSR from a strategic point of view instead of business ethics as before.…”

Flattening or addressing complexity? The future role of GRI in light of the sustainability accounting (r)evolution

“…In particular, this growing body of research highlights the urgency of developing accounting and accountability with the inclusion of marginalized stakeholders and inequalities (Schönherr et al , 2021).…”

“…Efforts to strengthen regulations seem to have entered a new era in which laws and government regulations are considered essential and constantly evolving (Gallhofer and Haslam, 1997; Chauvey et al , 2015; Pizzi et al , 2020). In this scenario, the European Commission issued a directive in 2014, but its effectiveness was highly questioned (Luque-Vilchez and Larrinaga, 2016), leading to new legislation emphasizing elements not previously addressed (Schönherr et al , 2021; Howitt, 2022).…”

“…In sum, GRI’s theoretical competencies should be geared toward recognizing the complexity of the sustainability foundations, defining and measuring their core components (Schönherr et al , 2021). GRI technical experience could help in assessing coherent measurement systems, avoiding the risk of flattening the multiple complexities to be addressed.…”

Mapping corporate social responsibility practices at the international level: systematic review and content analysis approach

“…ICSRIs can be distinguished according to the way that commercial organizations are able to participate in or use them (Berger‐Walliser and Scott, 2018). Certain ICSRIs may require certification (Raynolds et al , 2014; Schönherr et al , 2022). This is a verification of compliance, often resulting in the enterprise being allowed to use a particular label on their products (Lebaron et al , 2017).…”