Audience Enabling as Corporate Responsibility for Media Organizations

Olkkonen, Laura

doi:10.1080/23736992.2015.1082914

Cited by 12 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 140 publications

(214 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, an area of caution was added between the positive and negative realms of expectations. Furthermore, an empirical testing of expectation mapping showed that expectations are often interconnected; the optimism or hopes in positive expectations can be pulled down by a simultaneous impact of negative expectations (Olkkonen, 2015a). This can happen, for example, if the organization's good deeds are perceived as insufficient to counteract (broader) negative trends, such as commercialization and concentration of ownership.…”

Section: Olkkonen: a Conceptual Foundation For Expectations Of Corpormentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Dahlsrud, 2008;Matten and Moon, 2008;Okoye, 2009), expectations that concern sector-based corporate responsibilities deal with the specific consequences of doing a certain type of business and the broader issues and processes a certain business is connected to, both from the liability perspective and social connection perspective (cf. Young, 2006;Timonen and Luoma-aho, 2010;Vidal et al, 2010;Schrempf, 2012;Olkkonen, 2015a). After focusing on the empirical examples as specific CR issues of the sector that was studied-the media sector-the end of the paper will discuss the more general implications of expectation analysis for corporate communication.…”

Section: Olkkonen: a Conceptual Foundation For Expectations Of Corpormentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As noted during the testing and revising of the Expectation Grid (Olkkonen, 2015a;2015b), these four expectation types are extremities as in reality stakeholders might display caution in their expectation rather than, for example, pure optimism or cynicism. Thus, an area of caution was added between the positive and negative realms of expectations.…”

Section: Olkkonen: a Conceptual Foundation For Expectations Of Corpormentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Young, 2006;Schrempf, 2012). Hence, the issues that are included in the empirical examples relate to both business ethics and media/journalism ethics that together constitute the corporate responsibility of the media sector (Olkkonen, 2015a;Adams-Bloom and Cleary, 2009;Global Reporting Initiative, 2014).…”

Section: Empirical Examplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The two embedded assessments-normative assessment of different outcomes and organization-specific assessment dealing with confidence in a particular organization-are the basis for the Expectation Grid (first introduced by Olkkonen and Luoma-aho, 2015; empirically tested and revised by Olkkonen, 2015a;2015b). Figure 1 below depicts the Expectation Grid and opens up the differences between the positive (optimistic or hopeful), and negative (cynical or pessimistic) expectations.…”

Section: How Responsibility and Expectations Are Currently Connectedmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A conceptual foundation for expectations of corporate responsibility

Olkkonen

2017

CCIJ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -Ability to identify and meet stakeholder expectations is seen as imperative for succeeding in corporate responsibility (CR). However, the existing literature of CR communication treats expectations predominantly as positive constructions. The article addresses this positivity bias and offers insights for a more profound conceptual and empirical understanding of stakeholder expectations.Design/methodology/approach -The article presents findings from a targeted literature search and empirical illustrations from a thematic analysis of interview data with a focus on the media sector.Findings -The conceptual understanding of expectations is advanced by exploring positive (optimistic and hopeful), and negative (cynical and pessimistic) expectations. The empirical examples portray expectation analysis and how it becomes more complex when expectations turn negative.Research limitations/implications -The data is limited to one sector but implications are discussed with a wider lens to aid future studies in addressing expectations of CR with less positivity bias and, instead, with more conceptual and empirical precision. IntroductionThere is a wide-spread agreement in the literature of corporate responsibility that identifying and meeting stakeholder expectations and societal expectations is an important factor for succeeding in corporate responsibility (e.g., introductions to literature by Scherer and Palazzo, 2007;2011).More specifically, corporate responsibility is often explained as conformance to societal expectations or as anticipation of societal expectations (e.g., . Essentially, the value in fulfilling expectations of moral and ethical behavior is the trust and legitimacy it can generate (Adams et al., 2010). Trust, by definition, is based on positive expectations despite a possible risk (Lewicki et al., 1998;Rousseau et al., 1998).However, trust is not automatically generated by CR actions and by actively communicating (or Olkkonen: A conceptual foundation for expectations of corporate responsibility advertising) them-instead, efforts to communicate CR can backfire due to perceived hypocrisy, spin or lack of credibility (Waddock and Googins, 2014 Expectations as a forward-looking phenomenon are an area that can explain both the success and pitfalls of this negotiation as they set the frame for assessing CR efforts, their communication and future development. This article departs from this background.The article has a conceptual tone as it aims to investigate the details of expectations as a concept and how to approach expectations in empirical research. First, a targeted literature search in communication journals is presented to map the use of expectations in the current literature of CR communication. As will be discussed in the article, despite the wide circulation and use of expectations in the literature, the conceptual understanding of expectations tends to be narrow and biased in the sense that expectations are understood solely or, at least, predominantly as positive anticipations that ...

show abstract

Section: Olkkonen: a Conceptual Foundation For Expectations Of Corpormentioning

confidence: 99%