Corporate reputation through strategic communication of corporate social responsibility

Ajayi, Oyindamola Abiola; Mmutle, Tsietsi

doi:10.1108/ccij-02-2020-0047

Cited by 68 publications

(81 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Unlike other studies (Ajayi and Mmutle, 2020; Cho et al , 2017), current findings show that during the study period, banks predominantly used the interacting CSR communication strategy on Facebook. This suggests that banks were likely willing to subject their CSR activities to public discourse and intended to engage with stakeholders using two-way communication (Capriotti, 2011; Morsing and Schultz, 2006).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 89%

“…Second, unlike existing research (e.g. Ajayi and Mmutle, 2020; Cho et al , 2017; Cortado and Chalmeta, 2016; Etter, 2014), this study provides new evidence related to deployed CSR communication strategies, the direction of communication (one-way vs two-way) and the balance of communication (asymmetrical vs symmetrical). Despite these findings, one-sided communication continues to be the dominant model of communication between organizations and their stakeholders.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

“…Although scholars have suggested that corporations utilize bidirectional communication strategies (Capriotti, 2011; Capriotti and Moreno, 2007; Morsing and Schultz, 2006), empirical studies have shown that most corporations have not yet transitioned from one-way to two-way communication (e.g. Ajayi and Mmutle, 2020; Cho et al , 2017).…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication via social media sites: evidence from the German banking industry

Schröder

2021

CCIJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis study aims to explore how banks practice corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication on two popular social media sites (SMSs), Facebook and Twitter. Furthermore, this study examines CSR communication strategies on SMSs, including the levels of communication direction and communication balance.Design/methodology/approachData were extracted from Facebook and Twitter over a five-year period (2015–2019), and content analysis was performed. The research setting was the German banking industry.FindingsThe results indicate that the number of banks using SMSs to communicate CSR-information increased over time. Although the majority of banks’ messages were not related to CSR, the most-referenced (least-referenced) CSR-theme was “society” (“human rights”). On Facebook, banks employed an interacting CSR communication strategy more often than an informing one when communicating CSR activities; on Twitter banks used a balanced mix of communication strategies. In terms of stakeholder engagement, social media users interacted with banks more frequently on Facebook than on Twitter, and banks made efforts to engage in two-way symmetrical communication.Research limitations/implicationsAlthough the sample comprised the most relevant banks in Germany, it was limited to a single national context. Thus, the results may not be generalizable.Originality/valueThis study makes a significant contribution to the limited literature on banks’ CSR communication via SMSs, provides new empirical evidence on the use of CSR communication strategies and extends prior research on the direction and balance of communication. Recommendations are provided for banking communication practitioners.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 89%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 61%

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication via social media sites: evidence from the German banking industry

Schröder

2021

CCIJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Content analysis is a widely used method in different settings, including organizational and social studies (Duriau et al, 2007;Krippendorff, 2018;Vourvachis and Woodward, 2015). Recently, this method has been increasingly used in the research fields of business ethics, CSR, CSR-related disclosure, and corporate communication (Ajayi and Mmutle, 2020;Christ et al, 2019;Nielsen and Thomsen, 2018;Saenz and Romero, 2020;Talbot and Boiral, 2018;Verbeeten et al, 2016;Vourvachis and Woodward, 2015;Wall-Tweedie and Nguyen, 2018).…”

Section: Methodology 41 Research Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Climate change policies and carbon-related CEO compensation systems: an exploratory study of European companies

Winschel

2021

JGR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose In view of current climate change policies, this study aims to provide researchers, regulators, and business practice with the current picture of practices regarding carbon-related compensation granted to chief executive officers (CEO). To this end, it examines whether and to what extent European companies translate their carbon reduction strategies into carbon targets underlying their CEOs’ short-term and long-term compensation, what characteristics the carbon targets used commonly have in terms of their quality and time frame, and whether the carbon targets used differ among carbon-intensive, and less carbon-intensive companies. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on the stakeholder-agency theoretical perspective, this study explores the patterns of use and characteristics of carbon-related targets in CEO compensation. In this vein, a content analysis of corporate disclosure for the business years 2018 and 2019 is conducted for a European sample of 65 large listed companies from 16 countries and 11 industries. Findings The findings of this study show that albeit the trend toward new adoption, carbon-related CEO compensation systems are still uncommon. The results also reveal that carbon targets are mainly used to determine short-term compensation. Further, the findings highlight that carbon-related CEO compensation is almost equally widespread among carbon-intensive and less carbon-intensive companies. However, in terms of target quality, the study shows that carbon-intensive companies display greater heterogeneity and opacity. Originality/value By analyzing the characteristics of carbon targets and the prevalence of carbon-related CEO compensation for the first time, this study contributes to the stakeholder-agency theoretical perspective on corporate governance. In view of the European Green Deal and climate-related stakeholder demands, regulators and business practice are encouraged to recognize that carbon-related CEO compensation should gain momentum and the disclosure on this matter should become more transparent and comparable among companies and across industries.

show abstract

“…In addition, scholars have studied the impact of organizational corporate social responsibility efforts on relationship outcomes (e.g. Chen et al, 2019;Wang and Huang, 2018), as well as other indicators of public approval including reputation (Ajayi and Mmutle, 2020) and stock market value (P erez et al, 2020). However, these approaches leave decisions about whether and how to operate in the public interest mostly in the hands of organizations (Coombs and Holladay, 2011) that may engage in social responsibility or reputation management activities with little to no public input.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Legitimacy, autonomy and trust: a recipe for organizations to operate in the public interest

Wilson¹,

Knighton

2021

CCIJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis study aims to examine the effect of publics' legitimacy evaluations on Arthur W. Page's conceptualization of “reasonable freedom of action” by breaking it into two parts: (1) perceived organizational autonomy and (2) trust in the organization.Design/methodology/approachThis study conducted an online experiment using a 2 (legitimacy: low, high) × 2 (legitimacy type: institutional, actional) between-subjects design. Measured variables included perceived organizational autonomy and trust.FindingsOrganizations acting in their own self-interest while ignoring community norms and expectations were perceived to be exercising higher levels of organizational autonomy and have lower levels of trust. The interaction between legitimacy type and level had an effect on perceived organizational autonomy and trust.Research limitations/implicationsPublic's view their relationships with organizations from a perspective that prioritizes responsibility and conformity to community norms and expectations. Also, organizations have more to lose by acting in their own self-interest to resolve institutional legitimacy concerns and more to gain by handling them in a way that includes the public interest than when they are managing an actional legitimacy situation.Practical implicationsSocietal norms, values and beliefs, which may have accommodated, or even supported, an organization's approach to doing business in the past, can change over time, calling into question an organization's legitimacy and its ability to operate in the public interest. As a result, organizational leaders need the Chief Communication Officer to help them understand current societal norms, values and beliefs.Originality/valueThis study addresses a core assumption of the organization–public relationship paradigm that has not yet been studied empirically. It also expands the understanding of organizational autonomy from a public perspective and examines the effect of legitimacy on organizational autonomy and trust.

show abstract

Corporate reputation through strategic communication of corporate social responsibility

Cited by 68 publications

References 47 publications

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication via social media sites: evidence from the German banking industry

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication via social media sites: evidence from the German banking industry

Climate change policies and carbon-related CEO compensation systems: an exploratory study of European companies

Legitimacy, autonomy and trust: a recipe for organizations to operate in the public interest

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About