CSR as aspirational talk

Abstract

Most writings on corporate social responsibility (CSR) treat lack of consistency between organizational CSR talk and action as a serious problem that needs to be eliminated. In this article, we argue that differences between words and action are not necessarily a bad thing and that such discrepancies have the potential to stimulate CSR improvements. We draw on a research tradition that regards communication as performative to challenge the conventional assumption that CSR communication is essentially superficial, as opposed to CSR action. In addition, we extend notions of organizational hypocrisy to argue that aspirational CSR talk may be an important resource for social change, even when organizations do not fully live up to their aspirations.

Is Decoupling Becoming Decoupled from Institutional Theory? A Commentary on Wijen

“…Several researchers have discussed the processes through which symbolic gestures induce behavioral change and have tangible consequences, which indicates that decoupling can be regarded as a transitory phenomenon (Christensen, Morsing, & Thyssen, 2013;Haack, Schoeneborn, & Wickert, 2012;Tilcsik, 2010).…”

Sustainable Oil and Profitable Wind

“…On the one hand, a moralising public sphere could push a company like Shell even further in the direction of CSR over-communication practices (Eisenegger & Imhof 2008). On the other hand, Christensen, Morsing & Thyssen (2013) assume that "aspirational talk" has more potential to be performative when it is carried out in public. Overall, blurring lines or (de)coupling processes between public and non-public responsibility communications are key research questions that deserve greater theoretical reflection and empirical exploration.…”

“…So, what might the consequence of inverted positioning be? We assume two possibilities -either a reputational "downward spiral" (Hambrick & D´Aveni 1988) or "aspirational talk" (Christensen, Morsing & Thyssen 2013) facilitating organisational learning processes (Huzzard & Östergren 2002). A corporate "downward spiral" has been conceptualised by March (2007) as "Ibsen dilemma" and by Ashforth & Gibbs (1990) as a vicious circle induced by an "overacting actor".…”

“…A more optimistic theoretical perspective has been offered by Christensen, Morsing & Thyssen (2013) who introduced the concept of "aspirational talk" in order to better understand perceived gaps between talk and action. They argue from a CCO perspective that these gaps do not necessarily indicate organisational hypocrisy or decoupling processes.…”

Marking Their Own Homework: The Pragmatic and Moral Legitimacy of Industry Self-Regulation

“…Focusing on the rhetoric of ISR, critical theorists also ask how managers learn to talk about social issues and solutions (Green 2004). Even weak ISR can serve as ''aspirational talk'', and the beginnings of a learning process (Christensen et al 2013), offering the possibility of aligning interests and gaining pragmatic legitimacy over time.…”