Is Publicity Always Better than Advertising? The Role of Brand Reputation in Communicating Corporate Social Responsibility

Abstract

Previous studies on corporate social responsibility (CSR) communication suggest that firms' social initiatives should be communicated through third-party, non-corporate sources because they are perceived as unbiased and therefore reduce consumer skepticism. In this article, we extend existing research by showing that source effects in the communication of social sponsorships are contingent on the brand's pre-existing reputation. We argue that the congruence between the credibility and trustworthiness of the message source and the brand helps predict consumer responses to a social sponsorship. The results show that a noncorporate source (publicity) generates more positive brand evaluations than a corporate source (advertising) when the sponsor has a positive reputation. However, the converse effect occurs when brand reputation is low: when the sponsor has a poor reputation, a corporate source generates more positive brand evaluations than a non-corporate source. Mediation analyses show that the interaction effect between CSR information source and brand reputation can be explained by sponsorship attitude, persuasion knowledge, and perceived fit between the brand and the cause.

The mediating effect of transparency in the relationship between corporate social responsibility and corporate reputation

“…In fact, the database Web of Science reports only 35 studies on both concepts (corporate social responsibility and reputation) in the title together from 2010 to 2017, with effects in both directions. There are studies that find that prior corporate reputation has an impact on how consumers evaluate CSR Elisa Baraibar-Diez / Ladislao Luna Sotorrío activities (Lee, Chang, Kim, & Lee, 2016;Skard & Thorbjornsen, 2014) but the major stream refers to the effect of CSR on corporate reputation (Brammer & Pavelin, 2004;Eberle, Berens, & Li, 2013;Fernández Sánchez, Luna Sotorrio, & Baraibar Diez, 2015;Fombrun & Shanley, 1990;Kim, 2015;Luna & Baraibar, 2011;Melo & Garrido-Morgado, 2012;Odriozola, Martín, & Luna, 2015;Toms, 2002). That is why it is considered as a circular relationship (Olmedo, Martínez, Arcas, & Longuinos, 2012), although there are also studies from other points of view, considering reputation as a mediator between CSR and brand performance (Lai, Chiu, Yang, & Pai, 2010), financial performance (Saeidi, Sofian, Saeidi, Saeidi, & Saaeidi, 2015), or multiple stakeholder outcomes (Arikan, Kantur, Maden, & Telci, 2016).…”

Communicating Corporate Social Responsibility: re-assessment of classical theories about fit between CSR actions and corporate activities

“…CSR communications generally enjoy greater credibility when they come from sources not controlled by the company (Arthur W. Page Society, 2012;Simmons & Becker-Olsen, 2006;Skard & Thorbjørnsen, 2014;Swaen & Vanhamme, 2005), rather than from the company itself. Most members of the public distrust messages broadcast by corporate brands (Van de Ven, 2008), leading frequently to the paradox that people are more critical of companies that communicate their ethical values and good deeds than of companies that do not (Jahdi & Acikdilli, 2009).…”

How Does It Fit? Exploring the Congruence Between Organizations and Their Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Activities

“…The benefits for the organization strongly depend on the quality of the CSR communication, which is clearly emerging as a relevant research field within the CSR domain (Arvidsson 2010;Chaudhri 2014;Du et al 2010;Skard and Thorbjørnsen 2014;Van Rekom et al 2014). One major problem is that stakeholders are often unaware of the CSR activities of organizations (Beckmann 2007;Du et al 2010;Fatma and Rahman 2015;Hartmann et al 2013).…”