Measuring Credibility Perceptions in CSR Communication: A Scale Development to Test Readers’ Perceived Credibility of CSR Reports

Abstract

Credibility is central to communication but often jeopardized by “credibility gaps.” This is especially true for communication about corporate social responsibility (CSR). To date, no tool has been available to analyze stakeholders’ credibility perceptions of CSR communication. This article presents a series of studies conducted to develop a scale to assess the perceived credibility of CSR reports, one of CSR communication’s most important tools. The scale provides a novel operationalization of credibility using validity claims of Habermas’s ideal speech situation as subdimensions. The scale development process, carried out in five studies including a literature review, a Delphi study, and three validation studies applying confirmatory factor analysis, resulted in the 16-item Perceived Credibility (PERCRED) scale. The scale shows convergent, discriminant, concurrent, and nomological validity and is the first validated measure for analyzing credibility perceptions of CSR reports.

CSR and Greenwashing: A Matter of Perception in the Search of Legitimacy

“…Nowadays, because of the increasing expectations of stakeholders, there is a high risk that corporate communication will be considered unreliable, creating a real gap in trust and legitimacy. Starting from these assumptions and based on previous research (Habermas 1984;Lock and Seele, 2017;Patten and Crampton, 2003;Cho et al, 2009;Vries et al, 2015) this work has analysed role of information disclosure in gaining legitimation and improving stakeholder perceptions.…”

“…Even if a company tries to go beyond the steps of a correct communicative process (Habermas, 1984) and uses greenwashing (e.g. Berrone et al, 2017), the message still has to be perceived by the receiver who receives the message and evaluates its credibility (Lock and Seele, 2017). Here, moreover, the risk for the company of gaining negative evaluation by stakeholders on the communication is likely to be greater because in not meeting the four validity claims, it is based not on facts and appropriateness, but on artefact, fashion, and impression management (Mahoney et al, 2013;Neu et al, 1998;Seele and Gatti, 2017).…”

“…The case of greenwashing is very interesting and complex because, in the case of misleading communication, the sender will base the entire communication on the exploitation of perception (Seele and Gatti, 2017;Suchman, 1995) in his/her role as an amplifier of credibility. If this role of perception does not work as expected, the construct of communication fails, because the four validity claims are lacking as supporting pillars (Habermas, 1984;Lock and Seele, 2017). Through misleading stakeholders, a company tries to meet the stakeholder requirement for the legitimacy of the firm in society, but not responding truthfully or completely (Claasen and Roloff, 2012).…”

“…Wagner et al, 2009;Lock and Seele, 2017). If it is true that in order to obtain legitimacy a communication must have credibility (Lock and Seele, 2017;Seele and Lock, 2015;Lock and Seele, 2016), built on the presence of all four of Habermas's principles, it is equally important to fully evaluate and consider the role of perception (in this stakeholder context) as moderator or amplifier both in achieving credibility and in obtaining legitimacy. The concept of credibility can be considered a multidimensional perception construct (Jackob, 2008).…”

Do Actions Speak Louder than Words? An Exploratory Study on CSR

“…As follows, CSR reports may misrepresent a company's record of CSR actions. Such inconsistencies have spurred the implementation of government‐regulated CSR disclosures in a growing number of countries (Lock and Seele ) to increase firm accountability.…”