On the linkage between CEOs’ statements and CSR reporting: an analysis of visuals and verbal texts

Abstract

Purpose Research on corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting highlights an increasing lack of transparency in the information reported along with concerns surrounding overall reporting practices. One area that needs exploration is how chief executive officers (CEOs) convey messages in relation to CSR. This paper aims to investigate the linkage between CEO’s statements (words and images) in relation to CSR and the performativity of such communication. Design/methodology/approach The study analysed CEOs statements from five Malaysian companies contained in 2016, 2017 and 2018 standalone sustainability and annual reports. The texts and visuals are analysed by using discourse analysis. Findings The findings uncover three main discourses (economic, environmental and social) along with other discourses (achievements and recognition and challenges). The texts and images are found to be lacking in clarity and consistency and in many ways leave the stakeholders to make their own conclusions about the reported information. Originality/value The research indicates that while the leaders can be more direct to their stakeholders, however, the opportunity is not always capitalised. Overall, the analysis suggests an increasing scientism in CEOs messaging in relation to CSR as a tool to enhance perceived accountability of the business. The study also suggests avenues for improvement. This paper contributes to the emergence of different types of discourses that are being upheld by CEOs in their statements on CSR in Malaysian context. The discourses identified provide interesting insights into how CSR is perceived by the leaders.

SDGs disclosure: evidence from cruise corporations’ sustainability reporting

“…Furthermore, another linked limitation of this study concerns the lack of investigation of the internal variables (e.g. strategic governance and operational controls, sustainability control systems, CEOs’ statements or characteristics of the corporate boards), and external variables that can significantly affect the sustainability reporting of firms (Githaiga and Kosgei, 2022; Raimo et al , 2022; Effah et al , 2022; Khan and Sulaiman, 2021; Nursimloo et al , 2020; Nazari et al , 2015).…”

Does board chairperson experience matter? Examining the relationship between board attributes and human rights reporting in Kenya

“…These findings are consistent with the results of other researchers (Barako and Brown, 2008; Branco et al , 2021; García-Sánchez et al , 2019; Khan et al , 2019) indicating that diverse boards are more likely to improve human rights reporting because their diversities endows them with skills and experiences that facilitate the disclosure of human rights-related information. Khan and Sulaiman (2021) indicated that firms may communicate a picture, say of equal opportunity and gender diversity in their reports, but lacking the details and accuracy of how it has been achieved. Indeed, human rights reporting is based on high quality decisions of the board that are realized when they are diverse.…”

“…And so, there is need to incorporate human rights agenda into social responsibility policies. In this sense, the board as the highest governing organ is critical in ensuring that it integrates sustainability and human rights initiatives into its programmes and policies (Khan and Sulaiman, 2021; Rupley et al , 2012). Resource dependence theorists also places a responsibility on corporate boards in the sense that they provide important links with the external environment as well as expertise (Pfeffer and Salancik, 1978) in corporate reporting and in particular ensuring that human rights are upheld.…”

Corporate social responsibility in Vietnam: Systematic review of research and future directions

“…They proposed that contextual variation across countries such as institutional frameworks or national business system configurations may ultimately influence CSR conceptualization (CSR thinking) and CSR implementation (CSR doing). Their arguments are strongly supported by empirical CSR studies in developing countries, especially in Asia (Khan and Sulaiman, 2021;Choi et al, 2019;Dzever and Gupta, 2012;Kim et al, 2013;Yu et al, 2015). These articles not only suggest that Western values, laws and free-market conditions do not always accord with the Asian context but also show that CSR in Asia has distinctive features due to institutional constellations such as local socio-cultural values and traditions Murphy and Smolarski, 2020;Wang and Juslin, 2009), levels of economic development (Conte et al, 2020;Hong and Kim, 2017) and political system and governance (Rauf et al, 2020;Khan et al, 2018).…”