Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study examines 21 environmental sustainability reports from Fortune Global 500 petroleum companies to determine how competitive advantage and institutional language is used by corporations to explain their corporate social responsibility (CSR). Results suggest the environmental sustainability discourse of the world’s largest petroleum companies contains both institutional and competitive advantage language. Also, results indicate that corporations blend the two forms of CSR communication to create a comprehensive environmental CSR profile that simultaneously enhances their position within the industrial field and offers buffering protection due to intraindustry homogeneity. Competitive advantage language is used to describe the quality, scope, and innovation of their environmental CSR as superior to other companies within their industry, particularly when communicating about technology and innovations regarding conservation efforts and manufacturing processes. Institutional language is used to describe governmental regulations and laws, industry standards for CSR reporting and expenditures, and type of CSR initiatives and partnerships. Finally, the form CSR communication takes is deeply contextualized by industry and institutional pressures as well as organizational idiosyncrasies thereby challenging the universality of CSR initiatives.

Keywords

corporate social responsibility corporate communication organizational communication institutional theory

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

American Petroleum Institute. (2011, May 3). New study: U.S. oil and natural gas industry stays strong through recession. Retrieved from http://www.api.org/Newsroom/oil-industry-strong.cfm

Bae

Cameron

G. T.

(2006). Conditioning effect of prior reputation on perception of corporate giving. Public Relations Review, 32, 144-150. doi:10.1015/ j.pubrev.2006.02.007

Ballou

Heitger

D. L.

Landes

C. E.

(2006). The future of corporate sustainability reporting. Journal of Accountancy, 202(6), 65-74.

Boyd

Waymer

(2011). Organizational rhetoric: A subject of interest(s). Management Communication Quarterly, 25, 474-493. doi:10.1177/0893318911409865

Campbell

J. L.

(2007). Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32, 946-67. doi:10.5465/AMR.2007.25275684

Carroll

A. B.

(1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34, 39-48.

Central Intelligence Agency. (2009). The world factbook 2009. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html

CNNMoney. (2010). Global 500. Retrieved from http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2010/full_list/index.html

Cone. (2010). 2010 cause evolution study. Boston, MA: Author.

10.

Dacin

M. T.

(1997). Isomorphism in context: The power and prescription of institutional norms. Academy of Management Journal, 40, 46-81. doi:10.2307/257020

11.

Davies

Quirke

(2007). The impact of sector on school organizations: Institutional and market logics. Sociology of Education, 80, 66-90. doi:10.1177/ 003804070708000104

12.

DiMaggio

P. J.

Powell

W. W.

(1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147-160.

13.

Doh

J. P.

Howton

S. D.

Diegel

D. S.

(2009). Does the market respond to an endorsement of social responsibility? The role of institutions, information and legitimacy. Journal of Management, 36, 1461-1485. doi:0.1177/0149206309337896

14.

EconomyWatch. (2011, August 1). The World economic statistics and indicators (2010). Retrieved from http://www.economywatch.com/economic-statistics/country/the-World/

15.

Global Reporting Initiative. (2011, December 15). Sustainability reporting enters a new phase, experts say. Retrieved from https://www.globalreporting.org/information/news-and-press-center/Pages/Sustainability-reporting-enters-a-new-phase-say-experts.aspx

16.

Goetz

LeCompte

(1984). Ethnography and qualitative designs in education research. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

17.

Heath

R. L.

(2011). External organizational rhetoric: Bridging management and sociopolitical discourse. Management Communication Quarterly, 25, 415-435. doi:10.1177/0893318911409662

18.

Hendry

J. R.

(2006). Taking aim at business: What factors lead environmental non-governmental organizations to target particular firms? Business & Society, 45, 47-86. doi:10.1177/0007650305281849

19.

Jones

Watson

Gardner

Gallois

(2004). Organizational communication: Challenges for the new century. Journal of Communication, 54, 722-750. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2004.tb02652.x

20.

Jose

Lee

(2007). Environmental reporting of global corporations: A content analysis based on website disclosures. Journal of Business Ethics, 72, 307-321. doi:10.1007/s10551-006-9172-8

21.

Kolk

(2003). Trends in sustainability reporting by the Fortune global 250. Business Strategy and the Environment, 12, 279-291. doi:10.1002/bse.370

22.

Kurtz

(2005). Answer to four questions. Journal of Investing, 14(3), 125-139.

23.

Kurucz

E. C.

Colbert

B. A.

Wheeler

(2008). The business case for corporate social responsibility. In Crane

McWilliams

Matten

Moon

Siegel

D. S.

(Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility (pp. 83-112). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

24.

Lammers

J. C.

(2003).An institutional perspective on communicating corporate responsibility. Management Communication Quarterly, 16, 618-624. doi:10.1177/ 0893318902250642

25.

Lammers

J. C.

Barbour

J. B.

(2006).An institutional theory of organizational communication. Communication Theory, 16, 356-377. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2006.00274.x

26.

Marchand

(1998). Creating the corporate soul: The rise of public relations and corporate imagery in American big business. Berkeley: University of California Press.

27.

McWilliams

Siegel

(2011). Creating and capturing value: Strategic corporate social responsibility, resource based theory, and sustainable competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 37, 1480-1495. doi:10.1177/0149206310385696

28.

McWilliams

Siegel

D. S.

Wright

P. M.

(2006). Corporate social responsibility: Strategic implications. Journal of Management Studies, 43, 1-18. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00580.x

29.

Meyer

J. W.

Rowan

(1991). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. In Powell

W. W.

DiMaggio

P. J.

(Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 42-62). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1977)

30.

O’Connor

Shumate

(2010). An economic industry and institutional level of analysis of corporate social responsibility communication. Management Communication Quarterly, 24, 529-551. doi:10.1177/0893318909358747

31.

O’Connor

Shumate

Meister

(2008). Walk the line: Active moms define corporate social responsibility. Public Relations Review, 34, 343-350. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2008.06.005

32.

Orlitzky

Schmidt

F. L.

Rynes

S. L.

(2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta analysis. Organizational Studies, 24, 403-441. doi:10.1177/ 0170840603024003910

33.

Owen

D. L.

O’Dwyer

(2008). Corporate social responsibility: The reporting and assurance dimension. In Crane

McWilliams

Matten

Moon

Siegel

D. S.

(Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility (pp. 384-409). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

34.

Phillips

Lawrence

T. B.

Hardy

(2004). Discourse and institutions. Academy of Management Review, 29, 635-652. doi:10.5465/AMR.2004.14497617

35.

Porter

M. E.

Kramer

M. R.

(2006). Strategy & society: The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12), 78-92.

36.

Porter

M. E.

Kramer

M. R.

(2011). Creating shared value. Harvard Business Review, 89(1-2), 62-77.

37.

Rapley

(2007). Doing conversation, discourse, and document analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

38.

Reich

R. B.

(2007). Supercapitalism: The transformation of business, democracy, and everyday life. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf.

39.

Reinhardt

F. L.

(1998). Environmental product differentiation: Implications for corporate strategy. California Management Review, 49, 43-73.

40.

Rowley

Berman

(2000).A brand new brand of corporate social performance. Business & Society, 39, 397-418. doi:10.1177/000765030003900404

41.

Scott

W. R.

(2001). Institutions and organizations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

42.

Shumate

O’Connor

(2010). Corporate reporting of cross-sector alliances: The portfolio of NGO partners communicated on corporate websites. Communication Monographs, 77, 207-230. doi:10.1080/03637751003758201

43.

Smith

A. D.

(2007). Making the case for the competitive advantage of corporate social responsibility. Business Strategy Series, 8, 186-195. doi:10.1108/ 17515630710684187

44.

Sorsa

V. P.

(2008). How to explain socially responsible corporate actions institutionally: Theoretical and methodological critique. Electronic Journal of Business Ethics and Organizational Studies, 13, 32-41. Retrieved from http://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:jyu-201010052927

45.

U.S. Department of Energy. (2011, February 8). Oil and natural gas environmental solutions program. Retrieved from http://www.fossil.energy.gov/programs/oilgas/environment/index.html

46.

U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2011, March 8). Short-term energy outlook. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. Retrieved from http://www.eia.doe.gov/steo/#Global_Crude_Oil_And_Liquid_Fuels

47.

van den Hoonard

W. C.

(1997). Working with sensitizing concepts: Analytical field research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

48.

Verboven

(2011). Communicating CSR and business identity in the chemical industry through mission slogans. Business Communication Quarterly, 74, 415-431. doi:10.1177/1080569911424485

49.

Vilanova

Lozano

J. M.

Arenas

(2009). Exploring the nature of the relationship between CSR and competitiveness. Journal of Business Ethics, 87, 57-69. doi:10.1007/s10551-008-9812-2

50.

Vogel

(2005). The market for virtue: The potential and limits of corporate social responsibility. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

51.

Weber

Marley

K. A.

(2010). In search of stakeholder salience: Exploring corporate social and sustainability reports. Business & Society. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0007650309353061

52.

Zyglidopoulos

Z. C.

Georgiadis

A. P.

Carroll

Siegel

D. S.

(2009). The evolution of corporate social performance and the role of media visibility. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1514385

Black Gold,Green Earth

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References