Perceptions and perspectives: corporate social ... - IngentaConnect

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1363-254X.htm

JCOM 11,4

Perceptions and perspectives: corporate social responsibility and the media

348

Ralph Tench Leeds Business School, Leeds Metropolitan University, Leeds, UK, and

Ryan Bowd and Brian Jones Leeds Metropolitan University, Leeds, UK Abstract Purpose – The purpose of this research is to develop understanding of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and the Media. It reports on differing media interpretations, perceptions and perspectives of CSR and how they are prone to shift and change in part depending on the perceived definition and issue(s) discussed. Design/methodology/approach – The article reports on primary research findings that constitute a baseline study from which intra- and inter-national comparative analysis of CSR and the media might in future studies be progressed. Qualitative and quantitative data are used to gain insight to competing definitions and definitional components of CSR. Findings – The media view organisations’ engagement with CSR through one or more of five possible orientations: Conformist, Cynic, Realist, Optimist and Strategic Idealist. These theoretical constructs are explained and their utility and usefulness as tools of practical analysis explored through application. Despite being open to positive news coverage media reports of CSR issues are largely negative in tone and the tension inherent to the Corporate Social Irresponsibility (CSI) and CSR dualism is alluded to. Originality/value – Exploring how the media interprets and understands CSR the article will be of interest and relevance to public relations and communication practitioners, policy makers and the academic community. Existing theoretical models, concepts and frameworks have the potential to be further developed and informed by these practice-based primary research findings. “Real-world” application has the potential to shape, guide and inform theoretical constructs. The article is set in the context of increasing media interest in CSR and the primary data whilst informing theoretical frameworks also furthers understanding of the concept from academic, business practitioner and stakeholders’ perspectives. Keywords Perception, Corporate social responsibility, Information media Paper type Research paper

Introduction

Journal of Communication Management Vol. 11 No. 4, 2007 pp. 348-370 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 1363-254X DOI 10.1108/13632540710843940

Social Responsibility is neither a fad nor an optional extra. The interest in it is reflective of a deeper change in the relationship between companies and their stakeholders. . .Healthy business requires a healthy community, and should be contributing to its creation and maintenance. The public increasingly wants to know about companies that stand behind the brands and products presented to them, and use their power to reward “good” companies and punish the “bad” ones (Lewis, 2001, p. 32).

The above statement on Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) forms part of what is an ever-increasing debate within management and communications literatures (see

Capriotti and Moreno, 2007; Golob and Bartlett, 2007; Clark, 2000) as well as within the “real world” of business and wider society (see European Commission, 2004a, 2004b; www.csr.gov.uk, 2004). In the UK, Europe and internationally, CSR has become a “buzzword” from the boardroom to the living room pushed to the fore by growing media coverage dealing with such issues as corporate governance and environmental responsibility (Jackson, 2001). High profile corporate debacles such as Enron, Marconi and WorldCom have served to focus attention on the often largely obscured world of corporate behaviour. Research examining media coverage in the UK, USA, France and Germany by international communications specialists Echo Research found that from 2000 to 2001, media coverage dealing with CSR increased by 52 per cent from 377 articles to 573 articles. From 2001 to 2002 the increase was a further 407 per cent with the numbers of articles published jumping to 2,906 (Echo Research, 2003). Media coverage of CSR has increased in tandem with the growing number of organisations communicating and thus promoting their activities in this area Arpan (2005, p. 83) notes: Organizations with positive images have been shown to be rewarded with greater perceived financial value . . . enhanced legitimacy, lower operating costs . . . greater market acceptance of new products . . . and an enhanced ability to successfully weather times of trouble . . .

Engaging in CSR is generally perceived to be a “good thing” and organisations such as the EU, British government and advocacy groups aim to generate coverage that will deliver the “reward” referred to in the opening statement. However, for most organisations communication of CSR has seen mixed results from the positive to negative and simply ambivalent; quite often it is believed that the media perceive CSR to be nothing more than a “‘greenwash’ or ‘PR fig leaf’” (Siegle, 2004). A potential cause of the negative sentiments expressed may be put down to the fact that most executives and communications professionals don’t know exactly what the media’s views, opinions and interests are with respect to CSR. Executives and communication professionals are unsure as to what the media will cover or where exactly the news story will fall on the Corporate Social Irresponsibility (CSI) – Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) spectrum (Jones et al., forthcoming 2008). Like the recent research of Evuleocha (2005) the findings add to and further develop the conceptual framework of CSR. It is suggested here that executives and communication professionals are unsure as to the ways and means by which they can best engage with media organisations about CSR. A significant amount of research into CSR orientations has been carried out by the academic and professional communities (see Carroll, 1999; Arpan, 2005; European Commission, 2004a, 2004b). However, the bulk of this research has focused on stakeholder groups such as consumers, investors and amongst others, business leaders and little work has been done in the sphere of CSR and the media. This article seeks to help redress that research imbalance. We interviewed editors, journalists, news and business reporters – in short a number of media practitioners who for the purpose of this article will collectively be called journalists. The research reported on here was undertaken by Leeds Business School, Leeds Metropolitan University in partnership with Business in the Community, Connectpoint Media and the Chartered Institute of Public Relations North West.

Perceptions and perspectives

349

JCOM 11,4

350

Before describing how the research was conducted it is important to outline the overall aims of the project which were to build understanding of: (1) The concept of CSR: . How might CSR be defined and what are the emerging opinions/trends that will continue to shape, inform and drive it as an area of corporate importance? (2) Journalists’ perceptions of CSR: . What are journalists (UK news and business) understanding and opinion of CSR? . What are their interests in relation to CSR and who do they view as the influencers of CSR? . What kind of CSR related stories will they cover and how can organisations communicate most effectively with journalists? Opinions and trends that shape, inform and drive CSR are outlined. It explores the UK news and business media’s understanding and opinion of CSR; outlines a range of orientations to the subject and from a practice based viewpoint explores typologies of CSR related stories covered by the media and looks at the means by which organisations might communicate more effectively with journalists. The research strategy was broken down into two parts; desk based secondary research and primary data collection with media practitioners. The desk based secondary research findings have been reported on elsewhere (see Jones et al., forthcoming 2008). The purpose here is to outline the primary research methods used and report on findings.

Methodology Drawing on the inductive research method a bottom up approach to theory building is adopted whereby practice-based primary research is reported on and the implications for new and existing theoretical constructs teased out. The approach adopted challenges top down grand theoretical (for a discussion of grand theory see Mills, 1959) models characterised in part by the deductive research method, where real world practice is interpreted through theory as opposed to the context in and from which it operates. CSR and media stakeholders were involved throughout and this practice-based approach helped democratise the research, extend ownership of the process and increased the credibility and legitimacy of the findings. The approach adopted is very much rooted in grounded theory as espoused by Glaser and Strauss (1967). Primary research findings are not divorced from theory, for example the concept of CSR orientations outlined here emerged from synthesising and analysing the data. The two approaches very much belong to each other and are therefore not mutually exclusive. The research adopts a bottom up approach to grounded and empirically informed theory building and in so doing operates at the practical-theoretical interface.

Primary research This article helps to unravel, explore and explain the relationship between CSR and the media. It is primary research based and reports on media perceptions and understandings of CSR. The grounded empirical research utilises both qualitative and quantitative data. The quantitative data is statistically reliable and verifiable and is used to identify patterns and trends. The qualitative data is subjectively rich and has textual depth. Direct quotes from respondents are used to illustrate themes and points of issue. The research was carried out over a period of 6 months from July to December 2005. The primary data was gathered in November and December 2005. Qualitative and quantitative research was conducted as detailed below:


351

Quantitative Quantitative data was collected from a database of media practitioners (compiled using a media database). These practitioners were potentially news and business editors, reporters, journalists and correspondents from all of the UK national, regional and local newspapers and national and regional UK business magazines along with a representative sample of radio and television. Additionally some personal contacts of the research team were sent the questionnaire directly. A pilot survey was conducted to test the questionnaire for its validity and reliability. The questionnaire was hosted on an Internet site and the majority of respondents were able to access and return the questionnaire easily. There were some instances where the respondents had older or incompatible software/hardware. In these cases questionnaires were distributed and returned in hard copy. The target population (media practitioners i.e. journalists and reporters) for the research is notoriously difficult to research as it receives a large amount of correspondence on a daily or even hourly basis. As such the response of 72 completed and useable questionnaires is considered high by the research team and has enabled good quality analysis using descriptive statistics managed through the SPSS data management software (see Table I). Qualitative Qualitative data was collected to add a greater depth, richness and accuracy of data. This took two forms, responses on the questionnaire and some face-to-face interviews with journalists. Themes for the interviews were based on the issues emerging from the analysed questionnaire data. Selective direct quotes are used here in part to tell the story of issues surrounding CSR and the media as experienced by those involved. The account given is therefore in part subjective and gives access to the life-world (Schutz and Luckman, 1974) of journalists, their views, perceptions and perspectives. Using the words of those spoken to in the course of the research to construct and tell a story as Total responses Useable responses Total distribution of questionnaires Responses rate (%) Useable response rate (%)

75 72 550 4 13

Table I. Response rates

JCOM 11,4

352

experienced by those on the ground is an accepted and legitimate research tool that adds textual depth and perspective to the quantitative primary research data. The subjective accounts are intertwined with and ought to be read alongside the objective statistical data. The approach adopted is a means of accessing journalists’ views and perspectives as they are conceived, constructed and experienced on the inside. The use of the words of journalists as qualitative research data is used to weave another strand of the story of CSR and the media. Respondent Information As previously mentioned the research questionnaire was distributed to 550 members of the media of which 75 were returned and 72 deemed usable. The following provides a breakdown of respondent demographics from the quantitative survey. In terms of the type of media channel that each respondent was from the sample’s composition is as shown in Figure 1. The respondents identified the media channels as having the following coverage/reach (Figure 2), with a geographic spread as follows:

Figure 1. Type of media channel for which respondents work

Figure 2. Coverage of media outlet at which respondents work

. . . . . . . . . . . .

World: 2; National: 18; Scotland: 0; Wales: 0; Northern Ireland: 0; Southeast: 10; Southwest: 2; Midlands: 9; London and home counties: 5; Northwest: 14; Northeast: 1; and Channel Islands: 0.


353

They defined themselves as holding the positions as illustrated in Figure 3. Of those who responded 71 per cent were male and 29 per cent female. A total of 70 percent of respondents covered the business “desk” whilst the remaining 30 per cent covered the news “desk”. Their outlet released news with the frequency as illustrated in Figure 4. Additionally the survey revealed that the respondents’ in 96 per cent of cases have been a member of the media for more than 3 years and in 45 per cent of cases for more than ten years. Conclusion on respondents These survey statistics show that with regards to the demographics uncovered that a good mix of media professionals working for a representative mix of media outlets with a relevant mix of national and regional coverage, encompassing the majority of the UK was attained. However, it is acknowledged that with the exception of the national media, the research lacks the opinion of media whose coverage extends beyond England.

Figure 3. Positions of respondents

JCOM 11,4

354

Figure 4. Frequency of outlet that respondents work for

Furthermore, it is believed that the research demographic can be seen to have the requisite level of expertise to make judgments on the subject, as the majority hold some form of editorial position coupled with a high level of experience. These assertions can be seen to be supported by the capture of details of the exact job title and publication the respondents work for. These are included in the lists below. Names of publications at which some respondents work: . BBC News Interactive; . BBC Radio Southwest; . BBC Television East; . BBC Television Lincolnshire; . BBC Television News (National); . BBC Television Yorkshire; . BBC World Business Report; . Insider Magazines; . Manchester Evening News; . PR Week; . Sky News; . Sunday Express; . The Express; . The Independent;

. . . . .

The Star; The Sunday Times; The Times; The Times Online; and Yorkshire Evening Post.

Actual positions of some respondents and types of media outlet: . International Radio Business Programme, Producer; . National Business Magazine, Correspondent; . National Paper, Business Correspondent; . National Paper, Deputy Business Editor; . National Paper, News Editor; . National Television, Business Correspondent; . National Television, News Correspondent; . Online News Site, Business Editor; . Regional Business Magazines, Editor; . Regional Newspaper, Business Editor; . Regional Paper (Major Centres), Business Editor; . Sunday National, Assistant Business Editor; . Sunday National, Business Editor; and . Sunday National, Deputy News Editor.

Findings CSR Orientations This article suggests a number of orientations for exploring competing definitions of CSR. The proposed orientations help to situate and set the context for the exploration and analysis of the primary research data. Five orientations to CSR are outlined: (1) conformist; (2) cynic; (3) Realist; (4) optimist; and (5) strategic idealist. The orientations emerged from an analysis of the primary and secondary data and are outlined in the list below. (1) Conformist. In the conformist orientation organisations are only involved in CSR practice because “everyone else is”. These organisations are only following the example of others in order to not be left behind and view it only as a cost,


355

JCOM 11,4 (2)

356

(3)

(4)

(5)

and one which they are not sure of or have considered the real benefits that can be achieved from the practice. Cynic. The cynical orientation perceives companies, organisations, communities, groups and individuals signing up to the CSR agenda for purely self-interested purposes and that real substantive change is limited. For the cynics CSR is a laudable cause but the motives, drivers and determinants of change are business and economic self interest and not any inherent desire to sign up to CSR for its own sake. Change is perceptual rather than substantive and is perhaps best exemplified by the “business of business is to make money” mindset. For cynics CSR is a cost, a management fad and something to be endured. Realist. Realists recognise that CSR involves self-interest, are comfortable with this and see its potential to transform business, social, economic and other practices for the better. They believe that change for the better will occur, but that it is something people need to sign up to and it is not something that can be imposed. Realists see change occurring in a stepped, incremental manner. They understand the limitations of CSR, see its potential and work within existing frameworks and constraints to further implement and develop the agenda. For realists the cost of CSR is one that has to be paid to gain improvement, whilst it is of the moment it is more than just a fad and is something to be actively engaged with. Optimist. Optimists focus on the positive benefits of CSR for themselves, their communities and their businesses. They emphasise the potential benefits of CSR and downplay though do not disregard the negatives. For opportunists CSR is not a cost but an investment and is an agenda that requires active engagement. Optimists might be driven by community, environmental or pure economic self-interest. They actively seek out opportunities to influence, act on and deliver change. Strategic idealist. Strategic Idealists seek to maximise the positive benefits and minimise the negative effects of CSR. They recognise that CSR is about the long term and do not see it as a short-term fix. CSR is an investment, requires careful and considered engagement and has wide ranging potential benefits. It is something to exploit as a force for good, be that profit, community renewal, business or personal growth.

The reflections from the literature that accommodate both the academic and practitioner perspectives have enabled the formulation of the above framework. Understanding the orientations to and motivations for engaging in CSR was instrumental in formulating the research strategy for the CSR and the media project. Delivery of the research aims required the application of a research strategy and tactics using appropriate methods and relevant methodologies. What is CSR? Within the questionnaire there was a qualitative opportunity for the respondents to define in their own words what CSR as a term meant to them. From these responses the

majority made a statement that correlated around the theme of societal responsibilities and paying something back to the communities in which the organisation operates (see qualitative quotations in the Appendix). These findings then lead into the five key components of CSR (Figure 5) that the media respondents generally had high agreement on as: (1) good corporate citizenship; (2) how organisations run their business/activities; (3) environmental practices; (4) organisations being involved in the development of their communities; and (5) operating in an ethical manner.


357

Despite these positive agreements on the key components it is still worth recognising some of the cynicism that surrounds the term from the media practitioners’ perspective. When invited for further comment about the activity, amongst others the following responses were elicited: A well meaning mode of business practice has hideously mutated into a racket for consultants and public sector do-gooders to meddle in business and add to the burden of unnecessary regulation and red tape.

Figure 5. Key components of CSR

JCOM 11,4

“Something companies now have to do to ward off criticism” – they are not doing it out of the goodness of their heart Most firms only pay lip service to CSR and do so because of legal requirements.

358

With reference to how CSR can be understood and what it means to journalists (see Appendix) many of those spoken to identify it as being related to social responsibilities and payback to the community. Summarising this point well one journalist saw it as being about, “How a business behaves in its community.” Whilst another saw it in terms of, “Playing your part, to give something back to the wider community.” Another journalist explained that CSR was “A business which builds into its ethos and strategy a recognition of its responsibilities towards the community in which it operates and in which its people live.” Other journalists emphasised the importance of ethics to the concept of CSR. One commented that it was about “A continuing commitment by business to behave ethically.” Whilst another simply stated it was about “Business having ethics.” Some saw it in a rather cynical or negative way thus corresponding with the cynic orientation discussed earlier. One journalist reported that CSR was “A vague acronym that is frequently misused.” Another commented, “In practice it’s often used as a marketing tool.” A more sophisticated explanation of this position noted that it’s about “Corporations’ efforts to demonstrate that they are good corporate citizens, trying to dispel well-founded myths that they are after profits only, i.e. ruthless when it comes to dealing with communities and the environment.” The quotes given are representative of the sample received and help flesh out the meaning of the given categories and orientations. Journalists were asked to identify ten key elements of CSR (see Figure 5). Fifty per cent of respondents agreed that CSR was about the informal contract organisations have with society. Thirty per cent thought it was about the formal contract organisations have with society. In contrast 80 per cent stated it was about organisations operating in an ethical manner. Fifty per cent agreed that it involved organisations making donations to support groups addressing social causes (philanthropy/charitable giving). Forty five per cent suggested it entailed organisations being run in a profitable manner. A large number, 85 per cent of respondents, indicated that it was about organisations being involved in the development of their communities. Even more, 90 per cent, reported it involving organisations behaving as good corporate citizens. Seventy eight per cent indicated it involved organisations addressing social issues. Eighty five per cent saw it as being about how organisations run their business activities and the same percentage reported it involving environmental practices. This conceptual analysis aids understanding of how journalists interpret and give meaning to CSR. In breaking down the term into a number of component parts the construct is given greater clarity of analysis and depth of meaning. Media opinion of what and who drives CSR in the UK Responding to which stakeholders are the key influencers on CSR the sample unsurprisingly identified big business and organisations that represent or report on them, such as the media; pressure groups, EU, CBI and the DTI (government) (see

Figure 6). Interestingly the key drivers emerging from the media practitioners’ qualitative responses were the performance of the business (profit) and organisations’ concern with consumer mobilisation against them. Less evident in the media’s perception of influencers are the small business bodies, local government and representative bodies of the employees. Respondents stated that two key drivers of CSR in the UK (see Table II) are business performance and consumer mobilisation. Those advocating business performance as a driver of CSR in the UK cited “Profit” as a key theme. Two replies are worth quoting and illustrate the point well, “Profit appears to drive British industry” and “The business will take part in CSR activities if there appears to be some sort of financial gain or if it will have a positive influence on reputation.” As for consumer mobilisation one respondent stated that it involved, “Public pressure, e.g. boycotts of goods, products and services.” Another commented that it was about “Public opinion.” Whilst another reply used the example of “Customers and customer pressure of Shell and Nestle.” Two drivers of CSR acknowledged by respondents are political and media pressures. One respondent spoke about CSR as a political issue when defining it as, “A creeping socialism that sees business as evil. Why? Because these people failed to win the argument for socialism and will not accept that capitalist democracy is the best form of political economy. Therefore they seek to carp from the margins of society.” One respondent acknowledged the issue of media


359

Figure 6. Key influencers by percentage of respondents

JCOM 11,4

Example quotes Political

360

Media pressure Business performance

Consumer mobilisation Employees Business leaders

Table II. Other key drivers of CSR in the UK?

“A creeping socialism that sees business as evil. Why? Because these people failed to win the argument for socialism and will not accept that capitalist democracy is the best form of political economy. Therefore they seek to carp from the margins of society” “A growing sense of social responsibility from TV and to a lesser extent the press” “Profit” “Profit appears to drive British industry” “The business will take part in CSR activities if there appears to be some sort of financial gain or if it will have a positive influence on reputation” “Customers and customer pressure of Shell and Nestle” “Public opinion” “Public pressure, e.g. boycotts of goods, products and services” “Employees themselves” “Lots of companies seem to go down the ‘team building’ route where staff do voluntary work . . . ” “The behaviour of key business leaders” “The business community is a bit like the pop industry, it has its gurus and idols. These are people who can drive CSR by example. If Richard Branson or Alan Leyton does it then the British business community sits up and takes notice”

Note: 20 qualitative responses received for this question

pressure as a driver of CSR when noting, “A growing sense of social responsibility from TV and to a lesser extent the press.” Some journalists thought employees and business leaders were key drivers. “Employees themselves” was how one respondent explained and accounted for what drove CSR. Elaborating further a different respondent commented that, “Lots of companies seem to go down the “team building” route where staff do voluntary work . . . ”. As to what is a key driver of CSR in the UK one respondent stated, “The behaviour of business leaders.” Another respondent went further stating, “The business community is a bit like the pop industry, it has its gurus and idols. These are people who can drive CSR by example. If Richard Branson or Alan Leyton does it then the British business community sits up and takes notice.” Journalists obviously felt their degree of influence along with that of politicians in driving and determining the CSR agenda in the UK was slight. The power of consumer mobilisation and business performance is acknowledged. Journalists perceive their role and that of politicians as being limited and it is this that makes Table II particularly interesting. Media opinion as to the level of CSR engagement in the UK Generally the results demonstrate that members of the media view organisations’ engagement with CSR from either a conformist or cynical view. Notable exceptions are the voluntary sector and Trans-national Corporations (TNCs) (see Figure 7).


361

Figure 7. Why do we think organisations engage in CSR?

Media view in general as to why organisations engage in CSR With regards to why organisations engage in CSR, the media felt that they, their organisations and the media as a whole held the following viewpoints: .

as individuals, journalists felt that organisations engage in CSR from a realist view (45 per cent);

.

in terms of their organisations, they felt the consensus view would be that they engage from a realist view (53 per cent); and

.

however, in terms of the media as a whole they felt the view would be that organisations engage as a result of a cynical view (56 per cent).

An interesting observation is the potential contradiction by the respondents. From the above it is apparent that individually they perceive organisations engaging in a realist way with CSR. However, from a collective media perspective they hold a much more cynical view of organisations and their engagement with CSR. Highest expectations of organisations sits with public sector and public companies with over 70 per cent of the respondents expecting them to behave in an ethical manner (see Figure 8). However, less than 25 per cent believe they are currently operating above the legal level. Lowest expectation is with regards to SMEs, with only 51 per cent expecting them to behave in an ethical manner (see Figure 8) although less than 11 per cent believe they are now operating above the legal level. Therefore because they hold the lowest media expectations, the SME grouping has arguably the most opportunity to benefit from any perceptual or practical improvement in their CSR activities.

JCOM 11,4

362

Figure 8. Level of engagement

Journalists’ coverage of CSR Journalists demonstrate a likelihood of covering CSR in a positive manner. However, when questioned and asked to name the “story” they most frequently cover the angle is of a negative nature (32 per cent, see Table III) and around the CSI theme. What this demonstrates is that journalists will always cover CSI but there is a latent willingness % of responses Example quotes

Table III. CSR stories that are most frequently written about

Bad practice – scandal/failures

32

Local/community angle

16

Environment (re-cycling)

13

Impact – how it is used

6

“Companies being caught with their pants down” “Bad practice” “Bad practice affecting poorer nations” “Companies who are found to be irresponsible who are in our market” “CSR failure is a better story than success . . . ” “Generally I would say only when CSR guidelines are breeched – the discovery of sweatshops in Asia that kind of thing” “Mostly negative. Where business causes harm to the wider community or more distant stakeholders” “Unmasking the hypocrisy” “Stories with a strong local angle” “Community involvement of companies” “Initiatives within the community” “Local community involvement” “Stories encouraging re-cycling – environment saving use less energy, reduce fuel bills and help environment and increase your profits” “Mainly to do with green purchasing and recycling” “How it is used as a tool” “rarely about the policies of the companies but their impact”

Note: 32 qualitative responses received for this question (Table highlights all responses made by more than a sole individual)

to cover more positive or optimistic angles on CSR as well as those points journalists felt were the key attributes of CSR. Table IV details the attributes that the respondents are likely to cover positively, negatively or not at all. Additionally opportunity exists for organisations to communicate stories to the media that they are interested in and currently don’t receive (see Table V). Sixty six percent of respondents reported they were likely to cover CSR in a positive way and the remaining 34 per cent stated they would report it negatively (see Figure 9). CSR stories most frequently written about by journalists are identified (see Table III) as those being about bad practice, scandal and failures perhaps best summed up by the Not likely to cover

Likely to cover positively

Likely to cover negatively

Organisations obeying the formal laws and regulations of society Organisations evolving to meet society’s changing expectations Organisations listening to and communicating with their stakeholders The formal contract organisations have with society The informal contract organisations have with society

Environmental practices Organisations addressing social issues Organisations being involved in the development of their communities Organisations being run in a profitable manner Organisations making donations to support groups addressing social causes (philanthropy/charitable giving)

Environmental practices Health and safety practices Commitment to quality of products and services Corporate governance practices Human Rights Organisations addressing social issues Organisations being accountable to all interested stakeholders for their activities and any impact as a result of these activities Organisations being run in a profitable manner Organisations operating in an ethical manner


363

Table IV. Likelihood of covering stories on CSR components

Example quotes Case studies (detailed and how they impact)

Cost/value of CSR

Long term programmes Strategic business decisions/choices Helping Third World or a major issue

“Case studies and how their policies and practices are making a difference” “Honest stories put into their complete context” “Interesting examples of them going the extra mile” “Wholly honest stories saying the good and the bad” “Cost of CSR to organisations” “The amount of wasted management time on these specious compliance issues” “The real benefits which organisations have discovered from CSR” “Long term programmes to sustain community relations” “Much more about decisions taken which are a clear choice between profit and benefits for the wider community” “Helping Third World countries/Fair Trade” “Pharmaceutical companies releasing drugs at onset of global pandemics”

Note: 24 responses to this qualitative question

Table V. Stories that organisations are currently not communicating in which journalists are interested

JCOM 11,4

364

quote, “Companies being caught with their pants down.” Another respondent remarked, “CSR failure is a better story than success . . . ”. One journalist defined it rather neatly when noting that CSR entailed, “Unmasking the hypocrisy.” Linking CSR with globalisation another journalist commented, “Generally, I would say only when CSR guidelines are breached – the discovery of sweatshops in Asia, that kind of thing.” Another respondent thought that CSR stories most frequently written about were, “Mostly negative. Where business causes harm to the wider community or more distant stakeholders.” Other categories of stories written about include those written from a local community angle, environment and recycling, impact and finally advice and guidance as to how it is used. “Local community involvement”, “Community involvement of companies” and “Initiatives within the community” constitutes three journalists responses to CSR stories written from a local community angle. One journalist felt CSR was “Mainly to do with green purchasing and recycling.” Whilst another respondent emphasised the importance of CSR by stressing that it is “rarely about the policies of the companies themselves but their impact”. Another pointed out that it is “How it is used as a tool.” Another journalist reported that CSR stories most frequently written about are around the need to give “General advice on how to be more socially responsible.” The quotes given help illustrate the general themes and categories. Table IV identifies CSR stories that journalists are likely to cover positively, negatively and those that are not likely to be covered. Table IV is largely selfexplanatory and serves as a useful indicator of CSR stories likelihood of being or not being reported on. Table V gives sample quotes looking at stories around CSR not being communicated but that journalists’ are interested in reporting. Topical areas of interest include case studies, the cost and value of CSR, long-term programmes, strategic business decisions and helping the Third World (see Figure 9).

Communication with the media on CSR Regarding organisations’ communication with the media, qualitative responses emphasised two unsurprising negatives in the approaches taken. The two points of weakness were firstly that communications were poorly targeted or inappropriate (see quote below and Table VI) and/or secondly communication was poorly written and structured (grammatically).

Figure 9. Likelihood of covering CSR in a positive manner

Too many companies highlight activities under the banner of CSR that are really just publicity stunts and photo opportunities. That damaged the reputation of CSR and makes it difficult for companies that are genuinely committed (Survey Respondent).

A number of reasons were put forward as to why communication around the issue of CSR by organisations is deemed irrelevant. The three most common reasons given by respondents are around the themes of charitable donations, badly written copy and that it’s not deemed relevant to a media audience (see Table VI). For some journalists CSR communication by organisations is deemed irrelevant due to “Badly written press releases” or “Media packs and advertising waffle.” Those that said it was not relevant to media audiences justified their claims on the following grounds, “Information not relevant to our readership”, “organisations who don’t read the paper and fail to make stories interesting to the public” and “CSR stories that aren’t relevant.” Some journalists regarded CSR communication as irrelevant because it was primarily about “Charitable donations” or it involved “emails with pictures of donations, fund raising events.”


365

Effective CSR communications In terms of what was effective and what journalists looked for in communications; well presented personal communique´s that are honest, well researched/evidenced and targeted were the attributes most frequently raised. (See quotes in Table VII for indicative evidence).

Example quotes Not relevant to media audience

Charitable donations Badly written copy

“Organisations who don’t read the paper and fail to make stories interesting to the public” “CSR stories that aren’t relevant” “Information not relevant to our readership” “Charitable donations” “emails with pictures of donations, fund raising events” “Badly written press releases” “Media packs and advertising waffle”

Table VI. Most common reason that CSR communication by organisations is deemed irrelevant

Example quotes Email Face to face

Press conference Press packs Press trips Feature ideas

“A well written email” “email communication with images attached” “emails and feature ideas” “Face to face communications of any kind” “Off the record chats” “Specific briefing by a senior director. . .and only to me, companies forget that the media is competitive too” “Press conferences” “general press packs. . . then a briefing” “Press trips/lunches” “Feature story ideas”

Note: 27 responses to this qualitative question

Table VII. To which methods are journalists most receptive?

JCOM 11,4

366

E-mail, face-to-face meetings with press/communications team and senior management and press packs were identified as journalists’ preferred communication channels. Options provided to journalists: . annual reports; . conferences; . corporate advertising; . email; . exhibitions; . face-to-face meetings communications team; . face-to-face meetings management team; . feature story submissions; . off the record conversations; . other written conversations; . over the telephone; . press conferences; . press packs; . word of mouth; and . other. Conclusions The concept of CSR This article has sought to interpret, describe and analyse the complex and dynamic nature of the relationship between CSR and the media/journalists’. Nielsen and Thomsen note: The lack of a common understanding and terminology in the area of CSR has made it difficult for organisations to develop consistent strategies for reporting on CSR in terms of genres, media, rhetorical strategies, etc. This, coupled with the jungle of discourses, which reign in the domain of CSR, have caused the communication from many organizations to be rather inconsistent (Nielsen and Thomsen, 2007, p. 25).

The changing shape and form of CSR, together with inconsistent organizational communication on the subject, allied with a range of journalists’ understandings and misunderstandings of the term make for a shifting landscape of perceptions and perspectives. Journalists’ act as a lens of interpretation for society as a whole and the fact there is confusion and uncertainty as to what and how to report CSR issues suggests the CSR story is open to misreporting and misrepresentation. The misrepresentation and misreporting is likely to be unintentional but the consequences for the parties affected can be serious. Arpan (2005, pp. 83-4) notes: . . .organizations that attempt to avoid crises or organizational transgressions have been shown to have higher stock values over the long run than organizations that operate illegally or irresponsibly . . . Additionally, organizations with proactive environmental policies and

positive social performance ratings tend to be more attractive to potential employees . . . and firms with well known affirmative action policies have been associated with higher stock prices . . . Conversely, organizations embroiled in crises have been subject to lower stock prices, decreases in short-term sales of products and services, increased scrutiny from media and government entities, and damage to their reputations or images . . .

To minimise the possibility of bias CSR issues need to be thoroughly researched and critically informed. To maintain stakeholder trust (for a discussion of trust and communication see Sparrow and Cooper, 2003; Welch and Jackson, 2007) organisations communicating CSR issues need to do so openly, honestly and ought to recognise that stakeholder dialogue is imperative and constructive. The following points have emerged from the primary research: (1) CSI to a CSR position is as much a perceptual as a substantive change; (2) perception of CSR is dependent on where you are in the stakeholder network; (3) it should not be forgotten that CSI can impact on and harm a company’s bottom line and it is primarily for this reason that a conspiracy of silence pervades organisations and workplace cultures where irresponsible practices exist; (4) the majority of FTSE 100 companies are keen to embrace CSR issues (www.ftse. com/ftse4good/) and of their own volition go beyond legal minimum requirements; (5) journalists perceive that companies want to do well by doing good, but also some want to do good because they believe it to be the right and proper thing to do; (6) journalists increasingly recognise that companies adopting a CSR approach can be both an ethical and profitable way to manage a business; (7) ethics and profit are not mutually exclusive terms but have a symbiotic relationship in the form of CSR; and (8) CSR can contribute to the bottom line. CSR and the media Key findings from journalists’ perspective included increased clarity of what they see as the driving forces behind CSR. They perceive these to be business outcomes (performance and profit) and the organisations that inform and advise business (i.e. CBI, BITC, DTI etc). Another important driver identified by the respondents was the consumer (reflected through their perceived power if mobilised to action). Generally the results demonstrate that journalists view organisations’ engagement with CSR from either a conformist or cynical view. Notable exceptions are the voluntary sector and TNCs (Trans National Corporations). Regarding organisations’ communication with journalists’, qualitative responses emphasised two unsurprising negatives in the approaches taken. Firstly communications were reported to be either poorly targeted or inappropriate (Table VI) and/or secondly they were poorly written and structured (grammatically). Some important findings for communications practitioners on how they can improve their practice were in terms of what was effective and what the media looked


367

JCOM 11,4

368

for in communications. This came out as well-presented personal communique´s that are honest, well researched/evidenced and targeted. E-mail, face-to-face meetings with press/communications team and senior management and press packs were identified as journalists’ preferred communication channels. Email was stated as journalists’ single preferred method when asked to highlight their overall preference. Journalists’ acknowledge a likelihood of covering CSR in a positive manner, however when asked to name the “story” they most frequently cover, the angle is of a negative nature (see Table III) and around CSI themes. What this contradiction demonstrates is that the media will always cover CSI but there is what the researchers define as a latent willingness to cover more positive or optimistic angles on CSR. This does present opportunities for organisations to: achieve coverage on desired subjects; for SME’s to put messages out relating to their CSR as the media’s expectations for them is lower than for other sectors. The five CSR orientations outlined earlier are confirmed by the analysis of journalists’ comments. That there are different positions and perceptions of CSR is in one sense inevitable given the number of stakeholders’ pursuing their respective issues and agendas. The conformist, cynic, realist, optimist and the strategic idealist orientations accurately capture the range and diversity of positions towards CSR. As a conceptual framework of analysis the CSR orientations capture the essence of CSR as it is perceived, interpreted, understood, acted out and acted upon in the course of stakeholder engagement and practice. Journalists’ reflected a range of opinion in their general comments and answers to specific questions about CSR and how it is reported. Journalists’ act as a lens of interpretation and filter news stories to the public. The processes and means by which this is done are subjective and prone to personal or political bias. The orientations reflect the fact there are a variety of lenses journalists’ use to filter in or filter out CSR stories. This is in part what makes the subject of study such a dynamic, fast moving and developing issue. It is suggested that one way to progress the research reported here is to have it replicated in other national contexts to test the primary research findings and orientations to CSR. References Arpan, L.M. (2005), “Integration of information about corporate social performance”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 83-98. Capriotti, P. and Moreno, A. (2007), “Corporate citizenship and public relations: the importance and interactivity of social responsibility issues on corporate websites”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 84-91. Carroll, A. (1999), “Corporate social responsibility: evolution of a definitional construct”, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 4, pp. 268-96. Clark, C.E. (2000), “Differences between public relations and corporate social responsibility: an analysis”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 363-80. Echo Research (2003), “International Trends in CSR; ‘Giving Back’ Report on Global Markets, 2001-2002”, PowerPoint presentation for Institute of Public Relations CSR Forum. United Kingdom, Institute of Public Relations, available at: www.IPR.org.uk (accessed 21 February 2003). European Commission (2004a), ABC of the Main Instruments of Corporate Social Responsibility, European Commission, Brussels.

European Commission (2004b), European Multistakeholder Forum on CSR Final Report, 29 June. Evuleocha, S.U. (2005), “Managing indigenous relations corporate social responsibility in a new age of activism”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 10 No. 4, pp. 328-40. Glaser, B. and Strauss, A. (1967), The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research, Aldine and Atherton, Chicago, IL. Golob, U. and Bartlett, J.L. (2007), “Communicating about corporate social responsibility: a comparative study of CSR reporting in Australia and Slovenia”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 1-9. Jackson, B. (2001), Management Gurus and Management Fashions, Routledge, London. Jones, B., Bowd, R. and Tench, R. (2008), “Corporate irresponsibility and corporate social responsibility: competing realities”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal (forthcoming). Lewis, S. (2001), “Measuring corporate reputation”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 31-5. Mills, C.W. (1959), The Sociological Imagination, Oxford University Press, New York, NY. Nielsen, A.E. and Thomsen, C. (2007), “Reporting CSR – what and how to say it?”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 25-40. Schutz, A. and Luckman, T. (1974), The Structures of the Life-World, Heinemann Educational Books, London. Siegle, L. (2004), “Faking it”, Observer Monthly, 31 October, p. 61. Sparrow, P. and Cooper, C.L. (2003), The Employment Relationship, Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford. Welch, M. and Jackson, P.R. (2007), “Rethinking internal communication: a stakeholder approach”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 177-98. www.csr.gov.uk (2004), Corporate Social Responsibility, available at: www.csr.gov.uk. Further reading Bowd, R., Jones, B. and Tench, R. (2005), CSR and the Media, Summary Research Report, Leeds Metropolitan University and Connectpoint.


369

JCOM 11,4

Appendix Table AI gives a series of sample quotes from journalists addressing the question as to how CSR might be defined and understood. A number of respondents identified CSR with societal responsibilities and payback to the community whilst others identified it with ethics or with a negative/cynical orientation.

370

Example quotes Societal responsibilities/payback to the community

Ethics Negative/cynical

Table AI. What does the term CSR mean to you?

“A business which builds into its ethos and strategy a recognition of its responsibilities towards the community in which it operates and in which its people live” “Playing your part to give something back to the wider community” “How a business behaves in its community” “Business having ethics” “A continuing commitment by business to behave ethically . . . ” “A vague acronym that is frequently misused” “Corporations’ efforts to demonstrate that they are good corporate citizens, trying to dispel well-founded myths that they are after profits only, i.e. ruthless when it comes to dealing with communities and the environment” “In practice it’s often used as a marketing tool”

Note: 33 qualitative responses received for this question (that were not just the words Corporate Social Responsibility)

Corresponding author Ralph Tench can be contacted at: [email protected]

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints