Searching for New Forms of Legitimacy Through Corporate Responsibility Rhetoric

被引:0
作者
Itziar Castelló
Josep M. Lozano
机构
[1] Universitat Ramon Llull,CBS Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility (cbsCSR), Copenhagen Business School and Institute for Social Innovation, ESADE Business School
[2] Universitat Ramon Llull,Institute for Social Innovation, ESADE Business School
来源
Journal of Business Ethics | 2011年 / 100卷
关键词
business and society; business ethics; Corporate Social Responsibility; discourse analysis; globalization; organizational legitimacy; rhetoric;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
This article looks into the process of searching for new forms of legitimacy among firms through corporate discourse. Through the analysis of annual sustainability reports, we have determined the existence of three types of rhetoric: (1) strategic (embedded in the scientific-economic paradigm); (2) institutional (based on the fundamental constructs of Corporate Social Responsibility theories); and (3) dialectic (which aims at improving the discursive quality between the corporations and their stakeholders). Each one of these refers to a different form of legitimacy and is based on distinct theories of the firm analyzed in this article. We claim that dialectic rhetoric seems to signal a new understanding of the firm’s role in society and a search for moral legitimation. However, this new form of rhetoric is still fairly uncommon although its use is growing. Combining theory and business examples, this article may help managers and researchers in the conceptualization of how firms make sense of their role in society and what forms of differentiation they strive for through their rhetoric strategies.
引用
收藏
页码:11 / 29
页数:18
相关论文
共 116 条
[1]  
Abrahamson E.(1996)The Information Content of the President’s Letter to Shareholders Journal of Business Finance & Accounting 23 1157-1181
[2]  
Amir E.(1994)Fools Rush in? The Institutional Context of Industry Creation Academy of Management Review 19 645-670
[3]  
Aldrich H. E.(1993)Organization as Rhetoric: Knowledge-Intensive Firms and the Struggle with Ambiguity Journal of Management Studies 30 997-1015
[4]  
Fiol C. M.(2000)Taking the Linguistic Turn in Organizational Research: Challenges, Responses, Consequences Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 36 136-158
[5]  
Alvesson M.(1998)The Stakeholder Theory and the Common Good Journal of Business Ethics 17 1093-1102
[6]  
Alvesson M.(1991)Accounting Interest and Rationality: A Communicative Relation Critical Perspectives on Accounting 2 31-58
[7]  
Karreman D.(1990)The Double-Edge of Organizational Legitimation Organization Science 1 177-194
[8]  
Argandoña A.(1989)Organizational Theories: Some Criteria for Evaluation Academy of Management Review 14 496-515
[9]  
Arrington C.(1983)Semiotics and the Study of Occupational and Organizational Cultures Administrative Science Quarterly 28 393-413
[10]  
Puxty A.(2008)Corporate Social Responsibility: A Process Model of Sensemaking Academy of Management Review 33 122-136