Over the past several decades, the corporate world has experienced a pronounced increase in focus on organizations’ ethical behaviors and responsibilities towards their environments. This is evident in the shift in focus from shareholder value (i. e. maximizing profit) to stakeholder value, where companies are striving at balancing people, planet and profit. The new tendency is a consequence of the fact that progressively more power rely with stakeholders, who demand transparency in organizational communication and expect companies to acknowledge their impact on their surroundings.
These societal expectations pressure companies to act responsible with regards to their external as well as internal environments (Du, Bhattacharya & Sen. , 2010; Issaksson & Jorgensen, 2010; Waller & Conaway, 2011) The terminology for this organizational shift is Corporate social responsibility (CSR), which Du et al. (2010) broadly define as “a commitment to improve [societal] well-being through discretionary business practices and contributions of corporate resources (p. 8).
Since its introduction in the 1950s, CSR has increasingly gained importance and influence within the corporate world and has evolved from revolving mainly around philanthropy of powerful individuals to incorporating corporate social, ethical and environmental responsibility (Waddock, 2008).
The Term Paper on Corporate responsibility
... discussed, and applied all around the world. In short, corporate responsibility aims to express the relationship of business and ... bankruptcies of the century as well as poster companies for the corporate governance and audit reforms of the Sarbanes- ... a corporation. Historically, Arthur Andersen evolved into a multiservice company of management consultants, audit services information systems and ...
Despite the rather complex categorization of the phenomena, CSR is generally perceived of as both ethical and moral correct, as well as it is an approach believed to be benefitting all stakeholders (Du et al. , 2010; Waddock, 2008,).
Waddock (2008) found that today, a major part of corporations’ assets are found in intangible assets such as goodwill, reputation, and human capita, which supports the claim that CSR approaches are important for corporate success and legitimization. Again, the power of various stakeholders is emphasized since goodwill and reputation is constituted by how stakeholders perceive an organization, i. e. how the corporate communicative tools are interpreted.
This furthermore illustrates that CSR is an important area within public relations (PR), when relating to the definition of PR as “… the process of establishing and maintaining mutually beneficial relations between an organization and [the]publics on whom it depends” (Cutliip, Center & Broom, 1995, qtd. in Hallahan, 1999, p. 207).
It should be acknowledged, though, that PR theorists and practitioners have questioned and criticized this conception of CSR as an ethically correct approach.
The arguments claim that CSR is not necessarily the optimal ethical approach as it is counteracting the goal of maximizing shareholders revenue, which is deeply rooted in the corporate paradigm (Mitra, 2011).
This leaves corporations in a dilemma where they on one hand are facing a pressure from stakeholders, who demand transparent and responsible actions, and on the other hand pressure from shareholders, who expect performance and maximized profit. The Page 5 of 42 Sanne Bruhn-Hansen Supervisor: Tomasz A. Fediuk
Corporate Social Responsibility & Starbucks BAMMC – BA Thesis May, 2012 debate continues on how businesses can balance these conflicting goals and how they should communicate to the different stakeholders in a legit manner. Stakeholder groups, such as conscious consumers, activists and investors, put major pressure on organizations to live up to the high expectations concerning CSR (Du et al. , 2010).
With the world being increasingly globalized, businesses, environments, people and profit are highly interlinked and seen in tight context.
The Business plan on Employee Engagement and CSR: TRANSACTIONAL, RELATIONAL, AND DEVELOPMENTAL APPROACHES
This article looks at the relevance of corporate social responsibility (CSR) for engaging employees, including its impact on their motivation, identity, and sense of meaning and purpose. It explores three different ways that companies engage their employees through CSR: a transactional approach, where programs are undertaken to meet the needs of employees who want to take part in the CSR efforts ...
Major organizations, with great power and influence, are targets for different behavioral accusations and their actions are being scrutinized. This puts even higher pressure on such businesses to attempt to live up to the societal expectations and sustain their organizational legitimacy (Suchman, 1995; Waddock, 2008).
Simply engaging in CSR activities is not enough though, as stakeholders’ awareness hereof is essential, but not given.
Therefore, the PR practitioners must focus on framing their messages in appropriate ways and tailor them to specific stakeholder groups, as well as consider what channels to utilize in order to accomplish this (Du et al. , 2010, Hallahan, 1999).
1. 1. Problem statement On the basis of the above mentioned, this thesis seeks to address the following problem statement: How does Starbucks communicate its CSR initiatives through its corporate website? Starbucks is interesting, in this relation, because it is a successful global company with a position as a market leader.
As a consequence, Starbucks has received a lot of attention from various stakeholder groups. Starbucks has acted on this increased pressure and is now engaged in several CSR initiatives, expressed through various communication tools on its corporate website. The aim is to analyze how Starbucks has utilized various communication tools to articulate its efforts to specific stakeholder groups, in a legit, transparent and persuasive manner. Page 6 of 42 Sanne Bruhn-Hansen Supervisor: Tomasz A. Fediuk 1. 2. Corporate Social Responsibility & Starbucks
BAMMC – BA Thesis May, 2012 Scientific method Seeing that the problem statement takes its point of departure in Starbucks as the sender of the CSR communication, and that the analysis centers on how the sender communicates its CSR initiatives through its corporate website, the relationship in focus is that between the sender (Starbucks) and the text (the corporate website).
This means that receivers’ interpretation is not the focal point in the analysis, as it is a content rather than a reception analysis.
Based on this, the scientific approach for this thesis is Schleiermacher’s methodological hermeneutics (Palmer, 1969).
The Term Paper on Csr Assignment – Starbucks
... Transparency At Starbucks, transparency is important thus they have published their CSR report as part of their broader communications efforts ... consumption by 25%. Conclusion We have studied about corporate responsibility, companies’ omnipresence in communities, in society and in our ... topics are of most significance to their stakeholders and to Starbucks itself and publish everything online. In a ...
By applying the principles of methodological hermeneutics, the aim is reconstruction of the author’s mental schemas, that is, to understand the intentions of the sender of the message. Henceforth, ontologically this approach assumes that there is only on true meaning of the text, which is ‘injected’ by the sender. On the epistemological level, this meaning can be reached through interpretation of sender’s intended meaning, which is obtained through ‘The Hermeneutic Circle’ (ibid, p. 86).
This methodology defines the process of understanding parts and relating them to the whole unit through interpretation of the grammatical dimension and the psychological dimension in order to understand the intentions of the sender (ibid, 1969).
1. 3. Delimitation The scope of the theoretical field of CSR is broad and more or less indefinable, which consequently requires certain limitations set for this thesis, in order to provide a focused analysis. More or less all concepts within the public relations discourse lack one overall definition, which makes the field even broader.
Consequently, the definitions of the various concepts in this report are not necessarily the most correct ones seen in all eyes, but they have been applied due to an evaluation of a contextual fit judged by me as author. In addition, the conclusions reached in this report must be critically viewed, as neither the process, the findings nor conclusions have been validated by peer reviews. The analysis is solely based on a case study of Starbucks’ corporate website. This leads to another limitation with regards to the material which has been analyzed.
A company can communicate its CSR initiatives through various communication channels. Hence, in order to get a comprehensive view of its communication, all channels must be included in the analysis. But due to page limitations, the focus of this report is only on Starbucks’ corporate website (USA version), which excludes advertisement, in store communication etc. , as well as evaluation of packaging and presentation of products is left out. Page 7 of 42 Sanne Bruhn-Hansen Supervisor: Tomasz A.
Fediuk Corporate Social Responsibility & Starbucks BAMMC – BA Thesis May, 2012 2. Theoretical framework The organizational environment today is constituted of multifaceted companies and organizations, which are all interdependent on each other and the environments in which they operate. This tightly bounded societal structure is conceptualized as a systems approach to organizational structure, which emphasizes that an organization must cope with constant pressure from its ever-changing environment.
The Term Paper on Evaluate the benefits for a company of practicing Corporate Social Responsibility
I certify that the attached is my own work. Material drawn from other sources has been acknowledged according to unit-specific requirements for referencing. Signature of student:________________________________ Date:__25 June 2013___ Traditionally companies focus primarily on gaining profits without regard for the community and environment. Ignoring the waste and pollution for example causes ...
Organizations influence each other in terms of expectations about performance and increasingly also about ethical correct behavior and responsible actions (Suchman, 1995).
One way companies can respond to these societal expectations is though their CSR activities and communication hereof, in order to obtain organizational legitimacy (ibid, 1995).
Suchman (1995) defines legitimacy as a “… generalized perception or assumption that the actions of an entity are desirable, proper, or appropriate within some socially constructed system of norms, values, beliefs, and definitions” (p. 574).
This illustrates the effects a CSR strategy can have on how an organization is perceived among its stakeholders, and that legitimacy not only affects stakeholders’ reactions toward an organization, but also their interpretations and opinions of it (ibid, 1995).
A CSR strategy includes both the CSR activities and equally important the CSR communication to various stakeholders, in order to increase their awareness. This is essential as stakeholders are the primary reason why companies engage in CSR to facilitate organizational legitimacy.
Furthermore, a company’s communication strategy is critical in terms of framing the CSR messages in a way that facilitates stakeholders’ interpretations in alignment with the intended message. Thus, there is a major pressure on the PR practitioners’ communication skills, as there is a lot to consider and even more at stake. Isaksson and Jorgensen (2010) stress that business ventures must understand what types of messages their website audiences give highest priority and credibility. This is a very difficult task in relation to CSR communication, primarily due to the nature of CSR as a very broad and company-sensitive phenomenon.
Du et al. (2010) explain it by comparing corporate ability-related information about products, services, innovation etc. with CSR information and state that “CSR information reveals aspects of [a company’s]corporate identity that are not only fundamental and enduring, but also often more distinctive by virtue of their disparate and idiosyncratic bases ” (p. 10).
The Essay on Introduction to Communication in Health, Social Care or Children’s and Young People’s Setting (Shc 21)
Introduction to communication in health, social care or children’s and young people’s setting (SHC 21) Assessment Criteria Outcome 1 – Understand why communication is important in the work setting 1. Identify different reasons why people communicate • People communicate so job the job can be done properly, by communicating this can also improve relationship and promote team work. At work I speak ...
This not only stresses how CSR communication is a complex matter, but also represents the risk of stakeholder-skepticism if the communication is inefficient.
All the above mentioned aspects and complications of CSR communication will be addressed in the following sections by applying theories on the given agendas. In addition, an interpretation of how these theories can be combined to comprise a comprehensive analytical tool for analyzing Starbucks’ CSR communication will be presented. Page 8 of 42 Sanne Bruhn-Hansen Supervisor: Tomasz A. Fediuk 2. 1. Corporate Social Responsibility & Starbucks BAMMC – BA Thesis May, 2012 CSR motives Before entering the discourse of effective CSR communication, it is relevant to briefly state the motives behind companies’ engagement with CSR.
To do this, the ‘Three Domain Approach’ (Schwartz and Carroll, 2003) will be applied. This approach is a refined version of Carroll’s (1991) popular ‘Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility’, which has been modified based on critical constraints identified by various theorists1. The Three Domain model (figure 1) comprises the three main responsibility areas: economic, legal and ethical. Philanthropy, which is the forth area in the original model, is no longer classified as an individual area, as it is subsumed under the ethical and/or economic domain (Schwartz & Carroll, 2003).
Figure 1 Source: Schwartz & Carroll (2003).
Corporate Social Responsibility: A Three-Domain Approach. The economic domain (motive: to be profitable) includes those activities which are intended to have either a direct or an indirect positive economic impact on the company. This can be seen in terms of maximizing shareholder value or maximizing profit. Activities with a direct impact need not be much explained as it refers to any action, which will resolve in an immediate increase in either profit or 1 Refer to Carroll (1991) citation in the reference list for an elaboration on the original version Page 9 of 42 Sanne Bruhn-Hansen Supervisor: Tomasz A. Fediuk
The Essay on Small group Is The Nature Of Communication In Social Clusters Of
Small-group is the nature of communication in social clusters of three to twelve individuals, which consists of a mixture of interpersonal communication. Patterns among members are predictable in terms of the "input-process-output" communication. Input factors exist before the group meets. Process factors occur during a meeting, and output factors result from the meeting. Interpersonal ...
Corporate Social Responsibility & Starbucks BAMMC – BA Thesis May, 2012 shareholder value. The indirect economic impact, however, is less definable. It can be activities, which improve a company’s image and then eventually lead to increased sales, or activities improving the conditions for suppliers or other members of the value-chain, which in turn increases the quality of the products/services offered by the company. There are many examples of CSR activities, which can have an indirect economic effect. In this relation, it is reasonable to argue that the motives behind CSR activities are fundamentally economic in nature.
This argument has its origin in Friedman’s (1970) theory, which centers on the claim that the social responsibility of business is to increase its profits. However, this approach is, as aforementioned, no longer enough. Several contemporary theorists agree that companies, who act based on economic interests alone, often neglect to realize the impact their operations have on stakeholders, societies, and nature and thereby damage their legitimacy (Waddock, 2008; Marrewijk, 2003; Schwartz & Carroll, 2003).
Therefore, the two other domains are important to include as well.
The legal domain (motive: to obey the law) refers to a company’s responsiveness to and compliance with legal expectations and laws about different standards. It includes both standards about waste, resources, working conditions, products, services, packaging, suppliers etc. Hence, the infrastructure of the environment in which an organization exists. These standards can be validated by various NGO’s, governments and other regulators, with whom a company cooperates. The ethical domain (motive: to sustain legitimization) submits an organization’s ethical (and social) responsibility to its environment.
This responsibility is the aggregated societal expectations from all stakeholders (external, internal, active, and passive), i. e. the ethical domain constitutes the complexity of CSR. This also explains why the economic domain is not sufficient if an organization wants to sustain its legitimacy. The motive of maximizing profit or shareholder value may always be present; however, it is vital that an organization incorporates and makes salient the ethical and legal domain in its CSR strategy as well, in order to comply with the societal expectations.
Figure 1 illustrates that the three domains are often overlapping, which is due to the interrelated nature of the concepts. An ideal CSR activity would consequently be present in the very middle where all three motives overlap. Seeing as the motives behind CSR endorsement have been presented, the focus will return to the effective CSR communication framework. Page 10 of 42 Sanne Bruhn-Hansen Supervisor: Tomasz A. Fediuk 2. 2. Corporate Social Responsibility & Starbucks BAMMC – BA Thesis May, 2012 Conceptual Framework for CSR communication Du et al.(2010) created a conceptual framework of CSR communication, which explains the factors that are likely to influence the effectiveness of a company’s CSR messages. Three overall factors constitute the framework, namely CSR communication, contingency factors and communication outcomes (Du et al. , 2010).
The different components relevant for this paper will be explained in the following, as well as an interpretation of how aspects of Hallahan’s (1999) theory of framing can be integrated, in order to create a cohesive framework for analysis.
Framing is a valuable tool for communication practitioners, as it can help shape the perspective through which the stakeholders interpret the CSR messages (Hallahan, 1999).
This is possible because framing involves practices of exclusion and inclusion of specific social actors, actions, circumstances etc. in a context, in order to guide the audience towards the intended meaning of the communication. In addition, framing can be used to emphasize essential information for specific stakeholder groups, which then tailors the communication accordingly (ibid, 1999).
2. 2. 1. CSR Communication The first part of the framework focuses on the CSR communication itself, i. e. message content and the channel(s) used to distribute the message (Du et al. , 2010).
2. 2. 1. 1. Message content The content of CSR messages should clarify the level of the company’s involvement in the CSR activity(ies) by emphasizing one or more of the following factors; commitment, impact, motives and/or fit. To support these content-specific factors, companies can take advantage of rhetorically framing of attributes and responsibility.
Companies’ commitment to the CSR activities they engage in varies greatly in duration, consistency and input. This, in turn, has an influence on stakeholders’ perception of a company’s motives and the sincerity of its efforts. Duration, for instance, can help counterwork the critique of CSR as being a ‘the flavor of the month’ fix companies only engage in to increase profit (Du et al. , 2010).
Input can also differ significantly and determine how stakeholders perceive the sincerity of the efforts, however, not necessarily based on the amount of input itself, but rather in connection with durability.
If, for instance, a company donates a relatively large one-time monetary amount to a social cause and leaves it at that, stakeholders’ suspicion is likely to intensify, seeing as input is high, but durability is low. However, if a company provides smaller amount of corporate and/or monetary resources in a long-term perspective and emphasize the impact hereof, the credibility of the motives behind increases. Consequently, stakeholders are likely to attribute positive associations to the company motives and the CSR initiatives (ibid, 2010).
This goes in alignment Page 11 of 42
Sanne Bruhn-Hansen Supervisor: Tomasz A. Fediuk Corporate Social Responsibility & Starbucks BAMMC – BA Thesis May, 2012 with the ‘Three Domain Approach’ described in section 2. 1, which suggested that a combination of motives is the optimal approach for effective CSR communication. Another approach is to emphasize the impact of the involvement, i. e. the output of the efforts. The output/benefits of CSR activities can be either a direct or an indirect consequence of the action. In addition, it can involve different stakeholder groups such as consumers, investors, environments, societies etc.
However, as Forehand and Grier (2003) argue, stakeholder skepticism is reduced if companies indicate the self-beneficial consequences regardless, as stakeholders expect such always to be present. This shows that the company strives at balancing both people, planet and profit, which increases the credibility of the communication. Furthermore, CSR communication practitioners should mainly stick to objective facts and avoid the impression of ‘bragging’. If the messages seem unrealistic in comparison with the goal of maximizing profit, the legitimacy will arguably decrease and skepticism for ulterior motives will arise (Du et al. (2010).
Finally, Du et al. (2010) stress that a CSR fit, i. e. congruence between the social issue at hand and the company’s core business, is important to communicate. This is important because stakeholders generally expect companies to support and engage with societal issues that have a logical fit with their core corporate activities. This is supported by Porter & Kramer (2002), who add that the more a social issue relates to a company’s core business, the more it also leads to economic benefits. The authors further state that social and economic goals are interconnected and not inherently conflicting – as critiques of CSR would argue.
Initiatives such as preserving the environment, securing proper working conditions and improving social and economic conditions in developing countries will create new markets for both sales and production, increase productivity and utilization of resources, as well as motivate employees to perform (Porter & Kramer, 2002).
If a company engages in CSR activities with no apparent fit, Du et al. (2010) argue the CSR messages should explain and emphasize the strategic link between the company’s business area and the social cause, and thereby reduce the risk of stakeholder skepticism.
This is what Hallahan (1999) refers to as ‘contextual cues’, which can guide stakeholders to draw inferences that go in accordance with the intended message. If there, on the other hand, is a clear fit the company should make both firm-serving and public-serving motives salient. This will comply with stakeholders’ mental schemas, as they are expecting a balance between economic and ethical/philanthropic motives and therefore will attribute these in advance (Forehand & Grier, 2003).
According to Hallahan (1999), expectations derived from people’s mental schemas can add additional meaning to a context – a mechanism referred to as ‘priming’.
This provides a tool for communication practitioners to provide contextual cues to trigger these schematic expectations and thereby guide the stakeholders’ frame of reference (ibid, 1999).
Page 12 of 42 Sanne Bruhn-Hansen Supervisor: Tomasz A. Fediuk Corporate Social Responsibility & Starbucks BAMMC – BA Thesis May, 2012 Henceforth, the two framing mechanisms, contextual cues and priming, are essential for effective communication as these facilitate the goal of framing a company’s attributes, responsibilities and actions in the CSR communication. 2. 2. 1. 2. Channel
Regarding the channel(s), through which a company chooses to communicate its CSR information, several considerations must be taken into account. Overall, companies can choose to communicate their CSR activities by utilizing either internal or external communication channels, or a combination of the two. Internal channels include official documents such as annual reports, CSR reports, news releases and other formal documents. These can be accessible in printed formats or available at a company’s corporate website and the content is completely controlled by the company (Du et al, 2010).
In addition, a company can make use of external channels such as traditional advertising in magazines, TV and radio. As advertisement is paid promotion, the company controls the content of the messages. Conversely, PR practitioners can utilize a number of channels through which the company does not entirely control the content of the messages. Such channels are typically word-of-mouth (WOM) of both internal stakeholders (employees and members of the value-chain) and external stakeholder (customers, interests groups, investors etc. ).
It can also be media coverage through independent media and various social media platforms online. The risk of using such channels is that the company cannot control how the communication is framed or if it supports the company’s reputation. On the other hand, the company does not pay these channels to communicate the messages, hence stakeholders attribute increased perceived credibility to the messages they receive (Du el al. , 2010).
Consequently, companies are faced with this bias of controllability and credibility, which they must address and attempt to balance.
As this report seeks to analyze Starbucks’ CSR communication through its corporate website, the next section will address the use of the Internet as a communication channel. The World Wide Web has become a trendy channel for corporate communication, due to its wide reach and flexibility in terms of content, target audience, accessibility, as well as its low-cost nature. It is a highly effective communication channel to improve and strengthen a company’s image, reputation and relationships with its stakeholders and a corporate website should be seen as iconic representation of the company (Esrock & Leichty, 2000).
An organization can through its corporate website tailor its communication to address multiple stakeholders simultaneously, as it can incorporate the diverse communication options including two-way communication with stakeholders (www. europa. eu; Esrock & Leichty, 2000).
Corporate websites have a broad array of audiences, including customers, employees, investors, media Page 13 of 42 Sanne Bruhn-Hansen Supervisor: Tomasz A. Fediuk Corporate Social Responsibility & Starbucks BAMMC – BA Thesis May, 2012 etc. , whom must be addressed differently. The stakeholder approach will be further elaborated in section 2. 2. 2, but the different communicative devices available through a website will be presented here. CSR reports for instance, are generally targeted at NGOs, investors, activists and such, as these stakeholders are actively seeking out information and critically evaluating the content of the communication (www. europa. eu).
Other ways of communicating on a website is through two-way communication in form of blogs, feedback and ongoing dialogue with various visitors. Social media platforms such as facebook and twitter are perfect tools for this, as well as sharing through email, RSS and feed.
These communication devices are less formal, hence proper tools for addressing employees and customers. Finally, visuals and multimedia options can be supporting CSR communication, as these can enhance user experience by enriched content and increased customization. Evidently, the importance of framing within the corporate communication discourse is significant. PR practitioners can take advantage of the somewhat manipulative nature of framing and ensure that the different audiences’ attention is drawn to essential aspects of the messages and away from others.
In this relation, however, it is important to keep in mind that one cannot not communicate, hence whatever is excluded from a CSR message might still ‘tell a story’ and trigger the mental schemas of the audience. It is particularly difficult to decide what to include and exclude, because something might be important for a specific stakeholder group, while being completely irrelevant for another (Esrock & Leichty, 2000).
This is why it is crucial to distinguish between different stakeholder groups’ needs and expectations when tailoring the communication, respectively. 2. 2. 2.
Contingency factors In addition to message content and channel, some company- and stakeholder-specific factors are likely to influence the effectiveness of the CSR communication (Du et al. , 2010).
Company-specific factors comprise corporate reputation and CSR positioning. These are very important to consider in relation to communication channel and the bias between credibility and controllability. Company-controlled channels are more likely to activate the stakeholders’ mental schemas about the company and attribute these to the interpretation of the CSR message (Du et al. , 2010).
Hence, official documents, e. g. reports on a corporate website, are ideal channels for CSR communication, in order to make the company-specific factors salient. The explanation hereof is that the mental schemas are constituted of pre-existing attributes based on e. g. memories, experiences, beliefs etc. , which stakeholders draw upon in order to interpret CSR information. Hence, if a company has a strong reputation, stakeholders will use this existing information when interpreting the CSR communication and therefore attribute positive
Page 14 of 42 Sanne Bruhn-Hansen Supervisor: Tomasz A. Fediuk Corporate Social Responsibility & Starbucks BAMMC – BA Thesis May, 2012 connotations to the company when judging its activities (Du et al. , 2010; Forehand & Grier, 2003)2. Conversely, if a company has a bad reputation it will influence stakeholders’ interpretation of the CSR communication negatively, i. e. the risk of skepticism increases. In addition to the reputation, the industry in which a company operates can also influence the effectiveness of CSR communication.
This applies especially for companies operating in ‘sin-industries’, that is, industries which by nature are bad for the environment or for consumers’ wellbeing. These include industries such as fast-food, tobacco, oil etc. (Du et al. , 2010; Morsing & Schultz, 2006).
Finally, a company’s position in the market has an influence on the communication, or more correctly what stakeholders expect of the CSR communication. Market leaders and major international and global organizations are exposed to significantly more observation and pressure from their organizational environments, because such businesses have a major impact on their surroundings.
Their actions are therefore scrutinized, henceforth transparency, as well as concern and commitment is essential (Du et al. , 2010; Marrewijk, 2003).
As touched upon previously, certain stakeholder-specific factors will also influence the effectiveness of the CSR communication, seeing as the key concept in the communication process – sender, message, context, receiver – is interpretation. All the above factors affect the effectiveness of CSR communication because they affect the way stakeholders interpret the messages and motives behind.
Henceforth, stakeholder type and their motivation to process the CSR information will naturally influence their mental schemas and thereby their reading of the messages3. These factors are more or less external to the company, which increases the complexity of CSR communication even further. Preble (2005) provided the following definition of a stakeholder “… any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the achievement of the organization’s objectives” (p. 409), which highlights the need for dividing stakeholders into smaller groups in order to optimize the CSR communication.
Stakeholders include customers (local, national and/or global), employees, members of the value-chain, non-governmental organizations (NGO’s), investors, media, local communities, activists and so forth. They differ in terms of their expectations of the company and its services, their information needs, their engagement in the company’s activities etc. As a consequence, they also respond differently to various communication channels, as well as the content and framing of the messages. In addition, the threshold of organizational legitimacy is equally dependent on 2
Recognizing that this may be interpreted as being controversial in relation to the scientific approach for this thesis, it is included due to the fact that it is essential to know how different stakeholders approach CSR communication in order to frame it accordingly. This does not change the focus from the relationship between the text and the sender, but merely stresses the importance of keeping the receiver in mind, when creating the CSR messages. 3 Same as the above footnote Page 15 of 42 Sanne Bruhn-Hansen Supervisor: Tomasz A. Fediuk Corporate Social Responsibility & Starbucks BAMMC – BA Thesis
May, 2012 whether the company is dealing with an active or passive stakeholder group (Suchman, 1995).
Therefore, it is essential that the CSR communication is tailored to stakeholders’ different interests, information needs, preferred channels and legitimacy demands (Dawkins, 2004; Suchman, 1995).
Preble (2005) divided stakeholders into three groups; primary stakeholders (shareholders, investors, employees, customers and suppliers), secondary stakeholders (media and interest groups) and public stakeholders (governments and communities), which is a broadly accepted definition of stakeholder groups.
The author suggested three additional stakeholder attributes, namely legitimacy, power and urgency, to contribute to stakeholder identification and salience4. In theory, primary stakeholders have high salience, as they possess all three attributes due to their direct influence on the company. Secondary stakeholders possess almost equally high salience due to their indirect impact on a company, as they create the societal expectations and pressure a company is facing (Preble, 2
