International Journal of Marketing and Business Communication

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

CSR Communication through Annual Reports: To Whom, How Much and Why?


Affiliations
1 Shanti Communication School, Ahmedabad., India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


Purpose: The purpose of the paper is to understand the difference in the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) communication made by Indian and MNCs through the use of Annual Reports (ARs).

Design/Methodology/Approach: Annual reports of top 100 Information and Technology (IT) Companies operating in India bifurcated into Indian and Multinational Companies (MNCs) were analysed using content analysis and chi-square value was seen to gauge the difference in CSR communication vis-a-vis the stakeholders and their area of activity.

Findings: Indian and MNCs communicate their CSR differently to various stakeholders. Their focus of CSR activities for the same stakeholder also varies primarily because CSR communication is dependent upon the size, age, country of origin and composition of the board of the organization.

Research Limitations/implications: The study is limited to the IT sector.

Originality/Value: The paper brings out a clear picture of the CSR communication made by the IT sector, through the Annual Reports and best practices for CSR communication.


Keywords

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), Annual Reports, Information and Technology (IT) Sector
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Abbott, W. F. & Monsen, R. J. (1979). On the Measurement of Corporate Social Responsibility: Self-Reported Disclosures as a Method of Measuring Corporate Social Involvement. Academy of Management Journal, 22(3), pp. 501 - 15.

  • Adams, C. (2002). Internal Organizational Factors Infl uencing Corporate Social and Ethical Reporting - Beyond Current Theorizing. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 15(2), pp. 223 - 250.

  • Adams, C. A. & Kuasirikun, N. (2000). A Comparative Analysis of Corporate Reporting on Ethical Issuesby UK and German Chemical and Pharmaceutical Companies. European Accounting Review, 9(1), pp. 53 - 80.

  • Adams, C. A. (1999). The Nature and Process of Corporate Reporting on Ethical Issues. CIMA Research Monograph, CIMA, London.

  • Adams, C. A., Hill, W. Y. & Roberts, C. B. (1995). Environmental Employee and Ethical Reporting in Europe, ACCA Research Report No 41, ACCA, London.

  • Adams, C. A., Hill, W. Y. & Roberts, C. B. (1998). Corporate Social Reporting Practices in Western Europe: Legitimating Corporate Behavior. British Accounting Review, 30(1), pp. 1 - 21.

  • Amran, A. (2006). Corporate Social Responsibility in Malaysia: An Institutional Perspective, Ph.D. thesis, University of Malaysia.

  • Anderson, C. & Imperia, G. (1992). The Corporate Annual Report: A Photo Analysis of Male and Female Portrayals. The Journal of Business Communications, 22(2), pp. 113 - 28.

  • Andrew, B. H., Gul, F. A., Guthrie, J. E. & Teoh, H. Y. (1989). A Note on Corporate Social Disclosure Practices in Developing Countries: The Case for Malaysia and Singapore. British Accounting Review, December, pp. 371 - 376.

  • Balmer, J. M. T. (2001). Corporate Identity and the Advent of Corporate Marketing. Journal of Marketing Management, 14(8), pp. 993 - 96.

  • Balmer, J. M. T. (2001). Corporate Identity, Corporate Branding and Corporate Marketing - Seeing Through the Fog. European Journal of Marketing, 35(3 & 4), pp. 248 - 91.

  • Belkaoui, A. & Karpik, R. G. (1989). Determinants of Corporate Decision to Disclose Social Information. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 2(1), 36 - 51.

  • Bernstein, D. (1984). Company Image and Reality. Eastbourn: Reinhart and Winston.

  • Bostdorff, D. & Vibbert, S. L. (1994). Values Advocacy: Enhancing Organizational Images, Defl ecting Public Criticism and Grounding Future Arguments. Public Relations Review, 20, pp. 141 - 158.

  • Carroll, A. B. (1979). A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance. Academy of Management Review, 4(4), pp. 497 - 505.

  • Chambers, E., Chapple, W., Moon, J. & Sullivan, M. (2003). CSR in Asia: A Seven Country Study of CSR Website Reporting. ICCSR Research Paper Series, No.09-2003, Nottingham, UK: Nottingham University

  • Clarkson, M. B. (1995). A Stakeholder Framework for Analysing and Evaluating Corporate Social Performance. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), pp. 95 - 117.

  • Commission of the European Communities. (2001). Promoting a European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility. Commission of the European Communities.

  • Cornelissen, J. (2004). Corporate Communications, Theory and Practice. London: Sage.

  • Cowen, S. S., Ferreri, L. B. & Parker L. D. (1987). The Impact of Corporate Characteristics on Social Responsibility Disclosure: A Typology and Frequency Based Analysis. Accounting Organizations and Society, 12, pp. 285 - 313.

  • Dagiliene, L. (2010). The Research of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosures in Annual Reports. Engineering Economics, 21(2), pp. 197 - 204.

  • Data Quest. (2010). Retrieved November 22, 2011 from dqindia.ciol.com/dqtop20/2010/CompanyRanking/default. asp.

  • Davis, K. (1973). The Case For and Against Business Assumption of Social Responsibilities. Academy of Management Journal, 16(3), pp. 312 - 322.

  • Deegaan, C. & Gordon, B. (1996). A Study of the Environmental Disclosure Practices of Australian Corporations. Accounting and Business Research, 26(3), pp. 187 - 199.

  • Deegan, C. & Rankin, M. (1996). Do Australian Companies Report Environmental News Objectively? An Analysis of Environmental Disclosures by Firms Prosecuted Successfully by the Environmental Protection Authority. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 9(2), pp. 50 - 67.

  • Duncan, T. & Moriarty, S. (1997). Driving Brand Value: Using Integrated Marketing to Manage Profi table Stakeholder Relationship. New York: McGraw-Hill.

  • Ernst & Ernst. (1978). Social Responsibility Disclosure Surveys, Ernst and Ernst, Cleveland, O H.

  • European Communities. (2001). Promoting European Framework for Corporate Social Responsibility. Green Paper. Available at www.europa.eu.int Accessed on 20th November, 2011.

  • Fill, C. (1995). Marketing Communications: Frameworks, Theories and Applications. Hemel Hampstead: Prentice Hall.

  • Fomburn, C. (1996). Reputation: Realizing Value from the Corporate Image. Harvard Business School Press.

  • Gray, R. (2002). The Social Accounting Project and Accounting Organization and Society - Privileging Engagement Imaginings, New Accountings and Pragmatism over Critique? Accounting Organization and Society, 27, pp. 687 - 708.

  • Gray, R. H., Kouhy, R. & Lavers, S. (1995). Constructing a Research Database of Social and Environmental Reporting by UK Companies: A Methodological Note. Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal, 8(2), pp. 78 - 101.

  • Gray, R., Javad, M., Power, D. M. & Sinclair, C. D. (2003). Social and Environmental Disclosure and Corporate Characteristics: A Research Note and Extension. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 28 (3-4), pp. 327 - 356.

  • Grunig, J. E. & Repper, F. C. (1992). Strategic Management, Publics and Issues. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Guthrie, J. E. & Mathews, M. R. (1985). Corporate Social Accounting in Australasia. Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, 7, pp. 251 - 77.

  • Guthrie, J. E. & Parker, L. D. (1990). Corporate Social Disclosure Practice: A Comparative International Analysis. Advances in Public Interest Accounting, 3, pp. 159 - 75.

  • Hackston, D. & Milne, M. (1996). Some Determinants of Social and Environmental Disclosures in New Zealand Companies. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal. 9(1), pp. 77 - 108.

  • Haniffa, R. M. & Cooke, T. E. (2005). The Impact of Culture and Governance on Corporate Social Reporting. Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, 24, pp. 391 - 430.

  • Haron, H., Ibrahim, D., Ismail, I., Hoo, Q., Ali, N., Zainuddin, Y., Nasruddin, E., Said, R. & Hariri, H. (2006). Governance, Ethics and Corporate Social Responsibility of Public Listed Companies in Malaysia. A Research Report on CSR, Submitted to Institute Integrity Malaysia and IIM- MAREF Malaysia (unpublished).

  • Hines, R. D. (1988). Managing Accounting: In Communicating Reality We Construct Reality. Accounting, Organizations and Society. 19(3), pp. 251 - 61.

  • Holder, W. L., Cohen, J. R., Nath, L. & Wood, D. (2009). The Supply of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosures among U.S. Firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 84, pp. 497 - 527.

  • Holsti, O. R. (1969). Content Analysis for the Social Sciences. London: Addison Wesley.

  • Hopwood, A. G. (1996). Introduction. Accounting Organization and Society. 21(1), pp. 55 - 56.

  • Kapoor, S. & Sandhu, H. S. (2010). Does It Pay to be Socially Responsible? An Empirical Examination of the Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Financial Performance. Global Business Review, 11(2), pp. 185 - 208.

  • Khanna, V. (2004). Singapore Companies Heeding the CSR Call. The Business Times Singapore. Retrieved June 11, 2004 from Factiva Database March 20.

  • Krippendorf, K. (1980). Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology, New York, NY: Sage.

  • Kumpikaite, V. (2008). Human Resource Development in Learning Organization. Journal of Business Economics and Management. 9(1), pp. 25 - 31.

  • Lammers, J. C. & Barbour, J. B. (2006). An Institutional Theory of Organizational Communication. Communication Theory. 16, pp. 356 - 377.

  • Lanis, R. & Waller, D. S. (2009). Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure of Advertising Agencies: An Exploratory Analysis of Six Holding Companies Annual Reports. Journal of Advertising. 38(1), pp. 109 - 121.

  • Lynn, M. (1992). A Note on Corporate Social Disclosure in Hongkong. British Accounting Review, June, pp. 105 - 10.

  • Macerinskiene, I. & Vasiliauskaite, J. (2007). The Model of Evaluation of the Impact of Corporate Social Capital on the Operation of Enterprise. Inzinerine Ekonomika- Engineering Economics. 4, pp. 53 - 60.

  • Maignan, I. & Ralston, D. A. (2002). Corporate Social Responsibility in Europe and the U.S.: Insights from Businesses' Self-Presentations. Journal of International Business Studies. 33(3), pp. 497 - 514.

  • Maignan, I., Ferrell, O. C. & Hult, T. (1999). Corporate Citizenship: Cultural Antecedents and Business Benefi ts. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(4), pp. 455 - 469.

  • Mathew, M. R. (1997). Twenty-Five Years of Social and Environmental Accounting Research -Is There a Silver Jubilee to Celebrate? Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 10(4), pp. 481 - 531.

  • McIntosh, M., Leipziger, D., Jones, K. & Coleman, G. (1998). Corporate Citizenship: Successful Strategies for Responsible Companies. London: Pitman Publishing.

  • Murray, K. B. & Vogel, C. M. (1997). Using a Hierarchy of Effects Approach to Gauge the Effectiveness of Corporate Social Responsibility to Generate Goodwill towards The Firm: Financial Versus Non-Financial Impacts. Journal of Business Research, 38, pp. 141 - 159.

  • Murthy, V. (2008). Corporate Social Disclosure Practices of Top Software Firms in India. Global Business Review, 9(2), pp. 173 - 188.

  • NAA (National Association of Accountants). (1974). Accounting for Corporate Social Performance: Measurement of Costs of Social Actions. Management Accounting, September, 56, pp. 2 - 8.

  • Nambudiri, R. & Tewari, R. (2010). Corporate Social Responsibility and Organizational Commitment: The Mediation of Job Satisfaction. Paper Presented at The 24th Annual ANZAM Conference, 2010, 7th-10th December.

  • Nasscom, (2007). Catalyzing Change. New Delhi: Nasscom Foundation.

  • NASSCOM. (2009). Indian IT-BPO Industry 2009: NASSCOM Analysis' from http://www.nasscom.in/ upload/5216/IT_Industry_Factsheet-Mar_2009.pdf Retrieved November 2, 2011.

  • Ness, K. E. & Mirza, A. M. (1991). Corporate Social Disclosure: A Note on the Test of the Agency Theory. British Accounting Review, September, pp. 211 - 218.

  • Nielsen, A. & Thomsen, C. (2007). Reporting CSR - What and How to Say It? Corporate Communications, 12(1), pp. 25.

  • Niskala, M. & Pretes, M. (1995). Environmental Reporting in Finland: A Note on the Use of Annual Reports. Accounting Organizations and Society, August, pp. 457 - 68.

  • O'Riordan L. & Fairbrass J. (2008). Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): Models and Theories in Stakeholder Dialogue. Journal of Business Ethics. 83, pp. 745 - 758.

  • Phillips, N., Lawrence, T. B., & Hardy, C. (2004). Discourse and Institutions. Academy of Management Review, 29, pp. 635 - 652.

  • Raman, S. R. (2006). Corporate Social Reporting in India: A View from the Top. Global Business Review, 7, pp. 313 - 324.

  • Robb, S. S. G., Single, L. E. & Zarzeski, M. T. (2001). Non-Financial Disclosure Across Anglo-American Countries. Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, 10, pp. 71 - 83.

  • Roberts, C. B. (1990). Environmental Disclosures: A Note on Reporting Practices in Mainland Europe. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 3, pp. 62 - 71.

  • Roberts, R. W. (1992). Determinants of Social Responsibility Disclosure: An Application of Stakeholder Theory. Accounting Organizations and Society, 17, pp. 595 - 612.

  • Schlegelmilch, B. B. & Pollach, I. (2005). The Perils and Opportunities at Communicating Corporate Ethics. Journal of Marketing Management, 21(3/4), pp. 267 - 290.

  • Sethi, S. P. (1979). A Conceptual Framework for Environmental Analysis of Social Issues and Evaluation of Business Response Pattern. Academy of Management Review, 4(1), pp. 63 - 74.

  • Sharma, A. & Talwar, B. (2005). Corporate Social Responsibility: Modern Vis-a-Vis Vedic Approach. Measuring Business Excellence, 9(1), pp. 35 - 45.

  • Smaliukiene, R. (2007). Stakeholders' Impact on the Environmental Responsibility: Model Designing and Testing. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 3, pp. 213 - 223.

  • Snieska, V. & Simkunaite, I. (2009). Socio-Economic Impact of Infrastructure Investments. Inzinerine Ekonomika- Engineering Economics, 3, pp. 16 - 25.

  • Sriramesh, K., WeeNg, C., Ting, S. & Wanyin, S. (2007). Corporate Social Responsibilities and Public Relations: Perceptions and Practices in Singapore. Submitted to the 14th International Public Relations Symposium, Bled, Slovenia, July, pp. 3 - 5.

  • Stanton, P. & Stanton, J. (2002). Corporate Annual Reports: Research Perspectives Used. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 15(4), pp. 478 - 500.

  • Sveiby, K. E. (1997). The New Organizational Wealth: Managing and Measuring Knowledge-Based Assets. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

  • Theoh, H. & Thong, G. (1986). Another Look at the Corporate Social Responsibility and Reporting: An Empirical Study in a Developing Country. Malaysian Management Review, 21(3), pp. 36 - 51.

  • Tixier, M. (2003). Soft vs. Hard Approach in Communicating on CSR. Thunderbird International Business Review, Jan/Feb.

  • Trotman, K. T. & Bradley, G. W. (1981). Associations between Social Responsibility and Characteristics of Companies. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 6, pp. 355 - 62.

  • Ubius, U. & Alas, R. (2009). Organizational Culture Types as Predictors of Corporate Social Responsibility. Inzinerine Ekonomika-Engineering Economics, 1, pp. 90 - 99.

  • Unerman, J. (2000). Methodological Issues-Refl ections on Quantifi cation in Corporate Social Reporting Content Analysis. Accounting, Auditing and AccountabilityJournal, 13(5), pp. 667 - 681.

  • United Nations, (1994). Environmental Disclosures: International Survey of Corporate Reporting Practices, United Nations Economic and Social Council E/C.10/AC.3/1992/3. New York, NY.

  • Votaw, D. (1973). Genius Becomes Rare, In D. Votaw and S. P. Sethi (eds.), The Corporate Dilemma: Traditional Values versus Contemporary Problems (pp. 11 – 45). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

  • WBCSD. (1999). Corporate Social Responsibility, World Business Council for Sustainable Development.

  • WBCSD. (2002). Corporate Social Responsibility - The WBCSD’s Journey, Retrieved November 25, 2011 from http://www.wbcsd.ch/ DocRoot/10NYLirijYoHBDfl unP5/csr2002.pdf.

  • Williams, S. M. & Pei, C. H. W. (1999). Corporate Social Disclosures by Listed Companies on Their Web Sites: An International Comparison. The International Journal of Accounting, 34(3), pp. 389 - 419.

  • Wood, D. (1991) Corporate Social Performance Revisited. Academy of Management Review, 16(4), pp. 691 - 718.

  • Zamiki, F. & Hamid, A., (2004). Corporate Social Disclosure by Banks and Finance Companies: Malaysian Evidence. Corporate Ownership and Control, 1(4), pp. 118 - 30.

  • Zeghal, D. & Ahmed, S. A. (1990). Comparison of Social Responsibility Information Disclosure Media Used by Canadian Firms. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 3(1), pp. 38 - 53.

  • Zhang, Z. & Han, F. (2008). Analysis of Accounting Disclosure Model for Strengthening Corporate Social Responsibility. International Journal of Business and Management, 3(9), pp. 157 - 161.


Abstract Views: 453

PDF Views: 0




  • CSR Communication through Annual Reports: To Whom, How Much and Why?

Abstract Views: 453  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Ruchi Tewari
Shanti Communication School, Ahmedabad., India

Abstract


Purpose: The purpose of the paper is to understand the difference in the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) communication made by Indian and MNCs through the use of Annual Reports (ARs).

Design/Methodology/Approach: Annual reports of top 100 Information and Technology (IT) Companies operating in India bifurcated into Indian and Multinational Companies (MNCs) were analysed using content analysis and chi-square value was seen to gauge the difference in CSR communication vis-a-vis the stakeholders and their area of activity.

Findings: Indian and MNCs communicate their CSR differently to various stakeholders. Their focus of CSR activities for the same stakeholder also varies primarily because CSR communication is dependent upon the size, age, country of origin and composition of the board of the organization.

Research Limitations/implications: The study is limited to the IT sector.

Originality/Value: The paper brings out a clear picture of the CSR communication made by the IT sector, through the Annual Reports and best practices for CSR communication.


Keywords


Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), Annual Reports, Information and Technology (IT) Sector

References