Journal of Business Ethics 78 (1-2):47 - 64 (2008)
|Abstract||This paper examines voluntary corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting as a form of moral discourse. It explores how alternative stakeholder perspectives lead to differing perceptions of the process and content of responsible reporting. We contrast traditional stakeholder theory, which views stakeholders as external parties having a social contract with corporations, with an emerging perspective, which views interaction among corporations and constituents as relational in nature. This moves the stakeholder from an external entity to one that is integral to corporate activity. We explore how these alternative stakeholder perspectives give rise to different normative demands for stakeholder engagement, managerial processes, and communication. We discuss models of CSR reporting and accountability: EMAS, the ISO 14000 series, SA8000, AA1000, the Global Reporting Initiative, and the Copenhagen Charter. We explore how these models relate to the stakeholder philosophies and find that they are largely consistent with the traditional atomistic view but fall far short of the demands for moral engagement prescribed by a relational stakeholder perspective. Adopting a relational view requires stakeholder engagement not only in prescribing reporting requirements, but also in discourse relating to core aspects of the corporation such as mission, values, and management systems. Habermas’ theory of communicative action provides guidelines for engaging stakeholders in this moral discourse.|
|Keywords||stakeholder engagement stakeholder reporting relational stakeholder perspective corporate social responsibility Theory of Communicative Action discourse ethics|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Elsa González (2002). Defining a Post-Conventional Corporate Moral Responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics 39 (1-2):101 - 108.
Kate Grosser & Jeremy Moon (2005). Gender Mainstreaming and Corporate Social Responsibility: Reporting Workplace Issues. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 62 (4):327 - 340.
Simon Knox, Stan Maklan & Paul French (2005). Corporate Social Responsibility: Exploring Stakeholder Relationships and Programme Reporting Across Leading FTSE Companies. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 61 (1):7 - 28.
Ataur R. Belal & Robin W. Roberts (2010). Stakeholders' Perceptions of Corporate Social Reporting in Bangladesh. Journal of Business Ethics 97 (2):311 - 324.
David Hess (2007). Social Reporting and New Governance Regulation. Business Ethics Quarterly 17 (3):453-476.
David Hess (2008). The Three Pillars of Corporate Social Reporting as New Governance Regulation. Business Ethics Quarterly 18 (4):447-482.
Loke Min Foo (2007). Third Way CR and Third World CR. International Corporate Responsibility Series 3:35-53.
Loke Min Foo (unknown). Third Way CR and Third World CR: In What Way Should Responsible Corporations Serve the World? :35-53.
Andrew C. Wicks (2007). Corporate and Stakeholder Responsibility. Business Ethics Quarterly 17 (3):375-398.
Michelle Greenwood (2007). Stakeholder Engagement: Beyond the Myth of Corporate Responsibility. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 74 (4):315 - 327.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads22 ( #62,658 of 722,776 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,776 )
How can I increase my downloads?