Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

From Implicit to Explicit CSR in a Scandinavian Context: The Cases of HÅG and Hydro

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this article is to explain the transition from implicit CSR to explicit CSR that has taken place in Scandinavia over the last two decades. Matten and Moon’s (Academy of Management Review, 33:404–424, 2008) distinction between implicit and explicit CSR is the point of departure for the analysis, which is based on case studies of two Norwegian companies: HÅG and Hydro. On the basis of these case studies, we identify two forces that are pushing the transition from implicit to explicit CSR in Scandinavia: (1) Organizational expressiveness and (2) Re-legitimizing. Both of these measures are adjustments to the globalization of the economy, altering the competitive situation even in highly institutionalized, Scandinavian economies. HÅG, a midsized Norwegian manufacturer of office chairs, made CSR and environmental values an integral part of their expressive strategy in the early 1990s. Hydro, a big Norwegian aluminium producer, made CSR an explicit issue around the turn of the millennium, in an attempt to re-legitimize their business operations in a new market situation where plants in local communities in Norway were shut down and relocated to less regulated regimes in low-cost regions abroad.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Cf. Ihlen and Høivik (2013).

  2. At the same time, pointing beyond the frame of this article and to further research, CSR seems to be evolving in a more profound direction whose implications are yet to fully develop. Arguably, the conventional notion of CSR, emphasizing philanthropy, is less relevant in the context of globalization. Instead, what comes into focus is the idea that companies are responsible for the negative externalities emanating from the core business activities (cf. Sethi 2003, 2008; Visser 2011).

  3. Scandinavia is a geographic region consisting of the three countries: Denmark, Norway and Sweden. The term “Scandinavian” refers to the cultural and linguistic similarities of these countries, and the strong historic and socio-political bonds between them. The term “Nordic” is sometimes used synonymously with “Scandinavian”, but is actually a broader term incorporating Iceland and Finland (cf. Britannica Online: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/526461/Scandinavia (retrieved 20th November 2012).

  4. See Hagen (2009) for more on the methodology and data materials of the PhD project.

  5. The primary data sources of the Hydro case are: Hydro Annual Reports (1997–2011), Hydro (2000, 2004, 2007), Reiten (2007).

  6. BIBSYS ASK, the search engine of the Norwegian university and college library, generated 719 references for “Norsk Hydro” (Norsk Hydro has been the name used in Norway, while internationally and after selling out fertilizing and oil and gas, Hydro is the name being used. Moreover, hydro is a concept that may refer to many issues and searching merely on “Hydro” would have given many irrelevant hits)—searched for 23.03.2013.

  7. Part of the analysis and quotes in this paragraph is based on Hagen (2009), as accounted for in the methodology section.

  8. Dagens Næringsliv 21.11.2011.

References

  • Andersen, K. G. (2005). Flaggskip i fremmed eie. Hydro 1905–1945 [Flagship in foreign hands. Hydro 1905–1945]. Oslo: Pax Forlag.

  • Andersen, K. G., & Yttri, G. (1997). Et forsøk verdt: Forskning og utvikling i Norsk Hydro gjennom 90 år [Worth a trial. Research and development in Hydro through 90 years]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

  • Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction. A social critique of the judgement of taste. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brun, P., & Thornam, H. (2013). Corporate Sustainability reporting. In A. Midttun (Ed.), CSR and beyond. A Nordic perspective (pp. 88–116). Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akedemisk.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunsson, N. (1989). The organization of hypocrisy. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility. Evolution of a definitional construct. Business & Society, 38(3), 268–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carson, S. G., Fet, A., & Skaar, C. (2011). A Nordic perspective of corporate social responsibility (CSR). Etikk i Praksis, 5(1), 3–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassell, C., & Symon, G. (Eds.). (2004). Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Center, A. H., & Jackson, P. (2003). Public relations practices: Managerial case studies and problems. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chapple, W., & Moon, J. (2005). Corporate social responsibility (CSR) in Asia. A seven-country study of CSR website reporting. Business & Society, 44(4), 415–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forgues, B., & Vandangeon-Derumez, I. (2001). Longitudinal analyses. In R-A. Thiétart (Ed.), Doing management research. A comprehensive guide (pp. 332–350). London: Sage.

  • Frøland, H. O., & Karlsen, A. (2008). Innledning: Globalisering gjennom et århundre. Langsiktige trekk ved norsk aluminiumsindustri [Globalization through a century. Long-term features of Norwegian aluminum industry]. In J. Henden, H. O. Frøland, & A. Karlsen (Eds.), Globalisering gjennom et århundre. Norsk aluminiumsindustri 1908–2008 (pp. 7–32). Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.

  • Gjølberg, M. (2010). Varieties of corporate social responsibility (CSR): CSR meets the “Nordic Model”. Regulation & Governance, 4(2), 203–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gummesson, E. (2000). Qualitative methods in management research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gustavsen, B. (2007). Work organization and the ‘Scandinavian Model’. Economic and Industrial Democracy, 28(4), 650–671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagen, Ø. (2002). Mot et etisk marked? [Towards an ethical market?]. In U. Forseth and B. Rasmussen (Eds.), Arbeid for livet. Oslo: Gyldendal.

  • Hagen, Ø. (2008a). Seduced by their proactive image? On using auto communication to enhance CSR. Corporate Reputation Review, 11(2), 130–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagen, Ø. (2008b). Driving environmental innovation with corporate storytelling: Is radical innovation possible without incoherence? International Journal of Innovation and Sustainable Development, 3(3/4), 217–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagen, Ø. (2009). Do socially responsible brands lead to socially responsible companies? Understanding change in expressive organizations. PhD Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim.

  • Hofstede, G., & Hofstede, G. J. (2005). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hovden, J. (1998). The ambiguity of contents and results in the Norwegian internal control of safety, health and environment reform. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 60(2), 133–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hydro. (2004). Corporate Social Responsibility—Invitation to Action. Oslo: Hydro. Retrieved April 10, 2012, from http://www.hydro.com/pagefiles/7233/CSR_en.pdf.

  • Hydro. (2007). The Hydro way—Our way of working. Retrieved April 10, 2012, from http://www.hydro.com/en/About-Hydro/The-Hydro-Way/.

  • Hydro Annual Reports. (1997–2011). Retrieved April 10, 2012, from http://www.hydro.com/en/Investor-relations/Reporting/

  • Hydro Annual Report. (2011). Hydro, Oslo.

  • HÅG Annual Report. (1993). HÅG, Oslo.

  • HÅG Annual Report. (1995). HÅG, Oslo.

  • HÅG Annual Report. (1998). HÅG, Oslo.

  • HÅG Annual Report. (2006). HÅG, Oslo.

  • Ihlen, O., & Høivik, H. (2013). Ye Olde CSR: The historic roots of corporate social responsibility in Norway. Retrieved June 05, 2013, from http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10551-013-1671-9.

  • Lie, E. (2005). Oljerikdommer og internasjonal ekspansjon. Hydro 1977–2005 [Oil wealth and international expansion. Hydro 1977–2005]. Oslo: Pax Forlag.

  • Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lunheim, R. (2005). Confessions of a corporate window dresser. Summer: Leading Perspectives.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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), 497–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). ‘Implicit’ and ‘explicit’ CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 404–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Midttun, A. (Ed.). (2013). CSR and beyond. A Nordic perspective. Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akedemisk.

    Google Scholar 

  • Midttun, A., Gautesen, K., & Gjølberg, M. (2006). The political economy of CSR in Western Europe. Corporate Governance, 6(4), 369–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Näsi, J. (1995). A Scandinavian approach to stakeholder thinking: An analysis of its theoretical and practical uses, 1964–1980. In J. Näsi (Ed.), Understanding stakeholder thinking (pp. 97–115). Helsinki: LSR-Julkaisut Oy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen, K., & Kvale, S. (2008). A qualitative stance: In memory of Steiner Kvale, 1938–2008. Aarhus: Aarhus Universitetsforlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (2008/2009). Corporate social responsibility in a global economy. Report No. 10 (2008-2009) to the Storting.

  • Reiten, E. (2007). Askeladden og den globaliserte økonomien—Hydro i endring. [Askeladden (The rising star) and the global economy—Hydro changing]. Kristofer Lehmkuhl Lecture, Norges Handelshøyskole. Retrieved April 10, 2012, from http://brage.bibsys.no/nhh/bitstream/URN:NBN:no-bibsys_brage_24761/1/Lehmkuhl_2007.pdf.

  • Rhenman, E. (1964). Foeretagsdemokrati och foeretagsorganisation [Industrial democracy and industrial management]. Stockholm: Thule.

  • Rhenman, E. (1968). Industrial democracy and industrial management. London: Tavistock.

    Google Scholar 

  • Røvik, A. (2007). Trender og Translasjoner: Ideer som former det 21. århundrets organisasjon [Trends and translations: Ideas shaping the 21st century’s organization]. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

  • Røyrvik, E. A. (2008). Directors of creation: An anthropology of capitalist conjunctures in the contemporary. PhD Thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim.

  • Sagafos, O. J. (2005). Progress of a different nature. Hydro 1905–2005. Oslo: Pax Forlag.

  • Saksvik, P. Ø., & Quinlan, M. (2003). Regulating systematic occupational health and safety management: Comparing the Norwegian and Australian experience. Industrial Relations, 58(1), 33–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scandinavian Business Seating Annual Report. (2008). Scandinavian Business Seating, Oslo.

  • Scandinavian Business Seating Annual Report. (2011). Scandinavian Business Seating, Oslo.

  • Schultz, M., Hatch, M. J., & Larsen, M. H. (2000). The expressive organization: Linking identity, reputation, and the corporate brand. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, S. P. (2003). Globalization and the good corporation: A need for proactive co-existence. Journal of Business Ethics, 43(1–2), 21–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, S. P. (2008). Defining the notion of Good Corporation in the context of globalization: A paradigm shift from corporate social responsibility to corporate social accountability. In A. Scherer & G. Palazzo (Eds.), Handbook of research on global corporate citizenship (pp. 74–98). Zurich: Edgar Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strand, R. (2009). Corporate responsibility in Scandinavian supply chains. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 179–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strand, R. (2013). The chief officer of corporate social responsibility: A study of its presence in top management teams. Journal of Business Ethics, 112(4), 721–734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tamagno, S., & Aasland, T. (Eds.). (2000). Invitasjon til dialog [Invitation to a dialogue]. Oslo: Hydro Media.

  • Tengblad, S., & Ohlsson, C. (2010). The framing of corporate social responsibility and the globalization of national business systems: A longitudinal case study. Journal of Business Ethics, 93(4), 653–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research: Analysis types and software tools. New York: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trygstad, S., & Lismoen, H. (2008). Fagbevegelsen og CSR [The trade union movement and CSR]. Oslo: Fafo.

  • Vallentin, S., & Murillo, D. (2010). Government, governance and collaborative social responsibility. In A. Tencati & L. Zsolnai (Eds.), The collaborative enterprise. Bern: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Visser, W. (2011). The age of responsibility: CSR 2.0 and the new DNA of business. West Sussex: Wiley.

  • Vogel, D. (1992). The globalization of business ethics: Why America remains distinctive. California Management Review, 35(1), 30–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, R. (1997). Business systems. In A. Sorge & M. Warner (Eds.), The IEBM handbook of organizational behaviour (pp. 173–186). London: International Thomson Business Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, R. (1998). Internationalization and varieties of capitalism: The limited effects of cross-national coordination of economic activities on the nature of business systems. Review of International Political Economy, 5(3), 445–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willums, J. (2005). Voluntary partnerships as a social asset. In A. Habisch, M. Wegner, R. Schmidpeter, & J. Jonker (Eds.), Corporate social responsibility across Europe (pp. 37–50). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research. Design and methods. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank three anonymous reviewers as well as the editors of this thematic issue on the Scandinavian Approach for their thoughtful and instructive comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript. We would also like to thank Sverre Lie for proofreading of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Philosophy, NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7491, Trondheim, Norway

    Siri Granum Carson

  2. Department of Leadership and Organizational Behaviour, BI Norwegian Business School, Oslo, Norway

    Øivind Hagen

  3. Zicklin School of Business, Baruch College, City University of New York, New York, NY, USA

    S. Prakash Sethi

Authors
  1. Siri Granum Carson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Øivind Hagen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. S. Prakash Sethi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Siri Granum Carson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Carson, S.G., Hagen, Ø. & Sethi, S.P. From Implicit to Explicit CSR in a Scandinavian Context: The Cases of HÅG and Hydro. J Bus Ethics 127, 17–31 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1791-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1791-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation