Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Rhetorical Construction of Narcissistic CSR Orientation

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

Abstract

This paper takes a critical perspective on corporate social responsibility (CSR) and examines the ways in which an industry organization discursively manages the relationship between the industry and its stakeholders in a situation where the legitimacy of the industry is called into question. Drawing on the literature on organizational narcissism and sensemaking the paper develops the construct of narcissistic CSR orientation and empirically elaborates on three defensive rhetorical strategies through which the organization makes sense of the accountability and responsibility of the industry for the negative societal effects of their business. The paper advances knowledge in the field of critical CSR by proposing a new framework for critically examining organization-stakeholder relationships and organizational responses to stakeholder demands in contexts where the interests of organizations are in conflict with the public good.

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

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

ABA:

American Beverage Association

CSPI:

Center for Science in the Public Interest

CSR:

Corporate Social Responsibility

WHO:

World Health Organization

References

  • Agle, B., Donaldson, T., Freeman, R. E., Jensen, M. C., Mitchell, R., & Wood, D. (2008). Dialogue: Toward superior stakeholder theory. Business Ethics Quarterly, 18(2), 153–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson, M., & Deetz, S. (2000). Doing critical management research. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson, M., & Kärreman, D. (2000). Taking the linguistic turn in organizational research: Challenges, responses, consequences. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 36(2), 134–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashforth, B. E., & Gibbs, B. W. (1990). The double-edge of organizational legitimation. Organization Science, 1(2), 177–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashman, I., & Winstanley, D. (2007). For or against corporate identity? Personification and the problem of moral agency. Journal of Business Ethics, 76(1), 83–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aula, P. (2010). Social media, reputation risk and ambient publicity management. Strategy & Leadership, 38(6), 43–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, S. B. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: The good, the bad and the ugly. Critical Sociology, 34(1), 51–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, S. B. (2010). Governing the global corporation: A critical perspective. Business Ethics Quarterly, 20(2), 265–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, M. L. (2006a). Finding a working balance between competitive and communal strategies. Journal of Management Studies, 43(8), 1753–1773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, M. L. (2006b). Waves of collectivizing: A dynamic model of competition and cooperation over the life of an industry. Corporate Reputation Review, 8(4), 272–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basu, K., & Palazzo, G. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: A process model of sensemaking. Academy of Management Review, 33(1), 122–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bitzer, L. F. (1968). The rhetorical situation. Philosophy & Rhetoric, 1, 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brickson, S. L. (2005). Organizational identity orientation: Forging a link between organizational identity and organizations’ relations with stakeholders. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(4), 576–609.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brickson, S. L. (2007). Organizational identity orientation: The genesis of the role of the firm and distinct forms of social value. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 864–888.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. D. (1997). Narcissism, identity, and legitimacy. Academy of Management Review, 22(3), 643–686.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, A. D., & Starkey, K. (2000). Organizational identity and learning: A psychodynamic perspective. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 102–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cai, Y., Jo, H., & Pan, C. (2012). Doing well while doing bad? CSR in controversial industry sectors. Journal of Business Ethics, 108(4), 467–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, W. K., Reeder, G. D., Sedikides, C., & Elliot, A. J. (2000). Narcissism and comparative self-enhancement strategies. Journal of Research in Personality, 34(3), 329–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castelló, I., & Lozano, J. M. (2011). Searching for new forms of legitimacy through corporate responsibility rhetoric. Journal of Business Ethics, 100(1), 11–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, L. T., & Cheney, G. (2000). Self-absorption and self-seduction in the corporate identity game. In M. Schultz, M. J. Hatch, & M. Holten Larsen (Eds.), The expressive organization: Linking identity, reputation, and the corporate brand (pp. 256–270). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craig, R., & Amernic, J. (2011). Detecting linguistic traces of destructive narcissism at-a-distance in a CEO’s letter to shareholders. Journal of Business Ethics, 101(4), 563–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Bakker, F. G. A., & den Hond, F. (2008). Introducing the politics of stakeholder influence. Business and Society, 47(1), 8–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devinney, T. M. (2009). Is the socially responsible corporation a myth? The good, the bad, and the ugly of corporate social responsibility. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(2), 44–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doane, D. (2005). Beyond corporate social responsibility: Minnows, mammoths and markets. Futures, 37, 215–229.

  • Dorfman, L., Cheyne, A., Friedman, L. C., Wadud, A., & Gottlieb, M. (2012). Soda and tobacco industry corporate social responsibility campaigns: How do they compare? PLoS Medicine, 9, e1001241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dubois, A., & Gadde, L. E. (2002). Systematic combining: An abductive approach to case research. Journal of Business Research, 55(7), 553–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duchon, D., & Burns, M. (2008). Organizational narcissism. Organizational Dynamics, 37(4), 354–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duchon, D., & Drake, B. (2009). Organizational narcissism and virtuous behavior. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(3), 301–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edward, P., & Willmott, H. (2008). Corporate citizenship: Rise or demise of a myth? Academy of Management Review, 33(3), 771–773.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fieseler, C., Fleck, M., & Meckel, M. (2010). Corporate social responsibility in the blogosphere. Journal of Business Ethics, 91(4), 599–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, P., & Jones, M. T. (2013). The end of corporate social responsibility: Crisis and critique. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, P., Roberts, J., & Garsten, C. (2013). In search of corporate social responsibility: Introduction to special issue. Organization, 20(3), 337–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ganesh, S. (2003). Organizational narcissism: Technology, legitimacy, and identity in an Indian NGO. Management Communication Quarterly, 16(4), 558–594.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gill, A. M., & Whedbee, K. (1997). Rhetoric. In T. A. van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as structure and process: Vol. 1. Discourse studies: A multidisciplinary introduction (pp. 157–184). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gioia, D. A., & Chittipeddi, K. (1991). Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation. Strategic Management Journal, 12(6), 433–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenfield, W. M. (2004). In the name of corporate social responsibility. Business Horizons, 47(1), 19–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, M. (2007). Stakeholder engagement: Beyond the myth of corporate responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 74(4), 315–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grunig, J. E. (2009). Paradigms of global public relations in an age of digitalisation. PRism, 6(2), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heracleous, L. (2006). A tale of three discourses: The dominant, the strategic and the marginalized. Journal of Management Studies, 43(5), 2322–2380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A. J., & Hitt, M. A. (1999). Corporate political strategy formulation: A model of approach, participation, and strategy decisions. Academy of Management Review, 24(6), 825–842.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. M., Felps, W., & Bigley, G. A. (2007). Ethical theory and stakeholder-related decisions: The role of stakeholder culture. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 137–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, M. T., & Fleming, P. (2003). Unpacking complexity through critical stakeholder analysis: The case of globalization. Business and Society, 42(4), 430–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelleher, T., & Miller, B. M. (2006). Organizational blogs and the human voice: Relational strategies and relational outcomes. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 395–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ketola, T. (2008). A holistic corporate responsibility model: Integrating values, discourses and actions. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(3), 419–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, G. (2007). Narcissism and effective crisis management: A review of potential problems and pitfalls. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 15(4), 183–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotler, P., & Lee, N. (2004). Corporate social responsibility: Doing the most good for your company and your cause. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T., & Deetz, S. (2008). Critical theory and corporate social responsibility: Can/should we get beyond cynical reasoning. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D. Matten, J. Moon, & D. Siegel (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility (pp. 173–196). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindgreen, A., Maon, F., Reast, R., & Yani-De-Soriano, M. (2012). Guest editorial: Corporate social responsibility in controversial industry sectors. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(4), 393–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindorff, M., Jonson, E. P., & McGuire, L. (2012). Strategic corporate social responsibility in controversial industry sectors: The social value of harm minimisation. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(4), 457–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lubit, R. (2002). The long-term organizational impact of destructively narcissistic managers. Academy of Management Executive, 16(1), 127–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maccoby, M. (2004). Narcissistic leaders: The incredible pros, the inevitable cons. Harvard Business Review, 82(1), 92–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maitlis, S. (2005). The social processes of organizational sensemaking. Academy of Management Journal, 48(1), 21–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malik, V. S., Schulze, M. B., & Hu, F. B. (2006). Intake of sugar-sweetened beverages and weight gain: A systematic review. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 84(2), 274–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maon, F., Lindgreen, A., & Swaen, V. (2009). Designing and implementing corporate social responsibility: An integrative framework grounded in theory and practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(1), 71–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maon, F., Lindgreen, A., & Swaen, V. (2010). Organizational stages and cultural phases: A critical review and a consolidative model of corporate social responsibility development. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 20–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maon, F., Swaen, V., & Lindgreen, A. (2012). Make sense who may: Corporate social responsibility as a continuous multi-stakeholder co-construction process. In A. Lindgreen, P. Kotler, F. Maon, & J. Vanhamme (Eds.), A stakeholder approach to corporate social responsibility: Pressures, conflicts, and reconciliation (pp. 317–330). Aldershot: Gower.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matten, D. (2009). Review Essay: “It’s the politics, stupid!”: Reflections on the role of business in contemporary nonfiction. Business & Society, 48(4), 565–576. doi:10.1177/0007650309337123

  • Matten, D., Crane, A., & Chapple, W. (2003). Behind the mask: Revealing the true face of corporate citizenship. Journal of Business Ethics, 45(1–2), 109–120.

    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 

  • Morf, C. C., Weir, C., & Davidov, M. (2000). Narcissism and intrinsic motivation: The role of goal congruence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36(4), 424–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nijhof, A., & Jeurissen, R. (2006). Editorial: A sensemaking perspective on corporate social responsibility: Introduction to the special issue. Business ethics: A European review, 15(4), 316–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Higgins, E. R. E. (2010). Corporations, civil society, and stakeholders: An organizational conceptualization. Journal of Business Ethics, 94(2), 157–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ogden, C. L., Carroll, M. D., Kit, B. K. & Flegal, K. M. (2012). Prevalence of obesity in the United States, 2009-2010. NCHS Data Brief No. 82. National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville, MD.

  • Palazzo, G., & Richter, U. (2005). CSR business as usual? The case of the tobacco industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 61(4), 387–401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, N., & Oswick, C. (2012). Organizational discourse: Domains, debates, and directions. The Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 435–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J. (2003). The manufacture of corporate social responsibility: Constructing corporate sensibility. Organization, 10(2), 249–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, S. A., & Pittinsky, T. L. (2006). Narcissistic leadership. The Leadership Quarterly, 17(6), 617–633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rouleau, L. (2005). Micro-practices of strategic sensemaking and sensegiving: How middle managers interpret and sell change every day. Journal of Management Studies, 42(7), 1144–1413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, A. G., Palazzo, G., & Matten, D. (2009). Introduction to the special issue: Globalization as a challenge for business responsibilities. Business Ethics Quarterly, 19(3), 327–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, S. P. (1979). A conceptual framework for environmental analysis of social issues and evaluation of business response patterns. Academy of Management Review, 4(1), 63–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sip & Savor (2013), American Beverage Association blog. http://www.ameribev.org/blog/.

  • Stein, M. (2003). Unbounded irrationality: Risk and organizational narcissism at Long Term Capital Management. Human Relations, 56(5), 523–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suddaby, R., & Greenwood, R. (2005). Rhetoric strategies of legitimacy. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(1), 35–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland Rahman, S., Waddock, S., Andriof, J., & Husted, B. (2003). Introduction. In J. Andriof, S. Waddock, B. Husted, & S. Sutherland Rahman (Eds.), Unfolding stakeholder thinking 2: Relationships, communication, reporting and performance (pp. 9–12). Sheffield: Greenleaf Publishing.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Vaara, E. (2010). Taking the linguistic turn seriously: Strategy as a multifaceted and interdiscursive phenomenon. Advances in Strategic Management, 27, 29–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vaara, E., & Tienari, J. (2008). A discursive perspective on legitimation strategies in MNC’s. Academy of Management Review, 33(4), 985–993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vartanian, L. R., Schwartz, M. B., & Brownell, K. D. (2007). Effects of soft drink consumption on nutrition and health: A systematic review and meta-analysis. American Journal of Public Health, 97(4), 667–675.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, T. J. (1995). Rhetoric, discourse and argument in organizational sense making: A reflexive tale. Organization Studies, 16(5), 805–821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E. (1995). Sense-making in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K. E., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4), 409–421.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wodak, R. (2004). Critical discourse analysis. In C. Seale, G. Gobo, J. F. Gubrium, & D. Silverman (Eds.), Qualitative research practice (pp. 197–213). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Health Organization (WHO). (2000). Obesity: preventing and managing the global epidemic. Report of a WHO Consultation (WHO Technical Report Series 894). Geneva.

  • World Health Organization (WHO) (2013). Obesity and overweight. Fact sheet No. 311. Updated March 2013. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs311/en/. Accessed 11 Sept 2013.

  • Yoon, S. and Lam, T. H. (2013). The illusion of righteousness: corporate social responsibility practices of the alcohol industry. BMC Public Health 13(1), 630. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/13/630. Accessed 28 Nov 2013.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management Studies, Aalto University School of Business, P.O. Box 21210, 00076, Aalto, Finland

    Kirsti Iivonen & Johanna Moisander

Authors
  1. Kirsti Iivonen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Johanna Moisander
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Johanna Moisander.

Additional information

We need to open up new spaces and provide new frameworks for organization-stakeholder dialogs, as well as critically examine the dynamics of the relationships between corporations, NGOs, governments, community groups and funding agencies (Banerjee 2008).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Iivonen, K., Moisander, J. Rhetorical Construction of Narcissistic CSR Orientation. J Bus Ethics 131, 649–664 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2298-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2298-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation