![[object Object],[object Object],ANALYZING CSR, TRANSPARENCY, AUTHENTICITY AS MYTHOS. A non-dualistic perspective](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/presentationcsrcommcsrauthenticitytransparency2-111117160356-phpapp02/85/Session-19-Schultz-1-320.jpg)
![Outline ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()
Recommandé
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Similaire à Analyzing CSR, Transparency and Authenticity from a Non-Dualistic Perspective
Similaire à Analyzing CSR, Transparency and Authenticity from a Non-Dualistic Perspective (20)
Plus de csrcomm
Plus de csrcomm (20)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
Analyzing CSR, Transparency and Authenticity from a Non-Dualistic Perspective
- 5. What is said to be going on? Functionalist Corporate Communications Normative Business Ethics
- 9. What about a descriptive perspective? Luhmann, CCO, …
- 12. What about taking a non-dualistic perspective, serious? Semantics Functions Implications
- 16. Conclusions
Notes de l'éditeur
- To summarize, management research often states a positive relation between CSR and reputation, which results in better financial performance. At the same time, the institutionalization of CSR is rationalized as strategic desire to maintain or enhance corporate reputation. CSR research in the marketing field discusses the relation between CSR and reputation especially with regard to Consumers, whereas research in Public Relations takes multiple stakeholders and media or channels of communication into account. CSR mainly as power relationship and discusses especially the political role of corporations in todays’ societies. Rooted in an objectivist tradition, its goal is to uncover the “real” agendas of corporations and depict the organization-society interface as a political arena, which is characterized by power struggles, goal conflicts and domination (Gond & Matten, 2007). The culturalist view regards CSR as a cultural product whose content, institutionalization and effect is dependent on cultural and political contexts and norms (Gond & Matten, 2007; see also Gj ø lberg, 2009; Matten & Moon, 2008). This view discusses, for example, the multiple sense making processes and narratives, which foster the institutionalization of CSR (Swanson, 1995). It analyzes on a meso-level differences in organizational culture, and on a macro-social level, the cultural and national differences, approaches and institutional components of CSR (Campbell, 2007).
- Kent and Taylor (2002), for example, regard authenticity as centrally for the building of public relations: „Indeed, for organizations to build community relations requires commitment to conversations and relationships, genuineness and authenticity — all strengths in ethical public relations” (p. 30). In a similar vein argued also other authors (e.g., Burkart, 1994) and other academic disciplines such as philosophy (Habermas, 1981): The idea of consensual communication which directs towards responsibility, truth, truthfulness, and righteousness and contrasts to strategic communication implicitly builds on a similar epistemological model and underlies until today normative conceptualizations of organizational behaviour (e.g. Palazzo & Scherer, 2006). At latest since the 1980s, authenticity and its characteristics transparency, consistency and truthfulness are regarded as being centrally to the building of trust (Bentele & Seidenglanz, 2008), of general relations to publics (Grunig, 2006; Kent & Taylor, 2002), of commitment (Grunig et al., 2002), and finally as most efficient. A revival of these ideas can be observed in recent concepts and theories of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and related discussions on communication ethics, that institutionalized based on similar societal expectations and problems (Schultz, 2010; Schultz & Wehmeier, 2010):
- Authentic actors have to be true or honest towards themselves ( truthfulness ), present their “self” transparent , take responsibility for their actions, and behave consistent with regard to their values and constructions (Kernis & Goldmann, 2006; see Shen & Kim, 2010, Henderson & Brookhart, 1996 )
- Already in the beginning of the last century Cassirer developed a kind of symbolic constructivism, in which he overcame the Cartesian and Kantian distinction between subject and object by regarding both as related poles which are based on symbolic mediation. Cassirer argues, that man’s perception of the world is mediated by models, symbols and myths as anchors for their orientation (1944, 1955). Their consciousness requires the symbolic medium to realize and articulate itself.
- Already in the beginning of the last century Cassirer developed a kind of symbolic constructivism, in which he overcame the Cartesian and Kantian distinction between subject and object by regarding both as related poles which are based on symbolic mediation. Cassirer argues, that man’s perception of the world is mediated by models, symbols and myths as anchors for their orientation (1944, 1955). Their consciousness requires the symbolic medium to realize and articulate itself. attribution “authentic” reflects not only that something is authentic, but what is based on constructions regarded as being authentic
- Already in the beginning of the last century Cassirer developed a kind of symbolic constructivism, in which he overcame the Cartesian and Kantian distinction between subject and object by regarding both as related poles which are based on symbolic mediation. Cassirer argues, that man’s perception of the world is mediated by models, symbols and myths as anchors for their orientation (1944, 1955). Their consciousness requires the symbolic medium to realize and articulate itself. attribution “authentic” reflects not only that something is authentic, but what is based on constructions regarded as being authentic
- Already in the beginning of the last century Cassirer developed a kind of symbolic constructivism, in which he overcame the Cartesian and Kantian distinction between subject and object by regarding both as related poles which are based on symbolic mediation. Cassirer argues, that man’s perception of the world is mediated by models, symbols and myths as anchors for their orientation (1944, 1955). Their consciousness requires the symbolic medium to realize and articulate itself. attribution “authentic” reflects not only that something is authentic, but what is based on constructions regarded as being authentic
- Already in the beginning of the last century Cassirer developed a kind of symbolic constructivism, in which he overcame the Cartesian and Kantian distinction between subject and object by regarding both as related poles which are based on symbolic mediation. Cassirer argues, that man’s perception of the world is mediated by models, symbols and myths as anchors for their orientation (1944, 1955). Their consciousness requires the symbolic medium to realize and articulate itself. attribution “authentic” reflects not only that something is authentic, but what is based on constructions regarded as being authentic
- Already in the beginning of the last century Cassirer developed a kind of symbolic constructivism, in which he overcame the Cartesian and Kantian distinction between subject and object by regarding both as related poles which are based on symbolic mediation. Cassirer argues, that man’s perception of the world is mediated by models, symbols and myths as anchors for their orientation (1944, 1955). Their consciousness requires the symbolic medium to realize and articulate itself. attribution “authentic” reflects not only that something is authentic, but what is based on constructions regarded as being authentic