Keynote Morsing 28 october

1. Communica)on
of
CSR:
The
iden)ty
challenge
of
being
branded
as
“good”:
Me$e
Morsing
Centre
for
Corporate
Social
Responsibility
(cbsCSR)
Copenhagen
Business
School
CSR
Communica,on
Conference
Amsterdam,
October
28,
2011

2. Generalized
expecta;on
to
increase
in
communica;on
of
CSR:
Isomorphic
pressures
for
corpora;ons
to
not
only
”do”
but
also
explicitly
”communicate”
their
CSR
polices,
ac;ons
and
impacts,
expecta;ons
from
societal
actors
that
corpora;ons
par;cipate
in
reparing
the
planet
(Campbell,
2007).
From
implicit
to
explicit
CSR
approaches
(Ma$en
&
Moon,
2008)
Just
four
days
ago:
EU
Commission’s
new
”Communica)on
on
CSR”,
October
25,
2011:
A
new
defini;on
of
CSR
as
“the
responsibility
of
enterprises
for
their
impacts
on
society”.
”more
visibility
of
CSR”
(awards,
clarifica;on,
transparency,
documenta;on,
inclusion
of
public
sector,
etc.)

3. Communica;on
of
CSR:
An
interdisciplinary
exercise
Much
research
has
inves;gated
CSR
communica;on
in
analysis
of
adver)sing,
CSR
as
a
marke)ng
dimension
(e.g.
Maignan
&
Ferrell,
2002;
Metzger,
2009),
topic
analysis
of
codes
of
conduct
and
CSR
reports
(e.g.
Kolk,
2002),
CSR
accountability
and
transparency
(e.g.
Zadek
et
al.,
2008;
O’Dwyer,
2006)
or
social
media
of
CSR
network
(e.g.
Fieseler
et
al.
2009),
CSR
as
dialogue
(Andriof
et
al,
2042;
Hardis,
2002),
NGO
ac)vism
(Vestergaard,
2011;
Castello
&
Barbera,
2011)
or
media
men;on
of
CSR
(Buhr
&
Grafström,
2006)
Only
li$le
research
has
explored
how
communica;on
of
CSR
(such
as
fx
ethical
codes
of
conduct)
work
to
ins;tu;onalize
new
behaviors
in
organiza;ons
(e.g.
Academy
of
Management’s
special
issue:
Corpora;ons
as
social
change
agents,
2007):
how
internal
processes
and
mo;ves
of
organiza;onal
members
determine
how
organiza;ons
shape
ac;on
and
relate
to
external
stakeholders
(Brickson
2007,
Aguilera
et
al
2007),
and
inves;ga;on
of
how
cer;fied
management
standards
shape
socially
desired
firm
behavior
(Terlaak
2007).
Communica;on
of
CSR
signals
promises
and
expecta;ons
to
organiza;onal
integrity
and
reliability
that
includes
the
organiza;on
as
a
whole
(Christensen,
Morsing
&
Cheney,
2006).
Much
instrumental
research
on
CSR
communica;on
therefore
centers
on
the
no;on
of
consistency
(e.g.,
MacIntosh,
2007;
Ihlen,
Bartle$
and
May,
2011).
But
it
is
an
open
ques;on
if
CSR
the
gap
between
words
and
ac;on
will
ever
be
closed?
Will
a
company
ever
by
10%
socially
responsible?
Research
on
accountability,
transparency
and
corporate
communica;on
assumes
(implicitly)
that
words
and
ac;ons
must
be
consistent
for
the
CSR
message
to
be
trustworthy.
Cri;cal
management
research
ques;ons
and
inves;gates
to
what
extent
corporate
messages
about
CSR
are
a
true
reflec;on
of
reality?
Are
organiza;ons
living
up
to
their
own
words?
Communica;on
scholars
have
argued
that
CSR
is
about
aspira;onal
talk
(Christensen
et
al.
2010)
and
that
ins;tu;onaliza;on
of
communica;on
of
CSR
will
increase
gap
between
words
and
ac;on.
However,
such
gap
may
be
produc;ve.
A
devoid
of
gaps
may
mean
iner;a
and
rigidity
and
be
counterproduc;ve
for
organiza;onal
flexibility
and
innova;on
within
the
area
of
social
and
environmental
responsibility.

4. Communica;on
of
CSR:
An
interdisciplinary
exercise
Public
rela;ons
THEMES:
Company-­‐stakeholder
dialogue
Poli;cal
Corporate
Reuta;on
communica;on
communica;on
NGO
Ac;vism
Democray
Transparency
Accountability
Communica;on
of
CSR
CSR
reports
Codes
of
conduct
Media
Marke;ng
and
corporate
Media
and
Adver;sing
branding
culture
studies
…
theory
…
INSTRUMENTAL
RESEARCH
Iden;ty
AND
INTERPRETIVE
RESEARCH

5. Communica;on
of
CSR:
An
interdisciplinary
exercise
Public
rela;ons
THEMES:
Company-­‐stakeholder
dialogue
Poli;cal
Corporate
communica;on
communica;on
Reuta;on
NGO
Ac;vism
Democray
Transparency
Accountability
Communica;on
CSR
reports
of
CSR
Codes
of
conduct
Communica;on
Media
and
studies
culture
studies
Media
Adver;sing
…
…
Iden;ty
Marke;ng
and
*
INSTRUMENTAL
RESEARCH
corporate
branding
theory
*
INTERPRETIVE
RESEARCH
*
CRITICAL
MANAGEMENT
STUDIES

6. Posi;ve
iden;fica;on
is
taken
for
granted
by
communica;on
research
and
management:
Research
implicitly
seems
to
assume
that
corporate
communica,on
of
CSR
is
seamlessly
desired,
integrated
and
adopted
into
organiza,onal
prac,ce
by
members.
Managers
tend
to
agree:
”CSR
is
part
of
or
DNA”
However,
maybe
communica;on
of
CSR
is
not
always
be
welcomed
that
easily
…

7. Why
is
iden;ty
important
for
understanding
the
corporate
project
of
communica;ng
CSR
1)
Employees
are
–
willingly
or
unwillingly
–
central
part
of
the
communica)on
of
CSR,
of
the
corporate
brand
promise
of
CSR
(Hatch
&
Schultz,
2009)
2)
Organisa;onal
members
are
probably
the
most
engaged
stakeholder
of
the
corporate
communica;on
of
CSR
(Christensen
&
Cheney,
2001)
3)
Iden)ty
decides
the
ways
in
which
organiza)ons
engage
in
social
ac)on,
and
relate
to
external
stakeholders
(Brickson,
1997)
4)
Employees
may
be
seen
as
a
new
”public”
(e.g.
public
rela;ons)
in
the
corporate
communica;on
of
CSR.
Employees
become
a
”public”
because
they
are
cons;tuted
as
the
corporate
brand
on
CSR.
This
is
accentuated
by
social
media,
where
employees
are
invited
to
discuss
social
issues,
but
par;cipate
as
”themselves”
but
speak
in
accordance
with
the
corporate
CSR
policy.

8. Damned
if
we
do.
Damned
if
we
don’t.
Anita
Roddick
on
CSR
communica3on
in
Body
Shop s
first
non-­‐financial
report
1995,
p.5

9. Whose
iden;ty
is
displayed
in
corporate
brand
promises
of
CSR?

12. •
Employing
more
than
5,000
people.
•
Los
Angeles
manufacturing
facili;es.
•
Paying
workers
12
USD
an
hour
(minimum
wage:
6,75
USD)

13. Why
is
iden;ty
important
for
understanding
the
corporate
project
of
communica;ng
CSR
1)
Employees
are
–
willingly
or
unwillingly
–
central
part
of
the
communica)on
of
CSR,
of
the
corporate
brand
promise
of
CSR
(Hatch
&
Schultz,
2009)
2)
Organisa;onal
members
are
probably
the
most
engaged
stakeholder
of
the
corporate
communica;on
of
CSR
(Christensen
&
Cheney,
2001)
3)
Iden)ty
decides
the
ways
in
which
organiza)ons
engage
in
social
ac)on,
and
relate
to
external
stakeholders
(Brickson,
1997)
4)
Employees
may
be
seen
as
a
new
”public”
(e.g.
public
rela;ons)
in
the
corporate
communica;on
of
CSR.
Employees
become
a
”public”
because
they
are
cons;tuted
as
the
corporate
brand
on
CSR.
This
is
accentuated
by
social
media,
where
employees
are
invited
to
discuss
social
issues,
but
par;cipate
as
”themselves”
but
speak
in
accordance
with
the
corporate
CSR
policy.

14. Communica;on
of
CSR
in
frame
Theore;cal
the
perspec;ve
of
auto-­‐communica;on
Figure
1:
Adver;sing
as
Auto-­‐communica;on
(Christensen,
1997:208)
Message
1:
Message
1:
Sender
Adver)sement
Adver)sement
The
ideal
Code
1:
Code
2:
corporate
we
Sales
or
Organiza;onal
Posi;oning
rhetoric
Self-­‐percep;on
Displacement
of
Context
Receiver
Message
2:
The
ideal
Community,
corporate
we
Belonging
Iden)fica)on

15. Why
is
iden;ty
important
for
understanding
the
corporate
project
of
communica;ng
CSR
1)
Employees
are
–
willingly
or
unwillingly
–
central
part
of
the
communica)on
of
CSR,
of
the
corporate
brand
promise
of
CSR
(Hatch
&
Schultz,
2009)
2)
Organisa;onal
members
are
probably
the
most
engaged
stakeholder
of
the
corporate
communica;on
of
CSR
(Christensen
&
Cheney,
2001)
3)
Iden)ty
decides
the
ways
in
which
organiza)ons
engage
in
social
ac)on,
and
relate
to
external
stakeholders
(Brickson,
1997)
4)
Employees
may
be
seen
as
a
new
”public”
(e.g.
public
rela;ons)
in
the
corporate
communica;on
of
CSR.
Employees
become
a
”public”
because
they
are
cons;tuted
as
the
corporate
brand
on
CSR.
This
is
accentuated
by
social
media,
where
employees
are
invited
to
discuss
social
issues,
but
par;cipate
as
”themselves”
but
speak
in
accordance
with
the
corporate
CSR
policy.

16. To
what
extent
is
communica;on
of
CSR
a
communica;on
dept.
task?
Board
CEO
Marke;ng/
R&D
Logis;cs
Finance
Communica;on

17. ...
and
to
what
extent
is
communica;on
of
CSR
an
organiza;onal
task?
Board
CEO
Marke;ng/
R&D
Logis;cs
Finance
Communica;on

18. Why
is
iden;ty
important
for
understanding
the
corporate
project
of
communica;ng
CSR
1)
Employees
are
–
willingly
or
unwillingly
–
central
part
of
the
communica)on
of
CSR,
of
the
corporate
brand
promise
of
CSR
(Hatch
&
Schultz,
2009)
2)
Organisa;onal
members
are
probably
the
most
engaged
stakeholder
of
the
corporate
communica;on
of
CSR
(Christensen
&
Cheney,
2001)
3)
Iden)ty
decides
the
ways
in
which
organiza)ons
engage
in
social
ac)on,
and
relate
to
external
stakeholders
(Brickson,
1997)
4)
Employees
may
be
seen
as
a
new
”public”
(e.g.
public
rela;ons)
in
the
corporate
communica;on
of
CSR.
Employees
become
a
”public”
because
they
are
cons;tuted
as
the
corporate
brand
on
CSR.
This
is
accentuated
by
social
media,
where
employees
are
invited
to
discuss
social
issues,
but
par;cipate
as
”themselves”
but
speak
in
accordance
with
the
corporate
CSR
policy.

19. So,
what’s
so
special
about
communica;on
of
CSR?
Why
does
communica;on
of
CSR
involve
employees?
Expecta)ons
about
a
)ght
coupling
between
words
and
deeds
That
companies
do
what
they
say
An
expecta)on
about
authen)city
That
the
company
not
only
does
but
also
believes
in
what
it
says
Most
oPen
an
expecta)on
of
moral
commitment
to
responsibility
That
CSR
implies
an
ethical
responsibility
Expeca)ons
about
a
longterm
commitment
That
the
company
does
not
withdraw
its
CSR
promise

20. Framework
towards
understanding
how
communica;on
influences
iden;ty:
Member
percep;ons
of
communica;on
of
CSR
POSITIVE
PERCEPTIONS
NEGATIVE
PERCEPTIONS
CORPORATE
Cynical
SUPPORT
Iden;fica;on
distance
CORPORATE
RISK
Self-­‐
Resistance
absorp;on

21. Framework
towards
understanding
how
communica;on
influences
iden;ty:
Member
percep;ons
of
communica;on
of
CSR
POSITIVE
PERCEPTIONS
NEGATIVE
PERCEPTIONS
CORPORATE
Cynical
SUPPORT
Iden;fica;on
distance
CORPORATE
RISK
Self-­‐
Resistance
absorp;on

22. Iden;fica;on
Cynical
distance
Self-­‐
Iden;fica;on
absorp;on
Resistance
Characteris)c:
Personal
dedica;on
and
self-­‐gra;fica;on
by
par;cipa;ng
in
the
company’s
statements
about
contribu;ons
to
solve
the
world’s
social
and
environmental
problems
Research
ques)on:
when
does
iden)fica)on
occur?
Contextualiza;on
of
posi;ve
iden;fica;on
with
communica;on
of
CSR?
(Elsbach
&
Kramer,
Du$on
&
Dukerich).
Leadership?
Culture?
Values?
Or
perhaps
communica;on
itself?

23. Cynical
Iden;fica;on
distance
Iden;fica;on
Self-­‐
absorp;on
Resistance
Observa,ons:
“Sustainable
living
is
about
improving
society,
even
though
we
also
gain
from
it
in
a
business
economic
sense.
I
am
proud
of
that.
I
am
pleased
that
VELUX
works
with
Sustainable
Living
–
that
I
work
for
a
company
with
a
sustainability
strategy.
But
I
also
expect
my
workplace
to
do
so.
Otherwise
I
would
not
want
to
work
here”.
(VEPO))
“It
means
something
very
personal
for
me
that
I
work
in
a
company
that
ac,vely
pursues
to
improve
social
and
environmental
problems
at
a
global
scale.
Novo
Nordisk
has
been
a
frontrunner
on
sustainability
issues
and
con,nuously
sets
high
goals
for
itself.
I
am
proud
of
being
part
of
it
and
I
am
proud
of
telling
my
family
about
it”
(NNOK)
“I
think
it
is
mo,va,ng
to
know
that
we
build
factories
that
make
a
difference
for
people
all
over
the
world.
Even
though
our
part
is
just
a
,ny
step
and
even
though
it
might
be
a
liZle
far-­‐fetched
to
state
that
we
are
saving
the
world,
you
feel
that
you
are
doing
something
important
which
is
reflected
in
the
brand.”
[SBDT]
“We
are
a
large
mul,na,onal
player
with
global
influence,
and
we
must
contribute
to
a
more
sustainable
world.
For
me
working
in
company
that
takes
steps
to
improving
labor
condi,ons
in
for
example
Asia
is
very
important.
Okay,
we
are
not
perfect.
But
we
dare
to
do
take
ac,on
and
to
serve
as
a
role
model
by
also
pu`ng
demands
on
our
suppliers.
In
this
way,
XXX
helps
to
spread
rings
in
the
water
for
a
beZer
world”.
(IKOK)

24. Iden;fica;on
Cynical
distance
Self-­‐
Iden;fica;on
absorp;on
Resistance
Characteris)c:
Personal
dedica;on
and
self-­‐gra;fica;on
by
par;cipa;ng
in
the
company’s
statements
about
contribu;ons
to
solve
the
world’s
social
and
environmental
problems
Research
ques)on:
when
does
iden)fica)on
occur?
Contextualiza;on
of
posi;ve
iden;fica;on
with
communica;on
of
CSR?
(Elsbach
&
Kramer,
Du$on
&
Dukerich).
Leadership?
Culture?
Values?
Or
perhaps
communica;on
itself?

25. Cynical
Iden;fica;on
distance
Self-­‐absorp;on
Self-­‐
absorp;on
Resistance
Characteris)c:
Strong
sense
of
self,
autonomous
sense-­‐making:
”we
are
doing
the
right
thing”,
self-­‐confidence
of
the
corporate
engagement
in
social
and
environmental
issues,
narcissism
Research
ques)on:
?
What
lead
employees
to
not
listening
to
cri;que?
Self-­‐closure
and
communica;on
as
ritual
(Christensen,
1997),
defense
strategies
and
denial
of
cri;que
as
communica;on
rou;nes
(Cornelissen,
2010

26. Cynical
Iden;fica;on
distance
Self-­‐absorp;on
Self-­‐
absorp;on
Resistance
Observa;ons:
Percep3ons
of
managerial
self-­‐absorp3on:
”Management
is
invited
to
conferences
and
presenta,ons
talking
about
all
the
good
deeds
we
do.
They
love
hearing
themselves
talk
about
CSR.
But
it
most
of
all
seems
like
they
are
celebra,ng
themselves
–
forge`ng
the
serious
cause
about
poor
peopel
and
climate
change
we
are
actually
doing
this
for”
(VEXA)
“We
have
had
our
focus
on
an
external
audience
and
have
treated
our
internal
colleagues
as
a
stepchild.
Informa,on
is
oben
available
on
the
intranet,
but
it
is
just
a
copy
of
the
external
messages
-­‐
it
is
not
wriZen
to
me
as
an
employee.
That
means,
why
do
we
par,cipate
in
the
different
events?
For
example,
we
decided
to
be
part
of
COP
15
–
what
was
our
strategy
for
doing
that?
It
is
all
about
making
demonstra,on
houses
and
talking
to
poli,cians,
while
ge`ng
employees
on
board
…
who
cares?”
(Employee,
VEMU)
Percep3ons
of
marke3ng
dept.
self-­‐absorp3on:
“When
I
had
to
present
this,
I
believe
I
said:
This
is
then
our
Marke,ng
Department
who
believes
that
we
need
to
be
presented
as
something
new
and
fancy
–
something
like
that
–
and
then
we
laughed
about
it
and
we
did
not
talk
about
it
again.
“
[CCSJ]
GeFng
absorbed
in
poten3ally
peripheral
or
disconnected
CSR:
X
Coffee
company
engaging
in
animal
welfare
due
to
the
owner-­‐manager’s
personal
preferences
Not
listening
to
stakeholder
concerns
and
sugges3ons:
Nestlé-­‐GreenPeace

27. Cynical
Iden;fica;on
distance
Self-­‐absorp;on
Self-­‐
absorp;on
Resistance
Characteris)c:
Strong
sense
of
self,
autonomous
sense-­‐making:
”we
are
doing
the
right
thing”,
self-­‐confidence
of
the
corporate
engagement
in
social
and
environmental
issues,
narcissism
Research
ques)on:
?
What
lead
employees
to
not
listening
to
cri;que?
Self-­‐closure
and
communica;on
as
ritual
(Christensen,
1997),
defense
strategies
and
denial
of
cri;que
as
communica;on
rou;nes
(Cornelissen,
2010

28. Cynical
Iden;fica;on
distance
Cynical
distance*
Self-­‐
absorp;on
Resistance
Characteris)c:
Employees
distancing
themselves
from
the
corporate
promise
of
CSR,
yet
obedient
by
passively
conforming.
Silent
(dormant)
disagreement.
”I
dont
want
to
do
it,
but
I
know
I
have
to
do
it”.
The
pressure
to
perform
CSR.
Research
ques)on:
?
How
do
impulses
to
openly
resist
become
neutralized?
Why
do
employees
not
ac;vely
sabotage
or
protest
their
disagreement?
(Spicer
&
Fleming).
What
societal
processes
of
ins;tu;onaliza;on
re-­‐inforce
cynical
distance
to
communica;on
of
CSR?
Source
of
concept:
Spicer
&
Fleming

29. Cynical
Iden;fica;on
distance
Cynical
distance
Self-­‐
absorp;on
Resistance
Observa;ons:
”So
we
just
try
to
work
around
it.
Nobody
really
talks
about
[the
CSR
tagline]
…
Maybe
it
is
this
taglin,e
that
is
a
bit
American
and
too
different
from
what
one
would
have
done
in
Denmark.
Not
that
it
is
wrong
–
I
don’t
know
what
works
out
there
in
the
world.
I
am
not
a
marke,ng
person,
so
if
it
works
it
is
ok.
But
I
do
understand
the
people,
who
think
that
it
is
over
the
top.
It
is
not
Danish
mentality.”
[CQ]
[I
am]
a
bit
skep,cal
[towards
the
brand]
because
we
would
like
to
contribute
to
improve
things
in
society,
but
we
are
more
than
700
employees
in
Denmark
and
a
lot
of
what
we
do
is
good
robust
engineering
work
and
not
necessarily
this
high-­‐fly
kind
of
thing.
So
[the
brand]
easily
sounds
like
very
grand
and
high
in
the
sky-­‐like
–
”Engineering
for
a
healthier
world”
it
brings
out
tears
in
your
eyes
[laughing]”
[JARN]
”
[…]
Right
when
we
had
those
new
templates
and
the
front
page
with
the
globe
–
what
did
we
need
that
for
–
and
the
tagline
and
all
that.
I
actually
thought
it
was
embarrassing
to
come
to
those
customer
mee,ngs.
[...]
When
I
sat
there
opposite
the
customer
and
had
to
present
it
[the
company]
with
that
front
page
–
I
quickly
turned
the
page
away
from
it
[…].
Now
I
am
more
used
to
it.
[CCSJ]

30. Cynical
Iden;fica;on
distance
Cynical
distance*
Self-­‐
absorp;on
Resistance
Characteris)c:
Employees
distancing
themselves
from
the
corporate
promise
of
CSR,
yet
obedient
by
passively
conforming.
Silent
(dormant)
disagreement.
”I
dont
want
to
do
it,
but
I
know
I
have
to
do
it”.
The
pressure
to
perform
CSR.
Research
ques)on:
?
How
do
impulses
to
openly
resist
become
neutralized?
Why
do
employees
not
ac;vely
sabotage
or
protest
their
disagreement?
(Spicer
&
Fleming).
What
societal
processes
of
ins;tu;onaliza;on
re-­‐inforce
cynical
distance
to
communica;on
of
CSR?
Source
of
concept:
Spicer
&
Fleming

31. Cynical
Iden;fica;on
distance
Resistance
Self-­‐
absorp;on
Resistance
Characteris)c:
CSR
is
perceived
as
”implicit”,
employees
opposing
that
the
values
and
”authen;city”
of
CSR
is
being
supplanted
by
commercial
interests:
”CSR
is
part
of
our
cultural
heritage,
it
is
NOT
a
branding
exercise”.
Refusal
to
par;cipate,
engage
in
CSR
but
only
in
own
area
of
exper;se.
Percep;ons
of
corporate
over-­‐
promising,
or
CSR
fa;gues.
Research
ques)on:
?
How
does
explicit
communica;on
of
CSR
contribute
to
employee
resistance?
In
what
ways
does
resistance
to
a
socially
desirable
act
(CSR)
transform
into
a
perceived
iden;ty
threat?

32. Cynical
Iden;fica;on
distance
Resistance
Self-­‐
absorp;on
Resistance
Observa;ons:
”I
think
this
is
very
important
for
companies
to
take
part
in
CSR.
And
I
think
it
is
very
important
for
XX
to
be
socially
responsible.
In
fact,
this
is
ingrained
in
our
heritage.
But
the
recent
approach
to
be
”Thought
Leader
in
Sustainable
Living”
…
I
simply
fail
to
see
how
that
has
anything
to
do
with
our
CSR
values,
and
I
am
not
the
one
engaging
myself
in
this
project”
(VEME)
”Well,
we
are
si`ng
here
as
ordinary
engineers,
doing
our
work
and
then
some
fancy
marke,ng
agency
from
the
expensive
neighborhoods
of
Copenhagen
comes
along
–
actually,
I
dont
know
where
they
are
form,
but
it
feels
that
way
–
and
suddenly
there
is
this
big
bubble
of
”doing
right”
around
you”
(MHOU)
“I
have
absolutely
no
idea.
I
don’t
use
it
myself
–
and
I
am
not
going
to
use
it.
It
would
seem
completely
wrong
on
the
occasions
where
I
talk
to
customers.
[…]
Pain,ng
an
icon
of
our
company
is
too
big
a
step.
It
is
easier
for
me
to
look
the
customer
in
the
eyes
and
build
trust
from
the
liZle
things
we
do
instead
of
this
thing
about
crea,ng
a
beZer
world.
[…]
I
am
not
ready
at
all
to
take
up
that
discussion.”
[KIMT]

33. Cynical
Iden;fica;on
distance
Resistance
Self-­‐
absorp;on
Resistance
Characteris)c:
CSR
is
perceived
as
”implicit”,
employees
opposing
that
the
values
and
”authen;city”
of
CSR
is
being
supplanted
by
commercial
interests:
”CSR
is
part
of
our
cultural
heritage,
it
is
NOT
a
branding
exercise”.
Refusal
to
par;cipate,
engage
in
CSR
but
only
in
own
area
of
exper;se.
Percep;ons
of
corporate
over-­‐
promising,
or
CSR
fa;gues.
Research
ques)on:
?
How
does
explicit
communica;on
of
CSR
contribute
to
employee
resistance?
In
what
ways
does
resistance
to
a
socially
desirable
act
(CSR)
transform
into
a
perceived
iden;ty
threat?

34. A
non-­‐desirable
scenario:
Member
percep;ons
of
communica;on
of
CSR
POSITIVE
PERCEPTIONS
NEGATIVE
PERCEPTIONS
CORPORATE
Cynical
SUPPORT
Iden;fica;on
distance
CORPORATE
RISK
Self-­‐
Resistance
absorp;on

35.
So,
can
we
learn
something
about
stakeholder
rela;ons
from
inves;ga;ng
how
iden;ty
is
influenced
by
communica;on
of
CSR
and
trying
to
understand
the
most
dedicated
”public”’s
commitment
and
hesita;ons?
I
think
so
…

36. Communica;on
influences
iden;ty:
consumer
rela;ons
to
corpora;on
communica;on
of
CSR
POSITIVE
PERCEPTIONS
NEGATIVE
PERCEPTIONS
Cynical
distance
CORPORATE
Iden;fica;on
SUPPORT
THE
APATHETIC
THE
FAN
CONSUMER
CORPORATE
RISK
Self-­‐absorp;on
Resistance
THE
NARCISSISTIC
THE
SKEPTICAL
CONSUMER
CONSUMER

37. Summing
up:
Communica;on
of
CSR
as
a
posi;ve
iden;fier
as
well
as
an
iden;ty
threat
Communica;on
of
CSR
as
a
powerful
source
of
cultural
engineering
of
employees’
selves
On
the
one
hand,
communica;on
of
CSR
serves
to
enhance
member
iden;fica;on
with
the
corporate
brand,
to
increase
member
loyalty,
commitment,
dedica;on
and
self-­‐gra;fica;on,
…
On
the
other
hand,
communica;on
of
CSR
also
func;ons
ambiguously
as
a
compelling
and
powerful
narra;ve
for
employees
while
simultaneously
cap;va;ng
organiza;onal
iden;ty
as
a
form
of
iden;ty
threat
in
which
increased
pressure
to
perform
is
enacted,
cri;cism
is
pacified
and
local
iden;fica;on
with
the
CSR
message
is
discouraged.

38. CONCLUDING
NOTE:
Ques;ons
for
research
1)
How
not
only
socially
undesirable
but
also
socially
desirable
features
a$ached
to
a
corporate
image
threaten
the
organiza;onal
self-­‐concept
of
its
members
2)
Resistance
not
only
“becomes
an
integra;ve
mechanism
reinforcing
the
domina;on”
(Spicer
and
Fleming)
but
rather
reintroduces
the
domina;on
upon
the
individual
member
to
passively
subjugate
him
or
herself
and
accept
the
domina;on
of
a
publicly
perceived
desirable
corporate
brand
feature
3)
Therefore,
challenges
the
no;on
of
CSR
being
a
voluntary
ac;vity
for
organiza;onal
members,
as
we
argue
that
employees
are
cap;vated
and
pacified
to
reproduce
Managerial
visions
of
CSR
in
uncri;cal
ways
-­‐
by
the
corporate
brand
promise
of
CSR
4)
Such
resistance
is
likely
to
be
accentuated
when
employees
become
part
of
the
corporate
brand
messages
in
social
media
where
they
are
encouraged
to
personally
engage
with
external
audiences
but
remain
with
the
communicated
frame
of
corporate
CSR
policies
and
ac;vi;es.

39. Thank
you
Me$e
Morsing
Copenhagen
Business
School
mm.ikl@cbs.dk