Session 8, Berens, van Halderen & Popma
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Session 8, Berens, van Halderen & Popma

on

  • 638 views

CSR Communication: Concepts, Models & Approaches

CSR Communication: Concepts, Models & Approaches

Statistics

Views

Total Views
638
Views on SlideShare
638
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Companies increasingly communicate to consumers about their CSR actions, but in many cases this communication is not effective in changing consumer attitudes or behaviors. Why is that the case?First, what consumers see is in many cases a brand, which is not identical to the company that produces the brand.
  • Second, in addition to companies, other parties also communicate about companies’ CSR actions, and these messages are sometimes inconsistent with each other.
  • Eco-label (Loureiro, McCluskey & Mittelhammer 2002)“No sweat” label (Dickson 2001)Fair trade (De Pelsmacker, Driesen & Rayp 2005; Shaw & Clarke 1999)Organic food (e.g., Sparks & Shepherd 1992; Verhoef 2005)
  • Do consumersseecompanies‘ CSR actionsfrom a deontologicalperspective or from a consequentialistperspective?(Kant: Grundlegung zur Metaphysik der Sitten; Mill: Utilitarianism)

Session 8, Berens, van Halderen & Popma Presentation Transcript

  • 1. Creating consumer confidence in CSR communications Guido Berens Wybe Popma Mignon van Halderen
  • 2. Lack of information
  • 3. Inconsistent messages „E.ON in Schulen und Kindergärten AKW-Lobbyisten bei unseren Kindern” (umweltrundschau.de) (http://vorort.bund.net/ suedlicher-oberrhein/leuchtpol.html)
  • 4. Types of media: Degree of independence Company- Third party-verified verified Company- Advertising Cause-related marketing,constructed DisclosuresThird party- Publicity Labels, Consumer guides,constructed Publicity
  • 5. Advertising• Skepticism vs. cynicism (e.g. Mayer et al. 1993, Youn et al. 2008)• Specific vs. general (e.g. Davis 1994, Maronick & Andrews 1999)• Actions vs. outcomes (Pomering & Johnson 2009)• CSR vs. product benefits (e.g. Schaefer & Crane 2005, Luchs et al. 2010)• CSR history (Pashupati et al. 2002, Vanhamme & Grobben 2009)
  • 6. Types of media: Degree of independence Company- Third party-verified verified Company- Advertising Cause-related marketing,constructed DisclosuresThird party- Publicity Labels, Consumer guides,constructed Publicity
  • 7. Cause-related marketing• Perceived motives (Barone et al. 2000, Ellen et al. 2006)• Company-cause fit (e.g., Pracejus & Olsen 2004; Zdravkovic et al. 2011)
  • 8. Disclosures (Johnson & Johnson, 2009 sustainability report)
  • 9. Disclosures• Credible (Roe et al. 2001)• Disclosures vs. labels (Roe et al. 2001, Teisl et al. 2008)• Interpretative frame, e.g. “traffic light” (FSA 2005)
  • 10. Types of media: Degree of independence Company- Third party-verified verified Company- Advertising Cause-related marketing,constructed DisclosuresThird party- Publicity Labels, Consumer guides,constructed Publicity
  • 11. Publicity• Awareness? (Sen et al. 2006)• Positive vs. neutral vs. negative reputation (Arnold et al. 1996, Handelman & Arnold 1999)• Crisis situation (e.g. Wagner et al. 2009, Eisingerich et al. 2011)
  • 12. Types of media: Degree of independence Company- Third party-verified verified Company- Advertising Cause-related marketing,constructed DisclosuresThird party- Publicity Labels, Consumer guides,constructed Publicity
  • 13. Labels & certifications• Values and lifestyle (e.g. De Pelsmacker et al. 2005, Royne et al. 2011)• Label proliferation (Giovannucci 2003, SER 2004)• Positive versus negative labels (Grankvist et al. 2004)• Labels versus disclosures (Roe et al. 2001)
  • 14. Consumer guides• Most trusted (Mohr et al. 2001)• Information overload? (Shaw & Clarke 1999)
  • 15. Conclusion• Consumers are skeptical rather than cynical regarding company-controlled CSR communicationSpecificOutcomesBenefitsHistory
  • 16. ConclusionI. Kant J.S. Mill Deontological Consequentialist CSR Product benefits Societal actions Societal outcomes Motives Results