Investigating the making of organizational social responsibility as a polyphony of voices: A ventriloquial analysis of practitioners’ interactions

Abstract

Though studies increasingly suggest nurturing a polyphonic and conflict-centered understanding of organizational social responsibility—referred to as CSR here—little is known about which voices make a difference (how and with what effect) when practitioners discuss CSR matters. Similarly, more work is needed on what and how tensions emerge in CSR planning, and how conflicts are addressed. By analyzing conversations with a ventriloquial framework, this research shows that CSR unfolds as different elements of a situation voice themselves as concerns. As the voices of these elements support seemingly incompatible actions, visibility, coherence, and performance tensions surface in interactions. Given that doing CSR consists in responding to concerns and conflicts originating from them, the needs practitioners experience may prompt them to (re)negotiate alternatives for action, balance diverging requests, and/or silence pressing issues to benefit other interests. This study enriches the understanding of CSR as polyphony by unveiling the centrality of voice inclusion–exclusion dynamics in how practitioners try to respond to the (ethical) value of the many conflict- and uncertainty-causing courses of action that manifest in interactions. It also provides insights on the nature of voice mobilization processes, which boost the ventriloquial perspective on organizing. Ultimately, by identifying the making of CSR as unfolding in interplays of voice invitation, mitigation, and shelving, it enhances CSR research by inviting scholars to spotlight more the variability and poly-dimensionality of doing CSR.