Drawing on Judith Butler’s understanding of performativity, this study aims to explore how power embeds in CSR videos of multinational companies. It adopts a critical semiotics multimodal analysis to show how a particular kind of responsible corporation is constituted by the language, both verbal and visual, that those CSR videos speak. Our findings show in-depth the multimodal construction of three subjects of a responsible corporation: hero, missionary and architect. We advance the constitutive turn in CSR communication by conceptualizing CSR communication as a political project which (1) subjectifies the corporation through the articulation of a relationship that subordinates CSR beneficiaries and the audience and (2) iterates the business ideology. We discuss how multimodality contributes to masking power, and conclude with guidelines for alternative multimodal CSR communication.
BourgoinAlaricBencherkiNicolasFarajSamer (2020). ‘And who are you?’: A performative perspective on authority in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 63, 1134–1165.
9.
BoxenbaumEvaJonesCandaceMeyerRenate E.SvejenovaSilviya (2018). Towards an articulation of the material and visual turn in organization studies. Organization Studies, 39, 597–616.
10.
ButlerJudith (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge.
11.
ButlerJudith (1993). Bodies that matter: On the discursive limits of sex. New York: Routledge.
12.
ButlerJudith (1997). Excitable speech: A politics of the performative. New York: Routledge.
13.
ButlerJudith (2005). Giving an account of oneself. New York: Fordham University Press.
ChristensenLars T.MorsingMetteThyssenOle (2013). CSR as aspirational talk. Organization, 20, 372–393.
16.
ChristensenLars T.MorsingMetteThyssenOle (2017). License to critique: A communication perspective on sustainability standards. Business Ethics Quarterly, 27, 239–262.
17.
ChristiansenLærke H. (2018). The use of visuals in issue framing: Signifying responsible drinking. Organization Studies, 39, 665–689.
18.
CoorenFrançois (2020). A communicative constitutive perspective on corporate social responsibility: Ventriloquism, undecidability, and surprisability. Business & Society, 59, 175–197.
19.
CraneAndrewGlozerSarah (2016). Researching corporate social responsibility communication: Themes, opportunities and challenges. Journal of Management Studies, 53, 1223–1252.
20.
FeixAurélienPhilippeDéborah (2020). Unpacking the narrative decontestation of CSR: Aspiration for change or defense of the status quo?Business & Society, 59, 129–174.
21.
FlemingPeterJonesMarc T. (2013). The end of corporate social responsibility: Crisis and critique. London: SAGE Publications.
22.
FlemingPeterSpicerAndré (2014). Power in management and organization science. Academy of Management Annals, 8, 237–298.
23.
FouweatherIanBosmaBas (2021). The desire to rethink power AND performativity AND process. Organization Studies, 42, 1795–1815.
24.
GarudRaghuGehmanJoel (2019). Performativity: Not a destination but an ongoing journey. Academy of Management Review, 44, 679–684.
25.
GondJean-PascalCabantousLaureHardingNancyLearmonthMark (2016). What do we mean by performativity in organizational and management theory? The uses and abuses of performativity. International Journal of Management Reviews, 18, 440–463.
26.
GondJean-PascalNybergDaniel (2017). Materializing power to recover corporate social responsibility. Organization Studies, 38, 1127–1148.
27.
GutheyEricJacksonBrad (2005). CEO portraits and the authenticity paradox. Journal of Management Studies, 42, 1057–1082.
28.
HaackPatrickSchoenebornDennisWickertChristopher (2012). Talking the talk, moral entrapment, creeping commitment? Exploring narrative dynamics in corporate responsibility standardization. Organization Studies, 33, 815–845.
29.
HardyCynthiaPhillipsNelson (1999). No joking matter: Discursive struggle in the Canadian refugee system. Organization Studies, 20, 1–24.
30.
HöllererMarkus A.JancsaryDennisGrafströmMaria (2018). ‘A picture is worth a thousand words’: Multimodal sensemaking of the global financial crisis. Organization Studies, 39, 617–644.
31.
JancsaryDennisHöllererMarkus A.MeyerRenate E. (2016). Critical analysis of visual and multimodal texts. In WodakRuthMeyerMichael (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse studies (3rd edition, pp. 180–204). London: SAGE Publications.
32.
KnightEricTsoukasHaridimos (2019). When fiction trumps truth: What ‘post-truth’ and ‘alternative facts’ mean for management studies. Organization Studies, 40, 183–197.
33.
KressGunther (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
34.
KressGunthervan LeeuwenTheo (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design (2nd edition). Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
35.
LefsrudLianneGravesHeatherPhillipsNelson (2020). ‘Giant toxic lakes you can see from space’: A theory of multimodal messages and emotion in legitimacy work. Organization Studies, 41, 1055–1078.
36.
MeyerRenate E.HöllererMarkus A.JancsaryDennisvan LeeuwenTheo (2013). The visual dimension in organizing, organization, and organization research: Core ideas, current developments, and promising avenues. Academy of Management Annals, 7, 489–555.
37.
MeyerRenate E.JancsaryDennisHöllererMarkus A.BoxenbaumEva (2018). The role of verbal and visual text in the process of institutionalization. Academy of Management Review, 43, 392–418.
38.
MillerJoseph H. (2009). For Derrida. New York: Fordham University Press.
39.
MillsCatherine (2003). Contesting the political: Butler and Foucault on power and resistance. Journal of Political Philosophy, 11, 253–272.
40.
MorsingMette (2006). Corporate social responsibility as strategic auto-communication: On the role of external stakeholders for member identification. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15, 171–182.
41.
MorsingMetteSchultzMajken (2006). Corporate social responsibility communication: Stakeholder information, response and involvement strategies. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15, 323–338.
42.
PorterAmanda J.KuhnTimothy R.NerlichBrigitte (2018). Organizing authority in the climate change debate: IPCC controversies and the management of dialectical tensions. Organization Studies, 39, 873–898.
43.
RoseGillian (2016). Visual methodologies: An introduction to researching with visual materials. London: SAGE Publications.
44.
SchoenebornDennisKuhnTimothy R.KärremanDan (2019). The communicative constitution of organization, organizing, and organizationality. Organization Studies, 40, 475–496.
45.
SchoenebornDennisMorsingMetteCraneAndrew (2020). Formative perspectives on the relation between CSR communication and CSR practices: Pathways for walking, talking, and t(w)alking. Business & Society, 59, 5–33.
46.
SchoenebornDennisTrittinHannah (2013). Transcending transmission: Towards a constitutive perspective on CSR communication. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 18, 193–211.
47.
SchultzFriederikeCastellóItziarMorsingMette (2013). The construction of corporate social responsibility in network societies: A communication view. Journal of Business Ethics, 115, 681–692.
48.
SimpsonBarbaraHardingNancyFlemingPeterSergiVivianeHussenotAnthony (2018). Call for papers: Special issue on power and performativity as interweaving dynamics of organizing. Organization Studies.
49.
SontagSusan (1977). On photography. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
50.
TaylorJames R.CoorenF. (1997). What makes communication ‘organizational’? How the many voices of a collectivity become the one voice of an organization. Journal of Pragmatics, 27, 409–438.
51.
TaylorJames R.Van EveryElizabeth J. (2014). When organization fails: Why authority matters. New York: Routledge.
52.
Van DijkTeun A. (1993). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society, 4, 249–283.
53.
Van LeeuwenTheo (1996). The representation of social actors. In Caldas-CoulthardCarmen R.CoulthardMalcolm (Eds.), Texts and practices: Readings in critical discourse analysis (pp. 32–70). London: Routledge.
