Purpose: To understand Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) communication made through the use of sustainability reports and to compare the CSR communication made by the Indian Companies and the Multinational Companies (MNCs) through the medium of sustainability reports.
Design/Methodology/Approach: Sustainability reports of the top 100 companies operating in the Information and Technology sector in India were taken and content analysis techniques of visual communication were used to compare the performance of the Indian and the MNCs in terms of CSR disclosure. Further, guidelines stated by the Global Reporting Initiatives (GRT) were taken as a measure of comparison to gauge the standardization of the sustainability reports published by the Indian companies and the MNCs.
Findings: The total number of Indian companies in the IT sector publishing sustainability reports is few but the quality of reports is of global standards and the international benchmarks stated by GRI are achieved by a larger percentage of the Indian companies as against the MNCs operating in India in the IT sector.
Research Limitations/Implications: The paper considers the sustainability reports only and no other medium of CSR communication. The study is limited to the companies operating in the IT sector only.
Originality/Value: Sustainability reports as a medium of CSR communication is highly ignored and therefore the findings will supplement and enhance the understanding of CSR communication.
AdamsC. (2002). Internal organizational factors influencing corporate, social and ethical reporting—Beyond current theorising. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 15(2), 223–250.
2.
AdamsC.A.HillW.Y.RobertsC.B. (1998). Corporate social reporting practices in Western Europe: Legitimating corporate behaviour. British Accounting Review, 30(1), 1–21.
BasalamahA.JermiasJ. (2005). Social and environmental reporting in Indonesia. Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business, 7(1), 109–127.
5.
BelalA.OwenL. (2007). The views of corporate managers on the current state of and future prospects for, social reporting in Bangladesh. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 30(3), 472–492.
6.
BostdorffD.VibbertS.L. (1994). Values advocacy: Enhancing organizational images, deflecting public criticism, and grounding future arguments. Public Relations Review, 20(2), 141–158.
7.
BottomleyP.A.DoyleJ.R. (2006). The interactive effects of colors and products on perceptions of brand logo appropriateness. Marketing Theory, 6(63), 63–83.
8.
BowdR.BowdL.HarrisP. (2006). Communicating corporate social responsibility: An exploratory case study of a major UK retail centre. Journal of Public Affairs, 6(2), 147–155.
9.
BrogaF.CitterioA.NociG.PizzurnoE. (2009). Sustainability report in small enterprises: Case studies in Italian furniture companies. Business Strategy and the Environment, 18(3), 162–176.
10.
BrownN.DeeganC. (1999). The public disclosure of environmental performance information—A dual test of media agenda setting theory and legitimacy theory. Accounting and Business Research, 37(1), 21–41.
11.
BuhrN. (1998). Environmental performance, legislation and annual report disclosure: The case of acid rain and Falconbridge. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 11(2), 163–190.
12.
BuhrN. (2007). Histories of and rationales for sustainability reporting. In UnermanJ.BebbingtonJ.O’DwyerB. (Eds), Sustainability accounting and accountability (pp. 57–69). London: Routledge.
13.
CampbellL.J. (2007). Why do corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 946–967.
14.
CarolA.McNicholasP. (2007). Making a difference: Sustainability reporting, accountability and organisational change. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 20(3), 382–402.
15.
CerinP. (2002). Communication in corporate environment reports. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 9(1), 46–65.
16.
ChambersE.ChappleW.MoonJ.SullivanM. (2003). CSR in Asia: A seven country study of CSR website reporting (RP-9). Nottingham, United Kingdom: International Center for Corporate Social Responsibility.
17.
CheneyG.ChristensenL.T. (2001). Organizational identity: Linkages between internal and external communication. In JablinF.M.PutnamL.L. (Eds), The new handbook of organizational communication (pp. 231–269). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
18.
DeeganC.RankinM.VoghtP. (2000). Firms’ disclosure reactions to major social incidents: Australian evidence. Accounting Forum, 24(1), 101–130.
19.
DonaldsonT.DunfeeT.W. (1999). Ties that bind: A social contracts approach to business ethics. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
20.
DuS.BhattacharyaC.SankarS. (2010). Maximizing business returns to corporate social responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication. International Journal of Management Reviews, 12(1), 8–19.
21.
FernsB.EmelianovaO.SethiS.P. (2008). In his own words: The effectiveness of CEO as spokesperson on CSR-sustainability issues—Analysis of data from the Sethi CSR monitor. Corporate Reputation Review, 11(2), 116–129.
22.
FreemanR. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.
23.
FriedmanM. (1962). Capitalism and freedom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
24.
FoucaultM. (1977). Discipline and punishment: The birth of prison. New York: Vintage.
25.
GarberL.L.HyattE.M. (2003). Color as a tool for visual persuasion. In ScottL.M.BatraR. (Eds), Persuasive imagery: A consumer response perspective (pp. 313–36). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
26.
GerardA.GoldsteinB. (2005). Going visual. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
27.
GrayR. (2002). The social accounting project and accounting organization and society—Privileging engagement imaginings, new accountings and pragmatism over critique?Accounting Organization and Society, 27, 687–708.
28.
GrayR.H.BebbingtonJ. (2001). Accounting for the environment. London: SAGE.
29.
GrayR.H.KouhyR.LaversS. (1995). Corporate social and environmental reporting: A review of literature and longitudinal study of UK disclosure. Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal, 8(2), 47–77.
30.
GrayROwensDAdamsC. (1996). Accounting and accountability: Changes and challenges in corporate social and environmental reporting. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall Europe.
31.
GRI. (2006). Sustainability reporting guidelines. Global Reporting Initiative, Amsterdam.
32.
GuthrieJ.E.ParkerL.D. (1990). Corporate social disclosure practice: A comparative international analysis. Advances in Public Interest Accounting, 3, 159–175.
33.
HedbergC.MalmborgF. (2003). The Global Reporting Initiatives and corporate sustainability reporting in Swedish companies. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 10(3), 153–164.
34.
HolstiO.R. (1969). Content analysis for the social sciences. London: Addison Wesley.
IslamM.DeeganC. (2008). Motivations for an organization within a developing country to report social responsibility information. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 21(6), 850–874.
KrippendorfK. (1980). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. New York: SAGE.
39.
KureshiH. (2003). Loose tongues and liberty. Guardian Review, London, 7June, pp. 4–6.
40.
MalarvizhiP.YadavS. (2008/2009). Corporate environmental disclosures on the Internet: An empirical analysis of Indian companies. Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting, 2(2), 211–32.
41.
MathewsM.R. (1997). Twenty-five years of social and environmental accounting research—Is there a silver jubilee to celebrate?Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 10(4), 481–531.
42.
McGuireJ.W. (1963). Business and society. New York: McGraw-Hill.
43.
MoirL. (2001). What do we mean by corporate social responsibility?Corporate Governance, 1(2), 16–22.
44.
MorhardtJ. E. (2009). Corporate social responsibility and sustainability reporting on the Internet. Business strategy and the environment. Retrieved from http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/122504234/abstract
45.
MorsingM.SchultzM. (2006). Corporate social responsibility communication: Stakeholder information, response and involvement strategies. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15(4), October, 323–338.
46.
Nasscom. (2007). Catalyzing change. New Delhi: Nasscom Foundation.
47.
NasiJ.NasiS.PhillipsN.ZyglidopoulosS. (1997). The evolution of corporate social responsiveness. Business & Society, 36(3), 296–321.
48.
NeuD.WarsameH.PedwellK. (1998). Managing public impressions: Environmental disclosures in annual reports. Accounting, Organizations & Society, 23(3), 265–282.
49.
O’DonovanG. (1999). Managing legitimacy through increased corporate reporting: An exploratory study. Interdisciplinary Environmental Review, 1(1), 63–99.
50.
PrestonL.PostJ.E. (1975). Private management and public policy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
SahayA. (2004). Environmental reporting by Indian corporations. Business Strategy and the Environment, 1(1), 11–24.
53.
SobhaniF.AmranA.ZainuddinY. (2009). Revisiting the practices of corporate social and environmental disclosure in Bangladesh. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 16(3), 167–183.
54.
SimmonsC.J.Becker-OlsenK.L. (2006). Achieving marketing objectives through social sponsorships. Journal of Marketing, 70(4), 154–169.
55.
SonesM.GranthamS.VieiraE. (2009). Communicating CSR via pharmaceutical company websites. Evaluating message frameworks for external and internal stakeholders. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 14(2), 144–157.
56.
SuchmanM.C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610.
57.
TinkerT.NiemarkM. (1987). The role of annual reports in gender and class contradictions at General Motors. Accounting, Organisations and Society, 12(1), 71–88.
WerbachA. (2008). Strategy for sustainability: A business manifesto. Boston: Harvard Business Press.
60.
YoonY.Gurhan-CanliZ.SchwarzN. (2006). The effect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities on companies with bad reputations. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(4), 377–390.
