The paper examines how the tensions of corporate responsibility are articulated and reconciled in a controversial situation of a foreign investment. We conducted a conventionalist analysis on the company press releases in a case where a Finnish forest industry company invested in a pulp mill in South America. The findings show that the use of language in press releases mobilizes certain stakeholders while reassuring others, and that the argumentation used creates value-neutral communication, making it possible to pursue strategic goals despite competing values. For teaching, we provide insights on how to communicate in a conflict situation.
AaltonenK.KujalaJ.OijalaT. (2008). Stakeholder salience in global projects. International Journal of Project Management, 26, 509-516.
2.
BoltanskiL.ThévenotL. (2006). On justification. economies of worth. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
3.
CarrollA. B. (2004). Managing ethically with global stakeholders: A present and future challenge. Academy of Management Executive, 18, 114-120.
4.
DaigleP.RouleauL. (2010). Strategic plans in arts organizations: A tool of compromise between artistic and managerial values. Strategic Management, 12, 13-30.
5.
de BakkerF. G. A.den HondF. (2008). Activists’ influence tactics and corporate policies. Business Communication Quarterly, 71, 107-111.
6.
DenisJ.-L.LangleyA.RouleauL. (2007). Strategizing in pluralistic contexts: Rethinking theoretical frames. Human Relations, 6, 179-215.
7.
ErikssonP.LehtimäkiH. (2001). Strategy rhetoric in city management: How do the presumptions of classic strategic management live on?Scandinavian Journal of Management, 17, 201-223.
8.
JoutsenvirtaM.VaaraE. (2009). Discursive (de)legitimation of a contested Finnish Greenfield investment project in Latin America. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 25, 85-96.
9.
KujalaJ.ToikkaT.HeikkinenA. (2009). Communicating corporate responsibility through media. Progress in Industrial Ecology: An International Journal, 6, 404-420.
10.
LevinL. A.BehrensS. J. (2003). From swoosh to swoon: Linguistic analysis of Nike’s changing image. Business Communication Quarterly, 66(3), 52-65.
11.
MahinL. (1998). Critical thinking and business ethics. Business Communication Quarterly, 61(3), 74-78.
12.
MattenD.MoonJ. (2008). “Implicit” and “explicit” CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33, 404-424.
13.
O’NeilR.PientaD. A. (1994). Economic criteria versus ethical criteria: Toward resolving a basic dilemma in business. Journal of Business Ethics, 13, 71-78.
PakkasvirtaJ. (2008). From pulp to fiction? Fray Bentos pulp investment conflict through the Finnish media. Cooperation and Conflict, 43, 421-446.
27.
PanapanaanV. M.LinnanenL.KarvonenM.-M.PhanV. T. (2003). Roadmapping corporate social responsibility in Finnish companies. Journal of Business Ethics, 44, 133-148.
28.
SkippariM.PajunenK. (2010). MNE–NGO–host government relationships in the escalation of an FDI conflict. Business & Society, 49, 619-651.
29.
SokuvitzS.GeorgeA. M. (2003). Teaching culture: The challenges and opportunities of international public relations. Business Communication Quarterly, 66(2), 97-113.
30.
SteurerR.LangerM. E.KonradA.MartinuzziA. (2005). Corporations, stakeholders and sustainable development I: A theoretical exploration of business–society relations. Journal of Business Ethics, 61, 263-281.
31.
WhysallP. (2004). What can we learn from retailers’ news releases? A “stakeholder engagement” perspective. International Review of Retail, Distribution and Consumer Research, 14, 31-45.
