Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) en de invloed ervan op consumenten

Sophie

Mellen

Sophie

Mellen

In the face of growing worldwide interest in Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), this paper explores consumer perceptions related to CSR. CSR has been defined as a company’s status and activities with respect to its perceived societal or stakeholder obligations (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2004). The study investigates whether receiving information about CSR policies can influence consumers’ perceptions and their evaluation towards corporate social responsible companies. Previous research especially focused on CSR as a corporate issue, which means that it ignored other stakeholders aside from the company and its investors as for example, the essential role of consumers in marketing (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003). Today, marketers need to be aware of the impact consumers have on companies. Concerns related to the environment are evident for the increasing ecologically conscious consumer and consumers demand more and more CSR information from companies (Oberseder, Schlegelmilch & Murphy, 2013). Conscious consumers are interested in the different initiatives companies take. Currently, the problem remains that consumers still find it hard to make a distinction between ethical and unethical companies. They are often not aware of those CSR initiatives taken (Pomering & Dolcinar, 2009). A first reason for this problem is that CSR is a complex and broad notion. For consumers who are not familiar with this concept it is hard to understand what the actual meaning of CSR is (Beckmann, 2005a). A second reason is a lack of information about CSR due to insufficient communication about the CSR initiatives of companies (Singh, Sanchez, & Del Bosque, 2008).

In order to make consumers more aware of CSR, communication about CSR initiatives of a company is important and should be enhanced and encouraged by companies (Panapanaan, Linnanen, Karnoven, & Phan, 2003). In particular marketeers are responsible for these communication initiatives and should have a better understanding of the consumers’ point of view in order to adjust their CSR implementation to consumers’ beliefs and expectations (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2004). Nowadays, consumers receive a lot of conflicting information about CSR initiatives undertaken by companies which makes it even harder for consumers to make the distinction between socially conscious and irresponsible companies (Boulstridge & Carrigan, 2000). Consequently, reactions to CSR are not as straighforward and evident as they seem. There are strong differences in reactions when receiving positive or negative information of a firms behavior. Receiving positive information leads to positive perceptions although these are not usually translating into actual purchase behavior (Lee & Shin, 2009; Mohr, Webb, & Harris, 2001). In order for social responsibility to lead to positive attitudes, the CSR has to be pereceived as trustworthy by consumers (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2003). Receiving negative information results in developing negative attitudes towards such company and consequently may lead to boycotts (Lin-Hi & Müller, 2013; Yoon, Gurhan-Canli, & Schwarz, 2006). Despite the fact that perceptions might not result in actual purchase behaviour, the role that perceptions play cannot be underestimated (Beckmann, 2005a). A company with CSR can influence attitudes towards itself as well as towards new products it manufactured (Ellen, Mohr, & Webb, 2006). Also, CSR associations may have effects on consumer’s corporate evaluations (Bhattacharya & Sen, 2004). When studies examine the impact of information about firms’ ethics, consumers’ evaluations are often explained in terms of self-interest or social pressure. Little empirical research has been performed about the impact of information about CSR on enhancing consumers’ perceptions towards an ethically behaving company. This study examines whether or not consumers react differently towards companies when receiving information about their CSR approach.

As consumers’ perceptions of CSR are complex to research, a quantitative approach offers some advantages. Through an online inquiry form, spread through Facebook, 200 participants have been reached in a fast way. 90% of the participants were still studying. 63% were female participants and 36.5% were male participants. The average age was 21 years old. Importantly, a quantitative research design gives the opportunity to draw causal relations between independent and dependent variables. This was necessary because of two manipulations used in this study.

-The first manipulation consisted in measuring the influence of receiving ‘general’ CSR information on participants’ perceptions. Participants either received general CSR information, general CSR information with a statement on strategic interests or no CSR information at all.
-The second manipulation consisted in measuring the influence of receiving ‘company related CSR information’ in comparison to receiving ‘company related information without any mentioning’ of CSR. Six conditions could be formed. Approximately 30 participants were exposed to each condition.

With regard to the consumer participants, the underlying dimension was consumers’ attitudes towards CSR, their evaluations of the reputation of the company and their purchase intentions towards the company. In first instance, this master thesis attempts to prove that consumers’ attitudes and evaluations of the reputation of the company will tend to become more positive after having received company related CSR information than when no information is given about the company’s CSR initiatives (Hypothesis 1). A second hypothesis expects also purchase intentions to grow stronger and more positive after having received company related CSR information than participants who did not receive any information of CSR initiatives from the company (Hypothesis 2). As previously mentioned, gathering general information in advance about CSR may enhance consumers understanding of the concept and lead to more positive attitudes and better evaluations of the company’s reputation, as well as stronger purchase intentions towards the company after having received company related CSR information (Hypothesis 3 and Hypothesis 4). Furthermore, previous research emphasized that negative information may lead consumers to boycot supposodedly unethical firm’s whereas positive information leads to positive reactions towards a firm behaving ethically. This is why the study expected participants who only received general information on strategic interests in relation to CSR policies would evaluate a company with CSR more negatively after having received company related CSR information (Hypothesis 5). Participants would show a more negative attitude towards the company, evaluate the reputation of the company more badly, and develop negative purchase intentions towards such company.

The results indicated that attitude and evaluations on the reputation of the company become more positive towards the company after receiving company related CSR information in comparison with those who did not receive any company related CSR information (Hypothesis 1 and Hypothesis 2). This was not the case with purchase intentions. Participants did not show more positive purchase intentions after being exposed to company related CSR information. The hypotheses regarding the influence of receiving general (positive) information on more positive company evaluations after reading company related CSR information was not supported. Strangely, participants showed more positive attitudes and more positive company evaluations on reputation when they received general CSR information with strategic mentioning than when they did not receive any information about CSR. There was no influence on purchase behaviour. Hypothesis 3 and hypothesis 4 cannot be confirmed. Lastly, this study expected participants who received general information of CSR with strategic mentioning to react more negative towards the company after receiving company related CSR information. Instead of more negative they reacted more positive towards the company (Hypothesis 5). This might be related to some limitations of the study as for example the manipulation regarding general CSR information that was not successful.

Based on these findings the role of CSR on consumers’ perception has been confirmed. Consumers pay attention to CSR initiatives that companies take when they are aware of the CSR approach of a company. Consumers develop positive attitudes towards a social responsible company and evaluate the companies’ reputation more positively. Although positive influences occurred when receiving company related CSR information, such influence did not occur when participants received general (positive) information on CSR before receiving company related CSR information. This might be due to the second manipulation that was not successful. This means that marketing managers have to bear in mind the complex consumer evaluation process required to achieve consumers’ appreciation of CSR efforts. Companies should pay more attention in communicating their specific CSR initiatives related to the company’s business to consumers.

Bibliografie

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1977). Attitude-behavior relations: A theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychological Bulletin, 84, pp. 888-918.

Auger, P., Burke, P., Devinney, T. M., & Louviere, J. J. (2003). What will consumers pay for social product features? Journal of Business Ethics. 42(3), pp. 281-330.

Auger, P., Devinney, T. M., Louviere, J. J., & Burke, P. F. (2008). Do social product features have value for consumers? International Journal of Research in Marketing, 25(3), pp. 183-191.

Balmer, J. M. T., & Greyser, S. A. (2006). Corporate marketing: integrating corporate identity, corporate branding, corporate communications, corporate reputation. European Journal of Marketing, 40(9-10). pp. 730-812.

Barone, M. J., Miyazaki, A. D., Taylor, K. A. (2000). The Influence of Cause-Related Marketing on Consumer Choice: Does One Good Turn Deserve Another? Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), pp. 248-262.

Basu, K., & Palazzo, G. (2008). Corporate Social Responsibility: A Process Model of Sensemaking. Academy of Management Review, 33(1), pp. 122-136.

Beckmann, S. C. (2005a). Consumers’ perceptions of and responses to CSR: So little is known so far.

Bhattacharya C. B., & Sen, S. (2003), Consumer-company identification: a framework for understanding consumers' relationships with companies, Journal of Marketing, 67(2), pp.76-88.

Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2004). Doing better at Doing Good: when, why, and how consumers respond to corporate social initiatives. California Management Review, 47(1), pp. 9-24.

Billiet, J., & Waege, H. (2003). Een samenleving onderzocht, methoden van sociaal- wetenschappelijk onderzoek. Berchem: De Boeck.

Boulstridge, E., & Carrigan, M. (2000). Do consumers really care about corporate responsibility? Highlighting the attitude-behaviour gap. Journal of Communication Management, 4(4), pp. 355- 368.

Campbell, J. L. (2007) ‘Why Would Corporations Behave in Socially Responsible Ways? An Institutional Theory of Corporate Social Responsibility’, Academy of Management Review, 32(3), pp. 946–967.

Carrigan, M., & Attalla, A. (2001). The myth of the ethical consumer – do ethics matter in purchase behaviour? Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), pp. 560-578.

Carroll, A. B. (1991). “The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders”. Business Horizons, 34(4). pp. 30-48.

Carroll, A. B. (2008). A history of corporate social responsibility: concepts and practices. In A. Crane, A. McWilliams, D., Matten, J. Moon & D. S. Siegel (Eds.). The Oxford handbook of corporate social responsibility (pp. 19-4). United States: Oxford University Press.

Carter, C. R. & Rogers, D. S. (2008). A framework of sustainable supply chain management toward new theory. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 38(5), pp. 360-387.

Colruyt Group. (2013). Een nieuwe wind in duurzaamheid: duurzaam ondernemen. [15.05.2014, Colruyt Group: http://www.colruytgroup.be/nl/duurzaam-ondernemen].

Cone Communications. (27.03.2012): Consumers still purchasing, but may not be “buying” companies’ environmental claims. [22/04/2014, Cone Communications: http://www.conecomm.com/stuff/contentmgr/files/0/1b7667e63cd5dd2858bd5a… 2012_cone_green_gap_trend_tracker_release_and_fact_sheet.pdf].

Cone Communications. (2013). Cone communications social impact study: the next cause evolution. [18.05.2014, Cone Communications: http://www.conecomm.com/stuff/contentmgr/files/0/e3d2eec1e15e858867a5c2… 013_cone_comm_social_impact_study.pdf].

Creyer, E. H., & Ross, J. (1997). "The influence of firm behavior on purchase intention: do consumers really care about business ethics?" Journal of Consumer Marketing, 14(6), pp. 419- 432.

Currás-Pérez, R., Bigné-Alcañiz, E., & Alvarado-Herrera, A. (2009). The role of self-definitional principles in consumer identification with a socially responsible company. Journal of Business Ethics, 89(4), pp. 547-564.

Dawkins, J. (2004) “Corporate responsibility: the communication challenge” in Journal of Communications Management, 9(3), pp.108-119.

De Pelsmacker, P., Driesen, L., & Rayp, G (2005). Do consumers care about ethics? Willingness to pay for Fair-Trade Coffee. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 39(2), pp. 363-385.

Di Maio & Fabbri, (2010). Consumer Boycott, Household Heterogeneity and child labour. [15.04.2014, Discussion paper: http://sites.uclouvain.be/econ/DP/IRES/2010036.pdf]

Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2007). Reaping relational rewards from corporate social responsibility: the role of competitive positioning. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 24(3), pp. 224–241.

Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2010). Maximizing Business Returns to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR): The Role of CSR Communication. International Journal of Management R eviews, 12(1), pp. 8‐19.

Ellen, P. S., Webb, D. J., & Mohr, L. A. (2006). Building Corporate Associations: Consumer Attributions for Corporate Social Responsibility Programs? Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), pp. 147-157.

Elkington, J. (1998). Cannibals with forks: the triple bottom line of 21st century business. Oxford: Capstone Publisher Ltd.

Field, A (3rd ed.), (2009). Discovering Statistics using SPSS. London: Sage.

Franklin, D. (17.01.2008). Just good business: A special report on corporate social responsibility. [20/04/2014, The Economist: http://www.economist.com/node/10491077].

Göbbels M. (2002b). Reframing corporate social responsibility: the contemporary conception of a fuzzy notion. In M. Van Marrewijk (Reds.), Concepts and Definitions of CSR and Corporate Sustainability: Between Agency and Communion. Journal of Business Ethics.

Godfrey, P. C & Hatch, N. W. (2007). Researching Corporate Social Responsibility: An Agenda for the 21st Century. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(1), pp. 97-98.

Green, T., & Peloza, J. (2011). How does corporate social responsibility create value for consumers?. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 28(1), pp. 48-56.

Helmig, B., Spraul, K., & Ingenhoff. D. (2013). Under positive pressure: How Stakeholder pressure affects corporate social responsibility implementation. Business and Society, 37(1), pp. 37-55.

Henderson, D. (2001). Misguided virtue: False notions of corporate social reponsibility. London: Institute of Economic Affairs.

Henriques, I. & Sadorsky, P. (1999). `The relationship between environmental commitment and managerial perceptions of stakeholder importance'', Academy of Management Review, 42(1), pp. 87-99.

Kaur, P. (2013). CSR and Consumer Affairs, an Unresolved Paradox: An Empirical Study in Indian Perspective. Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention, 2(11), pp. 58-66.

Kent, T., & Stone, D. (2007). The Body Shop and the role of design in retail branding. International Journal Of Retail & Distribution Mangament, 35(7), pp. 531-543.

Klein, N. (2000). No Logo: taking aim at the brand bullies. HarperCollins: New York.

Koschate-Fischer, N., Stefan, I. V, & Hoyer, W. D. (2012). Willingness to Pay for Cause-Related Marketing: The Impact of Donation Amount and Moderating Effects. Journal of Marketing Research, 49, pp. 910–927.

Lee, K. H., & Shin, D. (2010). Consumers’ responses to CSR activities: The linkage between increased awareness and purchase intention. Publications review, 36(2), pp. 193-195.

Lin-Hi, N., & Müller, K. (2013). The CSR bottom line: preventing corporate social irresponsibility. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), pp.1928-1926.

Lyon, L., & Cameron, G. T. (2004). A relational approach examining the interplay of prior reputation and immediate response to a crisis. Journal of Public Relations Research, 16(3), pp. 213-241.

Maignan, I. & Ferrel, O. C. (2000). Measuring Corporate Citizenship in two countries. The case of the United States and France. Journal of Business Ethics, 23(3), pp. 283-297.

Maignan, I. (2001). Consumers’ perceptions of corporate social responsibilities: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Business Ethics, 30(1), pp. 57-72.

Maignan, I. & Ferrell, O. C. (2003). Nature of corporate responsibilities: Perspectives from American, French, and German consumers. Journal of Business Research, 56(1), pp. 55-67.

Maignan, I., & Ferrell, O. C. (2004). Corporate Social Responsibility and Marketing: An Integrative Framework? Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32(1), pp. 3-19.

Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), pp. 853-86.

Mitchell, A. A., Olson, J. C. (1981). Are product attribute beliefs the only mediator of advertising effects on brand attitude? Journal of Marketing Research. 18, pp. 318-322.

Mohr, L. A., Webb, D.. J., & Harris, K. E. (2001). Do consumers expect companies to be socially responsible? The impact of corporate social responsibility on buying behavior. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 35(1), pp. 45-72.

Mohr, L. A. & Webb, D. J. (2005). The effects of Corporate Social responsibility and price on consumer responses. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 39(1), pp. 121-147.

Oberseder, M., Schlegelmilch, B. B., & Murphy, P. E. (2013). CSR Practices and Consumer Perceptions. Journal of Business Research, 66, pp. 1839-1851.

Over, W. (1999). Human rights in the international public sphere: civic discourse for the 21st century. USA: Stamford.

Panapanaan, V. M., Linnanen, L., Karnoven, P. & Phan, K. (2003). "Roadmapping Corporate Social Responsibility in Finnish Companies." Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2), pp. 133- 148.

Parguel, B., Benoît-Moreau, F., & Larceneux, F. (2011). How sustainability ratings might deter ‘Greenwashing’: A closer look at ethical corporate communication. Journal of Business ethics, 102(1), pp. 15-28.

Pomering, A. & Dolnicar, S. (2009). Assessing the prerequisite of successful CSR implementation: are consumers aware of CSR initiatives?. Journal of Business Ethics, 85 (2s), pp. 285-301.

Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2006). Strategy and society. The link between competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 84(12) pp. 1-15.

Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). The big idea: creating shared values. Harvard Business Review.

Pirsch, J., Gupta, S. & Grau, S. L. (2007). A framework for understanding corporate social responsibility programs as a continuum: an exploratory study. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(2), pp. 125-140.

Post, J. (1985). Assessing the Nestle Boycott: Corporate Accountability and Human Rights. California Management Review, 27(2). pp. 113-131.

Reidenbach, R. E; Robin, D. P. (1990) Toward the Development of a Multidimensional Scale for Improving Evaluations of Business Ethics, Journal of Business Ethics, 9, pp. 639-653.

Sandelowski, M. (2000). Whatever happened to qualitative description? Research in nursing & health, 23, pp. 334-340.

Schmeltz, L. (2012). Consumer-oriented CSR communication: focusing on ability or morality? Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 17(1), pp.29-49.

Sen, S., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Does doing good always lead to doing better? Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility. Journal of Marketing Research, 38(2), pp. 225–243.

Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Korschun, D. (2006). The role of corporate social responsibility in strengthening multiple stakeholder relationships. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), pp. 158−166.

Schwartz, M. S. & Carroll, A. B. (2003). Corporate social responsibility: A three-domain approach. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(4). pp. 503-530.

Scott, S. G. & Lane, V.R. (2000). A stakeholder approach to organizational identity”, Academy of Management review, 25(1), pp. 43–62.

Sheth, J. N., Newman, B. I., & Gross, B. L. (1991). Why we buy what we buy: A theory of consumption values. Journal of Business Research, 22(2), pp. 159-170.

Sierzschula, W., Bakker, S., Maat, K., & Van Wee, B. (2012). The competitive environment of electric vehicles: An analysis of prototype and production models. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 2, pp. 49-65.

Skarmeas, D., & Leonidou, C. N. (2013). When consumers doubt, watch out! : the role of CSR scepticism. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), pp.1831-1838.

Simmons, J. (2004). ‘Managing in the post-managerialist era: towards socially responsible corporate governance’, Management Decision, 42(3–4), pp.601–611.

Singh, J., Sanchez, M. M. G., & Del Bosque, I. R. (2008). Understanding Corporate Social Responsibility and Product Perception in Consumer Markets: A Cross-cultural Evaluation. Journal of Business Ethics. 80, pp. 597-611.

Unie van Belgische Adverteerders, (2010). Maatschappelijk verantwoord communiceren: aanbevelingen van het Expertise Center MVO van de UBA in samenwerking met Business&Society Belgium. Strombeek-Bever: Unie van Belgische Adverteerders

Vagias, W. M. (2006). Likert-type scale response anchors. Clemson International Institute for Tourism & Research Development.

Van Marrewijk, M. (2003). CSR and corporate sustainability: between agency and communication. Journal of Business Ethics, 44(2-3), pp. 658-672.

Vlachos, P. A., Tsamakos, A., Vrechopoulos, A. P., & Avramidis, P. K. (2009). Corporate social responsibility: attributions, loyalty, and the mediating role of trust. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 37(2), pp. 170–180.

Yoon, Y., Gurhan-Canli, Z. & Schwarz, N. (2006). The effect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities on companies with bad reputations. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 16(4), pp. 377–390.

Wagner, T., Richard L., & Barton A. W. (2009). Corporate Hypocrisy: Overcoming the Threat of Inconsistent Corporate Social Responsibility Perceptions, Journal of Marketing, 73(6), pp. 77–91.

Windsor, D. (2001). ‘The Future of Corporate Social Responsibility, International Journal of Organizational Analysis, 9(3), pp. 225–256.