IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/ijbmjn/v16y2023i2p96.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fostering Stakeholder Engagement through Companies’ Website: A Comparison between Sector

Author

Listed:
  • Eva Cerioni

Abstract

During the years, different authors underline the role of CSR communication as an instrument of transparency towards the stakeholders of each company. In the scenario emerge the importance of stakeholder engagement for estabilish between company and stakeholders “proactive and ongoing dialogue†, trough Internet and it’s tools as a facilitator of corporate communicative action. With the aim of communicating with the stakeholders, companies can implement different methods of engagement. Operating in different sectors many time it is an additional variable that influences the practice of CSR communication, will it be the same for the stakeholder engagement methods adopted? This contribution analyses, through a content analysis, all the stakeholder engagement tools used by the 316 companies listed in DJSI on their institutional websites. The DJSI companies are strongly motivated to commit in economic, social and environmental terms and belonging to 24 different sectors thus allowing to carry out inter-sectoral analyzes. There are two main results- prevailing use of one-way communication tools regardless of the sector of the company and a widespread choice to use social media as the main two-way communication tool. If the sector of belonging, in other study has turned out to be an influential variable, the same cannot be said in relation to stakeholder engagement tools. This study has three main limitations- data change speed, language and method. In the future, understanding the expectations and needs of stakeholders related to CSR communication could be intersting to analyse.

Suggested Citation

  • Eva Cerioni, 2023. "Fostering Stakeholder Engagement through Companies’ Website: A Comparison between Sector," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 16(2), pages 1-96, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:ijbmjn:v:16:y:2023:i:2:p:96
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijbm/article/download/0/0/44674/47200
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijbm/article/view/0/44674
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Janet Elaine Haddock‐Fraser & Marielle Tourelle, 2010. "Corporate motivations for environmental sustainable development: exploring the role of consumers in stakeholder engagement," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(8), pages 527-542, December.
    2. Riccardo Torelli & Federica Balluchi & Katia Furlotti, 2020. "The materiality assessment and stakeholder engagement: A content analysis of sustainability reports," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(2), pages 470-484, March.
    3. Patten, Dennis M., 2002. "The relation between environmental performance and environmental disclosure: a research note," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 27(8), pages 763-773, November.
    4. Magnus Frostenson & Sven Helin & Johan Sandström, 2011. "Organising Corporate Responsibility Communication Through Filtration: A Study of Web Communication Patterns in Swedish Retail," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 100(1), pages 31-43, April.
    5. Stephen J. Brammer & Stephen Pavelin, 2006. "Corporate Reputation and Social Performance: The Importance of Fit," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(3), pages 435-455, May.
    6. Williams, S. Mitchell & Ho Wern Pei, Carol-Anne, 1999. "Corporate social disclosures by listed companies on their web sites: an international comparison," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 389-419, August.
    7. Diane Holt & Ralf Barkemeyer & Frank Figge & Christian Herzig & Jasmin Godemann, 2010. "Internet‐supported sustainability reporting: developments in Germany," Management Research Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 33(11), pages 1064-1082, September.
    8. Alfonso Siano & Francesca Conte & Sara Amabile & Agostino Vollero & Paolo Piciocchi, 2016. "Communicating Sustainability: An Operational Model for Evaluating Corporate Websites," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(9), pages 1-16, September.
    9. Guthrie, James & Cuganesan, Suresh & Ward, Leanne, 2008. "Industry specific social and environmental reporting: The Australian Food and Beverage Industry," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 1-15.
    10. Unerman, Jeffrey & Bennett, Mark, 2004. "Increased stakeholder dialogue and the internet: towards greater corporate accountability or reinforcing capitalist hegemony?," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 29(7), pages 685-707, October.
    11. Christian Herzig & Jasmin Godemann, 2010. "Internet‐supported sustainability reporting: developments in Germany," Management Research Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 33(11), pages 1064-1082, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rowbottom, N. & Lymer, A., 2009. "Exploring the use of online corporate sustainability information," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 176-186.
    2. María D. Odriozola & Elisa Baraibar‐Diez, 2017. "Is Corporate Reputation Associated with Quality of CSR Reporting? Evidence from Spain," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(2), pages 121-132, March.
    3. Abeer Hassan & Essam Ibrahim, 2012. "Corporate Environmental Information Disclosure: Factors Influencing Companies' Success in Attaining Environmental Awards," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(1), pages 32-46, January.
    4. Giorgio Mion, 2020. "Organizations with Impact? A Study on Italian Benefit Corporations Reporting Practices and Reporting Quality," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-21, October.
    5. Riccardo Torelli & Federica Balluchi & Katia Furlotti, 2020. "The materiality assessment and stakeholder engagement: A content analysis of sustainability reports," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(2), pages 470-484, March.
    6. H. L. Zou & R. C. Zeng & S. X. Zeng & Jonathan J. Shi, 2015. "How Do Environmental Violation Events Harm Corporate Reputation?," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(8), pages 836-854, December.
    7. Bouten, Lies & Everaert, Patricia, 2015. "Social and environmental reporting in Belgium: ‘Pour vivre heureux, vivons cachés’," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 24-43.
    8. Aerts, Walter & Cormier, Denis & Magnan, Michel, 2008. "Corporate environmental disclosure, financial markets and the media: An international perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(3), pages 643-659, January.
    9. Ki‐Hoon Lee, 2017. "Does Size Matter? Evaluating Corporate Environmental Disclosure in the Australian Mining and Metal Industry: A Combined Approach of Quantity and Quality Measurement," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 209-223, February.
    10. Kouassi Marius Honoré Aké & Olivier Boiral, 2023. "Sustainable development and stakeholder engagement in the agri‐food sector: Exploring the nexus between biodiversity conservation and information technology," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(1), pages 334-348, February.
    11. Bouten, Lies & Everaert, Patricia & Van Liedekerke, Luc & De Moor, Lieven & Christiaens, Johan, 2011. "Corporate social responsibility reporting: A comprehensive picture?," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 187-204.
    12. Guidry, Ronald P. & Patten, Dennis M., 2012. "Voluntary disclosure theory and financial control variables: An assessment of recent environmental disclosure research," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 81-90.
    13. Pablo Gomez‐Carrasco & Giovanna Michelon, 2017. "The Power of Stakeholders' Voice: The Effects of Social Media Activism on Stock Markets," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(6), pages 855-872, September.
    14. Grueso Gala, Melanie & Camisón Zornoza, César, 2022. "A bibliometric analysis of the literature on non-financial information reporting: Review of the research and network visualization," Cuadernos de Gestión, Universidad del País Vasco - Instituto de Economía Aplicada a la Empresa (IEAE).
    15. Syeda Khiraza Naqvi & Faisal Shahzad & Ijaz Ur Rehman & Fiza Qureshi & Usama Laique, 2021. "Corporate social responsibility performance and information asymmetry: The moderating role of analyst coverage," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(6), pages 1549-1563, November.
    16. Radhakrishnan, Suresh & Tsang, Albert & Liu, Rubing, 2018. "A Corporate Social Responsibility Framework for Accounting Research," The International Journal of Accounting, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 274-294.
    17. Varsha Sehgal & Naval Garg & Jagvinder Singh, 2023. "Impact of sustainability performance & reporting on a firm’s reputation," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 14(1), pages 228-240, February.
    18. Patten, Dennis M. & Zhao, Na, 2014. "Standalone CSR reporting by U.S. retail companies," Accounting forum, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 132-144.
    19. Torelli, Riccardo & Balluchi, Federica & Furlotti, Katia, 2019. "The materiality assessment and stakeholder engagement: A content analysis of sustainability reports," OSF Preprints tw6c7, Center for Open Science.
    20. Gregory D. Saxton & Charlotte Ren & Chao Guo, 2021. "Responding to Diffused Stakeholders on Social Media: Connective Power and Firm Reactions to CSR-Related Twitter Messages," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 172(2), pages 229-252, August.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:ijbmjn:v:16:y:2023:i:2:p:96. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.