IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/accfor/v39y2015i4p312-327.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A feedback-based model for CSR assessment and materiality analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Armando Calabrese
  • Roberta Costa
  • Francesco Rosati

Abstract

Current CSR literature offers little insight into how to engage customers and other stakeholders about their CSR expectations and perceptions. The aim of this paper is to propose a model for CSR evaluation and planning based on the classification of customer CSR feedback through the comparison of three aspects of CSR commitment (disclosed, perceived and expected). Although the paper is focused on customers, the model can be applied indifferently to any stakeholder group, thus providing a valuable instrument for materiality analysis and stakeholder engagement. In effect, the model allows identifying material CSR issues regarding all stakeholder perceptions and expectations.

Suggested Citation

  • Armando Calabrese & Roberta Costa & Francesco Rosati, 2015. "A feedback-based model for CSR assessment and materiality analysis," Accounting Forum, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(4), pages 312-327, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:accfor:v:39:y:2015:i:4:p:312-327
    DOI: 10.1016/j.accfor.2015.06.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1016/j.accfor.2015.06.002
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.accfor.2015.06.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rita Henriques & Cristina Gaio & Marisa Costa, 2022. "Sustainability Reporting Quality and Stakeholder Engagement Assessment: The Case of the Paper Sector at the Iberian Level," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-14, November.
    2. Mariappanadar, Sugumar & Maurer, Iris & Kramar, Robin & Muller-Camen, Michael, 2022. "Is it a sententious claim? An examination of the quality of occupational health, safety and well-being disclosures in global reporting initiative reports across industries and countries," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(2).
    3. Andrea Venturelli & Simone Pizzi & Fabio Caputo & Salvatore Principale, 2020. "The revision of nonfinancial reporting directive: A critical lens on the comparability principle," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(8), pages 3584-3597, December.
    4. Labrini Sideri, 2021. "Leveraging CSR for Sustainability: Assessing Performance Implications of Sustainability Reporting in a National Business System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-16, May.
    5. Hana Mohelska & Marcela Sokolova, 2017. "Innovative Culture of the Organization and Its Role in the Concept of Corporate Social Responsibility ? Czech Republic Case Study," The AMFITEATRU ECONOMIC journal, Academy of Economic Studies - Bucharest, Romania, vol. 19(46), pages 853-853, August.
    6. 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.
    7. Jordan Famularo, 2023. "Corporate social responsibility communication in the ICT sector: digital issues, greenwashing, and materiality," International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 1-25, December.
    8. 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.
    9. Charles H. Cho & Kathrin Bohr & Tony Jaehyun Choi & Katharine Partridge & Jhankrut Mukesh Shah & Ada Swierszcz, 2020. "Advancing Sustainability Reporting in Canada: 2019 Report on Progress," Accounting Perspectives, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 181-204, September.
    10. Cinthia Leonora Murillo‐Avalos & Mitzi Cubilla‐Montilla & Miguel Ángel Celestino Sánchez & Purificación Vicente‐Galindo, 2021. "What environmental social responsibility practices do large companies manage for sustainable development?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(1), pages 153-168, January.
    11. Helena Ranängen & Mathias Cöster & Raine Isaksson & Rickard Garvare, 2018. "From Global Goals and Planetary Boundaries to Public Governance—A Framework for Prioritizing Organizational Sustainability Activities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-26, August.
    12. Francesco Rosati & Lourenço Galvão Diniz Faria, 2019. "Business contribution to the Sustainable Development Agenda: Organizational factors related to early adoption of SDG reporting," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(3), pages 588-597, May.
    13. Francesco Rosati & Roberta Costa & Armando Calabrese & Esben Rahbek Gjerdrum Pedersen, 2018. "Employee attitudes towards corporate social responsibility: a study on gender, age and educational level differences," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(6), pages 1306-1319, November.
    14. Joel A. Martínez-Regalado & Cinthia Leonora Murillo-Avalos & Purificación Vicente-Galindo & Mónica Jiménez-Hernández & José Luis Vicente-Villardón, 2021. "Using HJ-Biplot and External Logistic Biplot as Machine Learning Methods for Corporate Social Responsibility Practices for Sustainable Development," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(20), pages 1-16, October.
    15. Maria Teresa Lamata & Vicente Liern & Blanca Pérez-Gladish, 2018. "Doing good by doing well: a MCDM framework for evaluating corporate social responsibility attractiveness," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 267(1), pages 249-266, August.
    16. Jintao Lu & Mengshang Liang & Chong Zhang & Dan Rong & Hailing Guan & Kristina Mazeikaite & Justas Streimikis, 2021. "Assessment of corporate social responsibility by addressing sustainable development goals," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 686-703, March.
    17. Xiao, Xinning & Shailer, Greg, 2022. "Stakeholders’ perceptions of factors affecting the credibility of sustainability reports," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(1).
    18. Alicia Girón & Amirreza Kazemikhasragh & Antonella Francesca Cicchiello & Eva Panetti, 2021. "Sustainability Reporting and Firms’ Economic Performance: Evidence from Asia and Africa," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(4), pages 1741-1759, December.
    19. Andrew S. Chang & Larissa S. Paramosa & Calista Y. Tsai, 2021. "Linking key topics to environmental indicators in corporate social responsibility reports of construction companies," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(4), pages 1335-1347, July.
    20. Susie Ruqun Wu & Changliang Shao & Jiquan Chen, 2018. "Approaches on the Screening Methods for Materiality in Sustainability Reporting," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-16, September.

    More about this item

    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:taf:accfor:v:39:y:2015:i:4:p:312-327. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/racc .

    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.