Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorDitlev-Simonsen, Caroline D.
dc.contributor.authorWenstøp, Søren
dc.date.accessioned2012-03-28T11:43:30Z
dc.date.available2012-03-28T11:43:30Z
dc.date.issued2011
dc.identifier.issn1978-0591 (e-utg)
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/93470
dc.descriptionThis is the authors’ final, accepted and refereed manuscript to the articleno_NO
dc.description.abstractThis paper investigates rhetoric applied in 80 Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) reports in 2005. A taxonomy of five distinct rhetorical strategies for describing the purpose of CSR is applied; Agency (profit), Benefit (collective welfare), Compliance (laws and contracts), Duty (duties), and Ethos (virtue). The findings reveal that very different rhetoric is applied. Ethos is the most common ethical perspective expressed in the reports, Benefit and Agency are on second and third place. Specific patterns of ethical reasoning appear to be common, while other possible reasoning strategies are rare. The most prevalent pattern of ethical reasoning is to link Agency and Benefit perspectives, claiming that Benefit is done for the sake of Agency. These findings constitute a new approach in CSR research.no_NO
dc.language.isoengno_NO
dc.publisherISEAno_NO
dc.subjectcorporate social responsibility (CSR)no_NO
dc.subjectreportingno_NO
dc.subjectethicsno_NO
dc.subjectrhetoricno_NO
dc.titleCompanies’ ethical commitment: an analysis of the rhetoric in CSR reportsno_NO
dc.typeJournal articleno_NO
dc.typePeer reviewedno_NO
dc.source.pagenumber65-81no_NO
dc.source.volume5no_NO
dc.source.journalIssues in Social and Environmental Accountingno_NO
dc.source.issue1/2no_NO


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel