CSR Communications on Twitter: An Exploration into Stakeholder Reactions
The chapter explores CSR communications on Twitter and examines stakeholder reactions to the communication approaches of global food and beverage brands. The purpose is to gain insights into how companies communicate CSR on Twitter and how stakeholders perceive such approaches. Over 3000 Tweets from three companies and their stakeholders were collected using purposive sampling and coded using content analysis. The analysis revealed that a higher CSR ranking (Global CSR RepTrak 100) is an indicator of a higher amount of CSR communications. Findings suggest that product-related initiatives are well received by stakeholders and that there is a desire for more communication about the responsibility of products. The study contributes to the academic literature as it found that none of the companies were seen to have a two-way symmetrical dialogue approach, instead that companies are using a selective-dialogue approach when communicating on Twitter. The paper concludes that a more open dialogic approach to CSR communications on Twitter is not only better perceived than broadcast type communication by stakeholders, but that using stakeholder insights from this platform can aid companies in making strategic CSR decisions.
KeywordsCSR communication Twitter Stakeholder engagement Dialogue
- Becker-Olsen, K.L., and R.P. Hill. 2006. The Impact of Sponsor Fit on Brand Equity: The Case of Nonprofit Service Providers. Journal of Service Research: 73–83.Google Scholar
- Devinney, T.M. 2009. Is the Socially Responsible Corporation a Myth? The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly of Corporate Social Responsibility. Academy of Management Perspectives: 44–54.Google Scholar
- Nguyen, Cau Ngoc, and Renee Oyotode. 2015. The Moderating Effect of Marketing Capabilities on the Relationship Between Changes in CSR perceptions and Changes in Brand Equity. International Management Review 11 (1): 17.Google Scholar
- Peloza, J., and Shang, J. (2011). Investing in CSR to Enhance Customer Value. The Conference Board 3(3) [Online]. https://www.conference-board.org/retrievefile.cfm?filename=TCB%20DN-V3N3-111.pdf&type=subsite. Accessed 24 Sept 2015.
- Reputation Institute. (2014). 2014 CSR Global RepTrak 100 [Online]. https://www.reputationinstitute.com/Resources/Registered/PDF-Resources/2014-CSR-RepTrak-100-Study.aspx. Accessed 23 Sept 2015.
- The Ethical Consumer. (2017). The Best and the Worst of the Last 25 Years [online]. http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/aboutus/ethicalconsumerat25/thebestandworstofthelast25years.aspx. Accessed 25 May 2017.