Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Handbook of Business Legitimacy pp 1–16Cite as

Dialogue and Business Legitimacy

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:

  • 149 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter presents two mental models for justification of business legitimacy. One is the public arena, and the other is the corporate public diamond. As presented in this chapter, the imagination of a public arena with an agenda for societal debates is linked to developments in the modern era, including the idea of individual freedom, the acknowledgment of reason as important for building knowledge, steam-powered printing presses, and national autonomous mass media. The model makes most sense in societies, where fundamental norms and values are shared and business practices can be tested in relation to them. Mass media reports on fraud, unsanitary, and inhumane working conditions in the meat-packing industry in the twentieth century are mentioned as an example of how the public arena best works. The corporate legitimacy diamond reflects contemporary thinking. Using the public arena as a point of departure, it adds a corporate public diplomacy level. The model takes into consideration the post-millennium quest for human dignity and localized trust. When transnational corporations invest in many parts of the world, they are faced with many different perspectives on what constitute legitimate business behavior. They need to balance local norms and values around the globe, because social media allow a transnational audience to discuss their legitimacy. Using diplomatic practices, corporations can build long-term relationships, share information, and make compromises with local civic society representatives. Human resource management and plans for constructions are mentioned as examples of topics to be negotiated between corporations and civic society.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

References

  • Athique A (2016) Transnational audiences: media reception on a global scale. Polity Press, Cheshire

    Google Scholar 

  • Baumann-Pauly D, Scherer AG, Palazzo G (2016) Managing institutional complexity: a longitudinal study of legitimacy strategies at a Sportswear Brand Company. J Bus Ethics 137:31–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2532-x

  • Bitektine A, Haack P (2015) The “Macro” and the “Micro” of Legitimacy: Toward a Multilevel Theory of the Legitimacy Process. Acad Manag Rev 40:49–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Boltanski L, Thévenot L (2006) On justification. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Carey JW (2002) American journalism on, before and after September 11. In: Zelizer B, Allan S (eds) Journalism after September 11. Routledge, New York, pp 71–90

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • CPJ (2019) Committee to protect journalists. https://cpj.org/. Accessed 26 Oct 2019

  • Cutlip SM (1994) The unseen power: Public relations, a history. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Der Derian J (1987) On diplomacy: a genealogy of Western estrangement. Basil Blackwell Ltd., Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Deephouse DL, Suchman MC (2008) Legitimacy in organizational institutionalism. In Greenwood R, Oliver C, Sahlin K, Suddaby R (eds) The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism. London: Sage, pp 49–77)

    Google Scholar 

  • Dicken P (2015) Global shift: mapping the changing contours of the world economy, 7th edn. SAGE, London

    Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio PJ, Powell WW (1983) The iron cage revisited: institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organiza- tional fields. Am Sociol Rev 48(2):147–160

    Google Scholar 

  • Edelman (2019) 2019 Edelman Trust Barometer reveals “my employer” is the most trusted institution. In: News Award. https://www.edelman.com/news-awards/2019-edelman-trust-barometer-reveals-my-employer-most-trusted-institution. Accessed 11 Oct 2019

  • Franklin B, Hamer M, Hanna M et al (2005) Key concepts in journalism studies. Sage, London/Thousand Oaks/New Delhi

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama F (2018) Identity. Farrar, Strauss and Giroux, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Gond JP, Barin Cruz L, Raufflet E, Charron M (2016) To frack or not to frack? The interaction of justification and power in a sustainability controversy. J Manag Stud 53:330–363. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruber L (2014) The intersection of economic development, land, and human rights law in political transitions: the case of Burma. University of California, Irvine

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1991) The structural transformation of the public sphere – an inquiry into a category of Bourgeois society. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchins RM (1947) A free and responsible press: a general report on mass communication: newspapers, radio, motion pictures, magazines, and books. Am Sociol Rev 12:486. https://doi.org/10.2307/2087294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ICIJ (2019) International consortium of investigative journalists. https://www.icij.org/. Accessed 26 Oct 2019

  • Ingenhoff D, Marschlich S (2019) Corporate diplomacy and political CSR: similarities, differences and theoretical implications. Public Relat Rev. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PUBREV.2019.01.002

  • Kirchherr J, Charles KJ, Walton MJ (2017) The interplay of activists and dam developers: the case of Myanmar’s mega-dams. Int J Water Resour Dev 33:111–131. https://doi.org/10.1080/07900627.2016.1179176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kjærbeck S (2013) Legitimitetsstrategier i forandring: en analyse af CSR-kommunikation. In: Holmström S, Kjærbeck S (eds) Legitimitet under forandring. Frederiksberg, Denmark, pp 205–233

    Google Scholar 

  • Kragelund P (2019) South-South development, 1st edn. Routledge, Oxon

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kroeger B (2012) Undercover reporting: the truth about deception. Northwestern University Press, Evanston

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lottrup K (2019) Falsk føde. Weekendavisen. Copenhagen, Denmark. Newspaper article, 1–2

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann N (1979) Trust and power: two works by Niklas Luhmann. With introduction by Gianfranco Poggi. Wiley, Chichester

    Google Scholar 

  • Marschlich S, Ingenhoff D (2019) CSR and corporate diplomacy: how multinational corporations engage in societal issues in the UAE. In: Morsing M, Golob U, Podnar K (eds) CSR COMMUNICATION 2019 CONFERENCE, The 5th International CSR communication conference Stockholm. Faculty of Social Sciences, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm, Stockholm, Sweden, pp 172–178

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer RC, Davis JH, Schoorman FD (1995) An integrative model of organizational trust. Acad Manag Rev 20:709–734

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCombs ME, Shaw LD (1993) The evolution of agenda-setting research: twenty-five years in the marketplace of ideas. J Commun 43:58–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mogensen K (2002) News as a commercial product: why journalistic freedom may be good business. Bus Res Yearb 9:627–631

    Google Scholar 

  • Mogensen K (2014) Trust vs. Crisis. Nordicum-Mediterraneum 9(3):11–11. 1p.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mogensen K (2016) Making sense of war and peace: from extreme distrust to institutional trust i Aceh, Indonesia. In: Jagd S, Fuglsang L (eds) Trust, organizations and social interaction. Studying trust as process within and between organizations, 1st edn. Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, Cheltenham, pp 107–124

    Google Scholar 

  • Mogensen K (2017) From public relations to corporate public diplomacy. Public Relat Rev 43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2017.03.011

  • Mogensen K (2019a) Interdisciplinary perspectives on: the idea of corporate public diplomacy and how it differs from state public diplomacy. Roskilde University, Roskilde

    Google Scholar 

  • Mogensen K (2019b) Legitimacy issues in corporate public diplomacy. In: Rendtorff JD (ed) Handbook of business legitimacy: responsibility, ethics and society. Springer, Charm, pp 1–17

    Google Scholar 

  • Mogensen K, Nordfors D (2010) How silicon valley journalists talk about: independence in innovation coverage. Innov J 7:November 15, 2014-1-22

    Google Scholar 

  • Ordeix-Rigo E, Duarte J (2009) From public diplomacy to corporate diplomacy: increasing corporation’s legitimacy and influence. Am Behav Sci 53:549–564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pache A-C, Santos F (2010) When worlds collide. The internal dynamics of organizational responses to conflicting institutional demands. Acad Manage Rev 35:455–476

    Google Scholar 

  • Palazzo G, Scherer AG (2006) Corporate legitimacy as deliberation. A communicative framework. J Bus Ethics 66:71–88

    Google Scholar 

  • Parson T (1937) The Structure of Social Action. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons T (1991) The social system, new. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Patriotta G, Gond JP, Schultz F (2011) Maintaining legitimacy: controversies, orders of worth, and public justifications. J Manag Stud 48:1804–1836. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00990.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pigman GA (2015) The diplomacy of global and transnational firms. In: Cooper AF, Heine J, Thakur R (eds) The Oxford handbook of modern diplomacy. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 192–208

    Google Scholar 

  • Protess DL, Cook FL, Doppelt JC et al (1991) The journalism of outrage. The Guilford Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross A (1968) Directives and norms. Routledge & Kegan, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherer AG, Palazzo G (2011) The new political role of business in a globalized world: a review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy. J Manag Stud 48:899–931. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00950.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schönhagen P, Meißner M (2016) The co-evolution of public relations and journalism: a first contribution to its systematic review. Public Relat Rev 42:748–758. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.08.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulze KE (2007) The conflict in Aceh: struggle over oil. In: Kaldor M, Karl TL, Said Y (eds) Oil wars. Pluto Press, Ann Arbor, pp 183–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Siebert F, Theodore P, Schramm W (1956) Four theories of the press: the authoritarian, libertarian, social responsibility, and Soviet communist concepts of what the press should be and do. University of Illinois Press, Urbana

    Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair U (1906) The jungle. Doubleday, Jabber & Company, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • SPJ (2014) SPJ code of ethics. In: Society of professional journalists. http://spj.org/ethicscode.asp. Accessed 7 Nov 2019

  • Stoker K, Rawlins BL (2005) The “light” of publicity in the progressive era from searchlight to flashlight. Journal Hist 30:177–188

    Google Scholar 

  • Suchman MC (1995) Managing legitimacy: strategic and institutional approaches. Acad Manag Rev 20:571–610. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toepfl F, Piwoni E (2015) Public spheres in interaction: comment sections of news websites as counterpublic spaces. J Commun 65:465–488. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vercic AT, Colic V (2016) Journalists and public relations specialists: a coorientational analysis. Public Relat Rev 42:522–529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2016.03.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vos TP (2011) Explaining the origins of public relations: logics of historical explanation. J Public Relat Res 23:119–140. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2010.504793

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westermann-Behaylo MK, Rehbein K, Fort T (2015) Enhancing the concept of corporate diplomacy: encompassing political corporate social responsibility, international relations and peace through commerce. Acad Manag Perspect 29:387–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whelan G, Moon J, Grant B (2013) Corporations and citizenship arenas in the age of social media. J Bus Ethics 118:777–790. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1960-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Bank (2016) Foreign direct investment, net inflows (BoP, current US$). In: data.worldbank.org. http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/BX.KLT.DINV.CD.WD. Accessed 1 Mar 2017

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Social Sciences and Business, Roskilde University, Roskilde, Denmark

    Kirsten Mogensen

Authors
  1. Kirsten Mogensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kirsten Mogensen .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Roskilde University, Roskilde, Denmark

    Jacob Dahl Rendtorff

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Mogensen, K. (2020). Dialogue and Business Legitimacy. In: Rendtorff, J. (eds) Handbook of Business Legitimacy. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68845-9_107-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68845-9_107-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-68845-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-68845-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Religion and PhilosophyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Humanities

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation