La legitimización en el discurso de la Responsabilidad Social Corporativa (RSC)El sector energético y financiero del Ibex35

  1. Ana M. Fernández-Vallejo 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Navarra
    info

    Universidad de Navarra

    Pamplona, España

    ROR https://ror.org/02rxc7m23

Revista:
Revista signos: estudios de lingüística

ISSN: 0035-0451,  0718-0934

Año de publicación: 2022

Volumen: 55

Número: 110

Páginas: 762-789

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.4067/S0718-09342022000300762 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Revista signos: estudios de lingüística

Resumen

Desde una perspectiva lingüística, este documento examina cómo la Responsabilidad Social Corporativa (RSC) se legitima en los mensajes de los presidentes a los accionistas publicados en memorias o informes anuales. El propósito es identificar cuáles son los modos discursivos preferidos por los presidentes para legitimar sus discursos sobre sostenibilidad; en concreto, se analizan qué temas surgen en relación con la RSC y qué clase de estrategias de legitimación están presentes en dichos discursos. En cuanto a los tipos de estrategias discursivas, distinguiremos entre morales, pragmáticas o cognitivas (Marais, 2012). Se realiza un análisis cuantitativo y cualitativo de 34 documentos (69.857 palabras) publicados en 2008, 2015 y 2019 por presidentes del sector bancario y energético del Ibex35, principal índice bursátil español. Por una parte, analizar estos años permiten una visión diacrónica del discurso de legitimación; por otra, a través de los sectores elegidos se comprenderá el discurso de legitimación de dos sectores cuya reputación quedó especialmente dañada, aunque por diferentes motivos: en el caso del sector energético, porque su actividad amenaza especialmente al medio ambiente y, en el caso del sector bancario, porque desde la crisis de 2008 el sector bancario ha sido objeto de sospechas. Los resultados obtenidos muestran un comportamiento similar por sector y año en cuanto a estrategias de legitimación; sin embargo, en función de los temas de RSC, se observan importantes diferencias, en el sector energético hay un claro predominio de los temas medioambientales mientras que el sector bancario prefiere los temas sociales.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Arvidsson, A. & Caliandro, A. (2016). Brand Public: Louis Vuitton on Twitter. Journal of Consumer Research, 42, 727-748.
  • Baviera-Puig, A., Gómez-Navarro, T., García-Melón, M. & García-Martínez, G. (2015). Assessing the Communication Quality of CSR Reports. A Case Study on Four Spanish Food Companies.Sustainability,7(8), 11010-11031.
  • Basanta, A. & Vangehuchten, L. (2019). Las cartas de presentación en los informes de RSC en Chile, España y México: En busca de un equilibrio entre People, Planet y Profit.Ibérica: Revista de la Asociación Europea de Lenguas para Fines Específicos (AELFE), 38, 99-126.
  • Breeze, R. (2012). Legitimation in Corporate Discourse: Oil Corporations after Deepwater Horizon.Discourse &Society,23(1), 3-18.
  • Breeze, R. & Fernández-Vallejo, A. M. (2020). Comparing Corporate Social Responsibility Discourses in the Letter to Shareholders: The Case of British and Spanish Banks. ESP Today Journal of English for Specific Purposes at Tertiary Level, 8(2), 250-274.
  • Cameron, K. S. & Whetten, D. A. (1981). Perceptions of Organizational Effectiveness over Organizational Life Cycles. Administrative Science Quarterly, 525-544.
  • Carroll, A. B. (2008). A History of Corporate Social Responsibility: Concepts and Practices.The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility, 19-46.
  • Carroll, A. B. (2016). Carroll’s Pyramid of CSR: Taking another Look.International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility,1(1), 1-8.
  • Conaway, R. N. & Wardrope, W. J. (2010). Do their Words Really Matter? Thematic Analysis of US and Latin American CEO Letters.The Journal of Business Communication. 47(2), 141-168.
  • Deephouse, D. & Suchman, M. (2017). Legitimacy in Organizational Institutionalism. En R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, T. B. Lawrence & R. E. Meyer (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism(pp. 27-54). Londres: Sage.
  • Ditlevsen, M. G. (2012). Telling the Story of Danisco’s Annual Reports (1935 through 2007-2008) from a Communicative Perspective. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 26(1), 92-115.
  • Domenec, F. (2012). The Greening of the Annual Letters Published by Exxon, Chevron and BPbetween 2003 and 2009. Journal of Communication Management,16(3), 296-311.
  • Edgar, V. C., Beck, M. & Brennan, N. M. (2018). Impression Management in Annual Report Narratives: The Case of the UK Private Finance Initiative.Accounting, Auditing &Accountability Journal, 31(6), 1566-1592.
  • Elkington, J. (2004). Enter the Triple Bottom Line. En A. Henriques & J. Richardson (Eds.), The Triple Bottom Line: Does It All Add Up (pp. 1-16). Londres, Reino Unido: Earthscan.
  • Etter, M., Colleoni, E., Illia, L., Meggiorin, K. & D’Eugenio, A. (2017). Measuring Organizational Legitimacy in Social Media: Assessing Citizens’ Judgement with Sentiment Analysis. Business and Society, December, 1-38.
  • Fairclough, N. & Wodak, R. (1997). Critical Discourse Analysis. En T. van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as Social Interaction (pp. 258-284). Londres: Sage.
  • Freeman, R. E. (2017). Five Challenges to Stakeholder Theory: A Report on Research in Progress. Stakeholder management. Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited.
  • Freeman, R. E. & Dmytriyev, S. (2017). Corporate Social Responsibility and Stakeholder Theory: Learning from Each Other.Symphonya. Emerging Issues in Management, 1, 7-15.
  • Frynas, J. G. & Yamahaki, C. (2016). Corporate Social Responsibility: Review and Roadmap of Theoretical Perspectives.Business Ethics: A European Review,25(3), 258-285.
  • Fuoli, M. (2018). Building a Trustworthy Corporate Identity: A Corpus-Based Analysis of Stance in Annual and Corporate Social Responsibility Reports.Applied Linguistics,39(6), 846-885.
  • Glozer, S., Caruana, R. & Hibbert, S. A. (2019). The Never-Ending Story: Discursive Legitimation in Social Media Dialogue.Organization Studies,40(5), 625-650.
  • Grantham, S. & Vieira Jr., E. T. (2018). Exxonmobil's Social Responsibility Messaging–2002–2013 CEO Letters.Applied Environmental Education &Communication,17(3), 266-279.
  • GRI (2016). GRI Standars [en línea]. Disponible en: shorturl.at/fyJKL.
  • Habermas, J. (1970). On Systematically Distorted Communication.Inquiry,13(1-4), 205-218.
  • Hahn, Y. & Kim, D. (2016). Corporate Social Responsibility: A Comparison Analysis.The Journal of Business Economics and Environmental Studies,6(4), 13-17.
  • Hayes, A. F. & Krippendorff, K. (2007). Answering the Call for a Standard Reliability Measure for Coding Data.Communication Methods and Measures,1(1), 77-89.
  • Higgins, C. & Walker, R. (2012). Ethos, Logos, Pathos: Strategies of Persuasion in Social/Environmental Reports. Accounting Forum, 36(3), 194-208.
  • Hossein, D. M. (2017). Discourse Analysis: An EmergingTrend in Corporate Narrative Research. Middle Eastern Journal of Business, 12(4), 3-9.
  • Hyland, K. (1998). Exploring Corporate Rhetoric: Metadiscourse in the CEO’s Letter. Journal of Business Communication, 35(2), 224-245.
  • Igalens, J. (2007). L’analyse du discours de la responsabilité sociale à travers les rapports annuels de développement durable d’entreprises françaises, Finance Contrôle Stratégie, 10(2), 129-55.
  • IIRC (2015). The International< IR> Framework.IR Council: Zurich, Switzerland [en línea]. Disponible en: https://integratedreporting.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/13-12-08-THE-INTERNATIONAL-IR-FRAMEWORK-SPANISH-1.pdf
  • Johansen,S. T.& Nielsen,A. E.(2011). Strategic Stakeholder Dialogues: A Discursive Perspective on Relationship Building.Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 16(3), 204-217.
  • Kohut, G. & Segars, A. (1993). The President's Letter to Stockholders: An Examination of Corporate Communication Strategy. Journal of Business Communication, 29(1), 7-21.
  • Korkeamäki, L. & Kohtamäki, M. (2020). To Outcomes and Beyond: Discursively Managing Legitimacy Struggles in Outcome Business Models.Industrial Marketing Management,91, 196-208.
  • Kulik, C. T. & Ambrose, M. L. (1992). Personal and Situational Determinants of Referent Choice. Academy of Management Review, 17(2), 212-237.
  • Li, Z. & Haque, S. (2019). Corporate Social Responsibility Employment Narratives: A Linguistic Analysis.Accounting, Auditing &Accountability Journal, 32(6), 1690-1713.
  • López, B. (2020). ConnectingBusiness and Sustainable Development Goals in Spain.Marketing Intelligence &Planning,38(5), 573-585.
  • Marais, M. (2012). CEO Rhetorical Strategies for Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR).Society and Business Review, 7(3), 223-243.
  • Martins, A., Gomes,D., Oliveira, L. & Ribeiro, J. L. (2019). Telling a Success Story through the President’s Letter.Qualitative Research in Accounting &Management, 16(3), 403-433.
  • Melloni, G., Caglio, A. & Perego, P. (2017). Saying More with Less? Disclosure Conciseness, Completeness and Balance in Integrated Reports.Journal of Accounting and Public Policy,36(3), 220-238.
  • Merkl-Davies, D. M. & Brennan, N. M. (2007). Discretionary Disclosure Strategies in Corporate Narratives: Incremental Information or Impression Management?Journal of accounting literature,27, 116-196.
  • Monfort, A., López-Vázquez, B. & Villagra, N. (2019). Exploring Grupos de Interés Dialogue and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) on Twitter.El profesional de la información,28(5), e280513.
  • Nekhili, M., Nagati, H., Chtioui, T. & Rebolledo, C. (2017). Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure and Market Value: Family versus Nonfamily Firms.Journal of Business Research,77, 41-52.
  • Ngai, C. S. B. & Singh, R. G. (2014). Communication with Grupos de Interés through Corporate Web Sites: An Exploratory Study on the CEO Messages of Major Corporations in Greater China.Journal of Business and Technical Communication,28(3), 352-394.
  • Observatorio de la Sostenibilidad (2019). Big Polluters 2019[en línea]. Disponible en: https://www.observatoriosostenibilidad.com/2019/04/22/big-polluters-2019/
  • Oncioiu, I., Petrescu, A. G., Bîlcan, F. R., Petrescu, M., Popescu, D. M. & Anghel, E. (2020). Corporate Sustainability Reporting and Financial Performance.Sustainability,12(10), 4297.
  • Palmieri, R., Rocci, A. & Kudrautsava, N. (2015). Argumentation in Earnings Conference Calls. Corporate Standpoints and Analysts’ Challenges.Studies in Communication Sciences,15(1), 120-132.
  • Pätäri, S., Arminen, H., Tuppura, A. & Jantunen, A. (2014). Competitive and Responsible? The Relationship between Corporate Social and Financial Performance in the Energy Sector. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 37, 142-154
  • Porter,M. E. & Kramer,M. R.(2011). Creating Shared Value.Harvard Business Review, 89, 1-17 [en línea]. Disponible en: https://sharedvalue.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Harvard-Business-Review-Creating-Shared-Value.pdf
  • Rivera‐Arrubla, Y. A., Zorio‐Grima, A. & García‐Benau, M. A. (2017). Integrated Reports: Disclosure Level and Explanatory Factors. Social Responsibility Journal, 13, 155-76.
  • Ruiviejo, A. C. A. & Morales, E. M. S. (2016). Social Responsibility in the Spanish Financial System. Social Responsibility Journal,12(1), 103-116.
  • Sapukotanage, S., Warnakulasuriya, B. N. F. & Yapa, S. T. W. S. (2018). Outcomes of Sustainable Practices: ATriple Bottom Line Approach to Evaluating Sustainable Performance of Manufacturing Firms in a Developing Nation in South Asia.International Business Research,11(12), 89-104.
  • Schneider, L. & Zerfass, A. (2018). Polyphony in Corporate and Organizational Communications: Exploring the Roots and Characteristics of a New Paradigm.Communication Management Review,3(02), 6-29.
  • Short, J. C. & Palmer, T. B. (2003). Organizational Performance Referents: An Empirical Examination of their Content and Influences.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,90(2), 209-224.
  • Scherer, A. G., Palazzo, G. & Seidl, D. (2013). Managing Legitimacy in Complex and Heterogeneous Environments: Sustainable Development in a Globalized World.Journal of Management Studies,50(2), 259-284.
  • Suchman, M. (1995). Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches. Academy of Management Review, 23(3), 571-610.
  • Szczepankiewicz, E. I. & Mućko, P. (2016). CSR Reporting Practices of Polish Energy and Mining Companies.Sustainability,8(2), 126.
  • Vaara, E. & Tienar, J. (2008). A Discursive Perspective on Legitimation Strategies in Multinational Corporations.Academy of Management Review,33(4), 985-993.
  • Van-Dijk, T. A. (2017). Análisis crítico del discurso.Revista Austral de Ciencias Sociales, 30, 203-222.
  • Van Leeuwen, T. (2007). Legitimation in Discourse and Communication. Discourse &communication, 1(1), 91-112.
  • Zappettini, F. & Unerman, J. (2016). ‘Mixing’ and ‘Bending’: The Recontextualisationof Discourses of Sustainability in Integrated Reporting.Discourse &Communication,10(5), 521-542.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet