I rischi della Corporate Social Responsibility per le imprese etiche e lo scetticismo del consumatore green

Titolo Rivista CORPORATE GOVERNANCE AND RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT STUDIES
Autori/Curatori Antonella Monda, Antonio Botti
Anno di pubblicazione 2021 Fascicolo 2021/1 Lingua Italiano
Numero pagine 28 P. 101-128 Dimensione file 0 KB
DOI 10.3280/cgrds1-2021oa10552
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più clicca qui

Vedi l'articolo Scarica l'articolo open access

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA)associazione indipendente e non profit per facilitare (attraverso i servizi tecnologici implementati da CrossRef.org) l’accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche

Il presente studio ha l’obiettivo di indagare la percezione dei consumatori riguardo le attività di corporate social responsibility (CSR) di una azienda impegnata nel sociale che, tuttavia, non gode di un giudizio favorevole presso i propri consumatori, allo scopo di verificare se ad un giudizio negativo dell’impresa corrisponde una percezione negativa anche delle pratiche di CSR. A tale scopo, si persegue un duplice obiettivo: 1) individuare l’esistenza del fit tra il core business dell’azienda in questione e le attività di CSR intraprese dall’impresa, per comprovare l’eticità dell’impresa in questione; 2) identificare l’eventuale fit tra la comunicazione delle attività di CSR dell’azienda e la percezione delle attività etiche dell’impresa da parte dei consumatori.La ricerca è basata sulla metodologia del case study, che esamina il caso aziendale Ferrovie dello Stato (FS), tramite l’analisi di dati secondari e dati primari. I risultati confermano l’esistenza del fit tra il core business e le attività di CSR di FS ma, allo stesso tempo, mostrano una discrepanza tra la comunicazione delle attività di CSR dell’azienda e la percezione delle stesse da parte dei consumatori.;

Keywords:corporate social responsibility, greenwashing, sustainability, sostenibilità aziendale, impresa etica, scetticismo

  1. Davis J.J. (1992). Ethics and environmental marketing. Journal of Business Ethics, 11(2): 81–87. DOI: 10.1007/BF00872314
  2. Bichi R. (2003). Il disegno della ricerca. In: Cesareo V., a cura di, I protagonisti della Società civile, Rubbettino, Soveria Mannelli, 71-91.
  3. Botti A, Monda A. (2020). Sustainable Value Co-Creation and Digital Health: The Case of Trentino eHealth Ecosystem. Sustainability, 12(13): 5263. DOI: 10.3390/su12135263
  4. Botti A., Feola R., Monda A., Parente R., Vesci M. (2019). Humane Entrepreneurship: directions from selected Italian case study. In: Sinergie - Sima Management Conference “Management and sustainability: Creating shared value in the digital era”, 20-21 June 2019, pp.179-182, Sapienza University: Rome, Italy.
  5. Carroll A.B. (1979). A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance. Academy of management review, 4(4): 497-505. DOI: 10.5465/amr.1979.4498296
  6. Challenge your word (2000). Greenwashing, McGill College Ave., Canada. In: http://www.slideshare.net/challengeyourworld/what-is-greenwashing.
  7. Colley R.H. (1961). Defining advertising goals for measured advertising results, New York: Association of National Advertisers.
  8. Corbetta P. (1999). Metodologia e tecniche della ricerca sociale. Bologna: il Mulino.
  9. Delmas M.A., Burbano V.C. (2011). The drivers of greenwashing. California Management Review, 54(1): 64-87. DOI: 10.1525/cmr.2011.54.1.64
  10. Eisenhardt K.M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, vol. 14: 532-550, DOI: 10.2307/258557
  11. Elkington J. (1994). Towards the sustainable corporation: Win-win-win business strategies for sustainable development. California management review, 36(2): 90-100.
  12. Ellen P.S., Mohr L.A., Webb D.J. (2002). Pure or Mixed Motives: Consumer Attributions for Corporate Pro-Social Marketing Programs. In: P.A. Keller, D.W. Rook, a cura di, Advances in Consumer Research (Association for Consumer Research, Valdosta, GA), 322-324.
  13. EU, Green Paper (2001). Communication from the commission to the european parliament, the council and the european economic and social committee. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/ LexUriServ.do?uri= COM:2006:0136: FIN: EN:PDF.
  14. Fabris G. (2009). Societing. Il marketing nella società postmoderna. Milano: Egea.
  15. Feagin J., Orum A., Sjoberg G.A (1991). Case for Case Study. University of North Carolina Press: Chapel Hill, NC, US.
  16. Fill C. (1999). Marketing Communication: Contexts, Contents and Strategies, 2nd ed., Hemel Hempstead, Prentice Hall.
  17. Freeman R.E. (1984). Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach, Cambridge University Press.
  18. Futerra Sustainability Communications (2008). The greenwash guide. In: http://www.futerra.co.uk.
  19. Gallicano T.D. (2011). A critical analysis of greenwashing claims. Public Relations Journal, 5(3): 1-21.
  20. GfK (2010). American consumers lead the world in environmental skepticism. In: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/new-report-american-consumerslead-the-world-in-environmental-skepticism-103520764.html.
  21. Kapferer J.N. (2002). Ce qui va changer les marques-Discount, mondialisation et marchés matures. Éditions d’Organisation: Paris.
  22. Kotler P. (2011). Reinventing marketing to manage the environmental imperative. Journal of Marketing, 75(4): 132-135. DOI: 10.1509/jmkg.75.4.132
  23. Kim K.C., El Tarabishy A., Bae Z.T. (2018) Humane entrepreneurship: How focusing on people can drive a new era of wealth and quality job creation in a sustainable world. Journal of Small Business Management, 56(1): 10–29. DOI: 10.1111/jsbm.12431
  24. Laufer W.S. (2003). Social accountability and corporate greenwashing. Journal of Business Ethics, 43(3): 253-261. DOI: 10.1023/A:1022962719299
  25. Lee M.P. (2008). A review of the theories of corporate social responsibility: Its evolutionary path and the road ahead. International Journal of Management Reviews, 10(1): 53-73. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2007.00226.x
  26. Lydenberg S. (2005) Corporations and the Public Interest: Guiding the Invisible Hand. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
  27. Mander J. (1972). Ecopornography: One year and nearly a billion dollars later, advertising owns ecology. Communication and Arts Magazine, 2, 45-56.
  28. McWilliams A., Siegel D.S., Wright P.M. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: Strategic implications. Journal of management studies, 43(1): 1-18. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00580.x
  29. Mobley A.S., Painter T.S., Untch E.M., Unnava H.R. (1995). Consumer evaluation of recycled products. Psycology & Marketing, 12(3): 165-176. DOI: 10.1002/mar.4220120302
  30. Mohr L.A., Webb D.J., Harris K.E. (2001). Do Consumers Expect Companies to be Socially Responsible? The Impact of Corporate Social Responsibility on Buying Behavior. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 35(1): 45–72. DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-6606.2001.tb00102.x
  31. Nyilasy G., Gangadharbatla H., Paladino A. (2013). Perceived Greenwashing: the interactive effects of green advertising and corporate environmental performance on consumer reactions. Journal of Business Ethics, 117(3): 693-707. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-013-1944-3
  32. Parente R., El Tarabishy A., Vesci M., Botti A. (2018). The epistemology of humane entrepreneurship: Theory and proposal for future research agenda. Journal of Small Business Management, 56(1): 30-52. DOI: 10.1111/jsbm.12432
  33. Parente R., El Tarabishy A., Botti A., Vesci M., Feola R. (2020). Humane entrepreneurship: Some steps in the development of a measurement scale. Journal of Small Business Management, 1-25. DOI: 10.1080/00472778.2020.1717292
  34. Polese F., Botti A., Grimaldi M., Monda A., Vesci, M. (2018). Social innovation in smart tourism ecosystems: How technology and institutions shape sustainable value co-creation. Sustainability, 10(1): 140.
  35. Porter M.E., Kramer M.R. (2002). The competitive advantage of corporate philanthropy. Harvard Business Review, Dec, 80(12): 56-68, 133.
  36. Porter M.E., Kramer M.R. (2006). Strategy and society. Harvard Business Review, vol. 84: 78-92.
  37. Rochlin S., Witter K., Mirvis P., Jordan S., Beevas D.T. (2004). The State of Corporate Citizenship in the US: A View from Inside, 2003–2004. The Center for Corporate Citizenship at Boston College, Boston.
  38. Schuhwerk M.E., Lefkoff-Hagius R. (1995). Green or non-green? Does type of appeal matter when advertising a green product? Journal of Advertising, 24(2): 45-55. DOI: 10.1080/00913367.1995.10673475
  39. Singh J., de los Salmones Sanchez M., del Bosque I. (2008). Understanding corporate social responsibility and product perceptions in consumer markets: A cross-cultural evaluation. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(3): 597-611. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-007-9457-6
  40. Tellis W. (1997) Application of a Case Study Methodology. The Qualitative Report, 3(3): 1-9. DOI: 10.46743/2160-3715/1995.2015
  41. TerraChoice (2007), The Six Sins of Greenwashing. TerraChoice Environmental Marketing Inc. https://sustainability.usask.ca/documents/Six_Sins_of_Greenwashing_nov2007.pdf.
  42. Vanhamme J., Grobben B. (2009), “Too good to be true!”. The effectiveness of CSR history in countering negative publicity, Journal of Business Ethics, 85(2): 273-283. DOI: 10.1007/s10551-008-9731-2
  43. Vollero A. (2013). Il rischio di greenwashing nella comunicazione per la sostenibilità: implicazioni manageriali, Sinergie, vol. 92: 3-23. DOI: /10.7433/s92.2013.02
  44. Weick K. (1977). Educational organizations as loosely coupled system, Administrative Science Quartely, vol. 21(1): 1-19. DOI: 10.2307/2391875
  45. Yin R.K. (2018). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods, Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
  46. Yin R.K. (1984). Case Study Research; Sage Publications: Beverly Hills, CA, USA.
  47. Yin R.K. (2009). Case Study Research: Design and Methods; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.

Antonella Monda, Antonio Botti, I rischi della Corporate Social Responsibility per le imprese etiche e lo scetticismo del consumatore green in "CORPORATE GOVERNANCE AND RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT STUDIES" 1/2021, pp 101-128, DOI: 10.3280/cgrds1-2021oa10552