culture and credibility in csr communication

8/13/2019 Culture and Credibility in CSR Communication

1/164

...

, 24251

,

1

200


2/164

CULTURE AD CREDIBILITY I CSRCOMMUICATIO

2

1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 4

1.1 Problem statement ...................................................................................................................... 5

1.2 Purpose ....................................................................................................................................... 5

1.3 Theory and method .................................................................................................................... 6

1.4 Structure ..................................................................................................................................... 7

1.5 Selection of companies .............................................................................................................. 9

1.6 Delimitation ............................................................................................................................... 9

2. Corporate Social Responsibility..................................................................................................... 10

2.1 CSR communication ................................................................................................................ 11

2.2 Organisational responsibilities ................................................................................................. 11

2.3 CSR in the international food industry .................................................................................... 13

2.3.1 Results from analysis of industry specific CSR issues ..................................................... 13

2.3.2 Framework for discourse analysis..................................................................................... 17

2.4 CSR and culture ....................................................................................................................... 22

2.4.1 The organization situated in a cultural system .................................................................. 23

2.4.2 Explicit vs. implicit CSR .................................................................................................. 24

2.4.3 CSR in Denmark ............................................................................................................... 25

2.4.4 CSR in the US ................................................................................................................... 26

2.5 Summary of CSR and culture .................................................................................................. 28

3. Credibility ...................................................................................................................................... 29

3.1. Ethos........................................................................................................................................ 29

3.1.1 The dimensions of ethos ................................................................................................... 31

3.2 Operationalising ethos.............................................................................................................. 32

3.2.1 The Ethos Model ............................................................................................................... 33

3.3 Summary of credibility ............................................................................................................ 35

4. Analysis of CSR discourse ............................................................................................................. 36

4.1 Presentation of empirical material ........................................................................................... 36

4.1.1 Background for CSR profile: Arla Foods ......................................................................... 36

4.1.2 Background for CSR profile: Smithfield Foods ............................................................... 38

4.2 Analysis of Arlas CSR discourse ............................................................................................ 39

4.2.1 Preliminary conclusion on Arlas CSR discourse ............................................................. 42

4.3 Analysis of Smithfields CSR discourse .................................................................................. 43


3/164


3

4.3.1 Preliminary Conclusion on Smithfields CSR discourse ............................................. 48

5. Analysis of ethos ............................................................................................................................ 50

5.1 Arla........................................................................................................................................... 50

5.1.1 Expertise............................................................................................................................ 50

5.1.2 Character ........................................................................................................................... 54

5.1.3 Goodwill............................................................................................................................ 55

5.1.4 Conclusion on ethos analysis of Arla ................................................................................ 56

5.2 Smithfield ................................................................................................................................. 57

5.2.1 Expertise............................................................................................................................ 57

5.2.2 Character ........................................................................................................................... 58

5.2.3 Goodwill............................................................................................................................ 59

5.2.4 Conclusion on Smithfields ethos analysis ....................................................................... 60

6. Discussion ...................................................................................................................................... 61

6.1 Comparison of Arla and Smithfield ......................................................................................... 61

6.1.1 Response to problem areas ................................................................................................ 61

6.1.2 Relations to stakeholders .................................................................................................. 62

6.1.3 Providing proof ................................................................................................................. 65

6.2 Differences based on explicit vs. implicit CSR ....................................................................... 65

7. Conclusion ..................................................................................................................................... 69

References .......................................................................................................................................... 73

Appendices ......................................................................................................................................... 78

Characters: 123.008


4/164


4

1.

In modern society, it is not enough for companies to simply provide consumers with a satisfying

product. Factors such as political consumerism, globalisation and information technology have

influenced consumers to become more educated and critical. Modern consumers therefore not only

demand satisfying products to fulfil their needs, but they also consider less tangible factors such as

the corporate social responsibility (CSR) strategy of the company1.

CSR is based on the idea that firms have responsibilities towards society and stakeholders which go

beyond profit making. In order to meet the demands of their stakeholders, the trend of

communicating CSR on corporate websites has increased in recent years2.

As a consequence of the increase in CSR communication, the demand for guidance on how tocommunicate CSR was also augmented. Scholars, such as Nielsen and Thomsen3, have engaged in

research on how and what to report in terms of CSR. However, other research showed that CSR

does not only differ between companies, but also between cultures. Some of the scholars who have

conducted research in the area of CSR and culture are Maignan and Ralston4and Matten and

Moon5. Their results showed that culture has an influence on, amongst others, the extent to which

CSR is communicated and how firms present themselves as responsible CSR companies6.

In terms of the extent of CSR communication, research indicated that Danish firms have

traditionally communicated less openly about their CSR activities than US firms7. However,

Morsing et al.8argue that the Danish traditional approach turns towards an Americanisation and

that Danish companies increasingly engage in more open CSR communication.

Additionally, research showed that cultural differences have an effect on companies self-portrayal

as responsible citizens, and Morsing et al.9argue that consumers in Denmark seem to be more

sceptical towards companies intention of communicating CSR than US consumers10

.

1http://kommunikationsforum.dk/?articleid=12048

2Morsing et al. (2006), p. 153Nielsen & Thomsen (2007)4Maignan & Ralston (2002)

5Matten & Moon (2008)

6Maignan & Ralston (2002), p. 497 and Sotorrio & Sanchez (2008), p. 3797

Morsing et al. (2006), p. 238Ibid.9Ibid., p. 3010

Ibid., p. 30


5/164


5

1.1

Based on the above-mentioned research results and theories by e.g. Maignan and Ralston and by

Matten and Moon, who argue for certain cultural differences in CSR communication, this thesis will

examine and discuss CSR communication by a company from the US and Denmark, respectively, in

order to examine the nature of cultural differences. It will also be discussed whether these cultural

differences are shaped as indicated by relevant theory and previous research or whether there is

evidence that Denmark moves away from its traditional CSR approach towards Americanisation.

Furthermore, it is assumed that one of the cultural differences is that consumers in Denmark are

more sceptical towards companies intention behind CSR communication. In this relation, the

assumption is that scepticism towards CSR is reflected in the CSR communication of the Danish

company, as the company needs to be more careful in portraying themselves as a credible company.

The problem statement therefore is as follows:

By analysing the CSR communication of a Danish and a US company, this thesis examines how the

national cultures of these two firms influence the way in which CSR is communicated and

portrayed. Are theories and results from previous research right about the nature of cultural

differences, or is there evidence of Americanisation of the traditional Danish approach?

Furthermore, this thesis will examine the assumption that Danish companies express credibility in

CSR communication differently than US companies, due to more sceptical consumers in the Danish

culture.

1.2

The overall purpose of this thesis is to contribute to an understanding of how CSR is framed within

the cultural bounds of the US and Denmark.

More specifically, the purpose of this thesis is to study general differences in the communication of

CSR, as well as how companies in Denmark and the US express credibility in the companies CSR

communication. This is based on the assumption that Danish companies need to be more concerned

with portraying themselves as credible CSR companies, due to consumer scepticism towards the

companies intentions behind CSR.


6/164


6

For both analyses the purpose is also to establish whether American and Danish companies use the

traditional approach for their cultures, as established by previous research11or whether there is

evidence for Americanisation as stated by Morsing et al.12

To my knowledge, no research exists which has examined expressions of credibility in connection

to cultural based differences in CSR communication. My analysis could therefore form the basis for

further research in this area.

1.

The next chapter aims at presenting the CSR concept and allows the identification of organizational

responsibilities which are presented through Carrolls pyramid of corporate social responsibility13

and the triple bottom line14. These theories will be discussed and reflected upon in order to identify

which responsibilities firms have towards society and stakeholders in todays society.

The chapter will shortly present CSR communication and elaborate on tendencies and benefits of

CSR communication by e.g. Morsing et al.15.

Furthermore, the chapter will include a section on industry specific CSR issues. In this section, the

organizational responsibilities identified earlier will help to find out which issues are emphasised by

companies in the food industry in general16. For the analysis, 10 websites from companies in the

global food industry will be analysed for the responsibilities and CSR issues the company

communicates. The goal with this analysis is to be able to identify central and common issues

which will be likely to be presented by the two companies in the case study. The results of this

analysis will therefore contribute to the development of an analytical model which will be inspired

by Nielsen and Thomsen17and by Maignan and Ralston18. This model will be used in chapter 5 to

analyse the CSR discourse of the two companies.

In order to answer the problem statement, it is also important to define cultural theory in relation toCSR. Cultural theory will not only be discussed on the basis of existing theory, but also on the basis

of previous research in this field by scholars such as Matten and Moon19, Maignan and Ralston20,

11By e.g. Maignan & Ralston (2002) or Matten & Moon (2008)

12Morsing et al. (2006), p. 2313Carroll (1999)14

Van Marrewijk (2003), p. 10115

Morsing et al. (2006)16Based on my own analysis of CSR issues of 10 companies in the food industry appendix117

Nielsen & Thomsen (2007)18Maignan & Ralston (2002)19Matten & Moon (2008)20

Maignan & Ralston (2002)


7/164


7

Morsing et al.21, etc. However, the cultural theory and research results will not be used in order to

conduct an operational analysis of culture in the CSR communication of the two companies, but

will rather serve as a framework for discussion in chapter 7.

Finally, the notion of credibility will be presented in chapter 3. The approach to credibility will be

based on both traditional and modern scholars such as Aristotle22, McCroskey23, Isaksson and

Jrgensen24and Lund and Petersen25. This thesis will adopt the approach of rhetorical theory where

the credibility of a source is referred to as ethos. Ethos consists of three dimensions, expertise,

character and goodwill. By communicating on these dimensions, companies can influence how they

are perceived as credible in their communication. The notion of ethos and the three dimensions will

therefore be used for the analysis of credibility (ethos) in chapter 5. In chapter 3, existing models

for identification of ethos will be discussed and one will be selected for the ethos analysis in this

thesis.

In the comparison and discussion of the two analyses, the cultural theory and perspectives by e.g.

Maignan and Ralston, Morsing et al. and Matten and Moon will be discussed and compared to the

results of the analyses of the two companies. In the discussion, the problem statement of how

cultural differences and credibility are shaped in the case study will be answered. Furthermore, it

will be possible to identify whether there is any evidence of Americanisation in this case.

1.

This thesis consists of eight chapters. The aim has been to make a logical and progressive structure.

Therefore, there is a gradual movement from theoretical discussions to analyses to comparison and

discussion of the analyses.

In the introductory chapter, the content of the thesis has been outlined, delimited and structured in

order to define the frame of this thesis.

In chapter 2, the notion of CSR will be defined and outlined. This chapter will provide the basis for

an understanding of CSR and organisational responsibilities. Furthermore, an analysis of industry

specific CSR issues will identify which responsibilities companies in the food industry emphasise.

21Morsing et al. (2006)22

Cited in McCroskey (2001), Hoff-Clausen (2001) and Isaksson & Jrgensen (2008)23McCroskey (2001)24Isaksson & Jrgensen (2008)25

Lund & Petersen (2001)


8/164


9/164


9

1.

The companies of the case study have been selected based on the fact that they are both global firms

which have their headquarters in their national country. Both companies are leaders in the food

industry, Arla as a dairy firm, Smithfield as a meat firm. Both companies emphasise CSR on their

corporate websites.

I have selected only companies from the food industry in that CSR issues may vary according to

industry. I am aware that companies within the same industry might focus on different CSR issues.

However, in chapter 2 an analysis of industry specific issues will give an overview over issues

generally emphasised in the food industry. Focusing on the same CSR issues for both companies

will provide a better basis for comparison and discussion of cultural differences.

1.

The research in this thesis is based on a case study of two companies of different cultural settings.

As this sample is so small, it is possible to go into depth with the two companies. Furthermore, it

allows a specific and in depth examination of how culture influences CSR communication and

expressions of ethos.

As the case study only includes two companies, this thesis cannot be used to draw statistical

conclusions on cultural differences between Danish and US companies in general. This thesis can

therefore only serve as an exploratory study and as a basis for further research on the subject. In

order to still be able to discuss and compare the two companies in a credible and professional way,

the discussion of culture will be based on prior research.


10/164


10

2.

The purpose of this thesis is to contribute to an understanding of how CSR is constructed in

Denmark and the US. In order to be able to fulfil this purpose, it is important to understand what

CSR is and which responsibilities companies seem to have towards society and stakeholders in

general, and, more specifically, which responsibilities companies in the food industry seem to

emphasise. This knowledge will form the basis for the analysis of CSR discourse in the two case

study companies.

One may say that the concept of CSR is a widely discussed topic on todays business agendas and

in academic circles26. However, it is not a new concept. According to Carroll, the concept of CSR

has a long and varied history. However, formal writing on social responsibility is largely a product

of the 20th century27

. The fact that CSR has been defined in many different ways and that it goes

under a variety of names, such as corporate citizenship, business ethics and sustainability, proves

that CSR still is a rather complex and fuzzy concept28. Academics may not agree on one single

definition of CSR, however, most include that corporate responsibilities go beyond pure profit

making29. The European Commission defines CSR as a concept whereby companies integrate

social and environmental concerns in their business operations and in their interactions with their

stakeholders on a voluntary basis.30

According to scholars, the benefits of involving in and communicating on CSR are various31. One

of the main benefits emphasised is the contribution of CSR to the companys image and reputation,

which in turn has a positive influence on differentiation of the company and its competitive

advantage32. In the eyes of consumers the media, legislators and investors, social and

environmental responsibilities are increasingly powerful drivers of reputation.33CSR might also

add value to the product, as it might provide consumers with information about circumstances that

are important to them, such as conditions for workers and animal welfare.

To enjoy the benefits of CSR, the companys responsibilities must be communicated to

stakeholders as they will otherwise remain ignorant of the companys efforts.

26http://kommunikationsforum.dk/?articleid=551127

Carroll (1999), p. 26828

Ibid.29See e.g. Tench & Yeomans (2006), p. 97 and Carroll (1999), p.28330

http://europa.eu/scadplus/leg/en/lvb/n26034.htm31See e.g. Tench & Yeomans (2006), p. 10132Macleod (2001), p. 833

Tench & Yeomans (2006), p.105 f.


11/164


12/164


12

Economic responsibilities represent the basis of the pyramid, as Carroll defines the primary role of

companies to be profitable in order to be able to compete on the market. The second layer of the

pyramid consists of legal responsibilities, where it is expected that companies comply with the laws

and regulations of the government and other institutions. Ethical responsibilities represent the third

layer and consist of ethical norms about fairness and justice and include activities and practiceswhich are expected by society and stakeholders, but which are not law. The last layer represents

philanthropy, which are made up of those actions which often are associated with the firm being a

good corporate citizen37. Examples of philanthropy could be engaging in programs to improve

living conditions in the local community or donating money for people in social need.

What Carroll does not consider, however, are environmental responsibilities which in contrast are

part of the Triple Bottom Line: Profit, People, Planet38. Environmental responsibilities are of

increasing importance in todays society with growing issues such as the climate change, which is

widely discussed in all areas of business39. One could therefore argue that environmental

responsibilities should also be considered in CSR communication.

To sum up, Carroll argues that economic and legal responsibilities form the basis of the CSR

pyramid, and without these, the business has no basis to exist. However, increased pressure from

society and consumers forces companies to consider other responsibilities, such as ethics,

philanthropy and the environment.

As the goal of this thesis is to find out cultural aspects in CSR and as it in this connection may be

relevant to analyse the cultural difference in the communication of basic responsibilities such as

economic and legal responsibilities, the analysis of CSR discourse in chapter 5 will be based on

Carrolls CSR pyramid. However, the analysis will be supplemented with environmental

responsibilities, as this issue is crucial in CSR communication today, due to recent discussions on

e.g. climate change and the exploitation of natural resources.

37Caroll (1991), p.43

38Van Marrewijk (2003), p.10139

Sriram & Forman (1993)


13/164


13

2.

In the previous section, organisational responsibilities have been identified by Carrolls pyramid of

CSR as well as the Triple Bottom Line. In the following, industry specific CSR issues for the global

food industry will be examined. These industry specific CSR issues will serve to create a model for

identification of CSR discourse of the two companies which will be analysed later. Thereby, it is

possible to distinguish between issues which can be said to be general for the food industry and

issues which are company-specific.

2..1

The following companies have been considered in the analysis of industry specific CSR issues:

Danone40, Nestl41, Kellogs42, Kraft Foods43, Unilever44, Dole Food Company45, Heinz46, Vion

Food Group47, Ben & Jerrys48, Pepsi Co49.

These 10 companies are not just part of the food industry. These companies are also, just as the two

case companies Arla and Smithfield, large, multinational corporations from different cultural

settings. The goal here is not to find issues from a specific cultural setting, but to identify the global

and overall issues the food industry deals with in order to apply them in the discourse analysis later.

The issues found on the companies websites were divided into the four responsibilities defined by

Carroll in order to categorize the different issues. Furthermore, Carrolls four responsibilities have

been supported by environmental responsibilities.

Economic responsibilities

Economic responsibilities are communicated by some corporations (4 out of 10) as the basis of their

business operations. The corporations argue that without the financial means, the firm is not able to

create value to its stakeholders and is not able to fulfil their responsibilities. This is in accordance

with Carrolls argument that economic responsibilities form the basis of business operations.

40http://www.danone.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=41&lang=en&Itemid=78

41http://www.nestle.com/CSV/CSVHome.htm42http://www.kelloggcompany.com/corporateresponsibility.aspx?id=152643

http://www.kraftfoodscompany.com/About/44

http://www.unilever.com/sustainability/ and http://www.unilever.com/aboutus/ourpeople/45http://dolecsr.com/46

http://www.heinz.com/sustainability.aspx and http://www.heinz.com/our-company/ethics-and-compliance.aspx47http://www.vionfood.com/811/Socially_responsible_business/48http://www.benjerry.com/company/sear/2007/index.cfm49

http://www.pepsico.com/Purpose.aspx


14/164


14

One could assume that companies do not communicate much on their economic responsibilities

because the company may want to be considered as caring for e.g. people and the environment more

than caring about making profits. Therefore, by communicating less on economic responsibilities

and more about other responsibilities, such as the environment, they may want to signal that

financial gain is not as important.

Legal

Legal responsibilities consist primarily of statements claiming that the firm complies with the law

(7 out of 10). Some companies communicate further about internal laws, such as a code of conduct

(5 out of 10).

The issues observed under legal responsibilities can be said to be more general issues and not

necessarily bound to the food industry, as they are important in all areas of business. They are

therefore not considered as industry specific. However, this analysis makes clear that, in this

analysis, 50% of corporations communicate on self-regulation of the company. However, as

mentioned earlier, this should only be concluded for this analysis and is not a general conclusion, as

10 companies is too small a sample to make general conclusions.

Ethical

As mentioned earlier, responsibilities towards employees are included under the category of ethical

responsibilities. 10 out of 10 companies communicate their responsibilities towards employees. It

then depends on the nature of the company which issues are emphasised. Generally these issues

deal with employees and the work environment, health and safety and diversity. For corporations

operating in 3rdworld countries (e.g. Dole), the issues also include non-exploitation, wages, human

rights, no child labour, working hours etc. Other issues are: promoting a healthy lifestyle to

consumers, which is not only emphasised by corporations with unhealthy products, but it is

generally emphasised by 7 out of 10 corporations. Additionally, animal welfare is emphasised by

companies, whose products have to do with animals (e.g. Vion, who works with slaughtering,

processing and selling fresh meat). Furthermore, responsible marketing, dealing with e.g. marketing

towards children etc., are emphasised by some of the companies dealing with unhealthy products

or products for children (Kelloggs, PepsiCo). None of the two companies in our case study,

however, deal with these products, therefore responsible marketing will probably not be emphasised

by these companies.


15/164


15

Philanthropic

The results of the analysis of philanthropic responsibilities reveal various different forms of

philanthropic actions. This indicates that corporations support philanthropic actions which they can

identify with and often these actions are connected to their business operations and the products.

One common denominator is, however, responsibilities towards the community. Almost all

corporations (8 out of 10) seem to feel some kind of responsibility towards the community, be it the

community in their national country or the local community where the company has business

operations. Also foundations (5 out of 10) and volunteerism (5 out of 10) have been communicated

broadly.

Environmental

In terms of environmental responsibilities, all 10 companies communicate about the protection and

preservation of natural resources, including limiting the impact of business operations on the

environment. 7 out of 10 companies also focused on sustainable agriculture. Agriculture has been

shown to have significant effects on climate change primarily through the production and release of

greenhouse gases50. Therefore the issue of sustainable agriculture is a relevant issue to address in

CSR communication of food companies with agricultural backgrounds.

Other issues

Besides the issues identified above, one can point out that the relationship between food, health and

nutrition is mentioned in many of the companies CSR communication (8 out of 10). This can be

explained by the fact that consumers and society in general are becoming increasingly aware of

obesity and health problems in developed countries51. The issue has also become prominent in the

media and has since brought about a consumer health trend. This trend may have forced companies

into considering how they can help consumers to make healthier choices, as they will otherwise risk

losing consumer trust and sales. What can be observed now is that many companies, besides their

regular range of food products, have a range of food products with reduced fat, reduced sugar, or

otherwise more healthy choice foods. One example is PepsiCos Smart choices made easy

labelling52, which consists of a label on the front of the package with e.g. calorie information. They

argue that this label will make it easier and quicker for consumers to identify their needs. In this

50http://localfoods.wordpress.com/2008/06/25/greenhouse-gas-emissions-from-agriculture/

51http://www.iblf.org/media_room/general.jsp?id=12378852

http://www.pepsico.com/Purpose/Health-and-Wellness/Responsible-Marketing.aspx


16/164


16

relation, many companies have also begun to communicate truth in labelling, meaning labelling that

is truthful and not misleading.It is a widely discussed and criticized issue that food labels are often

incomprehensible and consequently make some choices difficult for the consumer53. The companies

in this analysis promoting the connection between health and food (7 out of 10) have therefore also

in some form promoted truth labelling as a way to make smart choices easier for consumers.

Another issue discussed by some companies was the issue of food safety (3 out of 10). The number

of companies responding to this issue is surprisingly low. The reason could be that this issue is

connected to the kind of product. As diseases and bacteria from meat and poultry are emphasised by

the media regularly, it seems reasonable that companies providing these products need to

communicate more on food safety54. As the two companies in the case study conducted later deal

with dairy and meat, food safety is likely to be an issue they will emphasise.

To sum up, the main issues in the food industry seem to be:

Responsibilities CSR issues in the food industry Sub-issues

Economic Economic achievements as basis for

business operations

Legal Lawfulness Compliance with national law

Standards and regulation

Code of conduct

Self-regulation

Ethical Employees Workplace

Diversity

Health & Safety

Other circumstances (fair trade, wage,

working hours, payment, Employee

representation etc.)

Responsible Marketing (will not be

emphasised in relation to the case study

corporations)

Promoting a healthy lifestyle Nutrition

Labelling

53http://www.truthfullabeling.org/issue.htm54

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26369583/


17/164


17

Animal welfare

Food safety

Environmental Protection and preservation of natural

resources

Limiting the impact of the business operations

Sustainable agriculture

Philanthropic Local community In national country

In countries where operations take place

In third world countries

Foundations

Volunteerism

Table 1 CSR issues in the food industry

The CSR issues in the food industry will be applied in the model presented in the next section. The

CSR issues identified in this section will be called CSR issues in the food industry.

2..2

The analysis in chapter 5 will contain an analysis of Arla and Smithfields CSR discourse. This

section will deal with the creation of the framework that will help identifying the CSR discourse of

the two case study companies.

The frameworks structure will be based on the semantic topic analysis by Nielsen and Thomsen55.

The semantic topic analysis is used to examine which issues are emphasised by categorizing the

companies statements into topics, such as employees, local community etc. Nielsen and Thomsen

categorise citations from the companies according to the appropriate topic. For example, Loyal

and motivated employees is categorised under employees whereas environmental protection

and sustainable development is categorised under environment. It seems reasonable to say that

the topical analysis is used to observe which issues have been emphasised and not to analyse these

issues.

55Nielsen & Thomsen (2007), p. 31


18/164


18

Nielsen and Thomsen state that the analysis gives us a rough idea of the reporting companies

identity and self-understanding as CSR pioneers and CSR caring organizations.56

A shortened version57of Nielsen and Thomsens table for semantic topic analysis can be seen here:

Topic Company X Company Y Company Z

Employees

Local

Community

Environment

Society

Corporate

GovernanceEtc.

Table 2 A shortened version of ielsen and Thomsens table of Topical Analysis58

Nielsen and Thomsens framework gives an overview over issues reported by the companies, but it

does not elaborate on e.g. how the companies report on these issues or which stakeholders they feel

responsible to. As the purpose of this analysis is to contribute to an understanding of how CSR is

constructed in Denmark and the US, the framework used for analysis must not only be a tool to

identify which issues are communicated, but also how they are communicated. By identifying how

the companies report on their CSR issues, it will be possible to discuss their perspective on CSR.

Furthermore, instead of the topics identified by Nielsen and Thomsen, the industry specific CSR

issues (identified in section 2.3.1) will be used. This will give a more specific picture of the

companies CSR as Nielsen and Thomsen do not identify e.g. animal welfare or food safety.

Maignan and Ralston59

compare the extent and content of CSR communication in three European

countries and the US. In order to do so, they investigate the CSR principles, processes and

stakeholder issues discussed on the companies websites. They have created two tables which can

be used as an operational tool to identify and categorise the CSR principles, processes and

56Nielsen & Thomsen (2007), p. 3057

This table has been shortened, as Nielsen & Thomsen include many topics which are not of any relevance to theanalysis in this thesis.58Nielsen & Thomsen (2007), p. 3159

Maignan & Ralston 2002


19/164


19

stakeholder issues. The first table presents CSR principles and processes and the second table

presents stakeholder issues60.

The CSR principles are motivating principles followed by corporations to motivate CSR

involvement and they are divided into three categories, value-driven, stakeholder driven and

performance driven. It is reasonable to say that these motivating principles are likely to be different

from company to company even within the same cultural boundaries. Therefore they will not be

emphasised in this thesis.

Maignan and Ralstons CSR processes consist of managerial procedures, programs and activities

used to realise CSR in the company. The scholars identify stakeholder issues as concerns of

importance to the groups that can directly or indirectly affect or be affected by the firms

activities61 Below a shortened version62of Maignan and Ralstons table for processes can be seen.

Maignan and Ralston here identify and define seven processes a company can engage in based on

previous research or found in their own research.

Processes

Philanthropic programs The company presents a formalized philanthropic program made of clear

mission and application procedures to allocate donations and grants.

Sponsorships The company introduces sponsorships as a type of responsibility initiative

aimed at providing assistance either financial or in-kind to a cause or charity.

Volunteerism The company presents programs that allow employees to work for a good

cause or charity.

Code of ethics The company discusses the content and/or implementation of a code of ethics

or conduct.

Quality Programs The company describes a formal product/service quality program as a form

of responsibility initiative.

Health and safety programs The company introduces formal health and safety programs aimed at one or

more stakeholder groups as a form of responsibility initiative.

Management of environmental

impacts

The company discusses activities aimed at diminishing the negative impact

of productive activities on the natural environment.

60

Maignan & Ralston (2002), p. 501 ff.61Ibid., p. 49862The table has been shortened as the original table by Maignan & Ralston includes results from their analysis, whichare of no relevance here.


20/164


20

Table 3 A shortened version of Maignan and Ralstons original table of categorization of CSR processes63

Maignan and Ralstons table of stakeholder issues can be seen below. Here the scholars identify

five stakeholder groups and give detailed suggestions for which issues could be of importance to

these groups.

Stakeholder issues

Community stakeholders Arts and culture: The company discusses its support of organizations, activities,

actors, and objects linked to the arts or the national culture

Education: The company presents its support of activities aimed at improving

educational opportunities and the quality of the education received by

populations outside the firm.

Quality of life: The company expresses its dedication to improving the quality of

life and well-being of the communities in which the firm operates, or of society

as a whole.

Safety: The company displays concern for the preservation of the natural

environment either in general or in the communities where the firm operates

Protection of the environment: The company shows concern for the preservation

of the natural environment either in general or in the communities where the

firm operates

Customer stakeholders Quality: The company presents the achievement of high product/service quality

as part of its commitment to social responsibility

Safety: The company displays concern for the safety of its customers in relation

with its production activities or products/services.

Employee stakeholders Equal opportunity: The company expresses its commitment to giving the same

chances in recruitment and promotion to all employees regardless of race,

gender, age, or handicap.

Health and safety: The company expresses its concern for protecting the safety

of employees in the workplace along with their overall health level.

Shareholders The company expresses its commitment to the involvement of shareholders in

corporate governance and/or to the proper information of shareholders.

Suppliers The company expresses its dedication to giving equal opportunities to suppliers

in terms of gender, race, and size and/or to assuring suppliers safety.

Table 4 Maignan and Ralstons table of categorization of the stakeholder issues64

63Maignan & Ralston (2002), p.50164

Maignan & Ralston (2002), p.503


21/164


22/164


22

Animal

welfare

Food safety

Protection and

preservation of

natural

resources

Community

Foundation

Volunteerism

Table 5 Julia Geier's model for analysis of CSR discourse

2.

The previous section defined general organisational responsibilities and examined which issues

companies in the food industry generally emphasise. With these issues in mind, the chapter

introduced a framework for analysis of CSR issues on the website which will be used in chapter 5.

The theory necessary for analysing the CSR discourse of the two case-study companies has

therefore been defined.

This leads to the subject of CSR in relation to culture. The theory of CSR and culture in this chapter

will not be used in the analysis. The theory presented here will serve as a framework for the

discussion of the two analyses in chapter 7.

In this chapter, different views on CSR and culture will be introduced in order to get a varied

overview over the connection between CSR and culture and relevant theory.

Scholars presented in this chapter, such as Kampf66, Matten and Moon67as well as Morsing et al.68,

66Kampf (2007)67

Matten & Moon (2008)


23/164


24/164

CULTURE

2..2 .

In their research, Matten and Mo

four key features of national insti

political system and the cultural

establish the conceptual framewo

corporate policies that lead comp

interest to society. Implicit CSR

relation within a society that can

Figure 8 Matten and Moons explicit and

In the following, CSR in Denma

cultural system of the national b

and Moons framework on impli

as it will be supplemented with r

72Matten & Moon (2008)

73Ibid, p. 41074

As e.g. Morsing et al. (2006) , Kamp

Explicit CSR

Describes corporate activitieassume responsibility for theof society

Consists of voluntary corporpolicies, programs, and strat

Incentives and opportunitiesmotivated by the perceivedexpectations of different staof the corporation

D CREDIBILITY I CSRCOMMUICATIO

on72use the national business systems appro

tutional frameworks. Two of those will be p

ystem. In connection with this approach, Ma

rk of implicit and explicit CSR, where expli

anies to voluntarily assume responsibility fo

n the other hand is embedded in the busines

be called state-defined.

implicit CSR73

k and the US will be presented by using the

siness systems approach. In relation to the t

it and explicit CSR will be applied to Denm

sults from research by other scholars74.

(2007) and Maignan and Ralston (2002)

s thatinterests

tegies

are

eholders

Implicit C

Describes corporations'the wider formal and ininstitutions for society'sconcerns

Consists of values, northat result in (often codimandatory) requiremencorporations

Motivated by the societ

the legitimate expectatiand contributions of allin society, including cor

24

ch, which identifies

esented here: the

tten and Moon

it CSR refers to

selected areas of

s-society-government

eature political and

o systems, Matten

rk and the US as well

R

role within theormalinterests and

s, and rulesfied ands for

l consensus on

ns of the rolesmajor groupsporations


25/164


26/164


27/164


27

Political system

In contrast to the Danish institutional system, US businesses have long traditions of self-

governance, where the state exercises minimal legislative control and does not provide the extensive

social services available to all citizens in Denmark.88As the government is not seen as being

responsible for the well-being of the people, US businesses have established traditions of

philanthropy, as they need to establish their place in the community through caring for the people

and the community89.

Cultural system

The high level of individualism in the US culture and the before mentioned scepticism about

government led to a tradition of businesses having internal policies in order to police themselves

as well as external communication to demonstrate CSR90. Internal policies such as employee

representation and participation are covered by dense employment regulation and protection in

Denmark. These issues are part of CSR in the US.

Figure 10 CSR situated in the US cultural system91

88

Kampf (2007), p. 4789Ibid, p. 4890Ibid, p. 4791

Ibid, p.48

Outside influences:

Global focus on CSR

Stakeholder

expectation

Origins or

ecological factors:

History of state as a

threat to peoples

well being and

therefore focus on

minimizing its power

orms:

Concern for business

practices

Concern for the

money of

shareholders/ owners

Contribute to society

by choice

Institutional

consequences:

High degree of self

regulation for

businesses

Businesses needing

CSR in external

communication


28/164


28

2.

Matten and Moon argue that the implicit approach does not need to emphasise the same issues as

the explicit approach, as many of the issues are already presented by the state. Alas also argues that

some societies do not need to communicate ethics to the same extend as others, however, she bases

this on the desire of ethics and not on traditions or national systems.

Morsing et al. argue that even though the traditional approach to CSR in Denmark is implicit,

Danish companies increasingly engage in visible activities as a consequence of global focus on CSR

and stakeholders expectations for more visible CSR efforts92. Additionally, CSR is gradually more

seen as a competitive advantage for corporations. Morsing et al. call this development for

Americanization93. At any rate, Morsing et al. argue themselves that Danish businesses are forced

to develop and articulate CSR - an approach which goes more from implicit to explicit withoutdisregarding their traditions for close interaction with the state and institutions94.

Concluding one can say that the scholars mentioned in this section agree that the reason for the

differences in CSR communication can be found in the way society is build up around institutions

and norms. By institutions, it is here referred to the definition given by Matten and Moon95which,

beside the formal organization of government and corporations, also includes norms, incentives and

rules.

92

Morsing et al. (2006), p. 2393Ibid, p. 23f.94Ibid, p. 2895

Matten & Moon (2008), p. 406


29/164


29

.

In the previous chapter, research and theory on CSR and culture have been presented. In the chapter

it was established that consumers might be sceptical towards the intention of the companies

commitment to CSR, as it is increasingly used strategically as a marketing tool to improve the

reputation of companies. Morsing and Schulz argue that, in the Danish culture, consumers regard

the open account for CSR as taking advantage of other peoples misfortune in order to improve their

reputation96. Consequently, companies have to ensure to appeal credible in their communication

about CSR activities.

Throughout more than two thousand years, rhetorical scholars have been concerned with the role of

credibility in communication. From among many rhetorical scholars, Aristotles view on credibility

has been assigned the most support and much modern empirical research has been based on his

views. Among the researchers who grounded their studies on his views can be named, Hovland,

Berlo et al., McCroskey, Tuppen, Lund and Petersen and many more.

According to Aristotle, persuasion can be created through the use of the three appeals: logos, pathos

and ethos. Logos describes the appeal through reason, pathos is the appeal through emotions and

ethos defines source credibility97. Aristotle argued that persuasive communication would contain all

three appeals. While the goal of this thesis is to find out whether there are cross-cultural differences

in the CSR discourse and the self-portrayal of two firms, the notion of ethos will be dealt with in

this thesis, while logos and pathos will not be regarded here.

.1.

As mentioned above, ethos defines source credibility and it is also often regarded as a synonym for

credibility98. However, academics do not agree on where in the communication process ethos is

situated as such. Some academics, e.g. McCroskey argue that the receiver has ethos and not the

source, as they believe that ethos exists in the mind of the receiver. Ethos is therefore the attitude of

the receiver towards the source of communication99. Other scholars, such as Hoff-Clausen100 and

Isaksson and Jrgensen101understand Aristotles view on ethos as the personal credibility which a

source can strive to achieve in communication. Ethos thereby becomes a technique to be used for

96Morsing & Schulz in Morsing et al. (2006), p. 136

97Fem Nielsen (2004), p. 28598

Lund & Petersen (2001), p. 12199McCroskey (2001), p.84100Hoff Clausen (2002), p.39101

Isaksson & Jrgensen (2008), p. 369


30/164

CULTURE

self representation. Isaksson and

ethos in a written text (see sectio

the rhetorical strategy ethos in or

receiver who has ethos, these sch

However, McCroskey may haveor not the receiver of the commu

on whether the communication is

source wants to establish credibil

Lund and Petersen argue for a tri

image and identity form credibili

trustworthiness, all three need to

Figure 11 Lund and Petersens model of c

Lund and Petersens definition o

contrast to the way image is seen

and Petersen furthermore agree

of the source and the evaluation

focus on ethos as a rhetorical tec

102Lund & Petersen (2001), p. 129 f

103Fill (1995), p. 435104

Lund & Petersen (2001), p. 121

D CREDIBILITY I CSRCOMMUICATIO

Jrgensen even design an analytical model f

4.2.1). One must therefore assume that a so

der to portray itself as a credible company. I

olars would not have been able to identify et

a point in claiming that the use of ethos doesication is persuaded by ethos, and one can t

perceived as credible, one can only attempt

ity.

chotomy model of credibility, where the inte

ty. Lund and Petersen argue that, in order to

be identical102.

redibility

image as the sources desire to appear in a c

traditionally- as the way the receiver percei

ith McCroskey on the view that ethos is the

f how credible the source is104. As discussed

nique to self-portrayal, which can have an e

Competence

Moral character Goodwill

30

r identification of

urce can make use of

it would be only the

os in a written text.

not indicate whethererefore not comment

o identify how the

action of ethos,

ave a stable

ertain way, stands in

es the source103. Lund

eceivers perception

earlier, some scholars

fect on image. This is


31/164


32/164


33/164


34/164


34

The eleven credibility appeals constitute the operational level of the model. Below, Isaksson and

Jrgensens coding framework is given. This framework allows the identification of credibility

appeals in chapter 5 and permits to recognise these appeals consistently and precisely.

(1) Expertise:Entitlements /Enhancements. Entitlements are used to communicate what the

corporation has achieved, while Enhancements are used to bring attention to and take credit for a

particular achievement, which the corporation believes they should be especially rewarded for.

(2) Expertise:World knowledge. By communicating World knowledge, the corporation can

portray its insight and knowledge. It is especially used to demonstrate universal truths or

generalities about business life/conditions, the industry or company or the world at large.

(3) Expertise:Presence/Resources. By demonstrating Presence and Resources, the corporation

explains where it is situated and its ability to perform. This will typically be statements about the

physical presence of the corporation, and its capabilities or way of performing, in concrete terms, or

any description, recommendation, offering, or praising of products, services, or specialization

offered by the corporation.

(4) Expertise:Knowledge/Skills. By communicating Knowledge and Skills, the corporation states

what they are made up of. These statements could contain information on knowledge and skills

acquired by the members of the corporation through education or training, rank, merit, recognition,

position or status, or cooperation with a third party or membership of an organization.

(5) Expertise:Abilities/Attributes. Abilities and Attributes refer to the corporations fundamental

competences. This will be expressed through statements about abilities or attributes that relate to the

corporations natural qualities, work-related experience and insights, vision or human effectiveness,

thoroughness or trust.

(6) Character:Integrity/Justice.Integrity and Justice stand for how the corporation behaves.

Integrity refers to statements about the corporations business morality or objectivity, neutrality,

impartiality, or its members diligence. Justice refers to statements about the corporations equity,

fairness and compliance with the law.

(7) Character:Truthfulness. Through Truthfulness the corporation expresses its corporate identity

with respect to morale, honesty and sincerity.


35/164


35

(8) Character:Passion. Passion is how the corporation expresses its enthusiasm and excitement

and state what they find rewarding.

(9) Character:Courage. Courage is how the corporation communicates its responds to challenges

and threats and refers to statements about the corporations competitiveness, its ability to

demonstrate resolution and persistence.

(10) Goodwill:Attention. Attention refers to statements concerned with the corporations selfless

behaviour and concern for society and common good, or its devotion and attention to the target

audience, or an indication of a bond between the corporation and its audience.

(11) Goodwill:Enjoyment. Statements relating to Enjoyment are concerned with the corporations

communication of their ability to generate happiness and joy, pleasure and satisfaction with others.

.

In this chapter, the notion of credibility and ethos has been presented and relevant theory has been

discussed. It was established that this thesis will follow the approach that a source can use ethos as a

tool to present itself as credible. Lund and Petersens model of credibility was discussed in relation

to Isaksson and Jrgensens the Ethos model. It was decided that the Ethos model is the appropriate

choice for the analysis of ethos in chapter 5, as it is operational and permits to identify the ethos

appeals based on rather fixed boundaries.

However, this thesis will call the ethos appeals for expertise, character and goodwill, based on

Aristotles original appeals, yet with the modification of calling Aristotles intelligence appeal for

expertise.


36/164


36

.

In the previous chapters, the theory which serves as background for this thesis has been outlined.

Chapter 2 presented the notion of CSR and CSR communication, as well as accounted for CSR

issues in the food industry and the relation between CSR and culture.

In this chapter an analysis of the CSR discourse of the two case study companies, Arla and

Smithfield, will be carried out. The framework created in section 2.3.2 will be used in order to find

out what and how the two companies communicate CSR. The analysis will include which issues

they address, which processes they communicate in order to realise the CSR discourse and who the

company identifies as stakeholders for the issue communicated.

.1

On Arla Foods website, the Our responsibility section will be analysed. All issues addressed in

this section and which can be related to the industry specific CSR issues (see section 2.5.1) will be

addressed.

On Smithfield Foods website, the section Responsibility will be regarded in this analysis. CSR

or issues closely related to CSR, such as Corporate Governance, are also communicated by the

company in other sections such as Employees and Investors. However, these will not beregarded, as the thesis strives for a comparative discussion of the two companies and therefore it is

necessary that the two sections analysed are directly comparable. That would not be necessary if

results from sections such as Corporate Governance would be included from one company but not

from the other.

.1.1

In this section, Arla will be shortly presented. Furthermore, two of the companys problem areas

will be accounted for, as these issues might be reflected in the companys CSR communication. For

example could Arla decide to communicate more extensively on an issue in order to improve its

image in a problem area. This might then have an influence on the analysis of Arla and the

comparison of the two companies.


37/164


38/164


38

tolerance are basic Islamic values.122Arla also stated that New Arla initiatives include sponsoring

humanitarian projects in the region, i.e. by giving aid to disabled children, cancer sufferers and the

hungry. Arla has approached the Danish Red Cross to assist in co-ordinating the effort. Arla also

intends to support activities aimed at creating greater understanding between the worlds religions

and cultures.

As the issue includes philanthropic actions, such as support to humanitarian projects, it is likely to

be emphasised in the companys CSR communication.

.1.2

Smithfield Foods, Inc. is the worlds largest pork producer and processor124. Its headquarters are in

Smithfield, Virginia, with operations in 26 states and 9 countries.

Environment

In 1997, Smithfield was fined 12.6 million USD for violation of the federal Clean Water Act, due to

millions of gallons of faecal matter and other pollutants that were released into the rivers of North

Carolina over a five year period125. The pollution was said to have a serious impact on the

environment and the local community. Smithfield was charged the largest Clean Water Act fine

ever at that time126. Consequently, Smithfield Foods has adopted more environmental friendly

initiatives and has among other things entered into an agreement with the Waterkeeper Alliance127

and taken steps to environmental certification of its slaughterhouses128. Therefore it is likely that the

company communicates on their initiatives and certifications in order to improve their image in

terms of the environment.

Labour issues

In 2005, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) announced its decision finding Smithfield

Packing Company guilty of illegally assaulting, intimidating and harassing its workers in Tar Heel,NC, when the company attempted to form a union in 1994 and 1997. The company has since paid

back $1.1 million in wages, plus interests, to 10 workers that were fired during past union-

122

http://www.arla.com/press/archive/arla-attempts-a-comeback-in-the-middle-east/123

http://www.arla.com/press/archive/breakthrough-for-arla-in-the-middle-east/124http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EUY/is_31_12/ai_n26959360/125

http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/1997/August97/331enr.htm126Ibid127http://www.waterkeeper.org/mainarticledetails.aspx?articleid=216128

http://www.smithfieldfoods.com/responsibility/el.aspx


39/164


39

organizing elections129. This issue might also be communicated in Smithfields CSR in order to

attract employees and improve the companys reputation as a good corporate citizen.

.2

Economic achievement

We manage our business in a good cooperative spirit that promotes the financial interests of our

owners summarizes that Arla thinks of its economic responsibility as a responsibility towards its

owners. Since Arla is a producer cooperative and the owners of the company are the farmers, it is

not surprising that Arla has to account for how the company is operated and how the company

cooperates with and satisfies the interest of their owners. This may be the reason why Arla has

dedicated a section of the CSR to how the business is managed. In this section the company

accounts for the relationship with their owners in terms of resources, governance, the cooperativeconditions and the insight the owners can have in the companys business operations.

As this information could very well have had its own section on the website, instead of being part of

the CSR report, Arla must have thought about the satisfaction of their owners as part of their

responsibility instead of simply being part of their business strategy. One could also tend to believe

that, since Arla has had issues with its owners in the past (see section 5.1.1), the company therefore

communicates their responsibilities towards their owners in order to re-establish the companys

good reputation and reduce the risk of scepticism by the public as well as by present and futureowners of the company.

Compliance with law

In the section business principles, Arla poses the interesting question What does responsible

enterprise mean?As an answer to this question the company states that In all of the countries in

which we conduct our operations, and at all organisational levels, we obey the law.Arla therefore

communicates that obeying the law means to be a responsible company. The company furthermore

states that This enables us to act credibly and with integrity with all our stakeholders, where the

company expresses that by obeying the law the company also manages to be responsible towards

their stakeholders.

Arla does not only account for their compliance with the law and the transparency of the company,

but also state their approach to bribes. Especially the statement we never offer or provide any gift

or payment that constitutes, or could be interpreted as, a bribe is interesting, as Arla has been

charged with bribery not too long ago (see section 5.1.1).

129http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/20081219/nlrb-holds-off-on-certifying-smithfield-union-vote.htm


40/164


40

Employees

Arla has two sections which focus on the issue of employees, the workplace and human rights.

In the section workplace, Arla seems to communicate two topics. The first topic deals with the

companys responsibilities as an employer, such as to provide employees with a safe and healthy

workplace, to ensure the well-being of their employees, to counteract harassment and to respectdiversity. The second topic deals with statements connected to work achievements and

performance, which could represent what the employees can do for Arla. Some examples are that

the workplace judges work achievements regardless of ethnic background, gender, age, religion,

civil status or sexual orientation and that the company states to invest in their personal and

occupational development in order to support our business strategy.

Arla therefore seems to focus on both their responsibilities towards employees, but also highlight

performance and achievements.

Arla also communicates human rights, where the company asks the question can we accept

responsibility for peoples living conditions? This may be one of the overall issues of CSR

whether or not corporations should take on responsibility in relation to how their workers live. Arla

does not directly answer its own question, but rather states that Arla conducts business as a

responsible citizen through respecting and upholding internationally recognized human rights.

However, it is reasonable to say that peoples living conditions contain much more aspects than

human rights, such as housing, access to food and clean drinking water, education and so on. This

is however, not emphasised by Arla.

Healthy lifestyle

In this section, Arla poses the question Should we decide what people should eat? Instead of

answering the question explicitly, Arlas approach is to help consumers in their nutritional decision

making process by giving information about the product: The aim is that our products and the

information we provide will inspire and stimulate consumers to increase their interest in the link

between nutrition and health.The company expresses their motivation for doing so as we meet

consumer demands for healthy products and nutritional information about products. Even though

Arla communicates about this issue as though the company voluntarily informs about their products

due to consumer demand, there has been established legislation on food labelling by the EU

Commission130.

130http://www.ugebrevet-europa.dk/artikel.asp?AjrDcmntId=439


41/164


42/164


42

avoid talking about the subject. It seems as if Arla is communicating rather vaguely upon their

intentions.

Arla then accounts for the steps the company takes in order to always improve their protection of

the environment, which includes sound and sustainable principles from cow to consumer.

Examples of these principles are designing new facilities, procuring equipment, saving energy and

reducing material consumption, waste and CO2 emissions. Besides their own initiatives, Arla states

that we challenge and encourage our suppliers to develop and deliver products and services that

exceed our environmental standards and that the company is open towards the wishes expressed by

their stakeholders and regulatory authorities.

Also in the section of Agriculture, Arla expresses its views on making agriculture more

sustainable through support to sustainable farming and encouraging milk suppliers to protect the

environment. Still, Arla does not state how the support and encouragement is shaped and whether

the company will act on misbehaving suppliers.

Community

This section is introduced by the question Can Arla Foods improve the world? One might think

that this question is used to introduce Arlas philanthropic actions. Arla also emphasises this fact by

stating We cannot change the world on our own, but we believe we can make a difference withinthe local communitiesHowever, Arla focuses on maintaining good relationships with their

communities we maintain good, respectful and constructive community relations. Arla does not

further elaborate on how the company contribute positively to their development.

Arla did neither provide information on foundations or volunteerism in their CSR report.

.2.1

There are several tendencies to point out. Firstly, since Arlas CSR communication is arranged in

bullet-points, the critical reader may sometimes feel that the communication lacks argumentation,

i.e. in the issue of community or animal welfare, as much information may seem to be presented as

facts.

Secondly, as mentioned earlier, Arla has had some issues in the past which might be brought up in

CSR communication, such as bribery, unfair competition and religion. Arla distances itself from

bribery and unfair competition in their CSR and by doing so, Arla might be using its CSR

communication to improve their reputation and communicate that the corporation has changed.


43/164


43

Surprisingly, Arla did not report on the Mohammed crisis at all. One could have expected a section

where Arla reports on the respect of religions and that the company would never participate in any

actions that involve violation of their respect.

It can also be observed that Arla states that the company helps consumers to make the right choice

in terms of healthy lifestyle by informing consumers about the ingredients in their products. Here

Arla expresses that the company fulfils the demand of their consumers for healthy products and

nutritional information while also communicating concern and good will towards their consumers.

On the other hand, legislation on labelling of products already provides fixed boundaries on how

food producers should label their products. Arla does not emphasise that fact and it therefore seems

as though the company wants to communicate that the company informs consumers voluntarily.

Moreover, it can be observed that Arla encourages readers and stakeholders to contact the company

with their views and suggestions in relation to CSR. This further supports their statements of

stakeholders as drivers of CSR.

.

Smithfield has several sections on their website that deal with CSR or a related topic, such as

Corporate Governance. However, the section dealt with here is their Responsibility section

accessible from their front page. Each subsection of Smithfields CSR section begins with an

introduction to the subject. Then different issues are elaborated in a coherent text.

Economic achievement

Smithfield only states economic responsibilities in one case: Our global perspective and

commitment to inclusion are central to our mission to produce good food, responsibly, and

ultimately maximize shareholder value. This statement shows that Smithfield does feel responsible

towards their shareholders. Yet the company does not communicate further on this issue.

Compliance with law

Even though Smithfield does not have a section on lawfulness per se under Responsibility,

several statements of Smithfields intent to comply with the law are given. In most cases, however,

Smithfield communicates compliance with and exceeding the law and regulations, such as in the

environment section where Smithfield seeks to demonstrate its responsible corporate citizenship

by complying with relevant environmental legislation and regulations, and with other requirements

to which we voluntarily subscribe and Maintaining compliance with all federal, state, and local

regulatory requirements.It is also communicated widely that complying with company policies


44/164


45/164


45

committed to ensuring the health, safety, and well being of our employees, the people living and

working in communities near our facilities, and the environment. Smithfield therefore not only

relates health and safety to their employees, but also to the community and the environment.

Moreover, Smithfield describes their approach to health and safety as making their own standards

and own regulations since although occupational health and safety is highly regulated in the United

States, more so than almost any other country in the world, 100 percent compliance 100 percent of

the time with regulatory statues is not enough to keep people safe. Smithfield therefore argues for

self-regulation and going beyond regulations. This also applies to more areas in the field of health

and safety, where Smithfield argues Although here in the United States we have many laws and

various Occupational Safety and Health Administration agencies, we generally lack an overall

management system. Here, Smithfield criticizes part of the national system and reports how this

problem is solved within the company through self-regulation. This system is then described in

much detail, although it is merely a Health & Safety Summary.

Animal welfare

Smithfield reports that the company is recognized by the worlds foremost experts in animal well-

being as setting the standard for Americas pork industry.

To underline this statement, Smithfield elaborates on five different issues in terms of animalwelfare: their Animal Welfare Management System, their innovative approach to gestation stalls,

their overall Animal Welfare Policy, their Antibiotic Policy and their Accident Response program.

Smithfield therefore communicates extensively on animal welfare, from pregnant sows to sick

animals to accidents involving animals during transport. The company communicates their

motivation as to assure respectful and humane treatment of animals that we own or process, to

produce wholesome food products for our customers This claim is further supported by expert

recognitions and testimonials, as almost every one of the before mentioned issues is supported by a

citation of a 3rdparty expert in the field or even supplemented by a newspaper article. Moreover,

two experts in the field of Animal Science and Animal Agriculture are cited in the Recognition

section. However, as Smithfield states to produce wholesome food products for our customers,

their motivation to engage in animal welfare is also based on their responsibility towards their

customers.


46/164


46

Food safety

Smithfields motivation for engaging in food safety seems to be consumer satisfaction to ensure

our ability to provide safe, wholesome foods for families throughout the world, we use a multitude

of food safety processes and programs throughout our plants. Smithfield describes a series of

testing and HACCP programs and introduces their facility and food safety guidelines. The companyalso reports that their employees are central in these programs and that they receive proper training

in this field, All of us at Smithfield Foods never forget that we are working hard to produce the

safest foods possible. Thereby Smithfield expresses the commitment and involvement of the whole

company, in order to ensure that consumers are provided with safe food.

Environment

Smithfield states providing good food responsibly means going above and beyond to be good

stewards of the environment. The company therefore communicates that it is not only necessary to

behave correctly but also to make an effort and a positive contribution to the environment. As proof

of their commitment, the company states that their commitment is reflected in our ISO 14001

certification. Smithfield also gives examples of their achievements and actions. In this way the

company establishes an overview of their CSR activities and proves that it is a responsible

company.

The Environmental Management System section describes how the company reduces its use of

natural resources and finding ways to improve whereas World Water Monitoring Day and

National FFA Environmental Award focus more on philanthropic aspects, such as sponsoring and

volunteerism. World Water Monitoring Day will therefore be dealt with later, under the aspect of

Volunteerism. In terms of the National FFA Environmental Award Smithfield includes a

testimonial from a scholarship recipient in the FFA competition, where he states that the money will

go to his education in the field of Natural Resources. This statement further supports Smithfields

motivation to support agricultural education in order to provide students with the opportunity tolearn. Smithfields environmental responsibilities therefore not only involve the protection and

preservation of natural resources, but also include philanthropic activities such as sponsorships and

volunteerism.

Moreover, Smithfield includes Recognition in their communication of their environmental

responsibility as proof of their commitment to protecting and preserving the environment and the

company directly states You dont just have to take our word for it. Each award or honor provides

tangible proof.


47/164


47

Community

Smithfield states that its our responsibility to give back to the communities where our employees

live, work and raise their families. Smithfield therefore seems to include employees and their

families in its responsibilities towards the local community. The company furthermore reports that

one of their core involvements are educational initiatives which provide learning opportunities forthose that might not otherwise have them and providing support to food programs that help feed

the hungry. Smithfield therefore communicates philanthropic actions in their community section,

as those are activities which the company engages in voluntarily in order to ensure the continued

well-being of our employees and communities.

Furthermore, Smithfield emphasises feeding the hungry in their Helping Hungry Homes

initiative which supports families faced with food insecurity. In order to do so, Smithfield has four

courses of action: Food Banks, School Nutrition Programs, Disaster Relief and Community

Outreach. The company also arranged for a 10-City Helping Hungry Homes across America Tour,

where a popular kitchen chef helped providing food to families. Again, Smithfield describes exact

initiatives and activities to prove their role as a responsible and good citizen.

Foundation

The Smithfield-Luter foundation is the philanthropic arm of Smithfield Foods and provides

educational scholarships to children and grandchildren of Smithfields employees. Furthermore it

also funds the Learners to Learners education alliance to overcome challenges such as Academic

disadvantages, social challenges, cultural barriers etc.

Volunteerism

Smithfield states that its employees actively engage in World Water Monitoring Day in order to

help preserve resources. By stating that Around the world, our employees have tested waterways

together with school children, 4-H groups, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts and church groups Smithfield

relates its employees to committed volunteers with a good reputation. This way the commitment

and engagement of Smithfield volunteers may be enhanced. As discussed earlier, Smithfield has

been fined with a penalty for violation of the Clean Water Act 12 years ago. It seems reasonable to

say that Smithfield engages in this activity in order to dissociate itself from the past and to support

and engage in this initiative to ensure clean water to signal that Smithfield is a responsible

company.

Smithfield does not communicate on healthy lifestyle.


48/164


48

..1 Smithfields CSR section is dominated by three tendencies, the companys tendency to self-regulate

through company policies and regulations, its constant desire to prove that the company is

responsible and a good citizen through recognitions and testimonials, and its emphasis on

families.

The first tendency, their tendency to self regulate is especially visible in the situation where the

company states that in the US occupational health and safety are highly regulated, but state that it is

still necessary to self-regulate with a corporate system for health and safety, as the federal, state and

local policies are not sufficient. Also in other examples, Smithfield communicates corporate actions

which provide necessary services to e.g. employees and the local community. Some of these

examples are: a healthcare facility for employees and the local community at one of their sites, asthe area lacks affordable healthcare. The company supports education in order to give students an

opportunity they might not otherwise have. The company also provides food for families with food

insecurity.

Smithfield therefore seems to take great responsibility towards their employees and the local

community and the company seems to believe that their employees and the local community in

some cas

culture and credibility in csr communication

Documents