↓ Skip to main content

The Limits of Corporate Social Responsibility: Techniques of Neutralization, Stakeholder Management and Political CSR

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Business Ethics, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
2 policy sources
twitter
4 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
107 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
324 Mendeley
Title
The Limits of Corporate Social Responsibility: Techniques of Neutralization, Stakeholder Management and Political CSR
Published in
Journal of Business Ethics, March 2012
DOI 10.1007/s10551-012-1250-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gary Fooks, Anna Gilmore, Jeff Collin, Chris Holden, Kelley Lee

Abstract

Since scholarly interest in corporate social responsibility (CSR) has primarily focused on the synergies between social and economic performance, our understanding of how (and the conditions under which) companies use CSR to produce policy outcomes that work against public welfare has remained comparatively under-developed. In particular, little is known about how corporate decision-makers privately reconcile the conflicts between public and private interests, even though this is likely to be relevant to understanding the limitations of CSR as a means of aligning business activity with the broader public interest. This study addresses this issue using internal tobacco industry documents to explore British-American Tobacco's (BAT) thinking on CSR and its effects on the company's CSR Programme. The article presents a three-stage model of CSR development, based on Sykes and Matza's theory of techniques of neutralization, which links together: how BAT managers made sense of the company's declining political authority in the mid-1990s; how they subsequently justified the use of CSR as a tool of stakeholder management aimed at diffusing the political impact of public health advocates by breaking up political constituencies working towards evidence-based tobacco regulation; and how CSR works ideologically to shape stakeholders' perceptions of the relative merits of competing approaches to tobacco control. Our analysis has three implications for research and practice. First, it underlines the importance of approaching corporate managers' public comments on CSR critically and situating them in their economic, political and historical contexts. Second, it illustrates the importance of focusing on the political aims and effects of CSR. Third, by showing how CSR practices are used to stymie evidence-based government regulation, the article underlines the importance of highlighting and developing matrices to assess the negative social impacts of CSR.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 324 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 7 2%
Germany 2 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Vietnam 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
Unknown 309 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 88 27%
Student > Master 68 21%
Student > Doctoral Student 29 9%
Student > Bachelor 26 8%
Unspecified 24 7%
Other 89 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 139 43%
Social Sciences 75 23%
Unspecified 36 11%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 26 8%
Environmental Science 7 2%
Other 41 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 October 2018.
All research outputs
#1,836,145
of 12,802,184 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Business Ethics
#274
of 1,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,202
of 118,165 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Business Ethics
#3
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,802,184 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,832 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 118,165 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.