UNIVERSITY OF GHANA

THE IMPLICATION OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY AND REPORTING

ON THE ATTRACTIVENESS AND PROFITABILITY OF BUSINESS

BY

NICHOLAS NII TEIKO ARMAH

(10661126)

A LONG ESSAY SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ACCOUNTING,

UNIVERSITY OF GHANA BUSINESS SCHOOL, UNIVERSITY OF GHANA, LEGON, IN

PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF BACHELOR

OF SCIENCE DEGREE IN ADMINISTRATION (ACCOUNTING OPTION).

OCTOBER 2021

1
 DECLARATION

This paper is the result of my research, which I declare herein. No one at this university, or any

other university, has ever presented the study as an academic work. This work's references have

been properly credited. I am solely responsible for any shortcomings.

.................................................. 20/10/2021
DATE..........................................

NICHOLAS NII TEIKO ARMAH

(10661126)

2
 CERTIFICATION

I hereby certify that this research was supervised under procedures laid down by the University of

Ghana.

……………………………………….. 20/10/2021
DATE………………………….....................

DR. CLETUS AGYENIM BOATENG

(Supervisor)

3
 DEDICATION

I dedicate this work to everyone who helped me climb the academic ladder up to this stage.

4
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I am very thankful to the Almighty God for His love and never-ending grace which has seen me

through the entire research. My profound appreciation goes to Dr. Cletus Agyenim-Boateng, my

supervisor and his assistants Mr Kofi Oduro, Mr Delvin Addae and Mr John Kyei for their great

support and guidance.

My warmest appreciation goes to my family for the love and support, Mr Nicholas Armah, Mrs

Thelma Okine, Mr. Bright Armah, Princess Armah, Miss Nicholine Alijah and Marilyn-Layla

Armah. May the Almighty God richly bless you all.

I would also like to thank Emmanuel K. Mortey, Carlton K. Amegashie and all my friends and

loved ones who duly contributed to the success of this research.

5
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Contents

DECLARATION.................................................................................................................................2

CERTIFICATION................................................................................................................................3

DEDICATION.....................................................................................................................................4

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT...................................................................................................................5

TABLE OF CONTENTS.....................................................................................................................6

LIST OF ABREVIATIONS...............................................................................................................10

ABSTRACT.......................................................................................................................................11

CHAPTER ONE................................................................................................................................12

INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................................12

1.1 Background of Study................................................................................................................12

1.2 Problem Statement...................................................................................................................14

1.3 Research Questions..................................................................................................................16

1.3.1 Research Objectives..............................................................................................................16

1.3.2 Methodology.........................................................................................................................17

1.4 Significance of Study...............................................................................................................17

1.5 Structure of the Long Essay.....................................................................................................18

1.6 Chapter Summary.....................................................................................................................19

CHAPTER TWO...............................................................................................................................21

LITERATURE REVIEW...................................................................................................................21

2.1 Introduction..............................................................................................................................21

6
 2.2 Historical Background of Corporate Social Responsibility.....................................................21

2.2.1 Corporate Social Responsibility............................................................................................23

2.2.2 Importance of Corporate Social Responsibility....................................................................26

2.3 History of Corporate Social Reporting....................................................................................27

2.3.1 Corporate Social Reporting Today........................................................................................28

2.3.2 Corporate Social Reporting...................................................................................................29

2.3.3 Corporate Social Responsibility and Reporting in Ghana....................................................32

2.3.4 Reasons for Corporate Social Reporting...............................................................................33

2.3.5 Corporate Social Reporting and Profitability........................................................................35

2.3.6 Importance of Corporate Social Reporting...........................................................................35

2.4 Theoretical Review..................................................................................................................35

2.4.1 Legitimacy theory.................................................................................................................36

2.4.2 Stakeholder Theory...............................................................................................................38

2.4.3 Global Reporting Initiative...................................................................................................40

2.5 Chapter Summary.....................................................................................................................41

CHAPTER THREE............................................................................................................................42

METHODOLOGY.............................................................................................................................42

3.1 Introduction..............................................................................................................................42

3.2 Research Design.......................................................................................................................42

3.2.1 Research Philosophy.............................................................................................................42

3.2.2 Research Approach...............................................................................................................43

3.2.3 Research Method...................................................................................................................44

7
 3.3 Data Collection.........................................................................................................................44

3.3.1 Data Collection Methods.......................................................................................................45

3.3.2 Ethical Considerations..........................................................................................................46

3.4 Data Analysis...........................................................................................................................46

3.4.1 Documentation and Transcription of Qualitative Data.........................................................47

3.4.3 Coding Qualitative Data........................................................................................................48

3.5 Chapter Summary.....................................................................................................................48

CHAPTER 4.......................................................................................................................................50

PRESENTATION AND DISCUSION OF FINDINGS....................................................................50

4.0 Introduction..............................................................................................................................50

4.1 Corporate Social Events...........................................................................................................50

4.2 Access To External Market......................................................................................................51

4.3 CSR as A Shared Value...........................................................................................................52

4.4 Improved Recognition and Reputation....................................................................................54

4.5 Enhanced Customer Loyalty and Trust....................................................................................55

4.6 CSR as A Marketing Strategy..................................................................................................55

4.7 Formal and Informal Communication of CSR Activities........................................................56

4.7 Chapter Summary.....................................................................................................................57

CHAPTER 5.......................................................................................................................................58

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION................................58

5.1 Introduction..............................................................................................................................58

5.2 Summary of findings................................................................................................................58

8
 5.3 Implications/Conclusion..........................................................................................................58

5.4 Recommendations to future studies.........................................................................................59

5.5 Chapter Summary.....................................................................................................................59

References..........................................................................................................................................60

9
 LIST OF ABREVIATIONS

CSR- Corporate Social Responsibility

CSRR- Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting

SR- Sustainability Reporting

GRI- Global Reporting Initiative

WBCSD – World Business Council for Sustainable Development

10
 ABSTRACT

Purpose -This research examines and describes the present condition of the implication of

corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting the profitability and attractiveness of business.

Hence, this study aims to extend reviews of the CSR literature from the currently absent emerging

economy and practical perspective to create a comprehensive guide for future researchers

undertaking CSR research in this area.

Methodology – A qualitative research approach was adopted for this study and a semi structured

interview guide was used to collect data together with publicly available documents (annual reports)

from 4 different companies.

Findings – It was discovered through the findings that companies engage in different social

responsibility activities such as donations, health care, education and many more. These activities

are reported through varied channels such as websites, traditional media (radios and televisions) and

annual reports. As CSR activities vary from company to company, so are the reasons for which they

engage in these activities

Practical Implications – Findings from this study have practical implications for companies and

individuals interested in the corporate social reporting discourse as well as companies who want to

increase their knowledge on corporate social responsibility and its reporting and how the

attractiveness and profitability of the firm is affected by CSR.

Original/Value - The present study is novel because qualitative studies on the implications of

corporate social reporting on the attractiveness and profitability of business are limited considering

earlier research in Ghana, Africa and the world. Moreover, this is among the first study to directly

address the CSR impacts on firms’ economic value and reputation.

Keywords – Corporate Social Reporting, Corporate Social Responsibility, Profitability, Reputation

11
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

This chapter gives a synopsis of the full research project as it explores the impact of corporate

social reporting on businesses. The study further examines how the disclosure of corporate social

responsibility affects the profitability and attractiveness of businesses. It also provides a summary

of the significance and objectives of the study as well as a summary of the chapters.

1.1 Background of Study

The relationship between business organizations and their environment in contemporary times has

witnessed drastic changes. Until recently, environmental and social issues were not seriously

considered in management objectives because they were deemed not to have any significant

financial impact (Pereira Eugenio, Lourenco, & Morais, 2013). Businesses today be it public or

private play vital roles in the development of the societies in which they operate as Shocker & Sethi

(1973) argue that companies must perform well and engage in socially desirable actions to survive

and grow, for example by giving financial, social, or political benefits to the groups from which

they obtain their force to operate since their survival depends on them and their activities also

having a long-lasting impact on them. This is evident as Chelli et al. (2014, pp. 283-316) posit that

organizational Glo-survival depends on its capacity to manage the demands of its environment,

since it is the environment that holds the resources for its survival. Additionally, the prospects of

unfavorable publicity have prompted companies to take up, embrace and encourage CSR and its

related activities stressing on the fact that enterprises may do good contributing to social and

economic developments as well as environmental protection without the need for any interference

from the government, institutions or society (Jenkins, 2005). Companies are now not only taking

CSR seriously because it is important to the success of the business and can give them a

competitive advantage but also because organizational members care about the present and future

generations as CSR relates to and seeks to balance environmental, social and economic factors.

12
Golob & Barlett (2007) further assert that demand for business to play a more responsible role in

society are growing, and recent research of the corporate social responsibility discourse reveals that

several tools have been developed to improve, evaluate, and convey socially responsible operations.

According to Muller & Kolk (2008), CSR today remains an emerging concept in many developing

economies and in as much as organizations operate with a profit motive, there is an expectation

from the various stakeholders that organizations give back to their communities. As a result, CSR

disclosure, or reporting, has become one of the most popular research topics among accounting

professors (Deegan & Unerman, 2009; Mathews, 1997; Tilt, 2001). An explanation from Ofori &

Hinson (2007) explains that CSR issues are now being included in all parts of corporate operations,

and many businesses throughout the world have made specific commitments to CSR in their vision,

purpose, and value statements. Companies have now begun to produce CSR disclosures that focus

on qualitative aspects as previously, disclosures were primarily focused on quantitative regulatory

obligations (Danko, Goldberg, Goldberg, & Grant, 2008). According to Khan (2010), social

responsibility has been acknowledged as a crucial instrument for enterprises to maintain their long-

term continuous existence and survival, since disclosing CSR issues has become a necessary part of

businesses to demonstrate their commitment to society's well-being.

Corporate social reporting is a very delicate issue for businesses today as the need for transparency

and accountability from organizations operating worldwide has pushed them to put CSR high on

their agendas (Nielsen & Thomsen, 2007). Corporate social reporting is defined by Gray et al.

(1996) as “the process of communicating the social and environmental effects of organizations’

economic actions to particular interest groups within society and society at large.” According to

Nielsen & Thomsen (2007), the rise of non-financial reporting, often known as CSR reporting, can

be understood as an attempt to promote openness in business dealings with social and

environmental issues. To emphasize this, numerous reporting criteria have been devised that firms

must follow in order to ensure fairness, transparency, and veracity in their reporting (Reynolds &

Yuthas, 2008). These guidelines include the global reporting initiatives (GRI), SA (Social
13
Accountability, International Labor Standards) or the triple bottom line. The triple bottom-line

refers to measuring economic, social, and environmental performance, sometimes referred to as

people, profit and planet.

Guthrie & Parker (1990) highlights three higher purposes corporate social reporting can serve.

These are:

(a) Providing a comprehensive view of the organization and its resources.

(b) Providing a constraint upon socially irresponsible corporate behaviour.

(c)Providing positive motivation for the corporation to act in a socially responsible manner

Increased transparency, accountability, and credibility; better access to more appealing capital;

reduced legal risks and costs, forecast inaccuracies, and insurance costs; more ethical behavior

within the company and throughout its value chain; and improved employee and supplier morale

and productivity are just a few of the advantages of reporting. Non-financial reporting, which

incorporates a company's social, environmental, and economic effect, is becoming more popular,

not just as a tool for accountability, but also as a strategy for gaining access to new income and

growth streams. For efficient and proper CSR communication, you must know what to say, how to

communicate, and where to communicate, as well as have a good understanding of the company

and what matters to stakeholders (Danko, Goldberg, Goldberg, & Grant, 2008) Du et al., 2010).

1.2 Problem Statement

The topic CSR (sustainability) reporting has dominated debate around the world. Over the years,

there have been many scholarly articles on corporate social reporting. With businesses now

operating on all continents and in varied countries, the subject of companies reporting on their

social impact is becoming more prevalent. However, sadly and shockingly, no African company

ranks among the world’s 100 most sustainable firms according to the 2019 Global Most Sustainable

Corporations in the World. This necessitates a careful examination and review of the African

continent’s companies’ sustainability practices and how they disclose them even though Waddock
14
et al. (2002) argues that there are significant differences in the disclosure of sustainable practices

across developed and poor nations utilizing the Global Reporting Initiatives (GRI) Standards.

In as much as companies have recently begun to accept corporate social responsibilities as part of

their pre-mandate and core activities in ensuring their companies remain sustainable for the years to

come, the problem as to how and when to report these activities exist. Although corporate social

responsibility is becoming popular and most organizations are engaging in it to thrive, survive and

grow as well as harness the benefits it comes with, the concept of CSR and methods as to how these

activities are communicated to the various stakeholders have not been the best. This is supported by

Abugre & Nyuur (2015) as they affirmed that the extent to which companies in the country

understand the concept of corporate social responsibility is relatively and significantly lower than

known information in literature would suggest.

Additionally, reporting in accordance with the standards is limited to companies in developed

countries whereas firms in the developing countries are hesitant to embrace these standards. As

issues of globalization increases, this geographical divide must be addressed. According to the UN

Global Compact’s progress report, corporate social reporting has increased throughout the region,

but Ghana is not at the top of the list. This may be observed in the Progress Africa Sustainability

Reporting Communication where Ghana stands third alongside Nigeria after South Africa and

Kenya. Corporate social reporting as a whole and how it impacts the profitability and attractiveness

of businesses in Ghana and developing countries is suffering from an academic and literature gap as

most research works tend to focus on corporate social reporting in developed countries paying little

attention and focus on developing countries. Moreover, most academic researchers employ

quantitative research approach as a way of addressing issues and topics regarding corporate social

reporting with little being done on qualitative research approach.

These limitations in academic research are main the gaps this research paper seeks to address to

provide adequate information on corporate social reporting as well as educate companies on how to

go about their responsibility activities and how to report them since the global reporting standards

15
have been well detailed in this study to guide companies on how to report, what to report and when

to report.

1.3 Research Questions

The primary objective of this study is to understand the current implications of corporate social

reporting on the profitability and attractiveness of business taking into consideration what they do,

how they do it and the most important of them all why they do it. In doing so, the study seeks to

obtain in-depth information on the research topic by providing answers to the following research

questions:

1. What are the impacts of CSR on the activities of businesses?

2. Why does CSR affect the profitability and attractiveness of businesses?

3. How does CSR affect the profitability and attractiveness of businesses?

1.3.1 Research Objectives

The main aim of this research can be attained by providing answers to the research questions stated

above. This study seeks to attain the following objectives as a means of giving a clear and vivid

explanation and understanding of the topic. The answers to the research questions are as follows:

1. To understand the benefits and impacts of CSR on businesses. Corporate social reporting by far

is one of the key elements through which companies report, communicate and educate their various

stakeholders on the numerous social responsibility activities undertaken by the company and as

such, it is very important to understand how these activities affect the company.

2. To assess the reasons for which CSR impacts the attractiveness and profitability of business.

Profit maximization is and has always been a major objective of managers as businesses operate

with the motive of making profits. CSR in recent times has proven to affect the revenue generated

by most firms and as such, this paper seeks to assess why this is so.

3. To understand the ways through which CSR affects the attractiveness and profitability of

businesses. The growth and survival of businesses for the foreseeable future are one of the major

16
interests of the stakeholders as they look forward to the company providing them with their varied

needs. The public and society on the other hand also require the companies to perform certain

societal obligations and as such, managers engage and report on various non-profit activities which

are of enormous benefits to the public. As a result, it is important to know how these affect the

brand, the corporate image and reputation of the business because these activities do not generate

funds for the company however these firms tend to thrive and do good.

1.3.2 Methodology

The research methodology critically analyses and thoroughly explains the methods adopted for this

research paper. These include the research approaches, theories, how is data collected among other

things. Furthermore, it covers the benefits of these compositions and why they are employed. It also

elaborates on how they help in the comprehension of the implications of corporate social reporting

on the profitability and attractiveness of businesses.

1.4 Significance of Study

The study sought to enlighten the contemporary corporate world about the impacts of Corporate

Social Reporting as various studies on corporate social responsibility activities have been conducted

but there is a paucity of literature concerning business profitability and attractiveness.

Consequently, it encourages companies and corporate bodies to assimilate and adopt CSR

measures. The presumed and highly probable profits, as expounded in this piece, that CSR and

CSRR processes confer on businesses operationalize to ultimately assent to the primary objective of

business which is profit maximization.

The study fills a gap in the literature regarding profitability and attractiveness of business and leads

to that scholarly conversation by contributing to CSR studies. This implies that it will act as a

policy and strategic guide for both public and private sector organizations. Other specific

implications include the possibility of the study assisting in the identification and improvement of

corporate social responsibility orientation and actions and how they are reported.

17
The study will also serve as a reference for new companies looking to enter the market in terms of

understanding the function of CSR and corporate social reporting in brand positioning, as well as

being lucrative and attractive. It will further assist marketing and sustainability managers in charge

of corporate social responsibility of organizations in conceptualizing and developing effective

corporate social responsibility initiatives for their organizations, understand the need to disclose

such non-financial information as well as follow the required guidelines and standards for reporting.

Finally, this thesis will aid in the development of a better understanding of the notion of company

profitability and attractiveness in a context, as well as serve as a reference for any future research in

this field.

1.5 Structure of the Long Essay

This research paper is broken down into five chapters.

 Chapter one (Introduction): This chapter focuses on the introduction of the study with an

overview of the background of the study. It also presents the research gap, the research

questions which leads to the research objections as well as the significance of the research

paper.

 Chapter two (Literature review): This chapter reviews the relevant pieces of literature both

empirical and theoretical on the implication of corporate social reporting on the profitability

and attractiveness of businesses. This chapter is important as it provides a description,

summary, and critical evaluation of other literature related to the research problem being

investigated. It also serves as grounds for discussing empirical data. It begins by giving a

brief background and definition of corporate social responsibility and corporate social

reporting together with the theories employed for this paper which are stakeholder and

legitimacy theories.

 Chapter three (Research methodology): This chapter critically analyses and thoroughly

explicates the research methodology and its compositions, why and why not some

18
 approaches, theories, techniques inter alia were used at the expense of others. It also covers

the benefits of these compositions and how they help in the comprehension of the

implications of corporate social reporting on the profitability and attractiveness of

businesses. First, it takes a look at the research design which ensures evidence gathered

helps the researcher meet and address the research problem in a simple, logical and

chronological way. The research design further proposes that the qualitative approach is

employed for this study. It also highlights the data collection which shows how data for this

paper is gathered as well as the various means through which data is collected and the

challenges to be encountered. Next is the ethical considerations to be observed during the

study. This chapter finally looks at the data analysis approach. This paper employs the

thematic and content analysis techniques as its helps in analysing empirical data and

findings.

 Chapter four (analysis of the data and discussion): This chapter introduces and analyses the

factual data gathered through the various data collection methods and also focuses on the

findings as well as the discussion of data. This section is mostly considered the important

part of the study since it often demonstrates the ability of the researcher to think critically

about issues, how to establish innovative explanations to problems based on the findings and

to formulate a deeper understanding of the research problem being studied. It presents

findings on the implications of corporate social reporting on the profitability and

attractiveness of business with the responses gathered analysed using thematic and content

analysis techniques. The various themes to be discussed include:

 Chapter five (Summary): This chapter concludes the study by dealing with a summary of

findings, conclusions and recommendations on the implications of corporate social reporting

on the profitability and attractiveness of businesses.

19
1.6 Chapter Summary

This chapter explains the background of the research paper and further expatiates on the research

gap to have adequate knowledge on the purpose of the research as well as what the paper seeks to

address and solve. It also deals with the research methodology, the significance of the research and

finally the structure of the long essay.

We discuss the literature review in the next chapter.

20
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This chapter expatiates and critically reviews and analyses previous works concerning corporate

social reporting and its implication on the profitability and attractiveness of businesses to give a

detailed explanation and enhance our knowledge on the subject matter. To elaborate the discourse

and its related concepts and terminology, theoretical and conceptual frameworks are employed in

this chapter. It begins by studying the background and definition of corporate social responsibility

as they are in activities that are performed and engaged in before corporate social reporting is

possible. It also looks at the stakeholder and legitimacy theories which are used to explain the social

responsibility activities in order to better our understanding of the concept. This chapter concludes

by looking at the empirical reviews and standards that guide the reporting of responsibility

activities.

2.2 Historical Background of Corporate Social Responsibility

According to Bert Spector, the origins of the modern social responsibility movement may be traced

back to the early years of the Cold War, 1945–1960. He believes that Dean David and other

proponents of extending CSR did so in order to link commercial interests with the safeguarding of

free-market capitalism against the threat of Soviet Communism at the time (Spector, 2008). In the

1950s, William C. Frederick argued that three core ideas about CSR stood out. The manager as

public trustee, the balancing of competing claims to corporate resources, and corporate

philanthropy– business support of good causes was among them (Frederick, 2006). However,

Hoffman argued that the evolution of corporate social responsibility in the 1920s was based on

three views of business social obligations. These are the profit ethic, progressivism and the gospel

of wealth. The profit ethic of CSR was justified by the fact that, for society to experience rapid

21
development, businesses had to earn large profits and reinvest into the business whereas

progressivism sought to regulate and distribute wealth in the economy by making officials more

responsive and helping the socially and economically challenged to improve their living conditions

(Wiebe, 1989).

Corporate social responsibility according to Bowen (1953) emerged in the 1950s as a philosophy of

business doing good for society, including incorporating notions of corporate philanthropy and he

defined corporate social responsibility as an obligation of favourable policies to be followed,

decisions to be made and activities to be implemented concerning the “social goals and values”

Yilmaz (2010). His study titled “Social Responsibilities of Businessman” was the foundations of

social responsibility concept and developing a theoretical structure for social responsibility

(Aydemir, 2012). Murphy (1978) classified four broad CSR eras that embraced the period before

and after the 1950s, it later according to Carroll & Shabana (2010) due to factors like social rights

and legislative change expanded in the 1960s to increase expectations on companies with regards to

broader social concerns example environment and human right. These eras are (i) up to the 1950s

‘philanthropic’ era, in which companies donated to charities more than anything else, (ii) 1953–67

‘awareness’ era, characterized by more recognition of the overall responsibility of business and its

involvement in community affairs, (iii) 1968–73 ‘issue’ era, in which companies began focusing on

specific issues such as urban decay, racial discrimination, and pollution problems and finally (iv)

1974–8 and, continuing beyond dubbed the ‘responsiveness’ era, where companies began taking

serious management and organizational actions to address CSR issues. In contrast to previous

periods of CSR development that focused on profit maximization and trusteeship management, Hay

and Gray labeled this period of CSR development from the 1950s onwards as "Quality of Life

Management" (Hay & Gray, 1974). According to Frederick, the 1960s and 1970s were a time of

"business social responsiveness" (Frederick, 2008).

As the 1960s gave way to the 1970s and beyond, scholarly contributions in the literature and the

slowly developing realities of business practice fueled the growth of the CSR concept. The absence

22
of any link between social responsibility and financial achievement was another aspect of the 1960s

(Lee 2008, p. 58). This is to say, corporate social responsibility was primarily motivated by

external, socially conscious concerns, with little expectation of a return.

Carroll (1999) identifies four main components of CSR. These are economic, legal, ethical, and

discretionary or philanthropic. The economic component deals with the profit motive and survival

whereas the legal component is the company's obligation to obey the law and play. The ethical and

philanthropic components respectively deal with the responsibility of the firm to respect the right of

others as well as meet the obligations these rights have placed on them, and the philanthropic

activities engaged in to support the community. After the year 2000, communities all over the world

got significantly more interested in corporate social responsibility operations, and it became an

unavoidable issue for many corporations (Yldz, 2012, 96).

2.2.1 Corporate Social Responsibility

The debate over corporate responsibility is not new. However, Corporate Social Responsibility

(CSR) as a theme has been of enormous importance to companies and societies over the past few

decades as it is evident in various works of literature even though it is not always accepted. This is

supported by Hertherington (1973: 31) and cited in Crowther & Aras (2008) as he argued that

“there's no reason to think that shareholders are willing to tolerate an amount of corporate non-

profit activity which appreciably reduces either dividends or the market performance of the stock".

Proponents of CSR, on the other hand, claim that companies benefit in a variety of ways from

operating with a longer-term view of their organization and role in society rather than focusing just

on their short-term profitability because its impacts and significance extend beyond the typical

activities of the companies that participate in it.

Business strategists today have re-examined the intense rivalry and tough competition in the world

of the business by examining how they might make greater economic and social profit from contact

with society, this method of thinking saw a new phrase rise; it created shared value (Motilewa et al.,

23
2016). Navickas & Kontautiene (2012) further maintains that the primary goal of a company's

socially responsible actions is to maximize shared value, which can result in indirect investment

returns for its shareholders while minimizing negative consequences on society and the

environment. How CSR affects the perceptions of customers and its influence on a company's

brand, image and success have been one of the vital topics of sustainability as they form part of the

various stakeholders of the firm (Bhattacharya et al., 2009; Sen et al., 2006; Smith, 2003). Peloza &

Shang (2011) posit that customer value created by CSR initiatives is implicitly assumed but not

explicitly measured, and therefore, it is not clear whether CSR initiatives generate value at all and if

so, what kind of value. On the contrary, according to EIU (2008) companies who were strongly

committed to social and environmental activities reported an increase in profit and share prices as

991 multinational corporations enhanced their brand reputation as a direct result of CSR activities.

Research further shows that corporate social responsibility (CSR) is linked to profitability and leads

to staff dedication and customer loyalty; (Friday, 2015; Fraedrich & Ferrell, 2008). This

profitability can be assessed in terms of both financial and non-financial results and demonstrates

the importance of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in the business sector even though the

relationship between corporate social responsibility and firm profitability has yielded mixed results,

with no definitive evidence of a positive, negative, or neutral relationship (Aupperle, Carroll, &

Hatfield, 1985; McWilliams & Siegel, 2000; Waddock & Graves, 1997; Orlitzky, 2001). However,

findings from Anderson & Frankle (1980) showed that the market values social disclosures and

social responsibilities activities positively.

Corporate social responsibility refers to the firm’s consideration of and response to issues beyond

the narrow, economic, technical, and legal requirements of the firm, in a manner that will

accomplish social benefits along with the traditional economic gains which the firm seeks Davis

(1973) as cited in Hoffman, C.R. Davis & Blomstrom (1975) further explain CSR as “the

managerial obligation to take action to protect and improve both the welfare of society as a whole

and the interest of organizations” with the EU also holding the same view by defining CSR as the
24
responsibility of enterprises for their impact on society and outlines what an enterprise should do to

meet that responsibility. Similarly, Kok et al. (2001) defined CSR in general terms as “the

obligation of the firm to use its resources in ways to benefit society, through committed

participation as a member of society, taking into account the society at large and improving the

welfare of society at large independent of direct gains of the company” That is to mean that CSR is

mainly about enhancing the socio-economic welfare and wellbeing of the society at large as the

nine categories of CSR are ethics, governance, transparency, business relationships, financial

return, community involvement, product value, employment practices, and environmental

preservation (Epstein M. J., 2008). Customer demands and demands from other stakeholders as

pointed out by McWilliams & Siegel (2001) are the two primary wellsprings of corporate social

responsibility. Intangible traits such as reputation for quality and trustworthiness form part of

consumer-oriented CSR as people believe that companies engaged in CSR are often reliable and

produce goods of great quality.

Porter & Kramer (2011) also point out 3 distinct ways through which companies can create

economic value by societal value. These are reconceiving products and markets; redefining

productivity in the value chain; building supportive industry clusters at company locations. For this

paper, the definition as proposed by the (World Business Council for Sustinable

Development(WBCSD), 2004) is employed. They argue that “CSR is the commitment of a business

to contribute to sustainable economic development, working with employees, their families, the

local community and society at large to improve their quality of life”. In contrast, Friedman( 1970),

Zenisek (1979) hold the view that the social responsibility of a company must be purely economic

striving for maximum profitability for its shareholders while acting within the law which means

companies should be more focused on the creation of shareholder value and wealth and also

increasing profit as he believes businesses as a whole cannot be said to have responsibilities which

are to be performed by individuals even though a corporation is an artificial person.

25
According to McWilliams et al. (2006), several definitions of corporate social responsibility have

been proposed but no clear definition is given as CSR is used as a synonym for business ethics,

corporate philanthropy, corporate social performance and corporate citizenship making theoretical

development and measurement difficult. McWilliams & Siegel (2001) as cited in McWilliams et al.

(2006) define CSR as a situation where firms go beyond compliance and engage in ‘actions that

appear to further some social good, beyond the interests of the firm and that which is required by

law'. Additionally, the UN’s World Commission on the Environment and Development, called the

Brundtland Commission defined sustainable development as that which “meets the needs of the

present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (United

Nations, 1987). Economic growth, social fairness, and environmental conservation were identified

as three components of sustainable development in the Brundtland report. Milton Friedman on the

other hand views the existence of CSR as an agency problem within the firm and this implies that

CSR is a misuse of corporate resources that would have either be invested in internal projects or

returned to shareholders.

According to Crowther & Aras (2008), even though some definition of CSRs focuses on the

relationship between corporations and stakeholders, the major concerns with the broadest

definitions of CSR is the relationship between corporations and the local society in which they

operate or reside as societies tend to reward companies that are considered socially responsible

(Lewa, 2020). As a result, to improve their corporate image, companies have been urged to

implement policies that go beyond the financial aspects of their business and to incorporate CSR

into their operations (Park et al., 2014). Globally, the definition is concerned with the global

corporations, the governments and the citizens. It can then be inferred that the central tenet of CSR

is the social contract between the company and its stakeholders towards the present and future

members of society. They also argue CSR activities are made up of three basic principles which are

sustainability, accountability and transparency. Thus, following the principles of ethics, corporates

26
should not disregard their social responsibilities while pursuing their economic goals (Baden, 2016;

Sachs et al., 2009),

2.2.2 Importance of Corporate Social Responsibility

Liechtenstein et al. (2004) view CSR as a marketing technique that enhances managers' expertise

while also providing larger benefits to their company through improved image and brand equity

with Preston and O'Bannon (1997) finding evidence that positive social performance resulted in

positive financial performance.

CSR as of now extends several benefits to firms involved. The benefits enjoyed include:

 Reputation building or maintenance and employee loyalty and retention. Through CSR,

companies can solidify their brand as they produce and provide essential needs of the

societies they operate, this creates a form of loyalty between the actors involved which in

the long run affects the longevity of the business. Galbreath (2010) posits that CSR

activities help stakeholders conclude on the several positive features of the firms as they

provide visible signals hence CSR is seen as an important mechanism through which

companies can build their reputation. Fombrun & Shanley (1990) also emphasize the fact

that the gains of being socially responsible are seen through the reputation of the company

as building a positive reputation appears to be a major motivator for businesses interested in

Corporate Social Responsibility.

 Aguilera et al. (2007) also posit that CSR leads to lower employee turnover as it meets the

justice needs of employees. Companies with significant commitment to social responsibility

frequently have a superior capacity to attract, retain and maintain employee moral standards.

This reduces employee turnover, hiring and training expenses.

 Little (2006) asserted that corporate social responsibility activities can lead to innovation by

incorporating social, environmental, or sustainability factors into the development of new

products and services.

27
2.3 History of Corporate Social Reporting

According to Kannekanti & Muddu (2008), corporate social reporting was first introduced in the

20th century as most firms began issuing a sustainability report in the mid-1990s KPMG (2017) and

materialized in environmental disclosures. Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting (CSRR) is a

slowly emerging trend developed in Northern Europe and North American companies but spreading

vastly (Bausch, 2012) with France being the pacesetters. Different concepts were established under

the headings of corporate social accounting and corporate social audit with the goal of

systematically gathering, frequently documenting, and publicly discussing enterprises' socially

important information. However, these concepts were frequently misunderstood, thus a new term,

social reporting, was coined. The French bilan social Christophe & Bebbington (1992); eco-balance

sheets, such as those published by the Danish Steel Works Jorgensen (1993); the quantified

environmental balance sheet as produced by Eni Chem, Bartolomeo (1994); and BSO/Origin's

financially quantified environmental accounts (Gray & Symon, 1992; Huizing & Dekker, 1992) all

form the pioneering developments in corporate social reporting. Notable in the US, a survey in the

decade showed that about 90% of the fortune 500 companies reported their social performance by

1978 in the annuals.

(Dierkes and Antal 1986) claim that social reporting lost traction once it was discovered that it had

not been institutionalized and that people both inside and outside the organization had lost interest.

The focus of corporate social disclosure during the decade of the 1970s and 1980s was on reporting

social and environmental statistics, and this trend persisted into the 1990s.

2.3.1 Corporate Social Reporting Today

Recent developments in the 21st century have seen most companies performing and engaging in

corporate social responsibility activities as part of their roles to the societies and communities

where they operate. The sole purpose of these activities is normally targeted at accruing all the

benefits they come with. However, the argument in today's world is not just about being

28
environmentally responsible but also the ability to report on these activities to all the needed

stakeholders and this brings about an important topic, corporate social reporting. Corporate social

reporting today is a very important tool in recognizing companies that engage in sustainability

activities and it is evident today that, businesses are not only being socially responsible but also

reporting these activities. As there is a rising trend of corporations reporting on non-financial

issues, reporting on other areas such as the economic, social, and environmental profile is becoming

an accepted norm around the world (Kolk A. , 2003; KPMG, 2015). Porter & Kramer (2011) argue

that matters of sustainability reporting are increasingly assuming a global trend heading towards a

paradigm shift in the way businesses and organizations go about their businesses in society.

According to KPMG (2011), the practice of disclosing social and environmental information in

annual reports and on websites known as corporate social reporting is growing rapidly. Kolk (2003)

discovered that the practice of sustainability reporting is significantly more common in the

industrial sector than in the financial sector, implying that industries that encounter higher risks

report more frequently than those whose day-to-day operations do not pose an immediate threat.

2.3.2 Corporate Social Reporting

Corporate social reporting as defined by Gray et al. (1996) refers to “the process of communicating

the social and environmental effects of organizations’ economic actions to particular interest groups

within society and society at large.” Similarly, Epstein (1976) define Sustainability reporting as the

identification, measurement, monitoring and reporting of the social and economic effects of an

institution on society which is intended for both internal managerial and external accountability

purposes. On the contrary, (Hooghiemstra, 2000; Pattern, 2002) define corporate social reporting as

a method of self-presentation and impression management conducted by companies to ensure

various stakeholders are satisfied with their public behaviours. It appears not coincidental that

issues of sustainability reporting are also suffering definitional quagmire similar to that of CSR.

Gray (2000) also reiterate the fact that notwithstanding the extensive research in the area of CSR

29
reporting, there is no consensus on the exact definition of CSR reporting. Consequently, it has been

referred to variously as corporate citizenship report; triple-bottom-line (TBL) report; social and

environmental accounting; annual social report; integrity report; sustainability development report

among others (Abukari & Abdul-Hamid, 2018). Whiles Gray et al and Epstein focus on the effects

of the social and economic actions of the firm on society, Jamie Snider talks about how the

company is perceived by its stakeholders because of its public behaviours. CSR report reflects how

the CSR concept and CSR reporting are understood and perceived by a company at a particular time

with Ismail & Ibrahim (2009) arguing that the size of the firm, government ownership, and industry

determine the level of exposure. Gray et al. (1995) posit that corporate social reporting may

embrace: both self-reporting by organizations and reporting about organizations by third parties that

is to say information in the annual report and any other form of communication; both public domain

and private information; information in any medium (financial, non-financial, quantitative non-

quantitative). This means that corporate social reporting is not restricted to selected recipients even

though there may be people who are directly or indirectly affected by the actions of the company.

Due to the significance of CSR reports, which can be communicated by businesses to stakeholders

through several mediums including annual reports; community reports; press releases among others

(Abukari et al, 2018), several governments now require the disclosure of socially responsible

activities concerning social aspects (O’Rourke, 2004). However, how CSR is communicated,

according to Maignan & Ferrell (2004) is still being researched, and “for most firms, the decision is

not whether to communicate, but rather what to say, to whom, and how often” (Kotler, 2003).

Carroll (1999) highlights the types of information in the reports. These are the economic, legal,

ethical, and philanthropic responsibilities of the firm towards society in general together with their

corresponding stakeholders with the documents containing this information called CSR,

sustainability, corporate responsibility, and triple bottom line reports. However, according to Global

Reporting Initiative (2002, p. 9) ‘‘A primary goal of reporting is to contribute to ongoing

stakeholder dialogues and as such, reports are of less value if they fail to inform stakeholders or

30
influence the decisions and behaviour of both the reporting organization and its stakeholders. Even

so, it is very difficult to differentiate between private and socially responsible activities as managers

have to report these activities under social responsibility (McWilliams et al, 2006). They further

hold the view that it is not as to whether corporate social reporting varies across nations, regions

and cultures or how the expectation of the stakeholders is affected by the distinct organizational

milieu.

According to Abugre & Nyuur (2015, p. 173) “Communicating CSR is a means of ensuring that

these firms are in touch with their stakeholders to be responsible for their social and environmental

impacts”. There exist three types of CSR reporting literature. The first set of authors examine the

information's value to investors. A second group of academics looks into the relationship between

social disclosures and social performance. Finally, a collection of studies investigates the factors

that influence corporations' decisions to provide corporate social information. The growing desire

among businesses to engage in CSR can be linked to the numerous advantages that come with being

seen as socially responsible by society (Du et al., 2010).

According to Rizk et al. (2008) corporate social responsibility reporting is “the process of

communicating the social and environmental effects of organizations’ economic actions to

particular interest groups within society and society at large.” As a result, it entails extending

accountability of organizations (particularly) enterprises; beyond the traditional function of

presenting a financial account to capital owners, particularly shareholders. Fonseca et al. (2011) see

sustainability reporting, is the process of gaining access to and making periodic public disclosures

about an organization's social, environmental, economic, safety, and health performance.

According to Crowther & Aras (2008), it has been recognized by various writers that the firms'

activities impact the external environment and as such, there is the need to report on these impacts.

They further argue that reporting of these activities needs to be based on the following

characteristics and that the reports serve as a means through which companies communicate their

corporate actions to the various stakeholders to improve their understanding and perception of these

31
activities (Albu and Wehmeier, 2013; Arvidsson, 2010; Dando and Swift, 2003). Stanaland et al.

(2011) opined that the perceptions of a company’s attitude toward CSR are influenced by its

corporate marketing efforts like its communication (Schiefelbein, 2012; Mitra N. , 2015). Hence,

regardless of the philosophic perspectives on corporate recognition, developing a communications

plan for the initiative is a best practice ( Kotler & Lee, 2005). These characteristics are:

 understandability to all parties concerned

 relevance to the users of the information provided

 reliability in terms of accuracy of measurement, representation of impact and freedom from

bias

 comparability which implies consistency, both over time and between different

organizations.

2.3.3 Corporate Social Responsibility and Reporting in Ghana

In recent times, corporate social reporting has seen immense growth as many businesses are now

becoming active in giving back to the societies and communities, they operate than they used to as

they have realized that there are enormous benefits that come with being socially and

environmentally responsible. This is evident as Abukari & Abdul-Hamid (2018) highlight that

corporate social responsibility is gaining currency in many business enterprises in Ghana today with

the Ghanaian government proactively endorsing CSR friendly practices by firms operating in the

country (Atuguba & Dawuona-Hammond, 2006). Ghanaians regard CSR as building capacity for

sustainable lives, respecting cultural variations, and finding business opportunities in developing

the skills of employees, the community, and the government, according to the WBCSD report

"Making Good Business Sense". Businesses in Ghana engage in a wide range of CSR activities,

such as education and event promotion, and there is no formal policy framework in place to define

the boundaries of CSR activities in Ghana. GTZ (2009) further reiterated on the fact that

companies’ CSR activities are centered around health, monetary donations, education, the

32
environment, capacity building, corporate products and sponsorship of events even though there is

no comprehensive CSR strategy or regulation with government’s role in CSR mainly limited to

enforcing laws.

Research shows that reporting of CSR activities in Ghana mainly take the form of newspaper

reports, television coverage, radio stations and the internet. This is further supported by Hinson et

al. (2010) as they highlight the fact that several Ghanaian organizations have used annual reports

and corporate websites to provide CSR reports in order to improve stakeholder relationships and

commercial performance. Hinson et al. (2010) also discussed how banks in Ghana disclose their

CSR on their websites. Abugre & Nyuur (2015) point out that Ghanaians companies are committed

to CSR and rely on a wide range of channels to make their CSR contributions known to the public.

However, the companies dwell so much on corporate philanthropy as evidence of their CSR

engagements.

The Ghana Business Code (GHBC), which was launched in 2006 by the Association of Ghana

Industries (AGI), the Ghana Employers Association (GEA), and the Ghana National Chamber of

Commerce and Industry (GNCCI) to implement and intensify the practice of CSR in business

operations, was the first set of rules to guide the conduct of business and acceptable standards with

regard to CSR (Amponsah-Tawiah & Dartey-Baah, 2011). Even with diverse industries and levels

of attention, the CSR concept remains the same, according to (Ofori & Hinson, 2007). Each

company's reaction to CSR concerns, on the other hand, is distinct, and is determined by its size,

industry, business culture, stakeholder expectations, and previous growth. Other scholarly articles

posit that CSR activities and disclosure are determined by the culture and governance structure of

the country. According to Amponsah-Tawiah & Dartey-Baah (2011), multinational corporations in

Ghana prioritize CSR initiatives over small and medium-sized businesses. Tuokuu & Amponsah-

Tawiah (2016) further argue that evidence in Ghana and other developing countries shows that

transnational corporations (TNCs) and multinational corporations (MNCs) implement CSR

programs for prudence and not necessarily because they owe the society an obligation to give back
33
what they have taken from them as CSR implementation, communication and its contents differ

from country to country.

Most businesses in Ghana have created special departments to overlook these responsibilities as

they believe it is one of the ways of engaging and meeting the expectations of their various

stakeholders as well as harnessing and exploiting the usefulness of the activities they engage in.

MTN and Vodafone Ghana are no exception as these businesses have a department solely for this

purpose. Mining companies like Valco, Goldfields, and AngloGold have also been instrumental in

the social development of the country.

2.3.4 Reasons for Corporate Social Reporting

Lungu et al. (2011) posit that businesses are not pursuing sustainability for altruistic reasons.

However, profit and expansion are their motivations for adopting sustainability approaches into

their business plan. Kolk (2005) argues that there are certain drivers and motivations for choosing

to report or not reporting responsibility activities. These reasons are:

 License to operate and campaign. Every company requires direct or indirect permission to

operate from host governments, communities, and a variety of stakeholders and this known

as a "license to operate" by (Danko et al, 2008)

 Enhanced ability to track progress against a specific target

 Ability to clearly convey the corporate message internally and externally

 Reputational benefits, cost-saving identification, increased efficiency, enhanced business

development opportunities and enhanced staff morale

The reasons why companies on the other hand may choose not to report are as follows:

 Too expensive

 Doubts about the advantages to be accrued by the company

 There are several ways of communicating environmental issues

 Difficulty to consistently gather data from operations carried out.

34
Similarly, KPMG's drivers for corporate social reporting report KPMG (2013) further outlines that

motivation for CSR may be divided into economic and ethical consideration with the economic

consideration consisting of four narrow aspects; reputation and brand management, increased

access to capital and stakeholder value, risk management, and improved governmental

relationships, whereas ethical consideration involves transparent communication. Reputation

defined by Brown & Logsdon (1999) is “outsiders’ assessments about what the organization is, how

well it meets its commitments and conforms to stakeholders’ expectations, and how effectively its

overall performance fits with its socio-political environment.” That is to mean that it shows how the

firm is perceived by stakeholders (Roberts & Dowling, 2002).

Michaels & Gruning (2016) found that corporate reputation is greatly impacted by CSR disclosures

and as such Sethi (2014), Mitra (2015) feels that CSR reports, Business Responsibility Reports and

Sustainability Reports are instruments to manage reputation; therefore, should be the essence of a

robust communication strategy. Balmer & Greyser (2003) also define corporate image as “various

outbound communications channels deployed by organizations to communicate with customers and

other constituencies”. Consistently, Michaels & Gruning (2018) believe CSR disclosure is regarded

as a major determinant of corporate image. Previous research revealed that communicating

corporate social responsibility practices to consumers leads to positive attitudes and increased

purchasing awareness. Legal requirements, laws, and stock exchange policies are also all direct

reasons to measure and report CSR.

2.3.5 Corporate Social Reporting and Profitability

There really is no consistent association between profitability and the level of environmental

disclosures, according to acknowledged empirical studies. If one exists, the link between social and

environmental disclosures and profit measurements is hazy. Cowen et al (1987); Hackson & Milne

(1996) for instance, discovered no link between the variables. For return on assets and corporate

social and environmental disclosure, Belkaoui & Karpik (1989) found a substantial pairwise

association, although with a negative regression coefficient. Patten (2002) also found no substantial

35
positive relationship between profitability and corporate social and environmental disclosure, while

Gray et al. (2001) discovered a strong but modest relationship between profitability and

environmental disclosure in the United Kingdom.

However, according to several studies, profitability and the level of corporate social and

environmental disclosure have a favourable relationship ( Waddock & Graves, 1997; Bowman &

Haire, 1976). Roberts (2002) reaffirmed that he identified a positive relationship between a

company's profitability (as measured by the logarithm of earnings) and corporate social and

environmental disclosure, albeit he cautioned that the variables are lagged.

2.3.6 Importance of Corporate Social Reporting

2.4 Theoretical Review

There are several theories available to better explicate the assumptions and concepts with regards to

this thesis. Even though a comprehensive theoretical framework for explaining the underpinning

determinants of corporate social and environmental disclosure remains elusive though there is a

widespread academic and business interest in the issue of CSR reporting, there are a few selected

theories to further enhance and improve knowledge of these assumptions and concepts. (Reverte,

2009). Consequently, varied theories have been used to elucidate CSR reporting. Prior studies in the

social disclosure literature have used a single theory or a combination of theories to explain CSR

reporting. However, the stakeholder theory and the legitimacy theory were chosen for this paper

because Coffie (2018) claims that stakeholder theory and legitimacy theory are the commonly used

theoretical viewpoints in CSR research.

2.4.1 Legitimacy theory

The legitimacy theory, which is based on the concept of organizational legitimacy, stems from the

concept of a social contract as Dowling & Pfeffer (1975) define it to be the gap between societal

and organizational expectations. According to empirical studies, companies engage in voluntary

corporate social reporting to lessen this expectation gap and gain favour from stakeholders or the

36
society in which they operate (Lindblom, 1994; O'Donovan, 2002) and a way through which a

company responds to public pressures. Gray et al. (1995) posit that companies are constantly under

pressure from their stakeholders and the environment to improve their performance in areas of

sustainability and as such, sustainability reporting has been used to bridge the ‘legitimacy gap’.

Additionally, Frynas (2008) emphasize that through legitimacy obtained from CSR activities,

companies are protected from external threats and accrue external benefits. Organizations exist in

society through a social contract in which their survival and growth are predicated on the supply of

some socially desirable ends to society as a whole and the distribution of economic, social, or

political benefits to the groups from which they get their powers (Shocker & Sethi, 1974) and as

such, there is always a threat to an organization's legitimacy based on this perceived contract when

societal expectations of an organization's behaviour deviate from actual behaviour (Pereira Eugenio,

Lourenco, & Morais, 2013). Suchman (1995) defines legitimacy as a process of equating

perceptions or assumptions that actions taken by a company are actions that are desirable,

appropriate, or in accordance with norms, values, beliefs, and socially developed definitions.

Legitimacy comes in three kinds according to (Suchman, 1995) seminal typology. The first which

is pragmatic legitimacy is the simplest to obtain but the least long-lasting: it is essentially a

prerequisite for a company doing business with an individual or organization. The second-highest

stage is moral legitimacy, which is more lasting and difficult to achieve than pragmatic legitimacy

with cognitive legitimacy being the final stage. This stage is again more durable than its moral

counterpart and harder to attain.

The legitimacy theory further asserts that reporting social and environmental issues creates a

positive perception on all stakeholders regarding the operations and operational results of the

corporation. This means that reporting social responsibility issues non-financially legitimates the

operations and operational results of corporations on society and environment as it is previously

said that

37
corporations report on their CSR efforts to obtain legitimacy, since reporting initiatives are all

focused on improving their image and consequently garnering credibility from the communities in

which they operate.

Moreover, the legitimacy theory provides significant insights into how CSR disclosure is done by

firms operating in society. Business and society's interconnectedness can be seen in two ways: (1)

through its activities in the usual course of business, and (2) through external social situations.

Normal operations have different effects depending on where you are and how long you have been

there (Danko, Goldberg, Goldberg, & Grant, 2008). Evidence abounds in corporate social

disclosure literature that corporations engage in voluntary disclosure in their annual reports as a

way of managing legitimacy (Campbell, 2000). Hinson et al. (2010, p. 500) argue that “under the

legitimacy theory, businesses disclose their CSR activities to project a socially responsible image,

in order to legitimize their behaviours to their stakeholders,” hence if an industry sector's legitimacy

is threatened, organizations within that industry sector will react appropriately by reporting more

positive information on its activities. CSR is viewed by firms as a significant instrument to manage

their public image and regulate their reputation among customers, employees, suppliers, and others,

which ultimately has an impact on their legitimacy (Hughey & Sulkowski, 2012). Once reporting

on social concerns elicits legitimacy, firms will continually report on their CSR as it is the surest

way to ensure their continued existence, profitability and good image. Díez-Martín et al. (2013)

additionally posit that a lot of organizations have failed due to a full loss or deterioration of their

legitimacy, rather than a lack of resources or bad products. This forms the basis on which existing

researches have usually employed the legitimacy theory to explicate the environmental disclosure

behaviour of corporate bodies (Wilmshurst & Frost, 2000; Deegan, Rankin, & Tobin, 2002;

O'Donovan, 2002; Branco & Rodrigues, 2006; Brown & Deegan, 1998). Literature finally

propounds that the goal of corporate social and environmental reporting behaviour is to obtain

legitimacy or societal acceptance ( (Deegan, Rankin, & Tobin, 2002; Michell & Quinn, 2005;

38
Tilling & Tilt, 2010) as legitimacy is regarded as a win scenario for both the authorizing agency

(licensor) and the legitimized organization (licensee).

2.4.2 Stakeholder Theory

Stakeholder theory can be considered a CSR theory because it provides a normative framework for

socially responsible business (Mele, 2008). The stakeholder theory which has become the

prevailing ideology in CSR has advanced in many novel, innovative and fascinating ways. CSR

draws its origin from the stakeholder theory," according to certain experts (Tuokuu & Amponsah-

Tawiah, 2016), and as such, “CSR projects cannot be completed" if organizations do not receive

stakeholders' support (Huang & Zhao, 2016). Stakeholder management comprises cultivating

relationships and dealing with stakeholders to generate value (Freeman et al, 2007). Stakeholders

are groups or individuals who influence the achievement of an organization (Velasquez, 2012).

Crowther & Aras (2008) argue that the idea of stakeholder theory is to ensure that all stakeholders

are considered in the decision-making processes of the organization as companies must successfully

communicate their CSR to a wider target audience for their policies to be viewed as trustworthy and

for stakeholders to appropriately evaluate them (Du et al., 2010). Scholars have also argued that

companies that have a strong focus on disclosing social responsibility actions and initiatives are

better able to build and maintain long-term relationships with key stakeholders (Kitora & Okuda,

2017). They further state three reasons why this should happen. These are:

 It is the morally and ethically correct way to behave

 Doing so benefits shareholders as well

 It reflects what happens in the organization

CSR reporting, often known as social disclosure, is a corporate strategy that demonstrates a

company's social performance to stakeholders (Roberts, 1992) that is to mean that corporate social

reporting is an interaction between the companies and their stakeholders. He further points out three

aspects identified by the stakeholder theory as predictors of social responsibility disclosures. These

39
are stakeholder power, strategic posture, and past and current economic success. Stakeholder views

are obtained through an engagement process that allows them to be expressed without fear or

restriction.’’ (Accountability, 1999, p. 7)

This theory is one of the major influences of corporate social responsibility as corporate managers

use this approach to determine how much money is to be allocated and invested in CSR. Mitchell et

al. (1997) also opine that the stakeholder theory suggests that companies have a responsibility to

any group or individuals that are affected by their actions or operations or is affected by the

achievement of the organization’s objectives (Freeman, 1984). These individuals can be grouped

into two, namely primary and secondary stakeholders. According to (Clarkson, 1995), primary

stakeholders are “ones without whose continuing participation the corporation cannot survive as a

going concern” and are made up of investors, shareholders, customers, suppliers inter alia.

Secondary shareholders on the other hand refer to those who influence or affect or are influenced or

affected by the corporation, but they are not engaged in transactions with the corporation and are

not essential for its survival. He further argues that a stakeholder is only relevant if they have

invested something in the organization and are prone to risk from the activities of the organization.

Jonker & Foster (2002) argue that stakeholder theory offers a new sort of managerial understanding

and action, a new strategy to organize thinking about enterprises' commitments by emphasizing that

shareholder demands cannot be fulfilled until the requirements of other stakeholders are met (Foster

& Jonker, 2005; Jamali, 2008; Hawkins, 2006). This is due to fact that profit maximization and

value creation for shareholders can no longer be the sole goals of management; rather, they must be

obtained through or in collaboration with a grid of values of other stakeholders, including demands

and needs related to social and environmentally sustainable practices (Longo et al. 2005)

2.4.3 Global Reporting Initiative

Firms' corporate social reporting has changed through time, with various structures, orientations,

and systems in place to govern how CSR issues should be reported so that they can be quantified

and accounted for, as well as their impact on business and stakeholders, in a quantitative fashion.
40
With 11 principles, the Global Reporting Standards provide the basic underpinning standard for

reporting on accountability problems. Transparency, inclusion, auditability, completeness,

relevance, sustainable context, accuracy, neutrality, comparability, clarity, and timeliness are some

of these characteristics. The GRI was established in 1997 with the goal of bringing consistency and

standardization to sustainability reporting. It was founded by the non-profit "Coalition for

Environmentally Responsible Economies" and the Tellus Institute in the United States, with

backing from the UN Environment Program, with the goal of providing a worldwide reporting

framework for sustainable reporting (Clarkson et al., 2008). The GRI standard is a strict and

universal tool that helps the reporting process in businesses. It has a methodology, a report-creation

process, and a set of indicators that allow individual companies' outcomes to be displayed.

Organizations can also use the GRI Sustainability Reporting Standards (GRI Standards) to publicly

disclose their most significant impacts and how they manage them, while also adhering to an

internationally acknowledged standard. It also emphasizes the importance of documenting both

positive and negative outcomes from long-term growth initiatives (Brown, Jong, & Lessidrenska,

2009). The GRI's recommendations on corporate social reporting are a significant step toward

supporting firms in measuring and conveying sustainability concerns to investors and other

stakeholders in a more systematic manner. The GRI (2015) framework serves as the foundation for

the SPA System Paun et al. (2016), which is used to conduct sustainable performance research. This

enables users of the data to make well-informed analyses and decisions regarding the company.

GRI is an international organization that has helped organizations understand and express their

impact on sustainability concerns and has changed sustainability reporting into a practice that is

used by organizations all over the world. GRI principles and indicators are used in practically all

CSR reports around the world for 91 quantitative environmental, social, and economic performance

parameters. GRI is essentially the financial performance reporting equivalent of GAAP. Data can be

evaluated for a company's performance over time as well as intra- and interindustry business

comparisons because sustainability performance disclosed via GRI provides uniformity. For

41
measuring and reporting sustainability performance, GRI provides three sustainability indicator

categories (economic, environmental, and social) and four social subcategories (human rights, labor

practices, product responsibility, and society). They assist an organization in preparing and

reporting information on its material topics. Material themes are those that reflect the organization's

most significant economic, environmental, and human-rights implications, as well as providing a

framework for reporting. The GRI Standards are divided into three categories: Universal Standards,

Sector Standards, and Topic Standards.

2.5 Chapter Summary

This chapter reviewed scholarly works that have been so far conducted on the research topic stating

the definition of the subject matter from the definition of Gray et al. The theoretical underpinning of

the study is made up of the stakeholder theory and legitimacy theory. The definitions and histories

of corporate social responsibility and corporate social reporting were also explained in this chapter.

Furthermore, the definitions of terms and concepts and empirical reviews used throughout the work

have been specified as well.

CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter critically analyses and thoroughly explicates the research methodology and its

compositions, why and why not some approaches, theories, techniques inter alia were used at the

expense of others. It also covers the benefits of these compositions and how they help in the

comprehension of the implications of corporate social reporting on the profitability and

attractiveness of business.

3.2 Research Design

Though research consists of varied processes that help to execute it, a very important process of

them all is the research design which spells out how the research is to be conducted, the participants
42
to be observed, the necessary data to be collected and how to interpret, manage or analyze these

data gathered.

A research design ensures that the evidence obtained effectively addresses the research problem

logically and as clear as possible. Captured below are write ups on the various break downs of a

research design and they are research philosophy, research approach as well as the research

methodology

3.2.1 Research Philosophy

Research philosophy refers to a system of beliefs and assumptions about the development of

knowledge. It has to do with the things you do when engaging in research that is, developing

knowledge in a particular field. The research philosophy consists of important assumptions used at

different levels of research. They shape how you understand your research questions, the methods

used and how to interpret research findings Miles et al (2014) cited in Crotty (1998) in order to

make up credible research.

According to Burrell and Morgan 2016, there are several assumptions made during research. These

assumptions facilitate a uniformed research project where all elements fit together and they include

ontological, epistemological, methodology and axiological assumptions. Thakurta, (2015) defines

ontology as the nature of reality. It is classified based on objectivism and subjectivism.

Epistemology refers to the acceptable knowledge of a particular area study. Axiology on the other

hand is concerned with judgements, aesthetics and ethics. The research paradigm employed for this

paper is interpretivism with a subjective ontology.

Interpretivism refers to the approaches which emphasize the meaningful nature of people’s

character and participation in both social and cultural life (Elster, 2007; Walsham, 1995). Whitley

(1984) argue that interpretivists look for meanings and motives behind people’s actions like:

behavior and interactions with others in the society and culture. A subjective ontology is adopted

because it is concerned with social phenomena which comes from the perception and consequences

43
of the people involved. This will help understand each and everyone’s view on how corporate social

reporting impacts the profitability and attractiveness of business.

3.2.2 Research Approach

In as much as both words and numbers are needed to understand happenings in the world, it is very

important to know the best style that fits the purpose of the research being conducted hence, the

qualitative research approach will be used in this study as it seeks to deliberate on the implications

of CSR on the profitability and attractiveness of businesses.

The aims of the research are achieved by interacting with the various stakeholders who are one way

or the other involved in businesses and corporate social responsibility. Considering the context

being studied and how things are going to unfold, the quantitative approach to research is not going

to be the best fit since it pays less attention to the social and cultural aspect of a subject

(Myers,2013) whereas the qualitative approach helps to validate, interpret, clarify, and illustrate

quantitative findings, as well as through strengthen and revising theory. Qualitative data is not only

suitable for this paper but also present well-grounded, good descriptions and explanations of

processes in their local contexts as there is a chronological flow of events.

Moreover, qualitative methods also provide more genuine and opinionated answers as compared to

a quantitative method, where responses given in a sensitive area like ethical issues may be more

politically correct or socially desirable rather than truthful, especially when studying consumer

opinions, attitudes and perceptions (Joergens, 2006; Lea-Greenwood, 1999). Due to the nature of

qualitative data, researchers can go beyond the previous conception to generate or revise new ones

as findings from qualitative research are more concrete, vivid and meaningful.

Qualitative data, with their emphasis on people’s lived experience, are fundamentally well suited

for locating the meanings people place on the events, processes, and structures of their lives and for

connecting these meanings to the social world around them (Matthew B. Miles et al, 2014) and such

is going to help understand and decipher the phenomena under study since data is collected over a

sustained period.
44
3.2.3 Research Method

There are several qualitative research genres Miles et al (2014) cited in Saldana (2011b). However,

for the purpose of this research, case study is going to be employed. The case study approach is

particularly useful when there is a need to obtain an in-depth appreciation of an issue, event or

phenomenon of interest, in its natural real-life context.

Case studies provide a more dependable and fierce evidence as it allows for more comprehensive

exploration of research questions and theory development and has proven to be an effective

methodology to investigate and understand complex issues in real world settings as several

methodological approaches are applied.

3.3 Data Collection

Data has proven to be the sure way through which information and all other relevant materials are

acquired for a research work. They present us with detailed and well thought out arguments to make

a research paper very genuine. This section deciphers how data would be collected for this research

and spells out the specific methods employed to gather data for this qualitative research work. It

briefly discusses the activities involved in data collection together with the ethical consideration

that comes with it.

3.3.1 Data Collection Methods

There are several methods used to collect data for qualitative research. These include documents

(pictures, media, reports, websites), observations (participants and non-participants), interviews

(structured, semi-structured, unstructured) and focus groups (shared and lived experiences).

However, to comprehend and the opinions, experiences and perceptions of the stakeholders directly

and indirectly involved in corporate social responsibility and business, two of the methods stated

above are going to be employed. These are semi-structured face to face interviews and a review of

publicly available documents and reports.

Multiple data collection methods are incorporated to triangulate and validate the findings. The use

of these methods will help approve and (reprove) the research findings, throw more insights as well
45
as provide factual evidence for any shortcomings of the research paper. Stated below are the

breakdown and explanation of the methods used.

Face to face semi-structured interview. Interview is a natural and socially acceptable way of

collecting data as it can be used in various situations covering a variety of topics (Dörnyei 2007).

Interviews are more powerful in eliciting narrative data that allows researchers to investigate

people's views in greater depth (Kvale, 1996). Cohen et al (2007: 29) are also of the view that

interview is “a valuable method for exploring the construction and negotiation of meanings in a

natural setting”. This is to mean that interviews do not only produce in-depth knowledge, analysis

and reports on a particular subject but also facilitates the expression of the true feelings by the

interviewee.

The use of semi-structured face to face interview. The sampling technique adopted for this study is

purposive and convenience sampling. Convenience sampling is defined by Etikan et al. (2016) as a

type of non probability or non random sampling where members of a target population that meet a

certain criteria, such as easy accessibility, geographical proximity, availability at a given time or the

willingness to participate are included for the purpose of the study. Convenience sampling is used

because it helps collect information from participants who are easily accessible to the researcher.

Purposive sampling also called the judgement sampling is the deliberate choice of a participant

because of the qualities the participants possess.

Publicly available documents and reports: This is used in addition to interviews to have deep

insights and knowledge on the topic as well as corroborate the various stance in the research paper.

3.3.2 Ethical Considerations

Data collection is associated with several ethical issues and as such

must be considered at all stages. Interviews are an intrusion into respondents' private lives with

regard to time allotted and level of sensitivity of questions asked Cohen et al (2007) and as such

there should be high level of ethical considerations.

46
A brief explanation of the study would be given so as to ensure a free will participation. All data

collected would be kept confidential whiles participants remain anonymous. Participants would be

informed before hand should the interview be recorded.

3.4 Data Analysis

For every research paper, it is very important to know how data is analysed. Data analysis refers to

the examination and interpretation of data to comprehend what they represent. It is made up of three

con-concurrent flow of activities that is data reduction, data display and conclusion drawing and

verification. Data reduction is the process of selecting, focusing, simplifying, abstracting and

transforming data in written-up field notes. Data display also refers to an organized and compressed

assembly of information that facilitates conclusion drawing as they give a clear understanding of

events and actions to be taken whereas conclusion drawing, and verification has to do with

meticulously testing data collected for their final usage validity. Aside from the activities stated

above, there are several methods through which data is analysed which include grounded theory,

discourse analysis, narrative analysis, framework analysis, amongst others, however, for this paper,

I adopt the thematic and content analysis.

Thematic analysis is a method for identifying, analysing and reporting patterns (themes) within

data” (Braun & Clarke, 2006: 79). Content analysis is a general term for several different strategies

used to analyse text (Powers & Knapp, 2006). It is a systematic coding and categorizing approach

used for exploring large amounts of textual information unobtrusively to determine trends and

patterns of words used, their frequency, their relationships, and the structures and discourses of

communication (Mayring, 2000; Pope et al., 2006; Gbrich, 2007). The purpose of content analysis

is to describe the characteristics of the document’s content by examining who says what, to whom,

and with what effect (Bloor & Wood, 2006).

47
3.4.1 Documentation and Transcription of Qualitative Data

Information collected from qualitative research comprises of different types of data which include

written texts (documents or notes) or audible and visual data (recordings of interviews, focus

groups or consultations). These data cannot be effectively analyzed if they have not been well

organized. According to (Bailey, 2008) it is important to document and transcribe data collected so

that they can be studied in toto, linked with analytic notes and coded even though transcription is

seen as an inevitable and problematic step in qualitative analysis of data. Transcription involves

closing observing data by repetitive listening and viewing and these forms essential first step for

data analysis. It is further defined by Kowal & O'Connell (2013) as “any graphic representation of

selective aspects of verbal, prosodic and paralinguistic behavior” which means transcription mostly

has to do with vocal behavior. Transcription involves six steps which are: prepare, know, write,

edit, review and finish. Documentation on the other hand remains a vital element in ensuring data

gathered is quality.

3.4.3 Coding Qualitative Data

Researchers are normally presented with a wide range and chunk of information to work with as

data are collected from various sources. However, it is important to find a very easy way of

identifying and making meaning out of the welter of data available. Coding refers to the process of

labelling and organizing data to identify different themes and the relationship that exists between

them. This is normally achieved using codes. Codes are tags or labels for assigning units of

meaning to the descriptive or inferential information compiled during a study. It may also be a word

or short phrase that symbolically assigns a summative, salient, essence capturing and evocative

attribute for language based or visual data. There as several techniques to coding and they include

data layout, pre-coding, and preliminary jottings. In qualitative research, coding is essential as it

facilitates easy comprehension and interpretation of feedback from individuals and data collected. It

48
also helps the researcher to accurately analyse and summarize results as the use of codes reveals the

meaning of the various responses.

3.5 Chapter Summary

This chapter explains all the relevant aspect of the research methodology as well as the methods

used for the study. These are the research design, research philosophy and approach, data collection

methods, ethical considerations and data analysis. The next chapter presents and discusses the

findings of the research.

49
 CHAPTER 4

PRESENTATION AND DISCUSION OF FINDINGS

4.0 Introduction

This chapter presents the empirical findings gathered from the field. The aim and rationale are to

validate empirically the implications of corporate social reporting on the profitability and

attractiveness of business. The findings of this research presented are about the research questions

which are 1. How does CSR affect the profitability and attractiveness of businesses? 2. Why does

CSR affect the profitability and attractiveness of businesses? 3. What are the impacts of CSR on the

activities of businesses? with the mode of collecting data being mainly interviews, observation of

respondents which are the primary source and annual reports of companies forming the secondary

source. The major themes generated from the data collected include:

1. Access to external market

2. CSR as A Shared Value

3. Improved Recognition and Reputation

4. Enhanced Customer Loyalty and Trust

50
 5. CSR as A Marketing Strategy

6. Formal and Informal Communication of CSR

4.1 Corporate Social Events

It is important to note that corporate social responsibilities vary from firm to firm as various firms

engage in different activities and events of their choice. The 2020 annual report of GOIL highlights

the activities engaged in by the company with their key focus being on education, health and

financial inclusion. The social responsibility activities of GOIL include donations to needy

institutions, provision of health facilities, provision of water and sanitation, development of sports

and education and more. MTN, on the other hand, focuses on the different sets of CSR activities, as

do Vodafone.

4.2 Access To External Market

Businesses mostly may want to serve a particular target market or audience. However, they are

likely to face competitions from other businesses in the same industry. These competitions may

either lead to a collapse of business or lose of markets(customers). Findings from the research show

that companies are able to do well, attract more customers grow and. Survive for the long term

when they are involved in CSR. This is because customers want to associate themselves with

companies who are deemed responsible and are serving the needs of both their stakeholders and

society. This in the long run affects their profit margin as more and more customers patronize their

products since they have access to external markets. Profitability has been one of the major reasons

why companies engage in corporate social reporting as it is helps to keep the business in progress,

grow and ensure its long-lasting survival. However how and why corporate social reporting impacts

the profitability of the firm is yet to be known as many scholars still hold the view that profitability

and CSR has a negative correlation.

According to respondent one,

“Yes, it attracts more customers causing us to sell more and more over time.” This clearly

shows why CSR affects the sales of the firm there by increasing their profit.
51
Respondent two further stated that,

“External forces influence our business. Customers and individuals play a part in the business

world and through CSR, we can get to more people and attract potential buyers. This leads to

an increase in revenue reflecting in our profits” meaning corporate social reporting does not only

show what we give back to the society but also indicates how the firm’s profitability is being

affected.

Cowen et al. (1996) for instance, discovered no link between the variables with. (Patten, 2002) also

finding no substantial positive relationship between profitability and corporate social and

environmental disclosure. Despite the notion and views of these academic researchers, other

scholars believes that corporate social responsibility and reporting boost the profitability accrued by

firms as it gives the firm the needed recognition and create an avenue to market its product to

several people and the community at large. Roberts (2002) identified a positive relationship

between a company's profitability (as measured by the logarithm of earnings) and corporate social

and environmental disclosure, albeit he cautioned that the variables are lagged. In addition, from

several studies, profitability and the level of corporate social and environmental disclosure have a

favourable relationship ( Waddock & Graves, 1997; Bowman & Haire, 1976).

4.3 CSR as A Shared Value

Business strategists have re-examined the intense rivalry and tough competition in the world of the

business by examining how they might make greater economic and social profit from contact with

society, this method of thinking saw a new phrase rise; it created shared value (Motilewa et al.,

2016). This is to create a win-win situation for performing the societal and economic obligations.

Most often, companies see corporate social responsibilities as a way they can give back to the

society and communities for operating in their space as well as the available resources they enjoy

from them. Not only do they do this to legitimize their activities but also to provide good service to

their stakeholders. This dwells on the central tenet of CSR i.e., the social contract between the

52
company and its stakeholders towards the present and future members of society. This shared value

is elaborated in MTN’s sustainability report which says

“Our sustainability vision is to protect and create shared value for MTN and our stakeholders

through responsible environmental and social practices. To realise our vision, our

sustainability approach is categorised into three pillars that identify the areas we most focus

on, to ensure we operate responsibly and sustainably.”

The three pillars on which this approach is based on are sustainable economic value, eco-

responsibility and sustainable societies. This implies that businesses and society are intimately

interrelated and connected to economic growth potential, trade expansion, development of new

technologies and many more. As such, businesses’ good to society will positively impact their

activities. The picture below shows the focus areas of MTN in creating shared value.

According to the sustainability report of AngloGold Ashanti, the mission of the company is

“To create value for our shareholders, our employees and our business, and social partners

through safely and responsibly exploring, mining and marketing our products.”

Furthermore, respondent one commented that.

53
“To put smiles on the faces of these people and to give back to the society through our giving”

According to Shocker & Sethi (1974), organizations exist in society through a social contract in

which their survival and growth are predicated on the supply of some socially desirable ends to

society as a whole and the distribution of economic, social, or political benefits to the groups from

which they get their powers and as such, there is always a threat to an organization's legitimacy

based on this perceived contract when societal expectations of an organization's behaviour deviate

from actual behaviour (Pereira Eugenio, Lourenco, & Morais, 2013). Navickas & Kontautiene

(2012) also maintains that the primary goal of a company's socially responsible actions is to

maximize shared value, which can result in indirect investment returns for its shareholders while

minimizing negative consequences on society and the environment.

Furthermore,

4.4 Improved Recognition and Reputation

Recognition and good reputation are very vital elements for companies. Not only do they promote

the image of the business but also impacts their activities. Companies and most business are now

taking corporate social responsibility seriously as it helps build their brand and provides the needed

recognition to their target market and the community. A very good reputation and improved

recognition provided greater benefits to the company.

Respondent two commented

“Yes, CSR provides us with the needed publicity and recognition as well as give an active

audience drawing people’s attention and attracting them to what we are selling.”

Respondent one stated that “”

Galbreath (2010) posits that CSR activities help stakeholders conclude on the several positive

features of the firms as they provide visible signals hence CSR is seen as an important mechanism

through which companies can build their reputation. Fombrun & Shanley (1990) emphasizes the

fact that the gains of being socially responsible are seen through the reputation of the company as
54
building a positive reputation appears to be a major motivator for businesses interested in Corporate

Social Responsibility.

According to EIU (2008), companies who were strongly committed to social and environmental

activities reported an increase in profit and share prices as 991 multinational corporations enhanced

their brand reputation as a direct result of CSR activities. Michaels & Gruning (2016) also found

that corporate reputation is greatly impacted by CSR disclosures and as such Sethi (2014), Mitra

(2015) feels that CSR reports, Business Responsibility Reports and Sustainability Reports are

instruments to manage reputation; therefore, should be the essence of a robust communication

strategy.

Furthermore, CSR is viewed by firms as a significant instrument to manage their public image and

regulate their reputation among customers, employees, suppliers, and others, which ultimately has

an impact on their legitimacy (Hughey & Sulkowski, 2012).

4.5 Enhanced Customer Loyalty and Trust

Customers continue to be very important stakeholders in ensuring the longevity and survival of

firms since without them, companies won have people to buy their goods as well as get people to

serve. However, being able to maintain these customers is also another problem companies face

because of competition and varied producers of same goods and services. Corporate social

responsibility and reporting have proven to be one of the effectives ways of ensuring customer

loyalty and maintaining the target market. According to respondent one,

“CSR is important because it gives the business great influence as it prevents external factors

from interrupting the activities of the business and gives the business a bigger audience and

platform whiles building trust in customers as well as increasing sales.”

This is further buttressed by respondent one as she commented

“People are influenced to buy from us since they see that we give back to society.” This proves

that CSR practices have a greater effect on people who patronises a company’s goods and services.

55
Research further shows that corporate social responsibility (CSR) is linked to profitability and leads

to staff dedication and customer loyalty (Friday, 2015; Fraedrich & Ferrell, 2008). Intangible traits

such as reputation for quality and trustworthiness form part of consumer-oriented CSR as people

believe that companies engaged in CSR are often reliable and produce goods of great quality

(McWilliams & Siegel, 2001).

4.6 CSR as A Marketing Strategy

Companies depend on the societies they operate in for the various resources needed to further their

production of goods and services as well as facilitate their long-term survival. However, what are

the companies doing to ensure they stay relevant, grow and survive to continue to provide the needs

of their stakeholders? Corporate Social Responsibility as a concept plays a major role in projecting

the various companies and their activities to the general public. Not only does it show what they are

doing to keep the societies safe for future generations but also discloses how effective and efficient

companies are using resources handed over to them by the society. Marketing is a strategy

incorporated by every business to make their products and services known. Companies are

employing several ways and means to market their products and recently, corporate social

responsibility has been one of the ways to do that.

This is supported by respondent two by arguing that,

“The society is our motivation as it has provided with a comfortable environment to carry out our

activities hence, we engage in CSR as a way of showing appreciation and serve as a marketing

strategy to promulgate our business.”

Liechtenstein et al. (2004) view CSR as a marketing technique that enhances managers' expertise

while also providing larger benefits to their company through improved image and brand equity

with Preston and O'Bannon (1997) finding evidence that positive social performance resulted in

positive financial performance.

56
4.7 Formal and Informal Communication of CSR Activities

It is important to note that the benefits that comes with engaging in CSR cannot be accrued if

stakeholders have no idea of what the companies are doing. It is therefore beneficial for companies

to communicate and report on the various activities they engage in. Communication of corporate

social responsibility activities take both formal and informal ways. This keeps the stakeholders

abreast with the recent activities companies are indulged and also positively impacts the activities

of the firm. Findings from the research show that companies employ several means of

communications to disclose their social, environmental and economic activities to their various

stakeholders. These channels include annual reports, traditional media (radio and television) and

websites. MTN, Goil and AngloGold Ashanti for example report their socially responsible practices

in the annual and sustainability reports as well as their various websites.

Respondent one states that “We disclose our corporate social responsibility activities through

social media/website (Internet)”

Respondent two further supports this by saying “We report our activities through social media.

Twitter, Instagram and Facebook especially (internet)”.

According to KPMG (2011), the practice of disclosing social and environmental information in

annual reports and on websites known as corporate social reporting is growing rapidly. Hinson et al.

(2010) also highlight that several Ghanaian organizations have used annual reports and corporate

websites to provide CSR reports in order to improve stakeholder relationships and commercial

performance. Hinson et al. (2010) also discussed how banks in Ghana disclose their CSR on their

websites.

Finally, companies communicate their CSR activities to stakeholders through several mediums

including annual reports; community reports; press releases among others (Abukari et al, 2018),

57
4.7 Chapter Summary

This chapter highlights and explains into details the various findings gathered from the data

collection. It examines and discusses the data from both the empirical and theoretical point of view

and juxtapose them to the findings in order to create a more comprehensive and adequate

knowledge on the topic being discussed. It looked at the sustainability and annual reports of MTN,

GOIL and AngloGold Ashanti as well as data gathered from two respondents. Through these

sources of data, relevant themes like profitability, reputation, shared value came about. These give a

better understanding on the research questions and objectives discussed in chapter one of this paper.

To further corroborate our findings, graphical representation is also given. Chapter 5 which deals

with conclusion and recommendation is discussed in the next chapter.

CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Introduction

Chapter five which is the last of this research outlines the summary of the key findings together

with the conclusions made based on the objectives of the research paper. This chapter concludes the

findings of the research work in line with the research questions and objectives. This conclusion

and finding highlights the researcher’s views and opinions on the implications of corporate social

reporting on the profitability and attractiveness of business.

58
5.2 Summary of findings

This research paper aimed at understanding the implications of corporate social responsibility and

its reporting on the profitability and attractiveness of business. The findings of the study are

discussed in the subsequent paragraphs.

Findings from the analysis depict that the amount of resources committed to the corporate social

responsibilities vary from company to company. This is evident in the sustainability reports of

GOIL Ghana, MTN Ghana, AngloGold Ashanti and the various interviews conducted as these

companies have various sectors. The findings also showed that reporting of social responsibilities is

done through various mediums with websites, annual reports and television being dominant. The

data further revealed that companies engage and report their responsibility activities due to then

myriad of benefits they accrue and to legitimize their activities where they operate. Empirical

analysis above depicts that a negative and neutral relationship between firm’s profitability and

corporate social responsibility and reporting. However, findings from this research shows that there

is a positive relationship between firms’ profitability and corporate social responsibility and

reporting as the respondents emphasize on the fact the CSR improves sales which reflects in their

profitability.

5.3 Implications/Conclusion

Corporate Social Responsibility as a concept continues to gain traction in the Ghanaian economy.

The concept, highly embraced by both the firms and their internal and external environment, seems

to have come to stay. Most firms are now engaging in several philanthropic activities with varied

reasons and motivations. An aspect of the current CSR landscape in Ghana is evidenced in this

paper, pointing out the social responsibility activities and commitment of a few firms such as MTN

Ghana, AngloGold Ashanti and Goil Ghana as well as the need for them to report on these

activities.

59
It is evident from the above that CSR activities and its reportage is gaining grounds in developing

countries, mainly Ghana, with most companies now upholding CSR more of as a responsibility

rather than a choice, and duly disclosing their socially responsible activities to that effect.

5.4 Recommendations to future studies

Prior research shows a limited use of Global Reporting Initiative and other reporting standards in

communicating socially responsible activities and as such, companies should be encouraged to

incorporate these standards in their sustainability reports.

Going forward, it is important to incorporate employees in the reporting processes as most people

involved are part of management and as such, it is insightful to conduct a study on how employees

understand the concept of corporate social responsibility and reporting. Companies who do not

engage in corporate social responsibility and reporting should be encouraged and educated on the

benefits they can harness as well as how important it is to the activities of the firm.

5.5 Chapter Summary

This chapter discusses the various findings gathered from the research, together with the

recommendations on how to strengthen and improve corporate social responsibility and its

disclosure in Ghana as well as the standards to be followed in that regard.

References

60
Abugre, J. B., & Nyuur, R. B. (2015). Organizations’ commitment to and communication of CSR

activities: insights from Ghana. Social Responsibility Journal, 11(1), 161–178.

Abukari, J. A., & Abdul-Hamid, K. I. (2018). Corporate social responsibility reporting in the

telecommunications sector Ghana. Internal Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility.

Akmese, H., Cetin, H., & Akmese, K. (2016). Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting: A

Comparative Analysis of Tourism and Finance Sectors of G8 Countries. Elsevier B.V.

Amponsah-Tawiah, K., & Dartey-Baah, K. (2011). Corporate social responsibility in Ghana.

International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(17).

Anderson, J. C., & Frankle, A. W. (1980). Voluntary Social Reporting: An Iso-Beta Portfolio

Analysis. The Accounting Review, 55(3), 467-479.

Atuguba, R., & Dawuona-Hammond, C. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in Ghana, a

research report presented for the Ebert Foundation, (FES). Accra.

Aydemir, E. (2012). Hastanelerde Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk Raporlaması: Bir Vak'a Calısması.

Yuksek Lisans Tezi. İstanbul Universitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitusu.

Bailey, J. (2008). First Steps in qualitative data analysis: transcribing. 127-131.

Balmer, J. M., & Greyser, S. A. (2003). Revealing the corporation: Perspectives onidentity, image,

reputation, corporate branding, and corporate-level Marketing : An anthology. London and

New York: Routledge.

Bartolomeo, M. (1994). A new tool for environmental accounting: an approach from Italy. Social

and Environmental Accounting, 14(1), 6-8.

Bausch, L. (2012). Hotel Management Beyond Economic Responsibilities: an Exploratory

Research into CSR Views and Practices Among the Hotel Sector in Malta. Yuksek Lisans

Tezi. Wageningen University Department of Environmental Science.

Belkaoui, A., & Karpik, P. G. (1989). Determinants of the Corporate Decision to Disclose Social

Information. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal.

61
Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2004). Doing better at doing good: when, why and how consumers

respond to corporate social initiatives. California Management Review, 47(1), 9-24.

Bowman, E. H., & Haire, M. (1976). Social Impact Disclosure and Corporate Annual Reports. 1(1),

11-21.

Branco, M. C., & Rodrigues, L. L. (2006). Corporate social responsibility and resource-based

perspectives. Journal of Business Ethics, 69(2), 111–132.

Brown, B., & Logsdon, J. M. (1999). Corporate reputation and organization identity as constructs

for business and society research. Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Meeting of the

International Association for Business, 323-334.

Brown, H. S., Jong, M. D., & Lessidrenska, T. (2009). The rise of the Global Reporting Initiative: a

case of institutional entrepreneurship. Environmental Politics, 18, 182–200.

doi:10.1080/09644010802682551

Brown, N., & Deegan, C. (1998). The public disclosure of environmental performance information

—A dual test of media agenda setting theory and legitimacy theory. Accounting and

Business Research, 29(1), 21-41. doi:10.1080/00014788.1998.9729564

Campbell, D. J. (2000). Legitimacy theory or managerial reality construction? Corporate social

disclosure in marks and Spencer plc corporate reports, 1967-1997. Account Forum, 24(1),

80–100. doi:10.1111/1467-6303.00030

Carroll, A. B. (1999). Corporate social responsibility: Evolution of a definitional construct.

Business and Society, 38(3), 268-295.

Carroll, A. B., & Shabana, K. M. (2010). The business case for corporate social responsibility: A

review of concepts, research and practice. International Journal of Management Reviews,

12(1), 85–105. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00275.x

Chelli, M., Durocher, S., & Richard, J. (2014). France's new economic regulations: Insights from

institutional legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability 27(2), 283-316.

62
Christophe, B., & Bebbington, J. (1992). The French Bilan Social: a pragmatic model for the

development of accounting for the environment? A research note. British Accounting

Review, 281-291.

Clarkson , M. E. (1995). A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social

performance. Academy of Management Review 20, 92-117.

Coffie, W., Aboagye-Otchere, F., & Musah, A. (2018). ). Corporate social responsibility disclosures

(CSRD), corporate governance and the degree of multinational activities: Evidence from a

developing economy. Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, 8(1), 106–123. doi:I

10.1108/JAEE-01-2017-0004

Cooper, S. M., & Owen, D. L. (2007). Corporate social reporting and stakeholder accountability:

The missing link.

Cowen, S. S., Ferreri, L. B., & Parker, L. D. (1987). The Impact of Corporate Characteristics on

Social Responsibility Disclosure: A Typology and Frequency-Based Analysis. Accounting,

Organization and Society, 12(2), 111-122.

Crowe, S., Cresswell, K., Robertson, A., Huby, G., Avery, A., & Sheikh, A. (2011). The case study

approach. BMC Med Res Methodol.

Crowther, D., & Aras, G. (2008). Corporate Social Responsibility. Ventus Publishing ApS.

Danko, D., Goldberg, J. S., Goldberg, S. R., & Grant, R. (2008). Corporate Social Responsibility:

The United States vs. Europe. The Journal of Corporate Accounting & Finance, 19(6), 41-

47.

Davis, K. (1973). The case for and against business assumption of social responsibilities. Academy

of Management Journal, 16(2), 312-322.

Davis, K., & Blomstrom, R. L. (1975). Business and Society: Environment and Responsibility.

Deegan, C., & Unerman, J. (2009). Extended systems of accounting - the incorporation of social

and environmental factors within external reporting. Financial accounting theory, 378-425.

63
Deegan, C., Rankin, M., & Tobin, J. (2002). An examination of the corporate social and

environmental disclosures of BHP from 1983‐1997: A test of legitimacy theory.

Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal.

Diez-Martin, F., Prado-Roman, C., & Blanco-Gonzalez, A. (2013). Beyond legitimacy: legitimacy

types and organizational success. Management Decision, 312-343. doi:10.1108/MD-08-

2012-0561

Dowling, J., & Pfeffer, J. (1975). Organizational legitimacy: Social values and organizational

behavior. Pacific Sociological Review, 122-.

Du, S., Bhattacharya, C. B., & Sen, S. (2010). Maximizing business returns to corporate social

responsibility (CSR): The role of CSR communication. International Journal of

Management Review, 12(1), 8-19. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00276.x

EIU. (2008). Doing Good: Business and the Sustainability Challenge, Economist Intelligence Unit.

Elster, J. (2007). Explaining Social Behavior. More Nuts and Bolts for the Social Sciences.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511806421

Epstein, M. J. (2008). Making Sustainability Work: Best Practices in Managing and Measuring

Corporate Social, Environmental, and Economic Impacts. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-

Koehler Publishers.

Epstein, M., Flamholtz, E., & McDonough, J. J. (1976). Corporate social accounting in the United

States of America: state of the art and future prospects. Accounting, Organizations and

Society, 1(1), 23-42.

Etikan , I., Abubakar, S. M., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of Convenience Sampling and

Purposive Sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1-4.

Fombrun, C., & Shanley, M. (1990). What's in a Name? Reputation Building and Corporate

Strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 33(2), 233-258. Retrieved from

https://doi.org/10.5465/256324

64
Fonseca, A., Macdonald, A., Dandy, E., & Valenti, P. (2011). The state of sustainability reporting

at Canadian universities. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 12(1),

22–40.

Foster, D., & Jonker, J. (2005, December 1). Stakeholder relationship: the dialogue of engagement.

Corporate Governance, 5(5), 51-57.

Fraedrich, J., & Ferrell, O. (2008). Ethical Decision Making for Business. Cengage Learning.

Frederick, W. C. (2006). Corporation, be Good!: The Story of Corporate Social Responsibility.

Dog Ear Publishing.

Frederick, W. C. (2008). Corporate Social Responsibility: Deep Roots, Fluorishing Grwoth,

Promising Future. (A. Crane, D. Matten, A. McWilliams, J. Moon, & D. S. Siegel, Eds.)

The Oxford handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility.

Freeman, E. R., Harrison, J. S., & Wicks, A. C. (2007). Managing for Stakeholders: Survival,

Reputation, and Success.

Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach, Boston. Pitman Publishing.

Friday, B. O. (2015). The role of corporate social responsibility and its relevance in the Nigerian oil

industry. The International Journal of Business & Management.

Friedman, M. (1970, September 13). The social responsibility of business is to increase its profits,.

New York Times Magazine.

Frynas, J. G. (2008). Corporate Social Responsbility and International Development: Critical

Assessment. Corporate Governance, 16(4), 274-281.

Galbreath, J. (2010). How does corporate social responsibility benefit firms? Evidence from

Australia. European Business Review, 22(4), 411 - 431.

Global Reporting Initiative. (2002). Sustainability reporting guidelines. GRI, 9.

Golob, U., & Barlett, J. L. (2007). Communicating about corporate social responsibility: A

comparative study of CSR reporting in Australia and Slovenia. Public Relations Review,

33(1), 1-9.

65
Gray, R. (2000). Review essay: It's official, our future is safe in the hands of business. Social and

Environmental Accounting, 20(1), 19-22.

Gray, R. H., & Symon, R. W. (1992). Environmental reporting: BSO/Origin. Integrated

Environmental Management, 7, 8-10.

Gray, R., Javid, M., Power, D. M., & Sinclair, D. C. (2001). Social and Environmental Disclosure

and Corporate Characteristics: A Research Note and Extension. Journal of Business

Finance & Accounting, 28(3).

Gray, R., Kouhy, R., & Lavers, S. (1995). Corporate social and environmental reporting. A review

of the literature and a longitudinal study of UK disclosure. Accounting, Auditing &

Accountability Journal, 8 No. 2, 47-77. doi:10.1108/09513579510146996

Gray, R., Owen, D., & Adams, C. (1996). Accounting and Accountability: Changes and Challenges

in Corporate Social and Environmental Reporting. London: Prentice Hall.

GRI. (2015). G4 sustainability reporting guidelines: Reporting principles and standard disclosures.

Global Reporting Initiative.

GTZ, G. (2009). "Corporate Social Responsibility in Sub-Saharan Africa: built in or built on" , A

Survey Report on Promoting and Hindering Factors of CSR. Hatfield.

Guthrie, J., & Parker, L. D. (1990). Corporate social disclosure practice: A comparative

International Analysis. Advances in Public Interest Accounting, 159-176.

Hackson, D., & Milne, M. J. (1996). Some determinants of social and environmental disclosures in

New Zealand companies. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability, 9(1), 77-108.

Harrison, H., Birks, M., Franklin, R., & Mills, J. (2017). Case Study Research: Foundations and

Methodological Orientations. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative

Social Research, 18(1). doi:https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-18.1.2655

Hawkins, D. E. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: balancing tomorrow’s sustainability and

today’s profitability. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

66
Hay, R., & Gray, E. (1974). Social Responsibilities of Business Managers. The Academy of

Management Journal, 17(1), 135-143.

Hinson, R., Boateng, R., & Madichie, N. (2010). Corporate social responsibility activity reportage

on bank websites in Ghana. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 28(7).

Hughey, C. J., & Sulkowski, A. J. (2012). More disclosure better CSR reputation? an examination

of CSR reputation leaders and laggards in the global oil & gas industry. Journal of Academy

of Business and Economics, 12, 24-34.

Huizing, A., & Dekker, C. H. (1992). Helping to pull our planet out of the red: an environmental

report of BSO Origin. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(5), 449-458.

Jamali, D. (2008). A Stakeholder Approach to Corporate Social Responsibility: A Fresh Perspective

into Theory and Practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 82, 213-231.

Jenkins, R. (2005). Globalization, Corporate Social Responsibility and Poverty. International

Affairs, 81(3), 523-540.

Jensen, B., Annan-Diab, F., & Seppala, N. (2017). Exploring perceptions of customer value: The

role of corporate social responsibility initiatives in the European telecommunications

industry. European Business Review, 30(3).

Joergens, C. (2006). Ethical fashion: myth or future trend? Journal of Fashion Marketing and

Management, 10(3), 360-371. doi:https://doi.org/10.1108/13612020610679321

Jonker , J., & Foster, D. (2002). Stakeholder Excellence? Framing The Evolution And Complexity

Of A Stakeholder Perspective Of The Firm. Corporate Social Responsibility Environment

Management, 9, 187-195.

Jorgensen, H. B. (1993). The ‘‘green account’’ of the Danish Steel Works Ltd. Social and

Environmental Accountability Journal, 13(1). doi:10.1080/0969160X.1993.9665777

Kannekanti, S., & Muddu, V. (2008). Corporate space for social sciences through corporate social

responsibility initiatives rising trend of corporate social responsibility is a boom for Asia's

67
 social sciences from theory and practice perspective. Asian Social Science, 4(11).

Khan, H.-U.-Z. (2010). The effect of corporate governance elements on corporate social

responsibility (CSR) reporting empirical evidence from private commercial banks of

Bangladesh. International Journal of Law and Management, 52(2), 82-109.

Kitora, Y., & Okuda, S. (2017). The effects and determinants of extensive disclosure: Evidence

from Japan. Corporate Ownership and Control, 5(2), 212-224.

Kok, P., Brown, A., Mckenna, R., & Wiele, T. V. (2001). A Corporate Social Responsibility Audit

within a Quality Management Framework. Journal of Business Ethics, 31(4), 285-297.

Kolk, A. (2003). Trends In Sustainability Reporting By The Fortune Global 250. Business Strategy

and the Environment, 12(5), 279-291. doi:10.1002/bse.370

Kolk, A. (2005). Sustainability reporting 34-42. VBA Journal, 21(3), 34-42.

Kotler, P. (2003). Marketing Management. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Kotler, P., & Lee, N. R. (2005). Corporate Social Responsibility: doing the most good for your

company and your cause (1st edition ed.). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Kowal, S., & O'Connell, D. C. (2013). Transcription as a Crucial Step of Data Analysis. In U. Flick,

The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Data Analysis (pp. 64-78).

KPMG. (2013). The KPMG Survey of Corporate Social Responsibilty Reporting 2013. Executive

Summary.

KPMG. (2015). The KPMG Survey of Corporate Responsibility Reporting 2015. KPMG.

KPMG. (2017). The Road: The KPMG Survey of Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting 2017.

Retrieved from

https://home.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/campaigns/csr/pdf/CSR_Reporting_2017.pdf

Kumar, S. (2017). Corporate Social Reporting: A Theoretical Perspective in Current Scenario.

IOSR Journal of Business and Management, 57-64.

68
Kvale, S. (1996). InterViews : an introduction to qualitative research interviewing. Sage

Publications.

Lea-Greenwood, G. (1999). Ethical sourcing”, Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management. An

International Journal, 3(3), 94-99.

Lewa, P. M. (2020). CSR case studies of selected blue Chip companies in Kenya. (M. f.

Professionals, Ed.) Social entrepreneurship and corporate social responsibility, 373-388.

doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39676-3_24

Lichtenstein, D. R., Drumwright, M. E., & Braig, B. M. (2004). The Effect of Corporate Social

Responsibility on Customer Donations to Corporate-Supported Nonprofits. Journal of

Marketing, 68(4), 16-32. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkg.68.4.16.42726

Lindblom, K. C. (1994). The implications of organizational legitimacy for corporate social

performance and disclosure. Critical Perspectives on Accounting Conference, 120(3).

Longo, M., Mura, M., & Bonoli, A. (2005). Corporate social responsibility and corporate

performance: the case of Italian SMEs. Corporate Governance, 5(4), 28-42.

Lungu, C. I., Caraiani, C., & Dascălu, C. (2011). Research on Corporate Social Responsibility

Reporting. Amfiteatru Economic Journal, 13(29), 117-131.

Maignan, I., & Ferrell, O. C. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and marketing: An integrative

framework. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 32(1), 3-19. Retrieved from

https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070303258971

Marcus, M. (1969). Profitability and Size of Firm: Some Further Evidence. The Review of

Economics and Statistics, 51(1), 104-107.

Mathews, M. R. (1997, October 1). Twenty-five years of social and environmental accounting

research - Is there a silver jubilee to celebrate? Accounting Auditing and Accountability

Journal, 10(4), 481–531.

McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2000). Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance:

Correlation or Misspecification. Strategic Management Journal.

69
McWilliams, A., & Siegel, D. (2001, January). Corporate Social Responsibility: A Theory of the

Firm Perspective. Academy of Management, 26(1).

McWilliams, A., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, P. M. (2006). Corporate Social Responsibility:

International Perspectives.

McWilliams, A., Siegel, D. S., & Wright, P. M. (2006, January). Corporate Social Responsibility:

Strategic Implications. Journal of Management Studies.

Medelyan, A. (2020). Coding Qualitative Data: How to Code Qualitative Research. Retrieved from

https://getthematic.com/insights/coding-qualitative-data/amp/.

Mele, D. (2008). The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility. (A. Crane, D. Matten,

A. McWilliams, J. Moon, & D. S. Siegel, Eds.) Business and Management, Business Policy

and Strategy, History.

Michaels, A., & Gruning, M. (2016). Glaubwürdigkeit von CSR-Konzepten – Die Einflüsse von

CSR-Publizität und Corporate Identity auf CSR-Reputation. Uwf UmweltWirtschaftsForum,

24((2-3)), 179-193.

Michaels, A., & Gruning, M. (2018). The impact of corporate identity on corporate social

responsibility disclosure. International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility.

Michell, C. G., & Quinn, N. W. (2005). Environmental reporting disclosure in South Africa: A

comparative study of the expectations of selected groups of preparers and users. Meditari

Accountancy Research, 13(2), 17–33. Retrieved from

https://doi.org/10.1108/10222529200500010

Miles , M. B., Huberman , M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods

sourcebook.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. A. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd

ed ed.). Sage Publications, Inc.

Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification

and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of

70
 Management Review, 22(4). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1997.9711022105

Mitra, N. (2015). The why, how and what of CSR communication.

Mitra, N., Akhtar, A., & Gupta, A. D. (2018). Communicating Corporate Social Responsibility in

the post mandate period: Evidence from India. International Journal of Corporate Social

Responsibility.

Motilewa, B. D., Worlu, R. E., Agboola, M. G., & Gberevbie, M. A. (2016). Creating Shared

Value: A Paradigm Shift from Corporate Social Responsibility to Creating Shared Value.

International Journal of Social, Behavioural, Educational, Economic, Business and

Industrial Engineering, 10(8), 2670-2675.

Muller, A., & Kolk, A. (2008). CSR performance in emerging markets evidence from Mexico.

Journal of Business Ethics, 85(2), 325-337.

Murphy, P. E. (1978). An evolution: Corporate social responsiveness. University of Michigan

Business Review.

Navickas, V., & Kontautiene, R. (2012). THE INFLUENCE OF STAKEHOLDER-COMPANY

RELATIONSHIP. Economics and Management, 17(3), 58-62.

doi:https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.em.17.3.2111

Nielsen, A. E., & Thomsen, C. (2007). Reporting CSR – What and how to say it? Corporate

Communications: An International Journal, 12(1), 25-40.

O’Rourke, D. (2004). Opportunities and Obstacles for Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting in

Developing Countries. The World Bank.

O'Donovan, G. (2002). Environmental disclosures in the annual report: Extending the applicability

and predictive power of legitimacy theory. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability

Journal, 15(3), 344–371.

Ofori, D. F., & Hinson, R. E. (2007). Corporate social responsibility (CSR) perspectives of leading

firms in Ghana. Corporate Governance, 7(2), 178–193.

71
Orlitzky, M. (2001). Does Firm Size Comfound the Relationship Between Corporate Social

Performance and Firm Financial Performance? Journal of Business Ethics, 33(2), 167-180.

Park, B. I., Chidlow, A., & Choi, J. (2014). Corporate social responsibility: Stakeholders influence

on MNEs’ activities. International Business Review, 23(5), 966–980.

Patten, D. M. (2002). The relation between between environmental performance and environmental

disclosure: a research note. 27(8), 763-773.

Paun, D. (2018). Corporate sustainability reporting: An innovative tool for the greater good of all.

Paun, D., Bray, S., Yamaguchi, T., & You, S. (2016). A Sustainability Performance Assessment

Tool: The SPA System. Journal of Sustainability Education, 12.

Peloza, J., & Shang, J. (2011). How can corporate social responsibility activities create value for the

stakeholders? A systematic review. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 39(1),

117-135.

Pereira Eugenio, T., Lourenco, I. C., & Morais, A. I. (2013). Sustainability strategies of the

company TimorL: extending the applicability of legitimacy theory. Management of

Environmental Quality. An International Journal, 24(5), 570–582.

Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2011). Creating shared value: how to reinvent capitalism – and

unleash a wave of innovation and growth (Vol. 89).

Reverte, C. (2009). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure ratings by Spanish

listed firms. Journal Business Ethics, 88, 351–366.

Reynolds, M. A., & Yuthas, K. (2008). Moral disclosure and social responsibility reporting.

Journal of Business Ethics, 78(1/2), 47–64.

Rizk, R., Dixon , R., & Woodhead , A. (2008). Corporate social and environmental reporting: A

survey of disclosure practices in Egypt. Social Responsibility Journal, 4(3), 306-323.

Roberts, P. W., & Dowling, G. R. (2002). Corporate reputation and sustained superior financial

performance. Strategic Management Journal, 23(12), 1077-1093.

72
Roberts, R. W. (1992). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: an application of

stakeholder theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(6), 595–612. Retrieved from

https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(92)90015-K

Roberts, R. W. (2002). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure: An application of

stakeholder theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17(6), 595-612. Retrieved from

https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(92)90015-K

Saldana, J. (2015). The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers. SAGE Publications Inc.

Schiefelbein, K. (2012). Using the right CSR Communication Strategy: The impact on Consumer

Attitude and behaviour. Master Thesis in Communication Studies. Retrieved from

http://essay.utwente.nl/62190/1/MSc_K_Schiefelbein. pdf

Sethi, B. (2014). CSR - an essential strategic reputation management tool. CSR & Competitiveness.

1(9).

Shocker, A. D., & Sethi, S. P. (1973). An approach to incorporating social preferences in

developing action strategies. California Management Review Summer, XV(4), 97-105.

Shocker, A. D., & Sethi, S. P. (1974). An approach to incorporating action preferences in

developing corporate action strategies. In The unstable ground: Corporate in a dynamic

society.

Smith, C. N. (2003). Corporate Social Responsibility: Whether or How? California Management

Review, 45(4), 52-76. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/41166188

Snider, J., Hill, R. P., & Martin , D. (2003). Corporate Social Responsibility in the 21st Century: A

View from the World’s Most Successful Firms. Journal of Business Ethics(48), 175-187.

Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BUSI.0000004606.29523.db

Spector, B. (2008). "Business Responsibility in a Divided World": The Cold War Roots of the

Corporate Social Responsibility Movement. Enterprise & Society, 9(2), 314-336.

Stanaland, A. J., Lwin, M. O., & Murphy, P. E. (2011). Consumer perceptions of the antecedents

and consequences of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 102, 47-55.

73
 doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-0904-z

Suchman, M. (1995). Managing legitimacy: strategic and institutional approaches . Academy of

Management Review, 20(3).

Thakurta, S. G. (2015). Understanding research philosophy.

Tilling , M. V., & Tilt, C. A. (2010). The edge of legitimacy: Voluntary social and environmental

reporting in Rothmans’ 1956-1999 annual reports. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability

Journal, 23(1), 55-81.

Tilt, C. A. (2001). The content and disclosure of Australian corporate environmental policies.

Accounting Auditing and Accountability Journal, 14(2), 190-212.

Tuokuu, F. X., & Amponsah-Tawiah, K. (2016). Corporate social responsibility: is it an alternative

to government? Journal of Global Responsibility, 7(1).

United Nations. (1987). Report of the world commission on environment and development: Our

common future. Oxford,UK: Oxford University Press.

Velasquez, M. G. (2012). Business Ethics: Concepts and Cases (Seventh Edition ed.). United States

of America: Pearson Education Inc.

Waddock, S. A., Bodwell, C., & Graves, S. B. (2002). Responsibility: The new business imperative.

Academy of Management Executive, 16(2), 132-149.

Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The Corporate Social Performance-Financial Performance

Link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303-319.

Walsham, G. (1995). The Emergence of Interpretivism in IS Research. Information Systems

Research, 6(4), 376-394. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/isre.6.4.376

Welbeck, E. E., Owusu, G. Y., Bekoe, R. A., & Kusi, J. A. (2017). Determinants of environmental

disclosures of listed firms in Ghana. International Journal of Corporate Social

Responsibility. doi:https://doi.org/10.1186/s40991-017-0023-y

74
Whetman, L. L. (2017). The Impact of Sustainability Reporting on Firm Profitability.

Undergraduate Economic Review, 14(1).

Whitley, R. (1984). The Scientific Status of Management Research as a Practically-Oriented Social

Science. Journal of Management Studies, 21, 369-390. Retrieved from

http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1984.tb00234.x

Wiebe, R. H. (1989). Businessmen and Reform: A Study of The Progressive Movement. 1962 .

Wilmshurst, T. D., & Frost, G. R. (2000). Corporate environmental reporting: A test of legitimacy

theory. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 13(1), 10-26.

World Business Council for Sustinable Development(WBCSD). (2004). Cross-cutting themes-

Corporate responsibility. Retrieved from http://www.wbcsd.org/

Yilmaz, H. (2010). The Perception and Reporting of Corporate Social Responsibility in Airport

System: A Practice in TAV Airport Holding Company. 104.

Zenisek, T. J. (1979). Corporate social responsibility: a conceptualization based on organizational

literature. Academy of Management, 4(3), 359-368.

75