企业道德承诺:企业社会责任报告中的修辞分析

C. D. Ditlev-Simonsen, Søren H. Wenstøp
{"title":"企业道德承诺:企业社会责任报告中的修辞分析","authors":"C. D. Ditlev-Simonsen, Søren H. Wenstøp","doi":"10.22164/ISEA.V5I1.55","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper investigates rhetoric applied in 80 Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) reports in2005. A taxonomy of five distinct rhetorical strategies for describing the purpose of CSR isapplied; Agency (profit), Benefit (collective welfare), Compliance (laws and contracts), Duty(duties), and Ethos (virtue). The findings reveal that very different rhetoric is applied. Ethos isthe most common ethical perspective expressed in the reports, Benefit and Agency are on secondand third place. Specific patterns of ethical reasoning appear to be common, while otherpossible reasoning strategies are rare. The most prevalent pattern of ethical reasoning is to linkAgency and Benefit perspectives, claiming that Benefit is done for the sake of Agency. Thesefindings constitute a new approach in CSR research.","PeriodicalId":31316,"journal":{"name":"Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting","volume":"5 1","pages":"65-81"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Companies' Ethical Commitment: An Analysis Of The Rhetoric In CSR Reports\",\"authors\":\"C. D. Ditlev-Simonsen, Søren H. Wenstøp\",\"doi\":\"10.22164/ISEA.V5I1.55\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper investigates rhetoric applied in 80 Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) reports in2005. A taxonomy of five distinct rhetorical strategies for describing the purpose of CSR isapplied; Agency (profit), Benefit (collective welfare), Compliance (laws and contracts), Duty(duties), and Ethos (virtue). The findings reveal that very different rhetoric is applied. Ethos isthe most common ethical perspective expressed in the reports, Benefit and Agency are on secondand third place. Specific patterns of ethical reasoning appear to be common, while otherpossible reasoning strategies are rare. The most prevalent pattern of ethical reasoning is to linkAgency and Benefit perspectives, claiming that Benefit is done for the sake of Agency. Thesefindings constitute a new approach in CSR research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":31316,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"65-81\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22164/ISEA.V5I1.55\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Issues in Social and Environmental Accounting","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22164/ISEA.V5I1.55","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

摘要

本文对2005年80份企业社会责任报告中的修辞手法进行了研究。本文采用了五种不同的修辞策略来描述企业社会责任的目的;Agency(利润)、Benefit(集体福利)、Compliance(法律和合同)、Duty(责任)和Ethos(美德)。研究结果显示,他们使用了截然不同的修辞手法。Ethos是报告中最常见的道德观点,Benefit和Agency排在第二和第三位。特定的道德推理模式似乎很常见,而其他可能的推理策略却很少。最普遍的道德推理模式是将代理和利益观点联系起来,声称利益是为了代理而做的。这些发现为企业社会责任研究提供了新的思路。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Companies' Ethical Commitment: An Analysis Of The Rhetoric In CSR Reports
This paper investigates rhetoric applied in 80 Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) reports in2005. A taxonomy of five distinct rhetorical strategies for describing the purpose of CSR isapplied; Agency (profit), Benefit (collective welfare), Compliance (laws and contracts), Duty(duties), and Ethos (virtue). The findings reveal that very different rhetoric is applied. Ethos isthe most common ethical perspective expressed in the reports, Benefit and Agency are on secondand third place. Specific patterns of ethical reasoning appear to be common, while otherpossible reasoning strategies are rare. The most prevalent pattern of ethical reasoning is to linkAgency and Benefit perspectives, claiming that Benefit is done for the sake of Agency. Thesefindings constitute a new approach in CSR research.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信