CSR Discourse in Crisis Communication: A Case Study of Discursive Misalignments between Corporate Social Responsibility and Crisis Communication
Author
Jensen, Jens Mathias Kjær
Term
4. term
Publication year
2015
Submitted on
2015-07-26
Pages
113
Abstract
Virksomheders sociale ansvar (CSR) – altså en virksomheds arbejde for at handle etisk og skabe samfundsmæssig værdi – kan styrke image og omdømme. Det gør CSR særligt relevant i kriser, hvor et klart og situationsbestemt budskab til interessenter er afgørende. Hvis krisen handler om socialt ansvar, kan CSR-sprog og -forpligtelser være en del af løsningen, hvis de formidles konsistent. Dette speciale undersøger de kommunikative udfordringer under Mozillas organisationskrise i 2014, hvor CSR-præget kommunikation blev brugt intensivt. Det centrale spørgsmål er, om der opstod CSR-relaterede diskursive uoverensstemmelser – altså modsætninger mellem de værdier og identiteter, der blev kommunikeret – som kan have bidraget til, at Mozillas kriserespons mislykkedes og endte med en fuld undskyldning for håndteringen. Studiet bygger på en hermeneutisk og fortolkende tilgang (den hermeneutiske cirkel og socialkonstruktivisme) og anvender kendte modeller for krisekommunikation (Benoits teori om imagegenoprettelse, Coombs’ situational crisis communication theory og Frandsen & Johansens retoriske arena-model) til at analysere den overordnede kommunikation. Diskursens indhold og spændinger analyseres med Faircloughs kritiske diskursanalyse suppleret af Laclau & Mouffes diskursteori. Analysen viser, at Mozillas fremstilling af sit sociale ansvar rummer diskursive uoverensstemmelser, som skaber et uklart krisebudskab. Uoverensstemmelserne knytter sig især til, at flere autoritative stemmer (CEO, Executive Chairwoman og organisationen) kommunikerede med delvist modstridende identiteter og formål. Disse forskelle er dog så subtile, at de er vanskelige at vurdere med gængs krisekommunikationsteori, og studiet kan derfor ikke fastslå, i hvilket omfang de forårsagede krisens udfald. Resultaterne peger samtidig på, at eksisterende krisekommunikationsteori ikke fuldt ud fanger komplekse, fler-stemmige diskursstrukturer i organisationskriser. På trods af begrænset omfang giver studiet nyttig viden om brugen af CSR-diskurs i krisekommunikation og åbner for videre forskning i et område, der forekommer underbelyst.
Corporate social responsibility (CSR)—an organization’s efforts to act ethically and create social value—can strengthen image and reputation. This makes CSR especially relevant in crises, when clear, situation-specific communication to stakeholders is critical. In crises tied to social responsibility, CSR language and commitments may help, if presented consistently. This thesis examines the communication challenges during the Mozilla Foundation’s 2014 organizational crisis, in which CSR-infused messaging was used extensively. It asks whether CSR-related discursive misalignments—contradictions between the values and identities being communicated—contributed to the failure of Mozilla’s crisis response, which ended with a full apology for mishandling the situation. The study follows a hermeneutic and interpretive approach (the hermeneutic circle and social constructionism) and applies established crisis communication models (Benoit’s image restoration theory, Coombs’s situational crisis communication theory, and Frandsen & Johansen’s rhetorical arena model) to analyze the overall response. It examines the content and tensions of the CSR discourse using Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis, supplemented by Laclau & Mouffe’s discourse theory. The analysis finds discursive misalignments in Mozilla’s representation of its social responsibility, producing an ambiguous crisis message. These misalignments stem mainly from multiple authoritative voices (the CEO, the Executive Chairwoman, and the organization) communicating with partly conflicting identities and aims. The differences are subtle enough that current crisis communication theory struggles to evaluate them, so the study cannot determine how much they drove the crisis outcome. At the same time, the results suggest that existing theory does not fully capture complex, multi-voice discursive dynamics in organizational crises. Despite its limited scope, the study offers useful insights into using CSR discourse in crisis communication and highlights avenues for further research in an underexplored area.
[This abstract was generated with the help of AI]
Keywords