1. CSR across the globe: Dutch and Indian consumers response to CSR CSR Communication ConferenceAmsterdam, the Netherlands 28 October 2011 Brigitte Planken(Radboud University, the Netherlands) Catherine Nickerson(Zayed University, United Arab Emirates) Subrat Sahu(Pandit Deendayal Petroleum University, India)

2. Starting points

strategic CSR (communication)positive stakeholder outcomes?

debate on localized v. universal approach in international marketing communication

cross-cultural differences in CSR policy

achieving fit between CSR policy and (local) stakeholders CSR attitudes, concerns and expectations

CSR in emerging (versus developed) regions

3.

Carrolls CSR Pyramid (1991)

Economic responsibility Legal responsibility Ethical responsibility Philanthropic responsibility *Be a goodCorporate Citizen *Be Ethical *Obey the Law *Be Profitable 4.

Vissers CSR Pyramid (2007)

Ethical responsibility Legal responsibility Philanthropic responsibility Economic responsibility Adopt voluntary codes of governance & ethics Ensure good relations with govt. officials Set aside funds for corporate social/community projects Provide investments, create jobs & pay taxes 5. Indian business: philanthropic policy stance

Tata Indias Council for Community Initiatives & Literacy Programmes

• http :// www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXUW6cTV3VA

Sterlite Industries Indias Community Outreach programmes

• http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y06NbT3K7tY&feature=related

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd.s adoption of ca. 50 rural villages

6. Why this study?

not much research on CSR (communication) in emerging economies

few cross-cultural studies of stakeholders CSR attitudes, particularly involving emerging economies, like India

a philanthropic CSR policy focus in India makes sense historically and socio-economically; does it match what (local) stakeholders regard as important?

differences between stakeholders in emerging vs. developed countries?

7. Aim

to investigate Dutch and Indian consumers attitudes to social responsibility (=CSR platforms), CSR initiatives and CSR-based marketing strategies

expectations:

• Indians attach greater importance to philanthropicresponsibility(vs. legal and ethical); the importance assigned to different social responsibilities by Dutch and Indian consumers differs

• Indians attach greater importance toCSR initiativesreflecting philanthropic (rather than legal & ethical) CSR domains; the importance attached to CSR initiatives by Dutch and Indian consumers differs

• CSR-based marketing strategies (with a philanthropic orientation) influence Indian stakeholder outcomes (attitude to company & intent to support company) differently than Dutch stakeholder outcomes

8. Survey

1. importance social responsibilities:

• statements & 7-point scales (very important not at all important)

2. importance CSR initiatives:

• descriptions: respondents asked to rank relative importance of each

3. response to CSR-based marketing strategies (Kotler & Lee, 2005):

• scenario/ descriptions & 7-point scales to gauge:

• • attitude to company (positive - negative)

• • purchasing intent (likely - unlikely)

examples of statements/ descriptions:

• Companies should pay their debt to society by contributing to social, community projects

• The company implements policy to promote ethical business practices, for example by signing Fair Business contracts or implementing a Code of Ethics

• The company informs consumers that it will donate 5% of the proceeds from every product it sells to a research foundation that studies the effects of global warming

9. Results: importance social responsibilities

Dutch:

legal>ethical**;ethical>philanthropic***; legal & ethical>economic***

• legal>ethical>[philanthropic]>economic responsibility

Indians:

legal & ethical>philanthropic & economic***

• legal & ethical>philanthropic & economic responsibility

10. Results: importance CSR initiatives (most to least important)

Dutch (%important/ unimportant)

Environmental projects

• (75.8%/24.2%)

Work conditions

(61.1%/38.9%)

Ethical code/ responsible business

• (55.8%/44.2%)

Social/community projects

(49.5%/50.5%)

Donating to causes

(34.7%/65.3%)

Sponsoring

(29.5%/70.5%)

Indians (%important/ unimportant)

Environmental projects

• (80.3%/19.7%)

Work conditions

(67.7%/32.4%)

Social/community projects

• (63.4%/36.6%)

Ethical code/responsible business

(42.3%/57.7%)

Donating to causes

(35.2%/64.8%)

Sponsoring

(14.1%/85.9%)

11. Results: response to CSR-based strategies (company image) Mean attitude to the company (sd) Strategy type Dutch (n = 95) Indians (n = 95) 1.Cause promotion 4.06 (1.51) 4.85 (1.31) 2.Cause-related marketing 5.47 (1.06) 5.51 (1.09) 3.Corporate social marketing 5.33 (1.16) 5.48 (1.12) 4.Corporate philanthropy 5.25 (1.30) 5.18 (1.38) 5.Volunteerism 5.18 (1.34) 5.49 (1.32) 6.Socially responsible business 5.67 (0.97) 6.06 (0.94) Within nationality: 1 < 2, 3, 4, 5, & 6*** 1 < 2, 5 & 6* 6 > 1, 3, 4 & 5* 6 > 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5***;3 > 4* Between nationalities: Cause promotion (1):Indians> Dutch*** Socially responsible business (6): Indians > Dutch** 12. Results: response to CSR-based strategies (intent to buy) Mean intent to buy from company (sd) Strategy type Dutch (n = 95) Indians (n = 95) 1.Cause promotion 3.58 (1.56) 4.21 (1.38) 2.Cause-related marketing 5.02 (1.41) 4.85 (1.45) 3.Corporate social marketing 4.68 (1.35) 4.71 (1.39) 4.Corporate philanthropy 4.69 (1.49) 4.24 (1.52) 5.Volunteerism 4.37 (1.53) 4.42 (1.56) 6.Socially responsible business 4.96 (1.25) 5.35 (1.34) Within nationality : 1 < 2 & 6*** 6 > 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5* 2 & 6 > 5* 2 & 3 > 4* Between nationalities : Cause promotion (1): Indians > Dutch** Socially responsible business (6): Indians > Dutch* 13. Discussion

social responsibilities/ CSR platforms:

• importance assigned to the four responsibilities similar across the two nationalities

• the Indians in this study did not regard philanthropic responsibility as more important than legal and ethical responsibilities

• both the Dutch and Indians in this study assigned greater importance to ethical and legal responsibilities than to philanthropic and economic responsibilities

CSR initiatives :

• importance assigned to different CSR initiatives similar across the two nationalities

• the Indians in this study did not rank philanthropic initiatives as relatively more important than initiatives reflecting legal and ethical responsibilities

• both the Dutch and Indians in this study assigned CSR initiatives reflecting ethical (planet & people) concerns relatively greatest importance, while philanthropic CSR initiatives were assigned less importance

14. Discussion

response to the CSR-based marketing strategies:

• two (of the six) strategies Cause promotion and Socially responsible business- affected stakeholder outcomes across the two nationalities to a different extent

• the Indians response to these two strategies was more positive than the Dutch response, with respect to both evaluation of the company and intent to support the company

15. Food for thought

stakeholders in the two countries may be more similar with regard to the importance they attach to differentsocial responsibilitiesandCSR initiativesthan might be assumed on the basis of the literature on CSR in emergent versus developed countries

the CSR platform prominently pursued by Indian business (=philanthropic focus) may not match some local stakeholders societal concerns and what they regard as important

(some) CSR-based marketing strategies seem to influence stakeholder outcomes differentlywithinandacrossthe nationalities studied

the findings underline the importance of monitoring (local) stakeholder concerns with different CSR issues; such information can be used to create fit between CSR-based communications and what stakeholders regard as relevant in terms of CSR issues

future research emergent economies:

• insight into opportunities & limitations of CSR (communication)

• insight into effects of different CSRcontent , s tances,message framing , etc. in CSR-based communication campaigns on stakeholder outcomes

• local or universal CSR communication approach?

16. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION

Brigitte Planken (Radboud University, the Netherlands)

[email_address]

Catherine Nickerson (Zayed University, United Arab Emirates)

Subrat Sahu (Pandit Deendayal Petroleum University, India)

17. Background literature

Arli, D. and Losmono, H. (2010), Consumers perception of corporate social responsibility in a developing country,International Journal of Consumer Studies , Vol. 34 , pp. 4651.

Arora, B. and Puranik, R. (2005), A review of corporate social responsibility in India,Development , Vol. 47 No. (3), pp. 93100.

Carroll, A. (1991), The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders,Business Horizons , Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 39-48.

Chapple, W. and Moon, J. (2005), Corporate social responsibility in Asia: a seven-country study of CSR web site reporting,Business and Society , Vol. 44 No. 4, pp. 415-441.

Chaudri, V. and Wang, J. (2007), Communicating corporate social responsibility on the Internet: a case study of the top 100 information technology companies in India,Management Communication Quarterly , Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 232-247.

Christie, P., Kwon, I., Stoeberl, P. and Baumhart, R. (2003), A cross-cultural comparison of ethical attitudes of business managers: India, Korea and the United States.,Journal of Business Ethics , Vol. 46, pp. 263-287.

Dahl, F. and Persson, S. (2008), Communication of CSR. How Swedish consumers perceptions and behaviour are influenced by promoted CSR activities Unpublished MA thesis, University of Jnkping, Sweden.

18. Background literature

Esrock, S. and Leichty, G. (1998), Social responsibility & corporate web pages: Self-presentation or agenda setting?,Public Relations ReviewVol. 24 No. 3, pp. 305-319.

Gupta, A. (2007), Social responsibility in India towards a global compact approach,International Journal of Social Economics , Vol. 34 No. 9, pp. 637-663.

Jamali, D. and Mirshak, R. (2007), Corporate social responsibility (CSR): Theory and practice in a developing country context,Journal of Business Ethics , Vol 72, pp. 243262.

Kotler, P. and Lee, N. (2005),Corporate social responsibility: Doing the most good for your company and your cause , Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.

Maignan, I. (2001), Consumers perceptions of corporate social responsibilities: a cross-cultural Comparison,Journal of Business Ethics , Vol. 30 No.1, pp. 57-72.

Maignan, I. and Ralston, D. (2002), Corporate social responsibility in Europe and the US: Insights from businesses self-presentations,Journal of International Business Studies , Vol 33, pp. 497-514.

Muruganantham, G. (2010), Case study on Corporate Social Responsibility in MNCs in India, paper presented at the International Trade & Academic Research Conference (ITARC), 8-10 November 2010, London, United Kingdom.

Planken, B., Sahu, S. and Nickerson, C. (2010), Corporate social responsibility communication in the Indian context,Journal of Indian Business Research , Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 10-22.

19. Background literature

Planken, B., Waller, R. and Nickerson, C. (2007), Reading stories and signs on the internet: analyzing CSR discourse on the BP website, in Garzone, G., Poncini, G. and Catenaccio, P. (Eds),Multimodality in corporate communication. Web genres and discursive identity , Franco Angeli, Milan, pp. 93-110.

Podnar, K. and Golob, U. (2007), CSR expectations: the focus of corporate marketing,CorporateCommunications: An International Journal , Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 326-340.

Ra machandran, J. and Patvardhan, S. (2007),Fabindia: Crafting Success , Indian Institute ofManagementBangalore Case, Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore, India.

Rettab, B., Brik, A. and Mellahi, K. (2009), A study of management perceptions of the impact of corporate social responsibility on organisational performance in emerging economies: the case of Dubai,Journalof Business Ethics , Vol. 89, pp. 371390.

Sagar, P. and Singla, A. (2004), Trust and corporate social responsibility: Lessons from India,Journal of Communication Management , Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 282290.

Visser, W. (2007), Corporate social responsibility in developing countries, in Crane, A. and Matten, D. (Eds.),Corporate social responsibility: Three volume set , Sage, London, pp. 473-499.

20. CSR-based marketing strategies (Kotler & Lee, 2005) Strategy Description Aim(s) 1.Cause promotion corporation promotes awareness of a societal cause as part of its CSR policy in an advertising campaign raise awareness of the cause; influence consumer attitudes/behaviour by combining corporate/ product promotion with cause promotion2.Cause-related marketing corporation is seen to be actively involved with a particular societal cause as part of its combined CSR and marketing policies; specific product(s) explicitly associated with the cause raise awareness of the cause; actively involve consumer in supporting cause by purchasing companys product (i.e. % of purchasing price is donated to cause) 3.Corporate social marketing corporation combines product/ service advertising with awareness-raising specifically targeted at changing consumer behaviour in a sustainable way persuade consumer to purchase; bring about structural change in stakeholder behavior beyond purchase 4.Corporate philanthropy corporation refers to its corporate giving policy as a marketing communication strategy which may be unrelated to specific product promotion raise awareness about CSR policy with regard to corporate giving; promote corporate reputation5.Community volunteering corporation refers to its community volunteering policy as a marketing communication strategy which may be unrelated to specific product promotion raise awareness about CSR policy/activities with regard to community volunteering; promote corporate reputation 6.Socially responsible business practice corporation emphasizes its behaviour as a good corporate citizen in general and its overall commitment to sustainable business as a blanket marketing strategy (essentially subsuming 1 to 5) promote corporate reputation as a responsible citizen 21. Method 1

written survey on:

• importance assigned to social responsibilities/ CSR platforms

• (economic, legal, ethical & philanthropic)

• importance assigned to different CSR initiatives

• (reflecting legal, ethical & philanthropic domains)

• response to six CSR-based marketing strategies: in terms of respondents evaluations ofcorporate imageandpurchasing intent

• [CSR communication preferences]

• background data

samples of consumers:

• Dutch: n 95 (male: 38.9%, female:61.6%)

• Indian: n 95 (male: 52.6%, female: 47.4%)

• Highly educated (higher vocational training to University)

• Age range: 18-65, biggest cluster 25-35 (both samples)