CSR for emergencies: The two concepts of accountability

Download This Article

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

This work tries to highlight the determinant role of CSR during periods characterized by non-linearity and to produce insights for further research on a dual perspective: 1) companies’ decision-making on CSR implementation and promotional tool preference; 2) consumers’ purchasing/consuming decision-making. So, the interrelated perspective, under the influencing contextual variable of the recent COVID-19 pandemic, would show a crucial role of CSR as an anti-crisis solution. The domain-based review, the direct observation mixed with field analysis survey-based on a sample of 208 respondents made possible the hermeneutical and inference activity on results according to the Situational Crisis Communication Theory and Goffman’s view on the art of impression management, mixed with a persuasive approach characterizing advertising. The perception analysis, not directly operated ethnographically with companies, allowed to investigate CSR from different angles, permits the researchers to observe the exponential rise of advertising campaigns with a social scope and CSR promotional activities in accordance with the emergence of the two intrinsic concepts of accountability from an external point of view.

Keywords: CSR Advertising, COVID-19, Emergencies, Anti-Crisis, Accountability, Corporate Reputation and Image

Authors’ individual contribution: Conceptualisation – G.M.; Methodology – C.R.; Resources – G.M.; Data Curation – G.M.; Formal Analysis – G.M.; Writing – C.R. and G.M.; Visualization – C.R. and G.M.; Supervision – C.R.

Declaration of conflicting interests: The Authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

JEL Classification: L22, L26, M14, M31, M48

Received: 07.07.2020
Accepted: 14.09.2020
Published online: 17.09.2020

How to cite this paper: Rainero, C., & Modarelli, G. (2020). CSR for emergencies: The two concepts of accountability. Corporate Ownership & Control, 18(1), 78-95. https://doi.org/10.22495/cocv18i1art7