Strategization of CSR

Author(s): Ziva Sharp and Nurit Zaidman

Source: Journal of Business Ethics , April 2010, Vol. 93, No. 1 (April 2010), pp. 51-71
Published by: Springer

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40605328

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/40605328?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of
Business Ethics

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Journal of Business Ethics (2010) 93:51-71 © Springer 2009
DOI 10.1007A10551-009-0181-2

Ziva Sharp
Strategization of CSR Nurit Zaidman

ABSTRACT. We examine the process of strategization The literature regarding CSR can be divided into
of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) within 12 two in light of two basic strategic viewpoints: the
Israeli firms using a longitudinal qualitative approach. ethical or moral orientation; the business orientation
We analyzed the process of CSR strategization under (Driver, 2006; Godfrey and Hatch, 2007). The
Jarzabkowski's framework. Our findings identify the
morally oriented approach is manifest, for example, in
differentiating characteristics of CSR strategization pro-
stakeholder theory (Godfrey and Hatch, 2007;
cesses, including the requirement for informative com-
Kleinrichert, 2008), which suggests, in its extreme
munications rather than persuasive negotiations, and the
form, that community stakeholders are allies of the
absence of resistance within the organizational commu-
nity. These unique aspects of CSR strategization may be corporation. Under this approach, CSR is an act of
attributed to the moral and value-centric nature of CSR reciprocity based on the firm's obligation toward its
stakeholders rather than a market transaction directed
activity.
toward underlying business objectives (Kleinrichert,
KEY WORDS: Corporate Social Responsibility, strat- 2008; Pfeffer, 1994).
egy, strategization, volunteerism The business or economic approach suggests
possible models for measuring the relationship
between CSR and financial performance (Godfrey,
Strategization of CSR 2005; Me Williams and Siegel, 2001). Empirical
studies have yielded conflicting results: Margolis and
Several Scholars argue that Corporate Social Walsh (2003) were unable to establish conclusive
Responsibility (CSR) is considered by corporations links between corporate financial performance and
as strategic for the business because of its contri- CSR, while Orlitzky et al. (2003) demonstrate that
bution to financial performance (Barnett, 2007; the practice of CSR has a positive impact on busi-
Orlitzky et al., 2003) or to market value (Mackey ness results. Similarly, Varadarajan and Menon
et al., 2007). Topics related to the marriage of CSR (1988) regard CSR under the banner of "doing
and the competitive strategy of the firm are widely better by doing good". Barnett (2007) finds CSR
discussed among practitioners and in scholarly for- correlated with improved relationships with stake-
ums. Recent studies find it wiser for the firm to act holders, while Mackey et al. (2007) developed a
strategically with regard to CSR activities and sug- mathematical model demonstrating how CSR can
gest using the same framework that guides their core improve market value given favorable supply and
business choices in order to make CSR a source demand conditions for CSR investments. The eco-
of competitive advantage for the firm (Maxfield,
nomic approach thus provides a strategic anchor for
2008). Attempts to integrate the concepts CSRofthat can be rationally linked into and form a
CSR and corporate strategy have included the part
stake-
of company business strategy.
Other researchers have taken a critical view of the
holder model of strategic management, the inclusion
of social demands as strategic issues, as well as orientation of CSR programs, criticizing
business
suggestions of more general ways in which CSR
the lack of altruism in corporate good deeds that
programmers can create strategic benefits for the
serve only the corporate good, or in the claim that
organization (e.g., Burke and Logsdon, 1996; such initiatives are at best a surrender to institutional
Carroll et al, 1987; Galbreath, 2006). pressures (Bies et al., 2007). CSR has been criticized

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
52 Ziva Sharp and Nurit Zaidman

unique
as "strategic philanthropy [which] isattributes
almostofnever
CSR impact the strategization
truly strategic, and often is not particularly
process. effective
as philanthropy" (Porter and Kramer,CSR encompasses
2006, ap. broad
56). range of activities
oriented to the
Our study attempts to move the focus from the social good, including, for example,
environmental
general strategic orientation (whether commitment,
ethical, busi-community involve-
ness-oriented or critical) to thement, a code of
process byethics, and fair business practices.
which
This social orientation
CSR strategy is internalized within entails a number of differ-
the business
ences from
organization. Our attempt to explain moreprocess
the standard business
byinitiatives within
a company. First, in contradistinction
which CSR is strategized in an organization can be to business
goals, which
viewed as a response, albeit partial, are typically
to the call by measurable, finite, and
within the
Bies et al. to examine CSR activities organization's
"as a strategic sphere of influence, CSR
addresses social needs
imperative" (2007, p. 792). Furthermore, by that are virtually infinite,
ana-
lyzing data regarding the CSR difficult
strategicto measure, and largely beyond the
process
taken from several firms at organization's
two points immediate
in the control. Second, CSR
organizations' life cycle, our studyactivities involve a to
contributes pronounced
the ethical dimension
that differentiates
too small body of empirical research in this field. them from the more purely profit
Moreover, we make a further contribution
orientation by business activities.
of standard strategic
Furthermore,
focusing on volunteerism during CSR efforts differ from profit-centric
the strategization
of CSR. activities in that they are less central to the com-
This article is aligned with the emerging schoolpany's
of primary business mission. Finally, CSR also
strategy as practice. Rather than viewing strategy asdiffers
a from other business activities in that it creates

property of organizations, the strategy as practice a point of contact between business and volunteer-
approach views strategy as "something that people ism. That is, CSR programs typically require not
do" (Whittington, 2006, p. 613, emphasis in original).only traditional monetary donations but also the
This approach focuses research on "people's strategy active involvement of employees as volunteers in
social projects. As a result, one can assume that
activity in all its intimate detail" (Whittington, 2006,
employees involved in CSR programs act both as
p. 613). The study of Jarzabkowski (2005) represents
an important contribution to this approach in itsemployees in a for-profit organization, and simul-
presentation of a theoretical and methodological taneously as volunteers in a not-for-profit organi-
zation. This might create a point of contact between
framework for the analysis of strategy as practice
business and volunteerism that could involve, at
(Kaplan, 2008). Following the terminology suggested
least theoretically, the potential for identity disso-
by Jarzabkowski (2005), strategy refers to "goal-ori-
nance for the employees and organizational discord
ented activity within an organization" (2005, p. 43),
oraconflict.
while "strategization" refers to the process by which
strategy is integrated into organizational behavior and In summary, then, we examine the extent and
process by which CSR, as a distinct and unique type
culture. Jarzabkowski's theoretical framework is
of activity, is strategized in a business organization.
useful for our study since it introduces a systematic,
in-depth explanation of the components, and stages Our
of approach can be summarized in the following
strategic activity, helping untangle what Stone ettwo
al. research questions:
(1999) defined as the "black box" of the strategic
Research Question 1: Once an organization has
process. Jarzabkowski uses the components of strate-
declared CSR as a strategic goal, is CSR strate-
gic activity to create a typology of strategy making
gized by the organization? Do organizations
(Kaplan, 2007). Since the theory addresses strategy in
practice what they preach about CSR?
general, it is interesting to examine how the theory
Research Question 2: How is CSR strategized
can be applied to the special case of CSR strategy. In
by the organization? In other words, how does
this article, we have used Jarzabkowski's framework
the organization make the transition from
to help develop an understanding of how CSR
preaching about CSR to practice? A side ques-
strategy evolves in organizations, the extent to which
tion stemming from the "how" question of
CSR is successfully strategized, and of how the

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Strategization of CSR 53

strategization focuses on the actor

and influential transformation of
in the strategization triangle, uses
volunteerism within organizational
the organization as the
practices to influence the formation of
strategization occurs. strategy, but these practices also influence manage-
ment. Similarly, management's interaction with the
organizational community around strategy formation
is constrained or activated by organizational practices
Strategization and norms.

The triangular interplay that produces the strategy

Basu and Palazzo (2008) are
is termed among
"strategizing." Accordingthe first
to Jarzabkowski,
researchers to have adopted a process
'"Strategizing perspective
is the ongoing interplay between top in
the study of CSR. They claim
managers and that an analysis
the strategizing of the
practices in shaping
sense-making process strategy
by which organizations
over time" (p. 43, 2005). This definition
understand and interpret CSR,
expresses rather
the continuous than
processional aspectaofstrict
the
strategic
focus on the content perse of a process
CSR emphasized
program,by use of the novel
enables
a deeper understanding of its nature.
"strategization" Sense-making
terminology. Jarzabkowski (2005)
can be viewed as one of the multiple
has developed mechanisms
a 2 χ 2 typology that defines modes, orthat
contribute to the strategization of a corporate
phases, of strategization, activity,
where the various phases are
and it is to this broader framework that levels
distinguished by different we of now turn.
legitimacy.
In this attempt to understand how
According to Suchman a strategic
(1995) CSR legitimacy
strategy is
penetrates through a business,
an organizational typically migrating
resource used by management to
from a declared strategy to the
promote andesired
operational strategy
strategy. While drawing on
embraced by the organization, we draw
Suchman's definition, Jarzabkowski's on the
model intro-
"strategy as practice" duces
model, asbetween
the distinction developed
interpretative andby
Jarzabkowski (2005), as structural
a theoretical frame of ref-
legitimacy. The concept of interpretative
erence. This model offers ais systematic,
legitimacy based on Weick's (1995) studycontext-
on sense-
sensitive framework to explain the intra-firm
making. Interpretative legitimacy refers to the process
estab-
of strategy making. Jarzabkowski's theory is based
lishment of "frameworks of meaning" (Jarzabkowski, on
Mintzberg's (1990) redefinition of
2005, p. 95) that enable strategy
individuals as an
to understand
emergent rather than an intended
what is considered right action. According
in an organizational com-
to Mintzberg, strategy munity.
is "aStructural
pattern legitimacyin a to
"refers stream
the social of
actions." Jarzabkowski (2005) modifies this defini-
order displayed in structural practices such as routines,
tion, imposing more stringent
hierarchies conditions for to
and roles" (p. 155). According activity
Jarzab-
to qualify as strategic, requiring that
kowski (2005), these strategic
frameworks actions
legitimize activity
be both goal-oriented by
and persistent
reinforcing a social order. over time:
"Strategy is a pattern in Asadiscussed
stream earlier, CSRof
differsgoal directed
significantly from
activity over time" (2005,
"standard" p. 43).
business The
strategy time
initiatives. However, weaxis,
which represents an important
would argue forparameter in Jarzab-
the applicability of Jarzabkowski's
kowski's model, is leveraged inprocesses
model to CSR the for current
three key reasons.research
First,
by analyzing data collected from a set of organiza-
CSR meets the criteria for goal-directed activity both
in content and in form. CSR ispoints,
tions at two discrete, well-separated directed toward social
in 2004
and 2008.
change, and it is strategic in terms of the fundamental
Jarzabkowski's model of strategization revolves centrality that sponsors of CSR aspire to have in the
around the triangular interplay and reciprocal influ-
corporate agenda. Second, CSR engages the three
ence between management and the organizational actors around which Jarzabkowski's model revolves:
community and strategy (see Figure 1). These threetop management, the community of employees, and
elements represent the vertices of the strategization
goal-directed activity. Third, given the pivotal role
triangle, where the interplay between these vertices isthat the model assigns to the organizational commu-
mediated by organizational practices and norms. For
nity in strategization, together with the centrality of
example, management, although the most powerfulinterpretative legitimacy, the model is well suited to

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 54 Ziva Sharp and Nurit Zaidman

Subject:
Top managers The companies comprise a variety of sectors, includ-
ing finance, communications, telecommunications,
infrastructure, food, waste management, retail, con-
sulting, agriculture, military, and plastics. Some of the

a// ' '''

companies operate mainly in the local Israeli market,
while others are international concerns.
âg// Strategizing ''% %
&.$ // practices: ' '·'% 3>
/j^ ·*·■'/ Institutionalised ' ' ' K ^. <^
<A/ // iules and Realized ' K ,% <£ Outcomes;Accessibility
*£// / Pinces ' Y Realized
·£.// ' / ' V strategy
■£ ψ ' L·^' X"'^ content
Our initial intention was to collect both quantitative
Organi2ational B: Contributes to and resists Strategy:
and qualitative data. That is, we were interested in
community activity through practices Goal-directed
4 'hard data" regarding several aspects of CSR, such
activity

as the number of participants and the number of

Figure 1. An activity theory framework
hours devotedfor strategy
to CSR activities in as
the organizations,
practice (2005, p. 43).
in order to analyze strategization. In 2004, however,
we found that this data hardly existed. In 2008,
several companies again did not have the data we
explain the process by which a CSR initiative pene-
were looking for, and three companies hesitated to
trates an organization. The success of a CSR program
provide this information, as they were afraid of its
depends on the organizational community's inter-
being misused. In spite of these limitations, we were
nalization and acceptance of CSR. In Jarzabkowski's
able to get estimations that were sufficient to obtain
terms, the value-centric nature of CSR requires
an understanding of the process. In addition to
interpretative legitimacy supported by procedural
estimations, we collected qualitative data in the form
legitimacy in order for CSR practices to be widely
of personal interpretations and "the story" as it was
adopted throughout the organizational community
told by the participants. We used this rich data to
(2005).
gain an in-depth understanding of the topic.

Methodology Data collection and analysis

Study approach
We designed our research as a multi-case study
focusing on "how" questions and on real-life situ-
ations (Yin, 1994). The article combines both
quantitative estimations and qualitative data.
Our main sources of data were interviews with key
people in the organizations. A secondary source was
information presented on their websites.
Interviews

We collected the data at two points in time, in 2004

Sample
We examine leading Israeli companies that deploy
CSR in their organizations. The selected companies
are considered to be leading in CSR within
the context of the Israeli organizational field. All the
companies were engaged with and led by Maala in the
process of CSR deployment. Maala is a non-profit
membership organization, founded in 1998, whose
mission is to assist Israeli businesses in developing and
implementing a CSR strategy (per the Maala website).
and 2008. The data from 2004 comprises in-depth,
face-to-face interviews with fourteen CSR managers
or coordinators within the firms. The interviews
were conducted individually with each subject. We
asked five standard questions in each interview,
with follow-up questions depending on the initial
answers: (1) What are the terms used in your orga-
nization to denote the firm's social involvement
activities? How this activity is defined? (2) When
and how has your organization been exposed to
CSR ideas? Who are the people, agents, and sources

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Strategization of CSR 55

who shape the concept

the along the way?
workers who volunteer What
similar to the organiza-
tion's
changes, if any, happened tovalues?
this Please explain, (14) and
concept Is therethese
a leader
activities in your organization?
among the workers(3) What
who perform are
the CSR the
activities?
responses of employees What
and management
is his/her to CSR
role? and (15) Is management (HQ)
and to the activities that are associated with it? Were directly involved in CSR activities?
there any objections to it? (4) Is CSR part of the Twelve of the companies responded willingly,
organization's 'life style" or "culture"? Please while two were evasive. Some of the respondents
explain, and (5) Can you please describe the activi- were the same people interviewed in 2004. Two of
ties that are taking place in your organization? Can the responders answered in writing. There was an
you recall activities that were rejected? additional face-to-face interview with a senior con-
We conducted a round of follow-up interviews sultant who specializes in the implementation of
with the same companies in 2008. These interviews CSR programs in Israeli firms. All interviews were
were conducted mainly by phone. The purpose of the transcribed word by word.
second round was to update the original data, while
enabling an analysis of CSR strategization over time.
The second round of interviews used an open-ended Interviews analysis
questionnaire but included several questions intended
to get quantitative evaluations from the respondents. The analysis was based on reading the 2004 inter-
The 2004 findings led to a question included in the views as one unit, detecting dominant patterns. This
2008 survey regarding whether volunteer work led to categorization of the strategic position and to
within the business context leads to the formation of a questions relating to the development of the strategic
"CSR group," which is bound by a strengthened position and mode of volunteerism. A ranking sys-
commitment to social values, and which operates in tem to assess the penetration of CSR initiatives in
separation from the rest of the organization. A related the enterprise (introduced by Maala) was employed
question, also examined in the 2008 interviews, is as one of the parameters for testing CSR strategi-
whether this pattern of voluntary behavior persists zation within the firm (see below).
when the strategic position of CSR is enhanced. The The questions that emerged from the analysis led
2008 interview questions were as follows: (1) Is social us to conduct the second round of interviews in
activity a strategic issue in your organization? To what 2008. Upon the conclusion of the second round, we
extent is it strategic? (from 1 to 6), (2) Do the CSR read the first round of interviews and refined our
activities fit the strategy of the organization? (3) Do all previous categorization of strategic positions and the
the workers know about the CSR activities? What voluntary activity. The new data provided both
percentage of the workers volunteer for the projects? information and perspective that enabled a richer
(4) Has the number of volunteers changed in the lastand more precise analysis and categorization, all
4 years? If so, in what direction (increased/presented in tables below for the sake of clarity.
decreased)? (5) Who initiated CSR in your organi- When this process was completed, we chose quo-
zation? (6) Who decides on the projects the organi-tations reflecting the main argument common to a
zation takes upon itself? (7) What is the amount of few of the participants about a specific topic. Our
time invested by volunteer workers? (8) Who decidesanalysis of the 2008 data focused on the leading
how much work time/resources are invested in social group of firms that developed and expanded their
projects? (9) Are there control mechanisms to regulate involvement in CSR as a strategic initiative.
time/resources invested in volunteerism? (10) Can
you describe the relationship among the workers who
perform the CSR activities? Is it a group? (11) AreFindings
there any conflicts between the volunteers and the rest
of the organization? Please specify, (12) Do theFindings from 2004: the embryonic stage
workers who volunteer in the social projects fulfill
their voluntary work as required? Do they invest timeThe 2004 data does not directly address the extent
beyond the call of duty? (13) Are the social values of
of CSR strategization by the surveyed companies.

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 56 Ziva Sharp and Nurit Zaidman

However, there are indirect indicators that

strategizing CSR. facilitate
First, these four companies had
an assessment. One of the indicators is the narrowtaken upon themselves a second area of activity, in
range of CSR activities in which the organizationsaddition to community involvement (for three of
engaged. A common index that is used to evaluate the four companies, the second area was environ-
CSR activities has been promoted by Maala. Thismental protection). Second, two of the companies
index, which has been adopted by the Israeli stockreported what they referred to as "strategic think-
exchange to evaluate the CSR commitment of ing" or were examining the possibility of expanding
publicly traded companies, comprises a set of CSR the CSR program. Third, the choice of projects was
activities, all of which the company needs to integrated into the core business strategy or repre-
implement in order to achieve the maximum rating:sented a response to a major threat to the firm.
business ethics, human rights and working envi- Fourth, the CSR coordinators complained that the
ronment, community involvement, environmentalprocess of absorption of CSR into the organization
commitment, and corporate governance. was too slow or that not all employees had the
Our data show that in 2004, CSR was only an chance to volunteer. Such complaints reflect an
emerging trend in the embryonic stage. The sur- orientation toward broadening the concept and
veyed companies, designated by a letter, are listed in practice of CSR, and possibly the aspiration to
Table I, together with their area of activity, and theelevate the CSR program into a strategic initiative.
level of CSR activity in 2004 and 2008 (see Findings The 2004 data also indicate that the initiation of
from 2008). Most company representatives reportedCSR in the corporation varied. In some cases, the
in 2004 that they had been involved in CSR CSR program was a bottom-up activity initiated by
activities in the previous 3-5 years. Ten of theemployees; in other companies, CSR was a top-
companies had implemented only one CSR activitydown activity introduced by top management, and
area, community involvement. In addition, for thesein some it was both bottom-up and top-down. For
ten firms, CSR was not part of the organizational example, in one firm (N), the management put an
strategy. The situation is articulated in the following emphasis on employees' involvement in the process
statement: "They were used to donations only,"in order to enhance their pride." Thus, they
employee involvement was low, everything is decided to conduct several focus groups with them
undergoing transformation, it is the beginning, weintroducing several models of CSR activities com-
are now building the strategy" (E, 2004). mon in other firms. In another firm (P), employees
In 2004, only four of the fourteen companies (M,initiated short-term activities associated with the
R, N and L) appeared to have initiated a process ofJewish holidays.

TABLE I

Change in CSR strategization 2004-2008

Co. Sector Strategic status 2004 Strategic status 2008

P Communications Embryonic Strategic

R Military industry Developing stage Strategic
N Agriculture Developing stage Strategic
E Food Developing stage Strategic
W Consulting Developing stage Strategic
M Communications Developing stage Strategic
K Retail Developing stage Strategic
B Communications Embryonic Embryonic
L Aviation Developing stage Embryonic
X Finance Embryonic Embryonic
P Manufacturing Embryonic Developing stage
F Holding company Embryonic Developing stage

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Strategization of CSR 57

As for the firms' motivation for

whose CSR activityintroducing CSR,
had remained at approximately
our findings on this point were
the same not whose
level; companies conclusive.
CSR activity In
some cases, management's
had motivation was
decreased; companies whose largely
CSR level had
business-driven (for example, in company
increased. It is also possible to identify changes in the P); in
other cases, however, the
nature of CSR activity. The changes inwas
motivation more
the level and
ideological (for example, in company
characteristics of CSR in each of the M). At
companies are this
stage, in some cases (e.g.,summarized
F, Ν, Υ)I. The
in Table the management
strategic level of 2008 is
was looking for those people who
based on five were ideologically
parameters:
motivated (or those who had a "deep soul", as one
said) in order to get things 1 . The evaluation of
done. AsCSR status
noted in the organi-
in the
literature review, scholars arezation as provided as
divided by the
torespondent.
whether (All a
respondents were the personsaresponsible
company's motivation for introducing CSRfor pro-
gram is typically ideological CSR
or in each organization).
business-oriented. In
that respect, our findings2. support
The number of CSRthe activityideological
areas covered
by the organization
orientation. The activity in 2004 was characterized(as defined in the Maala
index).
by work in small, closely knit groups. The people
3. The level of internal communication
involved expressed and demonstrated enthusiasm and
employeeThere
and dedication to the CSR cause. awareness concerning
was talk CSR. of a
4. The existence of mechanisms
"pioneer spirit," a "team spirit," "the introduction to control
of something new to the and monitor the implementation
organization," and of CSR
a
activities.
"commitment to values." In many cases, the activ-
5. The
ities were led by employees change actually
who in number of volunteers relative
initiated
to 2004 (increaseThe
the activity in the organizations. supportsvolunteers
enhanced strategic
were the subject of praise inposition
the of organization
CSR). and
were often regarded as elite units. In the interviews,
The data from 2004 does not include all of these
the CSR coordinators spoke like proud parents or
parameters. As described in the section on the 2004
founders of the CSR projects (see Appendix A).
findings, the assessment of the strategization of CSR
An accurate assessment of the significance of the
in 2004 is based on the breadth of CSR activity and
community involvement program in the organiza-
text analysis of the interviews.
tions demanded careful reading since the dominant
The comparison of CSR strategization in 2004
spirit of the respondents, who were all the organiza-
and 2008 in the surveyed firms is presented in
tions' lead coordinators of CSR activities, was one of
Table I. (Note that two of the firms did not respond
great enthusiasm. This enthusiasm created the impres-
in 2008, so the comparison covers just 12 firms).
sion that the subject was much more central and
The table uses the following levels of strategic
dominant than it actually was in the organization. The
positions: (a) embryonic - activity has been intro-
picture was only balanced by an analysis, as detailed
duced but CSR is not strategic; (b) developing -
above, of the actual activities in which the organizations
activity is expanding and there are developmental
were engaged. In the context of what had been
strategic activities such as a special committee that
achieved by 2008, and against our index of CSR
considers expansion (as in N) or discussions of how
activity, the 2004 programs represented only a
to make CSR strategic (as in E); and (c) strategic -
beginning.
CSR has become strategic based on the five criteria
presented above.
In analyzing these results, we can see that three of
Findings from 2008 the companies actually decreased their CSR activity.
This can be attributed to various reasons: Β
The companies can be divided into three groups, decreased CSR due to privatization, L appointed a
based on changes in the level of CSR activity since new CEO who terminated the CSR program, and,
the first round of data collection in 2004: companies under new ownership, X decided to outsource CSR

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 58 Ziva Sharp and Nurit Zaidman

activity to an external voluntary The results of this

nonprofit analysis are presented in
organi-
zation. Two of the companies, Ρ Table
and II. F, are engaged

in a slow but ongoing process of The

developing
tendency seemsCSR.
to be that during the initial
However, the most dominant phase,
trend CSRamong
activity isthe
characterized by vibrant
surveyed companies was the strategization of
enthusiasm, a strong CSR.
team spirit, and great dedication
Seven of the 12 companies transformed
to the chosen social cause. CSR
This enthusiasm exists
activity from an embryonic stage in 2004
regardless intothe
of whether a program
full was initiated top-
strategic commitment in 2008. down or bottom-up. Activities are focused on spe-
Owing to the possible clash between volunteer-
cial projects, which the CSR team tackles as a group.
ism and for-profit activities within
However, a as
business cor-
CSR is progressively strategized, this
poration, and the competition for pattern
time ofand resources
highly motivated, group-centric activity
that this clash might be expected
seemsto generate,
to subside, we
to be replaced by more routine,
might have envisaged that CSR systematically
activity could pro-
managed activities, involving a much
voke conflict and discord, forwider
example, between
group of people, in which volunteers partic-
managers who prefer that employees will spend
ipate not as members of the CSR group but as
overtime at work and employees who
employees of thewish to
company. This phenomenon can
be characterized
dedicate the time to the CSR projects. Thereas a reversal,
is no or transition, from a
support for this in the findings.group-centric
With thetoexception
an individual-centric pattern of
activity in parallel with the
of rare instances of criticism by other employees, thestrategization of CSR
respondents report no conflicts. The
in the respondents
firm. In parallel, another reversal is also in
dismissed the negative instances asplay.
minorThis is
andthe did
reversal
notin the distribution of
consider them a threat to the CSRCSR values.
activityIn thein
initial
any phase of a CSR pro-
gram, other employees tend to perceive the vol-
way. The overall picture that emerges suggests that
there is virtually no active resistance
unteers as to CSR
having pro-social values than the
stronger
grams in the surveyed companies. remainder of the organization. This perception
dissolves with the strategization of CSR. When
CSR is fully absorbed into the organizational
Comparison of CSR volunteerism during
culture, the same social values are shared across
strategization: data from 2004 and organization.
the entire 2008 One of the respondents in
the second round of interviews expressed this
It can be instructive to compare the level
succinctly: of CSR
"The volunteers are the organization"
(Seevolunteer
strategization against the level of Appendices Β and C).
activity
in the organization. Volunteer work forms a central
part of community involvement. Volunteerism is
measured in four dimensions: Discussion

1. The percentage of employees who volunteer

(this percentage includes both occasional and
ongoing volunteer work).
2. The change in the number of volunteers
(increasing or decreasing). (This parameter is
based on the qualitative testimony of respond-
ers. Quantitative data were not available from
the organizations.)
3. The mode of operation - either groups or
individual.
4. The values of the volunteers as compared to the
remainder of the organizational community.
In this section, we characterize and analyze the CS
strategizing process. We use Jarzabkowski's theory of
strategy as practice, as introduced in the literatur
review (Jarzabkowski, 2005). The section is orga
nized around a series of topics and observations, o
assertions, relating to strategization.
Topic #1: What characterizes the general CSR
strategizing behavior?
Observation #1: The CSR case studies follow
the overall pattern suggested in Jarzabkowski's
model

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Strategization of CSR 59

S DD
D "rt "rt
73 > >
> ~z *3
52 G 13 'G 'G
<υ ο "Goo

ia»
^
ο ° a
° ΛΛSδ "
·ΐ2
1s·ι ^Ι
<υ D <υ <Π <υ
^ ?
- il-β
« >
1 -C
> «υ·°
_β«
> ·§ Ϊ5 ^ Β 1 Β
ω § "· d g ι> <υ "· <υ r <υ

ε εεεεεε| 1|^|

a
V3 - , ^_ D
di vi rt et O ·- ι
D α D D £ g

C/5
•8 í6 I I :° 1
Ι 1| ξ i i %
"G
<υ
<υ

G "c3-j^'c3g'c3'c3'c3c ζ/) «îO ^

D DrtDrtD33rt ζ/) r > ^
~O
.& O .> 3 .>.>.> D D < 3 s
-Ό
£^£ϋ£££ϋϋ Zu o
α
ο

Η «
1Β
sΙ ãfi
i p Öß fcß 00
τ 's ^ öo öd öß oß oc .s .ε .ε te
& > .ε .ε .ε .ε .ε .ε s a s .ε §
U 2° ο oo-Sooouu^o A
<+*
Ο

ι
'S
CL

Ο
ϋ

* § fO
fO On(N^h<< Γ^ ><N *ii|l On(N^h<<

S öß fcß
3 Β Β
^00 Giß bß
υ ο ε ε
'5ßO 'S- "a.
H SS
ce 'öS "õ3
H C/3 C/3t/)t/5C/5C/3C/5- .- .- . ^ ^
Λί <υ <υ<υ<υ<υ<υιυθθθ(υ .- .- . <υ
>H >>H>H>H>,>,ZZZQ Q

a> i> i) a> d «υ α>

^ bß&ßtißbßbßbß fcß
^ rt ^ rt c^ ^ c3 o3

tî ^ o ω tp ω ω öß W) υ tß'ä'ä 'Sb
oo 'S εεεεεε*?^^^ ^
'a ο § *&, 'õ. Ε- 'ã'ãu o ã « « «
U ^ ^ OOOOOO^OiiÜ o tj
m -L* ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^^ ^ *-> ■*-* ■<-*
rtí g <υ<υ<υ<υ<υ<υ£<υΟΟ Ο
W ÛÛÛQQÛWQZZ Ζ

eu ^Zw^S^pq^-iX^ m

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 60 Ziva Sharp and Nurit Zaidman

According to Jarzabkowski legitimacy

(2005),(i.e.,
we thewould
deployment of methods and
expect that the strategization of CSR that
procedures besupport
driven by
and institutionalize an activity
the interaction between management, the organi-
within the organization) was also limited, as reflected
zational community, and the goal-directed activity
in the absence of standardized routine practice and the
focus on "special
(aka the strategy), where this triangular projects" in all
interaction isthe organizations.
mediated by "strategizing practices." Indeed, we
Observation #2.2: In 2004, the CSR programs
found that communication between the field and
top management was conducted within and con- were in the intended mode of the pre-active
strained by a set of organizational practices, including phase.
a process for budgeting of resources, a standardized
Jarzabkowski distinguishes between intended and
periodic administrative reporting structure, feedback
unintended initiatives within the pre-active mode.
mechanisms, establishment of committees, and
According to the model, intended activity is
recruitment of a CSR coordinator. Similarly, the
characterized by top management sponsorship.
organizations provided support and resources for
Unintended activity, in contrast, does not have top
recruiting, maintaining, and rewarding volunteers.
management sponsorship, but utilizes existing
The theory also describes a reciprocal relationship
administrative practices to penetrate mainstream
between management and the organizational com-
strategy. Based on the first round of interviews, in
munity, in which management has the power to
2004, the CSR programs can be characterized as an
shape but is also shaped by the organization. The
"intended" initiative. This is reflected, for example,
interviewees referred to the impact, which differed
in the interview with L company: "The CEO
in intensity among the various organizations, on top
wanted to focus on the relationship between L
management of field initiatives in strengthening
employees and the community." Similarly, in X
management's commitment to the CSR.
company: "We wanted to choose the way rather
Topic #2: What are the developmental patterns than the way choosing us."
of strategization within the organization? What
Observation #2.3: In 2008, the CSR programs
is the life cycle of a strategy in organizations?
were in the interactive phase, actively promot-
Observation #2.1: In 2004, the CSR case stud-
ing interpretative legitimacy.
ies were in the pre-active phase.
Data from 2008 provide clear evidence of inter-
In 2004, the CSR initiatives were in the pre-active
active strategizing, characterized by a focus on
phase. That is, they were in the first stage of the life
expanding interpretative legitimacy through the
cycle of a strategy, which is characterized by localized
persuasion of employees to accept and support the
activities that have yet to gain broad acceptance in the
initiative. We found that in the seven organizations
organization, and whose procedural basis is not yet
that moved forward with their CSR program, the
firmly established (Jarzabkowski, 2005). This is evi-
interviewees referred to significant communication
denced, for example, by a coordinator who said, in
and "propaganda" efforts. The respondents men-
reference to the organization's attitude to CSR, tioned training sessions, discussion panels, attitude
"They had some kind of a strategy but they did not
surveys, and feedback mechanisms. The communi-
follow it. They were involved with different areas
cation programs involved employees in a dialog: "The
with no focus and the person who was assigned to do
employees participate and present new ideas through
the job was in charge of many other projects and
regular surveys." Similarly, "There are initiatives
tasks" (Company P).
coming from the employees all the time". Other
CSR activity was confined to a small group of mechanisms included coverage in company newslet-
employees who saw their values as distinct from those
ters, employee meetings, email reports, and educa-
of the organizational community as a whole. This is
tional sessions, such as one industrial company's
indicative of a low level of interpretative legitimacy,
campaign to educate employees on its approach to
that is, the organization's acceptance of an activity as
dealing with waste. In discussing the objectives of the
legitimate (Jarzabkowski, 2005). Similarly, structural

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Strategization of CSR 61

macy in CSR
communication program, interviewees programs
referred to is
thereflec
a CSR consultant
importance of ensuring knowledge whom of
and awareness we in
the CSR program, as well that "some organizations
as obtaining inputs fromthat
employees regarding bothcally stillCSR
current don't know how
projects and mu
new initiatives. One of the companies
much instituted
resources an
are invested in t
annual refresher course onemployees. This,Another
company ethics. however,
company holds an annual ceremony
Similarly, in W,tothe
express
CSR coord
appreciation and to reward volunteers.
almost amateurIn W, the
nature of proc
coordinator explained; "New recruits know about
I do not have statistics but I do have some data as to
the CSR programs before they even start working.
who volunteers and when. I use it to reward the
When they start they participate in orientation days
volunteers. If I happen to have tickets for the theater
and receive regular intra-company communications.
one of the partners [her boss] tells me to give it to the
You won't find W employees who don't know what
outstanding volunteers, so I give it to them.
we are doing."
In order to summarize, theThe
firms actively
level of support differs invest in
among companies, but
communicating CSR as a based
continuous learning
on the overwhelming emphasispro-
in the inter-
ject and keep the employees
views, the fully informed
focus on procedural legitimacy isand
minor in
comparison
actively involved. It seems that the to thecommunication
dominance of interpretative
program has been successful: in all seven companies
legitimacy.
that have actively strategized CSR,
It should, the
however, be social
noted thatvalues
although pro-
driving the CSR program cedural
had legitimacy
transitioned from role
occupies a secondary thein the
volunteers' "group values" ofof2004
strategization to this
CSR programs, become
role seems to be
"shared values" throughout the company
an important one. For example, by L's2008.
CSR coordi-
According to Jarzabkowskinator described
(2005), a situation
the where in 2004 CSR was
interactive
gaining
phase enables the negotiation of organizational
an agreed andmeaning
environmentalor
legiti-
interpretation relating tomacy,
a strategic activity.
but in 2008 a new How-
CEO adopted a less activist
ever, this newly negotiatedrole
meaning is procedural
and reduced the not durable. In and
infrastructure,
order to support the newly the CSR initiative dissolved.
acquired interpretative
legitimacy, Jarzabkowski' s model expects manage-
Topic #3: What are the
ment to be involved and procedural aspects of the strategi-
legitimacy to
zation process
develop in the interactive phase (Jarzabkowski, that specifically characterize
2005). CSR?
For companies following the interactive strategizing
The analysis to date has identified a close align-
route, procedural legitimacy exists alongside inter-
ment between Jarzabkowski's model (2005) and
pretative legitimacy. The difference is one of the
the strategization of CSR, as reflected in the case
degrees. In interactive strategizing, in contradistinc-
studies. However, there are also differences. These
tion to structural or integrative strategizing,
differences are manifest the
in the level of resistance
emphasis will be on interpretative legitimacy. Pro-
generated by the strategic initiative and the corre-
cedural legitimacy will be enhanced, but just to the
sponding level of negotiation required to secure its
extent required to support interpretative legitimacy
acceptance, and in the mode in which the strategy
(Jarzabkowski, 2005). Indeed, in the 2008 interviews,
is initiated. However, the differences should not be
although some of the more advanced firms did
interpreted as a refutation of the model, but rather
mention the institution of administrative practices
emphasize the aspects that specifically characterize
with regard to the CSR program, most of the
CSR. In addition, our analysis offers an explanation
respondents concentrated on and emphasized the
of the process through which interpretative legiti-
communication and learning processes that they had
macy expands through the organization, providing a
put in place to absorb the concept of CSR within the
level of granularity on this aspect of the process that
organization. In Jarzabkowski' s terms, this reflects a
is largely absent from the Jarzabkowski (2005)
focus on increasing interpretative
model. legitimacy. The
relatively slower development of procedural legiti-

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
62 Ziva Sharp and Nurit Zaidman

and they are themselves

Observation #3.1: Unlike Jarzabkowski's model,proud to participate in CSR
CSR activities generated a low events despite the
level ofobvious
resis- clash this involves relative
tance and required a low level to
of immediate business tasks.
negotiation to This potential conflict
and the apparent
achieve acceptance in the interactive phase.inconvenience were not men-
tioned by respondents. The fact that it was not
Jarzabkowski (2005) characterizes
mentionedinteractive
indicates the extent to which this spe-
strategizing as a process of negotiation
cialized modeto overcome
of interactive strategizing was effective
strong resistance within the organization.
in promoting the Based on of CSR. In order to
legitimacy
the evidence from our cases studies, CSR differs
summarize, in the context of interactive strategizing
from this characterization on a number of counts:
of CSR activity, the primary drivers of the dynamic
active resistance was low, the organization's activity process of interplay between managers, the organi-
could better be framed as "communication'1 rather
zational community and the goal-oriented activity
than "persuasion," and there is no evidence of were the volunteer activities themselves and the
"negotiation." To be sure, there were some reports values that they represent. The process of expanding
of sporadic resistance, such as a manager in one of interpretative legitimacy did not require negotiations
the organizations who felt that overtime hours were between intra-organizational stakeholders.
more important than voluntary work. However, the
interviewees related such incidents as exceptional Observation #3.2: The initiation mechanism for
and minor and did not view them as a reflection of CSR is either bottom-up or top-down.
the mainstream positive response of the organiza-
According to Jarzabkowski (2005), an intended
tion. Intuitively, this is a surprise finding, given that
strategy is a strategy that is actively sponsored by
CSR activity in business organizations, especially in
top management. Our findings suggest that CSR,
the Israeli context, is new and appears to run counter
although always intended in the sense that in all the
to the for-profit objectives of the enterprise.
case studies the CSR program has management
In terms of the active steps taken by the organi-
support, may originate as either a top-down (via
zation, the interviewees reported that the extension
management) or bottom-up (via employees) initia-
of "interpretative legitimacy," or, in their language,
tive. In some organizations, the initiative followed
the penetration and absorption of the CSR initiative,
the top-down pattern, sometimes at the global level
was achieved through standard communication
and other times driven by local national manage-
channels, rather than a dedicated campaign of
ment. In other organizations, it was a bottom-up
indoctrination or persuasion. Communication was
scenario where CSR was originally initiated by a
informative and educational, rather than persuasive.
Resistance was low: one coordinator reported that
group of employees who decided to embark on
volunteer projects. These employees subsequently
employee commitment to CSR "spread like fire in a
introduced the idea to the management, who then
field of thorns." Another interviewee reported that
accepted the initiative and assisted in its strategiza-
non-participants in the CSR program were eager to
tion. In our case studies, the bottom-up paradigm
join, being envious of the high moral ground
was demonstrated by R, N, and P.
occupied by volunteers.
In seeking an explanation for this difference vis-à- Observation #3.3: The extension of interpreta-
vis Jarzabkowski's model, we would suggest that a tive legitimacy is characterized by changes in the
possible reason is in the value-centric nature of value system.
CSR. The initiation of a CSR program may trigger
a social dynamic limiting internal resistance (in fact, The process by which interpretative legitimacy
resistance becomes illegitimate) and eliminating the spreads through an organization is not fully charac-
need for powerful organizational mechanisms such as terized in Jarzabkowski's model (2005). The case
negotiation and "hard-sell" persuasion campaigns. study data suggest a mode in which the attitudes and
The practical manifestation is that the great majority behaviors that characterized the original CSR group
of the managers allow and even actively encourage undergo multiple reversals and modifications in
their employees to volunteer during working hours, transitioning to the broader organizational commu-

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Strategization of CSR 63

TABLE III

Attitudinal and behavioral reversals in the transition to interpretative legitimacy

Type of activity Social value system

2004 2008 2004 2008

Dominance of Dominance of Dominance of Dominance of

group volunteerism individual volunteerism group values shared values

Pre-active strategizing High Low High Low

Interactive strategizing Low High Low High

nity. These changes occurred campaigns. By 2008, in a was

CSR activity number
routinized. of
dimensions, as summarized in Table
An example quoted by one ofIII.
the interviewees was a
In 2004, in the pre-active phase,
weekly lesson the work
on advanced technology in a youth of
volunteers was consistently center. According to another coordinator by
characterized (in com- a high
level of enthusiasm. By 2008,pany M): "Athis
group activity is a one timer and we
enthusiasm had
been replaced by the steady, don't like it. It mightwork
routine happen that weof go andaclean
broad
set of volunteers from acrossup a beach.the
But generally we prefer projects whose
organization. The
fulcrum of activity in 2004 impact
was can be the
measured group,
and which have an and the
volunteers were acting as members
influence of the CSR
on society for the long run."
In summary, then, the expansion
group. In 2008, the focus had shifted, and ofvolunteers
interpretative
saw themselves, and their legitimacy
involvement for CSR to accommodate the inneedsthe
of a CSR
program, as part of their company-wide
roles program and is facilitated
obligations by changes in as
employees of a companythe committed
nature of the activities, migration of to CSR. In
the refer-
other words, as volunteerism
ence pointgrew and
of the social value system spread,
from the group the
moral fulcrum of the volunteer's actions shifted
to the company, and the transformation of an elitist from
social ethic
the group to the individual. The to a generalized,
perception non-elitist ethic. of the
value system had also changed. In the pre-active
stage, CSR activists viewed themselves as belonging
to a proud, elite vanguard, admired
Conclusions by the rest of the
organization due to their commitment to a unique,
superior set of values. In the interactive
In the period covered stage, these
by the case studies, the level
values were viewed as the values shared by strategization of CSR had advanced meaningfully, i
employees across the entire depth and breadth of the terms of Jarzabkowski's model, in seven of the 1
company: companies examined (Jarzabkowski, 2005). Th
The values of volunteers are similar to the rest of the
indicates that CSR is a substantive strategic activit
for the corporation, and more than an empty
organization, the social values are part of our strategy
and all our employees behave according to these values declarative device used to bolster corporate image,
in all the parameters of social responsibility that pen- suggested by Porter and Kramer (2006).
etrated all areas of the organization within the ethical Although in many respects adoption of CSR in
code. (R) corporations follows the course suggested by
Jarzabkowski's model, the strategization of CSR i
Those who do not volunteer would like to volunteer.
distinguished by a noteworthy lack of resistance t
(E)
CSR within the organizational community. Given
the responsibility, time, and effort that the voluntee
The volunteers are the organization. (W)
assumes in undertaking a role in CSR activities, it
The activities also changed in nature. In 2004, seems that this lack of resistance may be attributed t
activities were typically special projects and isolated the unique, value-centric nature of CSR activit

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
64 Ziva Sharp and Nurit Zaidman

The value-centric perspective is research

supported focused
both by on the strategizat
scholars who promote the ideological
possiblemoral infra-
future research direction, ev
structure of CSR (Kleinrichert, 2008;
currentPfeffer, 1994;
data set, would be to analyze
Roberts, 2003) as well as by the nies that initiated
companies them- a CSR program t
neglected,
selves that adopt the all-encompassing reduced
ethical standor abandoned. To t
of CSR. A good example of this there
corporate embrace
is variation across organizations
opment
of the CSR perspective can be seen in theand persistence of CSR progra
following,
from Motorola's website: "Corporate
such a responsibility
study could help identify fact
tribute
means harnessing the power of our to the
global stabilizationto
business or destabilization of
benefit people. It also means doingstrategized
the right programs
thing orin
activities. In order to gen-
all aspects of our business, including how
eralize this point:we
the treat
current research analyzes how
anour
the environment, our employees, organization assimilates
customers, oura strategy, while there
partners and our communities." may be room for future studies to examine how an
There is a tendency for CSR activity
organization to migrate
retreats from such a strategy. Should the
from group volunteerism to individual volunteerism
economic crisis that began in 2008 negatively impact
as CSR attains strategic status and CSR programs, there may be an opportunity to
is institutionalized
observe if and how
in the organization. From the practitioner's organizations
point of cut back and
reverse
view, this transition, manifest in strategized partic-
employees' CSR norms and behavior. Spe-
cifically,
ipating in CSR activity as part of their for example,as
obligations it may be instructive to
examineof
employees, rather than as members thealevel of organizational resistance and
vanguard
group, may be an indication of negotiation
the penetration of
required to reverse a recently embedded
CSR values and of successful strategization. Thecould facilitate devel-
CSR program. Such a study
group-to-individual transition can also
opment of aserve as an
generic post-strategization extension to
indicator that voluntary activities the
canJarzabkowski model (2005). Moreover, given
be standardized
and routinized in the organization,the
incurrent concern
contrast to with
the the ethics of corporate
behavior
special projects style of activities that in characterize
the context of the 2008 financial crisis,
there may
earlier phases. Scholars may use this be utility in
transition examining linkages between
point
levelsto
as an analytical tool, for example, of compare
CSR strategization
the and the organization's
relative effectiveness of CSRadherence
strategization in
to accepted corporate ethics, norms, and
practices.
different organizational environments.
These conclusions, it should be noted, need to be
regarded with due caution. Our study is based on
Acknowledgment
case studies of a limited number of organizations in a
single geographical region. Similarly, the multiple
case study methodology used in The
ourauthors are grateful
research to Prof. Jarzabkowski for her
tends
permission to quote
to focus on aspects that are shared by several orga-her work.
nizations and thus eschews the insights that an
in-depth case study of a single organization can
yield. Looking to future research, it could be of
Appendix
interest to examine strategization of CSR in the
same organizations in a few years time. The current

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Strategization of CSR 65

il ülünl^l! 1 §i|
η i°ipj unit ξ. m

1 îlfiï Hfïlî iUlPi ill

> alsSsSü^lg^ u^-âLsá-ê oils

"* 1
χ *
3 -S
a ι Jini ΐπ §ι «!§ ι η a
Ζ 3

M 2 Ni " I g_.| ! ι !
I i δ fï î'Uth I ill H"l
je

■Ξ S a. g -i. : § 8 s! ε Si" §|^^^SS

I I S g î2 i I.Ö-I il á ΙΊ S§f s i

! d iflîil! Ill ifW i| i

t i|!llftJl4:p fi! JiJffiJ!
ï ï fô il 1 1 ■§ 1 1 1 ? i.r á s 1 1 1 ο ι ii ô ι s

ο
-a

il. lit ι II i I

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
66 ZiVd Sharp and Nurit Zaidman

j|§
ΟΟ.S
îii !îi Mil 1
.S a*a*J>*1 ^ 'ο α
^ 'ο α ilfg. OioSm lö§
OioSm wwUU hl
hl "S Oh
Oh "SIPu
Pu υυ"Si.ll
^ :^ .2
: .2 α
α "S(X
(X

111 llîiî Ι ι II
ι ííj I I if îïïSî !2iïi.
s m i&i jail ι II iijs.s-ï.-s.|sr.i;s.

. SU it tltt I | I iili
il
Q .S
h win mi î il ni ■
II lölki Uli I II III Jill
î ΐ ι
Ζ S
w ο

|S ^ δ·

S î H ! fil 1 I
1 I II ! II! ι !

iI IHiliiî
J 11J ló
Ji IIIllSlIllJllí fliîaiilr f If lis
III IIIllSlIllJllí Jι
«b2-c -a s ils la sa
lia «b2-c *I -a

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Strategization of CSR 67

α , Ι I* Mil Mi I !i
t it , ! hn nu in nil
ι il|! ili|!i!!l Hit III 1
1 !l!1ll>l!|llli fill !ii?!
c/3 ^3 ι · o> <υ

1 I 1 Ι 1 1 ί Ι sK I L I
1 SP §.§_§§> ε ^-o.s|^^p5^
- 2 ûwQSX Ν 'S >£ S J 2 2

« ° § 3d g> g1
g -g § .S 3 .S .S 3 .S «

á oqoooO û α û
ι
00
ο Ο ET S ο

£ ε
1 ι ^ | .1 | -I S 1,, Έ
II * ς áf * ! £ H ^£ | i -i I 8 ^ I
'S
S

υ-SS^ODDns
j -SS^ODDns IfO1 D
is aαϊ
s 1 í O a D 1
*à s s? o
ι ί ^§ΐ ο-
Ι5 ί ί 1 f f til | f g í í

I 51! LHllllf ÎL·

Zs2 ZsI-SZsSs Η 2 Κ
C fi

I "S "S £

il Ι Ι ι ^ r ι I ii
II Ι Ι ι 1 1 1 * 11

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 68 Ziva Sharp and Nurit Zaidman

" <υ ν * fi

t IMi ïf5«J
" Ι,^^^ε 'S sage
ι «ι Ι,^^^ε ι 'S Hau s
^ -s
<s g-s |c: §■§ |
s |^ §> a» g a. fo ^g

Ö Ößj^ggw Öß Öß
ÜSH .S^oî|g .S Öß .S Öß
fi -â fi ifi!SÖCc §: >
_g fi -â Ë^ 2§3Β°8 ο ο
üfi> OÄosU-u Ο Ο

. ί Ι
*ι Η SI -
Ω .S
2 c
w ο Ι ^^ § Ι Ι :
Iu ϊ£ν
£ν ^^ infioBUfi
Niïjî infioBUfi Ι Ι <<:

3 T3 >, -S >. >,

. § ^ S 11
. US Uh Ρμ Ρη PU

•5b

<S) > >

fi fi

«^ 11 Ii 1 *
il *% ZI S3 m

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Strategization of CSR 69
rv·

i g §
SP.fi s
It ϊι
^J £ ζ £ £ í á |
•S
Ö Ö« -^
GO-o

11 § 1 i 1 g f « i
a"3 c I § s s i Ι 8 i S §ä s
m >- υ. s >» >- u .s « S λ u >■

|, Η Η. t1s *liill|l1fll
(Ν
« ^ Β
(L> »-ι *·> <υ
t:
ÍU -S S o §
I
00

υI
Xg O"J^v) ^_,λ>ΟΧ) <U|C So ι; Ο ^> tá Λ° -^ ΟΟ ^3
3 ρ
ζ *
W -S

< s 1 6 1 i -S M i * 2 !
1 iië 6 1 îifiiîsi i -S M
■g

1? lit I
ái J|§ í II fiï Hill Hill
l
ïfi iυ i5!-_rt
■». ^I
Ο Ji 'h PAC . Vî WO <Λ ^^
υ Ο fi Ji 'h ί
G G
c ° ° i>.
g -a -ö c
j-i rt rt <-» a»

;r ι Ι88s ι*
Í-g8
Z.Sa-M
^g s.s
ι S«
lt îiyq su J Ζ

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 70 ZíVíí S/ζίΐφ íinrf Nurit Zaidman

g I § «ii S τ»

|t 5§lif.r Hin s&ii

II í II í 1 1 í ill II ill!

<υ d ri

£ tî ÖD "Ο

SÎ ü h S Su

*1
α .s

î!i îiiilïJ! i
2 S

Iu
II il iiïllliiyli If! |1MIÎt
υ

0 0 0 Ο Ο Ο
ü Ζ 2 2 Ζ 2

>tí C-S« SI a aS'j il ο α™"μ St α

0^2 < ã §2 ρ·?! aia §ΐ tkSl ãa ti

3 g3 s I
■op - 2 ε g .S
ë^ S2S73 s; .s ε a
2è~ ^.s^^ --o 2g w

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Strategization of CSR 7 1

References Margolis, J. D. and J. P. Walsh: 2003, 'Misery Loves

Companies: Rethinking Social Initiatives by Business',
Administrative Science Quarterly 48(2), 268-305.
Barnett, M. L.: 2007, 'Stakeholder Influence Capacity
doi: 10.2307/3556659.
and the Variability of Financial Returns to Corporate
Social Responsibility', Academy of Management Review Maxfield, S.: 2008, 'Reconciling Corporate Citizenship
32(3), 794-816. and Competitive Strategy: Insights from Economic
Basu, K. and G. Palazzo: 2008, 'Corporate Social Theory', Journal of Business Ethics 80, 367-377.
doi:10.1007/sl0551-007-9425-l.
Responsibility: A Process Model of Sensemaking',
Academy of Management Review 33(1), 122-136. McWilliams, A. and D. Siegel: 2001, 'Corporate Social
Bies, R. J., J. M. Bartunek, T. L. Fort and M. N. Zald: 2007, Responsibility: A Theory of the Firm Perspective',
'Corporations as Social Change Agents: Individual, Academy of Management Review 26(1), 117-127.
doi:10.2307/259398.
Interpersonal, Institutional, and Environmental Dynam-
ics', Academy of Management Review 32(3), 788-793. Mintzberg, H.: 1990, 'The Design School: Reconsidering
Burke, L. and J. M. Logsdon: 1996, 'How Corporate the Basic Premises of Strategic Management', Strategic
Social Responsibility Pays Off, Long Range Planning Management Journal 11(3), 171-195. doi:10.1002/
29(4), 495-502. doi: 10. 1016/0024-6301 (96)00041-6. smj.42501 10302.
Carroll, F., J. Hoy and A. Hall: 1987, 'The Integration of Orlitzky, M., F. L. Schmidt and S. L. Rynes: 2003,
Corporate Social Policy into Strategic Management', 'Corporate Social and Financial Performance: A
in S. P. Sethi and C. M. Falbe (eds.), Business and Meta-Analysis', Organization Studies 24(3), 403.
doi:10.1 177/0170840603024003910.
Society: Dimensions of Conflict and Cooperation (Lexing-
ton Books, Lexington, MA), pp. 449-470. Pfeffer, J.: 1994, Managing with Power; Politics and Influence in

Driver, M.: 2006, 'Beyond the Stalemate of Economics Organization (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).
Versus Ethics: Corporate Social Responsibility and the Porter, Μ. Ε. and M. R. Kramer: 2006, 'Strategy &
Discourse of the Organizational Self , Journal of Business Society: The Link Between Competitive Advantage
Ethics 66, 337-356. doi:10.1007/sl0551-006-0012-7. and Corporate Social Responsibility', Harvard Business
Galbreath, J.: 2006, 'Corporate Social Responsibility Review 84(12), 78.
Strategy: Strategic Options, Global Considerations', Roberts, J.: 2003, 'The Manufacture of Corporate Social
Corporate Governance 6(2), 175-187. Responsibility: Constructing Corporate Sensibility',
Godfrey, P. C: 2005, 'The Relationship Between Cor- Organization 10(2), 249-265. doi: 10. 1177/13505084030
10002004.
porate Philanthropy and Shareholder Wealth: A Risk
Management Perspective', Academy of Management Stone, M. M., B. Bigelow and W. Crittenden: 1999,
Review 30(4), 777-798. 'Research on Strategic Management in Nonprofit
Godfrey, P. C. and N. W. Hatch: 2007, 'Researching Organizations Synthesis, Analysis and Future Direc-
Corporate Social Responsibility: An Agenda for the tions', Administration and Society 31(3), 378-423.
21st Century', Journal of Business Ethics 70(1), 87-98. Suchman, M. C: 1995, 'Managing Legitimacy: Strategic
doi:10.1007/sl0551-006-9080-y. and Institutional Approaches', Academy of Management
Jarzabkowski, P.: 2005, Strategy as Practice - An Activity Review 20(3), 571-610. doi: 10.2307/258788.
Based Approach (Sage, London). Varadarajan, R. P. and A. Menon: 1988, 'Cause-Related
Kaplan, S.: 2007, 'Book Review of Strategy as Practice: Marketing: A Coalignment of Marketing Strategy and
An Activity Based Approach, by Paula Jazabkowski', Corporate Philanthropy', Journal of Marketing 52(3), 58.
doi:10.2307/1251450.
Academy of Management Review 32(3), 986-990.
Kaplan, S.: 2008, 'Framing Contests: Strategy Making Weick, K.: 1995, Sensemaking in Organizations (Sage,
Under Uncertainty', Organization Science 19(5), Thousand Oaks, SA).
729-752. doi:10.1287/orsc.l070.0340. Whittington, R.: 2006, 'Completing the Practice Turn in
Strategy Research', Organization Studies 27(5), 613-
Kleinrichert, D.: 2008, 'Ethics, Power and Communities:
634. doi:10.1 177/0170840606064101.
Corporate Social Responsibility Revisited', Journal of
Yin, R. K.: 1994, Case Study Research: Design and Methods
Business Ethics 78(3), 475-486. doi:10.1007/sl0551-
006-9339-3. (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).
Mackey, Α., Τ. Β. Mackey and J. B. Barney: 2007,
'Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Perfor- Ben Gurion University of the Negev,
mance: Investor Preferences and Corporate Strategies', POB 653, 84105, Beer-Sheva, Israel
Academy of Management Review 32(3), 817-835. E-mail: zivas@Jbgu.ac.il; zeidman@bgu.ac.il

This content downloaded from

203.130.19.74 on Sat, 07 Jan 2023 10:00:57 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms