CHAPTER ONE 1.Cline &Dia 2005). business partners. adaptation to change. their families. Within the company. including the environment. and society at large to improve their quality of life‟ (WBCSD. management of environmental impacts and natural resources. health and safety. CSR is a measure of the total impact of a business‟s activities on the lives of individuals within and without the company (David. the local community. Issues relating to the company‟s relationship with the outside world include local communities. which World Business Council for Sustainable Development defines as „business‟ commitment to contribute to sustainable economic development. Nowadays companies all over the world face pressure to engage in corporate social responsibility (CSR). and global environmental concerns (European Commission 2001). this includes human resources. Thus. suppliers and consumers.1 BACKGROUND The term Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) defines how a company conducts its business in a socially acceptable way and that it is accountable for its effects on all of its stakeholders. human rights.O INTRODUCTION 1. working with employees. 2003). .

2010). It is against this back ground that the resesarcher intends to find out the impact of communication on corporate social responsibility. 2009). trust. 108) states that communication „often remains the missing link in the practice of corporate responsibility‟. closer consumer-company identification (McWilliams & Siegel. competitive edge. Increased skepticism inhibits CSR communication effectiveness and presents companies with a challenge to communicate their CSR engagement in a credible way. 2009). attraction of more talented employees.In return. provided that the stakeholders are aware of the company‟s CSR initiatives (McWilliams & Siegel. Lewis (2003). Dawkins. CSR efforts are claimed to provide companies with some certain benefits such as increased consumer and staff loyalty. 2003. Lewis (2001) claims that consumers increasingly want to know about the companies that are behind the brands and products and to use their purchase power to reward „good‟ companies and punish „bad‟ ones. points out that although many companies are committed to fulfilling their social responsibilities. 2010) mainly because they are skeptical about companies‟ true motivation to engage in CSR (Vanhamme & Grobben. however. 2004). 2001. some researchers claim that although consumers want to get information about a company‟s CSR efforts. 2004). they fail to communicate their commitment actively enough to convey it. Bigne-Alcaniz & Alvarado-Herrera. . Although general public is rarely a primary target audience for a company‟s CSR communication. positive corporate image as well as keeping out new entrants and avoiding penalties for unethical behavior (Jahdi & Acikdilli. Bhattacharya & Sen. improved quality and productivity (Idowu & Towler. there is a public interest in receiving such information (Dawkins. 2001. Du. Bhattacharya & Sen. brand differentiation. 2009). Moreover. they are generally skeptical towards CSR messages (Arvidsson. Dawkins (2004 p. 2004. enhanced company reputation. Curras-Perez.

Organisations now must communicate what good they do to the public so as to ciltivate the desired positive image they so cherish. To find out the relationship between communication channels and CSR awareness of mukwano industry among public in Kampala. Corporate Social Responsibility has come a long way.Corporate social resposibility communication can go along way in helping the organisation meet its other objectives. To find out the communication channells used by mukwano industry in ceating awareness of its CSR activities. 1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS What are the CSR coomunication strategies used at mukwano industries? What communication channels are used to transmit CSR messages at mukwano industries? .1.a key aspect of modern coporate social responsibility is the reporting.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT During the last 25 years. 4. 2.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES 1. To find out the challenges involved in CSR communication 1. From being received with great skepticism by practitioners of business management and communication. 3. But it is not enough to be socialy responsible. Corporate Social Responsibility has received an ever-increasing amount of focus. To find out the level of awareness of mukwano industry‟s CSR in profits and reputation. both from theoreticians and practitioners. to being almost universally accepted as a fundamental part of doing business.

2 GEOGRAPHICAL SCOPE The research study will be conducted at mukwano industries located in kampala.What is the importace of csr communication at mukwano industries? What challenges are involved in CSR communication at mukwano industries? 1. 1.6.6 SCOPE OF THE STUDY 1.This location was located for it is within reach for the rsearcher 1.1 SUBJECT SCOPE The subject of the study is to investigate the impact of communication on corporate social responsibility at mukwano industries.7 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY The study will be useful to managers and employees of mukwano industris in understanding matters of corporate social responsibility communication The study is to help the researcher atttain a degree in public relations management .6.The researcher will aim at gathering views from employees on how CSR is communicated and their involvement in the same. 1.5 RESEARCH PURPOSE The purpose of this research is to investigate the impact of communication on CSR activities at mukwano industries.Knowledge about CSR in general will be sought from the employees of mukwano industries.

the study will be used by other researchers interested in the field of CSR gain useful knowledge on CSR communication .

Fiesler. issues beyond the narrow economic. to accomplish social benefits along with the traditional economic gains which the firm seeks” (Davis.. The responsibilities include economic responsibility to be profitable. 312-13). 1973. environmental. pp. all of them emphasize the interrelationship between economic. 2008. and social aspects and impacts of an organization‟s activities. the ethical .0 INTRODUCTION This chapter reviews the related literature on corporate social responsibility and communication. 2008). & Meckel. 2007. the legal responsibility to abide by the laws of the respective society. Hoffman. However. Davis (1973) defined corporate social responsibility as “the firm‟s consideration of. and legal requirements of the firm. technical.The literature explores the research questions raised by the researcher in the introduction. 2008).CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 2. society and the environment (Ihlen. Ihlen.1 Defining Corporate Social Responsibility There is no single authoritative definition of the term corporate social responsibility (Chaudhri. 2.. Most definitions revolve around the idea that corporate social responsibility is about minimizing the negative and maximizing the positive effects of organizational activity in relation to people. and response to. Corporate social responsibility practice in the in most times has been guided by Carroll‟s (1991) four step model of responsibilities which combines all four distinct responsibilities of a company.

He defined corporate social responsibility as “the expectations of businesses by non-state stakeholder groups. and responsibility to community development. Freeman (1984) defined stakeholder as any group or individual who can affect or is affected by the achievement of the organization's objectives. Waddock and Smith (2000) defined corporate social responsibility as the relationships that a company develops with its stakeholders. Hirschland (2006) provided a classic definition of corporate social responsibility.2 Motivations of companies to engage in CSR As Marrewijk (2003) puts it. 1984. 6). responsibility to the environment. educational. recreational or cultural purposes. Besser (1998) also explained corporate social responsibility in terms of stakeholder relationships broadly constituting responsibility to consumers. 2006. Clark (2000) traced the evolution and processes of corporate social responsibility and discussed commonalities between them and public relations. Waddock & Smith. . are made to do it or they want to do it. She noted that both disciplines acknowledged the need for relationship management and relationship building between an organization and its key stakeholders. companies engage in CSR practices because they either feel obliged to do it. just and fair. p. and other shareholders. 2000). Another school of thought defined corporate social responsibility with regard to the stakeholder theory (Freeman. and the strategic management of these demands by businesses that help to assure profits and enterprise sustainability” (Hirschland. 2000. employees. Clark. and the philanthropic responsibility to contribute to various kinds of social. 2.responsibility to do what is right.

thus. Hill & 10 . make certain that they have a „license to operate‟. 2006)..). alcohol. Dealing with these concerns presents a challenge to many companies even if their initial operations are not perceived as harmful to the surrounding environment. The core idea of legitimacy theory is that companies use reporting as a communication mechanism to defend or maintain legitimacy of their operations in the eyes of society and/or their stakeholders (Tilt. 2006). etc. a company‟s actions cease to be perceived as being in accordance with social values and norms. pornography. companies are trying to constantly inform society that their operations are in accordance to society‟s norms and values and. thus.2. which in practice are concerns across many if not all industries (Morsing & Schultz. Legitimacy theory studies suggest that companies in industries with high public visibility and potentially significant environmental impacts will be more concerned with improving their image and. the most prominent in CSR literature is legitimacy theory.While stakeholders previously primarily attributed negative attention to so called sin industries (companies producing tobacco. according to legitimacy theory. will be more likely to make social responsibility disclosures (Adams.1 Legitimacy claims From all the theories developed to explain what motivates companies to address CSR issues. weapons. gene-modified organisms. that is. 2009). Therefore. When society‟s expectations about company‟s behavior are not fulfilled. sweatshops. 2010). It is assumed that a „social contract‟ exists between business and society in which the company is allowed to operate as long as it acts in accordance with the norms and laws of the society (Farache & Perks. etc. a breach of the contract occurs and company‟s right to exists is threatened (Branco & Rodrigues. today CSR issues include child labor. 2.

3).Roberts. Bigne-Alcaniz & Alvarado-Herrera. 2010 p. more supportive communities. Owen and Adams (1996) broadly define CSR communication as the „process of communicating the social and environmental effects of organizations‟ economic actions to particular interest groups within society and to society at large‟ (p. 2001. Kim and Rader (2010) found that the majority of top 100 Fortune 500 corporations communicate their CSR engagement on their websites. competitive edge. 2006. Bhattacharya & Sen. positive corporate image and avoidance of penalties for unethical behavior (Jahdi & Acikdilli. Among the perceived benefits that company may gain by disclosing its CSR information are: increased customer loyalty. attraction of more talented employees. greater prestige and perceived attractiveness of brands. McWilliams & Siegel. Branco & Rodrigues. In addition. closer consumer-company identification (CurrasPerez. 2. However.3 CSR Communication Definition From what has been already discussed about CSR and communication. a more inclusive understanding of CSR . but also „multi-faceted business returns that corporations can potentially reap from their CSR endeavors‟ (Du. 2009).2. Gray. 1998. 8). Hill & Roberts. 1998). trust. 2. it was found that large companies are significantly more likely to disclose all types of corporate socialinformation (Adams. improved quality and productivity and the avoidance of potential reputational risks (Idowu & Towler. 2009).2 Positive consumer reactions It is not only legitimization claims that make companies to communicate their CSR engagement. 2010). In fact. Kim & Rader. 2004). it emerges that CSR communication is a component of corporate communication.

communication is concerned with building corporate reputation and creating value for its stakeholders (Hooghiemstra. Finally. a catalyst for innovation and competitive advantage. legitimize its behavior (Birth et al. Several studies have proved the benefits of communication of corporate social responsibility to organizations. Such communication on the topic of sustainability may become a catalyst for environmental learning and change processes within the company also and. and interactions with stakeholders (Podnar. in fact. Secondly. it can enhance trust and credibility among customers by positioning the company as a sustainable organization with sustainable products. 2000). by empowering the general public. it can be defined as dissemination of the true and transparent information about a company‟s or a brand‟s integration of its business operations. They explained that firstly. create positive consumer perceptions (Vanhamme & Grobben. Thus. 2009) and. Margolis and Walsh (2001) noted that the majority of empirical studies about the relationship between corporate social performance and financial performance found a positive . and sales promotion to build relations with customers to enhance sales of sustainable products. could result in more sustainable behavior of various publics. 2008). social and environmental concerns. it can complement other communication instruments like market communication. Signitzer and Anja (2009) noted three advantages of corporate sustainability communication. it could initiate processes of change within society which. advertisement. good performance in corporate social responsibility increases the legitimacy of a company in social and political activities. thus. 2008) in order to influence stakeholders‟ and society‟s image of the organization. Hemingway and Maclagan (2004) noted that although companies‟ strategies in social responsibility may or may not be directly aimed at commercial benefits. as a consequence.

Therefore. Therefore. the advance of sustainability.4 The Need and Importance of Corporate Social Responsibility Communication Tian (2004) noted that the importance of corporate social responsibility increased because of the six key issues that gripped the world: the increase in rich-poor divide. companies are . and hopes of new millennium. the State‟s disengagement. Owen (2003) defined corporate social reporting as the process of communicating the social and environmental effects of organizations‟ economic actions to particular interest groups within society and to society at large. A textual frame analysis of corporate websites can provide deep insights into the strategy of constructing corporate social responsibility discourse among people. 2. It involves extending the accountability of organizations beyond the traditional role of providing a financial account to the owners of capital. Corporate social responsibility communication goes beyond financial reporting and is fraught with challenges. adopting corporate social responsibility into corporate strategies is not only beneficial for the public and society. Chaudhri and Wang (2007) analyzed corporate social reporting in line with the legitimacy theories and extended the argument to include ongoing stakeholder dialogue and the larger process of building corporate reputation. the trend to transparency. the need for transparent and proactive communication of corporate social responsibility is a great concern. In a climate marked by informed publics and a critical media.relationship between these two variables. the anti-corporate backlash. in particular shareholders. but also for the companies The importance of corporate social responsibility and the increased importance of communicating it via the Internet makes an interesting case for the study of corporate websites to examine the ways various organizations are disseminating their social actions.

and made it possible for companies to solicit more feedback from a range of stakeholders. to attract users to browse their products and services. Dierkies. They explained that the Web offered the organizations the opportunity to design messages that do not have to follow dictates of gatekeepers as in print and electronic journalism. They also emphasized that one of the most strategic benefits of the Internet . MacMillan. Ihlen (2008) also noted that companies use their websites as a channel to communicate with their various publics and to present their positive images. they say they clean up their own act. Ihlen (2008) noted that companies use four overarching strategies: they claim to improve the world. Ihlen (2008) did a rhetorical study of how corporations try to come across as good environmental citizens. Chaudhri and Wang (2007) noted that the role of the Internet increased as one of the most preferred channels of corporate communication because of the compelling needs of transparency. companies have used different media to get their word out. Historically. they point to approval from others. The Internet facilitated the rapid spread of much more comprehensive information. and Marz (2002) also noted the importance of corporate social responsibility communication via websites. and to collect user responses and other related data. From the mid-1990s. to promote the company image. large corporations began to use their websites to announce their presence on the Web. both internal and external. and they argue that they care about consumers.facing clearly articulated expectations from customers and consumers regarding their contributions to sustainable development. to enhance public relations. This puts pressure on organizations to maintain transparency and be proactive in communicating with their publics. The Internet represents a new medium for companies to use in communicating with their publics. Antal. Tian (2004) noted that corporate websites had become an icon for a company in a manner similar to that of a corporate logo.

Curras-Perez. Maignan & Ferrell. 2004): consumer expectations and perceived importance of CSR (Creyer & Ross. consumers‟ trustworthiness perceptions of company communications and actions (Osterhus. Research focusing on CSR‟s influence on consumers‟ actual product purchase behavior indicates that the positive effects are not so straightforward and that various factors affect whether a firm‟s CSR activities will translate into consumer purchases (Bhattacharya & Sen. 2001).for Corporate Social Responsibility communication is that it allows an ongoing and interactive process. Several studies have illustrated the importance of mission statements on corporate websites for the portrayal of corporate social responsibility. most researchers agree that consumers do take CSR information into account when buying (Creyer & Ross. consumers' personal support of a CSR domain (Sen & Bhattacharya. Bhattacharya & Sen. 2005). 1997). 2001). nowadays positioning the company as socially responsible is used to generate a sense of connection consumers feel about the company. 1997. 2009). 2001) and evaluation of products and companies (Mohr. 2004). Bigne-Alcaniz & Alvarado-Herrera. This can be explained by the assumption that the firms. so called „consumer-company identification‟ (Bhattacharya & Sen. 1997. therefore. 2004) and it influences their overall assessments of corporate image (Brown & Dacin. Thus. 2003). Bhattacharya & Sen. their products are of higher quality (McWilliams & Siegel. Kline & Dai. . a company‟s overall marketing strategy and the position of CSR within it. Webb & Harris. are more reliable and. 2004. actively supporting CSR. 1997. 2001) which can ultimately lead to purchase behavior (David. However. Other conventional means of communication can only present a rather static annual product. a company‟s size and demographics (Bhattacharya & Sen.

an organization can display different modes of transparency and choose to present CSR information either in a balanced way.5 CSR communication strategies According to Basu and Palazzo (2008). according to this model. facts. The stakeholder response strategy is based on a two-way asymmetric communication. McWilliams. .2. Morsing and Schultz (2006) identified three ways in which companies can communicate their CSR engagement to the stakeholders: the stakeholder information strategy. but does not necessarily change as a result of that feedback. Siegel and Wright (2006) distinguished two types of CSR communication: persuasive and informative. pamphlets. It views stakeholders as being influential but passive respondents to corporate initiatives. Using this strategy. magazines. In the stakeholder information strategy companies use one-way communication from the organization to its stakeholders producing information for the media as well as a variety of brochures. an organization is seeking a feedback from its stakeholders. including only the favorable part. which is perceived as a feedback in terms of finding out what the public will accept and tolerate. or a biased way. In addition. Trustworthy communication originates from the company itself and this model is primarily used in CSR communication by governments. the stakeholder response strategy and the stakeholder involvement strategy. numbers and figures to inform the general public. Persuasive CSR communication attempts to positively influence consumer tastes for products with CSR attributes while informative CSR communication merely provides information about the CSR characteristics of the firm. a company tries to build its overall reputation and not to directly influence purchase decisions of the customers. Thus. with respect to both favorable and unfavorable aspects of its operations. non-profit organizations and many businesses.

especially in high public visibility sectors (Cerin. 2006. 15 2.6. They say that stakeholder dialogue increases the risk of delegitimization rather than fosters more legitimacy or higher financial performance. in contrast.1 An overview of CSR communication channels According to Birth et al (2008). 2002). Du.6 CSR communication channels 2. 1986 p. 2005). some others claim that stakeholder involvement strategy is very time consuming and expensive and after all it might even lead to paralyzing effects. However. seeks to have a dialogue with its stakeholders.The stakeholder involvement strategy. 2010). it is important for corporate communicators to understand that „even effective social responsibility communication will not necessarily be rewarded with instant gratification‟ (Manheim & Pratt. 2010). Bhattacharya & Sen. preventing an organization and its stakeholders from reaching consensus because of emotional content present in CSR discussions (Schultz & Wehmeier. because the effectiveness of CSR communication depends to a high degree on the target group‟s involvement with the issue (Schlegelmilch & Pollach. They argue that by identifying appropriate communication objectives and channels for different stakeholders and by understanding the communication context. there are few key elements in CSR communication: communication objectives and channels. This strategy suggests that companies engage in a frequent and systematical dialogue with their stakeholders in order to explore mutually beneficial action. Furthermore. Authors suggest that companies should use stakeholder involvement strategy to gain maximum benefits from their CSR activities and to increase the support from stakeholders (Morsing & Schultz. companies may overcome many of the intrinsic problems hindering the .

The content of CSR messages distributed via corporate channels such as CSR report. Bhattacharya & Sen (2010) have identified corporate and independent channels for CSR communication. organization and sponsorship of public actions (Juščius & Snieška. prizes and events. monitoring groups and consumer forums/blogs usually are outside the company‟s control.2 Perceived credibility of CSR communication channels Du. and vice versa. stakeholder word-ofmouth. on the other hand. Therefore CSR information received directly from the companies will be treated . public relations. employees (CSR Europe. 2008). product differentiation. stakeholder consultations. such as media coverage on TV and in the press. 2005). corporate website. Bhattacharya and Sen (2010) argue that a trade-off between the controllability and credibility of CSR communication exists: the less controllable the communicator is. 2008). While there are mainly three objectives of CSR communication addressed to customers – reputation. 2008). 2.g. Some other CSR communication channels mentioned in the literature are: codes of conduct. 2008). and customer loyalty (Birth et al.6. cause marketing campaigns. product labeling) are to a high degree controllable by the company. The channel in this context refers to a medium chosen for the CSR discourse (Schlegelmilch & Pollach. Independent channels. publishing and distributing of brochures about CSR events. From all the mentioned channels three channels in particular – social reports. websites and advertising – play the prominent role in CSR communication (Birth et al. Du. 2000 cited in Birth et al.achievement of transparent CSR communication. the more credible it is. there are many more CSR communication channels available for a company to choose from. advertising and point of purchase (e. the initiating of conferences and seminars on environmental and social issues and participating in them.

Du. 2005. thus. In order to enhance the credibility.g. Dando & Swift. In agreement. Therefore companies should try to get positive media coverage from independent. 2006. companies might try to embed CSR messages in more mainstream communications. 2003).with a great degree of skepticism (Schlegelmilch & Pollach. Facebook). 2009). 2003. 2010). Du. 2. Gurhan-Canli & Schwarz. Bhattacharya & Sen. Pomering & Dolnicar. Du. However. Bhattacharya & Sen. is for companies to be socially responsible and let others talk about it. 2010) or receive high profile awards for the best SCR practice (Dando & Swift. The power of consumer word-of-mouth in particular has been greatly magnified by the use of Internet communication media such as blogs. van de Ven (2008) explains that if companies communicate their CSR via marketing communication . Yoon. Bhattacharya & Sen.6. Morsing and Schultz (2006) as well as Jahdi and Acikdilli (2009) argue that subtle ways of CSR communication (so called „minimal channels‟) such as annual reports and websites are perceived as more appropriate CSR communication tools compared to corporate CSR advertising and other persuasive forms of communication. unbiased sources such as editorial coverage on television or in the press (Tixier. of their CSR messages and engender trust companies are advised to make use of third parties verification (Stoll. According to Dawkins (2004). or in other words believability. chat rooms and social media sites (e. according to them. 2002.3 Choosing the right channel The biggest challenge for a company is to decide how broadly it should communicate about its CSR activities. 2010) and is likely to face heightened scrutiny (Pomering & Johnson. 2003. 2009. many audiences are not proactively looking for CSR information. The simple formula for the credible CSR communication.

2007). it easily arouses public skepticism because of a very strong commercial dimension added to the message. 2008). online communications in the form of websites and emails.e. Jahdi and Acikdilli (2009) claim.4 CSR reports Publicly announced voluntary CSR reports have become the main instrument for companies to communicate their CSR engagement (Juščius & Snieška. Bhattacharya and Sen (2010) argue that in order to reach the general public effectively. They are produced to inform and convince stakeholders about corporate CSR activities and they are restricted to one-way communication (Morsing & Schultz. Du. 2006). it becomes clear that it is a challenging task for companies to decide which channels to use in their CSR communication with the stakeholders. sponsoring. where information on the social and environmental performance is integrated .6. companies should use a variety of communication channels or. i. According to Jahdi and Acikdilli (2009). One is towards a more complex reporting practice with a variety of reports divided on topics or issues. In the following part the most used CSR communication channels will be shortly described. focus on one or two highly relevant channels. alternatively. The other trend is an integrated reporting practice. Two trends might be identified in corporate reporting practice (Stiller & Daub. direct marketing.instruments like advertising. In addition. 2. especially consumers. Following the discussion. This strategy is mostly promoted by multinational companies with a large impact on the environment and society. that the choice of channels for CSR information disclosure is dependent on the target audience. packaging and promotions. have been most often treated with suspicion among the target audience. public relations and its more recent addition.

5 Internet Many researchers point out the growing importance of the Internet and corporate websites in organizational. 2009). The biggest disadvantage of CSR reports from the company‟s position is a lack of clear requirements for what has to be communicated in the CSR report. Rolland & O‟Keefe Bazzoni. Parker (1982) argues that social reports are inaccessible to a large majority because it either does not meet their information needs or its content is difficult to understand. and particularly CSR. It results in different companies producing different CSR reports and makes it impossible for readers to identify what to look for in the „normal‟ CSR report (Cerin. fact oriented. Snider. because the readers have to request them or find them on the corporate website. Moreover. the actual readership of CSR reports is very low. 2003. Idowu & Towler. Maignan & Ralston. 2002). 2002. An analysis by Esrock and Leichty (1998) revealed that 90 percent of a random sample of Fortune 500 companies had web pages and 82 percent of the sites addressed at least one CSR issue. 2006). 2009. 2. 2005). 1998. and hardly related to consumers‟ buying behavior (Schrader. with more and more companies producing CSR reports. 2004).6. Hill & Martin. Furthermore. their effectiveness for image communication is reduced (Schlegelmilch & Pollach. As a result. Corporate websites have become a major medium to communicate CSR to target . Moreno & Capriotti. CSR reports are usually complex.into the annual report. recipient appraisals of these reports do not seem high (Cerin. Moreover. although it is one of the main tools that companies use for CSR communication. 2002. communication (Esrock & Leichty. Hansen & Halbes. Therefore.

2002. Jahdi and Acikdilli (2009) argue that in the absence of media gatekeepers. 2004. persuade. 2008). rarely is the case. as a result. educate and proactively engage them in a direct and ongoing dialogue about a variety of matters (Esrock & Leichty. It means that users have to deliberately visit the company‟s website and choose to view the section about CSR. Rolland & O‟Keefe Bazzoni. companies have more freedom to positively present themselves and enhance their reputation. The biggest minus is that the Internet is a „pull‟ medium. Insch. they are not vetted by the gatekeeping function of journalists. 110). which. Antal et al. 1998. Stuart & Jones. especially in developed countries with prevailing use of the Internet (Basil & Erlandson. inform. In her research on World Wide Web and corporate self-presentation Pollach (2005) recommends that companies . 2009). web pages can also have interactive features to collect information. people become more concerned with the quality and reliability of web-based information. which means that users themselves have to request the content of the website and. According to Insch (2008). source reliability and credibility are essential requirements‟ (p. Moreover. 2006). the use of the Internet for CSR communication has disadvantages as well. corporate websites are a powerful public relations tool since they reach diverse stakeholder groups and. CSR communication through the Internet opens up a question about the target groups addressed and the ones actually reached (Isenmann. 2008). As a result. they do not view sections that do not interest them (Schlegelmilch & Pollach. 2005). They claim that „for any communication to be successful. as it has already been mention. solicit feedback from an unlimited range of stakeholders. Moreover.audiences (Insch. unlike traditional mass media. On the other hand. monitor public opinion. especially concerning an ethically glossy corporate image. 2008. Thus.

In addition.6. Pomering & Dolnicar. 2004.6 CSR ads CSR advertising can be recognized as a channel for creating. formalized and official perspective on CSR within the corporation (Farache & Perks. 2005). some research show that if the topic of the ad is 21 perceived as incompatible with the company's core business. would be a better choice than pull media for CSR. restoring or maintaining organizational legitimacy by using campaigns that appeal to consumer rationality as well as to their emotions (Farache & Perks. 2005).7 Challenges of CSR communication Various authors acknowledge that companies face a difficult and challenging task in seeking to communicate their CSR (Bhattacharya & Sen. . 2. 2010). Jahdi and Acikdilli (2009) add that audience involvement can be also employed to remedy this problem. Moreover. 2. because when communicating CSR. 2009). being the push medium. as it has been already mentioned. 2010). companies are trying to tell consumers something that they are not necessarily interested in. CSR advertising can be regarded as representing an approved. 2009). it is not always superior to other media (Schlegelmilch & Pollach. numbers or humanization.can enhance credibility of their web-based messages by using a number of persuasive appeals such as third-party evidence. However. Bhattacharya and Sen (2004) claim that „any communication surrounding CSR is a slippery slope‟ (p. 23). It happens because consumers are generally skeptical towards advertising and CSR advertising is especially perceived by many as over-accentuating the good deeds of the company and therefore resulting in skepticism and cynicism toward the CSR message (Pomering & Dolnicar. One could argue that advertising. advertising is even less credible and may make the company appear hypocritical (Schlegelmilch & Pollach.

2009). 2009. 2010) and to make . 2006. but rather respond negatively to any marketing strategies that seem manipulative or deceptive. Therefore a firm can inhibit stakeholder skepticism and enhance the credibility of its CSR messages by acknowledging both intrinsic and extrinsic motives in its CSR communication. Gurhan-Canli & Schwarz. Forehand & Grier. 2004. 2008). Webb & Mohr. Ellen. Pomering & Johnson. they can easily get suspicious that a company is trying to „sell‟ CSR information to them and then CSR communication may actually backfire. 2006). Pomering & Dolnicar. Yoon. In their later article Bhattacharya and Sen (2004) argue that customers are particularly susceptible to a company‟s CSR initiatives. meaning that a company is likely to receive more positive consumer reactions to its CSR initiatives if it does not deny the business interest in them. 2000. Bhattacharya & Sen. Pomering & Dolnicar. 2009). Brown and Dacin (1997) think that consumers may believe that the company promoting its CSR activities is trying to hide something. Miyazaki & Taylor. 2003.because although consumers like to hear the facts. Many researchers agree that consumers‟ skepticism towards the company‟s CSR messages may hinder the overall effectiveness of CSR communication (Yoon. argue that perceived profit-motivation of the company in regard to its CSR communication does not necessarily reduce perceived corporate credibility (van de Ven. they also increasingly believe that it is possible to serve both the needs of business and the society (Bhattacharya & Sen. Gurhan-Canli & Schwarz. however. 2006. Others. Some authors claim that public skepticism is especially heightened when CSR programs are cynically perceived to be insincere and used only as a corporate image tactic (Barone. Forehand and Grier (2003) argue that stakeholders do not respond negatively to extrinsic CSR motives per se. Majority of consumers understand that companies communicate about their CSR activities in order to enhance their reputation and image. From the preceding discussion it is possible to conclude that the key challenge of CSR communication is to minimize stakeholder skepticism (Du. however.

Pomering and Dolnicar (2009) suggest that market segmentation could be a promising approach to improve CSR communications. 2003) and CSR messages have to be matched to stakeholders‟ interests (Cerin. 2008. which makes consumer oriented CSR communication activities very expensive (Schrader. as well as to understand the company. 2005).company‟s claims more credible and convincing (Schlegelmilch & Pollach. 2004. corporate communicators face some more challenges when communicating CSR. Besides having to overcome consumers‟ skepticism. managers must know what to communicate (i. Thus. Schlegelmilch and Pollach (2005) suggest doing it through „the interplay of subtle. 2004. different information needs and they respond differently to the various communication channels used (Dawkins. Arvidsson. many organizations are unprepared for the task and communicate their CSR inconsistently (Nielsen & Thomsen. 2008. 2010).e. message channel). . according to Du. Pomering & Dolnicar. Pomering & Dolnicar. 2007). Hansen & Halbes. a successful CSR strategy must be context-specific for each business (Marrewijk. Bhattacharya and Sen (2010). Moreover. integrated communication‟ (p. 2009). message content) and where to communicate (i.e. 2002. Dawkins. On the other hand. 2006). Gill & Dickinson. Given previously mentioned variations. This is a challenging task. companies must think strategically about CSR communication and know which CSR information to communicate and how to employ different communication tools in order to meet stakeholders‟ expectations concerning CSR and to satisfy their information needs (Podnar. Because of lack of a common understanding of CSR and the absence of the framework for how to communicate consistently about CSR. 268). because various stakeholders have different expectations of companies.and stakeholder-specific factors that impact the effectiveness of CSR communication. 2009).

study population. ethical consideration.0 Introduction This chapter entails the research design. The quantitative data will be used to obtain the quantifiable data while the qualitative data will be used to investigate the quality CSR at mukwano industries. data collection procedure. area of study.1 Research design This study is based on a survey design. sampling technique. 3. so as to help the researcher to gather data from a sample of population at a particular time. descriptive statistics like percentages and frequencies will be used to assess the response. It involves both qualitative and quantitative methods of data analysis and interpretations. data processing and analysis.This will enable the researcher to understand a variety of methods of quality assurance for data analyses hence ensure accuracy of the findings and its implications there in. . trends and relationship among the identified variables. research instrument. The researcher will be able to establish patterns.CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3. Thus a correlation research design will be used by the researcher to understand the relationship between communication and successive CSR campaigns.

the company has about 180 employees employees. (2011).4.2 Locale of the study The study will be conducted at mukwano industries.5. 3. The company is located within kampala district 3. 3.4Sample Size The researcher will use New Man‟s (2000) which recommend that in a population of less than 1000 people.1 Sample procedure The research purposely aims at finding out the effects communication on CSR activities at mukwano industries.1 Primary and secondary data . The researcher will choose this group of people because they have the required information to certify the study objectives. 3.3 Population of the study According to a report derived from the human resouse manager.3. Kampala-Uganda.1 Target Population of the Study The researchers will target company employees and management. The researcher will use cluster sampling technique to get the required data from the sampled population. 3.5 Techniques of data gathering 3. the researcher is recommended to take 30% of that population.3. The researcher chose this sample size calculation formula as it is effective in a population bass of less than 1000 respondents. 30% of 180 =120 employee respondents.

Two basic types of questions which will be used in the questionnaire are open-end questions and closed-end questions. In addition. public relations. Thus. 2000). 2011).6 Data Collection Instruments The main instruments to be used will be self administered questioners and oral interviews. Polonsky and Waller (2011) stress the importance of examining secondary data first as it can provide invaluable background information. paradoxes in the field and to clearly define the research question.There are two main sources of data that can be used in a research: primary data and secondary data. corporate reputation. a questionnaire gives the respondents the chance to express their fully feelings and opinions as there is privacy when answering the questionnaire. However. Closed-end questions. 3. According to which questions are used. and . thus. no possible answers are given. The researcher will select these research instrument because it is cheap and time efficient.6. open-ended questions provide primarily qualitative data. on the other hand. provide quantitative data (Peterson.1 Questionnaire . Some books as well as journals within corporate business ethics. in practice most of the questionnaires consist of both types of questions. communication management. and consumer psychology field will prove to be the invaluable resources for the secondary data about CSR communication and allowe to identify main problems. This research will be initiated by gathering available secondary data. provide answers or response categories prespecified by the researcher and. marketing communications. 3. Mainly the literature from CSR and communication fields has been used in this research. Primary data is gathered by the researcher for a specific purpose while secondary data is already existing data. gathered and reported for some other purpose than the problem being investigated (Polonsky & Waller. In an open-end question respondents are free to provide any answer they like. questionnaires can be classified into qualitative or quantitative.

The questionnaire to be used in this research is also a „mixed questionnaire‟. measuring only one thing at the time. open-ended questions will provide the possibility for respondents to put the answers in their own words or to explain the choice of answer in order to decrease possible misunderstandings and wrong interpretations from the researcher‟s side. . . they will be constructed as clear as possible. Generally. 3. 3. Moreover.8 Reliability of the research instruments Reliability means the degree of consistency and precision in which increasing instrument demonstrates. 2009). .7 Validity of research instrument Validity refers to the extent to which data collection method accurately measures what it was intended to measure or to the extent to which research findings are about what they are claimed to be about (Saunders. Open-end questions to used in the questionnaire will mostly be follow-up questions. 1994). and main definition of CSR will be given to the respondents in order to avoid possible different interpretations of the main concept. In order to increase validity of the questions in this research. asking the respondents to provide more information or comments on their answer to the previous close-end question. Lewis & Thornhill. because it will containe both closed-end and open-end questions.this third type of the questionnaires is called a „mixed questionnaire‟ (Johnson & Christensen. 2010). validity of each question or group of questions is assessed rather than of the questionnaire as a whole (Bailey. This will be done in order to compensate the possible disadvantages of only using closed-end questions and to get deeper understanding of the answers provided by the participants.

coding. a minimum value of 0. Here adequate time will be given to the data collection process that will cater for any delay. This will help to clarify each answer to the questions into meaningful category.According to Cronbach‟s alpha. Coding. 3.In order to avoid subject or participant bias.11 Limitations/Anticipated Problems The researcher anticipates the problem of delay to answer the questions in the questionnaire leading to delay of the whole research process.the anonymity of the respondents will be assured. This will be done to reduce frequency into percentages.7 makes the researchers to regard the research instrument reliable and read for data collection. the researchers will code the response of each category of respondents.10 Ethical consideration The research is meant to be of positive effect to mukwano industry with out any harm.after editing. 3. Data entry—the raw data will be fed into computer for the purpose of analyzing it through the SPSS. The researchers will carefully scrutinize the data through editing to ensure that the data is accurate and consistent by reading through all the questionnaires and compare them with answer given to eliminate errors. . Thus the researchers will ensure that confidentiality is met and explained in writing how participants‟ rights to privacy will be safeguarded. data entry and tabulation so that the data can be accurate before the data analysis is done. which is one of the threats to reliability. Editing –this will involve examining the collected raw data in order to detect errors and omissions and to correct where necessary.9 Data processing and Analysis Data processing at this stage refers to editing. 3. Tabulating – this will include putting together the coded data into tables and statistical analysis.

Meinolf. L. the researcher will try to fit the study within the budget.B.. & Roberts. 1–21. Journal of General Management. Vol. J. and it is anticipated that the funds that will be availed to the researcher may not be sufficient to properly conduct this research. No. Allwood. (1998) Corporate social reporting practices in Western Europe: legitimating corporate behaviour? British Accounting Review. pp. M. For this case.A. difficulties may arise in fulfilling the research obligations within one year and also executing ones' job obligations at the same time. Corporate commitment to quality of life: Antal. The time span given for the research is too short. pp. . (2002) Bodily communication dimensions of expression and content. 1. 22 – 42. Dierkies. A. Ariane Berthoin. MacMillan. & Marz. Lutz (2002). Dierkies. C. Keith. (2002).-Y. C.B. Vol. W. Christie H.. 28. Louis H. & Amato. Hill. No.. 2. Amato. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. & Marz. K.Research is very expensive. MacMillan. For this case adequate planning shall be done so that all research activities are on schedule. 30. In: Granström et al (Eds. REFERENCES Adams. (2002) Corporate social reporting revisited. given that other University programs are ongoing. Antal.) Multimodality in Language and Speech systems.

Vol. M. M. Miyazaki. 122 – 136 . D. J. Vol. & Tedeschi. T. Corporate Reputation Review.S.. pp. 33. & Taylor. 2. 15 – 26. P. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. (2009). Arvidsson. 125 – 137. 1. 1. 14. Barone. Vol. Dennis K. Baghi. Journal of Marketing Communications. No.Academy of Management Review. pp. 96. Vol.. 3. & Schultz. (2010) Communication of corporate social responsibility: a study of the views of management teams in large companies. Vol. 339 – 354. Mass communication theory: Foundations. No. 2. & Davis. 16. No. (2009) A strategy to communicate corporate social responsibility: cause related marketing and its dark side. (2000) The influence of cause related marketing on consumer choice: does one good turn deserve another? Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science.Apéria. K. I. 248 – 262. No. 28. K. 3. Palazzo. 218 – 230. M. No.. No. (2008) Corporate social responsibility: a Process model of sensemaking . A. pp. pp. Basil. Erlandson. (2008) Corporate social responsibility website representations: a longitudinal study of internal and external self-presentations. Stanley J. Bronn. S. G. Vol. E. pp. Basu....D. 7.Z. pp. Baran. Rubaltelli. (2004) A reputation analysis of the most visible companies in the Scandinavian countries. Journal of Business Ethics.J.

Morsing. Vauday. Terry L. and how consumers respond to corporate social initiatives. Journal of Marketing. pp.bazillier. and Beckmann. J. No. why. Vol.Bazillier. (Eds. pp. Vol. Lurati. M. 182 – 196. Bhattacharya. Sen. (2010) The greenwashing machine: is CSR more than communication? [Internet] Available from <http://remi.. Birth.13. Bhattacharya. (2006) Strategic CSR communication: an emerging (2003) Consumer – company identification: a framework for understanding consumers‟ relationships with companies. Vol. L. No. and Beckmann. (2006) Consumers‟ perceptions of and responses to CSR: so little is known so far… In: Morsing. C. & Reisch.C. Copenhagen: DJOF Publishing. The significance of community to business social responsibility. 9 – 24. Illia. M.. S. . (2004) Doing better at doing good: when. Sen. 76 – 88. S. Besser. Beckmann. M. R. L. 47. S.C. Corporate Communications: an International Journal. California management review.B. G. S. Copenhagen: DJOF Publishing. No. S. F.. In: Morsing.. (1998). A.. pp.) Strategic CSR> [Accessed 20 April. 67. C. & Zamparini.C. 1.B. 2.2.) Strategic CSR Communication. S. (2008) Communicating CSR: practices among Switzerland‟s top 300 companies. (Eds.. 2011] Beckmann.

No. Vol. No. Moreno. A. 2. V. (2007) Communicating corporate social responsibility on the Internet: a case study of the top 100 information technology companies in India. 84 – 91. No.Capriotti. 63. Jian (2007). Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. pp. (2007b) Communicating corporate responsibility through corporate web sites in Spain.. P. 33. (2002) Communication in corporate environmental reports. 46 – 66. 69-87. Journal of General Management. Cerin. 12. Belmont. 232-247. 21. 22-42. CA: Thompson Wadsworth. J. Public Relations Review. 21(2). and future. Vidhi & Wang.. 412-431 . (2007) Corporate citizenship and public relations: the importance and interactivity of social responsibility issues on corporate websites. Rural Sociology. Vol. 1. Vol. Practice. Communicating corporate social responsibility on Communication Quarterly. 3. Corporate social reporting revisited. pp. P. 232 – 247. Evidence from company mission statements. No. P. Management Communication Quarterly. pp. Moreno. Journal of Marketing Theory and ferment.. A. 9. Capriotti. Corporate Communications: An International Journal. Wang. 1. pp. 10(4). 221 – 237. Chaudhri. Vol. 28. Chaudhri.

2. Management QUSTIONNIARE COMMUNICATION CHANNELS 3 2 1 1. NEMA communicates to the rest of the employees through exchanges 3. NEMA communicates to the rest of the employees through computer-mediated text transfers such as emails. telephone .the Internet: A case study of the top 100 IT companies in India. NEMA communicates to the rest of the employees through newsletter 4. NEMA communicates to the rest of the employees through video mediated conferences 6. NEMA communicates to the rest of the employees through memo or magazine 5. NEMA uses face-to-face meetings with the rest of the employees.