The impact of corporate identity on corporate social responsibility disclosure

This paper examines the impact of corporate identity on corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure. The study is based on 498 German companies that provided English language CSR reports and responded to a company survey measuring CSR-oriented corporate identity. Results show that value chain and future-oriented dimensions foster CSR disclosure, while introversive corporate identity dimensions hinder the release of CSR information. The paper contributes to existing literature by revealing insights on so far unobserved determinants of CSR disclosure.

O R I G I N A L A R T I C L E Open Access
The impact of corporate identity on
corporate socialresponsibility disclosure
Anne Michaels* and MichaelGrüning
Abstract
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is of increasing importance for the long-term success of corporations.Extending
existing literature this paper explores corporate identity as important determinant for CSR disclosure.The relationship
was examined based on 498 German companies that provided English language CSR reports and responde
company survey measuring CSR-oriented corporate identity.CSR disclosure has been analyzed with an automated
content analysis technique using artificial intelligence.Results indicate that value chain and future-oriented dimension
which were more pronounced in mature CSR concepts,foster CSR disclosure,while introversive corporate identity
dimensions that were strong in low level CSR concepts hinder the release of CSR information.The paper shows that a
tradition of social responsibility and values results into a low perceived need for legitimacy and outwards c
The findings support the view that that a combination of voluntary disclosure theory and legitimacy theory
to explain the drivers and constraints of CSR disclosure.
Keywords: CSR disclosure,Corporate identity,Content analysis,Survey,CSR determinants
Introduction
Within the last two decades, CSR disclosure by firms moti-
vated an increasing number of research studies examining
the motivation ofthis disclosure.Findingssupportthat
CSR disclosure isvalue relevant(Clarkson etal. 2013;
Plumlee et al.2015),increases earnings quality (Francis et
al. 2008),analystforecastaccuracy (Dhaliwalet al. 2012)
and firm level cost of capital (Michaels and Grüning 2017).
Firms also use CSR disclosure to differentiate from
competitors and as a marketing tool (Porter and Kramer
2006).Empiricalevidence suggests thatthe integration
of CSR in corporate strategy might establish a competi-
tive advantage(Carroll and Shabana2010).Although
firms may attemptto implementreal CSR concepts,
there is a tendency of“greenwashing” (Laufer 2014).In
line with the missing causallink between CSR perform-
ance and CSR disclosure stakeholders mainly regard the
latter as not trustworthy (Newelland Goldsmith 2001).
Volkswagen’s “DieselDupe” is a contemporary example.
CSR disclosurecredibilityincreasesif alignedwith
corporate strategy (McWilliams and Siegel2001).While
quite some research examined internaldeterminants to
supportthe strategic integration ofCSR (e.g.Engertet
al.2016;Lozano 2013,2015) only a few studies focussed
on the internalaspects facilitating CSR disclosure.Prior
research outlined a scheme to connect corporate identity
and CSR (Otubanjo 2013).The “identity-revealing nature
of CSR activities” is crucialin building a long-term sus-
tainable corporate image (Du etal. 2010,p. 17) and a
successfulCSR strategy (Heikkurinen and Ketola 2012)
but has been rarely addressed in the literature.Neverthe-
less,identity-based values and attributes as wellas their
communication are considered key factors for entrepre-
neurialsuccess(He and Balmer2007).Therefore,this
paper examines if the degree of CSR-orientation in cor-
porate identity is an important managerial driver of CSR
disclosure.Results show thatcorporate identity signifi-
cantly influences CSR disclosure even though they reveal
an ambiguous pattern.Whereas the corporate identity
dimensions “strategic integration” and “CSR application”
facilitate,“employeeintegration”and “attitudeaware-
ness”inhibitCSR disclosure.CSR disclosure is object-
ively measuredusing an artificial intelligencebased
narrative analysisof CSR reportsfrom 2013/14.CSR-
oriented corporate identity is extracted from a company
survey.Whereasthe total sampleconsistsof 498
* Correspondence:[e-mail]
Department of Economic Sciences and Media,Institute of Business
Administration,Group Accounting and ManagerialControl,Ilmenau
University of Technology,Helmholtzplatz 3,98693 Ilmenau,Germany
International Journal of
Corporate Social Responsibility
© The Author(s).2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
InternationalLicense (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/),which permits unrestricted use,distribution,and
reproduction in any medium,provided you give appropriate credit to the originalauthor(s) and the source,provide a link to
the Creative Commons license,and indicate if changes were made.
Michaels and Grüning InternationalJournalof Corporate SocialResponsibility
(2018) 3:3
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40991-018-0028-1

companies,the intersecting sample (providing data for all
main variables) consists of108 German companies.The
papercontributes to existing literature by revealing in-
sights on so far unobserved determinants of CSR disclos-
ure. It supportsthat managerialactivitiescan shape
internal drivers of CSR disclosure to obtain related finan-
cial benefits.Moreover,the paperprovidesquantitative
data to the state ofthe art ofcorporate identity profiles
and CSR disclosure of German firms.
The paper is structured as follows.The nextsection
reviews the existing literature and develops the hypoth-
eses.In the third section research design,sample selec-
tion and variable measurementare described.Section
four provides the results.The final section concludes.
Related research and hypothesis development
CSR disclosure
Numeroustheoreticalframeworkshavebeen used to
understand CSR as a relevantrealworld phenomenon.
Clarkson etal. (2008)categorizesCSR accounting re-
search into three broad fields ofinterest;(i) value rele-
vance of CSR disclosure;(ii) determinantsand
constraints regarding the disclosure of CSR information;
and (iii) the relationship between CSR performance and
CSR disclosure.Whereas this study relates to the second
group,findings from the third supportthe hypotheses
development.
As a particular type of voluntary non-financial disclos-
ure, CSR disclosure isbelieved to reduce information
asymmetry between managers and investors (Dhaliwal et
al. 2011).Voluntary disclosure theory suggests that vol-
untary disclosure is used by wellperforming companies
to differentiate from low performers in order to avoid an
adverse selection problem (Verrecchia 1983).High CSR
performers disclose more CSR information as they ex-
pectto benefiton financialmarkets (Reverte 2012).In
contrast,low performers disclose less in order to prevent
negativeeffects due to capital market participants
expecting a financial risk (Dhaliwal et al.2011).
Nevertheless,prior studies revealed thatCSR disclos-
ure in particular is somewhat different from other types
of non-financialinformation (Guidry and Patten 2012).
There was much evidence of a severe mismatch between
claims made in CSR disclosure and the implementation
of CSR programs (Baumann-Pauly etal. 2013).There-
fore legitimacy theory contrastingly argues that CSR low
performers disclose more CSR information to legitimate
themselves (Cho et al.2012,p. 21).In this view,public
pressure from the socialand politicalenvironmentis
regarded asthe main determinantof CSR disclosure
(Cho and Patten 2007).While empirical findings support
politicalcost(Reverte 2012)and increasing stakeholder
pressure (Young and Marais 2012) to affect CSR disclos-
ure, evidenceof a causalconnectionbetweenCSR
performance and CSR disclosure is mixed (Plumlee et al.
2015).Only a few studies empirically explore this rela-
tionship with a limited focuson ecologicaldisclosure
(Cho et al.2012).As a result,some research assumes a
complementaryrelationship between both theoretical
concepts;whereas voluntary disclosure theory explains
the volume ofCSR disclosure,legitimacy theory eluci-
dates patterns in the disclosure (Clarkson et al.2008).
As a consequence,prior research explores the individ-
ual determinantsof CSR disclosure in greaterdetails
(Hahn and Kühnen 2013) and distinguished internal and
externalfactors (Fifka 2013).The economic system,na-
tional culture,stakeholder orientation and company visi-
bility,etc.are regarded as external factors.Companies in
state-led marketeconomiesare found to reportin a
more aggregated way aboutCSR policiesand provide
more information on business behavior,labor concerns
and environmental issues than companies in liberal mar-
ket economies (Young and Marais 2012).In the context
of nationalculture,companies in countries with a pro-
nounced long-term orientation are considered to dis-
close more CSR information (Onceand Almagtome
2014).Stakeholder orientation also positively influences
CSR disclosure (Van der Laan Smith et al.2005).Finally,
company visibility is found to be an important driver of
CSR disclosure (Gamerschlag et al.2010).Industry affili-
ation,firm size,financialperformance and capitalmar-
ket orientation areregarded internaldeterminantsof
CSR disclosure.Previous studies show that companies in
CSR-sensitive industrieslike chemicals,mining oren-
ergydisclose moreCSR information (Shnayderet al.
2016;Young and Marais 2012).In addition,CSR disclos-
ure is considered to improve with increasing firm size
(Wickert et al.2016), financial performance (Haniffa and
Cooke 2005)and capitalmarketorientation (Heitzman
et al.2010).
The relevance of corporate identity for CSR disclosure
Further,more abstract internalCSR disclosure determi-
nants received little attention so far butmighthelp to
understand how voluntary disclosure theory and legitim-
acy theory explain CSR disclosure.Du et al.(2010,p. 11)
argue that a perceived “CSR fit” is an important internal
factor driving the credibility ofCSR disclosure.This fit
relates to a perceived match between disclosed CSR in-
formation and corporate identity (Hristache et al.2013).
Corporate identity is derived from shared values and be-
liefs (Van Rieland Fombrun 2007) and comprises what
is central,enduring and distinctive aboutthe company
(Albert and Whetten 1985).Corporate identity attributes
can be detected by observing a company’s strategy,be-
havior,rules,and structure (Melewar and Karaosmano-
glu 2006).Desirable characteristics of corporate identity
are a high quality mentality,supreme products,financial
Michaels and Grüning InternationalJournalof Corporate SocialResponsibility (2018) 3:3 Page 2 of 13

stability,an excellent working environment,as wellas a
sensitivity for CSR aspects (Einwiller and Will 2002).
He and Balmer (2013) connect an effective corporate
identity management with an improved corporate image
in the shortterm and a better corporate reputation in
the long term.Corporate image relates to the perception
of expressed corporate identity (Margulies1977).Not
the information content of a message but what receivers
perceive is relevantfor establishing an corporate image
(Boulding 1956).Balmer & Greyser (2006,p. 735) refer
to corporate image as“variousoutbound communica-
tions channels deployed by organizations to communi-
cate with customers and other constituencies”.This view
allows managerialactivities to significantly affectboth,
corporate identity and image (Gioia et al.2000).Corpor-
ate image is regarded as a direct consequence of corpor-
ate identity thatthe firm can controlcomprehensively
(Balmer and Greyser 2003).Accordingly,CSR disclosure
is regarded amajor determinantof corporateimage.
Hopwood (2009,p. 437) suggest that companies defend
with CSR disclosure by “providing a new face to the out-
side world while protecting the innerworkingsof the
organization from externalview”.Simultaneously,public
scandals uncover unethicalcorporate activities (Brennan
et al.2013).Consistently,Michaels and Grüning (2016a)
find that increased CSR disclosure has a positive impact
corporate reputation.
Altogether,prior research revealed an interdependency
between corporate identity and corporate strategy (He
and Balmer 2013). In this context, Otubanjo (2013) as well
as Venturelli et al.(2017) acknowledge the importance of
this connection for CSR concepts.Heikkurinen & Ketola
(2012,p. 332ff ) suggest an “awareness approach” for the
integration ofCSR into corporate strategy.Here,CSR is
part of the firm’s ethical, political and intrinsic convictions
and a lack ofcredibility may never exist.Choosing CSR
initiatives that address the entire organization as wellas
all dimensions ofCSR is crucialin this context (Lozano
2012).Variousviewsexiston the relationship between
CSR performance and CSR disclosure.The adoption of
CSR practices and values may lead to differentiating char-
acteristics in the market (Porter and Kramer 2006).Fol-
lowing this business case approach companies align their
CSR activities to create a competitive advantage that may
increaseprofits or create additionallyvalue added
(Michaels and Grüning 2016b). Alternatively,the
resource-based view of CSR suggests that companies en-
gage in CSR in order to create positive internal and exter-
nal benefits that enable a “more efficient use of resources”
(Branco and Rodrigues 2006, p. 120). Both view call for an
internal strategic adoption of CSR principles. Critics argue
that thesepurelyeconomicapproachesendangerthe
moralfoundations ofCSR and inhibitits proper imple-
mentation (Nijhof and Jeurissen 2010).
Baumgarth and Binckebanck (2011) note that the estab-
lishment of a CSR-oriented corporate identity and culture
are preconditionsto achieve a reliable and trustworthy
image and reputation.Both are highly affected by CSR
disclosure (Guidry and Patten 2012).Consequently,the in-
tegration of CSR into the corporate identity is crucial for a
successful CSR concept (McShane and Cunningham 2011).
Managers utilize corporate identity to give organizational
members “some sense of purpose” that motivates them to
achieve common goals (Cornelissen 2002,p.266).Corpor-
ate identity management enables the ability to express ind
viduality,to manifestdifferentiating attributes,to setand
expressstrategyas well as to communicateeffectively
(Balmer 2001).In mostcases the alignmentof corporate
identity towards CSR requires the adoption of new values
and beliefs as well as the definition of a new strategy and v
sion (Heikkurinen and Ketola2012).Furthermore,the
adoption of CSR principles requires most companies to re-
vise or establish processes and structures (Hristache et al.
2013).Accordingly,Lozano et al.(2016) found a strong re-
ciprocal relationship for organisational change managemen
and CSR disclosure.
Credibility isan importantissue forCSR disclosure
(Lock and Seele2016).Inconsistenciesbetween the
current status of CSR implementation and its communi-
cation have severe destructive consequences (Baumann-
Pauly et al. 2013,p. 701).Hence,if companiesface
difficulties in creating credibility for their CSR programs,
thosecompaniesthat dispose overhigh conformance
would use it to create credibility through increased CSR
disclosure.Accordingly,CSR-oriented corporate identity
is an importantinternaldeterminantof CSR disclosure
and the following hypothesis is formulated:
H1:A high level of CSR-oriented corporate identity is
positively associated with the level of CSR disclosure.
Sample, variable definition, and methodology
Sample selection
The analysisis basedon 498 listed and non-listed
German companies.Due to the history ofan advanced
social welfare system German companies likely assume a
distinctivesocial responsibility(Chen and Bouvain
2009).Germany is also known to have an extraordinarily
high numberof “hidden champions”(Simon 2012).
These companies are often family-owned and character-
ized by a high socialresponsibility (Spiegeland Block
2013, p. 12). Capital market sustainabilityratings
supportthe view thatGerman companies have an out-
standing sustainability performance,beating comparable
US,France and Austria firms (Sustainalytics 2012).
In line with other empirical CSR studies (e.g.Fatma et
al. 2016; Huang et al. 2014; Liu et al. 2014) a
Michaels and Grüning InternationalJournalof Corporate SocialResponsibility (2018) 3:3 Page 3 of 13

conveniencesamplinghas been applied (Table 1).
Companies are selected based on (i) two German image
and sustainabilityrankings(172);(ii) a list of the
German ministry ofenvironmentcontaining firms that
publish CSR reports(266);and (iii) randomly chosen
companiesof the prime and generalstandard ofthe
FrankfurtStock Exchange (60).Altogether,327 of the
498 firms (66.6%) English language CSR reports (stand-
alone CSR reports, integratedcorporatereports or
website information) could be collected from corporate
websitesor the GRI reporting database forreporting
year2013/2014.The latentconstructof CSR-oriented
corporate identity is measured using a company survey.
226 (45.4%)of the 498 samplecompaniesreplied of
which 149 (29.9%) firms provide usable answers.In total,
the intersecting sample of firms for which we could ob-
tain CSR disclosure as wellas usable answers from the
company survey consists of 108 companies.
AIMD
The dependentCSR disclosurevariableis measured
using automated contentanalysis deviated from Artifi-
cial IntelligenceMeasurementof Disclosure(AIMD)
(Grüning 2011).AIMD measuresthe extentto which
text documents refer to specified topics.Different to or-
dinary word countapproaches,AIMD is able to partly
consider the context of information,including thesaurus
and syntax (Grüning2011).In a first step (training
phase)a coding scheme mustbe developed to identify
certain topics in text documents.In a second step (appli-
cation phase) the topics oflarge quantities oftexts can
be classified using this coding scheme.Figure 1 summa-
rizes the basic procedure.The coding scheme consists of
semantic units (N-grams) that are “connotative categor-
ical equivalents”for a specified typeof information
(Grüning 2011,p.510),i.e.refer to the same topic.Using
various dictionaries N-grams are automatically standard-
ized and the resulting AIMD coding scheme is almost
not affected by grammar and orthography of the under-
lying texts.
Although the coding scheme can be generated manu-
ally,in this paper a fully automated approach is used be-
causeof superiorobjectivity.In line with linguistic
practice (Archer 2009, p. 2) N-grams appearing
frequently in the CSR reports and not frequently in the
annualreports (excluding CSR related chapters that are
removed manually)are regarded astypicalfor CSR
reporting.More specifically,for 29 firms from the
German DAX and MDAX CSR annualreports (except
of CSR chapters) for 2014 are enumerated into N-grams
of up to three consecutive words (excluding stopwords).
All N-grams thatoccur in x annualreports (exceptof
CSR chapters)and y CSR reports are collected separ-
ately.Lists with y > x are potentially indicative for CSR
reporting.An AIMD content analysis is performed using
each of the 841 = 29 ·29 N-gram lists.The one that best
replicates the CSR content analysis of Gamerschlag et al.
(2010) is finally chosen.The N-gram list that includes all
Table 1 Sample Distribution
1 2 3 4
No.of
companies
in % No.of CSR
reports
in % No.of CSR
surveys
in % No.of companies
with report + survey
in %
Initialsample Fullsample
PanelA:Distribution by Industry
Industry
Banks and Insurance 30 6.02 18 5.50 14 9.40 9 8.33
Chemicals,rubber,plastics,non-metallic products60 12.05 50 15.29 16 10.74 16 14.81
Food,beverages,tobacco 52 10.44 35 10.70 11 7.38 7 6.48
Gas,water,electricity,construction 30 6.02 19 5.81 10 6.71 8 7.41
Machinery,equipment,furniture,recycling 105 21.08 88 26.91 26 17.45 25 23.15
Other services 107 21.49 51 15.60 38 25.50 21 19.44
Post,telecommunications,transport,publishing 37 7.43 26 7.95 12 8.05 10 9.26
Wholesale & retailtrade 77 15.46 40 12.23 22 14.77 12 11.11
Total 498 100.00327 100.00149 100.00108 100.00
PanelB:Distribution by Stock market activity
Stock market activity
Listed 139 27.91 109 33.33 46 30.87 41 37.96
Not listed 359 72.09 218 66.67 103 69.13 67 62.04
Total 498 100.00327 100.00149 100.00108 100.00
Michaels and Grüning InternationalJournalof Corporate SocialResponsibility (2018) 3:3 Page 4 of 13

N-grams appearing in 15 ofthe 29 CSR reports butin
only seven ofthe annualreports (exceptof CSR chap-
ters)establishes the finalcoding scheme (see Table 2).
While for many ofthe N-grams the relation to CSR is
straight,some likely remain as artefacts because the cod-
ing scheme has been established empirically.Those are
not removed manually to preserve objectivity of the con-
tent analysis.Altogether,the correlation coefficientof
the AIMD results and the frequency counts of Gamers-
chlag et al.(2010) is 0.76 (p = 0.00).
To obtain the CSR disclosure measure for the sample
reportsAIMD frequenciesare determined using this
coding scheme in the application phase.A higher AIMD
frequency represents a higher level of CSR disclosure.1
Company survey
In order to characterize CSR-oriented corporate identity
comprehensively,eight dimensionsof interest are
derived from prior literature on CSR and surveys meas-
uring generalcorporate identity (Sackmann 2006):(i)
People orientation (McShane and Cunningham 2011);
(ii) Leadership (Strand 2014);(iii) Innovation (Fischer
and Sawczyn 2013);(iv) Work related issues (Collier and
Esteban 2007);(v) Stakeholder orientation (Brennan et
al. 2013);(vi) Communication (Du etal. 2010);(vii)
value orientation (Bondy et al.2012);and (viii) Strategy/
vision (Heikkurinen and Ketola 2012).For each dimen-
sion relevant items are generated in the survey.Follow-
ing Martins (2007),the survey is structured in a three-
pillar-order(see Table 3) where the items of one
dimension are not in a subsequent order.The advantage
of this three-fold approach is that all identity levels (arti-
facts,values and underlying assumptions)are captured.
Whereasartifactsare predominantlyincluded in the
beginningsection,values,beliefsand underlyingas-
sumptionsare mainlyrecorded within theother two
parts.Think-aloud-protocols (Ericsson 2006) and verbal
probing (Willis 2006) are applied to ensure the validity
of the questionnaire.The questionnaire was sent out in
spring 2015 with reminders after about 2 months.Data
collection finished after approximately4 months.
Construct validity ofthe company survey are evaluated
using exploratory factor analysis.An average Cronbach’s
alpha of0.96 demonstrates the reliability ofthe survey
items.The average Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin criterion is 0.91
and indicates a “marvelous”sampling adequacy.Based
on a screw test,exploratory factoranalysisestablishes
four major factors that comprise CSR-oriented corporate
identity which are (i) strategic integration;(ii) CSR appli-
cation;(iii) employee integration;and (iv) attitude aware-
ness.All factors have an Eigenvalue above 1.Strategic
integration refers to the relevance of CSR in a company’s
strategic planning processand its marketpositioning.
CSR application is related to CSR activities and artefacts.
The dimension employee integration reflectsthe rele-
vance in assuming socialresponsibility.Attitude aware-
ness indicates the degree ofcorporate awareness about
CSR-related values and principles.The retrieved factors
are consistent with related literature (e.g.He and Balmer
2007;Melewarand Karaosmanoglu 2006).Statistical
model fit indicators are in line with standard recommen-
dations (Unterreitmeier 2004).The four factors are used
as independent variables in the regression model.
Empirical model
To test H1,the relationship between CSR-oriented cor-
porate identityand CSR disclosureis examined.The
followingmultivariateregression analysismodel that
controls for various other determinants ofCSR disclos-
ure is applied:
DISCLOSURE ¼ β0 þ β1STRATEGY
þ β2APPLICATION
þ β3EMPLOYEE
þ β4AWARENESS
þ β5logSIZE þ β6INDUSTRY
þ β7logPROF
þ β8INCORPORATION
þ β9LISTED
þ β10STANDALONE
þ β11GRI þ ε ð1Þ
The dependentvariableDISCLOSURE is an AIMD
N-gram-countbased disclosure score.The main inde-
pendentvariablesare the four factor variablesthat
Fig. 1 Basic idea of AIMD disclosure level measurement.Figure 1 shows the two basic steps of AIMD disclosure measurement.The first step consists of
the training phase where a coding scheme is created based on a small number representative corporate reports in English.The second step consists of
the application phase of the coding scheme on arbitrary English corporate disclosure documents in text form
Michaels and Grüning InternationalJournalof Corporate SocialResponsibility (2018) 3:3 Page 5 of 13

constitute CSR-oriented corporate identity.The variable
strategicintegration,STRATEGY, comprises many
future-oriented survey items concerning mission,vision
and targets as wellas the role of CSR for strategic posi-
tioning.The variable CSR application,APPLICATION,
joins all items related to CSR activities.As a third factor,
the variable employee integration,EMPLOYEE,captures
items covering how good CSR is implemented as a par-
ticipativeorganizationalconcept.The last variable
approach awareness,AWARENESS,covers how import-
ant CSR-related values are for a company.
Following prior empirical work,the model controls for
the effects of structural company characteristics that im-
pact the levelof CSR disclosure (Fifka 2013).Data is re-
trieved from the Orbis database.Prior empirical findings
documented that firm size is significantly related to CSR
disclosure because larger companies are exposed to in-
creasedexternalstakeholderpressures(Guidry and
Patten 2012) or larger companies benefit from an econ-
omy of scaleregardingorganizationalcost for CSR
(Baumann-Pauly et al.2013).In this paper,logSIZE is al-
ternatively proxied as the naturallogarithm of the num-
ber of employeesor the logarithm ofannualsales.
Because ofstructurally identicalresults only the results
of the former are tabulated and results of the robustness
analysis using the latter are not reported.
Prior research suggestsindustryaffiliation,INDUS-
TRY,is an important control variable because companies
in particularindustriesare exposed to higherpublic
pressure (Jackson and Apostolakou 2010) and regulation
Table 2 Coding scheme (121 codes)
academic education training ilo organization
academy emission energy important
stakeholder
analysis materiality emission reduction information
sustainability
animal emission scope initiative support
apprentice employee germany intercultural
association freedom employee health internationallabor
assurance report employee make internationallabor
organization
balance life employee need issue sustainability
balance life work employee new labor organization
bargain employee opportunitylabor standard
bargain collective energy include lighting
biodiversity energy resource man woman
business travel energy saving management
safety
carbon disclosure energy water management
sustainability
carbon footprint engagement
stakeholder
management
waste
carbon reduce environment impact mentor
chain management
supply
environmentalissue ngos
charitable environmental
performance
occupationalsafety
child labor environmentalreduce offer program
combustion environmental
responsibility
organization s
community local environmental
socialstandard
pollution
compact global
principle
equalopportunity process
procurement
condition working gas greenhouse
reduce
product
responsibility
consumption
electricity
ghg program support
consumption energy
reduce
globalprinciple project social
consumption resourcegovernmentalnon project support
consumption water governmental
non organization
rate turnover
convention governmental
organization
recycle
country employee greenhouse reduce recycling
course training grus initiative reduce use
development
professional
grus initiative
reporting
relate work
dialog stakeholder hazardous renewable use
discrimination hazardous waste report
sustainability
Table 2 Coding scheme (121 codes) (Continued)
disposalwaste help program reuse
donate hiring socialstandard
drinking hour work sponsorship
drinking water hour working square
eco illness strategy
sustainability
economic environmentalilo use water
economic environmental
social
ilo labor organizationvolunteer
waste water
Words as parts of N-grams are order alphabetically and stemmed to their root
Table 3 Questionnaire Structure
Section Explanation
1 - Types and
organization
of CSR
Section 1 aims to capture the existing forms of CSR in
the company and their organization and anchoring in
directives.
2 - Application
of CSR
Section 2 is intended to cover how the company uses
CSR,what objectives it pursues.
3 - Cultural
anchor
Section 3 is to identify the values and levels at which
CSR is anchored in the company.
Michaels and Grüning InternationalJournalof Corporate SocialResponsibility (2018) 3:3 Page 6 of 13

of CSR issues,such asenvironmentalprotection,may
vary between industries (Fischer and Sawczyn 2013).
Profitability is included as a controlvariable although
the relationship between CSR disclosure and profitability
is inconclusive (McWilliams etal. 2006).However,the
resource based view suggests thatfinancially high per-
forming companies dedicate more resources to CSR ac-
tivities and thereforeincreasetheir CSR disclosure
(Russo and Fouts 1997).The naturallogarithm ofsales
per employee(logPROF)proxies for the economic
potentialof profitability because of data availability con-
siderations.Robustnesstest (not reported)indicate
structuralidenticalresultsfor other proxies(natural
logarithm ofearnings before tax;of return on assets;of
return on sales) that are constrained by data availability.
In addition,controls for the effect of disclosure regula-
tion with the variables legal form and stock market activ-
ity are implemented.Prior researchrevealedthe
interaction ofmandatoryand voluntarydisclosureto
affect the disclosure level(Dye 1990).Hence,companies
which are subject to larger mandatory disclosure release
more voluntaryinformation.Therefore,the indicator
STOCKCOMPANY is included to controlfor this effect.
Similarly,the indicator LISTED controls for stock market
activities as listed companies are regarded to have higher
voluntary CSR disclosure levels (Adhikariand Tondkar
1992)because oftheir multi-investor ownership struc-
ture (Rouf 2011).
Furthermore,it we controlfor the effects ofdifferent
CSR reporting types.These types,such as standalone re-
ports,integrated reporting or website information may
vary in volume,structure and content(Dhaliwalet al.
2011).Cho et al.(2015) found that firms with standalone
CSR reportssignificantly disclose more CSR informa-
tion. Therefore,STANDALONE is included as an
additionalcontrol.Moreover,the modelcontrols for the
effects ofthe application ofreporting guidelinesof the
GRI. Empiricalfindingssupportthat the adoption of
internationalreporting standards such as GRIleads to
increasedharmonizationand transparencyin cross-
country comparisons as wellas to higher levels ofCSR
disclosure (Fortanieret al. 2011;Nikolaeva and Bicho
2011).Accordingly,the indicator GRI is included in the
analysis.Table 4 offers a summary of all variables,abbre-
viations and data sources.
Results and discussion
Descriptive statistics
Table 5 summarizes descriptive statistics for allcontinu-
ous variables included in Eq.(1). All nominaland di-
chotomous variables are omitted.Variables STRATEGY,
APPLICATION, EMPLOYEE, AWARENESSare factor
values comprising CSR-oriented corporate identity.They
resultfrom the exploratoryfactoranalysisof survey
items described in “Company survey” section.The item
variables are standardized before exploratory factor ana-
lysis.Therefore,the factor values have a mean close to 0
and a SD close to 1.
Table 6 shows the Pearson correlationof CSR
disclosure(DISCLOSURE),all independentvariables
and the control variableswithoutindustry affiliation
(INDUSTRY).The correlation coefficients between the
independentvariables do notindicate the presence of
multicollinearity asthe highestvalue is0.655 (Farrar
and Glauber 1967).In line, the varianceinflation
factors (mean of 1.57) also do not reveal
multicollinearity.
Consistent with the hypothesis,at least two independ-
ent variables,STRATEGY and APPLICATION,show a
Table 4 Data sources
Variable Measure Source
Abbreviation Explanation
CSR disclosure DISCLOSURE CSR disclosure score measured by AIMD From company websites
Strategic integration STRATEGY Degree of strategic integration of CSR Company survey
CSR application APPLICATION Degree of CSR application Company survey
Employee integration EMPLOYEE Degree of employeee integration Company survey
Approach awareness AWARENESS Degree of approach awareness Company survey
Company size logSIZE Logarithm of number of employees Orbis database
Industry affiliation INDUSTRY Industry classification Orbis database
Profitability logPROF Logarithm of sales per employee Orbis database
Legalform INCORPORATION Indicator for limited company on shares Orbis database
Stock market activity LISTED Indicator for listed companies Orbis database
Reporting type STANDALONE Indicator for standalone reporting Own assessment
Application of GRIguidelines GRI Indicator for application of GRIguidelines Company survey
Michaels and Grüning InternationalJournalof Corporate SocialResponsibility (2018) 3:3 Page 7 of 13

significant positive correlation. The variables
EMPLOYEE and AWARENESS indicate a weak negative
correlation.Furthermore,a significantpositive relation-
ship between logPROF and DISCLOSURE as wellas be-
tween GRIand DISCLOSURE and STANDALONE and
DISCLOSURE isfound according to the expectations.
However,the results do not reveal a strong positive rela-
tionshipbetween companysize and CSR disclosure
which wasreported byother researchers(Baumann-
Pauly et al.2013).Stand-alone reports correlate signifi-
cantly positive with CSR disclosure.
Additionally,there is a significant negative correlation
between INCORPORATION and LISTED and strategic
integration.Furthermore,profitabilityis significantly
negatively correlated with CSR application.These find-
ings contradict with earlier empirical findings suggesting
that higher public pressures generate superior CSR per-
formance (Fischer and Sawczyn 2013).
Regression results
The hypothesis predicts a positive relationship between
CSR-oriented corporateidentityand CSR disclosure.
Standardized regression coefficients(beta)and signifi-
cance levels (p) for Equation (6) are reported in Table 7.
The robustness of the models is ensured by subsequently
adding the controlvariables (Models 1–8) for the same
sample (N = 108).The explained variance (R2) increases
from 10.4% in Model1 to 43.1% in Model 8.The coeffi-
cient estimatesof the control variablesare generally
consistentwith the correlation analysis in Table 6.The
issuance of standalone CSR reports (betaSTANDALONE= +
0.327***) and the application of GRI reporting guidelines
(betaGRI = + 0.331***) in particular indicate a highly sig-
nificantpositiveassociation.Firm size (logSIZE)and
profitability (logPROF) had significant positive effects in
Models 4–6.However,the finalmodel(Model8) does
not show a significant relationship.There are no signifi-
cant effectson CSR disclosurefor stock companies
(STOCKCOMPANY) or for companies that are listed on
the Frankfurt Stock Exchange (LISTED).This results are
contradictory to priorempiricalfindings forcorporate
disclosure in general(Healy and Palepu 2001).Different
to prior research (Gamerschlag et al.2010),a Wald test
for joint significance ofthe controlvariable INDUSTRY
(not tabulated) reveal no significant effect.
In line with the prediction,a significantpositive im-
pact of strategicintegration (betaSTRATEGY= + 0.165**)
and CSR application (betaAPPLICATION = + 0.167**)on
CSR disclosure is found.Inconsistently with the hypoth-
esis, employeeintegration(betaEMPLOYEE= − 0.167***)
and attitudeawareness(betaAWARENESS= − 0.153*)are
significantly negatively associated with CSR disclosure.
Theseresultsare considered robustas estimatesfor
STRATEGY,APPLICATION, EMPLOYEE,AWARENESS
do not structurally differbetween models.Notably,in
Table 5 Descriptive Statistics
Variable Number Mean Std.Dev. Min Max
DISCLOSURE 327 314.09 402.23 0.00 2905.00
STRATEGY 149 0.01 0.95 −2.96 1.90
APPLICATION 149 0.01 0.95 −3.17 2.31
EMPLOYEE 149 −0.01 0.97 −3.28 1.82
AWARENESS 149 0.00 0.95 −4.40 1.37
logSIZE 481 7.72 2.38 0.00 13.29
logPROF 459 5.81 1.34 −1.47 14.29
Only continuous variables included in Eq.(1) are shown.All nominaland
dichotomous variables are omitted
Variables STRATEGY,APPLICATION,EMPLOYEE and AWARENESS are factor
values comprising CSR-oriented corporate identity
They result from an exploratory factor analysis (EFA) of survey items relevant
for the measurement of CSR-oriented corporate identity
The item variables have been standardized before EFA.Therefore,the factor
values have a mean near to 0 and a SD close to 1
See Table 4 for variable explanations
Table 6 Pearson Correlations
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11)
DISCLOSURE (1) 1
STRATEGY (2) .193* 1
APPLICATION (3) .180* .038 1
EMPLOYEE (4) −.118 .035 .012 1
AWARENESS (5) −.111 .052 .028 .007 1
logSIZE (6) .059 −.081 .008 .119 −.030 1
logPROF (7) .179* −.037 −.240* −.079 −.048 −.354* 1
INCORPORATION (8) .004 −.218* −.081 .067 −.143* .360* −.070 1
LISTED (9) .017 −.175* −.099 −.024 −.021 .323* −.069 .661* 1
STANDALONE (10) .367* .073 .126 .026 .132 −.014 .018 −.110* −.114* 1
GRI (11) .440* .265* .057 .05 .133 .126 .118 .030 .048 .227* 1
A correlation coefficient with asterisk indicated that the correlation is statistically significant at the 10% level
See Table 4 for variable explanations
Michaels and Grüning InternationalJournalof Corporate SocialResponsibility (2018) 3:3 Page 8 of 13

the final model (Model 8) all independent variables indi-
cate roughly the same power ofassociation.Therefore,
the association of corporate identity and CSR disclosure
is regarded to vary between the various aspects ofcor-
porate identity.In particular,thosecorporate identity
dimensions which are more closely related to the value
chain and future-oriented targets stimulate an increasing
CSR disclosure compared to corporate identity dimen-
sions with an introversivefocus.Thus, the findings
explicitlysupportneithervoluntarydisclosuretheory
nor legitimacytheoryto explain thedeterminantsof
CSR disclosure.They rather indicate that CSR disclosure
is differentfrom othertypesof disclosure,as already
proposed by Guidry and Patten (2012).In summary H1
is only confirmed partly.
To better understand the ambivalent effects of various
corporateidentitycharacteristics,four informalinter-
viewswith corporate CSR experts who participated in
the survey have been conducted.2 The exploratory inter-
views providesome interestingthoughtsabout the
resultsand could help in refining thehypothesesto
stipulatefurther confirmativeresearch.The findings
from the interviews have not been used in evaluating the
logicalvalue ofthe hypotheses.The experts’feedback
suggests that the diverging impacts of corporate identity
dimensions might depend on the development stage of a
CSR concept in companies.The levelof corporate iden-
tity dimensions is expected to change according to the
implementation status of CSR.Whereas attitude aware-
ness and employee integration are more pronounced in
an early phase ofimplementation,CSR application and
strategicintegration become more importantwith the
maturity of the concept.In line with voluntary disclosure
theory,CSR disclosure is expected to grow with the evo-
lution of the concept.The results could indicate that the
hard attributes ofcorporate identity,such as CSR arte-
facts and the relevance of CSR in the strategic planning
process,promote CSR disclosure.This interpretation is
corroborated by prior findings which suggestthatstra-
tegic planning isalso considered an importantreason
for CSR disclosure(Pérezand Rodríguezdel Bosque
2011).According to the CSR experts,CSR disclosure has
a target setting function and willonly be provided once
a CSR program becomes more precise.In line,the GRI
considers CSR disclosure to be a milestone within the
continuous improvement of CSR programs (Brown et al.
2009).The CSR experts also state thatattitude aware-
ness and employee integration have been relevant dimen-
sions in their companies for a longer period of time than
it has been common to adopt “fancy” CSR programs and
discloseCSR information.As a consequence,these
issues may remain stable over time and may not contrib-
ute to the variance of CSR disclosure content.Similarly,
previous research revealsthat companieswith a long-
standing socialpersonality tend to investlessin CSR
communication (Baumann-Pauly etal. 2013).As such,
results may also suggestthatless CSR disclosure does
neither indicate ifcompanies do notdispose over any
CSR characteristicsin their corporate identity norto
whatextentthese characteristics are existent.It can be
Table 7 Regression Results
Dependent
Variable = DISCLOSURE
Model1 Model2 Model3 Model4 Model5 Model6 Model7 Model8
beta beta beta beta beta beta beta beta
STRATEGY .220*** .215*** .257*** .261*** .283*** .281*** .256*** .165**
APPLICATION .188** .182** .178** .224** .223** .225** .200** .167**
EMPLOYEE −.123 −.13 −.152* −.134 −.143* −.140* −.166** −.167***
AWARENESS −.116 −.106 −.110 −.105 −.090 −.092 −.114 −.153*
logSIZE .207* .192* .238* .201* .194 .220** .147
logPROF .197* .190* .180* .118 .063
INCORPORATION .110 .070 .053 .072
LISTED .061 .107 .082
STANDALONE .385*** .327***
GRI .331***
INDUSTRY No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
R2 10% 15% 17% 20% 21% 21% 35% 43%
N 108 108 108 108 108 108 108 108
* p < 0.10,** p < 0.05,*** p < 0.01
This table presents the regression results using DISCLOSURE as dependent variable
Model1 shows the regression results of dependent (DISCLOSURE) and independent variables (STRATEGY,APPLICATION,EMPLOYEE,AWARENESS) without any
control variables
In Model 2–8, we subsequently add control variables. We use robust standard errors over all models as heteroscedasticity is present. Model 8 contains the
See Table 4 for variable explanations
Michaels and Grüning InternationalJournalof Corporate SocialResponsibility (2018) 3:3 Page 9 of 13

suspected thatcompanies with strong CSR values em-
ploy other means to create transparency and to appear
trustworthy.
The regression results are regarded robustas the ef-
fects ofthe main variables remain stable over different
models.Various other models thatinclude a proxy for
CSR performanceare tested aswell (not tabulated).
Prior research uses CSR performance proxies from data-
bases such as MSCI KLD or Bloomberg (Cho et al.2013;
Nelling and Webb 2008).For 41 firms environmental,
social and governanceperformanceindicators(total
greenhouse gas emissions,employee turnover and board
meeting attendance) could be obtained from Bloomberg.
The resultsdo not reveala significanteffectof CSR
performance ofCSR disclosure.Due to the low sample
size,CO2 emissionsreported in the CSR reportsare
used as alternative measure in line with prior literature
(Clarkson etal. 2008,p. 308).The analysis based on a
sample of77 firms results (nottabulated)revealagain
no significant effect of(this very narrow) CSR perform-
ance on CSR disclosure.
Conclusion and future research
Today,CSR information is a major component ofcom-
panies’corporate disclosure.It is considered to mirror
companies’CSR performance as a response to increasing
stakeholder requirements and legitimate business opera-
tions.The growing interestin sustainability topics has
also motivated many researchers to examine CSR dis-
closure.Prior research revealed a numberof internal
and externalinfluentialfactors along with a number of
benefits thatcompanies gain from compiling and pub-
lishing CSR information.
The aim of this research study is to extend the know-
ledge of so far unobserved internaldeterminants of CSR
disclosure.In summary,the results of this study suggest
three majorfindings.First,characteristics ofcorporate
identity are related to the development stage ofa firm’s
CSR concept.Corporate identity dimensions thatindi-
cate a mature CSR concept are positively associated with
companies’CSR disclosure.Firms that remain in an early
phase ofCSR developmentor that have a superficial
CSR modeldisclose significantly less CSR information.
This finding is in line with voluntary disclosure theory.
Second,introversive corporate identity dimensionsare
more pronounced in a firm with low levelCSR engage-
ment.Value chain and future-oriented dimensions are
more pronounced in a firm with high levelCSR engage-
ment.Third,the perceived need for legitimacy influences
the degree ofa firm’s CSR disclosure.Companies that
historically possess a corporate identity ofstrong atti-
tude awareness and employee integration report less CSR
information because they do not detect the need for le-
gitimacy.Concernedcompaniesconsideraspectsof
these corporateidentitydimensionsto be ordinary
business conduct.This finding is in line with legitimacy
theory.It will be necessary to furtherinvestigate why
thesecompanieshavethis perception;they may use
other means and channels to create a trustfulrelation-
ship with their stakeholders.
In conclusion,the resultsof this study supportthe
claim that a combination ofvoluntary disclosure theory
and legitimacy theories (Clarkson etal. 2008)is neces-
sary to explain thedriversand constraintsof CSR
disclosure as wellas the relationship between CSR dis-
closure and CSR performance.
The empiricalanalysis contributes to CSR disclosure
literature by examining furtherpotentialdeterminants
and consequencesof CSR disclosure,which have re-
ceived little attention so far.To the authors’best know-
ledge,this study is the first that empirically examines the
relationship between corporate identity and CSR disclos-
ure.It extends the scope ofresearch ofwhatis known
aboutfirm’sinternaldeterminantsof CSR disclosure.
The discovery of corporate identity dimensions with am-
biguous effects on CSR disclosure supports the growing
field of researchers that state a complementary relation-
ship between voluntary disclosure theory and legitimacy
theory to explainCSR disclosure.Additionally,the
findings underline the results from prior research (e.g.
Dhaliwal et al.2014) by demonstrating that the reporting
framework has a substantialimpact on the levelof CSR
disclosure:Companies that issue standalone CSR reports
and applythe GRI guidelinesachievea significantly
higher disclosure level.Other determinants like the legal
form and stock market activity appear to be less import-
ant than expected.
From a methodological point of view, this is the first time
that artificial intelligence is applied to the measurement of
CSR disclosure. The study provides quantitative data on the
state ofthe artof CSR disclosure ofGerman firms.In
addition,it develops a survey-based measurement toolto
determine the degree of CSR orientation in firms’ corporate
identities and provides quantitative data on the current cor
porate identity profiles of German firms.
Limitations of the empiricalwork arose from potential
conceptualand methodologicalshortcomings.With re-
gard to the research question,it is possible thatadd-
itional factors that have a direct, moderatingor
mediating impacton the theoreticalconstructs are not
captured appropriately.Specifically,corporate identity is
an abstractconstructthat is difficultto capture.Even
though the corporate identity dimensions are based on
an extensive literature review,they are potentially biased
or incomplete.From a technicalpoint of view,it is
recognizedthat the cross-sectionaldesignthat was
chosen becauseof research economicconsiderations
severelylimits resultsbecauseof the probablebut
Michaels and Grüning InternationalJournalof Corporate SocialResponsibility (2018) 3:3 Page 10 of 13

undeterminable time lag of corporate identity effects on
CSR disclosure.Furthermore,the usualsampling issues
of field research may limit the generalizability of results.
The findings of this study unveil a number of research
paths that could be investigated in future research.Fur-
ther research should examine the relationship between
corporateidentityand CSR disclosureon an inter-
national level or apply different measurement techniques
to capture corporate identity.This may validate the find-
ings and provide further insights into the interaction of
CSR disclosure determinants derived from voluntary dis-
closure theory and legitimacy theory.Further research in
this direction may also apply a mix ofquantitative and
qualitative approachesto obtain more in-depth know-
ledge aboutthe interaction ofCSR identity and CSR
disclosure.The four exploratory interviews following the
confirmatory hypotheses evaluation suggest some poten-
tial avenues for further research.Additional empirical re-
search is also required to elaborate on the interaction
between information asymmetry and trust in the context
of CSR:do they have a cause-effectrelationship or are
they even substitutes for each other?
Endnotes
1For a detailed explanation of AIMD refer to Grüning
(2011).
2The interviews were conducted by telephone in April
2016 and took about 30–45 min.The participants work
in differentindustries (food and beverages,machinery,
chemicals,services)
Acknowledgements
Not applicable.
Funding
We acknowledge support for the Article Processing Charge by the German
Research Foundation and the Open Access Publication Fund of the
Technische Universität Ilmenau.
Availability of data and materials
Data are partly not available from public sources.
Authors’contributions
Both authors made substantialcontributions to the conception and research
design,data collection,analysis as wellas to the interpretation of data in this
paper.Both authors participated in drafting and revising the paper.Both
authors gave finalapprovalof the version being submitted to this journal.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutralwith regard to jurisdictionalclaims in
published maps and institutionalaffiliations.
Received:12 November 2017 Accepted:7 February 2018
References
Adhikari,A.,& Tondkar,R.H.(1992).Environmentalfactors influencing accounting
disclosure requirements of globalstock exchanges.Journalof International
FinancialManagement & Accounting,4(2),75–105.
Albert,S.,& Whetten,D.A.(1985).Organization identity.Research on
OrganizationalBehavior,7,263–295.
Archer,D.(2009).In D.Archer (Ed.),What’s in a word-list?:Investigating word
frequency and keyword extraction.Farnham,Burlington:Ashgate Publishing.
Balmer,J. M.T.(2001).Corporate identity,corporate branding and corporate
marketing-seeing through the fog.European Journalof Marketing,35(3),248–
291.https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560110694763.
Balmer,J. M.T.,& Greyser,S.A.(2003).Revealing the corporation:Perspectives on
identity,image,reputation,corporate branding,and corporate-levelMarketing :
An anthology.London,New York:Routledge.
Balmer,J. M.T.,& Greyser,S.A.(2006).Corporate marketing:Integrating corporate
identity,corporate branding,corporate communications,corporate image
and corporate reputation.European Journalof Marketing,40(7/8),730–741.
https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560610669964.
Baumann-Pauly,D.,Wickert,C.,Spence,L.J.,& Scherer,A.G.(2013).Organizing
corporate socialresponsibility in smalland large firms:Size matters.Journal
of Business Ethics,115(4),693–705.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1827-7.
Baumgarth,C.,& Binckebanck,L.(2011).Glaubwürdige CSR-Kommunikation
durch eine identitätsbasierte CSR-Markenführung:Forschungsstand und
konzeptionelles Modell.Uwf UmweltWirtschaftsForum,19(3–4),199–205.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00550-011-0212-1.
Bondy,K.,Moon,J.,& Matten,D.(2012).An institution of corporate social
responsibility (CSR) in multi-NationalCorporations (MNCs):Form and
implications.Journalof Business Ethics,111(2),281–299.
Boulding,K.E.(1956).The image:Knowledge in life and society.Michigan:
University of Michigan Press.
Branco,M.C.,& Rodrigues,L.L.(2006).Corporate socialresponsibility and
resource-based perspectives.Journalof Business Ethics,69(2),111–132.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-006-9071-z.
Brennan,N.M.,Merkl-Davies,D.M.,& Beelitz,A.(2013).Dialogism in corporate
socialresponsibility communications:Conceptualising verbalinteraction
between Organisations and their audiences.Journalof Business Ethics,115(4),
665–679.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1825-9.
Brown,H.S.,de Jong,M.,& Levy,D.L.(2009).Building institutions based on
information disclosure:Lessons from GRI’s sustainability reporting.Journalof
Cleaner Production,17(6),571–580.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2008.12.009.
Carroll,A.B.,& Shabana,K.M.(2010).The business case for corporate social responsibility:
A review of concepts,research and practice.International Journal of Management
Reviews,12(1),85–105.https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00275.x.
Chen,S.,& Bouvain,P.(2009).Is corporate responsibility converging? A
comparison of corporate responsibility reporting in the USA,UK,Australia,
and Germany.Journalof Business Ethics,87(SUPPL.1),299–317.
Cho,C.H.,Guidry,R.P.,Hageman,A.M.,& Patten,D.M.(2012).Do actions speak
louder than words? An empiricalinvestigation of corporate environmental
reputation.Accounting,Organizations and Society,37(1),14–25.
Cho,C.H.,Michelon,G.,Patten,D.M.,& Roberts,R.W.(2015).CSR disclosure:The more
things change…? Accounting,Auditing & Accountability Journal,28(1),14–35.
Cho,C.H.,& Patten,D.M.(2007).The role of environmentaldisclosures as tools
of legitimacy:A research note.Accounting,Organizations and Society,32(7–8),
639–647.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2006.09.009.
Cho,S.Y.,Lee,C.,& Pfeiffer,R.J. (2013).Corporate socialresponsibility
performance and information asymmetry.Journalof Accounting and Public
Policy,32(1),71–83.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2012.10.005.
Clarkson,P.M.,Fang,X.,Li,Y.,& Richardson,G.D.(2013).The relevance of
environmentaldisclosures:Are such disclosures incrementally informative ?
Journalof Accounting and Public Policy,32(5),410–431.https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jaccpubpol.2013.06.008.
Clarkson,P.M.,Li,Y.,Richardson,G.D.,& Vasvari,F.P.(2008).Revisiting the
relation between environmentalperformance and environmentaldisclosure:
An empiricalanalysis.Accounting,Organizations and Society,33(4–5),303–327.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.2007.05.003.
Collier,J.,& Esteban,R.(2007).Corporate socialresponsibility and employee
commitment.Business Ethics:A European Review,16(1),19–33.https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1467-8608.2006.00466.x.
Michaels and Grüning InternationalJournalof Corporate SocialResponsibility (2018) 3:3 Page 11 of 13

Cornelissen,J. P.(2002).On the “ organizationalidentity ” metaphor.British
Journalof Management,13,259–268.
Dhaliwal,D.S.,Li,O.Z.,Tsang,A.,& Yang,Y.G.(2011).Voluntary nonfinancial
disclosure and the cost of equity capital:The initiation of corporate social
responsibility reporting.The Accounting Review,86(1),59–100.
Dhaliwal,D.S.,Li,O.Z.,Tsang,A.,& Yang,Y.G.(2014).Corporate social
responsibility disclosure and the cost of equity capital:The roles of
stakeholder orientation and financialtransparency.Journalof Accounting and
Public Policy,33(4),328–355.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaccpubpol.2014.04.006.
Dhaliwal,D.S.,Tsang,A.,Radhakrishnan,S.,& Yang,Y.G.(2012).Nonfinancial
disclosure and analyst forecast accuracy:Internationalevidence on corporate
socialresponsibility disclosure.The Accounting Review,87(3),723–759.https://
doi.org/10.2308/accr-10218.
Du,S.,Bhattacharya,C.B.,& Sen,S.(2010).Maximizing business returns to
corporate socialresponsibility (CSR):The role of CSR communication.
InternationalJournalof Management Reviews,12(1),8–19.https://doi.org/10.
1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00276.x.
Dye,R.A.(1990).Mandatory versus voluntary disclosures:The cases of financial
and realexternalities.The Accounting Review,65(1),1–24.
Einwiller,S.,& Will,M.(2002).Towards an integrated approach to corporate
branding – An empiricalstudy.Corporate Communications:An International
Journal,7(2),100–109.https://doi.org/10.1108/13563280210426160.
Engert,S.,Rauter,R.,& Baumgartner,R.J. (2016).Exploring the integration of corporate
sustainability into strategic management:A literature review.Journal of Cleaner
Production,112,2833–2850.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.031.
Ericsson,K.A.(2006).The influence of experience and deliberate practice on the
development of superior expert performance.In K.A.Ericsson,N.Charness,
P.J. Feltovich,& R.R.Hoffman (Eds.),The Cambridge handbook of expertise
and expert performance (pp.685–706).Cambridge:Cambridge University
Press.
Farrar,D.E.,& Glauber,R.R.(1967).Multicollinearity in regression analysis:The
problem revisited.The Review of Economics and Statistics,49(1),92–107.
https://doi.org/10.2307/1926450.
Fatma,M.,Khan,I.,& Rahman,Z.(2016).The effect of CSR on consumer
behavioralresponses after service failure and recovery.European Business
Review,28(5),583–599.https://doi.org/10.1108/EBR-11-2015-0134.
Fifka,M.S.(2013).Corporate responsibility reporting and its determinants in
comparative perspective - a review of the empirical literature and a meta-analysis.
Business Strategy and the Environment,22(1),1–35.https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.729.
Fischer,T.M.,& Sawczyn,A.A.(2013).The relationship between corporate social
performance and corporate financialperformance and the role of innovation:
Evidence from German listed firms.Journalof Management Control,24(1),
27–52.
Fortanier,F.,Kolk,A.,& Pinkse,J. (2011).Harmonization in CSR reporting.
Management InternationalReview,51(5),665–696.
Francis,J.,Nanda,D.,& Olsson,P.(2008).Voluntary disclosure,earnings quality,
and cost of capital.Journalof Accounting Research,46(1),53–99.https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.1475-679X.2008.00267.x.
Gamerschlag,R.,Möller,K.,& Verbeeten,F.(2010).Determinants of voluntary CSR
disclosure:Empiricalevidence from Germany.Review of ManagerialScience,
5(2–3),233–262.
Gioia,D.A.,Schultz,M.,& Corley,K.G.(2000).Organizationalidentity,image,and
adaptive instability.The Academy of Management Review,25(1),63–81.
Grüning,M.(2011).Artificialintelligence measurement of disclosure (AIMD).
European Accounting Review,20(3),485–519.
Guidry,R.P.,& Patten,D.M.(2012).Voluntary disclosure theory and financial
controlvariables:An assessment of recent environmentaldisclosure research.
Accounting Forum,36(2),81–90.
Hahn,R.,& Kühnen,M. (2013).Determinants ofsustainability reporting:A
review ofresults,trends,theory,and opportunities in an expanding field
of research.Journalof CleanerProduction,59,5–21.https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jclepro.2013.07.005.
Haniffa,R.M.,& Cooke,T.E.(2005).The impact of culture and governance on
corporate social reporting.Journal of Accounting and Public Policy,24(5),391–430.
He,H.-W.,& Balmer,J. M.T.(2007).Identity studies:Multiple perspectives and
implications for corporate-levelmarketing.European Journalof Marketing,
41(7),765–785.https://doi.org/10.1108/03090560710752393.
He,H.-W.,& Balmer,J. M.T.(2013).A grounded theory of the corporate identity
and corporate strategy dynamic:A corporate marketing perspective.
European Journalof Marketing,47(3),401–430.https://doi.org/10.1108/
03090561311297391.
Healy,P.M.,& Palepu,K.G.(2001).Information asymmetry,corporate disclosure,
and the capitalmarkets:A review of the empiricaldisclosure literature.
Journalof Accounting and Economics,31(1–3),405–440.https://doi.org/10.
1016/S0165-4101(01)00018-0.
Heikkurinen,P.,& Ketola,T.(2012).Corporate responsibility and identity:From a
stakeholder to an awareness approach.Business Strategy and the
Environment,21(5),326–337.https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.744.
Heitzman,S.,Wasley,C.,& Zimmerman,J. L.(2010).The joint effects of materiality
thresholds and voluntary disclosure incentives on firms’disclosure decisions.
Journalof Accounting and Economics,49(1–2),109–132.https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jacceco.2009.10.002.
Hopwood,A.G.(2009).Accounting and the environment.Accounting,
Organizations and Society,34(3–4),433–439.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aos.
2009.03.002.
Hristache,D.A.,Paicu,C.E.,& Ismail,N.(2013).Corporate socialresponsibility and
organizationalidentity in post-crisis economy.Theoreticaland Applied
Economics,20(1),113–120.
Huang,C.,Yen,S.,Management,D.,Liu,C.,& Huang,P.(2014).The relationship among
corporate social responsibility,service quality,corporate image and purchase
intention.International Journal of Organizational Innovation,6(3),68–85.
Jackson,G.,& Apostolakou,A.(2010).Corporate socialresponsibility in Western
Europe:An institutionalmirror or substitute? Journalof Business Ethics,94,
371–394.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-009-0269-8.
Laufer,W.S.(2014).Corporate socialaccountability and greenwashing.Journalof
Business Ethics,43(3),253–261.
Liu,M.T.,Wong,I.A.,Shi,G.,Chu,R.,Brock,J. L.,Liu,M.T.,et al.(2014).The
impact of corporate socialresponsibility ( CSR ) performance and perceived
brand quality on customer-based brand preference.Journalof Services
Marketing,28(3),181–194.https://doi.org/10.1108/JSM-09-2012-0171.
Lock,I.,& Seele,P.(2016).The credibility of CSR (corporate socialresponsibility)
reports in Europe.Evidence from a quantitative content analysis in 11
countries.Journalof Cleaner Production,122,186–200.https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.060.
Lozano,R.(2012).Towards better embedding sustainability into companies’
systems:An analysis of voluntary corporate initiatives.Journalof Cleaner
Production,25,14–26.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2011.11.060.
Lozano,R.(2013).Are companies planning their organisational changes for
corporate sustainability? An analysis of three case studies on resistance to
change and their strategies to overcome it.Corporate Social Responsibility and
EnvironmentalManagement,20(5),275–295.https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1290.
Lozano,R.(2015).A holistic perspective on corporate sustainability drivers.
Corporate SocialResponsibility and EnvironmentalManagement,22(1),32–44.
https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1325.
Lozano,R.,Nummert,B.,& Ceulemans,K.(2016).Elucidating the relationship
between sustainability reporting and Organisationalchange Management for
Sustainability.Journalof Cleaner Production,125,168–188.https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.021.
Margulies,W.P.(1977).Make the most of your corporate identity.Harvard
Business Review,55(4),66–72.
Martins,E.(2007).Beteiligungsorientierte Unternehmenskultur:Konzept und
Messung (No.7).Arbeitspapier aus dem Projekt Transfer Innovativer
Unternehmensmilieus,pp.44–73.
McShane,L.,& Cunningham,P.(2011).To thine own self be true? Employees’
judgments of the authenticity of their Organization’s corporate social
responsibility program.Journalof Business Ethics,108(1),81–100.https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10551-011-1064-x.
McWilliams,A.,& Siegel,D.S.(2001).Note corporate social Responsibility :A theory
of the firm perspective.Academy of Management Journal,26(1),117–127.
McWilliams,A.,Siegel,D.S.,& Wright,P.M.(2006).Guest editors’introduction
corporate socialResponsibility :Strategic implications.Journalof
Management Studies,43(1),1–18.
Melewar,T.C.,& Karaosmanoglu,E.(2006).Seven dimensions of corporate
identity.European Journalof Marketing,40(7/8),846–869.https://doi.org/10.
1108/03090560610670025.
Michaels,A.,& Grüning,M.(2016a).Glaubwürdigkeit von CSR-Konzepten – Die
Einflüsse von CSR-Publizität und Corporate Identity auf CSR-Reputation.Uwf
UmweltWirtschaftsForum,24(2–3),179–193.https://doi.org/10.1007/s00550-
016-0414-7.
Michaels,A.,& Grüning,M.(2016b).Interne Treiber von CSR-Publizität:Der
Einfluss von Corporate Identity.Uwf UmweltWirtschaftsForum,24(4),315–324.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00550-016-0421-8.
Michaels and Grüning InternationalJournalof Corporate SocialResponsibility (2018) 3:3 Page 12 of 13

Michaels,A.,& Grüning,M.(2017).Relationship of corporate social responsibility
disclosure on information asymmetry and the cost of capital.Journal of
Management Control,28(3),251–274.https://doi.org/10.1007/s00187-017-0251-z.
Nelling,E.,& Webb,E.(2008).Corporate socialresponsibility and financial
performance:The “virtuous circle” revisited.Review of Quantitative Finance
and Accounting,32(2),197–209.
Newell,S.J.,& Goldsmith,R.E.(2001).The development of a scale to measure
perceived corporate credibility.Journalof Business Reserach,52(3),235–247.
Nijhof,A.H.J.,& Jeurissen,R.J. M.(2010).The glass ceiling of corporate social
responsibility:Consequences of a business case approach towards CSR.
InternationalJournalof Sociology and SocialPolicy,30(11/12),618–631.
Nikolaeva,R.,& Bicho,M.(2011).The role of institutionaland reputationalfactors
in the voluntary adoption of corporate socialresponsibility reporting
standards.J Acad Mark Sci,39(1),136–157.
Once,S.,& Almagtome,A.(2014).The relationship between Hofstede’s national
culture values and corporate environmentaldisclosure:An international
perspective.Research Journalof Business and Management,1(3),279–304.
Otubanjo,O.(2013).Theorising the interconnectivity between corporate social
responsibility ( CSR ) and corporate identity.Journalof Management and
Sustainability,3(1),74–94.https://doi.org/10.5539/jms.v3n1p74.
Pérez,A.,& Rodríguez delBosque,I.(2011).The role of CSR in the corporate
identity of banking service providers.Journalof Business Ethics,108(2),145–
166.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1067-7.
Plumlee,M.A.,Brown,D.,Hayes,R.M.,& Marshall,R.S.(2015).Voluntary
environmentaldisclosure quality and firm value:Further evidence.Journalof
Accounting and Public Policy,34(4),336–361.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jaccpubpol.2015.04.004.
Porter,M.E.,& Kramer,M.R.(2006).Stategy & Society - the link between
competitive advantage and corporate socialresponsibility.Harvard Business
Review,84(12),78–92.
Reverte,C.(2012).The impact of better corporate socialresponsibility disclosure
on the cost of equity capital.Corporate SocialResponsibility and
EnvironmentalManagement,19(5),253–272.
Rouf,A.(2011).Corporate characteristics,governance attributes and the extent of
voluntary disclosure in Bangladesh.African Journalof Business Management,
5(19),7836–7845.https://doi.org/10.5897/AJBM10.1180.
Russo,M.V.,& Fouts,P.A.(1997).A resource-based perspective on corporate
environmentalperformance and profitability.Academy of Management
Journal,40(3),534–559.https://doi.org/10.2307/257052.
Sackmann,S.(2006).Messen-Werten-Optimieren.Erfolg durch Unternehmenskultur.
Gütersloh:Bertelsmann Stiftung.
Shnayder,L.,van Rijnsoever,F.J.,& Hekkert,M.P.(2016).Motivations for
corporate socialresponsibility in the packaged food industry:An institutional
and stakeholder management perspective.Journalof Cleaner Production,122,
212–227.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.030.
Simon,H.(2012).Hidden Champions - Aufbruch nach Globalia:Die
Erfolgsstrategien unbekannter Weltmarktführer.Frankfurt am Main,New York:
Campus Verlag.
Spiegel,F.,& Block,J. (2013).Regionale Bedeutung von Familienunternehmen.Zeitschrift
Für KMU Und Entrepreneurship, 2(1–2),7–34.https://doi.org/10.3790/zfke.61.1-2.7.
Strand,R.(2014).Strategic leadership of corporate sustainability.Journalof
Business Ethics,123(4),687–706.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-2017-3.
Sustainalytics.(2012).Die Nachhaltigkeitsleistungen deutscher Großunternehmen.
Retrieved 15 March 2015,from http://www.sustainalytics.com/sites/default/
files/sustainalytics_dax_30_studie_2011_0.pdf
Unterreitmeier,A.(2004).Unternehmenskultur beiMergers & Acquisitions:Ansätze
zu Konzeptualisierung und Operationalisierung.Berlin,Heidelberg:Springer
Verlag.
Van der Laan Smith,J.,Adhikari,A.,& Tondkar,R.H.(2005).Exploring differences
in socialdisclosures internationally:A stakeholder perspective.Journalof
Accounting and Public Policy,24(2),123–151.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jaccpubpol.2004.12.007.
Van Riel,C.B.M.,& Fombrun,C.J. (2007).Essentials of corporate communication:
Implementing practices for effective reputation management.London,New
York:Taylor & Francis Retrieved from http://books.google.de/books/about/
Essentials_of_Corporate_Communication.html?id=4JItn6S4NSkC&pgis=1.
Venturelli,A.,Caputo,F.,Leopizzi,R.,& Mastroleo,G.(2017).How can CSR identity
be evaluated ? A pilot study using a fuzzy expert system.Journalof Cleaner
Production,141,1000–1010.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.172.
Verrecchia,R.E.(1983).Discretionary disclosure.Journalof Accounting and
Economics,5,179–194.https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-4101(90)90021-U.
Wickert,C.,Scherer,A.G.,& Spence,L.J. (2016).Walking and talking corporate
socialResponsibility :Implications of firm size and organizationalcost.
Journalof Management Studies,1–28.https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12209.
Willis,G.(2006).Cognitive interviewing as a toolfor improving the informed
consent process.Journalof EmpiricalResearch on Human Research Ethics,1(1),
9–24.https://doi.org/10.1525/jer.2006.1.1.9.
Young,S.,& Marais,M.(2012).A multi-levelperspective of CSR reporting:The
implications of NationalInstitutions and industry risk characteristics.
Corporate Governance:An InternationalReview,20(5),432–450.https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1467-8683.2012.00926.x.
Michaels and Grüning InternationalJournalof Corporate SocialResponsibility (2018) 3:3 Page 13 of 13