Strategic CSR, Corporate Identity, Branding and Marketing: Review

This report, based on a review and comments, explores the crucial relationship between Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), Corporate Identity, Branding, and Marketing. It investigates how strategic CSR initiatives affect corporate identity, which is fundamental to the brand, and how companies can strategically design CSR efforts to engage stakeholders and manage their brands effectively. The research identifies gaps in existing literature and proposes a framework to describe the effect of CSR on corporate branding and marketing, aiming to achieve sustainable competitive advantage and enhanced firm-level performance. The study highlights the importance of aligning CSR with long-term strategic goals, particularly in developing countries, and offers propositions for measuring CSR's impact on branding and marketing. It discusses the evolution of CSR from ethical and philanthropic dimensions to strategic approaches that create shared value for both the company and society. The report also examines how corporate branding is used to differentiate companies in the competitive global market and how CSR is becoming a key factor in determining corporate brand perception and organizational success. This study provides valuable insights into how companies can leverage CSR to improve their corporate identity, image, brand, and overall performance.

Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 4(3) 121
Strategic CSR, Corporate Identity, Branding and
Marketing: Review & Comments
Subrat Sahu*
School of Petroleum Management, Pandit Deendayal
Petroleum University
Suvendu Kr. Pratihari,
School of Management, National Institute of Technology, India
ABSTRACT
Today, many corporations are facing the challenges of intense competition in the global
market to gain sustainable competitive advantage. Corporate Branding is becoming the way
in which the corporations are differentiating themselves within the competition framework.
It is observed that national and multinational companies are increasingly moving towards
corporate branding rather than branding of their products and services. Customers are
giving more importance to corporate brands’ social quality as compared to technical and
functional values of a product. Corporate identity that is fundamental to a corporate brand
has been playing a significant role in consumers’ product evaluation. Corporate Social
Responsibility (CSR) currently has occupied an important position on the Corporate
Branding and Marketing agenda. A growing number of authors have presented the linkages
between CSR, Corporate Identity, Corporate Image, Corporate Branding and Corporate
Marketing. The present study has identified some research gaps through an extensive
literature review and has proposed a framework describing the effect of CSR on Corporate
Branding and Marketing. The study also offers a few propositions to measure the effect of
CSR on corporate branding and marketing to gain sustainable competitive advantage and
increased firm-level performance. Strategic CSR affects the corporate identity positively,
which is again fundamental to the corporate brand, as some authors stated. The study
discusses the strategic designing of various CSR initiatives and stakeholder engagement
from the corporate marketing perspective and how the strategic implementation of such
efforts help companies in managing their brands to gain competitive advantage and firm-
level increased performance.
Key Words: CSR & Strategic CSR, Corporate Identity, Corporate Branding, Corporate
Marketing

Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 4(3) 122
followed parallel evolutionary paths, they have converged to convey a unified sense of a
company’s long-term success and its existence (Vaaland et al., 2008). This idea of
corporate consciousness indistinguishably been tried to the stewardship of business of not
just its well-being, but also that of the natural and social environment in which it operates
(Hildebrand et al., 2011). This has led forward-thinking companies to make a strategic
approach to CSR, devoting unprecedented efforts and resources to create and maximize the
shared value (i.e. the value both for the company and the society) (Porter and Kramer,
2011). In this context, some efforts have been made to conceptualize the questions that
persevere about the relationship between a company, its stakeholders, and its CSR
initiatives, and, in particular, how these three entities come together to create that elusive
shared value (Simmons, 2009; Balmer et al., 2007; Fukukawa et al., 2007; Maignan and
Ferrell, 2004 and Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001).
Corporate branding is gaining momentum as the corporations are seeking to differentiate
themselves. Moreover, corporates consider corporate brands as an important element of
their organizational marketing strategy (Balmer, 2001a and Olins, 2000). Corporate brands
(CB) are significant assets that contribute billions of dollars to the balance sheet of the
company (Aaker, 1996). While the success or failure of virtually all major organizations
recognizes the significance of strong brand as an important factor for some time; CSR is
recently acknowledged as one of the most important factors in determining corporate brand
(Worcester, 2009). Moreover, CSR has been observed in becoming a mainstream topic,
rising to a corporate priority in management and marketing (Franklin, 2008). The question
of how does CSR affect customers’ and other stakeholders’ perception and how does it
affect the company’s identity, image, brand and organizational success, has become one of
the key topics at the intersection of sustainability and marketing research (Bhattacharya et
al., 2009; Sen et al., 2006; Smith, 2003).
2. CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (CSR)
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is the practice and policy of corporate social
involvement to satisfy social needs (Angelidis and Ibrahim, 1993; Enderle and Tavis,
1998). CSR comprises a wide range of corporate activities that focus on the welfare of
various stakeholder groups, including society and the natural environment (Sprinkle and
Maines, 2010). While a firm’s CSR action should be in harmony with societal values and
expectations (Lerner and Fryxell, 1998), CSR has been further refined into business
activities that involve four responsibilities such as economic, legal, ethical, and
philanthropic (Carroll, 1996).
Table-1: Defining Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 4(3) 123
business and promote innovation.
Legal
Firms’ fulfillment of their
economic responsibility within a
legal framework. To comply with the law
Ethical
Firms’ abide by acknowledging
societal values and norms
defining appropriate behaviour.
To be moral and fair, respect
people’s rights, avoid harm and
social injury.
Philanthropic
‘‘Purely voluntary’’ in
contributing to the betterment of
society and improving the overall
quality of life.
To perform activities those are
beneficial for society. These
include: Altruistic CSR and
Strategic CSR
Source: Compiled by author. (Depicting the dimensions of CSR as described by
Carroll (1996) and by Lantos (2001))
In Carroll’s (1979) conception on CSR, businesses were said to prioritize their profitability
(economic obligation) and their responsibility to conduct business within the law (legal
obligation). Only in the second instance would ethical concerns (norm-imposed obligation),
such as minimizing environmental impacts, and philanthropic or “discretionary” concerns,
such as corporate giving play a role (Carroll, 1991). Taking this into account, Esrock and
Leichty (1998) investigated 100 Fortune 500 companies in six industry segments about
their CSR communication initiatives in establishing CSR policy as to present themselves as
socially responsible companies. In their findings, these authors found significant
differences between industries in disclosing ethical CSR issues. However, they didn’t
establish substantial differences between industries in the extent to which philanthropic
CSR was discussed.
Maignan and Ralston (2002) analyzed CSR discourse on the corporate signature websites
of Fortune 500 companies in four developed countries in terms of CSR motivations,
initiatives / processes and stakeholder issues. They found a cross-cultural variation in terms
of the CSR platform companies across these four countries (France, the United Kingdom,
The Netherlands and the USA) in conveying their respective socially responsible identity.
While US companies tend to discuss philanthropic initiatives, centering on corporate
giving, and volunteerism, Dutch, and French businesses emphasize environmental
programs, i.e. ethical concerns, and to a much lesser extent than US companies’
philanthropic initiatives. UK companies adopt what Maignan and Ralston (2002) termed an
“intermediary approach”, a mix of CSR initiatives without a clear emphasis on one or
another CSR platform.

Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 4(3) 124
right, not merely because they are maintained by law or are profitable (e.g. money spent on
product safety or pollution control). With this argument, Lantos (2001) concluded that
there is nothing praiseworthy about this level of fulfillment of “social responsibility”, what
is ordinarily expected in the realm of morality. With this conceptualization, Lantos (2001)
incorporated ethical CSR as the economic, legal and ethical responsibility, as outlined by
Carroll (1979, 1991). Altruistic CSR is the humanitarian with the fulfillment of an
organization’s philanthropic responsibilities, irrespective of whether the business will reap
the financial benefit or not (Lantos, 2001). It has become significant that there must be
coherence between the company and their CSR strategy. If there is a real coherence, the
CSR strategy will affect the corporate identity positively, which is the fundamental to the
corporate brand (Aaker, 1991). This line of thought has been taken one step further to look
at branding theories and how CSR can be used to create a strong corporate identity.
In Carroll’s conception of this, corporations first consider their profits (the economic) and
the legal aspects of doing business, and they then go on to prioritize first ethical concerns,
and then finally philanthropic concerns, such as contributing their resources to the
community (Carroll, 1991). Visser’s recent adaptation of this for the developing countries
suggests that although economic responsibilities are still given the most emphasis, as is the
case in the developed countries and Carroll’s original work; philanthropy is now given the
second highest priority in the developing countries, followed by the legal dimension and
then finally ethical responsibilities (Visser, 2007).
This is further examined and supports the fact that ethical platform in CSR activities in the
global Oil and Gas (O&G) sector, which is dominated by Western corporations, whereas a
philanthropic platform was clearly present in the Indian O&G industry (Planken et. al.,
2007 and Sahu & Nickerson, 2008). It is also observed that CSR activities are generally not
related to core business interests within the Indian O&G sector, which contravenes what is
usually recommended in the professional marketing literature on planning CSR campaigns,
including the recommendations made by Kotler and Lee (Sahu & Nickerson, 2008; see
Kotler & Lee, 2004; Tandon, 2007, for a discussion of CSR and core business activities). In
another instance, while carefully examining the interventions of firms operating in Lebanon
context where private sector has traditionally been the dominant engine of growth, CSR is
found to be widely perceived as comprising the voluntary philanthropic contributions over
and above their mainstream contributions (Jamali, 2007). These findings lends tentative
support to the distinctions made by Lantos (2001) between mandatory CSR (ethical) and
voluntary CSR (social) and as observed by Visser (2007) that the understanding of CSR in
developing countries seems grounded primarily in the context of voluntary social
responsibility. However, this social voluntary contributions made, are rather, literally

Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 4(3) 125
related / supporting industries by investing in suppliers and infrastructure that support the
industry in which it competes. Both companies have thus aligned philanthropy with their
unique strategy, increasing benefits accumulating to the company through contextual
improvements (see Jamali, 2007).
2.1. STRATEGIC CSR
In recent years, the notion of strategic CSR has apprehended the global corporate
consciousness as the twin idea of CSR and sustainability (Hildebrand et al., 2011). While
both CSR and sustainability have followed somewhat parallel evolutionary paths, they have
converged to a unified sense to convey that a company’s long-term success and their
existence are tied to its stewardship of not just its welfare, but also that of the natural and
social environment in which it operates (Vaaland et al. 2008). This has made visionary
leaders in the corporate world to take a strategic approach to CSR by devoting exceptional
efforts and resources to create a shared value (i.e. value for the company and for society)
(Porter and Kramer, 2011). In this context, significant efforts are found (e.g. Sen and
Bhattacharya, 2001; Maignan and Ferrell, 2004; Balmer et al., 2007; Fukukawa et al.,
2007; Simmons, 2009, see Hildebrand and Sen, 2011) in conceptualizing the question that
endures about the relationship between a company, its stakeholder and its CSR, and, in
particular, how these three entities come together to create that shared vale (Balmer et al.,
2007).
In this juncture of the strategic significance of CSR, the coherence of the interest of
corporations came into picture with those of one or more stakeholder groups in a win-win
standpoint (Lantos, 2001). In this context, concerning the nature of CSR in question, two
important distinctions have been identified and classified as mandatory (ethical) versus
voluntary (social). Ethical CSR extends beyond economic and legal obligations to comprise
the mandatory fulfillment of various ethical duties of the firm in its capacity as a morally
responsible agent (Lantos, 2001). This ethical CSR as proposed by Lantos (2001) is in
support of the findings that the mandatory components of CSR include more than economic
and legal considerations (McGuire, 1963 and Davis, 1973). On the other hand, the
voluntary aspect of CSR as described by Lantos (2001) is in agreement with the opinions of
early scholars that conclude social responsibility as voluntary; this begins where ethical
responsibility ends. For instance, Walton (1967) suggested that an essential ingredient of
firm’s responsibility is the degree of voluntarism; whereas to qualify as a socially
responsible social action, business expenditure or activity must be purely voluntary (Manne
and Wallich, 1972). These above conceptualizations of early scholars strengthen the
mandatory versus the voluntary distinction as articulated by Lantos (2001).
Firms practicing altruistic CSR go beyond their morally mandated obligations (i.e. ethical

Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 4(3) 126
be aligned with the profit motive (Quester and Thompson, 2001) and expenditure on
strategic CSR activities are typically intended as long-term investments that are likely to
yield financial returns (Vaughn, 1999). Lantos (2001) witnessed the supremacy of an
alternative optimal social altruism that can be directed to make the firm profitable and
termed as strategic CSR. This view of strategic CSR is in continuation of the findings of
Drucker (1984), who highlighted that profitability and social responsibilities are compatible
with each other and that business ought to consist its social responsibilities into business
opportunities. Furtherance to this, Porter and Kramer (2003) postulated on the basic idea of
strategic CSR, which is the effective alignment of philanthropic contributions with business
and economic benefit. In this context, strategic CSR can be considered widely to
encompass any philanthropic activity that can result in long-term gain for the company.
Therefore, this strategic CSR accomplishes strategic business goals when corporations give
back to the society.
Though there is no clear-cut definition of strategic CSR, different authors emphasize
different aspects of CSR. Strategic CSR has made other scholars to look more favorably
upon the firm and, therefore, expenditure on strategic CSR activities can is viewed as
investment in the brand (Smith, 2003; Purkayastha and Fernando, 2007; Grant, 2008). By
doing so, companies can achieve the competitive advantage as well as build a strong
corporate brand (Porter and Kramer, 2006; Bhattacharya et al., 2008). This strategic CSR
can be used to cultivate the organization for executing according to its ethical standards and
ambitions. This results in the accomplishment of trustworthiness in strategic efforts through
corporate communications and thereby mediates the corporate brand and marketing,
concerning CSR (Hillestad et al., 2010).
3. CORPORATE MARKETING – A STRATEGIC CSR PERSPECTIVE
As the market continues to mature, and competition within the industry grows fierce, it
becomes difficult for the companies to succeed only with the product or service that they
offer. Although these core functions of the business are crucial, other aspects such as
company culture and corporate citizenship have increased in relative importance while
determining a company’s ability to compete (Brown, 1998; Fombrun, 1996 and Dowling,
1994). As a result, the success of a 21st-century business will be defined as much by “who
it is?” and “what it does?” (Schultz et al., 2005 and Keller & Aaker, 1998). In this context,
corporate social responsibility (CSR) and sustainability have been considered as the twin
idea of global corporate consciousness. While both ideas have followed parallel
evolutionary paths, they have converged to convey a unified sense of a company’s long-
term success and its existence (Vaaland et al., 2008). Moreover, the decadal growth of CSR
in both theory and practice has coincided with the advancement of marketing at the

Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 4(3) 127
corporate identity and corporate branding into a distinctive marketing model in its own
right (Balmer and Greyser, 2003 & 2006).
3.1. CORPORATE IMAGE
The concept ‘Corporate Image’ has drawn the attention of the researchers from the 1950s
to 1970s. In the business context, there have been discussions about the supremacy of
corporate image and the power of perception. In corporate terms, the image characterizes as
an individual’s perception of the actions, activities, and accomplishments of an
organization (Riordan et al., 1997). This supremacy is for the fact that perceptions
materially affect behavior and that we respond to images in the same way as we do to
reality that vary between individuals, different interest groups and can inhabit different
time frames (Balmer, 2009).
From the organizational behavior perspective, corporate image is viewed as the perceptions
of organizational members towards their organization, including “the way they believe how
others see the organization” (Dutton and Dukerich, 1991; Bromley and Basil, 1993 and
Hatch and Schultz, 1997, 2003). Strategists portray the corporate image as “the impression
of the overall corporation” held by its various publics (Gray and Smeltzer, 1985).
Similarly, sociologists view corporate image as “sensed” and “communicated” (Alvesson,
1990), whereas, psychologists outspread this approach, depicting corporate image as a
symbolic link between an organization and its various publics (Grunig, 1993).
Additionally, corporate image is described as “the total impression an entity makes on the
minds of people” (Dichter, 1985, as cited in Dowling, 1993). Moreover, corporate image
held the perceptions of an organization by a group or groups (Balmer, 1995) and the
impression of a particular company held by some segment of the public (Johnson and
Zinkhan, 1990).
Corporate image at the level of cognition indicates that it is “a person’s belief about an
organization” (Dowling, 2004). Scholars over the years have broadened this view by
incorporating the multiple interactions that form corporate image. Experiences,
impressions, beliefs, feelings and knowledge about a company are all sources that shape
corporate image (Bernstein, 1984; Dowling, 1986; Van Riel, 1995; Markwick and Fill,
1997; Melewar, 2003, See Lopez, 2011). In this context, corporate Image is defined as the
external stakeholders’ perception of the organization (Berg, 1985) and how the internal
members project the organization externally, and the way they do this in order to influence
the external stakeholders’ perception about the organization (Bromley, 1993). Various
authors have defined corporate image as “the belief of the members of the organization
about the perception of the outsider about the organization” (Dutton e.t. al., 1994), and
therefore described as “the sum of perceptions - referring to an organization - held by its

Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 4(3) 128
corporate identity, and corporate communications are the elements of ‘Corporate factors’
(de Chernatony, 1999; Balmer, 2001). Being one of the important determinants of
corporate image formation, the influence of ‘environmental factors’ have been discussed
under ‘extraneous influences’ (Kennedy, 1977); under ‘super and subordinate images’
(Dowling, 1993); under ‘environmental influences’ (Markwick and Fill, 1997); under
‘exogenous factors’ (Gray and Balmer, 1998) and under ‘environmental forces’ (Balmer,
1998; Stuart, 1999; Balmer and Gray, 2000). To summarize the elements of ‘individual
factors’ towards the formation of corporate images, current and prior personal experiences
with the company (through its products, customer-facing personnel, etc.) are considered as
the major attributes (Kennedy, 1977; Bernstein, 1984 and Dowling, 1986, 1993). However,
the receiver’s own economic, social and personal background (demographic) plays active
role in influencing the assessment of such experiences and hence, the characteristics of an
individual receiver influence corporate image formation (Bromley, 1993, 2001; Fombrun,
1996; Gotsi and Wilson, 2001).
3.2. CORPORATE IDENTITY
Corporate identity has been seen as a formulated promise that illustrates the message that
the company wants to send to its stakeholders and consumers in specific (Balmer, 2001;
Harris and de Chernatony, 2001; Roothart and van der Pol, 2003; Balmer and Gray, 2003;
Knox, 2004). In other words, corporate identity has been referred to the communication of
what the organization is, what it does and how it does (Markwick and Fill, 1997) and has
been viewed as an answer to the questions “Who are we?”, or “How do we see ourselves as
an organization?” (Albert and Whetten, 1985; Brown et al., 2006; Balmer, 2008).
Therefore, corporate identity captures all the elements that individuals use to classify the
organisation in terms of its activities and the audiences it serves (Fombrun, 1996).
Moreover, corporate identity brings together everything that members perceive as central,
distinctive and enduring in the organisation (Albert and Whetten, 1985), which originates
from individual perception (Aaker, 1991; Dutton and Dukerich, 1991; Dutton et al., 1994;
Fombrun, 1996). As a result of this individual perception, each of the audiences creates
mental images about the company by taking any type of communication that provides
information about its actions, plans or intentions as input (Fombrun, 1996). At this
juncture, CSR can have a mediating role in creating a positive corporate identity, because,
an organization can link its behaviour with social responsibility to build a strong corporate
identity (Papasolomou-Doukakis et al., 2005). This positive corporate identity is the basis
for creating a strong brand as it protects the company from competitors that are trying to
provide identical products (Aaker, 1991). Therefore, it has become necessary to identify the
key determinants that collectively form the corporate identity of the firm.

Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 4(3) 129
Table-2: Sub-Perspectives of Corporate Identity
Identity (Sub-
perspectives) Conceptualization Central Focus Key Issues
Visual Identity
(Identity from a
corporation)
Identity as the visual
means of
organisational
Self-presentation /
What the
corporation espouse
to be?
Organisation’s
symbolism / Project via
symbolism – especially
visual identity
How to keep the
visual identity
fashionable, updated
and appealing to
audience.
Corporate
Identity
(Identity of a
corporate)
Organisation’s
distinctive
attributes addressing
“what the
organisation is” /
What are the
corporation’s
distinguishing
traits?
Organisational
characteristics/rationale
How CI can be
communicated
effectively to nurture
positive corporate
image and reputation,
which in turn may
lead to competitive
advantage identity-
image interplay
multiple types of
identity identity-
strategy interplay
Organization’s
Identity
(Stakeholder’s
identification
with the
corporation)
Defining
characteristics of an
organisation as
perceived by
beholders / Who am
I in relation to the
corporation.
Collectively perceived
Organisational
characteristics
Interplay between
identity and image.
Interplay between
identity and strategy.
Multiplicity of
identity. Identity
dissonance among
different stakeholders.
How to define an
Organisation
Organizational
Identity (OI)
OI is a salient social
identity (relating to

Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 4(3) 130
Source: Adapted from He and Balmer, 2007; Balmer, 2008
In support of the above conceptualization of corporate identity as established by He and
Balmer (2007) and Balmer (2008), a broad range of determinants have been explored.
These determinants are ‘corporate culture’ (Peter and Waterman, 1982), ‘corporate
structure’ (Olins, 1986; Chajet, 1989; Strong, 1990; Ind, 1992), ‘industry identity’ (Balmer,
1997), ‘corporate strategy’ (Balmer, 1998), ‘corporate design’ and ‘corporate behaviour’
(Melewar and Elif, 2006) and ‘corporate auditory component” (Bartholme and Melewar,
2011).
Table-3: Determinants of Corporate Identity
Authors Determinants of Corporate
Identity
Peter and Waterman, 1982; Hatch and Schultz, 1997;
Van riel and Balmer, 1997; Cornelissen and Elving,
2003
Corporate culture
Olins, 1986; Chajet, 1989; Corporate structureStrong, 1990; Ind, 1992
Balmer, 1997, Melewar and Elif, 2006 Industry Identity
Balmer, 1998 Corporate strategy
Hatch and Schultz, 2003; Ingenhoff and Fuhrer,
2010 Corporate Vision
Melewar and Elif, 2006 Corporate design
Melewar and Elif, 2006 Corporate behaviour
Bartholme and Melewar, 2011 Corporate auditory component
Source: Compilation by authors
3.3. CORPORATE BRANDING
The mid-1990s onwards, the corporate branding construct, became prominent among other
corporate level concepts and declared the beginning of corporate marketing. Corporate
branding is considered new to both marketing (Saunders and Guoqun, 1997; Macrae, 1999)
and organizational literature (Balmer, 2001a, 2001b; Balmer and Gray, 2003; Argenti and
Druckenmiller, 2004). However, authors are using this concept of corporate branding in the
context of marketing and organizational theories (Knox and Bickerton, 2003). The

Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 4(3) 131
stakeholder group (Abratt and Kleyn, 2012). However, fundamental to the corporate brand
is the concept of corporate identity whereas corporate image and corporate identities are
core notions of corporate branding (Appel-Meulenbroek et al., 2010). Moreover, corporate
identity is from a company perspective, whereas, corporate image is from external
stakeholder standpoint, where associations are used to transfer the corporate identity to the
image among various stakeholders (Fombrun, 1996; Dowling, 2001; Brown et al., 2006;
Balmer, 2008; Abratt and Kleyn, 2012).
4. MAJOR FINDINGS AND OBSERVATIONS
Over the past decades, management literature has substantially defining and characterizing
the strategic CSR from a corporate marketing perspective in both developed and
developing economies. However, the development, operationalization and management of
strategic CSR are remaining unexplored in different industry settings. While summarizing
the concepts of CSR, the concern arises towards the significance of practice of one, or more
of the components of CSR, as describe by Carroll (1979, 1991) and Lantos (2001), each
one of which relates to economic, legal, ethical and philanthropic. Regardless of the fact
that some authors question the altruism behind CSR, the mainstream state that pragmatic
reason does not cause CSR. However, strategic CSR made other scholars to look more
favourably upon the firm and therefore, expenditure on strategic CSR activities can be
viewed as investment in the brand (Smith, 2003; Purkayastha and Fernando, 2007; Grant,
2008). By doing so, companies can achieve the competitive advantage as well as build a
strong corporate brand (Porter and Kramer, 2006; Bhattacharya et al., 2008). This strategic
CSR can be used to cultivate the organization for executing according to its ethical
standards and ambitions. This results in the accomplishment of trustworthiness in strategic
efforts through corporate communications and thereby mediates the corporate brand and
marketing concerning CSR (Hillestad et al., 2010). Therefore, in the core of the strategic
approach to CSR, the roles of stakeholders become significant from a corporate marketing
perspective (Fukukawa et. al., 2007; Galbreath, 2008; Vaaland, et. al., 2008; Polonsky and
Jevons, 2009). Specifically, companies are increasingly inferring CSR in terms of the
interest of a particular but large diverse set of stakeholders and their efforts are shaped by
the firm belief that its endeavour in the CSR domain can elicit company-favouring
responses from these stakeholder groups (Sen and Bhattacharya, 2001 and Balmer et. al.,
2007) to create a shared value (Porter and Kramer, 2011).
However, when companies declare their values at a corporate level, that relate to CSR, they
immediately come under increased scrutiny and often attract the attention of activists and
interest groups that aim explicitly to counter their corporate level marketing efforts.
Therefore, in the modern economy, the term “CSR” and “Sustainability” have become such

Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 4(3) 132
corporate level require a strong and authentic commitment from the organization. Only in
such situations, the company then devise the appropriate balance on strategic CSR and
corporate branding that produce a competitive advantage for the company.
5. MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS
A framework is proposed in Annexure-I that depicts the integration of strategic CSR with
corporate branding and other constructs like corporate identity, corporate image,
stakeholder attitude and firm-level performance. In consequence, these effects of strategic
CSR will result in a constructive change in the attitude among the stakeholders towards the
corporate brand. The underlying logic behind this framework has been centered on the role
of strategic CSR in differentiating a corporate brand. By focusing on strategic CSR as a
core value of the organization, the brand’s identity can be built. If the company succeeds in
positioning this brand identity from a CSR perspective, the corporate image can be
enhanced which can be measured. A corporate image that builds upon strategic CSR will
lead to positive attitudes among the stakeholders and customers, in particular, which further
lead to achieving sustainable competitive advantage and a definite level of firm
performance. Therefore, decision makers at the corporations need to identify specific CSR
initiatives to build upon their corporate identity and, therefore, to strengthen their corporate
brand.
6. LIMITATIONS AND SCOPE OF FUTURE INVESTIGATION
Creation of a positive corporate image in the minds of the stakeholders is one of the
assumptions while a company tries to send out positive signals related to CSR (Van Riel
and Balmer, 1997).The integration of the company’s images with the stakeholders’
perceptions can be strengthened when there is a healthy homogeneity between the
corporate identity and the corporate image (Van Riel and Balmer, 1997). This homogeneity
will only be possible when a corporation constructs its identities to influence its particular
stakeholders with a strong corporate image. Therefore, two related thoughts have been put
forward for further study. The first assumption focuses on the determinants of corporate
identity and how CSR affects these determinants for building a strong corporate identity.
The second assumption further reviews the understanding of stakeholders’ decision process
to do transaction with the company and the effect of CSR in creating a strong corporate
image and therefore, evoking a positive stakeholder attitude towards the corporate brand.
These two assumptions can be taken as the scope for future investigation in the setting of
corporate marketing. Moreover, this study has its limitations from two important
perspectives that are as follows;
a) The findings are based on the literature reviews and the proposed framework need

Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 4(3) 133
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors sincerely thank Dr. Shigufta Hena Uzma, Assistant Professor, School of
Management, NIT Rourkela for many helpful comments and suggestions.
REFERENCES
[1] Aaker, D. (1991), Managing Brand Equity: Capitalizing on the Value of a Brand
Name
[2] Abratt, R., Kleyn, N. (2012), “Corporate identity, corporate branding and corporate
reputations: Reconciliation and integration”, European Journal of Marketing, 46
(7/8), 1048-1063.
, The Free Press, New York, NY.
[3] Albert, S., Whetten, D. (1985), “Organizational identity”, Research in
Organizational Behavior, 7, 163-95.
[4] Alvesson, M. (1990), “Organization: from substance to image?” Organization
Studies, 11, 373-94
[5] Anderson, J. R. (1980). Cognitive Psychology and its Implications, San Francisco:
W. H. Freeman.
[6] Appel-Meulenbroek, R., Havermans, D., Janssen, I., van Kempen, A. (2010),
“Corporate branding: an exploration of the influence of CRE”, Journal of
Corporate Real Estate,
[7] Argenti, P., Druckenmiller, B. (2004), “Reputation and the corporate
brand”,
12 (1), 47-59.
Corporate Reputation Review
[8] Balmer, J., Greyser S. (2003), Revealing the Corporation: Perspectives on Identity,
Image, Reputation, Corporate Branding and Corporate-Level Marketing, London:
Routledge.
, 6 (4), 368-374.
[9] Balmer, J., Gray, E. (2003), “Corporate brands: what are they? What of them?”
European Journal of Marketing
[10] Balmer, J.M.T., Greyser, S. A. (2002), Managing the Multiple Identities of the
Corporation, California Management Review, 44(3), 72-86
, 37(7/8), 972-97
[11] Balmer, J.M.T. (1995), “Corporate branding and connoisseurship”, Journal of
General Management, 21(1), 24-46
[12] Balmer, J.M.T. (1997), “Corporate identity: past, present and future”, University of
Strathclyde, Glasgow, ICCIS Working Paper 4
[13] Balmer, J.M.T. (1998), “Corporate Identity and the Advent of Corporate
Marketing,” Journal of Marketing Management, 14(8), 963-996;
[14] Balmer, J.M.T. (1998), “Corporate identity and the advent of corporate
marketing”, Journal of Marketing Management, 14, 963-96

Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 4(3) 134
[17] Balmer, J. M. T. (2001b), “The three virtues and seven deadly sins of corporate
brand management”, Journal of General Management, 27 (1), 1-17
[18] Balmer, J. M. T. (2008) “Identity based views of the corporation: Insights from
corporate identity, organisational identity, social identity, visual identity, corporate
brand identity and corporate image.”
[19] Balmer, J. M. T. (2008), “Identity Based Views of the Corporation: Insights from
Corporate Identity, Organizational Identity, Social Identity, Visual Identity and
Corporate Image,” European Journal of Marketing, 42(9/10), 879-906
European Journal of Marketing, 42 (9/10),
879-906.
[20] Balmer, J. M. T. (2011), “Corporate Marketing Myopia and the Inexorable Rise of a
Corporate Marketing Logic: Perspectives from Identity Based Views of the Firm,”
European Journal of Marketing, 45(9/10), 1-30
[21] Balmer, J. M. T., Gray, E. R. (2000), “Corporate brands: What are they? What of
them”, European Journal of Marketing
[22] Balmer, J. M. T., Greyser, S. A. (2003), Revealing the Corporation: Perspectives
on Identity, Image, Reputation, Corporate Branding, and Corporate-Level
Marketing, eds. London / New York: Routledge.
, 37(7), 972-997
[23] Balmer, J. M. T., Greyser, S. A. (2006), “Corporate Marketing: Integrating
Corporate Identity, Corporate Branding, Corporate Communications, Corporate
Image and Corporate Reputation”, European Journal of Marketing, 40(7/8), 730-
741
[24] Balmer, J. M.T. (2001a) “Corporate identity, corporate branding and corporate
marketing, seeing through the fog”, European Journal of Marketing, 35(3/4), 248-
291
[25] Balmer, J. M.T. (2009), “Corporate Marketing: apocalypse, advent and epiphany”,
Management Decision, 47(4), 544-572
[26] Balmer, J. M.T., Stotvig, S. (1997) “Corporate Identity and Private Banking: A
Review and Case Study”, International Journal of Bank Marketing, 15(5), pp. 169-
84.
[27] Balmer, J.M.T. (2008), “Identity based views of the corporation: Insights from
corporate identity, organizational identity, social identity, visual identity, corporate
brand identity and corporate image”, European Journal of Marketing, 42(9/10), 879
-906.
[28] Balmer, J.M.T., Fukukawa, K., Gray, E. (2007), “The nature and management of
ethical corporate identity: a commentary on corporate identity, corporate social
responsibility and ethics”, Journal of Business Ethics, 76(1), 7-15.
[29] Bartholme, R. H., Melewar, T. C. (2011) “Exploring the auditory dimension of
corporate identity management”, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 29 (2), 92-

Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 4(3) 135
[32] Bernstein, D. (1984), Company Image and Reality. A Critique of Corporate
Communications, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Eastbourne, London.
[33] Bernstein, D. (1984), Company Image and Reality: A Critique of Corporate
Communications, Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Eastbourne.
[34] Bhattacharya, C. V., Korschun, D., Sen, S. (2008), “Strengthening stakeholder
company relationships through mutually beneficial corporate social responsibility
initiatives” Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 257-272.
[35] Britt, S.H. (1971) “Psychological principles of the corporate imagery mix”,
Business Horizons, 14, 55-59.
[36] Bromley, Basil, D. (1993), Reputation, image and impression management,
Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
[37] Bromley, D. B. (1993), Reputation, Image and Impression Management, Wiley,
London.
[38] Bromley, D. B. (2001) “Relationships between personal and corporate reputation”,
European Journal of Marketing, 35(3/4).
[39] Brown, A. (1998), Organizational Culture (2nd ed.), Financial Times-Prentice Hall:
Harlow, Essex.
[40] Brown, T. J., Dacin, P. A., Pratt, M.G., Whetten, D. A. (2006), “Identity, intended
image, construed image and reputation: an interdisciplinary framework and
suggested terminology”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science
[41] Carlson, R.O. (1963) “The nature of corporate images”, in Riley, J.W. (Ed.) The
corporation and its publics: Essays on the corporate image. New York: John Wiley
& Sons, 24-47
, 34(2), 99-
106.
[42] Carroll, A. (1979), “A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate
performance”, Academy of Management Review, 4(4), 497-505.
[43] Carroll, A. (1991), “The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: toward the
moral management of organizational stakeholders”, Business Horizons, 34(4), 39-
48.
[44] Chajet, C. (1989), “The making of a new corporate image”, The Business of
Strategy
[45]
, (May-June), pp. 18-20.
Cian, L. (2011), “How to measure the brand image: a reasoned review”, The
Marketing Review, 11(2), 165-
[46] Cornelissen, J. P., Elving, W.J.L. (2003), “Managing corporate identity: an
integrative framework of dimensions and determinants”, Corporate
Communications: an International Journal, 8(2), 114-120.
187.
[47] Davies, G., Miles, L. (1998). “Reputation Management: Theory versus Practice”,
Corporate Reputation Review, 2(1), 16-28.

Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 4(3) 136
[51] Dichter, E. (1985), “What’s in an image”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, 2 (1),
75-81
[52] Dowling, G.R. (1986), “Managing your corporate images”, Industrial Marketing
Management, 15, 109-15.
[53] Dowling, G.R. (1994), Corporate Reputations-Strategies for Developing the
Corporate Brand, Kogan Page, London.
[54] Dowling, G.R. (2001), Creating Corporate Reputations, Identity, Image and
Performance, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
[55] Dowling, G.R. (2004), “Corporate reputations: should you compete with yours?”
California Management Review, 46 (3), 19-36.
[56] Drucker, P. (1984), “The new meaning of corporate social responsibility”,
California Management Review, 26, 53-63.
[57] Dutton, J. E., Dukerich, J. M., Harquail, C. V. (1994), “Organizational images and
member identification”, Administrative science quarterly, pp. 239-263.
[58] Dutton, J.E., Dukerich, J.M. (1991), “Keeping an eye on the mirror: image and
identity in organizational adaptation”, Academy of Management Journal, 34 (3),
517-54.
[59] Esrock, S., Leichty, G. (1998), “Social responsibility and corporate web pages: self-
presentation or agenda setting?” Public Relations Review, 24(3), 305-319.
[60] Fisher-Buttinger, C., Vallaster, C. (2008), Connective Branding: Building Brand
Equity in a Demanding World, London: John Wiley & Sons.
[61] Fombrun, C.J. (1996), Reputation: Realizing value from the corporate image,
Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
[62] Fukukawa, K., Balmer, J., Gray, E. (2007), “Mapping the interface between
corporate identity, ethics and corporate social responsibility”, Journal of Business
Ethics, 76 (1), 1-5.
[63] Galbreath, J. (2008), “Building corporate social responsibility into strategy”,
European Business Review, 21(2), 109-127.
[64] Gotsi, M., Wilson, A. M. (2001), “Corporate reputation: seeking a
definition”, Corporate Communications: An International Journal
[65] Grant, Robert M. (2008), Contemporary Strategy Analysis, Cornwall: Blackwell
Publishing.
, 6(1), 24-30.
[66] Gray, E. R., Smeltzer, L. R. 1985, ’SMR Forum: corporate image an integral part of
strategy’, Sloan Management Review, summer, 73-7.
[67] Gray, E. R., Balmer, J. M. T. (1998), “Managing corporate image and corporate
reputation”, Long Range Planning, 31(5), 695-702.
[68] Gronroos, C. (1984), “A service quality model and its marketing implications”,
European Journal of Marketing, 18 (4), 36-44.

Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 4(3) 137
[72] Hatch, M.J., Schultz, M. (1997), “Relations between organizational culture, identity
and image”, European Journal of Marketing
[73] He, H-W., Balmer, J. M. T. (2007) “Identity Studies: Multiple Perspectives and
Implications for Corporate-level Marketing”, European Journal of Marketing, 41(
7/8), 765-785.
, 31(5), 356-65.
[74] Hildebrand, D. Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C. B. (2011), “Corporate Social
responsibility: a corporate marketing perspective”, European Journal of Marketing,
45 (9/11), 1353-1364
[75] Hillestad, T, Xie, C., Haugland, S. (2010), “Innovative corporate social
responsibility: The founder’s role in creating a trustworthy corporate brand through
“green innovation”, Journal of Product & Brand Management, 19(6), 440-451.
[76] Horowitz, M. J. (1978), Image Formation and Cognition, New York: Appleton-
Century Croft.
[77] Ind, N. (1992), The Corporate Image
[78] Jamali, D. (2007), “The case for strategic corporate social responsibility in
developing countries”, Business and Society Review, 112 (1), 1-27
, Kogan Page, London.
[79] Johnson, M., Zinkhan, G. M. (1990), “Defining and measuring company image”,
Thirteenth Annual Conference of the Academy of Marketing Science, New Orleans,
LA, Academy of Marketing Science, April, 346-50
[80] Keller, K. L., Aaker, D. A. (1998), “Corporate level marketing: The impact of
credibility on a company’s brand extensions”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol.
1(4) (August), 356-378.
[81] Kennedy, S. H. (1977), “Nurturing corporate images: Total communication or ego
trip?” European Journal of Marketing, (1), 120-1.
[82] Knox, S. (2004), “Positioning and branding your organisation”, Journal of Product
& Brand Management
[83] Knox, S., Bickerton, D. (2003), “The six conventions of corporate
branding”,
, 13(2), 105-15
European Journal of Marketing
[84] Knox, S., Maklan, S., Thompson, K. (1999), “Pan-company marketing and process
management”, Irish Marketing Review, 12(1), 36-45
, 37 (7/8), 998-1016.
[85]
[86] Lantos, G. P. (2001), “The boundaries of strategic corporate social responsibility”,
Journal of Consumer Marketing, 18(7), 595-630
Kotler, P., Lee, N. (2004), corporate social responsibility: Doing the most good for
your company and your cause. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
[87] Lopez, C. Gotsi, M., Andriopoulos, C. (2011), “Conceptualizing the influence of
corporate image on country image”, European Journal of Marketing, 45(11/12),
1601-1641.
[88] Macrae, C. (1999), “Brand Reality Editorial”, Journal of Marketing Management,

Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 4(3) 138
[91] Manne, H., Wallich, H. (1972), The Modern Corporation and Social Responsibility.
Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research.
[92] Margulies, W.P. (1977), “Make the most of your corporate identity”, Harvard
Business Review, 55, 66-74.
[93] Markwick, N., Fill, C. (1997), “Towards a framework for managing corporate
identity”, European Journal of Marketing, 31(5/6), 396-409.
[94] McGuire, J. (1963), Business and Society, New York: McGraw Hill
[95] Melewar, T. C. (2003), “Determinants of the corporate identity construct: a review
of the literature”, Journal of Marketing Communications, 9(4), 195-220.
[96] Melewar, T.C., Eliff, K. (2006), “Seven dimensions of corporate identity: a
categorization from the practitioners perspectives”, European Journal of Marketing,
40, 846-68.
[97] Olins, W. (1986), “The strategy of design”, Management Today,
[98] Olins, W. (1989), Corporate Identity: Making Business Strategy Visible through
Design, Thames and Hudson, London.
May, 52-5
[99] Papasolomou-Doukakis, I., Krambia-Kapardis, M., Katsioloudes, M. (2005)
“Corporate social responsibility: the way forward? Maybe not!: A preliminary study
in Cyprus”, European Business Review,
[100] Peter, T.J., Waterman, R.H. (1982),
17(3), 263-279.
In Search of Excellence: Lessons from
America's Best-run Companies
[101] Planken, B., Waller, R., Nickerson, C. (2007). Reading stories and signs on the
internet: Analyzing CSR discourse on the BP website. In G. Garzone, G. Poncini, &
P. Catenaccio (Eds.), Multimodality in corporate communication.Web genres and
discursive identity, Milan: Franco Angeli, 93-110.
, Harper and Row Publications, New York, NY.
[102] Polonsky, M., Jevons, C. (2009), “Global branding and strategic CSR: an overview
of three types of complexity”, International Marketing Review, 26(3), 327-47.
[103] Porter, M., Kramer, M. (2003), “The competitive advantage of corporate
philanthropy”, Harvard Business Review on Corporate Social Responsibility.
Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 27-64.
[104] Porter, M., Kramer, M. (2011), “Creating shared value”, Harvard Business Review,
89(1/2), 62-77.
[105] Porter, M., Kramer, M.R. (2006), “Strategy and society: the link between
competitive advantage and corporate social responsibility”, Harvard Business
Review, 84(12), 78-92.
[106] Purkayastha, D., Fernando, R. (2007), “The Body Shop: Social Responsibility or
Sustained Green washing?”,
[107] Quester, P., Thompson, B. (2001), “Advertising and promotion leverage on arts
Case studies in sustainability management and
strategy, Sheffield: Greenleaf, 226-251.

Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 4(3) 139
[110] Sahu, S. & C. Nickerson (2008). “Altruistic and strategic?The communication of
corporate social responsibility in the oil and gas sector”. Paper presented at the
Asia-Pacific Association for Business Communication, Nanyang Technological
University, Singapore.
[111] Saunders J, Guoqun F. (1997), “Dual branding: how corporate names add value”,
Journal of Product & Brand Management, 6 (1), 40-48
[112] Schultz, M., Antorini , Y. M., Fabian , F. C. (2005), Corporate branding: Purpose,
people, and processes, eds. Copenhagen Business School Press, Herndon, VA
[113] Schultz, M., de Chernatony, L. (2002), “The challenges of corporate branding”,
Corporate Reputation Review, 5(2/3), 105-112.
[114] Sen, S., Bhattacharya, C.B. (2001), “Does doing good always lead to doing better?
Consumer reactions to corporate social responsibility”, Journal of Marketing
Research, 38(2), 225-43.
[115] Simmons, J. A. (2009), “Both sides now: aligning external and internal branding for
a socially responsible era”, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 27(5), 681-97.
[116] Smith, N. C. (2003), “Corporate social responsibility: whether or how?” California
Management Review, 45, 52-76.
[117] Spector, A.J. (1961) “Basic dimensions of the corporate image”, Journal of
Marketing, 25, 47-51.
[118] Strong, F.P. (1990), “A company study: Kodak beyond 1990”, The Journal of
Business and Industrial Marketing
[119] Stuart, H. (1999), “Towards a definitive model of the corporate identity
management process”,
, 2(4), 29-36.
Corporate Communications: An International Journal
[120] Tandon, V. (2007), “PR with CSR: Commitment Pays”, Effective Executive,
Special Issue on Corporate Social Responsibility. Hyderabad: ICFAI University
Express.
, 4(4),
200-7.
[121] Vaaland, T.I., Heide, M., Gronhaug, K. (2008), “Corporate social responsibility:
investigating theory and research in the marketing context”, European Journal of
Marketing, 42(9), 927-53
[122] Van Riel, C. B. M. (1995), Principles of Corporate Communication, Prentice Hall,
Harlow.
[123] Van Riel, C. B. M., Balmer, J.M.T. (1997), “Corporate identity: the concept, its
measurement and management”, European Journal of Marketing, 31(5/6), 340-55.
[124] Vaughn, S. (1999), “Firms find long-term rewards in doing good.” In J. E.
Richardson (ed.), Business Ethics, 99, 198-199
[125] Visser, W. (2007), “ Revisiting Carroll’s CSR pyramid: An African perspective”, In
A. Crane & D. Matten (Eds.). Corporate social responsibility: Three volume set

Rev. Integr. Bus. Econ. Res. Vol 4(3) 140
Copyright  2015 Society of Interdisciplinary Business Research (www.sibresearch.org)
ISSN: 2304-1013 (Online); 2304-1269 (CDROM)
ANNEXURE-I
Proposed Framework depicting relationship among CSR, Corporate Identity, Corporate image, Corporate brand,
Competitive Advantage and Firm Performance
Firm’s
Performance
Firm’s
competitive
advantage
Corporate
Environmental
Individual
Corporate
Image
Determinants
Corporate
Identity
(CI)
Sakelder’s
Attitude
Corporate Branding Strategic
CSR
Corporate Design
Corporate Culture
Corporate Vision
Corporate
Corporate
Industry Identities
Auditory
Corporate
Determinants of