note, the incongruity between what consumers value most at the
point of purchasing behaviors and how marketers should market products (p. 127) presents a situation that remains largely inexplicable. In light of the shortcomings of current methodological approaches to the phenomena, Newholm and Shaw (2007) advocate for a new direction in research, governed by an anti-enlightenment assumption: the purchasing behavior behind ethical consumption should be explored as something other than rational activity.
al. (2011) define CSR as a concept whereby companies integrate
social and environmental concerns in their business operations and in their interaction with their stakeholders on a voluntary basis (p. 451).
All of these definitions presuppose a more sustained relationship
between companies and consumers. Consonant with this focus on sustaining relationships, Liu et al. (2011) note that businesses are starting to focus on transforming ethical practices from the purely philanthropical approach into more commercially related business activities (253). To that end, Tracey et al. (2005) posit moving beyond charity, which they define as a limited means by which to improve, and remain impactful in, communities. The logic of this argument follows the distinction posed by Matten et al. (2003)that corporate citizenship can be understood, and practiced, in two distinctive ways: the limited view, comprised of philanthropy and other volunteer activities; and the equivalent view, in which CSR becomes corporate citizenship, as firms seek to minimize damage they create and maximize the contributions they make in their societies.
Although not without its own set of limitations for marketers,
consumer engagement discourse has emerged recently as an attempt to fill the knowledge/motivation gaps between marketers and consumers. These approaches circumvent the assumption that rational decision-making is in the font of consumer purchasing behavior; instead, this approach encourages, and tracks, consumer behavior without directly engaging in understanding consumer motivation(s).
Del Pinto identifies key behavioral characteristics in the emerging
marketplace. Consumers, at once anonymous and social, arent interested in just reading about a productthey want to utilize a social network or communal dialogue to solve a specific problem (Trends and Observations). In this marketplace, consumers dont just access informationthey contribute to it and create it (Trends). This widespread trend inverts the paradigmatic relation between purchasing decision-making behavior and consumer motivation; as the consumer engagement denomination suggests, consumer behavior itself becomes purchasing decision content. Such content is governed by seeming opposites: as Del Pinto notes, the key characteristics of these forms of consumer interaction with a product or brand are that the experience remains personalized and tailoredsocial and interactiveand destination neutral (Trends)despite being embedded in, and anchored explicitly through, subjective perceptions and experiences of consumers themselves. Del Pinto identifies this phenomenon as a fundamental paradigm shift in both consumer interactions and expectations (Trends).
Tracey et al. (2005) identify the paradox of CSR research and
practice for businesses: despite increasing investment in CSR, and, in scholarship on CSR, while many writers have argued for the importance of corporate social responsibility (CSR), there has been very little scholarship that considers how corporations should manage their CSR activities in order to use their resources to deliver the greatest improvement in social outcomes (p. 327). As Alexander (1997) notes, companies CSR approaches are often poorly focused, lack coordination with the internal values of the company, and are largely ineffectual in generating measurable social benefitsor building tangibly the companys bottom line. As Tracey et al. conclude, these difficulties stem partly from corporations' continued reliance on philanthropy as the dominant mode for delivering CSR initiatives which fall outside the boundaries or core operations of the firm; and, as Porter and Kramer (2002) note, this strategy devolves into uncoordinated and piecemeal donations to 'worthy' local causes (Porter and Kramer, 2002). This is symptomatic of the fact that these kinds of CSR activity are regarded as peripheral in many companies (Tracey et al., 2005, p. 328).
Marks (2005), largely in agreement with Del Pintos assessment of
the changing consumer and emerging new rules of engagement, argues for a reinvigoration of the role of strategizing in marketing campaigns. The best practice, she contends, is to recognize the opportunity that consumer engagement models offer: to rewrite the rules [of marketing] by pursuing literally scores of microniches in a consumer-direct world (p. 18).
Messaging becomes a complex process in a rapid-paced climate of
meaning exchange. Consumers are wary of inconsistencies between businesses messaging functions and the consistency or coherence signified in and by their operations. These are often now understood, or framed, by consumers as ethical shortcomings, rather than as the consequence of doing business. In part, this demand for greater coherence across the entirety of business operations is due to the wider business and social climate. Recent historical events have kept the need for ethical review mechanisms a dominant feature of social and business discourse (and perpetuated the focus on communicating socially about ethical standards). In the wake of the Enron scandal, for example, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (2002) established both more wide-ranging and more specific accountability and transparency standards for public companies; exacerbated by the more recent housing finance scandals of 2007-08 and the long recession that has followed, the ethical climate in which, and the connectivity with which, consumers themselves make purchasing decisions has undergone radical changes.
How can businesses better position themselves as going (ethical)
concerns in the face of rapid changes posed by what is likely to become the most intractable arena of business ethics: environmental ethics? One tool that has been a mainstay in businesses ability to address ethical considerations in the marketplace is the concept of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Although CSR has a relatively short history of development and refinement, that history has been characterized by the definition of a set of performance measures whose primary aim has often been to represent more of a companys internal atmospherein particular, its internal climate of ethicallybased decision-making and actionthan the relation of a company to its (potential) external audiences. The majority of businesses communicate their ethos as practiced within the walls of that business, in order to indicate more of an internal environment than balance sheets and income statements can, and in more objective methodologies and findings, to its immediate stakeholders.
Even though a strong ethical orientation forms the bedrock of most
effective business strategies many business professionals and consumers often find themselves conflicted about the actualization of ethical decision-making processes, and its relation to strategic positioning for maximizing profitability in a global environment. In no business-consumer relation is this paradoxical crossroads more evident at present than in the conundrum represented by environmental ethics. The greening of the business environment has received considerable attention in the last fifteen years, with no signs of abating. But sustainability as a set of ethically-motivated ideas, behaviors and actions has produced a paralyzing crossroads between business-based definitions of ethically-motivated behavior and a more robust, more wide-spread, ethically-motivated ecoconsumerism. For instance, many businesses have done little to produce the coherence or consistency necessary for an actionoriented ethic represented by environmental sustainability; similarly, most consumers have done little to shift their purchasing behaviors and attitudes, beyond demanding more green solutions of businesses. As an ethical orientation, sustainability has produced
Increasingly, this approach places businesses at a disadvantage in
the marketplace of ethical responsiveness. And, although operative definitions of CSR have been advanced, there exists no universally agreed-upon definition, which, as Fooks et al. (2013) claim, prevents a standardized, outcomes-based assessment method, and may continue to allow CSR to be used by companies that operate in harmful ways, only to externalize many of their costs and pass themselves off as socially responsible (p, 284). On a more positive note, Davis and Blomstrom (1975) define corporate social responsibility as an obligation corporate decision makers have to take action which protects and improves the welfare of society as a whole along with their own interests(p. 6). Holme and Watts (2000) defined CSR as the continuing commitment by business to behave ethically and contribute to economic development while improving the quality of life of the workforce and their families as well as of the local community and society at large (p. 8). More recently, berseder et