Premium
An Integrational Framework of Organizational Moral Development, Legitimacy, and Corporate Responsibility: A Longitudinal, Intersectoral Analysis of Citizenship Reports
Author(s) -
Lewis Gabriella,
Palacios Sergio,
Valenzuela Marcus A.
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
business and society review
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.524
H-Index - 21
eISSN - 1467-8594
pISSN - 0045-3609
DOI - 10.1111/basr.12104
Subject(s) - lawrence kohlberg's stages of moral development , corporate social responsibility , legitimacy , citizenship , stakeholder , social responsibility , organizational citizenship behavior , conceptual framework , public relations , sociology , business , moral development , political science , organizational commitment , social science , law , politics
In this article, we outline a unique conceptual framework connecting legitimacy types (Suchman, 1995), theories of corporate responsibility (Brummer, 1991), and levels of organizational moral development based on Kohlberg's (1971) moral development stages. In addition, based on Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) categories, we found empirical support for our framework, by content analyzing Fortune 500 corporate citizenship reports from four different industries (i.e., chemicals, motor vehicle/auto parts, pharmaceutical, and utilities), at three data points (i.e., 2002, 2007, and 2012). Our analysis indicates that motor vehicle/auto parts and chemicals industries are at a higher developmental level, and portray moral legitimacy along with social demandingness corporate responsibility in recent years; while the pharmaceutical and utilities sectors are at a lower developmental level, showing signs of pragmatic legitimacy, alongside classical and stakeholder corporate responsibility strategies. This article contributes to the current organizational moral development literature by developing and finding empirical support of a conceptual framework of organizational moral development, legitimacy, and corporate responsibility. In particular, our findings provide a deeper understanding of the differences in moral development levels across four focal industries over a 10‐year timespan.