• Illia Manzan Laura Géraldine

• Illia Manzan Laura Géraldine

• Giorgi Nicole

Corporations can be important actors to improve societal goodwill. However, very often, reality shows that firms do not contribute to solve social issues. Either they do not have a Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and communication department, or they have such a department with the mere objective to support marketing communication  or corporate reputation, rather than build trust and authentically create social value for stakeholders. This course will familiarize students with the field of CSR and will enable them to think critically about how business can create value for society through communication.

The course consists of three parts. The first part will focus on learning how a corporation can link social value for stakeholders with profitability through communication and business related activities.  The second part will focus on  learning how to build a CSR and communication department that creates value for multiple stakeholders. Core to this part will be the learning of  how to establish a strategic approach to compliance and avoid reputational risks related to outsourcing, accountability, oversees bribery, CEO and board engagement, unethical suppliers and supply chain social issues. The third part will focus on how communication professionals can transform classical forms of corporate philanthropy into new ones.

To take a global and actual perspective, students will work on real cases from different periods of time, countries and industries. Also, in order to reach teaching objectives students will be involved in a number of workshop related activities such as class simulations and class labs where they will put hands on real issues related to communication and CSR. Students are therefore expected to participate actively in class and to read in advance material indicated by the professor.

PART 1: Unlock social value

• Understand what and how to map ethical initiatives of a business in a portfolio
• Learn business ethics theories and their relationship with communication
• Support ethical consumerism and circular economy by unlocking corporate social responsibility

PART 2: Assure social value

• Manage communication and business issues through various forms of ethics
• Learn theories related to an ethical approach to compliance, accountability, outsourcing, oversees bribery, CEO and board engagement, suppliers and supply chain social risks
• Build a department that facilitates ethical decision making in communication and marketing from zero

PART 3: Understand philanthropy

• Explore common forms of corporate philanthropy in six different industries
• Deepen the knowledge of e-philanthropy, digital advocacy, venture philanthropy, and impact investing

Mandatory readings

• Chandler, D. (2016). Strategic Corporate Social Responsibility: Sustainable Value Creation. Sage Publications (4th Edition). – Chapter 9, 14, and Part IV.

• Crane, A. & Glozer, S. (2016). Researching corporate social responsibility communication: Themes, opportunities and challenges. Journal of Management Studies, 53(7), 1223-1252.
• Crane, A., Palazzo, G., Spence, L. J., & Matten, D. (2014). Contesting the value of “Creating Shared Value.” California Management Review, 56(2), 130–153.

• Dahl, S. & Waehning-Orga, N. (2015). Ethical Consumption. In Eagle L. & Dahl S. (eds.), Marketing Ethics and Society (pp. 117-140). Sage.

• Esposito, M., Tse, T., & Soufani, K. (2018). Introducing a circular economy: new thinking with new managerial and policy implications. California Management Review, 60(3), 5-19.
• Hooghiemstra, R. (2000). Corporate communication and impression management - new perspectives why companies engage in corporate social reporting. Journal of Business Ethics, 27(1/2), 55-68.
• Illia, L., Romenti, S., Rodríguez-Cánovas, B., Murtarelli, G., & Caroll, C. E. (2016). Exploring corporations’ dialogue about CSR in the digital era. Journal of Business Ethics, 131(2), 39-58.
• Illia, L., Zyglidopoulos, S., Romenti, S., Rodriguez-Canovas, B., & Gonzalez del Valle Brena, A. (2013). Communicating corporate social responsibility to a cynical public. MIT Sloan Management Review, 54(3), 16–19.

• Jensen, J. (1997). Ethical Issues in the Communication Process.  Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. – Chapter 3 and 5.  
• Lacy P., Keeble, J., & McNamara, R. (2014). Circular advantage: Innovative business models and technologies to create value in a world without limits to growth. Accenture Strategy Report.

• Mintzberg, H. (1984). Who should control the corporation? California Management Review, 27(1), 90–115.
• Morsing, M., Schultz, M., & Nielsen, K. U. (2008). The ‘catch 22’ of communicating CSR: Findings from a Danish study. Journal of Marketing Communications, 14(2), 97-111.
• Porter, M. E. & Kramer, M. R. (2011). The big idea. Creating shared value. How to reinvent capitalism – and unleash a wave of innovation and growth. Harvard Business Review, 2011 (January-February), 62-77.
• Schoeneborn, D., Morsing, M., & Crane, A. (2019). Formative Perspectives on the Relation Between CSR Communication and CSR Practices: Pathways for Walking, Talking, and T(w)alking. Business & Society. DOI: 10.1177/0007650319845091
• Seeger, M. & Kuhn, T. (2011) Communication ethics and organizational contexts: Divergent values and moral puzzles. In G. Cheney, S. May & D. Munshi, Handbook of Communication Ethics: Information Censorship (pp. 166-189). Routledge.

• Smith, N. C., Drumwright, M. E., & Gentile, M. C. (2010). The new marketing Myopia. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 29(1), 4–11.

• Walker K. & Wan F. (2012). The harm of symbolic actions and green-washing: Corporate actions and communications on environmental performance and their financial implications. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(2), 227-242.
• Zadek, S. (2012). Path to corporate social responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 1-11.

Other recommended readings

• Bhattacharya, C. B. & Sen, S. (2004). Doing better at doing good: When, why, and how consumers respond to corporate social initiatives. California Management Review, 47(1), 9-24.
• Garriga, E. & Melé D. (2004). Corporate social responsibility theories: Mapping the territory. Journal of Business Ethics, 53(1-2), 51-71.
• Lee, M. (2008). A review of the theories of corporate social responsibility: Its evolutionary path and the road ahead. International Journal of Management Review, 10(1), 53-73.
• Morsing, M. & Schultz, M. (2006). Corporate social responsibility communication:  Stakeholder information, response and involvement strategies. Business Ethics: A European Review, 15(4), 324-338.
• Waddock, S. (2009). Making a difference? Corporate responsibility as a social movement. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 33, 35-46.

Recommended videography

• The Story of Stuff: It is a 20-minute documentary about the way people make, use and throw away all the stuff in their lives.
• International Corporate Citizenship Film Festival: The Boston College Center for Corporate Citizenship Film Festival celebrates the work and impact of corporate citizenship programs—as well as the inspiring methods companies use to communicate their efforts.
• Playing by the Rules: Ethics at Work (2016): This documentary explores the vital role of ethical decision-making in today’s business practices.
• The World According to Monsanto (2008): This French documentary provides an overview of Monsanto’s long track record of environmental crimes and health scandals. 
• Enron: The Smartest Guy in the Room (2005): This documentary describes one of the biggest corporate disasters of the last decades. It features insider accounts and rare corporate audio and video tapes that reveal the immorality of Enron’s corporate philosophy.
• Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price (2005): This documentary provides an overview of Wal-Mart’s impact on America’s values and culture.
• The Corporation (2004): A documentary on the global impact of large organizations. It treats them as a patient undergoing psychoanalysis and portrays them as being psychopaths.

Students will be subject to an ongoing evaluation, following the scheme below:

• Team project (40%).
• Individual project (60%)

No retake exam.

Course with continuous evaluation: after the registration period, you can no longer cancel your registration (see session calendar on the Faculty's website).