: critical Discourse Analysis: An Interdisciplinary Perspective ISBN 978-1-60741-320-2

litors: T. Lê, Q. Lê and M. short @ 2009 Nova Science Publishers' Inc'

CONSTRUCTING SOCIAL ITESPONSIBILITY THROUGH

CONPORATE SUST¿,TNABILITY REPORTING

Richørd Parsons and Bernard J' McKenna

Ansrn¡.cr

This paper aims to provide a tentative description of how social responsibility is

discursively constructed it th" g"*" of corporate sustainability-repofis' as illustrated by

comalco,s sustainable Development Report 2004. Far from being value-free conveyors

of objective information, such reports rhetorically construct companies' conceptions of

theirresponsibilitiestosociety.WeanalysetheComalcoreportatbothlexico-grammatlal and discursive leveis. Examining relational, mental, and material processes'

we find that the report positions Comalco as a socially responsible corporate citizen'

while only partialþ va¡åating this claim in terms of actual achievement' We also find

that the report draws predomLantly from traditional technical-business discourses' but

that these are juxtapåsed arongside *u't:otll""i¡ï'1ä"#ï,.ii:,ttt;;iiliscourses as complementary, there is littlehat functionalist discourses supporting an

,redominate.

Keywords: communication, corporate social responsibility, interdiscursivity' reporting'

sustainabilitY

INrnopucrIoN

- In recent years' a new geffe of reports

on social and environmental or countries

found that, on average, 41o/o o ed such a

184 Richard Parsons and Bemard J' McKenna

,,sustainability report" (centre for Australian Ethical Research, 2005)' ostensibly' reports in

this genre reports, typically appearing to present objective facts

regarding future intentions. unlike their financial counterparts'

however,ndardformat,leavingcompaniesrelativelyfreetodetermine what they include and what they exclude. Thus, company report writers hav¡ a

significant role in constructing the meaning of social and environmental responsibility' The

nomenclature "report", therefore, with its connotation of value-neutrality' may conceal the

rhetorical function of such documents, which is t'o establish the company's reputation as a

den & Andriof, 1998). Indeed, sustainability

llly an impression management strategy

'ort (Elkington, 1997), and even a form of

06, p.5). Nevertheless, it also reflects shifts in

societal expectations of large corporations',f action that became institutionalised and is

r9, p.10), by "consistent pattems of meaning"

rattèms of communicative practices" (Putnam'

Lstainability reports can be seen as recurrlng'

construct meaning regarding the role and

responsibility of business in contemporary society. In this article, we analyse how one

company discursively constructs the meaning of social responsibility in its 2004 sustainability

report.

CONTBXT : CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY

AND SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

Traditionally, business has opposed discussion of social and environmental issues (Gray

& Milne, 2002), and neoclassical economics has further marginalised conceptions of

community and social concern (Reed, 1996). Hence, corporate sustainability and social

responsibility are relatively new concepts. The concept of sustainability was popularised in

the 'Brundtland report', which defined sustaina

the needs of the present without compromisin

own needs" (WCED, 1987, p'43)' In recent y

to have surpassed 'sustainability' in governmt

seems to offer the promise of caring for the e

of economic growth (Tregidga & Milne' 20

been criticised for being anthropocentric an

of CSR has been that corporations have resp

and beyond legal obligations (Jones' 1980)'

are inextricably intertwined, and are often u

and environmental concems'

Constructing Social Responsibility through Corporate Sustainability Reporting 185

The extent of corporations' supposed responsibilities is contested, and may depend on

whether business executives take a neoclassical economic perspective, an 'enlightened self-

interest' perspective, or a moral obligations position (Moir, 2001). Recent literature suggests

that the neoclassical position (Friedman, 1970; Henderson, 2001; The Economisl,2005) has

receded, while a "moral obligations" position (Brock, 1996; Gibson, 2000) has never been

considered consistent with economic "realities". Accordingly, the "enlightened self-interest"

perspective dominates, manifested in notions such as instrumental stakeholder theory

lOonutaron & Preston, 1995; Freeman, 1984) and the "business case" for social and

environmental responsibility (Hargroves & Smith, 2005; Hawken, Lovins, & Lovins, 1999;

Holliday, Schmidheiny, & Watts, 2002).

Because the discourses of sustainability and CSR comprise elements of neoclassical

economics and managerial capitalism juxtaposed with previously antithetical discourses, such

as environmentalism and community development, their emergence can be seen as an

example of interdiscursivity. Interdiscursivity represents the joining, or overlapping' of

differLnt discourses into a new discursive order or text (Wodak ,2001, p. 67).Thus, it is more

than merely the combination of various texts (intertextuality), since it refers to the whole

system of language that draws on (in this case, contesting) discourses (Fairclough, 1992, pp'

1lS-120). It does not represent a new, stable state, but rather an ongoing contestation, which

may "allow for new helds of action" (Wodak, 2001, p.66). Thus, sustainability and CSR

constitute a new, unstable discursive order, exposing ambiguities between competing

paradigms and discourses (Livesey, 2OO2). The resulting interdiscursivity is the outcome of

.oriopãtiti.ul struggles to challenge existing hegemonic relations and "naturalised discourse

conventions" (Fairclough, I99 5, p'9 4)'

Through this interdiscursivþ, large corporations seek to demonstrate that addressing

social and environmental concerns is consistent with economic development (Dunphy,

Griffiths, & Benn, 2003; Elkington,1997,2001; WRI, UNEP & WBCSD, 2002), typically

publishing annual reports as evidence of this "Triple Bottom Line" (Elkingfon, 1997)

performance. The genre of "sustainability reports", therefore, exemplifies interdiscursivity,

since it incorporates dialectically opposed discourses, suc*t as environmentalism, community,

neoclassical economics, and management. However, the prevalence of sustainability reporting

between different industries is uneven. In Australia, the mining industry produces

proportionally one of the highest numbers of such leports (CAER, 2004), perhaps because of

it, ¡igf. leve1 of public scrutiny concemed with adverse environmental impacts and a history

of Inãigenous dispossession (AMEEF,2002;Banerjee,2000;Whiteman& Mamen, 2002)'

Comalco's 2004 Sustainable Development Report

Typical of such reporting is the 50-page Comalco Sustainable Development Report 2004

(Comaico, 2005). Theìompany was chosen for analysis because it has publicly sought to be

àn industry leader in sustainability. In the manner of this geffe, the report combines

quantitativl technical data, nanative text, and aesthetically-pleasing images of industrial

plants and machinery, flora and fauna, scenic landscapes, cheerful staff, and local community

Lembers. Following a Message from the CEo, a Business overview, and Perþrmance

Highlights, the main section is divided into three sub-sections, under the headings People

186 Richard Parsons and Bernard J' McKenna

concerns)' This

Planet, Profits",a "triPle bottom

countabilþ.

MnuroooLoGY

In analysing the report, we adopted principally an inductive' W'

assumed that the ,";;;;";d be interdiscu*iuå' but did not rent

discourses representeá' We conducted four analyses on a corpus of 1 ring

both lexico-grammatical and discursive levels:

1.tronic search for phrases containing either

uced 153 sentences' We considered the

existential.

Identifiing discourses represented i" 1l:^ genre' We searched manually for terms

(discourse identifiersi to ìaentiry the different discourses represented in the report'

Thisenabledustodescribetheinterdiscursivenatureofthereport.Followingatheoretical coding "pp;J,

we allowed the díscourses to emerge from the data

Strauss, 1967)' We then compared 'our

t'c"', saftware that analyses the content of

ly analYsed

with resPect

2.

J.

to social resPonsibilitY

4. other textual characieristics. we manually analysed the corpus further' to consider

other textual characteristics ofthis genre'

FnqoNcs

Considering Comalco as the Actor

Those 151 instances where Comalco is gr

and entified; other Prc

this le Processes' two

one once' Of the ren

r The actor (the person/thing doing the ,action,.in the,yerb) does not always appear in the subject position because

in passive voice the "oä.ää"î^

ir,,¡e indirect obj;;;:'.€"idõ0õì#t' oiuu*ltt were mined bv comalco"'

constructing Social Responsibility through corporate Sustainabilþ Reporting r87

esses, 33 mental processes, and 18 relational processes. Analysis of these instances

iães putative descrìptive information about this report genre, as well as insights into how

.äomalco positions itself subj ectively and discursively'

@MøterialProcesses I .t , -, ^- .^^+2^-) ,,^-L. ', Material processes, which are simply understood as 'doing' or 'action' verbs in

commonly understood grammar (Halliday, 1994, pp. lo9-ll2), were analysed for tense

frt.if. past, present, futire) and concrete/abstract dimensions (see Table 2).

Table2.Material verbs by tense and concrete/abstract

Concrete: 68 Abstract: 31

Past Present Future Past Present Future

1) 27 I 8 l4 9

concrete material processes predominate in the report. Most of these are in the past

tense, as would be expeóted in a text outlining past events. A typical sentence is:

l.In2004ComalcoSpentoverA$l5milliononcommunitycontributions'..Frequently, the concrete action is delivered as a grammatical metaphor where the verb is

changed to a nominalisation þroduction] with another abstract vetb fachieve{ introduced

(see Eggins, 1994, P.63):

2. In2004,Comalco also achievedrecord production at most sites across the business'

Grammatical metaphors involving nominalisations are very common in technical writing

genres. In the

verb/process prto be imported:the future. This grammatical form helps to pr

,"pårt, suggesting the structural and content ambiguity of an emerging geffe'

The numerical slrength of the concrete material process is somewhat deceptive as the

.actions, include procedural issues (n:4: e.g., embarked upon".a programme); statements of

commitment and philosophy (n:3: e.g., have developed a holistic approach); and strategic

and target development çÅ:): ¡os set a reduction target)- Thus, there is a lack of concreteness

ofaction. ofthe relativeìy few concrete future processes (n:9), the intended action is directed

towards setting targets 1n::;. rne 27 instances of present tense are appropriate to report

ongoing activity (e.g, Comalco employs)'

Abstractnlaterialprocessesarenotdelrnedintraditionalsystemicfunctionallinguistics'but were identified uy vcrenna & Graham (2000)2. To put it simply' a material verb

involves an action performed by an actor. This action (in transitive verbs) will be conducted

on a Goal (answered by the p.ób. "Did it to what or whom") or on a Range (which restates

the process or the extent ofihe range) (Eggins, 1994, pp.231-235).Thus, The veterinarian ,

tested the horse provides an ActoÈMaterial Process+Goal, whereas "The student asked a

, There has been online discussion of this notion among SFL theorists: e'g'' http://discurso'files'wordpress- -'-ü*tiOOStOq/sysflinglistabril0Sdiscusion-sobre-procesos-existenciales'doc

l.=:tþÐ,,tiT,

t!.lÞ-

llli

188 Richard Parsons and Bemard J' McKenna

question" provides an Actor+Material f these

"'*utnpr"r, ihe material process involves a owever'

abstract material verbs provide an implie e' focus

(which is actually urn"tåpfto' from a pirysical a they are

hard to confirm' For example, if someone say is clear

material evidence, or absence of it, to assess whether it has been done' However' if someone

SayS,..Iwillendeavourtheabsenceofamealdoesnotindicatethedegree to which the co avour) has been fulfilled' In the report, the

most common Process i Port saYs' ì

3. We will also focus on initiatives to engage and involve employees'

4. ...focuses onmonitoring and improvement of processes"'

other pursue'.These processes appear to

have the as genuinely committed to social

responsibiocessmakesithardtotesttheirachievement.

b) Mentøl Processes

Mental processes basically express thinking and feeling' Issues of thinking that involve

belief:

5. We believe our ongoing sustainability depends on" '

recognition:6. We recognise the importance of safety"'

and cognition:

7 . We identiff root causes " 'areÏypica|ofabusinessreport.However,onewouldprobablyconsideritlessusualto

find expressions of feeling in å report. This occurs in expression of pleasure (t=2; e'g''

comalco was pleased that). The affective processes (feeling) are reasonably evident in

expressing commitment (n:8):

8. Comalco is committed to ' "or aim (e.g., : hoPe, wish;n:6):g. ...we aim to minimise our footprint'

Each of these verbs forms a verbal group complex' that is conative in purpose:

I

,'ri:i.,¡i

il,iÈ.': I

ildïl::::1,

10. We are striving to achieve leading industry practice'

Conation connects knowledge and affect to behaviour to indicate the "personal'

intentional, planful, deliberate, goal-oriented, or striving component of motivation' the

proactive (as opposed to reactive ãr habitual) aspect ofbehaviour" and "is closely associated

3 Advioe received from Australian SFL experts was divided about whether the processes were in fact mental; with

rwo experts ,,rgg.rtirJääiir *-å1t.¿ to" it i.rutiotJ- However, oi '''ot"

importance is the notion of

conation.

Constructing Social Responsibility through Corporate Sustainabilþ Reporting 189

with... volition, defined as the use of will" (Huitt, 1999). In other words, these verbal groups

:ìrumort to indicate a corporate state of mind that is deliberate and goal-directed at thø very

íà^t, if not affectively committed to doing something in the future that, is beyond

conventional corporate financial objectives. Notably, the core process in the verb-complex is

,'¡ãir¡. action (mìnimising the footprint or achieving best practicé) but the intention, belief, or

feeling (aim, strive).

i ù Relàtional Processes

I These processes (typically using verbs /o be ot to have) petform two functions:

;. attributing (p is the attritute of q: The dinner is cold) and identiffing (p is the identity of 4;

':,li* ¡, oZoi¿ dinner).Although there are only 18 instances (Table 3) of this with Comalco a's

the grammatical subject (called 'carrier' when attributing, and 'token' when identiffing), they

. are significant because they express how comalco represents itself.

The intensive identifying function represents comalco as an impressive company (e'g', --

eighth largest aluminium company), but also a good corporate citizen (e'g', a maior sponsor)

r wto is port o¡ the solution, despite acknowledging that it is a significant emitter of

', grurnho)r" gir"r. The attributive possessives reinforce Comalco?s impressive corporate

i ituts (owns" 59 percent), balanced by its corporate citizenship (we have an overriding

commitment).

Table 3. Relational processes - Comalco as Carrier (Attributive) or Token (Identifying)

To summarise, the relational processes present Comalco as both an impressive company

and a good corporate citizen. The mental processes express belief in, and recognition of'

sustainauility principles, at the level of thought and affect. However, the material processes

tend only partially to validate such claims in terms of actual achievement

Identifying Discourses Represented in the Genre

Lexical selection can conceal ideology, because it "construes the social order without

referring to the system it is construing" (Halliday & Martin,Igg3, p'l13)' Thus, studying

lexical ãhoi.". can inform us of the ideological assumptions within a text' As noted earlier'

sustainability reports ostensibly fit the genre of financial reports, purporting to present

objective information regarding company performance and intentions. However, a key

difference is that they draw upon discourses that appear to be antithetical to the discourses of

Comqlco is a majorsupplier

we will be trainedand competent

Comqlco is

currently on track

Richard Parsons and Bemard J' McKennar90

neoclassicaleconomicsandmanagerialcapitalism,^presenlingimplicitcontradictions.Re adin g and re-re adi', *ä'åoän "ú:

t:' 1" *Ρ:";:*Ï.::ffi::ïätti"ï ;::1"::i:il;i,r"rill,i;ï.'ff,ä"üä. ï;'nã* *u"u these terms discourse identifiers because

they characterise a discourse in

discourse would include cha

orientation (e.g., fuel efficiency

;i --r ourses in the report (Table-4)'

(e.g., 'eco-friendly', 'holist-iC\are included here even though they

appear infrequently, because the appearan""

t"it"t îin"i.,î."tu not conventionally appear in

a company report may signal significant discursive strategres'

The coding ptocess provided six major ¿Jr"on ."', eãch with typical discourse identifiers'

Three of these are äåi i"r^t t"r¡oi"ar-uuslnes, dis"o"""s (Management and Business;

Industrial production; Economics and Financiïnd trt'"" are ¡lsllinauility-ethics

discourses

(Environment; Community; Et rics discourse' 'New age'' may

be present, but is not sufficien he technical-business discourse

identifiers (825 instantiations) nability-ethics discourses (221

instantiations); however' their rdicates the interdiscursivity of

i

j

rl

itl

. rill

tilir ti;

Ilìlcriic:ii.Lrl'

-t{JJtLaillt- 'l

the rePort.Itcanbeseen,then'thatwholediscourses,geffes'orsystems.oflanguage(Fairclough,

1992,pp-l15-120) ut" o""tlupping into " ""*'¿Tt"t"í"

o'd"" allowing for "new fields of

action" (Wodak, 2001, p'66)' On .1" one hand' the report comprises discourses of

Management ora uur¡rur", ií¿i"ut"d by terms such as target ar.d sirategy; of Industrial

production ç".g., opr:r'iriolo,-"r"rtn"ry);-un¿^àr Economics- and finance (e'g'' efficiency'

competitive).ontheotherhand,thereportalso_comprisesapparentlyantitheticaldiscourses,such as Environment (e'g'' susta ; Community (e'g" partner' neighbour)

and Ethics (e'g', respect' in 'rt'

therefore' appears to exempliff

interdiscursivity, but is still pre awn from traditional management' business'

tu"il,i:,:ij;îîäiìfJffii:rassirication with output rrom Leximancer' As exprained

above,Leximancerisasoftwarep,og,u,n-"thatanalysesthecontentoftextsanddisplaysthis content in a concepruar map, deriving c"áric"o" íttg an in-built t*^':ï: Í:Tf

*

Humphreys,2006).ConceptsÏhatappear..incloseproximityonthemapappearinsimilarconceptual contexts ," ür" ã""t red text (t.;.,, ,h"; io-or"u, with similar other concepts)' A

map displayirrg "*nu.,"á information ft;;il^ómalco report is shown in Figure 1" This

ttt;äîfi;l,,tJ:m:ïtr?ffiiiå1, *u *,' see llat ":ïîf rerativerv new to business

discourses, such as 1""r"a*rty, and 'environmental" appear in similar contexts to more

conventional bt'ittt';;;";;ts' such as- imar g tends to

confirm that the ttp"n i"*¿îscursively blend onversely'

concepts relating to ittt pfl'ital business of ( bauxite-

aretotherightofthern.ap,conceptuallydistantfrommostotherconcepts.Thesameappliesto concepts relating to adve.se "nni.o*..rtuiiÀpu.o

(e'g', 'greenhouse' and 'emissions')' in

the bottom right quadrant'

constructing Social Responsibility through corporate Sustainability Reporting 191

Table 4. Discourses & Discourse Identifiers in Comalco Report

122

105

10

J

2

I1

ExvrnoxlvlnxrsustainabilitY / sustainable

stewardshiP

fooþrintbiodiversityenvironmentallY fr iendlY

eco-friendlY

4Ur549l65

63

23

22

T9

16

1l7

5

4

4

6rucntmNT & BUSINESS

target(s)

maîage I managng / management

system(s)

strategy / strategic

excellence

riskadd(ine) value / value-added/ing

tools

measure(ment)procedure(s)

world-classkey results areas

54

l812

6

5

4

4

2

2

1

Connr,luNrtYstakeholder(s)parhrer(s)

neighbour(s)heritage

hostmutualcultural awareness

customs

26482

72

46

39

19

6

INDUSTRIAI- PRODUCTION

operation(s) / oPerational

smelter(s)

refinery/iessupply / suPPlied / suPPlier(s)

mine(s, d)

technolory

45

10

8

5

5

4

4

3

J

2

I

Ernrcsrespect

responsible / resPonsiblY

cooperative(lY)integrityethics / ethical

fair(ness)

honest(y)

care

open

equitable

7720

19

7

6

5

4

4

4J

J

2

EcoNon'qcs IND FINANcE

prosperitY

efficiencyeconomic viabilitYgrowthcompetitive(ness)

economic performance

assets

auditrevenue(s)

investment

shareholder tNew aget

wellness

holistic

Richard Parsons and Bemard J' McKenna192

Ite r¡ti

11.

Figure 1. Leximancer analysis of the report'

Itappears,therefore,thatthereportinterdiscursivelyintegratesrelativelyabstractnotions, such as .management, urd.,.o*ffi;, înti. o."igrnc tle 'dirty business' of the

company,s industrial [ã""rr", and impacts uil.on".n*al distance' The significance here is

that, by portraying *i;;;"rrñ,*"ti"¡ ¿i."outt* ; complementary' and by marginalising

contentious issues, ;;p* *.y, th.lT;."tti"n that mining and minerals processmg can

be entirely consisten;;i;;-broader societali;Ë;;J ",.necta-tions' In tum' this reinforces

orthodox assumptions regarding the purpose of business in society:

make a Positive

At comalco, we believe that our "pî{?i':*":""î*i:iiåiffi"#'ìi;';long-term conüibution to a susàinable tuture...' Th! t:Tlong-term conulDutru

etums for our shareholders.

o.rio*un"" is critical to providing superlor rl

Accordingry, when apparenJlv "'qtn-"11:1il':î:'::ì,iJ ffi""ïJ;,î:î'îiîlli*"i:.,åî'"ï:Ï:y'.il;T,å:'ää'ie"li;;ü#:*::*:,,iï'îJ,îi;T.'#J:i[:'äffJ5fiff1iå*"i#:'"ï,jli,i"'?nlit",*å"b.ö^"äop'i,*

social and environmental

initiatives:

l2'Comalcoseekscontinualimprovementinbusinessperformanceandinitscontribution to sustainabl" o"rrrtoprnlîi t"

"ì¿u tu enhance shareholder value'

Constructing Social Responsibilitythrough Corporate Sustainability Reporting 193

13. Comalco believes that good health is good business-.-

14. Comalco is committed to fostering healtþ relationships with these communities, as

they are fundamental to our long-term sustainability.

15. In order to be successful and grow, Comalco needs to ensure that our business

activities are undertaken responsibly and managed to maintain or improve

environmental quality.

16. We recognise that our overall business sustainability is enhanced by our

performance in non-financial aspects of business, including health, safety and

environmental performance.

That is, the 'enlightened self-interest' perspective, which perhaps dominates corporate

hes to social responsibility and which inheres in instrumental stakeholder theory

ldson & Preston, 1995; Freeman, 1984), is evident in the text of this sustainability

The company's discursive choices are clearly circumscribed by the prevailing

ive formation of management and economics. The assumption is thar. good business

and shareholder value are inherently desirable, and therefore incontestable, non-ideological

objectives. Consequently, the report justifies being socially responsible not for its own sake,

ibut because it is consistent with conventional conceptions ofbusiness.

Considering how Comalco Positions itself as Speaker

For this part of the analysis, we again analysed the 153 sentences containing either

'Comalco', 'we', or'the company', to investigate how Comalco positions itself with respect

to social responsibility. This enables us to describe more deeply the interdiscursive nature ofthe report, illustrating how Comalco rhetorically positions industrial processes as consistent

with, even contributing towards, social and environmental goals.

As noted above, the report draws on various discourses in an effort to portray Comalco as

concurrently a socially-responsible and commercially-successful company. Indeed' the report

attempts to create an impression of Comalco as able to deliver both sustainability and

community development. Firstly, Comalco is rhetorically positioned not as an inherently

unsustainable user of vast amounts of non-renewable resources (Jenkins,2004, p.3 1), but as

actually contributing to sustainability. In each case, there is an assumption that the goal, here

underlined, can be realised within the existing business paradigm:

lj . At Comalco, we believe that our operations and our products can make a positive

long-term contribution Io a sustainable future.At Comalco, we believe that aluminium is one of the most versatile and useful

materials on earth and is essential for a more sustainable socíety'

Therefore, we are determined to be part of the solution and seek to.work with all our

business partners towards sustainability.

Secondly, Comalco is rhetorically positioned as a 'partner', 'neighbour', and 'host' to the

communities where it operates, notions that suggest an equal power relationship, with

18.

19.

194

Comalco regularly consulting these

underlined:

communities. The goal of each statement is again

20.WhereverComalcooperates,ourvisionistobethepreferredpartnerlorcommunities --,:¿L ^"r -oiohhnrrrs characterised by

21. we set out to build enduring relationships with our.neighbours characterised b

mutual respect, ;;'* ;*""rst'ip- utta long-term commitment'

22. Thlswill mean sitting down with.membãrs of the community and other interested

parties r" Iirtr;;;;;;7, uiu*ron what we are doing and how we report our progress'

23. wherever we operate we will take care to engage our host communities ' ' ' '

Significantly,thesearepromissorystatements,withnodeclaredtimeframe.Becausetheyare not verifiable ,tut"*.nt. of achievem"nt, ìn.y are very. difficutt to challenge' Moreover'

comalco does not explain what it fn"unr,by 1'.o.aunity"' In practice' when mine.rals

companies talk of "to*t""ity engagement"'ittg 'tt" tt¡^t11"i::"î:irå1t:tiru:ff:il;

with local residents' iypicatiy' sulh clmlunications compnse

sessions and complaint' ietpo"ses Qeach' il;;' Brereton' & Paulsen' 2005)' However'

"community" is a highly contested '"""'éït ' 2001'; fopper' 2003; Little' 200'2;

McKenna, zoo5), ""å"|il.;;'räl "ï ¿"i.irion may incline the reader to rmagme

,,community,, as a .itt"J dream of living among friendly'.sympathetic' trusting' mutually

supportive people inurr*ur' 2001), u n"r,uîËi",^i¿"Ji..i simulacrum' rather than a really

existing community. it " potyr"ri" ,rutor. îr the word "community"' therefore' enables

companies to make affirming statements *t,iå*, i."ti¿i'g tungiule evidence of enhancing

communitY wellbeing'

Other Textual Characteristics

Furthercloseanalysisofthereport,stextualcharacteristicssuggestedthattwootherdiscursive effects u" pittt"tt technocratisation and reification'

"'T:{"::::;"'i:"':,:::ä:'å:::!:#:-roundations or stakehorder theory (Freeman' 1e84)'

sociar responsibi-' - "' ^'-'^1" L'aino t"""'"*J"r:înî:lî;:]1""""" notions or

social resPonsibi In particular, d

risk assessment, .ogg & Hardy,that, in some c o the adage, "Ifthat, in some c ........s the adage, "If

ïXX'l'Jff J:1i"i'JJäïiöïî"1;r:í1*1*;X*"=;ffi iî;HïJ"i'societies can be traced to Myncr

^rt nrovides olentiful examples

::Hfiî."tr'f iffi"'':å#äþi :iJ'.îïf'prentirur exampres

ofterms, phrases, and clauses that n' such as:

ii.ï:ï:'iî":Xt#J"'ii#ilü,",nareaorenvironmentarstewardship;

Richard Parsons and Bemard J' McKenna

Constructing Social Responsibility through Corporate Sustainability Reporting 195

26. key results areas (KRAs), which include specific one and five year targets forselected performance indicators;

27. the model that will integrate our health, safety and environmental management

systems;

28. engagement tools.

These examples feature some of the linguistic features of technocratic language

(McKenna & Graham,2000). These include the use of nominals and nominal groups to

classiff objects and things (performance; achievement; key results areas (KRAs);

performance indicators; management systems; engagement tools). Many of these become

mantric nostrums, "abstract notions that obscure real events," and ... are used over and over

in public discourse performance" (p.235). Combined, these help to reduce human agency in

the technocratic process.

Comalco thus technocratises its approach, implying that social responsibility can be

achieved via technological advancement and management systems, and that progress towards

it can be measured. The significance here is that technocratic discourse works to defend

power interests through a specific political and economic agenda (McKenna & Graham,

2000). It also assumes that the current westem economic paradigm, characterised by

economic globalisation, individual libertarianism, mass production, and competition, need not

be challenged (Korhonen,2002). Such a challenge would be paradigmafically inconsistent,

and thus cannot be stated in the report.

Reiftcation'While social responsibility is an abstract concept, Comalco does provide some tangible

evidence of actions that could be described as exemplif,ing social responsibility. For

example:

29. In2004, Comalco spent over A$15 million on community contributions in areas such

as commercial initiatives, community investments and charitable gifts.

30. In 2004, Comalco committed an additional $l million to the Comalco Community

Fund for the Gladstone Region for distribution over the next three years'

31. In conjunction with the community, Comalco Weipa has set employment targets for

Local Aboriginal People.

However, the tendency to account quantitatively for actions and relationships can lead to

the problem of reification (Lukács, I97l).That is, when social responsibility is measured by,

for example, financial donations and Indigenous employment targets, the whole notion ofsocial responsibility is assumed to be reducible to quantifiable 'key performance indicators'.

This phenomenon prevents deeper reflexivity, and hinders dialogic negotiation, concerning

the responsibilities of business in contemporary society. This leaves no space to contest either

the adequacy of the numbers concemed, or more abstract dimensions of social relationships

such as trust, mutuality, and respect.

Richard Parsons and Bernard J' McKennat96

DrscussroN aND coNclusroN

Thispapersetouttoprovideatentativedescriptionofhowsocialresponsibilityisconstructed in the gt*t oi corporate '"";;i;;-ïpo't''

as illustrated by Comalco's

Sustainable O"relopmelni *ron'2004. The;;;;"'f."dt"' tu" be described at a linguistic'

genre, and discourse level'

Linguistic Features

Thelinguisticfeaturesincorporatethelexisandthegrammaticalcharacteristics.

l.Materialprocesses(oractionverbs)predominateinsentenceswherethecompanyistheactor.Concreteprocessesoutnumberabstractones.Abstractprocessesoftensimply function in the normal r..irrri"Jru.irion of using grammatical metaphors [i'e''

the action verb is changed to a nominalisationl'

2. The use of austract iraterial processes, which are strongly represented' presents

implied non-specific actions.such *"lir;, and focus that are hard to confirm' They

allowthecompanytopositionitselfrhetoricallyasgenuinelycommittedtosomeideal, while lnut ing it difficult to t;; actual achievement' These processes occur in

complex verbal groups stch striv.e-;;;;;";;, emission levels' The central process is

3. fmX;fm'|::tn'reduction' re,eenerally goal-directed' and

have a conative PurPc :: relativelY

4' Mental Processes' w IflB'

limited way' Thinki ¡ ;f (w nition (r're

recognise)'and cogn ' Affective

processes are evident in expressing commitment tself in a positive way '

5. Relational pro...r". allowthe orr'^iru,ion to represent itself in a positive way usmg

attribution'

Genre features

l.Thereportostensiblyfitsthegenreoffinancialreports,purportingtopresentobjective informat performance and intentions'

2. The report display ãit."hoor.atic language' These include the

use of nominals and t classify objects *J thingt' many of which

become rnuntti' nostrums and which reduce human agency'

3 nc nos'[rurissssssssssss:

T;; .;;.;:î,:f,$Í;l"n,nt;.J;:ïïllïåi'"'.1ïü:

and about ^î'ã-uUtou"t

dimensions of social relationships

such as trust, mutuality' und respect'

Constructing Social Responsibility through Corporate Sustainabilþ Reporting 197

'Discourse Features

benignly as a responsible corporate citizen. In this report, Comalco rhetorically positions

itseli in this way, but in a way that is predominantly abstract and promissory. An important

feature of ideology is to cast history in a certain way or to ignore it. Here, the historical record

is for the previous year. There is no acknowledgement of the mining industry's adverse

environmental record or its brutal relationship with Indigenous people. This ahistorical

context limits the potential for genuine dialogue.

Three limitations with this study can be identified. Firstly, whereas we have examined

only verbal text, social responsibility, as a discursive phenomenon, can be seen as multimodal

[eáema & Wodak, 1999). Thus, a more complete understanding also requires attention to

visual text (Jameson, 2000, p.33).Indeed, Graves, Flesher, & Jordan (1996) argue that visual

design has become central to company reports, functioning rhetorically to assert certain

valuãs, ideologies, and truth claims. Secondly, as this analysis examines only one document,

its findings are not generalisable, but they do provide some possible lines of enquiry' Thirdly,

as such repo.ts form part of a suite of social responsibility 'dialogue' (which may also include

websites, planning documents, newsletters, and community meetings), they should be

understood as part of an overall communicative strategy. Nonetheless, this study provides a

useful starting point for future analysis.

RBpnnnNcrs

Australian Minerals and Energy Environment Foundation (AMEEF). (2002). Facing the

future: The report of the MMSD Austalia proiect.Melboume: AMEEF.

Bane¡ee, S. B. (2000). Whose land is it anyway? National interest, Indigenous stakeholders

and colonial discourses: The case of the Jabiluka uranium mine' Organization &

Envir onment, I 3 (1), 3 -38'

Bauman, Z. (2001). Community: Seeking safety in an insecure world. Cambridge: Polity

Press.

Beach, R., Parsons, R., Brereton,D., & Paulsen, N. (2005, 14-17 August)' Engaging on the

ground: SiteJevel community engagement practices in the Australian minerals industry.

Þaper presented at the Intemational Conference on Engaging Communities, Brisbane'

gowen, H. R. (1953) . Social responsibilities of the businessman' New York: Harper & Row'

iltltl

Iil

IT

II

198 Richard Parsons and Bernard J' McKenna

Brock,G.(1996).Meetingneedsandb":ii:t::ltigations:Anargumentforthelibertaria,I"pti". Jouínd of Busines't Ethics' 15(6)' 695-'702'

",,iÏ:'i: ä*;;' í;;;;g the swampv terrain "i p:"':1,'i :::ïï1li',IiÏl:

iä;å,iíii;íil;;; of "o,n.,,nity

deveropm ent. rournat of sociat work, 4(3),23''

246.

CentreforAustralianEthicalResearch.(2005).ThestateofsustainabilityreportingAustrqlia2005:AtlsÏralianGovernmentDepartmentoftheEnvironmentandHeritage.

Centre for Australian Ethical Research. (ZOd¿)' The state of sustainability reporting

Australia2004:AusÏralianGovernmentDepartmentoftheEnvironmentandHeritage'clegg, s. R., & H.rdy,-¿. ¿iolo). tntroauction: organizations, organization and organizit

InS.R.Clegg&C'Hardy(Eds'),Handbookoforganizationstudies(pp'1-28).Londc

c"r;iï. (2005). sustainabre Deveropment Report 2004.Retrreved December 8,2008 fr<

ttttp tlromaLco.migrate'f5'com'ar-r/document-get'aspx?id:520'-

czamiawska, B. (lggg). writing *orogu*"nì: organization theory as a líterary gen

Oxford: Oxford UniversitY Press'

oJ,ärä;Ï;ä;1.';. iiõôsl. rhe stakeholder theory of the corporation: concelì/r\ Á< o1

:;iä;, ñl'.pii"".* ' Academv of Management Review' 20(t)"6s-et'

o"ö"ï:'ä;äin";;;;;,'s'poo¡)'o:.t:Y'",:,:'-."!":t^"^!:í":,í::^Z:'ri! ; r,i r;,i i,' )" i; i i ¡", t e a d e r s and c h an g e ag e n à of th e fut ur e .,London: Routl ed ge

:^^ r ^-á^n' Þir

urrl',t"'{."'r'üiof "), ¡nt odrction to sysrJmic- funaional linguistics' London: Pil

i,i. ,il.iiirlll

,, útt,

.tii

Iirlct.c:!!t;;

'|-¡r

Êili

Publishers.

Elkington, J. (1997)' Cqnnibalswith Forks: The triple bottomline of 21st century busin'

Oxford: CaPstone'

Elkington, J. (2001). The Chrysatis Ec corporations canl

,âfun, andvalue creation' Oxford:

Fairclough, N. (1992)' Discourse and social t Press'

Fairclough, N. (1995)' Critical Discourse A' of language' Harl

Longman.

Flick,U.(2002)'Anintroductiontoqualitativeresearch(2nded.).London:Sage.Frankental, p. (z0orJ. ðorporate social responsibility - a PR invention? corpo

C ommunications, 6(l), 18'

Freeman,R.E'(19s4).strategicmanagement:Astakeholderapproach.Marshfield,ìPitman'

business is to increasFrie

Gib of Busíness Ethics' 2

24s-2s7.he discovery of grounded theory: Strategie

vR. s and the bottom line:

t r Organizations and So

2l(l),57-88.

Constructing Social Responsibility through Corporate Sustainability Reporting 199

Gray, R., & Milne, M. J. (2002). Sustainability reporting: ll'ho's kidding whom? Retrieved

Ápril 11" 2005, from http://www.accaglobal.com/pdfs/environment/newsletter/

: gray-milne.Pdf

Hallidai, M A. K. (1994) . An introduction to functional grammar (2nd ed')' London: Edward

Arnold.Halliday, M. A. K., &,Martin, J. R. (1993). llriting Science: Literacy and dìscursive power'

London: Falmer Press.

Ilargroves, K. C., & Smith, M. H. (Eds.). (2005). The natural advantage of nations: Business

opportunities, innovation, and governance in the 2lst century. London: Earthscan.

Hawkán, P., Lovins, 4., & Lovins, L. H. (1999)' Natural capitalism: Creating the next

industrial revolution' Boston: Little, Brown and Co'

Henderson, D. (2001). The case against'Corporate Social Responsibilþ'' Policy, 17(2),28-

32.

Holliday, C. O., Schmidheiny, S., & Watts, P. (2002). Walking the Talk: The business case

for s us t ainab I e dev e I opmen¡. Sheffi eld : Greenleaf'

Hooghiemstra, R. (2000). Corporate communication and impression management: New

perspectives why companies engage in corporate social reporting' Journal of Business

Ethics, 27,55-68'Hopper, P. (2003). Rebuitding communities in an age of individualism. Aldershot, uK:

Ashgate.

Huitt, W. (1999). Conation as an important factor of mind' Retrieved December 8, 2008 from

http : //chiron.valdosta. edu/whuitlcoVregsys/conation'html

Iedema, R., & Wodak, R. (1999). Introduction: Organizational discourses and practices'

Discours e and SocietY, I 0(l), 5-19.

Jameson, D. A. (2000). Telling the investment story: A narrative analysis of shareholder

reports. The Journal of Business Communícation, j7(L)'1-38'

Jenkins, H. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and the mining industry: Conflicts and

constructs. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management' I 1,23-34'

Jones, T. M. (19S0). Corporate social responsibility revisited, redefined' California

Management Review, 2 2(2), 59 -67 .

Korhonen, J. (2002). The dominant economics paradigm and corporate social responsibility.

C orp or at e S òci al Resp ons ibility and Envir onmental Management, 9 (I), 67 -80.

Little, A. (2002). The Polítics of community: Theory and practice. Edinburgh: Edinburgh

University Press.

Livesey, S. M. (2002). The discourse of the middle ground' Management Communication

Quar t erly, I 5 (3), 3 13 -3 49'

Lukács, G. (1971). History and class consciousness: studies in Marxíst dialectics (R'

Livingstone, Trans.). Cambridge, Mass': MIT Press'

Marsden, C., & Andriot J. (1998). Towards an understanding of corporate citizenship and

how to influence it- Citizenship Studies, 2(2)'329-352'

Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2007). working with Discourse: Meaning beyond the clause (2nd

ed.). London: Continuum'

McKenna, B. J. (2005, I4-l'7 Äugust). What is this thing called community? A

communication perspective. Paper presented at the International Conference on Engaging

Communities, Brisbane.

Richard Parsons and Bernard J' McKenna200

McKenna,B.J.,&Graham,P.(2000)'Technocraticdiscourse:Aprimer.JournalofTechnical Writingái¿ co**u"i:::i::' tofÐ:?T?,,t):

cnrnorate social responsibilitv:

*"{,",í!:i:,tf:,-:::"åi,o:"::";'îji;;'. i:; (2006) corporate sociar responsibilitv:

Strategic implications ' Jou'nol of Management Studies' 43(1)' 1-18'

Moir, L. (2001)' \ú;; d" *t t"u" uí'"átp"*te social responsibility? Corporate

Gov ernance, I (2), 16-22'

Myrick, D. (1941, Stpi"-U1t 1)' Measuring industry's "Soci

outlines ,tu"" tt't' u"¿ 'ecomme"dt

practical application'

Putnam, L. L', Phillþs' N'' & Chanlal' P' (1996)' Mett

organization' rt sitrtËg' c' Huøv & w' R' Nord @d

Stía¡", (pp. 395-a08)' London: Sage' l terrain. In S. R. Clegg &

Reed, M' (1996)' Organizatior rtestec

C. Hardy (Eds.), Handboc ping of

Smith, A. E', & HumPhreYs"' , tït'r'natural language with Le;

262-279' hlism and ethics. (A sceptical

'^" i::{";i;i',:':'i":iÏi:å '¡ rhe Economist' 374' e

Tregidga, H., & Milne' M' lrlârltl$êrrient to sustainable

development: A longitudi ealand environmental reporter'

Business Strategt oia 'l'u

Environment' 15'219-241' ¡orticioation in the min'

Whiteman, G., & Ma; l,i. fzooz¡. lluoriïgfut ,loirrltotio' and participation in the mining

sector? A review of the consutr"ti", or:,1;;il":i7i,3"-"4.lndigenous peoples within the

internationat *iniig'' u"io'' Ottawa: The North-South Institute'

The di In R' Wodak & M' MeYer (Eds')'

cal Dis London: Sage.

for E ent [WCED]' (1937)' Our common

future.Oxford: Oxford University Press' I Programme [.INEP], &

world Resources I";;i*" Ñol' unitef Nations Environmenl

world Business äïr*ri for sustainabr" ö"""Lptent [wBcsD]' (2002)' Tomorrow's

markets: Gtobatl"ri, ,ra their impticitili, ¡or'busineis:wRl, TINEP & wBcsD'

Languages and Linguistics Series

CnrrrcAr, DrscouRSE ANnrYSrs:AN INrBnDrscrpLrNARy PnnspECTrvE

Tnno LÊ

QuvNn LÊAND

MncrN SnonrErrrons

Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

New York ?-rOAg