The production of stand-alone sustainability reports: visual impression management, legitimacy and “functional stupidity”

ABSTRACT

Research on stand-alone sustainability reports (SASRs) has focused on published documents rather than on the process by which SASRs are produced. This study investigates the process of producing Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) G3.1 A+ rated SASRs, particularly examining how visual impression management choices are made within the organisation. The study analyses how and by whom SASRs are prepared, and the rationale for using visuals and blank space, and examines the respective roles of reporting managers and Chief Executive Officers (CEOs).

Semi-structured interviews were carried out with ten managers responsible for the process of preparing SASRs. The main findings are (i) the process and preparation of SASRs is complex and costly, (ii) the communication department champions the process of SASRs and external designers are responsible for the design of SASRs, (iii) the CEO plays a varying role in selecting designers and determining the form and (visual) content of the SASRs, (iv) reporting managers are constrained by the CEO’s reporting strategy, and (v) visuals and blank space are used symbolically to advance the CEO’s reporting strategy in order to maintain legitimacy.

We suggest that the tensions imposed on managers responsible for preparing SASRs provide evidence of “functional stupidity” within organisations, which employ an economics of persuasion that emphasises image and symbolic manipulations, and where reporting managers are encouraged to conform to perceived reporting strategies. The exploratory nature of this study opens avenues for future research in the context of “functional stupidity” and reporting processes.

KEYWORDS:

• Corporate social responsibility
• stand-alone sustainability reports
• visual impression management
• functional stupidity
• Global Reporting Initiative

Acknowledgements

The paper benefited from comments from participants at the 7th CSEAR North America conference, Toronto, June 2018 and the 22nd Financial Reporting and Business Communication conference, Bristol, July 2018. We also thank the editor, Carol Tilt, the associate editor, Niamh Brennan, and two anonymous reviewers for their very helpful comments on earlier drafts of the paper.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 For the purposes of this study, “functional stupidity” is a theoretical concept that applies at the level of the organisation, and should not be construed as pertaining to our interviewees.