trends and future of sustainable development - TransEco

sustainability webpages and press releases) of the three Finnish case companies was content analysed.Several different stakeholders are mentioned in the disclosure however most of them only a few times.The most often mentioned stakeholders were customers, cooperative companies and employees. Somedifferences arise when comparing the top ten stakeholders mentioned in different areas of CSR anddisclosure type.This analysis has a few limitations. First, only a part of the CSR disclosure was analysed. Also thetarget of analysis covered only one year of reporting. In other words, these results can be called as asnapshot of the CSR disclosure of the case companies. This limitation will be lowered during the projectwhen other parts of the CSR disclosure will be analysed as well. Also, in the future the analysis will coveryears 2007–2009 so the variation in time will be analysed. Second, limitation of the analysis is that itonly targeted the disclosure. CSR disclosure has been accused of concentrating only on the positiveissues and also of being an imago raising stunt. The positive tendency of reporting was not analysed inthe paper. However, it became very clear that the disclosure presents company’s view on the topic,especially in the case of press releases.In the previous literature, customers, employees and authorities were mentioned as importantstakeholders. In this analysis, customers, cooperative companies and employees were mentioned mostoften. Authorities were not very often mentioned. There are some reasons behind this difference. First,one could argue that does the pure amount of mentions relate with the importance of the stakeholder.The low amount of mentions of authorities, for example, cannot be said to imply that these companieswould not regard the authorities as an important stakeholder rather than the selected disclosures aresurely not the main disclosure channel towards the authorities.This analysis is a good starting point for the on-going project. At the same time, it argues for somefurther analysis. During the analysis, it became obvious that the corporate responsibility disclosure isonly company’s view of the CSR work and it might not be shared with the stakeholders. The project givesan interesting and important opportunity to compare the official picture of CSR in the company (i.e.corporate responsibility disclosure) with the picture that the company’s internal and externalstakeholders have. Also, the content analysis will be widened in three ways. First, analysis will cover thedisclosure of the case companies from the period 2007–2009. Also, the stakeholder magazines, theannual reports and CSR policies will be added to the analysis. Second, the subthemes of the CSR will beanalysed. Third, the analysis will focus on the most often mentioned stakeholders from the point of viewof the subthemes of CSR. Also, this preliminary analysis raises the interesting question of who are thetarget groups of the CSR disclosure and can the target groups be determined by listing and counting thementioned stakeholders?AcknowledgementsThe author wishes to thank the Tekes – the Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation(project number 770/31/2010) and the Finnish Work Environment Fund (project number 109344) forproviding the funding for the project reported in this paper.356