Analisis Persepsi Stakeholder atas Laporan Sustainability
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26487/akrual.v16i1.22234Keywords:
Legitimacy, Legitimacy Gap, Corporate Social Responsibility, Sustainability ReportAbstract
The triple bottom line paradigm in industrialization has encouraged companies to implement and disclose their social and environmental performance as well as their financial performance. This study aims to analyze the perceptions of PT Vale's external stakeholders, namely the people of Nuha District and NGOs engaged in social and environmental fields, about the legitimacy of PT Vale through its CSR program as disclosed in the PT Vale Sustainability Report. The data used in this study are primary data sourced from direct statements from NGOs and the community which were collected using in-depth interview techniques. The results of data collection were analyzed by qualitative methods using a descriptive approach. The results of the study illustrate that there is a congruence between stakeholder’s expectations and PT Vale's performance through the CSR program. However, there is still a dominant gap in the legitimacy of PT Vale's CSR as disclosed in PT Vale's Sustainability Report.Downloads
References
Beal, B. D. 2014. Corporate Social Responsibility: Definition, Core Issues, and Recent Developments. Los Angeles: Sage Publications, Ltd.
Carroll, A. B. 1991. The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders. Business Horizon, 34 (4): 39-48.
Colleoni, Elanor. 2013. CSR Communication Strategies for Organizational Legitimacy in Social Media. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 18 (2): 228 – 248.
Deegan, C. M. 2002. Introduction: The Legitimising Effect of Social and Environmental Disclosures – A Theoretical Foundation. Accounting, Auditing, & Accountability Journal, 15 (3): 282-311.
Deegan, C. M. 2019. Legitimacy Theory: Despite It’s Enduring popularity and Contribution, Time is Right for a Necessary Makeover. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 32 (8): 2307-2329.
Dowling, J. dan Pfeffer, J. 1975. Organizational Legitimacy: Social Values and Organizational Behavior. The Pacific Sociological Review, 8 (1): 122- 136.
Elkington, J. 1997. Cannibal with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business. Oxford: Capstone.
Global Reporting Initiative (GRI). 2016. GRI Standards. Amsterdam: Global Sustainability Standards Board (GSSB).
Gray, R.H., Kouhy, R., dan Lavers, S. 1995. Corporate Social and Environmental Reporting: A Review of the Literature and a Longitudinal Study of UK Disclosure. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 8 (2): 47-77.
Kotler, P. dan Lee, N. 2005. Corporate Social Responsibility: Doing the Most Good for Your Company and Your Cause. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Lindawati, A. dan Puspita, M. 2015. Corporate Social Responsibility: Implikasi Stakeholder dan Legitimacy Gap dalam Peningkatan Kinerja Perusahaan. Jurnal Akuntansi Multiparadigma, 2 (1): 89-109.
Mistry, V., Sharma, U., dan Low, M. 2014. Management Accountants’ Perception of Their Role in Accounting for Sustainable Development: An Exploratory Study. Pacific Accounting Review, 206 (1-2): 112-133.
O’Donoval, Gary. 2002. Environmental Disclosures in the Annual Report: Extending the Applicability and Predictive Power of Legitimacy Theory. Accounting, Auditing, & Accountability Journal, 15 (3): 344-347.
O’Dwyer, B. 2002. Managerial Perceptions of Corporate Social Disclosure: An Irish Story. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 15 (3): 406-436.
O’Dwyer, B., Jeffrey, U., dan Bradley, J. 2005. Perception of the Emergence and Future Development of Corporate Social Disclosure in Ireland: Engaging the Voices of Non-Governmental Organisation. Accounting, Auditing, and Accountability Journal, 18 (1): 14-43.
Rijali, A. 2019. Analisis Data Kualitatif. Jurnal Alhadharah, 17 (33):81-95.
Sekaran U. dan Bugie, R. 2016. Research Methods for Business (7th edition). Chichester: John Wiley &Sons Ltd.
Suchman, M. C. 1995. Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approach. The Academy of Management Review, 20 (3): 571-611.
Sugiyono. 2017. Metode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif, dan Kombinasi (Mixed Methods). Bandung: Penerbit Alfabeta.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Akrual: Jurnal Bisnis dan Akuntansi Kontemporer
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
