An investigation of Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting Practices in Saudi Arabian Firms

This study explores the plausible explanations for corporate social responsibility reporting (hereafter CSRR) practices in Saudi Arabian firms. It investigates the different factors that motivate companies to report their corporate social responsibility (hereafter CSR) activities from managerial perspectives, as well as the challenges that companies face when reporting their CSR activities. The study also investigates and tries to understand the role of non-corporate actors from the media, academia, NGOs, CSR consultants, and regulators in influencing companies to report their CSR activities and their perceptions of current CSRR practices in Saudi companies. An interpretive approach has been utilised in this research study, with neo-institutional theory, as proposed by DiMaggio and Powell (1983) and Scott (2008), employed as the main theoretical framework to interpret the findings. The major limitation of the neo-institutional theory in recognising active role of agents has been addressed through the work of Batillana (2006) and Battilana et al. (2009). Qualitative data collection methods were used to obtain data. A total of 34 semi-structured interviews were conducted and represented the main data collection method. In addition, documentary analysis was used as a secondary source. The findings reveal that institutional motivational factors exemplified in normative and mimetic pressures are the main drivers for CSRR. There is no evidence of coercive pressures. In addition, it is confirmed that in some cases, organizations are not merely “black boxes” in which managers have no role other than complying with the external pressures exerted on organizations, but managers and CEOs can also be drivers for CSRR. The findings also shed light on the different internal and external challenges that companies experience in reporting their CSR activities. Managerial perceptions indicate that these challenges have affected the companies’ CSRR, and sometimes led to the absence of reporting on some CSR issues. Meanwhile, the interviews allowed for identification of the different roles and perceptions of non-corporate actors in CSRR. This study concludes by providing some implications and suggestions for improvements to CSRR practices, and by proposing a number of potential avenues for future research.