A standards and maintain, or improve, its

A key aspect of corporate reputation is stakeholder groups’ perceptions of organization’s CSR, or more precisely, their perceptions of how well the organization’s CSR initiatives and outcomes meet stakeholders’ social and environmental values and expectations. In this context, CSR has the power to influence these perceptions, thereby contributing towards maximising the earning potential of corporate reputation (Unerman, 2008). Literature review proves that CSR and corporate reputation are positively correlated. For example, according to Husted & Allen (2007), building customers’ and stakeholder groups’ awareness of products, CSR value may affect the reputation of the organization positively. Bayoud & Kavanagh (2012) agrees that CSR reporting enhances corporate reputation and financial performance, with the ability to attract foreign investors and, greater customer satisfaction and employee commitment. Indeed, research of Husted & Allen (2007) demonstrates that good corporate reputation has a significant potential for value creation and is difficult to replicate. Corporate reputation is a key competitive advantage in markets where product differentiation is difficult. According to Melo & Galan (2011), this competitive advantage is strengthened through the use of CSR. CSR activities have very important role in what products or services customers choose to purchase. According to Castaldo et al. (2009), several surveys report that customers are influenced by the CSR activities of the organization. Moreover, Park, Lee, & Kim (2014) suggest that ethical and philanthropic CSR practices may create and foster customer beliefs that organization adheres to high ethical standards and cares about society’s wellbeing, which, in turn, positively impacts consumer assessment of corporate reputation. Lamberti & Lettieri (2009) agree that if customers become aware of the ethical implications of the organization’s behaviour, they assure that the organization will maintain certain quality standards and maintain, or improve, its corporate reputation. Melo & Garrido (2012) supplements to authors by stating that CSR is a heterogeneous construct and that, when broken down into qualitative areas, each of its dimensions affect corporate reputation differently. A. Perez (2015) agrees that overall reputational impact of CSR is likely to be jointly contingent upon which CSR dimension is under consideration. For example, a strong record of environmental performance may influence corporate reputation differently depending on whether the corporate activities fit with stakeholders’ environmental concerns. To summarize it must be noted that Perez (2015) points out five theoretical approaches to justify the positive outcomes of CSR reporting to corporate reputation. Among them, institutional/legitimacy theory and agency theory are the most common to justify the CSR reporting-reputation link. However, in accordance with impression