Abstract
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) and sustainability ratings increasingly shape how investors, employees, and customers evaluate firms. However, the proliferation of rating agencies and methodological heterogeneity have produced fragmented and sometimes inconsistent assessments of corporate sustainability performance, raising concerns about transparency, credibility, and accountability. This developmental study reconceptualizes CSR ratings as outcomes of a triadic co-creation process among firms, rating agencies, and customers. Drawing on service-dominant logic, we examine how value and legitimacy in CSR evaluation emerge through interactions between firm disclosures, agency methodologies, and stakeholder interpretations. Using a sequential multi-method design, we (1) compare FTSE-listed firms’ website disclosures with agency ratings, (2) interview firm managers and rating agencies, (3) survey firms on co-created versus imposed metrics, and (4) survey customers on rating consistency and decision-making. The study advances a co-creation framework to enhance market transparency for firm sustainability credentials and support responsible customer decision-making.