Webs of Influence: Secondary Stakeholder Actions and Cross-National Corporate Social Performance

References

• Acemoglu D, Hassan TA, Tahoun A (2018) The power of the street: Evidence from Egypt’s Arab spring. Rev. Financial Stud. 31(1):1–42.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agle BR, Mitchell RK, Sonnenfeld JA (1999) Who matters to CEOs? An investigation of stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance, and CEO values. Acad. Management J. 42(5):507–525.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aguilera RV, Rupp DE, Williams CA, Ganapathi J (2007) Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: A multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Acad. Management Rev. 32(3):836–863.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aguilera RV, Williams CA, Conley JM, Rupp DE (2006) Corporate governance and social responsibility: A comparative analysis of the UK and the US. Corporate Governance Internat . Rev. 14(3):147–158.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aharonson BS, Bort S (2015) Institutional pressure and an organization’s strategic response in corporate social action engagement: The role of ownership and media attention. Strategic Organ. 13(4):307–339.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arenas D, Lozano JM, Albareda L (2009) The role of NGOs in CSR: Mutual perceptions among stakeholders. J. Bus. Ethics 88(1):175–197.Crossref, Google Scholar
• de Bakker FG (2012) Exploring networks of activism on corporate social responsibility: Suggestions for a research agenda. Creativity Innovation Management 21(2):212–223.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ballesteros L (2015) Firm’s economic reliance to national markets and the corporate provision of public goods. Wharton School Research Paper No. 80, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
• Bartley T, Child C (2014) Shaming the corporation: The social production of targets and the anti-sweatshop movement. Amer. Sociol. Rev. 79(4):653–679.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blau PM (1977) A macrosociological theory of social structure. Amer. J. Sociol. 83(1):26–54.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bridoux F, Stoelhorst JW (2014) Microfoundations for stakeholder theory: Managing stakeholders with heterogeneous motives. Strategic Management J. 35(1):107–125.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Briscoe F, Gupta A (2016) Social activism in and around organizations. Acad. Management Ann. 10(1):671–727.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Briscoe F, Safford S (2008) The Nixon-in-China effect: Activism, imitation, and the institutionalization of contentious practices. Admin. Sci. Quart. 53(3):460–491.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Briscoe F, Gupta A, Anner MS (2015) Social activism and practice diffusion: How activist tactics affect non-targeted organizations. Admin. Sci. Quart. 60(2):300–332.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bundy J, Shropshire C, Buchholtz AK (2013) Strategic cognition and issue salience: Toward an explanation of firm responsiveness to stakeholder concerns. Acad. Management Rev. 38(3):352–376.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Campbell J (2007) Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Acad. Management Rev. 32(3):946–967.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chatterji AK, Durand R, Levine DI, Touboul S (2016) Do ratings of firms converge? Implications for managers, investors and strategy researchers. Strategic Management J. 37(8):1597–1614.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Christensen D (2019) Concession stands: How mining investments incite protest in Africa. Internat. Organ. 73(1):65–101.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Claassen C, Gibson JL (2019) Does intolerance dampen dissent? Macro-tolerance and protest in American metropolitan areas. Polit. Behav. 41(1):165–185.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clarkson ME (1995) A stakeholder framework for analyzing and evaluating corporate social performance. Acad. Management Rev. 20(1):92–117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coppedge M, Gerring J, Lindberg SI, Skaaning SE, Teorell J, Altman D, Bernhard M, et al.. (2017) Varieties of Democracy Codebook (Varieties of Democracy Project, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden).Google Scholar
• Davis K (1973) The case for and against business assumption of social responsibilities. Acad. Management J. 16(2):312–322.Crossref, Google Scholar
• den Hond F, de Bakker FGA (2007) Ideologically motivated activism: How activist groups influence corporate social change activities. Acad. Management Rev. 32(3):901–924.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Doh JP, Guay TR (2006) Corporate social responsibility, public policy, and NGO activism in Europe and the United States: An institutional-stakeholder perspective. J. Management Stud. 43(1):47–73.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dutton JE, Duncan RB (1987) The creation of momentum for change through the process of strategic issue diagnosis. Strategic Management J. 8(3):279–295.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eesley C, Lenox MJ (2006) Firm responses to secondary stakeholder action. Strategic Management J. 27(8):765–781.Crossref, Google Scholar
• El Ghoul S, Guedhami O, Kim Y (2017) Country-level institutions, firm value, and the role of corporate social responsibility initiatives. J. Internat. Bus. Stud. 48(3):360–385.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Flammer C (2013) Corporate social responsibility and shareholder reaction: The environmental awareness of investors. Acad. Management J. 56(3):758–781.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Freeman RE (1984) Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach (Pitman, Boston).Google Scholar
• Frooman J (1999) Stakeholder influence strategies. Acad. Management Rev. 24(2):191–205.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Frooman J (2010) The issue network: Reshaping the stakeholder model. Can. J. Admin. Sci. 27(2):161–173.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Garriga E (2009) Cooperation in stakeholder networks: Firms’ “tertius iungens” role. J. Bus. Ethics 90(4):623–637.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heclo H (1978) Issue networks and the executive establishment. King A, ed. The New American political system (American Enterprise Institute, Washington DC), pp. 87–123.Google Scholar
• Henisz WJ (2013) Preferences, structure, and influence: The engineering of consent. Global Strategy J. 3(4):338–359.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henisz WJ, Mansfield ED (2019) The political economy of financial reform: de jure liberalization vs. de facto implementation. Internat. Stud. Quart. 63(3):589–602.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henisz WJ, Zelner B (2005) Legitimacy, interest group pressures, and change in emergent institutions: The case of foreign investors and host country governments. Acad. Management Rev. 30(2):361–382.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henriques I, Sadorsky P (1996) The determinants of an environmentally responsive firm: An empirical approach. J. Environ. Econom. Management 30(3):381–395.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henriques I, Sadorsky P (1999) The relationship between environmental commitment and managerial perceptions of stakeholder importance. Acad. Management J. 42(1):87–99.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hiatt SR, Carlos WC (2019) From farms to fuel tanks: Stakeholder framing contests and entrepreneurship in the emergent U.S. biodiesel market. Strategic Management J. 40(6):865–893.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hiatt SR, Grandy JB, Lee BH (2015) Organizational responses to public and private politics: An analysis of climate change activists and U.S. oil and gas firms. Organ. Sci. 26(6):1769–1786.Link, Google Scholar
• Hillman AJ, Keim GD (2001) Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: What’s the bottom line? Strategic Management J. 22(2):125–139.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoffman AJ (1999) Institutional evolution and change: Environmentalism and the U.S. chemical industry. Acad. Management J. 42(4):351–371.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Husted BW, Allen DB (2007) Corporate social strategy in multinational enterprises: Antecedents and value creation. J. Bus. Ethics 74(4):345–361.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ingram P, Clay K (2000) The choice-within-constraints new institutionalism and implications for sociology. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 26(1):525–546.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ioannou I, Serafeim G (2012) What drives corporate social performance? The role of nation-level institutions. J. Internat. Bus. Stud. 43(9):834–864.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jackson G, Apostolakou A (2010) Corporate social responsibility in Western Europe: An institutional mirror or substitute? J. Bus. Ethics 94(3):371–394.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johnson C, Dowd TJ, Ridgeway CL (2006) Legitimacy as a social process. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 32(1):53–78.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katz D, Kahn RL (1978) The Social Psychology of Organizations (Wiley, New York).Google Scholar
• Keck ME, Sikkink K (1999) Transnational advocacy networks in international and regional politics. Internat. Soc. Sci. J. 51(159):89–101.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim EH, Lyon TP (2015) Greenwash vs. brownwash: Exaggeration and undue modesty in corporate sustainability disclosure. Organ. Sci. 26(3):705–723.Link, Google Scholar
• King B (2008) A social movement perspective of stakeholder collective action and influence. Bus. Soc. 47(1):21–49.Crossref, Google Scholar
• King BG, Walker ET (2014) Winning hearts and minds: Field theory and the three dimensions of strategy. Strategic Organ. 12(2):134–141.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kostova T, Roth K, Dacin MT (2008) Institutional theory in the study of multinational corporations: A critique and new directions. Acad. Management Rev. 33(4):994–1006.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lang MH, Lins KV, Miller DP (2003) ADRs, analysts, and accuracy: Does cross listing in the United States improve a firm’s information environment and increase market value? J. Accounting Res. 41(2):317–345.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Larson J, Soule S (2009) Sector-level dynamics and collective action in the United States, 1965–1975. Mobilization Internat. J. 14(3):293–314.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee MDP (2011) Configuration of external influences: The combined effects of institutions and stakeholders on corporate social responsibility strategies. J. Bus. Ethics 102(2):281–298.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Leetaru K, Schrodt P (2013) GDELT: Global Data on Events, Location and Tone, 1979–2012. Presentation, International Studies Association, April 2013, San Francisco, CA.Google Scholar
• Levitt B, March JG (1988) Organizational learning. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 14(1):319–338.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lucea R, Doh JP (2012) International strategy for the nonmarket context: Stakeholders, issues, networks, and geography. Bus. Polit. 14(3):1–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mahon JF, Heugens PPMAR, Lamertz K (2004) Social networks and non-market strategy. J. Public Affairs 4(2):170–189.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Marquis C, Raynard M (2015) Institutional strategies in emerging markets. Acad. Management Ann. 9(1):291–335.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Matten D, Moon J (2008) “Implicit” and “explicit” CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Acad. Management Rev. 33(2):404–424.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McAdam D, Boudet H (2012) Putting Social Movements in Their Place: Explaining Opposition to Energy Projects in the United States, 2000–2005 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• McDonnell MH, King BG (2013) Keeping up appearances: Reputational threat and impression management after social movement boycotts. Admin. Sci. Quart. 58(3):387–419.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McWilliams A, Siegel D (2001) Corporate social responsibility: A theory of the firm perspective. Acad. Management Rev. 26(1):117–127.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mitchell RK, Agle BR, Wood DJ (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Acad. Management Rev. 22(4):853–886.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Murillo-Luna JL, Garcés-Ayerbe C, Rivera-Torres P (2008) Why do patterns of environmental response differ? A stakeholders’ pressure approach. Strategic Management J. 29(11):1225–1240.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nartey LJ, Henisz WJ, Dorobantu S (2018) Status climbing vs. bridging: Multinational stakeholder engagement strategies. Strategy Sci. 3(2):367–392.Link, Google Scholar
• Neville BA, Menguc B (2006) Stakeholder multiplicity: Toward an understanding of the interactions between stakeholders. J. Bus. Ethics 66(4):377–391.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Odziemkowska K, McDonnell MH (2019) Ripple effects: How firm-activist collaborations reduce movement contention. Working paper, Rice University, Houston.Google Scholar
• Oliver C (1991) Strategic responses to institutional processes. Acad. Management Rev. 16(1):145–179.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Petersen MA (2009) Estimating standard errors in finance panel data sets: Comparing approaches. Rev. Financial Stud. 22(1):435–480.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Peterson MF, Arregle JL, Martin X (2012) Multilevel models in international business research. J. Internat. Bus. Stud. 43(5):451–457.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pollock TG, Rindova VP (2003) Media legitimation effects in the market for initial public offerings. Acad. Management J. 46(5):631–642.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ponticelli J, Voth HJ (2019) Austerity and anarchy: Budget cuts and social unrest in Europe, 1919–2008. J. Comp. Econom. 48(1):1–19.Google Scholar
• Powell WW, Oberg A, Korff V, Oelberger C, Kloos K (2017) Institutional analysis in a digital era: Mechanisms and methods to understand emerging fields. Krücken G, Mazza C, Meyer RE, Walgenback P, eds. New Themes in Institutional Analysis: Topics and Issues in European Research (Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK), 305–344.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rowley T, Moldoveanu M (2003) When will stakeholder groups act? An interest- and identity-based model of stakeholder group mobilization. Acad. Management Rev. 28(2):204–219.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rowley TJ (1997) Moving beyond dyadic ties: A network theory of stakeholder influences. Acad. Management Rev. 22(4):887–910.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rucht D (1996) The impact of national contexts on social movement structures: A cross-movement and cross-national comparison. McAdam D, McCarthy JD, Zald MN, eds. Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements: Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Framings (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK), 185–204.Google Scholar
• Rugman AM, Verbeke A (1998) Corporate strategies and environmental regulations: An organizing framework. Strategic Management J. 19(4):363–375.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schepers DH (2006) The impact of NGO network conflict on the corporate social responsibility strategies of multinational corporations. Bus. Soc. 45(3):282–299.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schneper WD, Guillen MF (2004) Stakeholder rights and corporate governance: A cross-national study of hostile takeovers. Admin. Sci. Quart. 49(June):263–295.Google Scholar
• Schwartz S (2006) A theory of cultural value orientations: Explication and applications. Comp. Sociol. 5(2–3):137–182.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Siegel JI (2005) Can foreign firms bond themselves effectively by renting US securities laws? J. Financial Econom. 75(2):319–359.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Siegel JI, Licht AN, Schwartz SH (2013) Egalitarianism, cultural distance, and foreign direct investment: A new approach. Organ. Sci. 24(4):1174–1194.Link, Google Scholar
• Soleimani A, Schneper WD, Newburry W (2014) The impact of stakeholder power on corporate reputation: A cross-country corporate governance perspective. Organ. Sci. 25(4):991–1008.Link, Google Scholar
• Soule SA (2009) Contention and Corporate Social Responsibility (Cambridge University Press, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Suchman MC (1995) Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Acad. Management Rev. 20(3):571–610.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Surroca JA, Aguilera RV, Desender K, Tribó JA (2020) Is managerial entrenchment always bad and corporate social responsibility always good? A cross-national examination of their combined influence on shareholder value. Strategic Management J. 41(5):891–920.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tantalo C, Priem RL (2016) Value creation through stakeholder synergy: Stakeholder synergy. Strategic Management J. 37(2):314–329.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vaccaro A, Palazzo G (2015) Values against violence: Institutional change in societies dominated by organized crime. Acad. Management J. 58(4):1075–1101.Crossref, Google Scholar
• van Wijk J, Stam W, Elfring T, Zietsma C, den Hond F (2013) Activists and incumbents structuring change: The interplay of agency, culture, and networks in field evolution. Acad. Management J. 56(2):358–386.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ward MD, Beger A, Cutler J, Dorff C, Radford B, Dickenson M (2013) Comparing GDELT and ICEWS event data. Analysis 21(1):267–297.Google Scholar
• Wartick SL, Cochran PL (1985) The evolution of the corporate social performance model. Acad. Management Rev. 10(4):758–769.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Whitley R (1998) Internationalization and varieties of capitalism: The limited effects of cross-national coordination of economic activities on the nature of business systems. Rev. Internat. Polit. Econom. 5(3):445–481.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Whitley R (1999) Divergent Capitalisms: The Social Structuring and Change of Business Systems (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Williams CA, Aguilera RV (2008) Corporate social responsibility in a comparative perspective. Crane A, Matten D, McWilliams A, Moon J, Siegel DS, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Social Responsibility (Oxford University Press, New York), 452–472.Google Scholar
• Wood DJ (1991) Corporate social performance revisited. Acad. Management Rev. 16(4):691–718.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yang X, Rivers C (2009) Antecedents of CSR practices in MNCs’ subsidiaries: A stakeholder and institutional perspective. J. Bus. Ethics 86(2):155–169.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yue LQ, Rao H, Ingram P (2013) Information spillovers from protests against corporations: A tale of Walmart and Target. Admin. Sci. Quart. 58(4):669–701.Crossref, Google Scholar