Pub Date : 2025-08-28DOI: 10.1177/01492063251359947
J. Cameron Verhaal, Samira Reis, Olga M. Khessina
A documented recent rise in the polarization of American legislative politics underscores the question of how increasing political polarization affects organizations and industries. Yet, organizational scholars have not directed significant attention to the impact of polarization. In this paper, we demonstrate that political polarization may play an important role in organizational dynamics by revealing that polarization may expedite the destigmatization of legal yet historically stigmatized industries. To this end, we develop a theory explaining how political polarization normalizes counter-normative behavior and encourages customers to become open about their engagement with stigmatized products and organizations—a key step toward industry destigmatization. We further argue that this polarization impact may vary across regional markets because of differences in local legitimation processes that can either amplify (normative legitimacy) or attenuate (regulatory legitimacy) the effect of polarization on consumer engagement with a stigmatized industry. We find empirical evidence for our theorizing in analyses of all U.S. dispensaries of medical marijuana that existed on the online platform Weedmaps.com from its beginning in 2008 to 2014. Ultimately, this paper suggests that political polarization can significantly influence organizations and industries and thus warrants more systematic investigation and attention from organizational scholars, particularly in stigmatized industries.
{"title":"Conquering the Divide? The Role of Political Polarization in the Destigmatization of a U.S. Medical Marijuana Platform Market","authors":"J. Cameron Verhaal, Samira Reis, Olga M. Khessina","doi":"10.1177/01492063251359947","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251359947","url":null,"abstract":"A documented recent rise in the polarization of American legislative politics underscores the question of how increasing political polarization affects organizations and industries. Yet, organizational scholars have not directed significant attention to the impact of polarization. In this paper, we demonstrate that political polarization may play an important role in organizational dynamics by revealing that polarization may expedite the destigmatization of legal yet historically stigmatized industries. To this end, we develop a theory explaining how political polarization normalizes counter-normative behavior and encourages customers to become open about their engagement with stigmatized products and organizations—a key step toward industry destigmatization. We further argue that this polarization impact may vary across regional markets because of differences in local legitimation processes that can either amplify (normative legitimacy) or attenuate (regulatory legitimacy) the effect of polarization on consumer engagement with a stigmatized industry. We find empirical evidence for our theorizing in analyses of all U.S. dispensaries of medical marijuana that existed on the online platform <jats:ext-link xmlns:xlink=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink\" ext-link-type=\"uri\" xlink:href=\"http://Weedmaps.com\">Weedmaps.com</jats:ext-link> from its beginning in 2008 to 2014. Ultimately, this paper suggests that political polarization can significantly influence organizations and industries and thus warrants more systematic investigation and attention from organizational scholars, particularly in stigmatized industries.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"53 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.5,"publicationDate":"2025-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144915537","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-08-17DOI: 10.1177/01492063251355248
Emily Grijalva, Timothy D. Maynes, Benjamin M. Galvin, Katie L. Badura
It is not uncommon for people to recount humbling experiences that have transformed how they see themselves and approach their work. Although the benefits of humbling experiences are widely assumed, we have an incomplete understanding of what these experiences entail and how they may help forge humility. Existing research consists largely of idiosyncratic lists of events that might be humbling without deeper inquiry into what makes these experiences unique or how they are integrated into one’s identity. Our theorizing combines insights from the sensemaking and humility literatures to specify the dynamic processes through which humbling experiences are internalized, including contingency factors that limit or enhance the impact of these events. This approach adds theoretical precision to the understanding of what it means to have had a humbling experience and challenges the implicit assumption that humility is a stable quality. In addition, we inform the debate about how humility relates to negative emotions and self-views by distinguishing humility itself from the process through which it is developed. Throughout the paper, we use leadership as an illustrative context to ground our theorizing, but the processes we propose apply across organizational roles. Altogether, this work provides a foundation for better understanding how humbling experiences cultivate humility—an attribute that allows individuals to approach their roles from a more self-aware, other-oriented perspective.
{"title":"From Diminishment to Development: A Sensemaking Model of How Life Experiences Foster Humility","authors":"Emily Grijalva, Timothy D. Maynes, Benjamin M. Galvin, Katie L. Badura","doi":"10.1177/01492063251355248","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251355248","url":null,"abstract":"It is not uncommon for people to recount humbling experiences that have transformed how they see themselves and approach their work. Although the benefits of humbling experiences are widely assumed, we have an incomplete understanding of what these experiences entail and how they may help forge humility. Existing research consists largely of idiosyncratic lists of events that might be humbling without deeper inquiry into what makes these experiences unique or how they are integrated into one’s identity. Our theorizing combines insights from the sensemaking and humility literatures to specify the dynamic processes through which humbling experiences are internalized, including contingency factors that limit or enhance the impact of these events. This approach adds theoretical precision to the understanding of what it means to have had a humbling experience and challenges the implicit assumption that humility is a stable quality. In addition, we inform the debate about how humility relates to negative emotions and self-views by distinguishing humility itself from the process through which it is developed. Throughout the paper, we use leadership as an illustrative context to ground our theorizing, but the processes we propose apply across organizational roles. Altogether, this work provides a foundation for better understanding how humbling experiences cultivate humility—an attribute that allows individuals to approach their roles from a more self-aware, other-oriented perspective.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"52 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.5,"publicationDate":"2025-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144898859","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-08-15DOI: 10.1177/01492063251355251
Junhyok Yim, Trevor A. Foulk, Anthony C. Klotz, Pauline Schilpzand
The organizational rituals literature has primarily focused on simple rituals and their positive effects on participants. While generative, this focus has obscured the intricacy and potential downsides of complex rituals, such as workplace celebrations and team-building retreats. In our research, we leverage Interaction Rituals Theory (IRT) to broaden the theoretical foundation of the study of organizational rituals by examining the range of experiences that employees have within complex organizational rituals. First, we inductively identify the positive and negative experiences within complex organizational rituals and create scales to measure them. Next, drawing further from IRT, we develop a model explaining how these experiences affect employee engagement and identify the subsequent work behaviors most likely to be affected by ritual-induced changes in engagement (helping, loyal boosterism, and job search behavior). In two field studies in the United States and Germany, we test this model, first in a single complex organizational ritual (i.e., company holiday party) and then across a broader set of common complex organizational rituals. Across both studies, we find that employees’ positive experiences during an organizational ritual enhance engagement and predict subsequent work behavior, while their effects can be significantly diminished by negative ritual experiences, challenging the assumption that rituals are uniformly beneficial. By providing evidence for a more balanced perspective on the impact of organizational rituals, our work provides a more nuanced and holistic understanding of the true nature of organizational rituals.
{"title":"Is Everyone Having a Good Time? The Effects of Complex Organizational Rituals on Employee Engagement and Behavior","authors":"Junhyok Yim, Trevor A. Foulk, Anthony C. Klotz, Pauline Schilpzand","doi":"10.1177/01492063251355251","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251355251","url":null,"abstract":"The organizational rituals literature has primarily focused on simple rituals and their positive effects on participants. While generative, this focus has obscured the intricacy and potential downsides of complex rituals, such as workplace celebrations and team-building retreats. In our research, we leverage Interaction Rituals Theory (IRT) to broaden the theoretical foundation of the study of organizational rituals by examining the range of experiences that employees have within complex organizational rituals. First, we inductively identify the positive and negative experiences within complex organizational rituals and create scales to measure them. Next, drawing further from IRT, we develop a model explaining how these experiences affect employee engagement and identify the subsequent work behaviors most likely to be affected by ritual-induced changes in engagement (helping, loyal boosterism, and job search behavior). In two field studies in the United States and Germany, we test this model, first in a single complex organizational ritual (i.e., company holiday party) and then across a broader set of common complex organizational rituals. Across both studies, we find that employees’ positive experiences during an organizational ritual enhance engagement and predict subsequent work behavior, while their effects can be significantly diminished by negative ritual experiences, challenging the assumption that rituals are uniformly beneficial. By providing evidence for a more balanced perspective on the impact of organizational rituals, our work provides a more nuanced and holistic understanding of the true nature of organizational rituals.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"132 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.5,"publicationDate":"2025-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144898869","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-08-15DOI: 10.1177/01492063251358215
Mark R. DesJardine, Zhiyan Wang
A commonly held assumption is that firm-specific human capital benefits firms while constraining employees, particularly by reducing their external mobility. While this tension holds in many contexts, it overlooks the possibility that firm-specific human capital developed by one group of employees—managers—can generate positive externalities for others. Using a novel empirical setting and a 16-year panel of 19,044 establishments with 107,309 establishment-year observations, we find that an increase in managers’ firm-specific human capital is associated with improvements in workplace safety. These effects are especially pronounced in organizations with weak safety orientations and with higher proportions of lower-skill employees, who are typically more vulnerable to safety risks. Our findings reveal a previously underexplored channel through which firm-specific human capital creates value: by enabling managers to protect other employees. This challenges the prevailing view that firm-specific human capital primarily serves firm interests and highlights a broader set of beneficiaries—offering a new perspective on the role of managers’ firm-specific human capital in shaping organizational outcomes.
{"title":"When Managers Stay, Workers Are Safer: Rethinking the Value of Firm-Specific Human Capital","authors":"Mark R. DesJardine, Zhiyan Wang","doi":"10.1177/01492063251358215","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251358215","url":null,"abstract":"A commonly held assumption is that firm-specific human capital benefits firms while constraining employees, particularly by reducing their external mobility. While this tension holds in many contexts, it overlooks the possibility that firm-specific human capital developed by one group of employees—managers—can generate positive externalities for others. Using a novel empirical setting and a 16-year panel of 19,044 establishments with 107,309 establishment-year observations, we find that an increase in managers’ firm-specific human capital is associated with improvements in workplace safety. These effects are especially pronounced in organizations with weak safety orientations and with higher proportions of lower-skill employees, who are typically more vulnerable to safety risks. Our findings reveal a previously underexplored channel through which firm-specific human capital creates value: by enabling managers to protect other employees. This challenges the prevailing view that firm-specific human capital primarily serves firm interests and highlights a broader set of beneficiaries—offering a new perspective on the role of managers’ firm-specific human capital in shaping organizational outcomes.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"22 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.5,"publicationDate":"2025-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144898861","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-08-04DOI: 10.1177/01492063251355258
James J. Chrisman, Hanqing “Chevy” Fang, Vitaliy Skorodziyevskiy
Using property rights theory to examine the characteristics that enable family firms to exclude rivals from their competitive space, we explain why the family form of governance is often selected instead of the nonfamily form of governance and what determines the scale and scope of family firms. Family-centered nonpecuniary goals allow family firms to capture rights to common property opportunities that nonfamily firms find unattractive. Furthermore, the development and deployment of non-tradeable, immobile, inimitable, and indivisible human and nonhuman resources enable family firms to protect their property rights from competitors. Finally, because family members act as owners and managers, family firm governance can reduce the cost of monitoring as well as the possibility of opportunistic behavior and underinvestment of family resources.
{"title":"Toward a Property Rights Theory of the Family Firm","authors":"James J. Chrisman, Hanqing “Chevy” Fang, Vitaliy Skorodziyevskiy","doi":"10.1177/01492063251355258","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251355258","url":null,"abstract":"Using property rights theory to examine the characteristics that enable family firms to exclude rivals from their competitive space, we explain why the family form of governance is often selected instead of the nonfamily form of governance and what determines the scale and scope of family firms. Family-centered nonpecuniary goals allow family firms to capture rights to common property opportunities that nonfamily firms find unattractive. Furthermore, the development and deployment of non-tradeable, immobile, inimitable, and indivisible human and nonhuman resources enable family firms to protect their property rights from competitors. Finally, because family members act as owners and managers, family firm governance can reduce the cost of monitoring as well as the possibility of opportunistic behavior and underinvestment of family resources.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.5,"publicationDate":"2025-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144769875","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-31DOI: 10.1177/01492063251351911
Eduardo Meléndez, Matthew S. Wood, Chad Navis
Market categorization—the process of grouping organizations perceived as sharing core attributes and serving similar demand profiles—has become a central topic in management research, offering a theoretically rich and interdisciplinary domain of study. Scholars have examined how market categories form, develop, and decline, drawing from structural, strategic, and constructionist perspectives to explore their role in shaping firms, industries, and institutions. Despite substantial advancements, research on market categorization remains fragmented, leading to inconsistent conceptualizations, theoretical isolation, and a lack of cross-stage integration. Studies often focus on individual stages while neglecting their interconnections or apply discipline-specific lenses that limit theoretical synthesis and hinder the accumulation of knowledge. To address these gaps, we conducted a systematic review of 195 articles published between 1999 and 2024, synthesizing insights across stages and perspectives to develop an evolutionary framework of market categorization. Our analysis identifies three cross-perspective mechanisms—categories as constraints, enablers, and actor-shaped entities—that underpin categorization processes and explain their underlying dynamics. In addition, by conceptualizing transitions between categorization stages, we provide a unified foundation for future research. This evolutionary perspective clarifies the role of market categorization in shaping economic and organizational landscapes while bridging theoretical divides and guiding future empirical inquiry.
{"title":"A Review of Market Categorization Research: An Evolutionary Framework Across Perspectives and Stages","authors":"Eduardo Meléndez, Matthew S. Wood, Chad Navis","doi":"10.1177/01492063251351911","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251351911","url":null,"abstract":"Market categorization—the process of grouping organizations perceived as sharing core attributes and serving similar demand profiles—has become a central topic in management research, offering a theoretically rich and interdisciplinary domain of study. Scholars have examined how market categories form, develop, and decline, drawing from structural, strategic, and constructionist perspectives to explore their role in shaping firms, industries, and institutions. Despite substantial advancements, research on market categorization remains fragmented, leading to inconsistent conceptualizations, theoretical isolation, and a lack of cross-stage integration. Studies often focus on individual stages while neglecting their interconnections or apply discipline-specific lenses that limit theoretical synthesis and hinder the accumulation of knowledge. To address these gaps, we conducted a systematic review of 195 articles published between 1999 and 2024, synthesizing insights across stages and perspectives to develop an evolutionary framework of market categorization. Our analysis identifies three cross-perspective mechanisms—categories as constraints, enablers, and actor-shaped entities—that underpin categorization processes and explain their underlying dynamics. In addition, by conceptualizing transitions between categorization stages, we provide a unified foundation for future research. This evolutionary perspective clarifies the role of market categorization in shaping economic and organizational landscapes while bridging theoretical divides and guiding future empirical inquiry.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"9 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.5,"publicationDate":"2025-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144748208","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
As robots become more integrated into the workplace, leaders are increasingly engaging in behaviors that anthropomorphize robots. Given that this form of leader behavior remains undertheorized, we conceptualize it as leader anthropomorphizing behavior toward robots (LABR)—an observable behavior through which leaders endow robots with human-like characteristics. Although practical wisdom and previous studies have highlighted a prevailing optimism about adopting LABR to manage human–robot teams, such optimism may be premature. Drawing on objectification theory, we develop a model that uncovers the detrimental effects of LABR on employees who observe such behavior. To test our model, we developed and validated a LABR scale (Study 1) and conducted five subsequent studies (Studies 2a–5) using vignette-based experiments and field surveys. The results showed that employees who observed LABR were more likely to perceive themselves as being objectified by their leaders, which in turn increased their likelihood of engaging in workplace deviance. By theorizing LABR and revealing its potential dark sides, we contribute to the literature on leader behavior, robot anthropomorphism, human–robot teams, and objectification.
{"title":"Leader Anthropomorphizing Behavior Toward Robots: Conceptualization, Measurement, and Implications for Perceived Objectification and Workplace Deviance","authors":"Limei Cao, Hansen Zhou, Puchu Zhao, Luyuan Jiang, Yaoqi Li, Juncheng Shang, Xin Qin","doi":"10.1177/01492063251350938","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251350938","url":null,"abstract":"As robots become more integrated into the workplace, leaders are increasingly engaging in behaviors that anthropomorphize robots. Given that this form of leader behavior remains undertheorized, we conceptualize it as leader anthropomorphizing behavior toward robots (LABR)—an observable behavior through which leaders endow robots with human-like characteristics. Although practical wisdom and previous studies have highlighted a prevailing optimism about adopting LABR to manage human–robot teams, such optimism may be premature. Drawing on objectification theory, we develop a model that uncovers the detrimental effects of LABR on employees who observe such behavior. To test our model, we developed and validated a LABR scale (Study 1) and conducted five subsequent studies (Studies 2a–5) using vignette-based experiments and field surveys. The results showed that employees who observed LABR were more likely to perceive themselves as being objectified by their leaders, which in turn increased their likelihood of engaging in workplace deviance. By theorizing LABR and revealing its potential dark sides, we contribute to the literature on leader behavior, robot anthropomorphism, human–robot teams, and objectification.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.5,"publicationDate":"2025-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144748210","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-29DOI: 10.1177/01492063251345482
Sumeet Malik, Taiyuan Wang, Geoff Martin, Luis Gomez-Mejia
Executive compensation is a key topic in management research, focusing on how firms use incentives to align CEOs’ decisions with shareholders’ interests. Yet, we know little about the influence of stock-option compensation—a major component of CEO pay—on CEO decisions facing adverse events involving multiple stakeholders. Analyzing U.S. medical device recalls between 2004 and 2017, we examine how stock options induce CEOs to protect their existing wealth while pursuing potential gains. We find that CEOs with greater current option wealth are more likely to adopt short-term impression management (IM) tactics, such as strategically timing recalls and maintaining silence in press releases, which can harm shareholders and stakeholders. In contrast, CEOs with higher prospective option wealth are less inclined to employ these tactics. Moreover, negative media scrutiny discourages CEOs with substantial current option wealth from using IM tactics, and encourages those with greater prospective option wealth to further avoid them. These findings highlight the powerful role of executive compensation, particularly stock options, in shaping CEO decisions facing adverse events.
{"title":"Mixed Gambles in Product Recalls: How CEO Stock Options Drive Impression Management Tactics","authors":"Sumeet Malik, Taiyuan Wang, Geoff Martin, Luis Gomez-Mejia","doi":"10.1177/01492063251345482","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251345482","url":null,"abstract":"Executive compensation is a key topic in management research, focusing on how firms use incentives to align CEOs’ decisions with shareholders’ interests. Yet, we know little about the influence of stock-option compensation—a major component of CEO pay—on CEO decisions facing adverse events involving multiple stakeholders. Analyzing U.S. medical device recalls between 2004 and 2017, we examine how stock options induce CEOs to protect their existing wealth while pursuing potential gains. We find that CEOs with greater current option wealth are more likely to adopt short-term impression management (IM) tactics, such as strategically timing recalls and maintaining silence in press releases, which can harm shareholders and stakeholders. In contrast, CEOs with higher prospective option wealth are less inclined to employ these tactics. Moreover, negative media scrutiny discourages CEOs with substantial current option wealth from using IM tactics, and encourages those with greater prospective option wealth to further avoid them. These findings highlight the powerful role of executive compensation, particularly stock options, in shaping CEO decisions facing adverse events.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"27 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.5,"publicationDate":"2025-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144748211","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-24DOI: 10.1177/01492063251346406
Tsvetomira V. Bilgili, Holly Loncarich, Debmalya Mukherjee, Erin E. Makarius
The perils of legitimacy threats for CBAs are widely acknowledged in the literature. However, prior research has focused on legitimacy threats stemming from factors not in the direct control of MNEs. In this study, we explore if and how acquirers’ CSI salience, a legitimacy threat stemming directly from the past actions and behaviors of the focal firm, influences a critical international expansion decision—the level of ownership obtained in cross-border acquisitions (CBAs). Drawing on neo-institutional theory, we argue that CSI salience reduces the level of ownership obtained in CBAs as it captures more stakeholder attention and is factored into their legitimacy evaluations. In addition, we examine how characteristics of the host country’s legitimating environment may attenuate or accentuate the legitimacy threat from CSI as they reflect how host country stakeholders notice, assess, and respond to CSI and the capacity of host institutions to monitor and enforce compliance. We find support for our hypotheses in a sample of 16,650 CBAs by 10,738 unique acquirers, and offer valuable insights into the interplay of CSI salience, legitimacy, and CBA ownership to research and practice.
{"title":"Corporate Social Irresponsibility and Ownership Level in Cross-Border Acquisitions","authors":"Tsvetomira V. Bilgili, Holly Loncarich, Debmalya Mukherjee, Erin E. Makarius","doi":"10.1177/01492063251346406","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251346406","url":null,"abstract":"The perils of legitimacy threats for CBAs are widely acknowledged in the literature. However, prior research has focused on legitimacy threats stemming from factors not in the direct control of MNEs. In this study, we explore if and how acquirers’ CSI salience, a legitimacy threat stemming directly from the past actions and behaviors of the focal firm, influences a critical international expansion decision—the level of ownership obtained in cross-border acquisitions (CBAs). Drawing on neo-institutional theory, we argue that CSI salience reduces the level of ownership obtained in CBAs as it captures more stakeholder attention and is factored into their legitimacy evaluations. In addition, we examine how characteristics of the host country’s legitimating environment may attenuate or accentuate the legitimacy threat from CSI as they reflect how host country stakeholders notice, assess, and respond to CSI and the capacity of host institutions to monitor and enforce compliance. We find support for our hypotheses in a sample of 16,650 CBAs by 10,738 unique acquirers, and offer valuable insights into the interplay of CSI salience, legitimacy, and CBA ownership to research and practice.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"14 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.5,"publicationDate":"2025-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144701926","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2025-07-21DOI: 10.1177/01492063251346401
Kaylee J. Hackney, Gary R. Thurgood, Dawn S. Carlson, Merideth J. Thompson
Using signaling theory, this research examines the role that social support during pregnancy plays in reducing work–family guilt upon returning to work after maternity leave. Specifically, we consider four sources of social support (two from the work domain: supervisor and coworkers; and two from the non-work domain: spouse and friends) and the signaling effect they have on a mother’s work–family guilt upon returning to work after maternity leave and her subsequent job and family satisfaction. Based on a sample of 247 women who completed surveys both before taking maternity leave and upon returning to the workforce, we found that supervisor, coworker, and friend support enhanced job satisfaction through reduced work-induced guilt. Further, both supervisor and spouse support contributed to family satisfaction through reduced family-induced guilt. Spouse support reduced family-induced guilt significantly more than coworker support, offering some modest support for domain specificity. Further, when considering the interaction of within-domain effects, we found that the work domain sources of support interact to provide a stronger effect on job satisfaction, but the non-work domain sources do not interact significantly. This provides an enlightening look at social support’s different roles in working mom guilt during a pivotal time in a woman’s life, her return to work after childbirth.
{"title":"How We Can Help Working Moms “Win”: The Impact of Social Support During Pregnancy on Postpartum Working Mom Guilt","authors":"Kaylee J. Hackney, Gary R. Thurgood, Dawn S. Carlson, Merideth J. Thompson","doi":"10.1177/01492063251346401","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063251346401","url":null,"abstract":"Using signaling theory, this research examines the role that social support during pregnancy plays in reducing work–family guilt upon returning to work after maternity leave. Specifically, we consider four sources of social support (two from the work domain: supervisor and coworkers; and two from the non-work domain: spouse and friends) and the signaling effect they have on a mother’s work–family guilt upon returning to work after maternity leave and her subsequent job and family satisfaction. Based on a sample of 247 women who completed surveys both before taking maternity leave and upon returning to the workforce, we found that supervisor, coworker, and friend support enhanced job satisfaction through reduced work-induced guilt. Further, both supervisor and spouse support contributed to family satisfaction through reduced family-induced guilt. Spouse support reduced family-induced guilt significantly more than coworker support, offering some modest support for domain specificity. Further, when considering the interaction of within-domain effects, we found that the work domain sources of support interact to provide a stronger effect on job satisfaction, but the non-work domain sources do not interact significantly. This provides an enlightening look at social support’s different roles in working mom guilt during a pivotal time in a woman’s life, her return to work after childbirth.","PeriodicalId":54212,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management","volume":"84 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.5,"publicationDate":"2025-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144669686","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：