概念化企业社会倡导与政治两极分化之间的关系

Joshua M. Parcha
{"title":"概念化企业社会倡导与政治两极分化之间的关系","authors":"Joshua M. Parcha","doi":"10.1108/ccij-09-2022-0117","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose Corporations are now taking stands on contemporary and controversial social issues that share no obvious connection to the corporations’ business practices. At the same time, political polarization continues to intensify, which begs the question: Are these corporate stands – referred to as corporate social advocacy (CSA) – and political polarization related to each other, and if so, how? The purpose of this study is to provide a conceptualization of the connections between CSA and political polarization through a series of propositions that can be tested in subsequent research studies. Corporations have influence in society, and the ways in which they communicate on controversial social issues could further intensify or help assuage political polarization. Conversely, political polarization may be causing CSA in the first place, which would put into question the legitimacy and desirability of CSA because of the environment from which CSA is cultivated. Design/methodology/approach This study is designed to be conceptual, and the approach is based on theory building. Findings The study conceptualizes the relationship between CSA and political polarization to be symbiotic because both are bidirectional causes of each other. Engagement in CSA is also argued to be positively associated with perceptions that corporations contain particular political ideologies, i.e. more “liberal-leaning” or “conservative-leaning.” This study also predicts that – dependent on particular conditions – CSA will also lead to an increase in both boycotts and skepticism. Practical implications This study will contribute to scholars’, practitioners’ and consumers’ understanding of the causes and effects of CSA. The way in which political polarization is potentially causing CSA puts into question the legitimacy of corporations engaging in CSA in the first place. If CSA is cultivated in the soil of political polarization, is CSA desirable for corporations? Conversely, the way in which CSA is potentially causing political polarization also puts the legitimacy of CSA into question. If CSA is causing political polarization, is CSA desirable for society? Social implications Corporations are an influential part of society, and thus will influence how society views controversial social issues. If the predictions in this study hold, corporations will play an important role in either intensifying or reducing political polarization, and political polarization will also play an important role in how corporations communicate about CSA issues. Originality/value Research focused on CSA is burgeoning, yet limited studies have examined how CSA and political polarization interact. Although there could be positive aspects of corporate involvement in CSA, this study examines some of the potential negative aspects of corporate involvement in CSA. Future research will also be able to test the propositions proposed in this study.","PeriodicalId":10696,"journal":{"name":"Corporate Communications: An International Journal","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conceptualizing the relationship between corporate social advocacy and political polarization\",\"authors\":\"Joshua M. Parcha\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/ccij-09-2022-0117\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Purpose Corporations are now taking stands on contemporary and controversial social issues that share no obvious connection to the corporations’ business practices. At the same time, political polarization continues to intensify, which begs the question: Are these corporate stands – referred to as corporate social advocacy (CSA) – and political polarization related to each other, and if so, how? The purpose of this study is to provide a conceptualization of the connections between CSA and political polarization through a series of propositions that can be tested in subsequent research studies. Corporations have influence in society, and the ways in which they communicate on controversial social issues could further intensify or help assuage political polarization. Conversely, political polarization may be causing CSA in the first place, which would put into question the legitimacy and desirability of CSA because of the environment from which CSA is cultivated. Design/methodology/approach This study is designed to be conceptual, and the approach is based on theory building. Findings The study conceptualizes the relationship between CSA and political polarization to be symbiotic because both are bidirectional causes of each other. Engagement in CSA is also argued to be positively associated with perceptions that corporations contain particular political ideologies, i.e. more “liberal-leaning” or “conservative-leaning.” This study also predicts that – dependent on particular conditions – CSA will also lead to an increase in both boycotts and skepticism. Practical implications This study will contribute to scholars’, practitioners’ and consumers’ understanding of the causes and effects of CSA. The way in which political polarization is potentially causing CSA puts into question the legitimacy of corporations engaging in CSA in the first place. If CSA is cultivated in the soil of political polarization, is CSA desirable for corporations? Conversely, the way in which CSA is potentially causing political polarization also puts the legitimacy of CSA into question. If CSA is causing political polarization, is CSA desirable for society? Social implications Corporations are an influential part of society, and thus will influence how society views controversial social issues. If the predictions in this study hold, corporations will play an important role in either intensifying or reducing political polarization, and political polarization will also play an important role in how corporations communicate about CSA issues. Originality/value Research focused on CSA is burgeoning, yet limited studies have examined how CSA and political polarization interact. Although there could be positive aspects of corporate involvement in CSA, this study examines some of the potential negative aspects of corporate involvement in CSA. Future research will also be able to test the propositions proposed in this study.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10696,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Corporate Communications: An International Journal\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Corporate Communications: An International Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/ccij-09-2022-0117\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Corporate Communications: An International Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ccij-09-2022-0117","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

企业现在对当代和有争议的社会问题采取立场,这些问题与企业的商业行为没有明显的联系。与此同时,政治两极分化继续加剧,这就提出了一个问题:这些企业的立场——被称为企业社会倡导(CSA)——与政治两极分化是否相互关联,如果是,又是如何关联的?本研究的目的是通过一系列命题来概念化CSA与政治两极分化之间的联系,这些命题可以在后续的研究中进行检验。企业在社会中具有影响力,它们就有争议的社会问题进行沟通的方式可能会进一步加剧或有助于缓和政治两极分化。相反,政治两极分化可能首先导致CSA,这将使CSA的合法性和可取性受到质疑,因为CSA的培养环境。设计/方法/方法本研究的设计是概念性的,方法是基于理论构建的。研究结果表明,政治极化与政治安全感之间的关系是共生的,因为两者互为双向原因。参与CSA也被认为与企业包含特定政治意识形态的认知呈正相关,即更“自由倾向”或“保守倾向”。这项研究还预测,在特定条件下,CSA也会导致抵制和怀疑的增加。实践意义本研究将有助于学者、从业人员和消费者对CSA的原因和影响的理解。政治两极分化可能导致CSA的方式,首先让人质疑企业参与CSA的合法性。如果CSA是在政治两极分化的土壤中培育出来的,那么CSA对企业来说是可取的吗?相反,CSA可能导致政治两极分化的方式也使CSA的合法性受到质疑。如果CSA正在造成政治两极分化,那么CSA对社会来说是可取的吗?公司是社会中有影响力的一部分,因此会影响社会如何看待有争议的社会问题。如果本研究的预测成立,企业将在加剧或减少政治两极分化方面发挥重要作用,政治两极分化也将在企业如何就CSA问题进行沟通方面发挥重要作用。关注CSA的原创性/价值研究正在蓬勃发展,但关于CSA与政治两极分化如何相互作用的研究有限。虽然企业参与CSA可能有积极的方面,但本研究考察了企业参与CSA的一些潜在的消极方面。未来的研究也将能够检验本研究提出的命题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Conceptualizing the relationship between corporate social advocacy and political polarization
Purpose Corporations are now taking stands on contemporary and controversial social issues that share no obvious connection to the corporations’ business practices. At the same time, political polarization continues to intensify, which begs the question: Are these corporate stands – referred to as corporate social advocacy (CSA) – and political polarization related to each other, and if so, how? The purpose of this study is to provide a conceptualization of the connections between CSA and political polarization through a series of propositions that can be tested in subsequent research studies. Corporations have influence in society, and the ways in which they communicate on controversial social issues could further intensify or help assuage political polarization. Conversely, political polarization may be causing CSA in the first place, which would put into question the legitimacy and desirability of CSA because of the environment from which CSA is cultivated. Design/methodology/approach This study is designed to be conceptual, and the approach is based on theory building. Findings The study conceptualizes the relationship between CSA and political polarization to be symbiotic because both are bidirectional causes of each other. Engagement in CSA is also argued to be positively associated with perceptions that corporations contain particular political ideologies, i.e. more “liberal-leaning” or “conservative-leaning.” This study also predicts that – dependent on particular conditions – CSA will also lead to an increase in both boycotts and skepticism. Practical implications This study will contribute to scholars’, practitioners’ and consumers’ understanding of the causes and effects of CSA. The way in which political polarization is potentially causing CSA puts into question the legitimacy of corporations engaging in CSA in the first place. If CSA is cultivated in the soil of political polarization, is CSA desirable for corporations? Conversely, the way in which CSA is potentially causing political polarization also puts the legitimacy of CSA into question. If CSA is causing political polarization, is CSA desirable for society? Social implications Corporations are an influential part of society, and thus will influence how society views controversial social issues. If the predictions in this study hold, corporations will play an important role in either intensifying or reducing political polarization, and political polarization will also play an important role in how corporations communicate about CSA issues. Originality/value Research focused on CSA is burgeoning, yet limited studies have examined how CSA and political polarization interact. Although there could be positive aspects of corporate involvement in CSA, this study examines some of the potential negative aspects of corporate involvement in CSA. Future research will also be able to test the propositions proposed in this study.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Societal impact of Brand Public Relations on gender equality: evidence for a mediation-type mechanism Empowering public relations for sustainability: examining the landscape in Turkey Effectiveness of femvertising communications on social media: how brand promises and motive attributions impact brand equity and endorsement outcomes Silent ripples: negative CSR associations' impact in non-crisis situations Online faith-holder communities in crisis: proposing and testing a dual-challenge model
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1