{"title":"道歉还是否认?企业不当行为发生后,公司如何捍卫华尔街、主要街道和市场街道的合法性","authors":"Marc Oberhauser, Marcus Conrad, Dirk Holtbrügge","doi":"10.1002/csr.2951","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this study is to analyze which measures corporations use to defend legitimacy after conducting misconduct and how different stakeholders react to these legitimacy‐defending measures (LDMs). Drawing on legitimacy theory and the concept of thought worlds, we derive hypotheses for three stakeholder groups and two types of corporate misconduct (CM): social‐ and environmental‐related CM and product‐ and service‐related CM. These hypotheses are tested in a sample of 343 cases of CM. Data for these CM were hand‐collected from various corporate publications, newspapers, and websites. We find that investors, customers, and society respond differently to different LDMs and different types of CM. The study contributes a stakeholder‐ and CM‐differentiated approach to legitimacy theory and adds to the literature on corporate misconduct, corporate legitimacy, and stakeholder management.","PeriodicalId":48334,"journal":{"name":"Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management","volume":"18 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Apologize or deny? How companies defend legitimacy of Wall street, Main street, and Market street after corporate misconduct\",\"authors\":\"Marc Oberhauser, Marcus Conrad, Dirk Holtbrügge\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/csr.2951\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The purpose of this study is to analyze which measures corporations use to defend legitimacy after conducting misconduct and how different stakeholders react to these legitimacy‐defending measures (LDMs). Drawing on legitimacy theory and the concept of thought worlds, we derive hypotheses for three stakeholder groups and two types of corporate misconduct (CM): social‐ and environmental‐related CM and product‐ and service‐related CM. These hypotheses are tested in a sample of 343 cases of CM. Data for these CM were hand‐collected from various corporate publications, newspapers, and websites. We find that investors, customers, and society respond differently to different LDMs and different types of CM. The study contributes a stakeholder‐ and CM‐differentiated approach to legitimacy theory and adds to the literature on corporate misconduct, corporate legitimacy, and stakeholder management.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48334,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2951\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.2951","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Apologize or deny? How companies defend legitimacy of Wall street, Main street, and Market street after corporate misconduct
The purpose of this study is to analyze which measures corporations use to defend legitimacy after conducting misconduct and how different stakeholders react to these legitimacy‐defending measures (LDMs). Drawing on legitimacy theory and the concept of thought worlds, we derive hypotheses for three stakeholder groups and two types of corporate misconduct (CM): social‐ and environmental‐related CM and product‐ and service‐related CM. These hypotheses are tested in a sample of 343 cases of CM. Data for these CM were hand‐collected from various corporate publications, newspapers, and websites. We find that investors, customers, and society respond differently to different LDMs and different types of CM. The study contributes a stakeholder‐ and CM‐differentiated approach to legitimacy theory and adds to the literature on corporate misconduct, corporate legitimacy, and stakeholder management.
期刊介绍:
Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management is a journal that publishes both theoretical and practical contributions related to the social and environmental responsibilities of businesses in the context of sustainable development. It covers a wide range of topics, including tools and practices associated with these responsibilities, case studies, and cross-country surveys of best practices. The journal aims to help organizations improve their performance and accountability in these areas.
The main focus of the journal is on research and practical advice for the development and assessment of social responsibility and environmental tools. It also features practical case studies and evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches to sustainability. The journal encourages the discussion and debate of sustainability issues and closely monitors the demands of various stakeholder groups. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management is a refereed journal, meaning that all contributions undergo a rigorous review process. It seeks high-quality contributions that appeal to a diverse audience from various disciplines.