The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Political Ideologies of CEOs: The Influence of Executives’ Values on Corporate Social Responsibility
Abstract
This article examines the influence on organizational outcomes of CEOs’ political ideology, specifically political conservatism vs. liberalism. We propose that CEOs’ political ideologies will influence their firms’ corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices, hypothesizing that (1) liberal CEOs will emphasize CSR more than will conservative CEOs; (2) the association between a CEO’s political ideology and CSR will be amplified by a CEO’s relative power; and (3) liberal CEOs will emphasize CSR even when recent financial performance is low, whereas conservative CEOs will pursue CSR initiatives only as performance allows. We test our ideas with a sample of 249 CEOs, measuring their ideologies by coding their political donations over the ten years prior to their becoming CEOs. Results indicate that the political ideologies of CEOs are manifested in their firms’ CSR profiles. Compared with conservative CEOs, liberal CEOs exhibit greater advances in CSR; the influence of CEOs’ political liberalism on CSR is amplified when they have more power; and liberal CEOs’ CSR initiatives are less contingent on recent performance than are those of conservative CEOs. In a corroborative exploration, we find that CEOs’ political ideologies are significantly related to their corporate political action committee (PAC) allocations, indicating that this largely unexplored executive attribute might be more widely consequential.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Agency Theory: An Assessment and Review
Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1989.4279003 · Cited by 13,338
The Social Responsibility of Business Is to Increase Its Profits
Friedman, M. (2007) · Corporate Ethics and Corporate Governance · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-70818-6_14 · Cited by 11,529
Corporate Social and Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis
Orlitzky, M., Schmidt, F. L., & Rynes, S. L. (2003) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840603024003910 · Cited by 7,641
Political conservatism as motivated social cognition.
Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339 · Cited by 4,904
WHY COMPANIES GO GREEN: A MODEL OF ECOLOGICAL RESPONSIVENESS.
Bansal, P., & Roth, K. (2000) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.2307/1556363 · Cited by 4,020
Power in Top Management Teams: Dimensions, Measurement, and Validation
Finkelstein, S. (1992) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/256485 · Cited by 2,389
Top executive commitment to the status quo: Some tests of its determinants
Hambrick, D. C., Geletkanycz, M. A., & Fredrickson, J. W. (1993) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250140602 · Cited by 1,058
Self-citation
Cited by
ESG: Research Progress and Future Prospects
Li, T.-T., Wang, K., Sueyoshi, T., & Wang, D. D. (2021) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su132111663 · Cited by 779
Beyond Good Intentions: Designing CSR Initiatives for Greater Social Impact
Barnett, M. L., Henriques, I., & Husted, B. W. (2020) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206319900539 · Cited by 358
Bonica, A. (2016) · Business and Politics · doi:10.1515/bap-2016-0004 · Cited by 147
Kim, M., & Mason, D. P. (2020) · Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management · doi:10.1108/jpbafm-12-2019-0179 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Chin, M. K., Hambrick, D. C., & Treviño, L. K.
- Venue
- Administrative Science Quarterly
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2013-04-15
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 197-232
- ISSN
- 0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
- 1930-3815
- OpenAlex
- W2099864960
- Cited by
- 1,125
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 113.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.