CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 393Corporate Social Responsibility ReportingEnvironmental Sustainability in BusinessCorporate Identity and Reputation

Strategic Silence: Withholding Certification Status as a Hypocrisy Avoidance Tactic

Open access
Carlos, W. Chad, Lewis, Ben W.·2018·Administrative Science Quarterly
DOI 10.1177/0001839217695089
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We examine why organizations that obtain prominent certifications may at times elect not to publicize them. Drawing on the impression management literature, we argue and show that concerns about being perceived as hypocritical may cause organizations to strategically withhold their certification status. Using a longitudinal panel of corporations that were members of the Dow Jones Sustainability Index, a prominent environmental certification, we show that in the face of reputational threats, organizations are less likely to publicize their certification status when the threat appears to directly contradict the claims implied by the certification. Our findings suggest that the threat of hypocrisy is amplified for firms with stronger reputations in the same domain as the certification and when audience members better understand and value the certification. Our findings delineate new boundary conditions under which firms will make prosocial claims and inspire reconsideration of long-held assumptions about the process of decoupling the implementation and communication of socially valued practices. This study also provides insights for scholars of nonmarket strategy on how corporations strategically communicate with external constituents about their sustainability initiatives.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0001839217695089

Cites

150 of 150 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

10 of 114 cited sources checked · 5 supported · 2 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Premisecitation

    Audiences must perceive a direct contradiction between claims and actions to recognize hypocrisy.

    “audiences must perceive a direct contradiction between claims and actions to recognize hypocrisy”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Effron and Monin, 2010 source
    • cites Effron, Lucas, and O'Connor, 2015 source

      The Theoretical and applied implications section says that explicitly endorsing or promoting a value is not necessary for someone to be condemned as a hypocrite. The General discussion likewise says a person's actions need only be inconsistent with what their organization preaches, contrary to the claim that a direct contradiction between the person's own claims and actions is required. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Findingown data

    When organizations face reputational threats, they are less likely to publicize a certification if the threat directly contradicts the claims implied by the certification.

    “we show that in the face of reputational threats, organizations are less likely to publicize their certification status when the threat appears to directly contradict the claims implied by the certification.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    The authors observed several instances in which firms chose to withhold rather than publicize their DJSI membership status.

    “we observed several instances in which firms chose to withhold rather than publicize their membership status.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Several companies appeared to remain silent about their DJSI membership, particularly when the risk of perceived hypocrisy was increased.

    “we found several companies that appeared to remain silent about their DJSI membership, particularly when the risk of perceived hypocrisy was increased”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    The negative moderating effect of environmental reputation was significantly stronger in magnitude for environmental shareholder activism (χ2 = 2.58, p = .054) than for threats outside the environmental domain.

    “the negative moderating effects of environmental reputation were significantly stronger in magnitude for environmental shareholder activism (χ 2 = 2.58, p-value = .054)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 33
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 39
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 1

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Newly added firms experience positive abnormal returns upon inclusion, indicating that investors generally view inclusion as a positive signal.

    “newly added firms experience positive abnormal returns upon inclusion, indicating that investors generally view inclusion as a positive signal (Cheung, 2011;Robinson, Kleffner, and Bertels, 2011;Hawn, Chatterji, and Mitchell, 2014)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Cheung, 2011 source
    • cites Robinson, Kleffner, and Bertels, 2011 source
    • cites Hawn, Chatterji, and Mitchell, 2014 source

      The event-study results (Table 2a, p. 17) report a statistically significant −0.25% abnormal return for firms added to the DJSI, not a positive return. The Empirical findings (p. 27) likewise say investors appear to punish added firms. Although returns became less negative over time, the later positive return for additions was not statistically significant (Table 2c, p. 19). (LLM, conf=0.94)

      Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Perceptions of hypocrisy arise when actors make claims that their own behavior does not conform to.

    “Perceptions of hypocrisy arise when actors make claims to which their own behavior does not conform”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Effron, Lucas, and O'Connor, 2015 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductcitation

    Self-selection could bias results if factors that predict the likelihood of becoming certified also influence the likelihood of publicizing the certification.

    “Such selection could nevertheless bias our results if factors that predict the likelihood of becoming certified also influence the likelihood of publicizing the certification (Hamilton and Nickerson, 2003;Bascle, 2008).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Hamilton and Nickerson, 2003 source
    • cites Bascle, 2008 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Company size is positively correlated with the likelihood of environmental disclosure and the number of prosocial claims made by a firm.

    “prior research has found company size to be positively correlated with the likelihood of environmental disclosure (Reid and Toffel, 2009;Lewis, Walls, and Dowell, 2014) and, more generally, the number of prosocial claims made by a firm (McDonnell and King, 2013)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Reid and Toffel, 2009 source
    • cites Lewis, Walls, and Dowell, 2014 source
    • cites McDonnell and King, 2013 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Organizations whose operations pose a greater risk to the environment are more likely to be heavily regulated and scrutinized by the state and will thus establish sophisticated reporting structures.

    “organizations whose operations pose a greater risk to the environment are more likely to be heavily regulated and scrutinized by the state (Bansal and Roth, 2000;Reid and Toffel, 2009;Chatterji and Toffel, 2010) and will thus establish sophisticated reporting structures and processes aimed at increasing the transparency of their operations and impacts (Lyon and Maxwell, 2011).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Bansal and Roth, 2000 source
    • cites Reid and Toffel, 2009 source

      The 'Extension: Environmentally sensitive industries' section (p. 26) describes firms in those industries as facing a heightened threat of regulatory scrutiny. That supports the scrutiny portion of the clause attributed to Reid and Toffel, but a threat of scrutiny does not establish that these firms are more likely to be heavily regulated. The later claim about reporting structures is attached to a different citation. (LLM, conf=0.83)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Chatterji and Toffel, 2010 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Study design and conductcitation

    Lagging all independent and moderating variables by one year avoids concerns about simultaneity or reverse causality.

    “To avoid concerns about simultaneity or reverse causality, we lagged all independent and moderating variables by one year (Reid and Toffel, 2009;Lewis, Walls, and Dowell, 2014).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Reid and Toffel, 2009 source

      The Model specification (p. 21) says the authors lagged independent variables to avoid simultaneity concerns, but expressly identifies two exceptions to the one-year lag: shareholder action and toxic chemical emissions. It does not separately say that this procedure eliminates reverse-causality concerns or specify that all moderating variables were lagged one year. (LLM, conf=0.90)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites Lewis, Walls, and Dowell, 2014 source

      The Model specification section says the authors lagged control variables by one year to minimize simultaneity concerns. It also says CEO education and tenure were measured in the current year, so the paper does not support lagging all independent variables; it does not claim that lagging eliminates simultaneity or reverse-causality concerns. (LLM, conf=0.90)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Shareholder resolutions are proposals often put forth by socially minded investors who seek to influence corporate decision makers by generating internal debates about a firm's policies and practices.

    “Shareholder resolutions are proposals often put forth by socially minded investors who seek to influence corporate decision makers by generating internal debates about a firm's policies and practices (Reid and Toffel, 2009).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Reid and Toffel, 2009 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The threat of hypocrisy is stronger for firms with stronger reputations in the same domain as the certification and when audiences better understand and value the certification.

    “Our findings suggest that the threat of hypocrisy is amplified for firms with stronger reputations in the same domain as the certification and when audience members better understand and value the certification.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    The average publication rate of DJSI membership over the panel was 59% (883/1,486).

    “the average publication rate over the panel was 59 percent (883/ 1,486)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The legitimacy of the DJSI increased over time, as indicated by cumulative media articles: 20 in 1999, exceeding 13,000 by the end of the study.

    “Our results strongly support the notion that the legitimacy of the DJSI increased over time.In 1999, the year the DJSI was introduced, we found only 20 articles that mentioned it.By the end of our study, the cumulative number of articles mentioning the DJSI exceeded 13,000.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Across all specifications, the coefficient for the inverse Mills ratio was negative and statistically significant.

    “Across all specifications we find a negative and statistically significant coefficient for the inverse Mills ratio”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The number of years on the DJSI had a strong positive main effect and a strong negative effect on its squared term.

    “We also find a strong positive main effect for the number of years on the DJSI but also a strong negative effect on the squared term.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Such claims become less likely when the claim and the threat share a domain and when stakeholders can easily see and grasp the inconsistency.

    “Such claims, however, are less likely to occur when the claim (e.g., publicizing a sustainability certification) falls in the same domain as the threat (e.g., environmental sustainability) and when the inconsistency between the claim and the threat is readily apparent to and understood by stakeholders.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    For firms with high versus low DJSI legitimacy, each media article mentioning an environmental protest, boycott, or lawsuit lowers the chance of publicizing DJSI membership by 2.5 percentage points.

    “and 2.5 percentage points (p-value = .078)for every media article that mentions an environmental protest, boycott, or lawsuit.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Authoritative endorsements signal quality and assure that an organization has substantively implemented required practices.

    “These authoritative endorsements serve as signals of quality and provide assurance that an organization has substantively implemented practices or engaged in activities that meet the requirements outlined by the certifying agency.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Sine, David, and Mitsuhashi, 2007 source
    • cites Lee, 2009 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    When a certification is new and not understood, an organization might believe it could tout the certification without being detected as a hypocrite.

    “When a certification is new and not yet understood by audience members, an organization might believe that it could get away with making claims by touting the certification without being detected as a hypocrite.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Actors who make claims inconsistent with their actions are often perceived as lacking credibility, which can lead audiences to view their other communications skeptically.

    “Prior research has shown that actors who make claims that are inconsistent with their actions are often perceived to lack credibility (Tedeschi, Schlenker, and Bonoma, 1971), which may lead audience members to view all other communications from them with skepticism (Rosenfeld, Giacalone, and Riordan, 1995).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Tedeschi, Schlenker, and Bonoma, 1971 source
    • cites Rosenfeld, Giacalone, and Riordan, 1995

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Certifications reveal otherwise hidden organizational attributes and provide assurance that the organization is trustworthy and aligned with socially prescribed values.

    “By revealing information about organizational attributes that would otherwise be hidden from external audiences (King, Lenox, and Terlaak, 2005), certifications provide assurance that the organization is trustworthy and that its actions are aligned with socially prescribed values and actions (McDonnell and King, 2013).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites King, Lenox, and Terlaak, 2005 source
    • cites McDonnell and King, 2013 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The reputation-enhancing benefits of certifications come from assurance about performance in a domain and endorsement by prominent respected actors.

    “the reputation-enhancing benefits of certifications are derived from two primary factors: certifications provide assurance about an organization's level of performance in a given domain, and they represent a powerful signal of endorsement by other prominent and respected actors”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Rao, 1998 source
    • cites Stuart, Hoang, and Hybels, 1999 source
    • cites Elsbach, 2003 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Organizations use impression management tactics, often routinized claims or strategic symbols, to promote positive audience perceptions.

    “Organizations engage in various forms of impression management to promote positive audience perceptions.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Elsbach, 2003 source
    • cites Ashforth and Gibbs, 1990 source
    • cites King and Whetten, 2008 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    Inconsistency between claims and actions is necessary but not sufficient for perceptions of hypocrisy.

    “Inconsistency between an organization's claims and actions is a necessary condition for perceptions of hypocrisy to arise, but it is not likely to be sufficient.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The DJSI was the first global index to identify and track sustainability-driven companies worldwide and is well regarded for credibility and transparency.

    “the DJSI was the first global index to identify and track the performance of sustainability-driven companies worldwide and is well regarded among the socially responsible investment community for its credibility and transparency”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Sadowski, 2010b

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Organizations defend reputations by using impression management to neutralize threats through rhetorical or symbolic actions emphasizing positive attributes and socially valued activities.

    “To defend their reputations, organizations will engage in impression management efforts to neutralize threats through rhetorical or symbolic actions that emphasize their positive attributes and socially valued activities”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Elsbach, 2003 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Organizations should want to avoid the reputational harm associated with being perceived as hypocritical.

    “Given these potentially damaging consequences, organizations should want to avoid the reputational harm associated with being perceived as hypocritical.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Negative media coverage and activism threaten organizations by generating negative public perceptions and increasing investor risk perception.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Organizations with strong generalized reputations are generally more visible and disproportionately celebrated by the public and media.

    “Organizations that have established strong generalized reputations are generally more visible than their peers and are disproportionately celebrated by the public”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Fombrun, 1996

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites King, 2011 source
    • cites Rhee and Haunschild, 2006 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Consumers and other audience members may detect organizational hypocrisy and view it with anger.

    “consumers and other audience members may detect such organizational acts of hypocrisy and view them with ire”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Wagner, Lutz, and Weitz, 2009 source
    • cites Janney and Gove, 2011 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Reputational threats occur when stakeholders publicize organizational misdeeds and pressure the organization to rectify or take responsibility.

    “Reputational threats can occur when stakeholders recognize organizational misdeeds and bring those actions to light in an effort to pressure the organization to rectify its actions or take responsibility for its transgressions”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Bartley and Child, 2011 source
    • cites Vasi and King, 2012 source
    • cites McDonnell and King, 2013 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Study design and conductcitation

    Reporting standard errors clustered by firm accommodates potential serial correlation within firms.

    “We also reported standard errors clustered by firm to accommodate potential serial correlation within firms (Marquis, Toffel, and Zhou, 2016).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Marquis, Toffel, and Zhou, 2016 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    Hypocrisy avoidance is more likely to occur when the threat facing an organization is in the same domain as the claims associated with the certification.

    “hypocrisy avoidance is more likely to occur when the threat facing an organization is in the same domain as the claims associated with the certification”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    The broad use of DJSI evaluations suggests that its influence extends beyond investors.

    “The broad use of the DJSI evaluations suggests that its influence extends beyond investors.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    As certification legitimacy increases, audience members become more cognizant of the specific claims implied by the certification and more capable of spotting contradictions in organizational behavior.

    “As the legitimacy of a certification increases, however, audience members would likely become more cognizant of the specific claims implied by the certification and be more capable of spotting contradictions in organizational behavior.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Companies often express initial and continued inclusion on the DJSI as a strategic goal, and for some CEOs it is a key performance indicator.

    “companies often express initial and continued inclusion on the index as a strategic goal, and for some CEOs it is a key performance indicator (Robinson, Kleffner, and Bertels, 2011)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Robinson, Kleffner, and Bertels, 2011 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Positive organizational claims may be effectively used to deflect criticism or direct attention away from a reputational threat.

    “Recent work has argued that positive organizational claims may be effectively used to deflect criticism or to direct attention away from a reputational threat”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Ingram, Yue, and Rao, 2010 source
    • cites McDonnell and King, 2013 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Inclusion on the DJSI can increase perceptions of legitimacy among socially conscious investors and enhance brands or reputations, helping maintain or improve competitive position.

    “inclusion on the index can increase perceptions of legitimacy among socially conscious investors and enhance their brands or reputations more generally, all factors that can help to maintain or improve the firm's competitive position among its industry peers (Searcy and Elkhawas, 2012)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Searcy and Elkhawas, 2012 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Shareholder resolutions often fail to receive enough support to change corporate policies, but they serve as disruptive activity and can threaten a firm's reputation.

    “Such resolutions often fail to receive enough support to change corporate policies, but they nevertheless serve as a form of ''disruptive activity'' and can thus threaten a firm's reputation (Lee and Lounsbury, 2011;McDonnell, King, and Soule, 2015).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Lee and Lounsbury, 2011 source
    • cites McDonnell, King, and Soule, 2015 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Corporations have made significant investments in environmental initiatives and green products to differentiate themselves and signal environmental consciousness.

    “they have made significant investments in environmental initiatives and green products to differentiate themselves from their competitors and to signal to the general public that they are environmentally conscious corporate citizens”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Vogel, 2005

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Vasi and King, 2012 source
    • cites United Nations Global Compact, 2013

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Prior research suggests organizations make positive claims to mitigate reputational threats.

    “prior research suggests that organizations make positive claims to mitigate reputational threats.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Making a claim of environmental leadership would more likely be perceived as hypocritical for a firm experiencing environmental protests but could effectively deflect attention from negative labor practices.

    “making a claim signifying leadership in environmentally sustainable activities would be more likely to be perceived as hypocritical for a firm experiencing activists' protests related to its environmental practices but could be an effective strategy for a firm trying to deflect attention away from its negative labor practices.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The DJSI is the most credible sustainability certification in the eyes of sustainability professionals.

    “One recent study found the DJSI to be the most credible sustainability certification in the eyes of sustainability professionals (Sadowski, 2010b).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Sadowski, 2010b

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Publicizing a certification in the same domain as a reputational threat is more likely to be perceived as hypocritical because it is directly contradicted by recent evidence of poor behavior or performance.

    “publicizing a certification that falls in the same domain as the reputational threat would more likely be perceived as hypocritical because it would be directly contradicted by recent evidence of poor behavior or performance.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Study design and conductcitation

    The interpretation of interaction effects when using probit regression is inherently difficult, so average marginal effects and graphs are also used.

    “Because the interpretation of interaction effects when using probit regression is inherently difficult (Hoetker, 2007), we also interpret our results using average marginal effects and graphs.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Hoetker, 2007 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    To be viewed as hypocritical, a claim must lie in the same domain as the threat and represent incongruence between words and deeds.

    “to be viewed as hypocritical, it must lie in the same domain as the threat and thus represent incongruence between words and deeds.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    Perceptions of organizational hypocrisy arise when organizations make claims that directly contradict their recent actions or performance and when these contradictions are well understood and recognized by constituents.

    “Perceptions of organizational hypocrisy arise when organizations make claims that directly contradict their recent actions or performance and when these contradictions are well understood and recognized by constituents.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    The DJSI application process is time-consuming, requiring a significant commitment to complete.

    “the application process is time-consuming, requiring a significant commitment to complete (Searcy and Elkhawas, 2012)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Searcy and Elkhawas, 2012 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Media and environmental activists have increased efforts to hold corporations accountable to their claims and watch for environmental hypocrisy, often labeled greenwashing.

    “The media and environmental activists have also increased their efforts to hold corporations accountable to their claims and have thus become vigilant observers, watching for evidence of environmental hypocrisy, often labeled as ''greenwashing''”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Lyon and Maxwell, 2011 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Corporate social and environmental initiatives often take a subordinate role to a firm's profitability goals.

    “corporate social and environmental initiatives often take a subordinate role to a firm's profitability goals (Margolis and Walsh, 2003)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Margolis and Walsh, 2003 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Over recent decades, corporations have faced increasing pressure to behave responsibly regarding their environmental impact.

    “Over the past several decades, corporations have faced increasing pressure to behave responsibly in regard to their impact on the natural environment”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Hoffman, 2001

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites Flammer, 2013 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The DJSI is internationally recognized for its transparency and objectivity and is well regarded by the investment community.

    “The DJSI is internationally recognized for its transparency and objectivity and is well regarded by the investment community (Cheung, 2011).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Cheung, 2011 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Attempts to make positive claims directly contradicted by recent negative events are more likely to be viewed as hypocritical and, when detected, likely wipe out positive effects of prior good deeds.

    “attempts to make positive claims that are directly contradicted by recent negative events are more likely to be viewed as hypocritical (Godfrey, 2005) and when detected will likely wipe out the positive effects of prior good deeds (Effron and Monin, 2010).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Godfrey, 2005 source
    • cites Effron and Monin, 2010 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisereasoning

    The DJSI World Index is generally seen as the most prestigious of the Dow Jones Sustainability Indices because firms compete against global rather than only national peers.

    “the DJSI World Index is generally seen as the most prestigious of the Dow Jones Sustainability Indices because firms are essentially competing for recognition against their global peers rather than only national peers.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Firms may take advantage of strategic opportunities to bolster their image, particularly when they are perceived as socially irresponsible.

    “firms may take advantage of strategic opportunities to bolster their image, particularly when they are perceived as socially irresponsible (Brammer and Millington, 2005;Muller and Kra ¨ussl, 2011).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Brammer and Millington, 2005 source
    • cites Muller and Kraussl, 2011 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Procedural and structural features can serve as a proxy for a firm's general willingness and capacity to collect and report on environmental initiatives.

    “These procedural and structural features can serve as a proxy for a firm's general willingness and capacity to collect and report on environmental initiatives (McDonnell, King, and Soule, 2015).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites McDonnell, King, and Soule, 2015 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Firms are placed into one of 59 RobecoSAM peer groups defined by the Global Industrial Classification Standard (GICS).

    “Each firm is assigned to one of the 59 RobecoSAM peer groups, which are based on the Global Industrial Classification Standard (GICS) (RobecoSAM, 2013).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites RobecoSAM, 2013

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    A strong reputation in a domain raises both the chance of being seen as a hypocrite and the cost of that negative judgment.

    “arguably because a strong domain-specific reputation increases both the likelihood of being identified as a hypocrite and the associated cost of this negative social evaluation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    KLD evaluates firms' positive and negative CSR performance in areas such as community relations, diversity, employee relations, human rights, and controversial business practices.

    “KLD rates a company's positive and negative CSR performance across several domains including community relations, diversity initiatives, employee relations, human rights initiatives, and socially controversial business practices(Vasi and King, 2012;Flammer, 2015).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Vasi and King, 2012 source
    • cites Flammer, 2015 source

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    A firm's environmental reputation is positively associated with its environmental performance ratings.

    “Implicit in this operationalization is the notion that these environmental performance ratings are positively correlated with a firm's environmental reputation, or the degree to which a firm is known for strong environmental performance and practices(Lange, Lee, and Dai, 2011;Jensen, Kim, and Kim, 2012).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Lange, Lee, and Dai, 2011 source
    • cites Jensen, Kim, and Kim, 2012 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Firms know about and worry about seeming hypocritical, and they avoid hypocritical acts more when detection is likely and when the inconsistency is a clear departure from their domain reputation.

    “Our findings contribute to this conversation by suggesting that organizations are aware of and concerned with the risk of being perceived as hypocritical and are less likely to engage in hypocritical actions when the likelihood of detection increases and when these inconsistencies represent salient departures from the organization's domain-specific reputation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Hypocrisy worries may lead key firms to stay quiet about environmental achievements, which could slow the spread of socially beneficial practices.

    “Such concerns could cause these key organizations to remain silent about their environmental accomplishments, thus hindering the diffusion of socially desirable activities.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    A strong environmental reputation and greater DJSI legitimacy make detection of hypocrisy more likely, so firms stay quiet about membership.

    “Both factors would increase the likelihood of hypocritical acts being detected and thus lead firms to remain silent about their DJSI membership.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Greater scrutiny from stakeholders and society can produce environmental disclosures that are more accurate, more substantive, or even overly modest.

    “increased scrutiny by stakeholders and society at large can lead to moreaccurate (Marquis, Toffel, and Zhou, 2016), more-substantive (Marquis and Qian, 2014), or even overly modest disclosures (Kim and Lyon, 2015).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Marquis, Toffel, and Zhou, 2016 source
    • cites Marquis and Qian, 2014 source
    • cites Kim and Lyon, 2015 source

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Managers worry that their firms will be called hypocrites, so they may keep quiet about environmental good deeds when speaking up could attract activist targeting.

    “These findings thus lend strong empirical support to previous anecdotal assertions that managers are concerned about their organizations being labeled as hypocrites and will remain strategically silent about their environmentally positive activities if such communications may place the firm at risk of being targeted by activists.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Selection bias probably affects the findings, a result that bolsters the empirical approach.

    “suggesting that our results are likely to be influenced by selection bias, thus providing further support for our empirical strategy.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The DJSI discloses the names of sector leaders, as well as the additions and deletions resulting from the annual review process.

    “the DJSI discloses the names of sector leaders, as well as the additions and deletions resulting from the annual review process (SustainAbility, 2013).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites SustainAbility, 2013

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Prior work indicates that prominent organizations, especially those known for resisting activists, drive the spread and institutionalization of socially responsible practices by adopting progressive policies.

    “Prior research has found that the diffusion and eventual institutionalization of socially responsible practices is largely driven by the adoption of progressive policies by prominent organizations, in particular by those that have reputations for or histories of being resistant to activists' requests”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Briscoe and Safford, 2008 source
    • cites Briscoe, Gupta, and Anner, 2015 source

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Proactive firms characterized by a progressive corporate culture often engage in socially responsible practices outside an environmental domain and may thus be less inclined to publicize their DJSI membership.

    “proactive firms characterized by a progressive corporate culture (Vasi and King, 2012) often engage in socially responsible practices outside an environmental domain and may thus be less inclined to publicize their DJSI membership”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Vasi and King, 2012 source
65 of 65

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Negative media coverage and activism threaten organizations by generating negative public perceptions and increasing investor risk perception.

    “Underlying each of these studies is an assumption that negative media coverage and activism can threaten an organization by generating negative perceptions among the general public and increasing the level of risk perceived by investors”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Organizations seek to avoid perceptions of hypocrisy.

    “Assuming that organizations will seek to avoid perceptions of hypocrisy”

  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Media coverage reflects the accumulated discourse and cognitive legitimacy of a given practice or structure.

    “Implicit in this approach is an assumption that media coverage reflects the accumulated discourse and cognitive legitimacy of a given practice or structure (Kennedy, 2008)”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Most firms likely seek to become certified with the intention of publicizing that certification to their stakeholders.

    “Because most firms likely seek to become certified with the intention of publicizing that certification to their stakeholders, we used a two-stage Heckman probit model to control for selfselection.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Certifications are intended to provide verification of substantive implementation.

    “Certifications, however, are unique in that they are intended to provide verification of substantive implementation.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Firms that obtain certifications must actively communicate their certification status to relevant stakeholders.

    “firms that obtain certifications must nevertheless actively communicate their certification status to relevant stakeholders.”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The DJSI is a prominent sustainability certification.

    “We tested our theory by examining whether corporations publicized their membership in the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI), a prominent sustainability certification.”
7 of 7

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Wald-test null hypothesis is stated in opposite directions

    Minor

    The table labels the Wald test as testing whether the environmental interaction coefficient is at least as large as the nonenvironmental coefficient. The accompanying note instead says the null is that the nonenvironmental coefficient is at least as large as the environmental one.

1 of 1

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Beder S., 2002, Ecologist, 32, 24
  2. Hoffman A. J. 2001 From Heresy to Dogma: An Institutional History of Corporate Environmentalism. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
  3. Jensen M., 2012, The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Reputation: 140–159
  4. Oberholzer-Gee F., 2007, Harvard Business School Case, 707
  5. Searle J. R. 1995 The Construction of Social Reality. New York: Free Press.
  6. Waddock S., 2000, Business Ethics, 14, 17

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Carlos, W. C., & Lewis, B. W.
Affiliations
Brigham Young University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Administrative Science Quarterly
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2017-02-01
Volume
63
Issue
1
Pages
130-169
ISSN
  • 0001-8392 (ISSN-L)
  • 1930-3815
DOI
10.1177/0001839217695089
OpenAlex
W2588891407
Semantic Scholar
d0e93cfd309013e4e99b872394d3c9f29f82dac5
Cited by
393
References
148
Citations by year
2026: 79 · 2025: 50 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 45 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 48 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2
FWCI
53.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Administrative Science Quarterly (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Environmental Sustainability in Business
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Corporate Identity and Reputation
Keywords
impression management, environmental certification, Dow Jones Sustainability Index, corporate reputation, sustainability communication, nonmarket strategy, reputational threats, corporate sustainability

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.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-09-28.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-09-28.

Cited sources are checked by gpt-6-sol.

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