A Dynamic Process Model of Private Politics: Activist Targeting and Corporate Receptivity to Social Challenges
Abstract
This project explores whether and how corporations become more receptive to social activist challenges over time. Drawing from social movement theory, we suggest a dynamic process through which contentious interactions lead to increased receptivity. We argue that when firms are chronically targeted by social activists, they respond defensively by adopting strategic management devices that help them better manage social issues and demonstrate their normative appropriateness. These defensive devices have the incidental effect of empowering independent monitors and increasing corporate accountability, which in turn increase a firm’s receptivity to future activist challenges. We test our theory using a unique longitudinal dataset that tracks contentious attacks and the adoption of social management devices among a population of 300 large firms from 1993 to 2009.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
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).”
From Strategic Silence: Withholding Certification Status as a Hypocrisy Avoidance Tactic (2018) · cites this paper as McDonnell, King, and Soule, 2015
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).”
From Strategic Silence: Withholding Certification Status as a Hypocrisy Avoidance Tactic (2018) · cites this paper as McDonnell, King, and Soule, 2015
Cites
Logistic Regression in Rare Events Data
King, G., & Zeng, L. (2001) · Political Analysis · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.pan.a004868 · Cited by 4,316 · see citing works
The Double-Edge of Organizational Legitimation
Ashforth, B. E., & Gibbs, B. W. (1990) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1.2.177 · Cited by 2,228 · see citing works
Briscoe, F., & Safford, S. (2008) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2189/asqu.53.3.460 · Cited by 335 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Strategic Silence: Withholding Certification Status as a Hypocrisy Avoidance Tactic
Carlos, W. C., & Lewis, B. W. (2018) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0001839217695089 · Cited by 393 · see citing works
McDonnell, M.-H., & King, B. (2014) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2373974 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- McDonnell, M.-H., King, B. G., & Soule, S. A.
- Affiliations
- Georgetown University (US)
- Northwestern University (US)
- Stanford University (US)
- Venue
- American Sociological Review
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2015-04-21
- Volume
- 80
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 654-678
- ISSN
- 0003-1224 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-8271
- OpenAlex
- W3124466808
- Cited by
- 307
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 22 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 3
- FWCI
- 76.55
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Sociological Review (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Harvard Business School
- Georgetown University
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Management and Organizational Studies
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Political Influence and Corporate Strategies
- Keywords
- corporate social responsiveness, social activism, social movement theory, corporate accountability, corporate legitimacy, private politics
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
