The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Ideologically motivated activism: How activist groups influence corporate social change activities
Abstract
Using insights from the social movement literature and institutional change theory, we explore how activism influences corporate social change activities. As the responsibility for addressing a variety of social issues is transferred from the state to the private sector, activist groups increasingly challenge firms to take up such issues, seeking to influence the nature and level of corporate social change activities. Eventually, they aim to bring about field-level change. We argue that ideological differences among activist groups motivate them to choose different influence tactics to support their claims.
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
Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches
Suchman, M. C. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258788 · Cited by 19,903
A Three-Dimensional Conceptual Model of Corporate Performance
Carroll, A. B. (1979) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/257850 · Cited by 10,480
Strategic Responses to Institutional Processes
Oliver, C. (1991) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1991.4279002 · Cited by 8,950
Moving beyond Dyadic Ties: A Network Theory of Stakeholder Influences
Rowley, T. J. (1997) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1997.9711022107 · Cited by 2,522
Institutional conditions for diffusion
Strang, D., & Meyer, J. W. (1993) · Theory and Society · doi:10.1007/bf00993595 · Cited by 2,114
Compliance without pressure: The foot-in-the-door technique.
Freedman, J. L., & Fraser, S. C. (1966) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0023552 · Cited by 1,637 · cited 1×
“Adding sig- 5 The mechanism resembles the so-called foot-in-the-door technique, in which agreement with a small request is followed by a larger request that is then more difficult to refuse (Burger, 2001; Freedman & Fraser, 1966).”
Method
Cited by
Institutional Complexity and Organizational Responses
Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, E. R., & Lounsbury, M. (2011) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2011.590299 · Cited by 3,519
Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. (2011) · Journal of Management Studies · doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00950.x · Cited by 2,131
Responding to public and private politics: corporate disclosure of climate change strategies
Reid, E. M., & Toffel, M. W. (2009) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.796 · Cited by 1,093
Spinning gold: The financial returns to stakeholder engagement
Henisz, W. J., Dorobantu, S., & Nartey, L. J. (2014) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.2180 · Cited by 546
Haack, P., Schoeneborn, D., & Wickert, C. (2012) · Organization Studies · doi:10.1177/0170840612443630 · Cited by 303
Metadata
- Authors
- den Hond, F., & de Bakker, F. G. A.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Review
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 2007-07
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 901-924
- ISSN
- 0363-7425 (ISSN-L)
- 1930-3807
- OpenAlex
- W2023667622
- Cited by
- 776
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 51.26
- 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.
