The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
CEO Sociopolitical Activism: A Stakeholder Alignment Model
Open accessAbstract
Conventional wisdom holds that CEOs should avoid wading into society’s debates. Yet, CEOs are increasingly ignoring this dictum and taking public stances on socially contentious issues. We address this relatively unexplored but important phenomenon by developing a theory of CEO sociopolitical activism. Our stakeholder alignment model posits that CEO activism stems foremost from a CEO’s personal values but is facilitated (or suppressed) by the CEO’s expectation of support from stakeholders, particularly employees and customers. We also highlight the importance of CEO power, celebrity, and narcissism in influencing whether, and how vividly, the CEO’s values manifest in activism. Then, following an episode of CEO activism, stakeholders psychologically respond to the leader’s action. Those who were ex ante predisposed toward the CEO’s public stance will feel pride in their affiliation with the company, and will consequently experience heightened identification with the firm and with the CEO’s stance. Stakeholders who were ex ante averse to the CEO’s stance will experience diminished identification with the firm, and their oppositional stance will be further cemented. Finally, we juxtapose CEO activism with other society-oriented firm practices (e.g., corporate social responsibility and corporate lobbying) and develop propositions about their independent and joint effects on stakeholder identification.
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
The case for motivated reasoning.
Kunda, Z. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480 · Cited by 9,022
Social Influence: Compliance and Conformity
Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142015 · Cited by 6,077
Muniz, A. M., & O'Guinn, T. C. (2001) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/319618 · Cited by 3,998
Stakeholder Theory: The State of the Art
Parmar, B. L., Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Purnell, L., & de Colle, S. (2010) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2010.495581 · Cited by 2,755
Power in Top Management Teams: Dimensions, Measurement, and Validation
Finkelstein, S. (1992) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/256485 · Cited by 2,389
Chatterjee, A., & Hambrick, D. C. (2007) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2189/asqu.52.3.351 · Cited by 2,074
Self-citationGroup norms and the attitude-behavior relationship: A role for group identification
Terry, D. J., & Hogg, M. A. (1996) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167296228002 · Cited by 1,444
Direct and indirect effects of self-image congruence on brand loyalty
Kressmann, F., Sirgy, M. J., Herrmann, A., Huber, F., Huber, S., & Lee, D.-J. (2006) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2006.06.001 · Cited by 971
Narcissism, Self-Esteem, and the Positivity of Self-Views: Two Portraits of Self-Love
Campbell, W. K., Rudich, E. A., & Sedikides, C. (2002) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167202286007 · Cited by 866
Judge, T. A., LePine, J. A., & Rich, B. L. (2006) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.762 · Cited by 762
Stakeholders, reciprocity, and firm performance
Bosse, D. A., Phillips, R. A., & Harrison, J. S. (2009) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.743 · Cited by 558
Briscoe, F., & Safford, S. (2008) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2189/asqu.53.3.460 · Cited by 335
Metadata
- Authors
- Hambrick, D. C., & Wowak, A. J.
- Venue
- Academy of Management Review
- Publisher
- Academy of Management
- Published
- 2021-01
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 33-59
- ISSN
- 0363-7425 (ISSN-L)
- 1930-3807
- OpenAlex
- W2943633405
- Cited by
- 322
- References
- 12
- FWCI
- 28.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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.
