Through the mud or in the boardroom: Examining activist types and their strategies in targeting firms for social change

Strategic Management Journal

Volumn 37, Issue 12, 2016, Pages 2425-2440

  Eesley, Charles ^a   Decelles, Katherine A ^b   Lenox, Michael ^c  

^a Stanford University   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

Author keywords

activism; extra institutional; social movements; stakeholder theory; sustainability

Indexed keywords

PLANNING; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT;

ACTIVISM; ACTIVIST GROUPS; EXTRA-INSTITUTIONAL; MEDIA ATTENTION; RELIGIOUS GROUPS; SOCIAL CHANGES; SOCIAL MOVEMENTS; STAKEHOLDER THEORY;

RISK PERCEPTION;

EID: 84953261937     PISSN: 01432095     EISSN: 10970266     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/smj.2458     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Aguilera RV, Rupp DE, Williams CA, Ganapathi J. 2007. Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: a multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review 32(3): 836–863.
2. Baron DP. 2005. Competing for the public through the news media. Journal of Economic Management Strategy 14(2): 339–376.
3. Bednar MK. 2012. Watchdog or lapdog? A behavioral view of the media as a corporate governance mechanism. Academy of Management Journal 55: 131–150.
4. Bhagat S, Bizjak J, Coles JL. 1998. The shareholder wealth implications of corporate lawsuits. Financial Management 27(4): 5–27.
5. Bowen FE. 2002. Does size matter? Organizational slack and visibility as alternative explanations for environmental responsiveness. Business and Society 41(1): 118–124.
6. Briscoe F, Safford S. 2008. The Nixon-in-China effect: activism, imitation, and the institutionalization of contentious practices. Administrative Science Quarterly 53(3): 460–491.
7. Chatterji AK, Toffel MW. 2010. How firms respond to being rated. Strategic Management Journal 31(9): 917–945.
8. Davenport C, Ball P. 2002. Views to a kill exploring the implications of source selection in the case of Guatemalan state terror, 1977-1995. Journal of Conflict Resolution 46(3): 427–450.
9. Davis GF, Zald MN. 2005. Social change, social theory, and the convergence of movements and organizations. In Social Movements and Organization Theory, Davis GF, McAdam D, Scott WR, Zald MN (eds). Cambridge University Press: New York; 335–350.
10. Delmas M, Russo MV, Montes-Sancho MJ. 2007. Deregulation and environmental differentiation in the electric utility industry. Strategic Management Journal 28(2): 189–209.
11. den Hond F, De Bakker FG. 2007. Ideologically motivated activism: how activist groups influence corporate social change activities. Academy of Management Review 32(3): 901–924.
12. Dimson E, Oğuzhan K, Li X. 2015. Active ownership. Review of Financial Studies, DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2154724, Forthcoming.
13. Earl J, Martin A, McCarthy JD, Soule SA. 2004. The use of newspaper data in the study of collective action. Annual Review of Sociology 30(1): 65–80.
14. Eesley C, Lenox MJ. 2006. Firm responses to secondary stakeholder action. Strategic Management Journal 27(8): 765–781.
15. Frooman J. 1999. Stakeholder influence strategies. Academy of Management Review 24: 191–205.
16. Getz KA. 1995. Implementing multilateral regulation a preliminary theory and illustration. Business and Society 34(3): 280–316.
17. Giugni MG. 1998. Was it worth the effort? The outcomes and consequences of social movements. Annual Review of Sociology 24(1): 371–393.
18. Graves SB, Waddock SA. 1994. Institutional owners and corporate social performance. Academy of Management Journal 37(4): 1034–1046.
19. Greene WH. 1997. Frontier production functions. In Handbook of Applied Econometrics (Volume 2). 81–166.
20. Haines HH. 1984. Black radicalization and the funding of civil rights: 1957–1970. Social Problems 32(1): 31–43.
21. Harrison JS, Freeman RE. 1999. Stakeholders, social responsibility, and performance: empirical evidence and theoretical perspectives. Academy of Management Journal 42(5): 479–485.
22. Hart SL. 1995. The natural resource-based view of the firm. Academy of Management Review 20(4): 986–1014.
23. Henriques I, Sharma S. 2005. Pathways of stakeholder influence in the Canadian forestry industry. Business Strategy and the Environment 14: 384–398.
24. Hiatt SR, Sine WD, Tolbert PS. 2009. From pabst to pepsi: the deinstitutionalization of social practices and the creation of entrepreneurial opportunities. Administrative Science Quarterly 54(4): 635–667.
25. Hoffman AJ. 2009. Shades of green. Stanford Social Innovation Review 7(2): 40–49.
26. Jones TM. 1995. Instrumental stakeholder theory: a synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review 20(2): 404–437.
27. Kassinis G, Vafeas N. 2006. Stakeholder pressures and environmental performance. Academy of Management Journal 49(1): 145–159.
28. King BG. 2008. A political mediation model of corporate response to social movement activism. Administrative Science Quarterly 53(3): 395–421.
29. King AA, Lenox MJ. 2000. Industry self-regulation without sanctions: the chemical industry's responsible care program. Academy of Management Journal 43(4): 698–716.
30. King A, Lenox M. 2002. Exploring the locus of profitable pollution reduction. Management Science 48(2): 289–299.
31. King BG, McDonnell MH. 2015. Good firms, good targets: the relationship between corporate social responsibility, reputation, and activist targeting. In Corporate Social Responsibility in a Globalizing World: Toward Effective Global CSR Frameworks, Tsutsui K, Lim A (eds). Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK; 430–454.
32. King BG, Pearce NA. 2010. The contentiousness of markets: politics, social movements, and institutional change in markets. Annual Review of Sociology 36(1): 249–267.
33. King BG, Soule SA. 2007. Social movements as extra-institutional entrepreneurs: the effect of protests on stock price returns. Administrative Science Quarterly 52(3): 413–442.
34. Klassen RD, Whybark DC. 1999. The impact of environmental technologies on manufacturing performance. Academy of Management Journal 42(6): 599–615.
35. Lenox MJ. 2006. The role of private decentralized institutions in sustaining industry self-regulation. Organization Science 17(6): 677–690.
36. Lenox MJ, Eesley CE. 2009. Private environmental activism and the selection and response of firm targets. Journal of Economic Management Strategy 18(1): 45–73.
37. Lexis Nexis Academic. 2003. LexisNexis Universe: general news topics. Available at: http://www.lexisnexis.com/universe (accessed 26 November 2003).
38. Lyon T. 2010. Good Cop, Bad Cop: Environmental MGOs and Their Strategies toward Business. RFF Press: Washington, DC.
39. McAdam D, Su Y. 2002. The war at home: antiwar protests and congressional voting, 1965 to 1973. American Sociological Review, 696–721.
40. McDonnell MH, King B. 2013. Keeping up appearances reputational threat and impression management after social movement boycotts. Administrative Science Quarterly 58(3): 387–419.
41. Oliver PE, Maney GM. 2000. Political processes and local newspaper coverage of protest events: from selection bias to triadic interactions. American Journal of Sociology 106(2): 463–505.
42. Paul K, Lydenberg SD. 1992. Applications of corporate social monitoring systems; types, dimensions, and goals. Journal of Business Ethics 11(1): 1–10.
43. Rehbein K, Waddock S, Graves SB. 2004. Understanding shareholder activism: which corporations are targeted? Business and Society 43(3): 239–267.
44. Rojas F. 2006. Social movement tactics, organizational change and the spread of African-American studies. Social Forces 84(4): 2139–2158.
45. Rojas F. 2007. From Black Power to Black Studies: How a Radical Social Movement Became an Academic Discipline. Johns Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, MD.
46. Rowley TI, Moldoveanu M. 2003. When will stakeholder groups act? An interest-and identity-based model of stakeholder group mobilization. Academy of Management Review 28(2): 204–219.
47. Russo MV, Harrison NS. 2005. Organizational design and environmental performance: clues from the electronics industry. Academy of Management Journal 48(4): 582–593.
48. Sharma S, Henriques I. 2005. Stakeholder influences on sustainability practices in the Canadian forest products industry. Strategic Management Journal 26(2): 159–180.
49. Smith NC, Cooper-Martin E. 1997. Ethics and target marketing: the role of product harm and consumer vulnerability. Journal of Marketing 1-20.
50. Strickland D, Wiles KW, Zenner M. 1996. A requiem for the USA: is small shareholder monitoring effective? Journal of Financial Economics 40(2): 319–338.
51. Vasi IB, King BG. 2012. Social movements, risk perceptions, and economic outcomes the effect of primary and secondary stakeholder activism on firms' perceived environmental risk and financial performance. American Sociological Review 77(4): 573–596.
52. Walker ET, Martin AW, McCarthy JD. 2008. Confronting the state, the corporation, and the academy: the influence of institutional targets on social movement repertoires. American Journal of Sociology 114(1): 35–76.
53. Walls JL, Berrone P, Phan PH. 2012. Corporate governance and environmental performance: is there really a link? Strategic Management Journal 33: 885–913.
54. Walls JL, Phan PH, Berrone P. 2011. Measuring environmental strategy: construct development, reliability, and validity. Business and Society 50: 71–115.