This paper examines how social activist tactics affect the diffusion of social-responsibility practices. Studying collegiate adoptions of a controversial supplier-sanction practice championed by anti-sweatshop activists, we compare how non-targeted organizations are influenced by different types of practice adoptions in their environment. Drawing on interorganizational learning theory, we argue and show that disruption-linked adoptions—those that occur following activists’ disruptive protests against the adopting organization—appear to be taken under coercive pressure and therefore provide non-targeted organizations with poor inferences about the merits of the practice. In contrast, strong inferences are provided by evidence-linked adoptions—those that occur after activists use evidence-based tactics with the adopting organization—and by independent adoptions occurring without any activism. Hence the contagious effect of independent and evidence-based adoptions is greater than that of disruption-linked adoptions. We further explore differences in receptivity to contagious influence, proposing that features of an organization and its proximal environment that increase issue salience also increase susceptibility to diffusion. Our findings demonstrate the importance of including non-targeted organizations in research on social movements and corporate social responsibility. They also offer a new vantage for interorganizational diffusion research, based on how activists and other third parties shape organizational decision makers’ inferences.
AbrahamsonE.RosenkopfL.1993 “Institutional and competitive bandwagons: Using mathematical modeling as a tool to explore innovation diffusion.” Academy of Management Review, 18: 487–517.
2.
AguileraR. V.RuppD. E.WilliamsC. A.GanapathiJ.2007 “Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: A multilevel theory of social change in organizations.” Academy of Management Review, 32: 836–863.
3.
AmentaE.CarruthersB.ZylanY.1992 “A hero for the aged? The Townsend movement, the political mediation model, and U.S. old-age policy, 1934–1950.” American Journal of Sociology, 98: 308–339.
4.
AndrewsK.BiggsM.2006 “The dynamics of protest diffusion: Movement organizations, social networks, and new media in the 1960 sit-ins.” American Sociological Review, 71: 752–777.
5.
BaronD. P.2001 “Private politics, corporate social responsibility, and integrated strategy.” Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 10: 7–46.
6.
BaronD. P.2003 “Private politics.” Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 12: 31–66.
7.
BartleyT.2005 “Corporate accountability and the privatization of labor standards: Struggles over codes of conduct in the apparel industry.” In PrechelH. (ed.), Research in Political Sociology, 14: 211–244. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
8.
BartleyT.2007 “Institutional emergence in an era of globalization: The rise of transnational private regulation of labor and environmental conditions.” American Journal of Sociology, 113: 297–351.
9.
BartleyT.ChildC.2011 “Movements, markets and fields: The effects of anti-sweatshop campaigns on U.S. firms, 1993–2000.” Social Forces, 90: 425–451.
10.
BaumJ. A.LiS. X.UsherJ. M.2000 “Making the next move: How experiential and vicarious learning shape the locations of chains’ acquisitions.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 45: 766–801.
11.
BenfordR. D.HuntS. A.1992 “Dramaturgy and social movements: The social construction and communication of power.” Sociological Inquiry, 62: 36–55.
12.
BenfordR. D.SnowD. A.2000 “Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment.” Annual Review of Sociology, 26: 11–39.
13.
BonacichE.AppelbaumR. P.2000Behind the Label: Inequality in the Los Angeles Apparel Industry. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
14.
BonardiJ.KeimG.2005 “Corporate political strategies for widely salient issues.” Academy of Management Review, 30: 555–576.
15.
BriscoeF.ChinM. K.HambrickD.2014 “CEO ideology as an element of the corporate opportunity structure for social activists.” Academy of Management Journal, 57: 1786–1809.
16.
BriscoeF.MurphyC.2012 “Sleight of hand? Practice opacity, third-party responses, and the interorganizational diffusion of controversial practices.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 57: 553–584.
17.
BriscoeF.SaffordS.2008 “The Nixon in China effect: Activism, imitation, and the institutionalization of contentious practices.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 53: 460–491.
18.
BundyJ.ShropshireC.BuchholtzA. K.2013 “Strategic cognition and issue salience: Towards an explanation of firm responsiveness to stakeholder concerns.” Academy of Management Review, 38: 352–376.
19.
BurnsL. R.WholeyD. R.1993 “Adoption and abandonment of matrix management programs: Effects of organizational characteristics and interorganizational networks.” Academy of Management Journal, 36: 106–138.
20.
ChristensenL. T.LangerR.2009 “Public relations and the strategic use of transparency: Consistency, hypocrisy, and corporate change.” In HeathR. L.TothE. L.WaymerD. (eds.), Rhetorical and Critical Approaches to Public Relations: 129–153. Hillsdale, NJ: Routledge.
21.
CreedW. E. D.ScullyM. A.AustinJ. R.2002 “Clothes make the person? The tailoring of legitimating accounts and the social construction of identity.” Organization Science, 13: 475–496.
22.
CyertR. M.MarchJ. G.1963A Behavioral Theory of the Firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
23.
DavisG. F.1991 “Agents without principles? The spread of the poison pill through the intercorporate network.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 36: 583–613.
24.
DavisG. F.GreveH. R.1997 “Corporate elite networks and governance changes in the 1980s.” American Journal of Sociology, 103: 1–37.
25.
DavisG. F.McAdamD.ScottW. R.ZaldM. N. (eds.) 2005Social Movements and Organization Theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.
26.
della PortaD.RuchtD.2002 “The dynamics of environmental campaigns.” Mobilization, 7: 1–14.
27.
DelmasM.ToffelM. W.2004 “Stakeholders and environmental management practices: An institutional framework.” Business Strategy and the Environment, 13: 209–222.
28.
den HondF.de BakkerF. G.2007 “Ideologically motivated activism: How activist groups influence corporate social change activities.” Academy of Management Review, 32: 901–924.
29.
DiMaggioP. J.PowellW. W.1983 “The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields.” American Sociological Review, 48: 147–160.
30.
EarlJ.KimportK.2011Digitally Enabled Social Change: Activism in the Internet Age. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
EsbenshadeJ.2004Monitoring Sweatshops: Workers, Consumers and the Global Apparel Industry. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
33.
FligsteinN.McAdamD.2012A Theory of Fields. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
34.
FissP. C.KennedyM. T.DavisG. F.2012 “How golden parachutes unfolded: Diffusion and variation of a controversial practice.” Organization Science, 23: 1077–1099.
35.
GabaV.TerlaakA.2013 “Decomposing uncertainty and its effects on imitation in firm exit decisions.” Organization Science, 24: 1847–1869.
36.
GamsonW. A.1968Power and Discontent. Homewood, IL: Dorsey.
37.
GetzK.1997 “Research in corporate political action: Integration and assessment.” Business and Society, 36: 1–24.
38.
GourmanJ.1998The Gourman Report: Undergraduate Programs. New York: Princeton Review.
39.
GrayB.PurdyJ. M.AnsariS.2015 “From interactions to institutions: Microprocesses of framing and mechanisms for the structuring of institutional fields.” Academy of Management Review, 40: 115–143.
40.
GreveH. R.1998 “Managerial cognition and the mimetic adoption of market positions: What you see is what you do.” Strategic Management Journal, 19: 967–988.
41.
GreveH. R.2005 “Interorganizational learning and heterogeneous social structure.” Organization Studies, 26: 1025–1047.
42.
GreveH. R.StrangD.TumaN. B.1995 “Specification and estimation of heterogeneous diffusion models.” Sociological Methodology, 25: 377–420.
43.
GusfieldJ. R.1981The Culture of Public Problems. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
44.
HainesH. H.1988Black Radicals and the Civil Rights Mainstream, 1954–1970. Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Press.
45.
HaunschildP. R.MinerA. S.1997 “Modes of interorganizational imitation: The effects of outcome salience and uncertainty.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 472–500.
46.
HavemanH. A.1993 “Follow the leader: Mimetic isomorphism and entry into new markets.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 38: 593–627.
47.
HavemanH. A.RaoH.ParuchuriS.2007 “The winds of change: The progressive movement and the bureaucratization of thrift.” American Sociological Review, 72: 117–142.
48.
HernesH.-K.MikalsenK.2002 “From protest to participation? Environmental groups and the management of marine fisheries.” Mobilization, 7: 15–28.
49.
HiattS. R.ParkS.2013 “Lords of the harvest: Third-party influence and regulatory approval of genetically modified organisms.” Academy of Management Journal, 56: 923–944.
50.
HiattS. R.SineW. D.TolbertP. S.2009 “From Pabst to Pepsi: The deinstitutionalization of social practices and the creation of entrepreneurial opportunities.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 54: 635–667.
51.
HwangH.PowellW. W.2009 “The rationalization of charity: The influences of professionalism in the nonprofit sector.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 54: 268–298.
52.
JenkinsJ. C.EckertC. M.1986 “Channeling black insurgency: Elite patronage and professional social movement organizations in the development of the black movement.” American Sociological Review, 51: 812–829.
53.
KatzensteinM.1998Faithful and Fearless: Moving Feminist Protest inside the Church and Military. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
54.
KelloggK. C.2009 “Operating room: Relational spaces and microinstitutional change in surgery.” American Journal of Sociology, 115: 657–711.
55.
KennedyM. T.FissP. C.2009 “Institutionalization, framing, and diffusion: The logic of TQM adoption and implementation decisions among U.S. hospitals.” Academy of Management Journal, 52: 897–918.
56.
KingB. G.2008 “A political mediation model of corporate response to social movement activism.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 53: 395–421.
57.
KingB. G.PearceN. A.2010 “The contentiousness of markets: Politics, social movements, and institutional change in markets.” Annual Review of Sociology, 36: 249–267.
58.
KraatzM. S.1998 “Learning by association? Interorganizational networks and adaptation to environmental change.” Academy of Management Journal, 41: 621–643.
59.
LevinthalD. A.MarchJ. G.1993 “The myopia of learning.” Strategic Management Journal, 14 (S2): 95–112.
60.
LipskyM.1968 “Protest as a political resource.” American Political Science Review, 62: 1144–1158.
61.
LockeR. M.QinF.BrauseA.2007 “Does monitoring improve labor standards? Lessons from Nike.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 61: 3–31.
62.
LounsburyM.VentrescaM.HirschP. M.2003 “Social movements, field frames and industry emergence: A cultural-political perspective on US recycling.” Socio-Economic Review, 1: 71–104.
63.
MarchJ. G.1991 “Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning.” Organization Science, 2: 71–87.
64.
MarchJ. G.SimonH. A.1958Organizations. New York: Wiley.
65.
McAdamD.1983 “Tactical innovation and the pace of insurgency.” American Sociological Review, 48: 735–754.
66.
McCarthyJ. D.WolfsonM.HarveyD. S.1987 “Chapter survey report: Project on the citizens movement against drunk driving.” Washington, DC: Center for the Study of Youth Development, Catholic University of America.
67.
McCarthyJ. D.ZaldM. N.1977 “Resource mobilization and social movements: A partial theory.” American Journal of Sociology, 82: 1212–1241.
68.
McCarthyM.2011 “Feds probe $4.5 billion college licensing industry.” USA Today, December1.
69.
McDonnellM. H.KingB.2013 “Keeping up appearances: Reputational threat and impression management after social movement boycotts.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 58: 387–419.
70.
MenaS.WaegerD.2014 “Activism for corporate responsibility: Conceptualizing private regulation opportunity structures.” Journal of Management Studies, 51: 1091–1117.
71.
MeyerD. S.WhittierN.1994 “Social movement spillover.” Social Problems, 41: 277–298.
72.
MeyerJ.RowanB.1977 “Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony.” American Journal of Sociology, 83: 340–363.
73.
MinerA. S.RaghavanS. V.1999 “Interorganizational imitation: A hidden engine of selection.” In McKelveyB.BaumJ. A. C. (eds.), Variations in Organization Science: In Honor of Donald T. Campbell: 35–62. London: Sage.
74.
MummendeyA.WenzelM.1999 “Social discrimination and tolerance in intergroup relations: Reactions to intergroup difference.” Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3: 158–174.
75.
OberschallA.1973Social Conflict and Social Movements. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
76.
ParkS.SineW. D.TolbertP. S.2011 “Professions, organizations, and institutions: Tenure systems in colleges and universities.” Work and Occupations, 38: 340–371.
77.
PerezG.2009 “Ignorance helps sweatshops to thrive: Wednesday night’s talk opened the annual Ludlow Memorial Labor Fest at CSU.” Pueblo Chieftain, April23.
78.
PollettaF.1998 “‘It was like a fever . . .’: Narrative and identity in social protest.” Social Problems, 45: 137–159.
79.
RaeburnN. C.2004Changing Corporate America from Inside Out: Lesbian and Gay Workplace Rights. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
80.
RaoH.GreveH. R.DavisG. F.2001 “Fool’s gold: Social proof in the initiation and abandonment of coverage by Wall Street analysts.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 46: 502–526.
81.
ReidE.ToffelM.2009 “Responding to public and private politics: Corporate disclosure of climate change strategies.” Strategic Management Journal, 30: 1157–1178.
82.
RheeM.KimY. C.HanJ.2006 “Confidence in imitation: Niche-width strategy in the UK automobile industry.” Management Science, 52: 501–513.
83.
RogersE. M.2003Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed.New York: Free Press.
84.
RojasF.2006 “Social movement tactics, organizational change and the spread of African American studies.” Social Forces, 84: 2139–2158.
85.
RosenE. I.2002Making Sweatshops: The Globalization of the U.S. Apparel Industry. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
86.
RossA.1997No Sweat: Fashion, Free Trade, and the Rights of Garment Workers. New York: Verso.
87.
RowleyT. J.MoldoveanuM.2003 “When will stakeholder groups act? An interest- and identity-based model of stakeholder group mobilization.” Academy of Management Review, 28: 204–219.
88.
SandersW. G.TuschkeA. C.2007 “The adoption of institutionally contested organizational practices: The emergence of stock option pay in Germany.” Academy of Management Journal, 50: 33–56.
89.
SchneibergM.2013 “Movements as political conditions for diffusion: Anti-corporate movements and the spread of cooperative forms in American capitalism.” Organization Studies, 34: 653–682.
90.
SchneibergM.BartleyT.2008 “Organizations, regulation, and economic behavior: Regulatory dynamics and forms from the nineteenth to twenty-first century.” Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 4: 31–61.
91.
SchneibergM.ClemensE. S.2006 “The typical tools for the job: Research strategies in institutional analysis.” Sociological Theory, 24: 195–227.
92.
SchneibergM.LounsburyM.2008 “Social movements and institutional analysis.” In GreenwoodR.OliverC.SuddabyR.Sahlin-AnderssonK. (eds.), Sage Handbook of Organizational Institutionalism: 648–670. London: Sage.
93.
SineW. D.LeeB. H.2009 “Tilting at windmills? The environmental movement and the emergence of the U.S. wind energy sector.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 54: 123–155.
94.
SnowD.RochfordE.WordenS.BenfordR.1986 “Frame alignment processes, micromobilization, and movement participation.” American Sociological Review, 51: 464–481.
95.
SouleS. A.1997 “The student divestment movement in the United States and tactical diffusion: The shantytown protest.” Social Forces, 75: 855–882.
96.
SouleS. A.2009Contention and Corporate Social Responsibility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
97.
SouleS. A.2012 “Targeting organizations: Private and contentious politics.” In CourpassonD.GolsorkhiD.SallazJ. J. (eds.), Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 34: 261–285. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.
98.
StillM. C.StrangD.2009 “Who does an elite organization emulate?” Administrative Science Quarterly, 54: 58–89.
99.
StrangD.MacyM. W.2001 “In search of excellence: Fads, success stories, and adaptive emulation.” American Journal of Sociology, 107: 147–182.
100.
StrangD.MeyerJ. W.1993 “Institutional conditions for diffusion.” Theory and Society, 22: 487–511.
101.
StrangD.SouleS. A.1998 “Diffusion in organizations and social movements: From hybrid corn to poison pills.” Annual Review of Sociology, 24: 265–290.
102.
StrangD.StillM. C.2004 “In search of the elite: Revising a model of adaptive emulation with evidence from benchmarking teams.” Industrial and Corporate Change, 13: 309–333.
103.
StrangD.StillM. C.2006 “Does ambiguity promote imitation, or hinder it? An empirical study of benchmarking teams.” European Management Review, 3: 101–112.
104.
StrangD.TumaN. B.1993 “Spatial and temporal heterogeneity in diffusion.” American Journal of Sociology, 99: 614–639.
105.
TaylorV.KimportK.Van DykeN.AndersenE. A.2009 “Culture and mobilization: Tactical repertoires, same-sex weddings, and the impact on gay activism.” American Sociological Review, 74: 865–890.
106.
TaylorV.Van DykeN.2004 “‘Get up, stand up’: Tactical repertoires of social movements.” In SnowD. A.SouleS. A.KriesiH. (eds.), The Blackwell Companion to Social Movements: 262–293. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
107.
TerlaakA.GongY.2008 “Vicarious learning and inferential accuracy in adoption processes.” Academy of Management Review, 33: 846–868.
108.
TimmermansS.EpsteinS.2010 “A world of standards but not a standard world: Toward a sociology of standards and standardization.” Annual Review of Sociology, 36: 69–89.
109.
TurnerJ. C.1991Social Influence. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
VasiB.WalkerE.2014 “No fracking way! Media activism, discursive opportunities and local opposition against hydraulic fracturing.” Paper presented at the American Sociological Association annual conference, San Francisco, August 15.
112.
WalkerE.MartinA.McCarthyJ. D.2008 “Confronting the state, the corporation and the academy: The influence of institutional targets on social movement repertoires.” American Journal of Sociology, 114: 35–76.
113.
WangD. J.SouleS. A.2012 “Social movement organizational collaboration: Networks of learning and the diffusion of protest tactics, 1960–1995.” American Journal of Sociology, 117: 1674–1722.
114.
WejnertB.2002 “Integrating models of diffusion of innovations: A conceptual framework.” Annual Review of Sociology, 28: 297–326.
115.
WestphalJ. D.GulatiR.ShortellS. M.1997 “Customization or conformity? An institutional and network perspective on the content and consequences of TQM adoption.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 42: 366–394.
116.
YueL. Q.RaoH.IngramP.2013 “Information spillovers from protests against corporations: A tale of Walmart and Target.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 58: 669–701
117.
ZietsmaC.McKnightB.2009 “Building the iron cage: Institutional creation work in the context of competing proto-institutions.” In LawrenceT. B.SuddabyR.LecaB. (eds.), Institutional Work: Actors and Agency in Institutional Studies of Organizations, 143–177. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
