Corporate political activity (CPA) has increased rapidly in the United States; however, research findings are spread across several social science fields. The authors use meta-analysis to aggregate findings involving two sets of research questions: (1) what factors and to what extent do these factors influence firms to engage in CPA, and (2) does CPA, in turn, affect firm performance and, if so, to what extent? Two important contributions are made. First, the evidence suggests that, although many factors shape CPA, very few affect CPA to a large extent. Second, the results suggest that CPA is positively related to firm performance and is an important determinant of firm performance. The authors build on this evidence to suggest several future research directions.
References marked with an asterisk indicate studies included in the meta-analysis.
2.
Aggarwal, V.K.2001. Corporate market and nonmarket strategies in Asia: A conceptual framework. Business and Politics, 3: 89-108.
3.
*Alt, J.E., Carlson, F., Heum, P., & Johansen, K.1999. Asset specificity and the political behavior of firms: Lobbying for subsidies in Norway. International Organization , 53: 99-116.
4.
*Andres, G.J.1985. Business involvement in campaign finance: Factors influencing the decision to form a corporate PAC. PS, 18: 213-220.
5.
Angell, M.2004. The truth about drug companies: How they deceive us and what to do about it. New York: Random House.
6.
Ansolabehere, S., De Figueiredo, J.M., & Snyder, J.M.2003. Why is there so little money in U.S. politics? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 17: 105-130.
7.
*Apollonio, D.E., & La Raja, R.J.2004. Who gave soft money? The effect of interest group resources on political contributions. Journal of Politics, 66: 1134-1154.
8.
Bacharach, S.B.1989. Organizational theories: Some criteria for evaluation . Academy of Management Review, 14: 496-515.
9.
Baron, D.P.1995. Integrated strategy: Market and nonmarket components. California Management Review, 37: 47-65.
10.
Baron, D.P.1997. Integrated strategy, trade policy, and global competition . California Management Review, 39: 145-169.
11.
Baumgartner, F., & Leech, B.2001. Interest niches and policy bandwagons: Patterns of interest group involvement in national politics. Journal of Politics , 63: 1191-1213.
12.
*Bhuyan, S.2000. Corporate political activities and oligopoly loss. Review of Industrial Organization, 17: 411-426.
13.
Blau, P.M.1964. Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley.
14.
Blumentritt, T.P.2003. Foreign subsidies’ government affairs activities: The influences of managers and resources. Business and Society , 42: 202-233.
15.
Boddewyn, J.J.2003. Understanding and advancing the concept of "nonmarket ." Business and Society, 42: 297-327.
16.
*Boies, J.L.1989. Money, business and the state: Material interests, Fortune 500 corporations, and the size of political action committees. American Sociological Review, 54: 821-833.
17.
Bonardi, J.-P., Hillman, A.J., & Keim, G.D.2005. The attractiveness of political markets: Implications for firm strategy. Academy of Management Review, 30: 397-413.
18.
*Bonardi, J.-P., Holburn, G.L.F., & Vanden Bergh, R.G.2006. Nonmarket strategy performance: Evidence from U.S. Electric Utilities. Academy of Management Journal, 49: 1209-1228.
19.
Buchanan, J.1975. The demand and supply of public goods. Chicago: Rand McNally.
20.
Center for Responsive Politics.2010. Business associations: Top contributors to candidates and parties. Retrieved from http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/contrib.php?cycle=2010&ind=N00 .
21.
*Chen, H., Parsley, D.C., & Yang, Y.2010. Corporate lobbying and financial performance. Working paper. Retrieved from SSRN, http://ssrn.com/abstract=1014264.
22.
Combs, J.G., Ketchen, D.J., Crook, T.R., & Roth, P. in press. Assessing cumulative evidence within "macro" research: Why meta-analysis should be preferred over vote counting. Journal of Management Studies. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00899.x
23.
*Cory, K.D.1995. Corporate political strategy as a competitive strategy: Influencing public policy to increase firm performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University.
24.
Crook, T.R., Ketchen, D.J., Combs, J.G., & Todd, S.Y.2008. Strategic resources and performance: A meta-analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 29: 1141-1154.
25.
Crook, T.R., Todd, S.Y., Combs, J.G., Woehr, D.J., & Ketchen, D.J. in press. Does human capital matter? A meta-analysis of the relationship between human capital and firm performance. Journal of Applied Psychology.
26.
Cropanzano, R., & Mitchell, M.S.2005. Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31: 874-900.
27.
*Darves-Bornoz, D.Y.2006. Corporate trade policy activism: Network and organizational determinates. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon.
28.
*De Figueiredo, J.M., & Silverman, B.S.2006. Academic earmarks and the returns to lobbying. Journal of Law and Economics, 49: 597-626.
29.
*De Figueiredo, J.M., & Tiller, E.H.2001. The structure and conduct of corporate lobbying: How firms lobby the Federal Trade Commission. Journal of Economics and Managerial Strategy, 10: 91-122.
30.
Deephouse, D.L.2000. Media reputation as a strategic resource: An integration of mass communication and resource-based theories. Journal of Management, 26: 1091-1112.
31.
DiMaggio, P., & Powell, W.1983. The iron cage revisited: Institutionalized isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociology Review, 48: 147-160.
32.
*Drope, J.M., & Hansen, W.L.2006. Does firm size matter? Analyzing business lobbying in the United States. Business and Politics, 8: 1-18.
33.
Epstein, E.1969. The corporation in American politics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
34.
*Esty, D.C., & Caves, R.E.1983. Market structure and political influence. Economic Inquiry, 21: 24-38.
35.
*Evans, D.1988. Oil PACs and aggressive contribution strategies. Journal of Politics, 50: 1047-1056.
36.
Freeman, R.E.1984. Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman.
37.
Getz, K.1997. Research in corporate political activity: Integration and assessment. Business and Society, 36: 32-77.
38.
Getz, K.1998. Corporate political activity bibliography. In J. E. Post (Ed.), Research in corporate social performance and policy, vol. 15: 187-206. Stamford, CT: JAI.
39.
Geyskens, I., Krishnan, R., Steenkamp, J.E.M., & Cunha, P.V.2009. A review and evaluation of meta-analysis practices in management research. Journal of Management, 35: 393-419.
40.
Geyskens, I., Steenkamp, J.B., & Kumar, N.2006. Make, buy, or ally: A transaction cost theory meta-analysis . Academy of Management Journal, 49: 519-543.
41.
Glass, G.V.1976. Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher, 5(10): 3-8.
42.
*Gray, V., & Lowery, D.1997. Reconceptualizing PAC formation: It’s not a collective action problem, and it may be an arms race. American Politics Quarterly, 25: 319-346.
43.
*Grier, K.B., & Munger, M.C.1993. Comparing interest group PAC contributions to House and Senate incumbents, 1980-1986. Journal of Politics, 55: 615-643.
44.
*Grier, K.B., Munger, M.C., & Roberts, B.E.1991. The industrial organization of corporate political participation . Southern Economic Journal, 57: 727-738.
45.
*Grier, K.B., Munger, M.C., & Roberts, B.E.1994. The determinants of industrial political activity, 1978-1986 . American Political Science Review, 88: 911-926.
46.
*Hansen, W., & Mitchell, N.2000. Disaggregating and explaining corporate political activity: Domestic and foreign corporations in national politics. American Political Science Review, 94: 891-903.
47.
*Hansen, W., & Mitchell, N.2001. Globalization or national capitalism: Large firms, national strategies and political activities. Business and Politics , 3: 5-19.
48.
*Hart, D.M.2001. Why do some firms give? Why do some give a lot? High-tech PACs, 1977-1996. Journal of Politics, 63: 1230-1249.
49.
*Hersch, P., & McDougall, G.2000. Determinants of PAC contributions to house incumbents: Own versus rival effects. Public Choice, 104: 329-343.
50.
Hillman, A.J., & Hitt, M.A.1999. Corporate political strategy formulation: A model of approach, participation and strategy decisions. Academy of Management Review, 24: 825-842.
51.
Hillman, A.J., & Keim, G.D.1995. International variation in the business-government interface: Institutional and organizational considerations. Academy of Management Review, 20: 193-214.
52.
Hillman, A.J., Keim, G.D., & Schuler, D.2004. Corporate political activity: A review and research agenda . Journal of Management, 30: 837-858.
53.
Hillman, A.J., Zardkoohi, A., & Bierman, L.1999. Corporate political strategies and firm performance: Indications of firm-specific benefits from personal service in the U.S. government. Strategic Management Journal, 20: 67-81.
54.
Hoeffler, S., & Keller, K.L.2002. Building brand equity through corporate societal marketing . Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 21: 78-89.
55.
*Hojnacki, M., & Kimball, D.C.1999. The who and how of organizations’ lobbying strategies in committee. Journal of Politics, 61: 999-1024.
56.
Hunter, J.E., & Schmidt, F.L.1990. Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
57.
Hunter, J.E., & Schmidt, F.L.2004. Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
58.
Kaiser, R.G.2009. So damn much money: The triumph of lobbying and the corrosion of American government. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
59.
Kalt, J.P., & Zupan, M.A.1984. Capture and ideology in the economic theory of politics . American Economic Review, 74: 279-300.
60.
Keim, G.2001. Business and public policy: Competing in the political marketplace. In M. A. Hitt, R. E. Freeman, & J. S. Harrison (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of strategic management : 583-601. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
61.
*Keim, G.D., & Zardkoohi, A.1988. Looking for leverage in PAC markets: Corporate and labor contributions considered. Public Choice, 58: 21-34.
62.
*Kelly, G.W., Hill, M.D., & Van Ness, R.A.2010. Determinants and effects of corporate lobbying. Working paper. Retrieved from SSRN , http://ssrn.com/abstract=1420224.
63.
*Kim, J.H.2008. Corporate lobbying revisited. Business and Politics, 10: 1-23.
*Lord, M.D.1995. An agency theory assessment of the influence of corporate grassroots political activism. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Academy of Management, Vancouver , Canada.
66.
*Lux, S.2008. Nonmarket effects on strategic fit and performance: An economic institutional change perspective. Unpublished doctoral dissertation , Florida State University, Tallahassee .
67.
Mahon, J.F., & McGowan, R.A.1996. Industry as a player in the political and social arena: Defining the competitive environment. Westport, CT: Quorum.
68.
*Marsh, S.J.1998. Creating barriers to foreign competitors: A study of the impact of anti-dumping actions on the performance of U.S. firms. Strategic Management Journal, 19: 25-37.
69.
*Martin, C.1995. Nature or nurture? Sources of preference for National Health Reform. American Political Science Review, 89: 898-913.
70.
*Masters, M.F., & Baysinger, B.D.1985. The determinants of funds raised by corporate political action committees: An empirical examination . Academy of Management Journal, 28: 654-664.
71.
*Masters, M.F., & Keim, G.D.1985. Determinants of PAC participation among large corporations . Journal of Politics, 47: 1158-1173.
72.
*Masters, M.F., & Zardkoohi, A.1986. The determinants of labor PAC allocations to legislators . Industrial Relations, 25: 328-338.
73.
Mayhew, D.R.1974. Congress: The electoral connections. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
74.
*McKeown, T.J.1994. The epidemiology of corporate PAC formation, 1975-84. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organizations, 24: 153-168.
75.
Meon, P.-G., Sekkat, K., & Weill, L.2009. Institutional changes now and benefits tomorrow: How soon is tomorrow?Economics and Politics, 21: 319-358.
76.
Meyer, J., & Rowan, B.1977. Institutional organizations: Formal structures as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83: 340-363.
77.
Miles, R.H.1987. Managing the corporate social environment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
78.
*Mitchell, N.J., Hansen, W.L., & Jepsen, E.M.1997. The determinants of domestic and foreign corporate political activity. Journal of Politics, 59: 1096-1113.
79.
Moran, T.1985. MNC’s: The political economy of FDI. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
80.
*Myers, B.W.2006. Corporate political activity and asset pricing. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University.
81.
North, D.C.1990. Institutions, institutional change, and economic performance . Oxford, UK: Cambridge University Press.
82.
Oliver, C.1991. Strategic responses to institutional processes. Academy of Management Review, 16: 145-179.
83.
Oliver, C., & Holzinger, I.2008. The effectiveness of strategic political management: A dynamic capabilities framework. Academy of Management Review , 33: 496-520.
84.
Olson, M.1965. The logic of collective action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
85.
Peng, M.W., Sun, S.L., Pinkham, B., & Chen, H.2009. The institution-based view as a third leg of a strategy tripod. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23: 63-81.
86.
Peterson, R.A., & Brown, S.P.2005. On the use of beta coefficients in meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90: 175-181.
87.
Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G.R.1978. The external control of organizations . New York: Harper & Row.
88.
*Pittman, R.1976. The effects of industry concentration and regulation on contributions in three 1972 U.S. Senate campaigns. Public Choice, 27: 71-80.
89.
*Pittman, R.1977. Market structure and campaign contributions. Public Choice, 31: 37-51.
90.
*Sadrieh, F.1997. The determinants of corporate lobbying participation and intensity: An exploratory study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Temple University, Philadelphia.
91.
Saiia, D.H., Carroll, A.B., & Buchholtz, A.K.2003. Philanthropy as strategy . Business and Society, 42: 169-201.
92.
*Salamon, L.M., & Siegried, J.J.1977. Economic power and political influence: The impact of industry structure on public policy. American Political Science Review, 71: 1026-1043.
93.
*Schuler, D.1996. Corporate political strategy and foreign competition: The case of the steel industry. Academy of Management Journal , 39: 720-737.
94.
Schuler, D.A.1999. Corporate political action: Rethinking the economic and institutional influences. Business and Politics, 1: 83-97.
95.
Schuler, D.A., & Rehbein, K.1997. The filtering role of the firm in corporate political involvement. Business and Society, 36: 116-139.
96.
*Schuler, D.A., Rehbein, K., & Cramer, R.2002. Pursuing strategic advantage through political means: A multi-variate approach. Academy of Management Journal, 45: 659-672.
97.
Selznick, P.1957. Leadership in administration. New York : Harper & Row.
98.
*Staber, U., & Scheafer, N.V.1987. An empirical investigation of determinants of trade association political activity. In Academy of Management Best Paper Proceedings. Briarcliff Manor, NY:Academy of Management.
99.
Stigler, G.J.1971. The theory of economic regulation. Bell Journal of Economics and Management Sciences, 2: 3-21.
100.
*Stratmann, T.1991. What do campaign contributions buy? Deciphering causal effects of money and votes. Southern Economic Journal, 57: 606-620.
101.
*Taylor, D.F.1997. The relationship between firm investments in technology innovation and political action. Southern Economic Journal , 63: 888-903.
102.
*Tripathi, M.2000. PAC contributions and defense contracting. Business and Politics, 2: 53-73.
103.
*Vanden Bergh, R.G., & Holburn, G.L.F.2007. Targeting corporate political strategy: Theory and evidence from the U.S. accounting industry. Business and Politics, 9: 1-33.
104.
Whitener, E.1990. Confusion of confidence intervals and credibility intervals in meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75: 315-321.
105.
Yoffie, D.B.1987. Corporate strategies for political action: A rational model. In A. A. Marcus, A. M. Kaufman, & D. R. Beam (Eds.), Business strategy and public policy: 43-60. New York: Quorum.
106.
*Zardkoohi, A.1985. On the political participation of the firm in the electoral process. Southern Economic Journal, 51: 804-817.
