Some companies have begun to take a stand on controversial social and political issues. These initiatives, which are defined as ‘corporate activism’, are part of a complex context that is characterised by distrust in public institutions and governments. This article analyses the impact of corporate activism on the financial returns of companies that have implemented it. Our contribution to the empirical research of corporate activism is to identify two variables not previously studied that have an influence on whether that impact is positive or negative. To this end, a wide sample of corporate activism cases were analysed using an event analysis approach to identify the effect of two key variables: (a) the controversial nature of the sector and (b) the type of activism. The results show that corporate activism actions have positive effects when the sector is not perceived as controversial, and negative when the type of activism is based on social rights. The findings provide managerial implications for marketing professionals and broaden the possibilities of corporate activism as long-term strategy.
AßländerM. S., & CurbachJ. (2014). The corporation as citoyen? Towards a new understanding of corporate citizenship. Journal of Business Ethics, 120(4), 541–554.
2.
AjzenI. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
3.
AjzenI. (2005). Attitudes, personality, and behavior. McGraw-Hill Education.
4.
AjzenI., & DriverB. L. (1992). Application of the theory of planned behavior to leisure choice. Journal of Leisure Research, 24(3), 207–224.
5.
AkerlofG. A., & DickensW. T. (1982). The economic consequences of cognitive dissonance. The American Economic Review, 72(3), 307–319.
6.
AltmanB. W., & Vidaver-CohenD. (2000). A framework for understanding corporate citizenship. Business and Society Review, 105(1), 1–8.
7.
AnkerT. B. (2017). Corporate democratic nation-building: Reflections on the constructive role of business in fostering global democracy. European Management Journal, 35(1), 1–7.
8.
AntoniouC., DoukasJ. A., & SubrahmanyamA. (2013). Cognitive dissonance, sentiment, and momentum. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 48(1), 245–275.
9.
AouadiA., & MarsatS. (2018). Do ESG controversies matter for firm value? Evidence from international data. Journal of Business Ethics, 151, 1027–1047.
10.
AustinL., GaitherB., & GaitherT. K. (2019). Corporate social advocacy as public interest communications: Exploring perceptions of corporate involvement in controversial social-political issues. The Journal of Public Interest Communications, 38(2), 3–3.
11.
Baksh-MohammedS., CallisonC., & ChoiM. H. (2012). Positive influence of organizational charitable involvement on perceptions of credibility and purchase intention. Public Relations Review, 38(3), 498–500.
12.
BartleyT., & ChildC. (2011). Movements, markets and fields: The effects of anti-sweatshop campaigns on U.S. firms, 1993–2000. Social Forces, 90(2), 425–451.
13.
BeauchampL. L., & O’ConnorA. (2012). America’s most admired companies: A descriptive analysis of CEO corporate social responsibility statements. Public Relations Review, 38(3), 494–497.
14.
BecchettiL., CicirettiR., & HasanI. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and shareholder’s value: An event study analysis(Working Paper). Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
15.
BedendoM., & SimingL. (2021). To advocate or not to advocate: Determinants and financial consequences of CEO activism. British Journal of Management, 32(4), 1062–1081.
16.
Bernal TriviñoA. I. (2015). Tecnología, redes sociales, política y periodismo: ¿Pluralidad informativa o efecto bumerán?Cuadernos. Info, 36, 191–205.
17.
BhagwatY., WarrenN., BeckJ., & Watson IVG. (2020). Corporate sociopolitical activism and firm value. Journal of Marketing, 84(5), 1–21.
18.
BhattacharyaC. B., & SenS. (2003). Consumer-company identification: A framework for understanding consumers relationships with companies. Journal of Marketing, 67(2), 76–88.
19.
BowmanE. H., & HaireM. (1975). A strategic posture toward corporate social responsibility. California Management Review, 18(2), 27–48.
20.
BrammerS., BrooksC., & PavelinS. (2006). Corporate social performance and stock returns: UK evidence from disaggregate measures. Financial Management, 35(3), 97–116.
21.
BrowerJ., & MahajanV. (2013). Driven to be good: A stakeholder theory perspective on the drivers of corporate social performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 117(2), 313–331.
22.
BrowningN., LeeE., ParkY. E., KimT., & CollinsR. (2020). Muting or meddling? Advocacy as a relational communication strategy affecting organization–Public relationships and stakeholder response. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 97(4), 1026–1053.
23.
ByrneE. (2010). The US military-industrial complex is circumstantially. Journal of Business Ethics, 95(2), 153–165.
24.
CaiY., JoH., & PanC. (2012). Doing well while doing bad? CSR in controversial industry sectors. Journal of Business Ethics, 108(4), 467–480.
25.
CarrollA. B. (1991). The pyramid of corporate social responsibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Business Horizons, 34(4), 39–48.
26.
ChatterjiA., & ToffelM. (2015). Starbucks’ ‘Race together’ campaign and the upside of CEO activism. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2015/03/starbucks-race-together-campaign-and-the-upside-of-ceo-activism
27.
ChatterjiA. K., & ToffelM. W. (2016). Do CEO activists make a difference? Evidence from a field experiment(Working Paper, 16–100). Harvard Business School.
28.
ChooT. H. (1964). Communicator credibility and communication discrepancy as determinants of opinion change. The Journal of Social Psychology, 64(1), 65–76.
29.
CiszekE., & LoganN. (2018) Challenging the dialogic promise: How Ben & Jerry’s support for Black lives matter fosters dissensus on social media. Journal of Public Relations Research, 30(3), 115–127. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2018.1498342
30.
CochranP. L., & WoodR. A. (1984). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 27(1), 42–56.
31.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (pp. 18–74). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
32.
ConnerM., & McMillanB. (1999). Interaction effects in the theory of planned behaviour: Studying cannabis use. British Journal of Social Psychology, 38(2), 195–222.
33.
CoombsW. T., & HolladayS. J. (2011). Managing corporate social responsibility: A communication approach. John Wiley.
34.
CorcoranM., NewmanK., & DevasagayamP. R. (2016). Consumer perception of corporate activism: Strategic implication for marketing. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 6(10), 52–61.
35.
CornwellT. B., & CooteL. V. (2005). Corporate sponsorship of a cause: The role of identification in purchase intent. Journal of Business Research, 58(3), 268–276.
36.
CovaB. (2020). To change the law, defy the law: Hijacking the cause and co-opting its advocate. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 39(4), 430–443.
37.
CutlerB. D., & MuehlingD. D. (1989). Advocacy advertising and the boundaries of commercial speech. Journal of Advertising, 18(3), 40–50.
38.
DavidP., KlineS., & DaiY. (2005). Corporate social responsibility practices, corporate identity, and purchase intention: A dual-process model. Journal of Public Relations Research, 17(3), 291–313.
39.
DavidsonW. N., & WorrelD. L. (1988). The impact of announcements of corporate illegalities on shareholder returns. Academy of Management Journal, 31(1), 195–200.
40.
DoddM. (2018). Globalization, pluralization, and erosion: The impact of shifting societal expectations for advocacy and public good. The Journal of Public Interest Communications, 2(2), 221–238.
41.
DoddM. D., & SupaD. W. (2014). Conceptualizing and measuring corporate social advocacy: Examining the impact on corporate financial performance. Public Relations Journal, 8(3), 2–23.
42.
DoddM. D., & SupaD. (2015). Testing the viability of corporate social advocacy as a predictor of purchase intention. Communication Research Reports, 32(4), 287–293.
43.
DozierD. M., & LauzenM. M. (2000). Liberating the intellectual domain from the practice: Public relations, activism, and the role of the scholar. Journal of Public Relations Research, 12(1), 3–22. https://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S1532754XJPRR1201_2
44.
DuhS. C. (2009). Good management, sound finances, and social responsibility: Two decades of US corporate insider perspectives on reputation and the bottom line. Public Relations Review, 35(1), 77–78.
45.
EastR. (1993). Investment decisions and the theory of planned behaviour. Journal of Economic Psychology, 14(2), 337–375.
46.
Edelman Trust Barometer. (2019). In brands we trust?Edelman Earned Brand.
47.
EilertM., & Nappier CherupA. (2020). The activist company: Examining a company’s pursuit of societal change through corporate activism using an institutional theoretical lens. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 39(4), 461–476.
48.
EllenP. S., WebbD. J., & MohrL. A. (2006). Building corporate associations: Consumer attributions for corporate socially responsible programs. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 34(2), 147–157.
49.
EriksenE., & WeigdrdJ. (2000). The end of citizenship? In McKinnonC. & Hampsher-MonkI. (Eds.), The demands of citizenship (pp. 13–24). Continuum.
50.
EyadaB. (2020). Brand activism, the relation and impact on consumer perception: A case study on Nike advertising. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 12(4), 30.
51.
FalkR. (2000). The decline of citizenship in an era of globalization. Citizenship Studies, 4(1), 5–17.
52.
FamaE. F. (1970). Efficient capital markets: A review of theory and empirical work*. The Journal of Finance, 25(2), 383–417.
FergusonM. A. (2018) Building theory in public relations: Interorganizational relationships as a public relations paradigm. Journal of Public Relations Research, 30(4), 164–178. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2018.1514810
55.
FestingerL. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance (Vol. 2). Stanford University Press.
56.
GodfreyP. C., MerrillC. B., & HansenJ. M. (2009). The relationship between corporate social responsibility and shareholder value: An empirical test of the risk management hypothesis. Strategic Management Journal, 30(4), 425–445.
57.
GoshK. (2017). Corporate reputation, social performance, and organizational variability in an emerging country perspective. Journal of Management & Organization, 23, 545–565.
58.
GriffinJ. J., & MahonJ. F. (1997). The corporate social performance and corporate financial performance debate: Twenty-five years of incomparable research. Business & Society, 36(1), 5–31.
59.
GrunigJ. E., & HuntT. (1984). Managing public relations. Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
60.
GuisanA., & ZimmermannN. E. (2000). Predictive habitat distribution models in ecology. Ecological Modelling, 135(2–3), 147–186.
61.
GuitartI. A., GonzalezJ., & StremerschS. (2018). Advertising non-premium products as if they were premium: The impact of advertising up on advertising elasticity and brand equity. International Journal of Research in Marketing, 35(3), 471–489.
62.
HadaniM., DohJ. P., & SchneiderM. (2019). Social movements and corporate political activity: Managerial responses to socially oriented shareholder activism. Journal of Business Research, 95, 156–170.
63.
HaleyE. (1996). Exploring the construct of organization as source: Consumers’ understandings of organizational sponsorship of advocacy advertising. Journal of Advertising, 25(2), 19–35.
64.
HeathR. L., & PalencharM. J. (2008). Strategic issues management: Organizations and public policy challenges. SAGE Publications.
65.
HertzN. (2002). The silent takeover: Global capitalism and the death of democracy(New Ed edition). Simon and Schuster; Arrow.
66.
HintereckerH., KopelM., & RessiA. (2018). CEO activism and supply chain interactions. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 89(1), 235–249.
67.
HmaittaneA., BouslahK., & M’ZaliB. (2019). Does corporate social responsibility affect the cost of equity in controversial industry sectors?Review of Accounting and Finance, 18(4), 635–662. https://doi.org/10.1108/RAF-09-2018-0184
68.
HollerJ. (2014). Event-study methodology and statistical significance (pp. 5–10). O1WIR Publisher for Economics, Computer Science and Law.
69.
HrubesD., AjzenI., & DaigleJ. (2001). Predicting hunting intentions and behavior: An application of the theory of planned behavior. Leisure Sciences, 23(3), 165–178.
70.
JoH., & NaH. (2012). Does CSR reduce firm risk? Evidence from controversial industry sectors. Journal of Business Ethics, 110, 441–456. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1492-2
71.
KangM., KimJ. R., & ChaH. (2018). From concerned citizens to activists: A case study of 2015 South Korean MERS outbreak and the role of dialogic government communication and citizens’ emotions on public activism. Journal of Public Relations Research, 30, 202–229. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2018.1536980
72.
KerlingerF. N. (1966). Foundations of behavioral research. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
73.
KilianT., & HennigsN. (2014). Corporate social responsibility and environmental reporting in controversial industries. European Business Review, 26(1), 79–101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EBR-04-2013-0080
74.
KimY. (2001). The impact of brand equity and the company’s reputation on revenues: Testing an IMC evaluation model. Journal of Promotion Management, 6(1–2), 89–111.
75.
KimJ. (2018). Why do people take to the streets? Understanding the multidimensional motivations of protesting publics. Public Relations Review, 44(4), 501–513. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.05.002
76.
KimJ.-N., & GrunigJ. E. (2011). Problem solving and communicative action: A situational theory of problem solving. Journal of Communication, 61(1), 120–149. https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcom.2011.61.issue-1
77.
KimS., & LeeY. J. (2012). The complex attribution process of CSR motives. Public Relations Review, 38(1), 168–170.
78.
KorschunD., RafieianH., AggarwalA., & SwainS. D. (2019). Taking a stand: Consumer responses when companies get (or don’t get) political (July 3, 2019). https://ssrn.com/abstract=2806476; http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2806476
79.
KotlerP., & SarkarC. (2018). Brand activism. From purpose to action. Idea Bite Press.
80.
Krebel-ChangK. (2017). Starbucks for president: The disappearing line between government and business as agents for social change. Revista Empresa y Humanismo, XX(1), 35–64.
81.
LaneV., & JacobsonR. (1995). Stock market reactions to brand extension announcements: The effects of brand attitude and familiarity. The Journal of Marketing, 59(1), 63–77.
82.
LeeD. H. (2015). An alternative explanation of consumer product returns from the postpurchase dissonance and ecological marketing perspectives. Psychology & Marketing, 32(1), 49–64.
83.
LeeT. M., & HutchisonP. D. (2005). The decision to disclose environmental information: A research review and agenda. Advances in Accounting, 1, 83–111.
84.
LeeK.-H., & ShinD. (2010). Consumers’ responses to CSR activities: The linkage between increased awareness and purchase intention. Public Relations Review, 36(2), 193–195.
85.
LeveneH. (1961). Robust tests for equality of variances. In OlkinI. (Ed.), Contributions to probability and statistics: Essays in honor of Harold hotelling (pp. 279–292). Stanford University Press.
86.
LinT. C. (2018). Incorporating social activism. Boston University Law Review, 98, 1535.
87.
MacInnisD. J., RaoA. G., & WeissA. M. (2002). Assessing when increased media weight of real-world advertisements helps sales. Journal of Marketing Research, 39(4), 391–407.
88.
MackeyA., MackeyT. B., & BarneyJ. B. (2007). Corporate social responsibility and firm performance: Investor preferences and corporate strategies. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 817–835.
89.
MaignanI., FerrellO. C., & HultG. T. M. (1999). Corporate citizenship: Cultural antecedents and business benefits. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(4), 455–469.
90.
MaonF., LindgreenA., & SwaenV. (2009). Designing and implementing corporate social responsibility: An integrative framework grounded in theory and practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 87(1), 71–89.
91.
MargolisJ. D., ElfenbeinH. A., & WalshJ. P. (2009). Does it pay to be good... and does it matter? A meta-analysis of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. SSRN Electronic Journal, 2009, 1–79.
92.
MarsdenC. (2000). The new corporate citizenship of big business: Part of the solution to sustainability?Business and Society Review, 105(1), 9–9.
93.
MarshallT. H. (1965). Class, citizenship, and social development, with and introduction by Seymour Martin Lipset. Doubleday.
94.
MattenD., & CraneA. (2005). Corporate citizenship: Toward an extended theoretical conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 166–179.
95.
MattenD., CraneA., & ChappleW. (2003). Behind the mask: Revealing the true face of corporate citizenship. Journal of Business Ethics, 45(1), 109–120.
96.
MayerD. (2017). The law and ethics of CEO social activism. Journal of Business Ethics, 23, 21.
97.
McCullaghP. (1984). Generalized linear models. European Journal of Operational Research, 16(3), 285–292.
98.
McGuireJ. B., SundgrenA., & SchneeweisT. (1988). Corporate social responsibility and firm financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 31(4), 854–872.
99.
McWilliamsA., & SiegelD. (1997). Event studies in management research: Theoretical and empirical issues. Academy of Management Journal, 40(3), 626–657.
100.
McWilliamsA., SiegelD., & TeohS. H. (1999). Issues in the use of the event study methodology: A critical analysis of corporate social responsibility studies. Organizational Research Methods, 2(4), 340–365.
101.
McWilliamsA., SiegelD. S., & WrightP. M. (2006). Corporate social responsibility: Strategic implications*. Journal of Management Studies, 43(1), 1–18.
102.
MukherjeeS., & AlthuizenN. (2020). Brand activism: Does courting controversy help or hurt a brand?International Journal of Research in Marketing, 37(4), 772–788.
103.
NelderJ. A., & BakerR. (1972). Generalized linear models. Wiley Online Library.
104.
NeureiterM., & BhattacharyaC. (2021). Why do boycotts sometimes increase sales? Consumer activism in the age of political polarization. Business Horizons, 64(5), 611–620. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2021.02.025
105.
OrlitzkyM., SchmidtF. L., & RynesS. L. (2003). Corporate social and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Organization Studies, 24(3), 403–441.
106.
ØstergaardP., HermansenJ., & FitchettJ. (2015). Structures of brand and anti-brand meaning: A semiotic square analysis of reflexive consumption. Journal of Brand Management, 22(1), 60–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/bm.2015.4
107.
PalazzoG., & BasuK. (2007). The ethical backlash of corporate branding. Journal of Business Ethics, 73(4), 333–346.
108.
PalazzoG., & RichterU. (2005). CSR business as usual? The case of the Tobacco Industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 61, 387–401.
109.
ParchaJ. M., & Kingsley WestermanC. Y. (2020). How corporate social advocacy affects attitude change toward controversial social issues. Management Communication Quarterly, 34(3), 350–383. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318920912196
110.
ParkD. J., & BergerB. K. (2004). The presentation of CEOs in the press, 1990–2000: Increasing salience, positive valence, and a focus on competency and personal dimensions of image. Journal of Public Relations Research, 16(1), 93–125.
111.
PelozaJ., WhiteK., & ShangJ. (2013). Good and guilt-free: The role of self-accountability in influencing preferences for products with ethical attributes. Journal of Marketing, 77(1), 104–119.
112.
RimH., LeeY., & YooS. (2020). Polarized public opinion responding to corporate social advocacy: Social network analysis of boycotters and advocators. Public Relations Review, 46(2), 101869.
113.
RobinsonS. R., IrmakC., & JayachandranS. (2012). Choice of cause in cause-related marketing. Journal of Marketing, 76(4), 126–139.
114.
RomanR. M., HayiborS., & AgleB. R. (1999). The relationship between social and financial performance: Repainting a portrait. Business & Society, 38(1), 109–125.
115.
SaeedA., BalochM. S., & RiazH. (2021). Global insights on TMT gender diversity in controversial industries: A legitimacy perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 179, 711–731. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10551-021-04849-6
116.
SamitasA., KenourgiosD., & ZounisP. (2008). Athens’ Olympic Games 2004 impact on sponsors’ stock returns. Applied Financial Economics, 18(19), 1569–1580.
117.
SchnietzK. E., & EpsteinM. J. (2005). Exploring the financial value of a reputation for corporate social responsibility during a crisis. Corporate Reputation Review, 7(4), 327–345.
118.
SchulerD. A., & CordingM. (2006). A corporate social performance corporate financial performance behavioral model for consumers. Academy of Management Review, 31(3), 540–558.
119.
SenS., & MorwitzV. G. (1996). Consumer reactions to a provider’s position on social issues: The effect of varying frames of reference. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 5(1), 27–48.
120.
ShapiroS. S., & WilkM. B. (1965). An analysis of variance test for normality (Complete Samples). Biometrika, 52(3/4), 591–611. https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2333709
121.
SimpsonW. G., & KohersT. (2002). The link between corporate social and financial performance: Evidence from the banking industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 35(2), 97–109.
122.
SuchmanM. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610.
123.
TrinksP. J., & ScholtensB. (2017). The opportunity cost of negative screening in socially responsible investing. Journal of Business Ethics, 140, 193–208.
124.
TsaiY. H., JoeS. W., LinC. P., ChiuC. K., & ShenK. T. (2015). Exploring corporate citizenship and purchase intention: Mediating effects of brand trust and corporate identification. Business Ethics: A European Review, 24(4), 361–377.
125.
TsoutsouraM. (2004). Corporate social responsibility and financial performance. Center for Responsible Business.
126.
UysalN. (2018). On the relationship between dialogic communication and corporate social performance: Advancing dialogic theory and research. Journal of Public Relations Research, 30(3), 100–114. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2018.1498344
127.
VilagaN., MonfortA., & Méndez-SuárezM. (2021). Value impact of corporate activism: Facebook and the stop hate for profit campaign. Journal of Business Research, 137, 319–326.
128.
VredenburgJ., KapitanS., SpryA., & KemperJ. A. (2020). Brands taking a stand: Authentic brand activism or woke washing?Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 39(4), 444–460.
129.
WallerD., FamK., & ErdoganB. (2005). Advertising of controversial products: A cross-cultural study. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 22(1), 6–13.
130.
WeinzimmerL. G., & EskenC. A. (2016). Risky business: Taking a stand on social issues. Business Horizons, 59(3), 331–337.
131.
Westermann-BehayloM. K., RehbeinK., & FortT. (2015). Enhancing the concept of corporate diplomacy: Encompassing political corporate social responsibility, international relations, and peace through commerce. Academy of Management Perspectives, 29(4), 387–404.
132.
WettsteinF., & BaurD. (2016). ‘Why should we care about marriage equality?’: Political advocacy as a part of corporate responsibility. Journal Business Ethics, 138, 199–213. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2631-3
133.
WilkinsS., BeckenuyteC., & ButtM. M. (2016). Consumer’s behavioural intentions after experiencing deception or cognitive dissonance caused by deceptive packaging, package downsizing or slack filling. European Journal of Marketing, 50(1), 213–235.
134.
WilsonA., & WestC. (1981). The marketing of ‘unmentionables’. Harvard Business Review, 51(1), 91–102.
135.
WoodD. J., & LogsdonJ. M. (2001). Theorising business citizenship. In AndriofJ. & McIntoshM. (Eds.), Perspectives of corporate citizenship (pp. 83–103). Greenleaf Publishing.
136.
YarivL. (2002). I’ll see it when I believe it? A simple model of cognitive consistency(Discussion Paper No. 1352). Cowles Foundation.
137.
ZyglidopoulosS. C. (2002). The social and environmental responsibilities of multinationals: Evidence from the Brent Spar case. Journal of Business Ethics, 36(1–2), 141–151.
