Firms are increasingly held accountable for their suppliers’ environmental misconduct and often face significant stakeholder pressure to respond or even end their affiliations with misbehaving suppliers. Despite the importance of the subject, we know little about antecedents to supplier exclusion. In this article, we build on the assumption of stakeholder expectations being a core mechanism—and adopt an expectancy-violation theory lens. Drawing also on complementary insights into signaling theory, we argue that the severity of the misconduct affects the decision to cut ties. Furthermore, we argue that the engagement in environmental partnerships of client firms as well as suppliers moderates this relationship. To test our hypotheses, we use a unique sample of 434 client firm–supplier dyads, including 27 focal firms pressured by Greenpeace to remove “dirty” palm oil suppliers, accused of illegal deforestation. The study’s findings provide contributions to several literature streams related to inter-organizational dynamics and environmental sustainability.
BasdeoD. K.SmithK. G.GrimmC. M.RindovaV. P.DerfusP. J. (2006). The impact of market actions on firm reputation. Strategic Management Journal, 27(12), 1205–1219.
6.
BaurD.PalazzoG. (2011). The moral legitimacy of NGOs as partners of corporations. Business Ethics Quarterly, 21(4), 579–604.
7.
BaurD.SchmitzH. P. (2012). Corporations and NGOs: When accountability leads to co-optation. Journal of Business Ethics, 106(1), 9–21.
8.
BettencourtB. A.DillK. E.GreathouseS. A.CharltonK.MulhollandA. (1997). Evaluations of ingroup and outgroup members, The role of category-based expectancy violation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33(3), 244–275.
9.
BitzerV.GlasbergenP. (2015). Business-NGO partnerships in global value chains: Part of the solution or part of the problem of sustainable change?Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 12, 35–40.
10.
BruyakaO.PhilippeD.CastañerX. (2018). Run away or stick together? The impact of organization-specific adverse events on alliance partner defection. Academy of Management Review, 43(3), 445–469.
11.
BundyJ.IqbalF.PfarrerM. D. (2021). Reputations in flux: How a firm defends its multiple reputations in response to different violations. Strategic Management Journal, 42(6), 1109–1138.
12.
BundyJ.PfarrerM. D. (2015). A burden of responsibility: The role of social approval at the onset of a crisis. Academy of Management Review, 40(3), 345–369.
13.
BundyJ.PfarrerM. D.ShortC. E.CoombsW. T. (2017). Crises and crisis management: Integration, interpretation, and research development. Journal of Management, 43(6), 1661–1692.
14.
BurgoonJ. K. (1978). A communication model of personal space violation: Explication and an initial test. Human Communication Research, 4(2), 129–142.
15.
BurgoonJ. K. (1993). Interpersonal expectations, expectancy violations, and emotional communication. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 12(1–2), 30–48.
16.
BusseC.KachA. P.BodeC. (2016). Sustainability and the false sense of legitimacy: How institutional distance augments risk in global supply chains. Journal of Business Logistics, 37(4), 312–328.
17.
CameronA. C.GelbachJ. B.MillerD. L. (2011). Robust inference with multiway clustering. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 29(2), 238–249.
18.
CarrollW. K.RatnerR. S. (1999). Media strategies and political projects: A comparative study of social movements. Canadian Journal of Sociology/Cahiers canadiens de sociologie, 24(1), 1–34.
19.
ChoM.ParkS.-Y.KimS. (2021). When an organization violates public expectations: A comparative analysis of sustainability communication for corporate and nonprofit organizations. Public Relations Review, 47(1), Article 101928.
20.
ClarkeT.BoersmaM. (2017). The governance of global value chains: Unresolved human rights, environmental and ethical dilemmas in the apple supply chain. Journal of Business Ethics, 143(1), 111–131.
21.
ComynsB.Franklin-JohnsonE. (2018). Corporate reputation and collective crises: A theoretical development using the case of Rana Plaza. Journal of Business Ethics, 150(1), 159–183.
22.
ConnellyB. L.CertoS. T.IrelandR. D.ReutzelC. R. (2011). Signaling theory: A review and assessment. Journal of Management, 37(1), 39–67.
23.
CoombsW. T. (1995). Choosing the right words: The development of guidelines for the selection of the “appropriate” crisis-response strategies. Management Communication Quarterly, 8(4), 447–476.
24.
CoombsW. T. (2007). Protecting organization reputations during a crisis: The development and application of situational crisis communication theory. Corporate Reputation Review, 10(3), 163–176.
25.
CoombsW. T.HolladayS. J. (2002). Helping crisis managers protect reputational assets initial tests of the situational crisis communication theory. Management Communication Quarterly, 16(2), 165–186.
26.
CoombsW. T.HolladayS. J. (2006). Unpacking the halo effect: Reputation and crisis management. Journal of Communication Management, 10, 123–137.
27.
CoombsW. T.HolladayS. J. (2015). CSR as crisis risk: Expanding how we conceptualize the relationship. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 20(2), 144–162.
28.
CottleS. (2008). Reporting demonstrations: The changing media politics of dissent. Media, Culture & Society, 30(6), 853–872.
29.
DacinM. T.OliverC.RoyJ. P. (2007). The legitimacy of strategic alliances: An institutional perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 28(2), 169–187.
30.
DaiJ.CantorD. E.MontabonF. L. (2015). How environmental management competitive pressure affect a focal firm’s environmental innovation activities: A green supply chain perspective. Journal of Business Logistics, 36(3), 242–259.
31.
DangelicoR. M. (2016). Green product innovation: Where we are and where we are going. Business Strategy and the Environment, 25(8), 560–576.
32.
De BakkerF. G. A.RascheA.PonteS. (2019). Multi-stakeholder initiatives on sustainability: A cross-disciplinary review and research agenda for business ethics. Business Ethics Quarterly, 29(3), 343–383.
33.
DeckerW. H. (2012). A firm’s image following alleged wrongdoing: Effects of the firm’s prior reputation and response to the allegation. Corporate Reputation Review, 15(1), 20–34.
34.
De MarchiV. (2012). Environmental innovation and R&D cooperation: Empirical evidence from Spanish manufacturing firms. Research Policy, 41(3), 614–623.
35.
del RíoP.PeñascoC.Romero-JordánD. (2015). Distinctive features of environmental innovators: An econometric analysis. Business Strategy and the Environment, 24(6), 361–385.
36.
Den HondF.De BakkerF. G. (2007). Ideologically motivated activism: How activist groups influence corporate social change activities. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 901–924.
37.
DohJ. P.HowtonS. D.HowtonS. W.SiegelD. S. (2010). Does the market respond to an endorsement of social responsibility? The role of institutions, information, and legitimacy. Journal of Management, 36(6), 1461–1485.
38.
EesleyC.LenoxM. J. (2006). Firm responses to secondary stakeholder action. Strategic Management Journal, 27(8), 765–781.
39.
Egels-ZandénN.WahlqvistE. (2007). Post-partnership strategies for defining corporate responsibility: The business social compliance initiative. Journal of Business Ethics, 70(2), 175–189.
40.
EiseneggerM.SchranzM. (2011). Reputation management and corporate social responsibility. In IhlenØ.BartlettJ.MayS.(Eds.), The handbook of communication and corporate social responsibility (pp. 129–146). Wiley-Blackwell.
41.
EtzionD. (2007). Research on organizations and the natural environment, 1992-present: A review. Journal of Management, 33(4), 637–664.
42.
EyermanR.JamisonA. (1989). Environmental knowledge as an organizational weapon: The case of Greenpeace. Social Science Information, 28(1), 99–119.
43.
FreemanR. E.HarrisonJ. S.ZyglidopoulosS. (2018). Stakeholder theory. Cambridge University Press.
44.
GaoH.KnightJ. G.ZhangH.MatherD.TanL. P. (2012). Consumer scapegoating during a systemic product-harm crisis. Journal of Marketing Management, 28(11–12), 1270–1290.
45.
GattoM.WollniM.QaimM. (2015). Oil palm boom and land-use dynamics in Indonesia: The role of policies and socioeconomic factors. Land Use Policy, 46, 292–303.
46.
GomulyaD.JinK.LeeP. M.PollockT. G. (2019). Crossed wires: Endorsement signals and the effects of IPO firm delisting on venture capitalists’ reputations. Academy of Management Journal, 62(3), 641–666.
47.
GovindanK.RajendranS.SarkisJ.MurugesanP. (2015). Multi criteria decision making approaches for green supplier evaluation and selection: A literature review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 98, 66–83.
48.
GrayB.StitesJ. P. (2013). Sustainability through partnerships. Capitalizing on collaboration. Network for Business Sustainability.
49.
GreveH. R.PalmerD.PoznerJ. E. (2010). Organizations gone wild: The causes, processes, and consequences of organizational misconduct. Academy of Management Annals, 4(1), 53–107.
50.
HajmohammadS.VachonS. (2016). Mitigation, avoidance, or acceptance? Managing supplier sustainability risk. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 52(2), 48–65.
51.
HartmannJ.MoellerS. (2014). Chain liability in multitier supply chains? Responsibility attributions for unsustainable supplier behavior. Journal of Operations Management, 32(5), 281–294.
52.
HashemiS. H.KarimiA.TavanaM. (2015). An integrated green supplier selection approach with analytic network process and improved Grey relational analysis. International Journal of Production Economics, 159, 178–191.
53.
HeathR. L. (1998). New communication technologies: An issues management point of view. Public Relations Review, 24(3), 273–288.
54.
HerselM. C.HelmuthC. A.ZornM. L.ShropshireC.RidgeJ. W. (2019). The corrective actions organizations pursue following misconduct: A review and research agenda. Academy of Management Annals, 13(2), 547–585.
55.
HoetkerG. (2007). The use of logit and probit models in strategic management research: Critical issues. Strategic Management Journal, 28(4), 331–343.
56.
HofmannH.BusseC.BodeC.HenkeM. (2014). Sustainability-related supply chain risks: Conceptualization and management. Business Strategy and the Environment, 23(3), 160–172.
57.
JamaliD.KeshishianT. (2009). Uneasy alliances: Lessons learned from partnerships between businesses and NGOs in the context of CSR. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(2), 277–295.
58.
JensenM. (2006). Should we stay or should we go? Accountability, status anxiety, and client defections. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51(1), 97–128.
59.
JeongY.SiegelJ. I.ChenS. Y.NeweyW. K. (2020). A recentering approach for interpreting interaction effects from logit, probit, and other nonlinear models. Strategic Management Journal, 41(11), 2072–2091.
60.
JonssonS.GreveH. R.Fujiwara-GreveT. (2009). Undeserved loss: The spread of legitimacy loss to innocent organizations in response to reported corporate deviance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54(2), 195–228.
61.
KimS.KrishnaA.DhaneshG. (2019). Economics or ethics? Exploring the role of CSR expectations in explaining consumers’ perceptions, motivations, and active communication behaviors about corporate misconduct. Public Relations Review, 45(1), 76–87.
62.
KimY.WooC. W. (2019). The buffering effects of CSR reputation in times of product-harm crisis. Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 24(1), 21–43.
63.
KingA. A.LenoxM. J.BarnettM. L. (2002). Strategic responses to the reputation commons problem. In HoffmanA. J.VentrescaM. J. (Eds.), Organizations, policy, and the natural environment: Institutional and strategic perspectives (pp. 393–406). Stanford University Press.
64.
KleinJ. G.SmithN. C.JohnA. (2004). Why we boycott: Consumer motivations for boycott participation. Journal of Marketing, 68(3), 92–109.
65.
LaariS.TöyliJ.OjalaL. (2018). The effect of a competitive strategy and green supply chain management on the financial and environmental performance of logistics service providers. Business Strategy and the Environment, 27(7), 872–883.
66.
LaFranceJ.LehmannM. (2005). Corporate awakening–Why (some) corporations embrace public–private partnerships. Business Strategy and the Environment, 14(4), 216–229.
67.
LauferD.GillespieK.McBrideB.GonzalezS. (2005). The role of severity in consumer attributions of blame: Defensive attributions in product-harm crises in Mexico. Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 17(2–3), 33–50.
68.
LauferD.WangY. (2018). Guilty by association: The risk of crisis contagion. Business Horizons, 61(2), 173–179.
69.
LeeK.-H.KimJ.-W. (2011). Integrating suppliers into green product innovation development: An empirical case study in the semiconductor industry. Business Strategy and the Environment, 20(8), 527–538.
70.
LinH. (2012). Cross-sector alliances for corporate social responsibility. Partner heterogeneity moderates environmental strategy outcomes. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(2), 219–229.
71.
LöfstedtR. E.RennO. (1997). The Brent Spar controversy: An example of risk communication gone wrong. Risk Analysis, 17(2), 131–136.
72.
MacKayB.MunroI. (2012). Information warfare and new organizational landscapes: An inquiry into the ExxonMobil–Greenpeace dispute over climate change. Organization Studies, 33(11), 1507–1536.
73.
MaranoV.TashmanP. (2012). MNE/NGO partnerships and the legitimacy of the firm. International Business Review, 21(6), 1122–1130.
74.
MelanderL. (2017). Achieving sustainable development by collaborating in green product innovation. Business Strategy and the Environment, 26(8), 1095–1109.
75.
MeleV.SchepersD. H. (2013). E Pluribus Unum? Legitimacy issues and multi-stakeholder codes of conduct. Journal of Business Ethics, 118(3), 561–576.
76.
MendenhallW.SincichT. T. (1986). A second course business statistics: Regression. Macmillan.
77.
MeschiP.-X.Norheim-HansenA. (2020). Partner-diversity effects on alliance termination in the early stage of green alliance formation: Empirical evidence from carbon-emission reduction projects in Latin America. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29(1), 250–261.
78.
MoogS.SpicerA.BöhmS. (2015). The politics of multi-stakeholder initiatives: The crisis of the Forest Stewardship Council. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(3), 469–493.
79.
Murillo-LunaJ. L.Garcés-AyerbeC.Rivera-TorresP. (2008). Why do patterns of environmental response differ? A stakeholders’ pressure approach. Strategic Management Journal, 29(11), 1225–1240.
NalickM.KubanS.HillA. D.RidgeJ. W. (2020). Too hot to handle and too valuable to drop: An expanded conceptualization of firms’ reactions to exchange partner misconduct. Academy of Management Journal, 63(6), 1976–2003.
82.
NaumovskaI.LavieD. (2021). When an industry peer is accused of financial misconduct: Stigma versus competition effects on non-accused firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 66(4), 1130–1172. https://doi.org/10.1177/00018392211020662
83.
NielsenI. E.BanaeianN.GolińskaP.MobliH.OmidM. (2014). Green supplier selection criteria: From a literature review to a flexible framework for determination of suitable criteria. In GolinskaP. (Ed.), Logistics operations, supply chain management and sustainability (pp. 79–99). Springer.
84.
NijhofA.de BruijnT.HondersH. (2008). Partnerships for corporate social responsibility: A review of concepts and strategic options. Management Decision, 46(1), 152–167.
85.
Norheim-HansenA.MeschiP.-X. (2021). De-escalate commitment? Firm responses to the threat of negative reputation spillovers from alliance partners’ environmental misconduct. Journal of Business Ethics, 173(3), 599–616.
86.
NortonE. C.WangH.AiC. (2004). Computing interaction effects and standard errors in logit and probit models. The Strata Journal, 4(2), 154–167.
87.
OetzelJ.DohJ. P. (2009). MNEs and development: A review and reconceptualization. Journal of World Business, 44(2), 108–120.
88.
ParkB.RoganM. (2019). Capability reputation, character reputation and exchange partners’ reactions to adverse events. Academy of Management Journal, 62(2), 553–578.
89.
ParmigianiA.KlassenR. D.RussoM. V. (2011). Efficiency meets accountability: Performance implications of supply chain configuration, control, and capabilities. Journal of Operations Management, 29(3), 212–223.
90.
ParuchuriS.HanJ.-H.PrakashP. (2021). Salient expectations? Incongruence across capability and integrity signals and investor reactions to organizational misconduct. Academy of Management Journal, 64(2), 562–586.
91.
ParuchuriS.MisangyiV. F. (2015). Investor perceptions of financial misconduct: The heterogeneous contamination of bystander firms. Academy of Management Journal, 58(1), 169–194.
92.
Perez-AlemanP.SandilandsM. (2008). Building value at the top and the bottom of the global supply chain: MNC-NGO partnerships. California Management Review, 51(1), 24–49.
93.
PfefferJ.SalancikG. R. (2003). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Stanford University Press.
94.
RascheA. (2012). Global policies and local practice: Loose and tight couplings in multi-stakeholder initiatives. Business Ethics Quarterly, 22(4), 679–708.
95.
ReuterC.FoerstlK.HartmannE.BlomeC. (2010). Sustainable global supplier management: The role of dynamic capabilities in achieving competitive advantage. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 46(2), 45–63.
96.
RheeM.HaunschildP. R. (2006). The liability of good reputation: A study of product recalls in the U.S. automobile industry. Organization Science, 17(1), 101–117.
97.
RheeM.ValdezM. E. (2009). Contextual factors surrounding reputation damage with potential implications for reputation repair. Academy of Management Review, 34(1), 146–168.
98.
RowleyT. I.MoldoveanuM. (2003). When will stakeholder groups act? An interest- and identity-based model of stakeholder group mobilization. Academy of Management Review, 28(2), 204–219.
99.
RuysschaertD.SallesD. (2016). The strategies and effectiveness of conservation NGOs in the global voluntary standards: The case of the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm-Oil. Conservation and Society, 14(2), 73–85.
100.
SeitanidiM. M.CraneA. (2009). Implementing CSR through partnerships: Understanding the selection, design, and insitutionalisation of nonprofit-business relationships. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(2), 413–429.
101.
SkarmeasD.LeonidouC. N. (2013). When consumers doubt, watch out! The role of CSR skepticism. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1831–1838.
102.
SohnY. J.LariscyR. W. (2014). Understanding reputational crisis: Definition, properties, and consequences. Journal of Public Relations Research, 26(1), 23–43.
103.
SohnY. J.LariscyR. W. (2015). A “buffer” or “boomerang?”—The role of corporate reputation in bad times. Communication Research, 42(2), 237–259.
104.
SoundararajanV.BrownJ. A.WicksA. C. (2019). Can multi-stakeholder initiatives improve global supply chains? Improving deliberative capacity with a stakeholder orientation. Business Ethics Quarterly, 29(3), 385–412.
105.
SpenceM. (1973). Job market signaling. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87(3), 355–374.
106.
SrivastavaS. K. (2007). Green supply-chain management: A state-of-the-art literature review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 9(1), 53–80.
StuartT. E.HoangH.HybelsR. C. (1999). Interorganizational endorsements and the performance of entrepreneurial ventures. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44(2), 315–349.
109.
SusantoS. R. (2007). The transformation of Greenpeace strategy in the 1990s: From civil disobedience to moderate movement. Global & Strategic, 2(1), 186–205.
110.
TaoW.SongB. (2020). The interplay between post-crisis response strategy and pre-crisis corporate associations in the context of CSR crises. Public Relations Review, 46(2), Article 101883.
111.
ThrallA. T.SteculaD.SweetD. (2014). May We have your attention please? Human-rights NGOs and the problem of global communication. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 19(2), 135–159.
112.
TsoukasH. (1999). David and Goliath in the risk society: Making sense of the conflict between Shell and Greenpeace in the North Sea. Organization, 6(3), 499–528.
113.
VanhammeJ.GrobbenB. (2009). “Too good to be true!.” The effectiveness of CSR history in countering negative publicity. Journal of Business Ethics, 85(2), 273–283.
114.
Van TulderR.SeitanidiM. M.CraneA.BrammerS. (2016). Enhancing the impact of cross-sector partnerships. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(1), 1–17.
115.
VeilS. R.DillinghamL. L.SloanA. G. (2016). Fencing out the Jones’s: The development of response strategies for spillover crises. Corporate Reputation Review, 19(4), 316–330.
116.
VergneJ.-P.WernickeG.BrennerS. (2018). Signal incongruence and its consequences: A study of media disapproval and CEO overcompensation. Organization Science, 29(5), 796–817.
117.
VogelD. (2010). The private regulation of global corporate conduct achievements and limitations. Business and Society, 49(1), 68–87.
118.
WassmerU.PaquinR.SharmaS. (2014). The engagement of firms in environmental collaborations: Existing contributions and future directions. Business and Society, 53(6), 754–786.
119.
WeberL.MayerK. J. (2011). Designing effective contracts: Exploring the influence of framing and expectations. Academy of Management Review, 36(1), 53–75.
120.
WinnM. I.MacDonaldP.ZietsmaC. E. (2008). Managing industry reputation: The dynamic tension between collective and competitive reputation management strategies. Corporate Reputation Review, 11(1), 35–55.
121.
YuT.LesterR. H. (2008). Moving beyond firm boundaries: A social network perspective on reputation spillover. Corporate Reputation Review, 11(1), 94–108.
122.
YuT.SengulM.LesterR. H. (2008). Misery loves company: The spread of negative impacts resulting from an organizational crisis. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 452–472.
123.
ZavyalovaA.PfarrerM. D.RegerR. K.HubbardT. D. (2016). Reputation as a benefit and a burden? How stakeholders’ organizational identification affects the role of reputation following a negative event. Academy of Management Journal, 59(1), 253–276.
124.
ZeyenA.BeckmannM.WoltersS. (2016). Actor and institutional dynamics in the development of multi-stakeholder initiatives. Journal of Business Ethics, 135(2), 341–360.
125.
ZhouZ.KiE.-J. (2018). Does severity matter? An investigation of crisis severity from defensive attribution theory perspective. Public Relations Review, 44(4), 610–618.
