Academic experience has been found to significantly impact on the attitudes and behaviors of managerial decision-makers, which in turn influences corporate strategic decisions. However, the impact of academic decision-makers on corporate ethical decisions, particularly corporate social irresponsibility (CSIR), has yet to receive due attention to date. In this study, we integrate the upper echelons theory and managerial discretion literature to examine whether and when academic CEOs (CEOs with academic experience) influence corporate social (...) irresponsibility (CSIR). First, we suggest that academic CEOs discourage CSIR because they have higher moral standards; thus, their companies are less likely to engage in CSIR activities. In addition, we propose that negative attainment discrepancy (slack resources) reduces (enhances) academic CEOs' managerial discretion to incorporate their ethical preferences into their decisions, thereby weakening (enhancing) the above relationship. This study is the first to examine the relationship between academic CEOs and CSIR. Additionally, the empirical findings of this study offer crucial insights for shareholders and policymakers to prevent or mitigate CSIR effectively. (shrink)

This study contributes to the corporate social responsibility, stakeholder theory, and executive succession literature by examining the effect of corporate social irresponsibility on strategic leadership turnover. We theorize that firms’ CSiR increases the likelihood of executive turnover. We also investigate the nature of succession and successor origin following CSiR. We further examine how the CSiR–CEO succession relationship is moderated by firm visibility to stakeholders and industry dynamism. Our results, based on a dataset (...) of 248 U.S. public firms between 2001 and 2008, provide evidence that firms’ CSiR affects what is conventionally seen as primarily a market-driven decision on executive turnover, especially when firms operate in a more dynamic industry. Research contributions and implications are discussed. (shrink)

Business Ethics, the Environment &Responsibility, Volume 32, Issue 4, Page 1452-1469, October 2023.

Corporations perform actions that can inflict harm with different levels of intensity, from death to material loss, to both companies’ internal and external stakeholders. Research has analysed corporate harm using the notions of corporate social irresponsibility and corporate crime. Critical management studies have been subjecting management and organizational practices and knowledge to critical analysis, and corporate harm has been one of the main concerns of CMS. However, CMS has rarely been deployed to analyse (...) class='Hi'>CSIR and corporate crime. Thus, the aim of this paper is to critically analyse the perspectives of CSIR and corporate crimes on corporate harm via CMS in general and postcolonial studies in particular. The paper contributes by arguing that research on CSIR and corporate crime could be perceived as producing research that does not challenge the essence of contemporary corporation profit-seeking activities that ultimately produces corporate harm. We argue that CSIR and corporate crime are ideologies that assist in disguising the contradiction between producing shareholder value and the social good that is at the heart of the modern corporation system and the current economic system. Furthermore, the postcolonial view of CSIR and corporate crime highlights how they are based on a Western-centric view of corporate harm that ignores the realities and perspectives of the Global South, especially in situations where corporate harm leads to death in the Global South. (shrink)

Prior studies on stakeholders’ responses to firms with high prior corporate social responsibility (CSR) engaging in corporate social irresponsibility (CSIR) show inconsistent results. To explore this inconsistency, we focus on the intentionality of CSIR and draw upon cognitive dissonance theory to examine how transgressional CSIR and accidental CSIR differently influence investors’ responses to firms with high prior CSR through both emotional (e.g., anger) and cognitive (e.g., moral judgment) processes. An experimental study (...) using a facial expression analysis technology— FaceReader 5.0 (Study 1) and a scenario experiment (Study 2), reveal that high prior CSR is a double-edged sword. Specifically, high prior CSR elicits an aggravating effect on investor responses (more anger, more negative moral judgment, and more negative effects on investment) in light of transgressional CSIR, but it has a buffering effect on investor responses (less anger, less negative moral judgment, and less negative effects on investment) in light of accidental CSIR. Moreover, we find that when prior CSR and CSIR are in the same (vs. different) domain, the aggravating effect of transgressional CSIR is strengthened, but the buffering effect of accidental CSIR is weakened. Our findings provide important theoretical and practical insights into the effect of prior CSR on investor responses in cases of different CSIR. (shrink)

Recent scandals involving executive leadership have significantly contributed to the topic of corporate social responsibility (CSR) becoming one of the most important concerns of the management literature in the twenty-first century. The antithesis of CSR is embodied in executive corruption and malfeasance. Unfortunately such things are all too frequent. We view the degree of centrality of leadership, and the primary power motivation of leaders, as key factors that influence the engagement in corruptive leader behavior and consequent corporate (...) social ir-responsibility (CSIR) in organizations. Shared and self-leadership, on the other hand, we introduce as alternatives to traditional top-down centralized views of leadership that can establish needed checks and balances capable of reducing corruptive tendencies. We offer a conceptual model along with several propositions to help guide future research and practice. (shrink)

This study investigates whether and how the corporate social responsibility (CSR) profile of a company transfers to another company when an executive leaves a firm. We integrate upper echelon and institutional theories, and develop a novel measure of CSR profiles to explore this issue with a longitudinal data set of executive migrations over a 14-year period. We find that migrated executives assimilate elements of their old firms’ CSR profiles into their new firms (i.e., narrowing the distance between the (...) two firms’ CSR profiles), and this is true for both CSR and corporate social irresponsibility (CSiR). This relationship is stronger when the migrating executive comes from a bigger firm with better social and financial performance than that of the new firm. We also find that the potential for improvement in CSR profiles in migration holds true for CSiR, but not CSR. Our findings have import for upper echelon theory and the managerial discretion afforded to executives regarding CSR decisions. (shrink)

This paper examines the impact on firm value created by investor reaction to same day news of corporate social responsibility and corporate social irresponsibility activities. First, using trading volume, the authors establish that the perceived value of moral capital generated by news involving institutional stakeholders is less clear to investors than that of the news involving technical stakeholders. Subsequently, the authors analyze abnormal returns from 565 unique firm events—each comprising at least one positive and one (...) negative stakeholder news item. Using signaling theory, the authors demonstrate that news of the number of CSR activities involving institutional groups counteracts the effects of same day CSiR news in an inverted U-shaped fashion. In contrast, they find that news of the number of CSR activities involving technical groups mitigates the effects of same day CSiR news in a U-shaped fashion. (shrink)