Search results

The purpose of this paper is to empirically test legitimacy theory by comparing the corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosures of tax aggressive corporations with those of non‐tax aggressive corporations in Australia.

A unique sample of 20 Australian corporations accused by the Australian Taxation Office of engaging in tax aggressive activities during the 2001‐2006 period was hand‐collected. These 20 tax aggressive corporations were then matched with 20 non‐tax aggressive corporations (based on industry classification, corporation size and time period). This process generated a choice‐based sample of 40 corporations for empirical analysis. Using content analysis techniques, financial accounting data were gathered from the Aspect‐Huntley database and CSR disclosures were individually measured for each corporation in the sample. Various statistical techniques were then used (e.g. paired sample statistics, Pearson correlation analysis and ordinary least squares regression analysis) to test legitimacy theory.

Overall, the empirical results consistently show a positive and statistically significant association between corporate tax aggressiveness and CSR disclosure, thereby confirming legitimacy theory in the context of corporate tax aggressiveness.

The paper provides empirical evidence in support of legitimacy theory as an explanation for why specific corporations disclose more CSR‐related information than others. Additionally, to the best of the authors' knowledge, the paper is one of the first to document an empirical association between corporate tax aggressiveness and CSR in the literature.

Much of the extant research into why companies disclose environmental information in the annual report indicates that legitimacy theory is one of the more probable explanations for the increase in environmental disclosures since the early 1980s. Legitimacy theory is based on the idea that in order to continue operating successfully, corporations must act within the bounds of what society identifies as socially acceptable behaviour. The purpose of the practical research undertaken and reported in this paper is to extend the applicability and predictive power of legitimacy theory by investigating to what extent annual report disclosures are interrelated to: attempts to gain, maintain and repair legitimacy; and the choice of specific legitimation tactics. The quasi‐experimental method adopted utilised semi‐structured interviews with senior personnel from three large Australian public companies. The findings indicated support for legitimacy theory as an explanatory factor for environmental disclosures. Moreover, findings about the likelihood of specific micro‐legitimation tactics being used in response to legitimacy threatening environmental issues/events, and dependent on whether the purpose of the response is designed to gain, maintain or repair legitimacy, are reported.

The purpose of this paper is a quantitative exploration of the annual report disclosure of contributions by Australian corporations to the relief appeal following the South-East Asian tsunami of 26 December 2004.

Hypotheses are developed from legitimacy and media agenda setting perspectives, predicting relationships between financial characteristics of the corporations and of their contributions with respect to presence and volume of content and extent of disclosure of cash amounts. The effect of public awareness of contributions on disclosure variables is also examined. Hypotheses not supported are re-examined from an agency perspective.

Most correlations, such as company size and volume of content, are found to be consistent with a legitimacy perspective, while those not supported, such as company profit disclosure of cash amounts, can readily be explained from an accountability perspective. Overall, the results indicate a strong relationship between public awareness of the contributions and disclosing behaviour. Size of company and profit were related to some aspects of disclosure, while no relationship was detected between the size of the cash donation and disclosing behaviour.

The findings have important implications for studies of the way in which corporations communicate with their shareholders and other stakeholders when conflicting interests exist and when media exposure has been positive. The results cannot be extrapolated to situations beyond the Tsunami Appeal.

Empirical research into the disclosure of corporate philanthropy by Australian corporations. Consideration of appropriate theoretical frameworks for study of corporate philanthropy disclosure.

This paper aims to explore any potential link between the corporate issue of a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation (SLAPP) with a changed environmental, social and governance (ESG) reporting focus as part of a complementary communicative legitimation strategy.

A longitudinal content analysis of the annual reports of three sample Australian corporations was undertaken, measuring changes in ESG disclosure levels and disclosure focus around the time a SLAPP was issued by each sample firm.

This paper provides support for the contention that both the number of ESG disclosures and the type of ESG disclosures changed after the sample firms issued SLAPPs.

A number of limitations are identified within the paper, including difficulties identifying when SLAPPs are initiated.

To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first investigation of the relationship between SLAPPs and ESG reporting, and this study helps open up a new area of research into how ESG reporting is used by corporations in a strategic manner.

This paper aims to investigate whether executive compensation and internal control can prevent overseas compliance risks through the mediating influence of multinational corporation (MNC) legitimacy and the moderating role of institutional distance.

Based on a law and economics perspective and the “bad apple,” the “red barrel” and the “bad cellar” theory of business misconduct, this paper constructs a systematic framework of “compliance motivation MNC legitimacy overseas compliance risk prevention” from the individual, organizational and systematic levels and uses data of Chinese MNCs for empirical analysis.

Empirical data from Chinese MNCs show that overseas compliance risks are comprehensively affected by the factors of the individual, organizational and systematic levels. Higher executive compensation and internal control will reduce MNCs’ overseas compliance risks through MNC legitimacy acquisition; institutional distance hinders the positive effect of internal control on MNC legitimacy and therefore aggravates overseas compliance risks.

This paper contributes to the understanding of the overseas law-abiding and offence behavior of MNCs from a law and economics perspective and offers valuable insights on how to prevent the ever-increasing overseas compliance risks.

Although the literature has analyzed the factors of compliance behavior, they are not interrelated, let alone integrated in a systematic risk prevention framework. This paper applies a law and economic analysis framework to the study of the overseas compliance risks for the first time.

The purpose of this study is to better understand the origins of modern corporate social responsibility. The paper seeks to examine some factors that enabled the new industrial corporation to expand its role in society.

Using institutional theory, this paper describes how some of the institutional characteristics of the modern corporation itself provided some opportunities or challenges in terms of gaining social legitimacy.

The institutional features of the corporation, its technology and management created new demands on the corporation by society. These in turn led to the development of such concepts of corporate social responsibility as: public relations, service, trusteeship, and public welfare.

Future research on social legitimacy should focus on demands placed by the institutional characteristics of new organizations. Other research might include comparative studies of corporate legitimacy in Europe or Asia or an examination of the evolving role of managers from the role of welfare capitalist to trusteeship.

Institutions that adapt to changing demands have the best chance to survive. Firms that adopt new social activities are likely to have to sustain them in the long run.

This study is the first to argue that the features of the modern corporation itself stimulated some of the social activities it undertook. Contributions of scientific management scholars to the shaping of the emerging corporate role are also noted.

The purpose of this paper is to examine whether the voluntary annual report disclosures, relating to conflict diamonds, for four of the largest diamond mining companies operating in South Africa can be explained through applying legitimacy theory and media agenda‐setting theory.

Applying legitimacy theory under the assumption of media agenda‐setting theory, the study draws a comparison between the volume of disclosure relating to conflict diamonds made in the annual reports of four of the largest diamond mining companies operating in South Africa and the volume of South African media publications addressing conflict diamonds.

The results of the study suggest that changes in the degree of media attention relating to the issue of conflict diamonds are largely mirrored by the annual report disclosure by one firm, but not by the other firms in the sample. Hence, legitimation motives lend support for only one of the four firms.

It should be noted that in relying upon legitimacy theory to examine variations in voluntary annual report disclosures regarding conflict diamonds, the study does not invalidate the likelihood that other theories, such as stakeholder theory or political economy theory, for example, may also hold explanatory power.

No prior research combining legitimacy theory and media agenda theory to explain voluntary disclosure of conflict diamonds by South African diamond mining companies could be found.

Corporations are now taking stands on contemporary and controversial social issues that share no obvious connection to the corporations’ business practices. At the same time, political polarization continues to intensify, which begs the question: Are these corporate stands – referred to as corporate social advocacy (CSA) – and political polarization related to each other, and if so, how? The purpose of this study is to provide a conceptualization of the connections between CSA and political polarization through a series of propositions that can be tested in subsequent research studies. Corporations have influence in society, and the ways in which they communicate on controversial social issues could further intensify or help assuage political polarization. Conversely, political polarization may be causing CSA in the first place, which would put into question the legitimacy and desirability of CSA because of the environment from which CSA is cultivated.

This study is designed to be conceptual, and the approach is based on theory building.

The study conceptualizes the relationship between CSA and political polarization to be symbiotic because both are bidirectional causes of each other. Engagement in CSA is also argued to be positively associated with perceptions that corporations contain particular political ideologies, i.e. more “liberal-leaning” or “conservative-leaning.” This study also predicts that – dependent on particular conditions – CSA will also lead to an increase in both boycotts and skepticism.

This study will contribute to scholars’, practitioners’ and consumers’ understanding of the causes and effects of CSA. The way in which political polarization is potentially causing CSA puts into question the legitimacy of corporations engaging in CSA in the first place. If CSA is cultivated in the soil of political polarization, is CSA desirable for corporations? Conversely, the way in which CSA is potentially causing political polarization also puts the legitimacy of CSA into question. If CSA is causing political polarization, is CSA desirable for society?

Corporations are an influential part of society, and thus will influence how society views controversial social issues. If the predictions in this study hold, corporations will play an important role in either intensifying or reducing political polarization, and political polarization will also play an important role in how corporations communicate about CSA issues.

Research focused on CSA is burgeoning, yet limited studies have examined how CSA and political polarization interact. Although there could be positive aspects of corporate involvement in CSA, this study examines some of the potential negative aspects of corporate involvement in CSA. Future research will also be able to test the propositions proposed in this study.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) may serve as a regulatory framework for corporate practices or as a management trend that helps to improve the legitimacy of corporations. This article explores whether and how petroleum corporations' adherence to standardised CSR instruments has influenced how they deal with climate change.

Comparative case study of Hydro and Shell based on assessments of central documents, publications on CSR and interviews with corporate representatives.

The management trend mode of CSR has prevailed within both companies. Company conduct is deeply influenced by the global petroleum field, but it mainly promotes CSR as legitimacy enhancer and hinders the instruments in working as regulative frameworks. Hydro executives have no aim of applying the CSR instruments to guide their actions. Executives at Shell have tried, but without being fully able to get the vast Shell group to adapt. Thus far, the failure of CSR as a regulative framework seems to contribute to its success as legitimacy enhancing concept. Nonetheless, it is not clear whether the two trends will continue to contrast or if they may start to work in conjunction.

Due to the global organisational span of such corporations, CSR research may gain from focussing specifically on institutionalisation processes at the level of their global organisational field.

The negative trade‐off between CSR as legitimacy enhancer and as a regulative framework may represent a core concern for CSR practitioners. Further, the findings indicate that it may prove more fruitful to develop CSR instruments within specific organisational fields than to focus on holistic instruments.

The framework applied tracks micro‐effects of the instruments and provides insights into the relative importance of company‐internal and ‐external factors. This may prove fruitful for CSR research directed at other business and social concerns.

How is moral legitimacy established in pluralist contexts where multiple moral frameworks co-exist and compete? Situations of moral multiplexity complicate not only whether an organization or practice is legitimate but also which criteria should be used to establish moral legitimacy. We argue that moral legitimacy can be thought of as the property of a dynamic dialogical process in which relations between moral schemes are constantly (re-)negotiated through dynamic exchange with audiences. Drawing on Boltanski and Thévenot’s ‘orders of worth’ framework, we propose a process model of how three types of truces may be negotiated: transcendence, compromise, antagonism. While each can create moral legitimacy in pluralistic contexts, legitimacy is not a binary variable but varying in degrees of scope and certainty.