Search results

This paper seeks to investigate Philip Morris's responses to a decade‐long crisis through the analysis of its CEO's speeches. It also aims to reveal the rich potential of corporate speeches as examples of crisis management strategies.

In total, 67 speeches of Philip Morris's CEO are analyzed using centering resonance analysis. The data are also cluster‐ and factor‐analyzed. Combining quantitative and qualitative examination of the dataset provides a broader understanding of the organization's rhetoric strategies.

Philip Morris's CEO crafted specific frames and image repair strategies to fit different stages of the crisis. The frames and restorations strategies used are, respectively: profitable multinational bolstering, minimization, and attack the accuser (1994‐1996); litigation target, transcendence (1997‐1998); and corporate good citizen, bolstering and transcendence (1999‐2001).

The paper highlights the significance of corporate speeches as a fully controlled form of corporate discourse that reveals strategic frames and communication tactics. Future research should concentrate on comparing such messages with other important actors' discourse.

The paper draws attention to the role of lawyers and other actors in defining crisis management strategies as well as emphasizing that corporate values may not be accepted by the entire society, yet may meet the expectations of specific stakeholders.

This paper combines qualitative and quantitative analysis to investigate a rich source of corporate communication: top management speeches. The study underscores how rhetoric strategies can play for time during crisis, but are limited in changing inherently bad products into socially acceptable ones.

In a number of recent multi-billion dollar cases brought against cigarette manufacturers, plaintiffs have in part alleged that the cigarette manufacturers (1) conspired not to compete on the basis of health claims or the introduction of potentially safer cigarettes since the 1950s, and (2) engaged in fraudulent advertising by making implied health claims in advertisements selling ‘low tar’/‘light’ cigarettes. In this type of litigation, defendants’ actions could be due to alleged illegal behaviour as asserted by plaintiffs, or be the result of market forces that may have nothing to do with allegedly inappropriate acts. We examine the economic evidence relating to these allegations, taking into account some of the major influences on cigarette company behaviour. In particular, our analyses show that much of the cigarette manufactures’ behaviour can be explained by Federal Trade Commission and related government actions, rather than conspiracy or fraudulent acts. We find the economic evidence is inconsistent with an effective conspiracy to suppress information on either smoking and health or the development and marketing of potentially safer cigarettes. Regarding ‘lower tar’ and ‘light’ cigarettes, the economic evidence indicates that the cigarette manufacturers responded to government and public health initiatives, and that disclosing more information on smoking compensation earlier than the cigarette companies did would not have had any significant impact on smoking behaviour.

Describes the history of the tobacco industry and its emergence as an extremely effective marketer and non-market strategist. After years of success, both publicly and politically, the leaders of the tobacco industry are faced with mounting political pressure and the financial threat of litigation from class-action lawsuits. The leaders face an industry-wide strategic decision of whether to acquiesce to government demands in exchange for immunity, focus on judicial success, or develop a new course of action.

To evaluate the formulation and implementation of non-market strategies in the context of regulatory, legislative, and legal institutions. To understand how various aspects of the non-market environment interact and how these environments not only change over time, but change market competition within an industry. Further, to formulate and decide between firm-specific and industry-wide strategies. Finally, to appreciate and reflect upon the potential conflict between non-market strategies and ethical concerns.

This article posits a paradigm of levels of success for strategic decision outcomes. A high level of strategic decision success is normally preceded by a positive strategic gap in which the strengths of the organization clearly outweigh its weaknesses. Three comprehensive cases are set forth as practical applications to illustrate and confirm the paradigm of levels of strategic decision success. Philip Morris’s decision in 1984 to diversify into the food processing industry is proffered as the epitome of a highly successful strategic choice. General Motors’ decision in 1978 to reinvent the corporation is advanced as a hallmark of a marginally successful strategic outcome. And Walt Disney’s decision in 1996 to acquire Capital Cities/ABC is cited as an example of a strategic choice with an indeterminately successful outcome. The conclusions in all three cases are supported by current research findings.

The purpose of this paper is to contribute to science communication literature by further highlighting the underexplored role of organizational and corporate perspectives in science communication.

The paper takes the form of a conceptual article that uses two illustrative vignettes to highlight the power of corporate science communication.

The key argument is that corporate science communication is a compound ideology that results from merging the hegemonic corporate voice with the ultimate/god-term science (see the work of Kenneth Burke) to form a mega-ideological construct and discourse. Such communication can be so powerful that vulnerable publics and powerful advocates speaking on their behalf have little to no recourse to effectively challenge such discourse. While critiques of corporate science communication in practice are not new, what the authors offer is a possible explanation as to why such discourse is so powerful and hard to combat.

The value of this paper is in the degree to which it both sets an important applied research agenda for the field and fills a critical void in the science communication literature. This conceptual article, in the form of a critical analysis, fills the void by advocating for the inclusion of organizational perspectives in science communication research because of the great potential that organizations have, via science communication, to shape societal behavior and outcomes both positively and negatively. It also coins the terms “compound ideology” and “mega-ideology” to denote that while all ideologies are powerful, ideologies can operate in concert (compound) to change their meaning and effectiveness. By exposing the hegemonic power of corporate science communication, future researchers and practitioners can use these findings as a foundation to combat misinformation and disinformation campaigns wielded by big corporate science entities and the public relations firms often hired to carry out these campaigns.

The papers in this issue were given at the 25th Annual Conference, held at Bristol University from 22nd to 25th September, 1950. Some 230 delegates from the British Isles, the Commonwealth and Europe were welcomed to dinner on Friday evening by Sir Philip Morris, C.B.E., M.A., Vice‐Chancellor of the University, and Lady Morris. No papers were given on Friday evening, Mr. J. E. Wright arranging an informal dance after dinner.

Companies changing their brand names are frequently reported in the business press but this phenomenon has as yet received little academic attention. This paper sets out to understand the drivers of the corporate rebranding phenomenon and to analyse the impact of such strategies on corporate brand equity.

A cross‐sectional sample of 166 rebranded companies provides descriptive data on the context in which rebranding occurs. Two case studies provide further detail on how the process of rebranding is managed.

The data show that a decision to rebrand is most often provoked by structural changes, particularly mergers and acquisitions, which have a fundamental effect on the corporation's identity and core strategy. They also suggest that a change in marketing aesthetics affects brand equity less than other factors such as employees' behaviour.

The paper proposes a conceptual model to integrate various dimensions of corporate rebranding. Analysing the rebranding phenomenon by assessing the leverage of brand equity from one level of the brand hierarchy to the other constitutes an interesting route for further research.

Managers are reminded that corporate rebranding needs to be managed holistically and supported by all stakeholders, with particular attention given to employees' reactions.

This paper is of value to anybody seeking to understand the rebranding phenomenon, including academics and business managers.

The dominant narrative in the investor-State dispute settlement (ISDS) system is that it enables powerful corporations to encroach upon the regulatory power of developing countries aimed at pursuing compelling public interest objectives. The example of Phillip Morris, the tobacco giant, suing Uruguay’s public health measures is cited as the most significant example to prove this thesis. The other side of the story that States abuse their public power to undermine the protected rights of foreign investors does not get much attention.

This paper reviews all the ISDS cases that India has lost to ascertain the reason why these claims were brought against India in the first place. The approach of the paper is to study these ISDS cases to find out whether these cases arose due to abuse of the State’s public power or affronted India’s regulatory autonomy.

Against this global context, this paper studies the ISDS claims brought against India, one of the highest respondent-State in ISDS, to show that they arose due to India’s capricious behaviour. Analysis of these cases reveals that India acted in bad faith and abused its public power by either amending laws retroactively or by scrapping licences without following due process or going back on specific and written assurances that induced investors to invest. In none of these cases, the foreign investors challenged India’s regulatory measures aimed at advancing the genuine public interest. The absence of a “Phillip Morris moment” in India’s ISDS story is a stark reminder that one should give due weight to the equally compelling narrative that ISDS claims are also a result of abuse of public power by States.

The originality value of this paper arises from the fact that this is the first comprehensive study of ISDS cases brought against India and provides full documentation within the larger global context of rising ISDS cases. The paper contributes to the debate on international investment law by showing that in the case of India most of the ISDS cases brought were due to India abusing its public power and was not an affront on India’s regulatory autonomy.

This paper aims to examine the prospect for international investment disputes in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic due to measures implemented by the Australian government to tackle the pandemic.

Doctrinal research. Contains qualitative analysis.

This paper finds that claims based on the protections in the International Investment Agreements (IIAs) signed by Australia are unlikely to succeed and that Australia’s COVID-19 measures can be justified as necessary measures under the general and security exception clauses included in more recent IIAs and under customary international law.

In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, scholars have written papers apprehending possible claims by international investors against emergency measures adopted by host countries to face the pandemic which might also have damaged the interest of the foreign investors. The existing literature is too vague and general. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first paper that draws some specific conclusions in this regard applicable to the COVID-19 regulatory measures taken by Australia. While the existing literature projects the possibility of such investor claims, this paper argues that at least no such claim would succeed against the COVID-19 measures taken by Australia.

The purpose of this article is to examine the influence of corporate culture on the practice of corporate philanthropy in a global environment.

The paper uses content analysis of corporate texts and media; interviews with global philanthropy practitioners.

The paper finds that: corporate philanthropy is a reflector of corporate values; global corporate philanthropists have a history of commitment to corporate social responsibility (CSR) activities; global companies practice international philanthropy; program delivery differs as a reflection of corporate history, values, mission, and business drivers; global corporations utilize CSR to gain and maintain their “license to operate”; and corporate cultural learning is pursued as an explicit activity; cross‐cultural learning is generally perceived as an implicit outcome. CSR shares values, opportunity for integrated cultural learning.

This research is not generalizable. Its findings could be explored by surveying a larger purposive sample.

The practical implications of this research are the sharing of corporate values and the inclusion of cultural learning through the integration of CSR activities, including philanthropy.

The study found corporate opportunities for cultural learning valuable to the development of the global corporation as global corporate citizen, a prerequisite to the effective practice of philanthropy and for doing business globally.