More and more firms are engaging in greenwashing, misleading consumers about their environmental performance or the environmental benefits of a product or service. The skyrocketing incidence of greenwashing can have profound negative effects on consumer and investor confidence in green products. Mitigating greenwashing is particularly challenging in a context of limited and uncertain regulation. This article examines the external (both institutional and market), organizational and individual drivers of greenwashing and offers recommendations for managers, policymakers, and NGOs to decrease its prevalence.

This paper examines the effects of employer social responsibility on the wages workers demand through randomized field experiments in two online labor marketplaces. Workers were recruited for short-term jobs and I manipulated whether or not they received information about the employer’s social responsibility. I then observed the payment workers were willing to accept for the job. In the first experiment, information about the employer’s social responsibility marginally reduced prospective workers’ wage requirements on average and had a significant effect on the highest performers, who were willing to give up the wage differential they would otherwise demand. In the second, prospective workers submitted 44% lower wage bids for the same job after learning about the employer’s social responsibility. This paper provides causal empirical evidence of a revealed preference for social responsibility in the workplace, and of a greater preference among the highest performers. More broadly, it provides evidence that workers value purpose and meaningfulness at work, and it demonstrates that workers are willing to give up pecuniary benefits for nonpecuniary benefits. It furthermore highlights heterogeneity in worker preferences for nonpecuniary benefits by worker performance type.

Despite a recent surge in corporate activism, with firm leaders communicating about social-political issues unrelated to their core businesses, we know little about its strategic implications. This paper examines the effect of an employer communicating a stance about a social-political issue on employee motivation, using a two-phase, preregistered field experiment in an online labor market platform. Results demonstrate an asymmetric treatment effect of taking a stance depending on whether the employee agrees or disagrees with that stance. Namely, I observe a demotivating effect of taking a stance on a social-political issue with which employees disagree and no statistically significant motivating effect of taking a stance on a social-political issue with which employees agree. This study has important implications for the nascent scholarship on corporate activism, as well as the scholarship on strategic human capital management. This paper was accepted by Greta Hsu, organizations.

Research Summary: Inquiry into CSR as a human capital management tool has suggested that firms benefit from such activities because employees value the meaningfulness of these activities, which influences motivation and retention. We propose an alternate avenue through which firms can benefit from an important type of socially responsible activity—pro bono services—that does not require that employees derive utility from the meaningfulness of the activity. We propose that pro bono activities can benefit firms through human capital learning and screening mechanisms, given the stretch roles that pro bono engagements allow. We formalize this argument in the legal services industry, where we provide primary evidence, a formal model, and empirical results using a panel dataset of the top 200 law firms to support this argument. Managerial Summary: We examine a type of CSR activity, pro bono engagements, in the context of the top 200 law firms in the United States. We show that firms can benefit from these engagements through human capital learning and screening mechanisms, due to the stretch roles that pro bono engagements allow junior lawyers. Our findings suggest that firms in which pro bono engagements provide stretch roles for junior employees can benefit from pro bono activities regardless of whether their employees value the meaningfulness or social impact of the pro bono work.

This article describes randomized field experiments implemented on two online labor market platforms examining the effect of employer charitable giving on a source of human capital that is becoming increasingly important to firms: the “gig” worker. It provides support that a message about charitable giving increases gig workers’ willingness to complete extra work, and that prosocially oriented gig workers are most responsive. A process experiment reveals that sharing information about charitable giving increases how close workers feel to their gig employer, and that the effect is greater if workers previously felt distant from (as opposed to already felt close to) their employer. This article provides insight into gig workers’ nonpecuniary motivation, explores heterogeneity in this type of workers’ responsiveness to charitable giving and illustrates how online platform labor markets can be used as a setting to implement field experiments examining effects of employer-level characteristics on gig worker behavior.