A novel framework to unearth corporate hypocrisy: Connotation, formation mechanism, manifestation, and contagion effect

Abstract

Corporate hypocrisy refers to the phenomenon of inconsistency between words and deeds of a firm in the process of fulfilling its social responsibility. Despite the fact that the literature related to corporate hypocrisy has made some progress, there have been very few attempts to scrutinize the topic systematically. In the light of egoistic and altruistic motivations, and capitalizing on social network theory, this study classifies corporate hypocrisy into three types: direct corporate hypocrisy, indirect corporate hypocrisy, and interactive corporate hypocrisy. Considering the differences in the identification of pro-social motivation attributes between companies and the public in releasing/analyzing hypocritical information, a 2 (companies vs. the public) × 2 (egoism vs. altruism) framework of the formation mechanism of corporate hypocrisy was constructed. Nine differentiated manifestations were defined from the perspective of preevent, during the event, and postevent time dimensions of corporate social responsibility (CSR) behaviors and the type of corporate hypocritical behavior. Based on stakeholder theory, the contagion effect of corporate hypocrisy was also analyzed from the perspective of primary and secondary stakeholders, the "immunityinfection" dual-pathway analysis model of the contagion effect of corporate hypocrisy was constructed, and the intervention measures were proposed. A novel framework to understand corporate hypocrisy in the mode of "sending-receiving" was proposed, which can enrich and deepen our understanding of corporate hypocrisy and possible causes and mitigation measures. Conclusions obtained through our study can help the public, governments, and firms to better understand, track, and oversee the phenomenon of corporate hypocrisy and evolve proper guidelines to minimize hypocritical behavior.

The influence of Islam in shaping organisational socially responsible behaviour

“…Embraced by leaders, this identity translates into particular organisational CSR behaviour, CSR priority-setting and peculiar reasons for CSR engagement as CSR becomes an instrument for fulfilling individual religious responsibilities. The outcome is a context-specific version of CSR that differs from established CSR frameworks (e.g., Carroll, 1979;Crane et al, 2013), known for typically following profit-driven and instrumental reasons for CSR engagement (Hafenbrädl & Waeger, 2021;Lu et al, 2022;Yin & Jamali, 2021). Therefore, the study advances the literature on ethical decisionmaking (e.g., Ananthram & Chan, 2016;Kumar et al, 2022;Nakpodia et al, 2020), particularly concerning the influence of Islam (e.g., Alziyadat & Ahmed, 2019;Sulaiman et al, 2021); organisational CSR behaviour (e.g., Peifer, 2015;Ray et al, 2014), CSR outcomes (Aguinis & Glavas, 2012;Christensen et al, 2014;Jamali & Karam, 2018), and the role of Islam in this regard (Jamali et al, 2020;van Aaken & Buchner, 2020); as well as the emerging field of Islamic CSR (Koleva, 2021) by introducing impactful concepts such as a'jr and al'akhira that offer a better understanding of CSR from an Islamic point of view, as well as playing a substantial role in terms of motivations for CSR engagement.…”

“…The study also offers insights into motivations for CSR engagement (Hafenbrädl & Waeger, 2021;Lu et al, 2022;Yin & Jamali, 2021).…”

“…Embraced by leaders, this identity translates into particular organisational CSR behaviour, CSR priority‐setting and peculiar reasons for CSR engagement as CSR becomes an instrument for fulfilling individual religious responsibilities. The outcome is a context‐specific version of CSR that differs from established CSR frameworks (e.g., Carroll, 1979; Crane et al, 2013), known for typically following profit‐driven and instrumental reasons for CSR engagement (Hafenbrädl & Waeger, 2021; Lu et al, 2022; Yin & Jamali, 2021). Contrary to established CSR paradigms, the study identifies forms of CSR engagement that are fully embodied in the examined organisations, shaped by religion and expressed through initiatives normally considered to be the responsibility of government or voluntary practice in the Western world.…”

“…The study also offers insights into motivations for CSR engagement (Hafenbrädl & Waeger, 2021; Lu et al, 2022; Yin & Jamali, 2021). Research demonstrates that organisational leaders invest in CSR primarily for instrumental reasons related to a positive effect on their organisation's image, employee motivation, retention and recruitment, contribution to market value, improved product quality, consumer awareness, attracting and retaining customers and ‘window dressing’ to appease various stakeholder groups (Feldman & Vasquez‐Parraga, 2013; Lu et al, 2022).…”

“…The study also offers insights into motivations for CSR engagement (Hafenbrädl & Waeger, 2021; Lu et al, 2022; Yin & Jamali, 2021). Research demonstrates that organisational leaders invest in CSR primarily for instrumental reasons related to a positive effect on their organisation's image, employee motivation, retention and recruitment, contribution to market value, improved product quality, consumer awareness, attracting and retaining customers and ‘window dressing’ to appease various stakeholder groups (Feldman & Vasquez‐Parraga, 2013; Lu et al, 2022). This instrumental reasoning regards CSR as a tool for fulfilment of individual interests, profit maximisation, improving the social state and well‐being of stakeholders including the environment, as well as building and maintaining relationships with these stakeholders (Jamali et al, 2020; McWilliams & Siegel, 2001; Yin & Jamali, 2021).…”