Asset divestment as a response to media attacks in stigmatized industries

Durand, Rodolphe; Vergne, Jean-Philippe

doi:10.1002/smj.2280

Cited by 186 publications

(214 citation statements)

References 80 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

207

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This encapsulates the negative valence associated with the stakeholder relationship, which also moderates the negative bias against cultural organizations connected to corporate donors. Considering the variance in the perception of stigmatized stakeholder groups (Durand & Vergne, 2015;Piazza & Perretti, 2015), we argue that there are variations in the way extraneous stakeholders are perceived by stakeholders within the field. Bourdieu (1993) draws qualitative distinctions between commercially oriented actors and acknowledges the multiplicity of their objectives.…”

Section: Mitigating the Negative Signal Of Being Associated With Extrmentioning

confidence: 99%

When Does Medici Hurt Da Vinci? Mitigating the Signaling Effect of Extraneous Stakeholder Relationships in the Field of Cultural Production

Shymko

Roulet

2017

AMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We thank associate editor Martine Haas and three anonymous reviewers for their constructive feedback, consistent support and guidance throughout the process. We are indebted to Joel Bothello: his help and advice were pivotal in shaping this paper. We are also grateful to Frederic Godart, Michael Gill, Pierre-Antoine Kremp, and the participants of OTREG at Imperial College in September 2015, in particular Matt Kraatz. Finally, we would like to thank Eva Cools for her operational support and Dariya Plaksina for her tremendous help with data collection. [2004][2005][2006][2007][2008][2009][2010][2011]. Firstly, we engage in a qualitative exploration of our setting to contextualize our hypotheses and understand how relationships with corporate donors, depending on their characteristics, affect peer recognition. We then quantitatively test our hypotheses and confirm that the salience of the relationship with extraneous stakeholders -operationalized as the number of corporate donors -has a negative effect on peer recognition. This effect however can be mitigated if theaters choose to limit the breadth, depth and negative valence of the relationship. We contribute to both the institutional logics and stakeholder literature by bringing in a signaling perspective: we show that peer recognition, upon which the maintenance of a dominant logic lies, is directly impacted by the nature of relationships with extraneous stakeholders.

show abstract

Section: Mitigating the Negative Signal Of Being Associated With Extrmentioning

confidence: 99%

When Does Medici Hurt Da Vinci? Mitigating the Signaling Effect of Extraneous Stakeholder Relationships in the Field of Cultural Production

Shymko

Roulet

2017

AMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, when an organization enters Chapter 11, this negative event immediately dominates audience perceptions of it, leading to the stigmatization of the organization (Sutton & Callahan, 1987). For example, some NGOs have stigmatized arms production, the core activity of arms manufacturers, because they consider that it promotes war (Durand & Vergne, 2014). For example, some NGOs have stigmatized arms production, the core activity of arms manufacturers, because they consider that it promotes war (Durand & Vergne, 2014).…”

Section: How Organizations Move From Stigma To Legitimacy: the Case Omentioning

confidence: 99%

How Organizations Move from Stigma to Legitimacy: The Case of Cook’s Travel Agency in Victorian Britain

Hampel

Tracey

2017

AMJ

121

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on an in-depth historical study of how Thomas Cook's travel agency moved from stigmatization to legitimacy among the elite of Victorian Britain, we develop a dialogical model of organizational destigmatization. We find that audiences stigmatize an organization because they fear that it threatens a particular moral order, which leads them to mount sustained attacks designed to weaken or eradicate the organization. Our model suggests that an organization that experiences this form of profound disapproval can nonetheless purge its stigma and become legitimate through a two-step process: first the organization engages in stigma reduction work designed to minimize overt hostility among audiences by showing that it does not pose a risk to them. Second it engages in stigma elimination work designed to gain support from stigmatizers by showing that it plays a positive role in society. Our study therefore reorients organizational stigma research from a focus on how organizations can cope with the effects of stigma, and considers instead how they can eradicate the stigma altogether. We also shed light on much neglected audiencelevel dynamics by examining the process through which audiences construct stigma and why these constructions change.

show abstract

“…As such, taking into account environmental disasters such as spills, oil and gas companies are often scrutinized by a wide variety of publics and given the ''classical role as the villains of climate change'' (Lovell 2010, p. xii). This has conversely led to increasing efforts, especially by environmental groups and ethical investors, to stigmatize the fossil fuel industry (Durand and Vergne 2015;Ferns and Gunther 2017). As Ansar et al (2013, p. 65) argue: ''the outcome of this stigmatization process […] poses a far-reaching threat to fossil fuel companies and the vast energy value chain.…”

Section: Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Drilling their Own Graves: How the European Oil and Gas Supermajors Avoid Sustainability Tensions Through Mythmaking

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explores how paradoxical tensions between economic growth and environmental protection are avoided through organizational mythmaking. By examining the European oil and gas supermajors' ''CEOspeak'' about climate change, we show how mythmaking facilitates the disregarding, diverting, and/or displacing of sustainability tensions. In doing so, our findings further illustrate how certain defensive responses are employed: (1) regression, or retreating to the comforts of past familiarities, (2) fantasy, or escaping the harsh reality that fossil fuels and climate change are indeed irreconcilable, and (3) projecting, or shifting blame to external actors for failing to address climate change. By highlighting the discursive effects of enacting these responses, we illustrate how the European oil and gas supermajors self-determine their inability to substantively address the complexities of climate change. We thus argue that defensive responses are not merely a form of mismanagement as the paradox and corporate sustainability literature commonly suggests, but a strategic resource that poses serious ethical concerns given the imminent danger of issues such as climate change.

show abstract

Asset divestment as a response to media attacks in stigmatized industries

Cited by 186 publications

References 80 publications

When Does Medici Hurt Da Vinci? Mitigating the Signaling Effect of Extraneous Stakeholder Relationships in the Field of Cultural Production

When Does Medici Hurt Da Vinci? Mitigating the Signaling Effect of Extraneous Stakeholder Relationships in the Field of Cultural Production

How Organizations Move from Stigma to Legitimacy: The Case of Cook’s Travel Agency in Victorian Britain

Drilling their Own Graves: How the European Oil and Gas Supermajors Avoid Sustainability Tensions Through Mythmaking

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About