Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Firms behaving badly? Investor reactions to corporate social irresponsibility.Vamsi K. Kanuri, Reza Houston & Michelle Andrews - 2020 - Business and Society Review 125 (1):41-70.
    Corporate social irresponsibility (CSI) and other questionable business incidents that appear to harm stakeholders frequently afflict firms yet draw disparate investor reactions. We address this disparity by investigating the association between firm legal orientation and investor reactions to CSI. We hypothesize the proportion of board members and top management team (TMT) executives with law degrees affects investor perceptions of firm foresight, and in turn, their judgment of blame and consequent punishment. Based on abnormal returns to 629 announcements of CSI and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Ethical Decision-making in Extreme Operating Environments.Manisha Singal, Richard E. Wokutch, Yaniv Poria & Michelle C. Hong - 2014 - Business and Professional Ethics Journal 33 (2-3):211-252.
    The business landscape today is characterized by looming global challenges like natural disasters, war, and industrial accidents throughout the world. However, there is limited research on describing how businesses operate and cope in extreme environments and whether principles of ethical decision-making can be used as guidelines in such situations. To address this gap we describe and analyze organizational and business responses to three different extreme environments, namely the fall 2012 Gaza conflict, Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans, and the so-called triple (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • A Mixed Blessing? CEOs’ Moral Cleansing as an Alternative Explanation for Firms’ Reparative Responses Following Misconduct.Joel B. Carnevale & K. Ashley Gangloff - 2023 - Journal of Business Ethics 184 (2):427-443.
    When firm misconduct comes to light, CEOs are often faced with difficult decisions regarding whether and how to respond to stakeholder demands as they attempt to restore their firms’ legitimacy. Prior research largely assumes that such decisions are motivated by CEOs’ calculated attempts to manage stakeholder impressions. Yet, there are likely other motives, particularly those of a morally-relevant nature, that might also be influencing CEOs’ decisions. To address this limitation, we advance moral cleansing as an alternative explanation for how and (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark