Co-author(s): Caterina Moschieri (IE)
Accepted at Journal of Management, 2022
Abstract. This study examines whether and when in a stigmatized industry firms’ negative publicity can lead to the appointment of their CEOs to the boards of directors of other firms within that sector. Building on research on in-group identification and on stigma, we propose that within a stigmatized industry, when a firm receives negative publicity, its CEO is more likely to join the board of other firms in the industry, possibly because these other firms interpret the negative publicity as a sign of social identification of the CEO with the stigmatized industry. We also suggest that this relationship is more likely when the negative publicity reveals information otherwise not available about the CEO. We test our hypotheses using a novel, hand-collected dataset of 408 CEOs in 205 firms in the global arms industry, between 1998 and 2017, and find that within this stigmatized industry, when a firm receives negative publicity, its CEO is more likely to join the board of other firms in the industry, and that lower levels of CEO’s reputational capital and visibility magnify this effect. Our findings advance the conversations in stigma research about upper echelons, highlighting the importance of internal and external actors and of the type of stigma, when investigating the consequences of stigma for upper echelons’ careers.
Co-author(s): Alessandro Piazza (Rice), Kam Phung (York U) & Wesley Helms (Brock)
Accepted at Strategic Management Journal, 2023
Abstract. How does organizational stigmatization engender economic sanctioning? Existing research offers little insight on this question, since the literature in this area has predominantly focused on the consequences of stigma for its targets. We address this gap by explicitly theorizing about stigmatization as the process through which audiences express disapproval of firms and their associates by strategically deploying negative labeling. More specifically, we posit that the extent of economic sanctioning that stigmatization targets will face is a function of the focus and the content of negative labels used, as well as of whether audiences are perceived as legitimate in their labeling choices.
Co-author(s): Angela Aristidou (UCL), Davide Ravasi (UCL)
Proposal accepted at Journal of Management Studies, 2022
Our work provides a comprehensive view of the growing XSP literature. We address the need to bring together different theoretical perspectives on XSPs by examining how five different perspectives have contributed to our understanding of three main phases in XSP (i.e., formation, management, and value creation/dissemination), and we provide avenues for future research through cross-pollination among these perspectives.
Co-author(s): Brent Lyons (York U)
Target Journal: Administrative Science Quarterly – [JOB MARKET PAPER]
· Nominated for the Best Conference PhD Paper Prize—SMS Annual Meeting, London, 2020.
Abstract. Using data of CEOs between 1998-2016, we draw on the categorization and stigmatization literatures to predict the amount of disapproval received by firms in stigmatized industries based on the characteristics of their CEOs. We argue that certain CEOs’ characteristics may be interpreted as signals of firms’ association with the stigmatized category and hence increase the amount of audiences’ disapproval. This relationship is moderated by ambiguity in the firms’ association with the stigmatized category and by the type of audiences evaluating firms.
Solo-authored
Data analysis stage
Abstract. Stigmatized industries continue to persist, despite the audiences' social contestation and pressures to govern the behavior of firms in such industries. In this paper, I argue that corporate long-termism is an important factor that can contribute to the persistence of stigmatized industries. I empirically test this hypothesis by examining how stakeholders' pressures interact with a) manager's long-term orientation, b) institutional owners with long-term perspective, and c) common ownership among firms to predict firms' mergers, acquisitions, and divestitures inside and outside the stigmatized industries (as different forms of resisting or conforming responses). Our findings challenge the assumption about corporate long-termism being beneficial for society.
Co-author(s): Ali Samei (TUM), Samira Fallah (LSU)
Soon to be submitted to the Journal of Management
Abstract. CEOs usually face a dilemma in allocating corporate resources to CSR activities. On one hand, CEOs may view CSR as a source of competitive advantage, which helps them differentiate their firms from competitors through stakeholder support and obtaining necessary resources. On the other hand, CEOs may evaluate CSR as a threat to their career due to the compensation and dismissal risks associated with CSR activities. There is little knowledge about how CEOs reconcile this conundrum. In this study, by focusing on the peers’ CEO dismissal as events that can simultaneously activate the frames of opportunity and threat for the focal firms’ CEOs, we try to shed some light on this void in the intersection of upper echelons and CSR research.
Co-author(s): Andrew Sarta (UCL)
Conceptual paper, initial stage
Abstract. Research on competitive dynamics has under-explored the role of stakeholders' attention and the valence (i.e., positive or negative) of this attention on how firms deploy different competitive actions toward their peers. In this study, we develop a conceptual model to advance the knowledge about this gap in the literature. We consider the interplay among firm performance, attention share , and attention valence as main antecedents of firms' competitive/collaborative actions.
Co-author(s): Caterina Moschieri (IE), Ithai Stern (INSEAD)
Conceptual paper, full manuscript
Abstract. Stakeholders’ criticism can have severe negative reputational and performance consequences for the targeted organization. In this paper, we theorize about when and how organizations choose to respond to stakeholders’ criticism. Building on the resource-based view and the stakeholder salience literatures, we depart from this prior research by considering the interplay between the criticizing party’s salience and the salience of the issue that it raises, together with the organization’s resource reconfiguration capabilities, as antecedents of organizational responses.