In a world overloaded with information that is difficult to verify, understanding how organizations use and respond to information to further their strategic interests is of critical importance.
My research seeks to address these questions across two streams. The first stream is comprised of my empirical work, which examines the interrelationship between scientific discourse and organizations' political activity. I study how scientific discourse affects organizations' decisions to lobby, as well as how firms' scientific contributions for informing public health agencies compare to those of non-profits.
The second stream constitutes my theoretical work, which explores the interrelationship between firms' engagement with empirical evidence and stakeholder perceptions. The first paper from this stream is published in the Academy of Management Review and considers how firms use strategies that leverage empirical debate to influence stakeholders' perceptions of issues and remedies. Work in progress draws on behavioral stakeholder theory to explore how firms may respond to pressure from stakeholders and government elites that is driven by misperceptions--beliefs in false or empirically unsubstantiated claims.
I integrate literature in non-market strategy and innovation—specifically, the literatures on corporate political activity, stakeholder governance, and the sociology of science. Empirically, I use question-driven quantitative methods and situate my studies in the contexts of the opioid crisis and creation of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
My research is published at the Strategic Management Journal and the Academy of Management Review.
I hold a PhD in Business Administration from the University of Washington, as well as a Master of Environmental Management in Environmental Economics and Policy from Duke University and a Bachelor of Commerce in Business Economics and Law from the University of Alberta.