IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/232047.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What does corporate social advocacy signal? Evidence from boycott participation decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Afego, Pyemo N.
  • Alagidede, Imhotep P.

Abstract

Purpose - This paper explores how a firm's public stand on a social-political issue can be a salient signal of the firm's values, identity and reputation. In particular, it investigates how boycott participation-conceptualized as a cue of a corporation's stand on important social-political issues-may affect the stock market valuation of that corporation, as well as how corporations legitimise their stand on the issues. Design/methodology/approach - The authors employ a mixed-methods design that uses both qualitative techniques (content analysis) and quantitative methods (event study methodology) to examine a sample of US firms who participated in a boycott campaign that sought to call attention to issues of hate speech, misinformation and discriminatory content on social media platform Facebook. Findings - Findings from the qualitative content analysis of company statements show that firms legitimise their stand on, and participation in, the boycott by expressing altruistic values and suggesting to stakeholders that their stand aligns not only with organizational values/convictions but also with the greater social good. Importantly, the event study results show that firms who publicly announced their intention to participate in the boycott, on average, earn a statistically significant positive abnormal stock return of 2.68% in the four days immediately after their announcements. Research limitations/implications - Findings relate to a specific case of a boycott campaign. Also, the sample size is limited and restricted to US stocks. The signalling value of corporate social advocacy actions may vary across countries due to institutional and cultural differences. Market reaction may also be different for issues that are more charged than the ones examined in this study. Therefore, future research might investigate other markets, use larger sample sizes and consider a broader range of social-political issues. Practical implications - The presence of significant stock price changes for firms that publicly announced their decision to side with activists on the issue of hate propaganda and misinformation offers potentially valuable insights on the timing of trades for investors and arbitrageurs. Insights from the study also provide a practical resource that can be used to inform organizations' decision-making about such issues. Social implications - Taking the lead to push on social-political issues, such as hate propaganda, discrimination, among others, and communicating their stands in a way that speaks to their values and identity, could be rewarding for companies. Originality/value - This study provides novel evidence on the impact that corporate stances on important social-political issues can have on stock market valuation of firms and therefore extends the existing related research which until now has focused on the impact on consumer purchasing intent and brand loyalty.

Suggested Citation

  • Afego, Pyemo N. & Alagidede, Imhotep P., 2021. "What does corporate social advocacy signal? Evidence from boycott participation decisions," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, issue forthcomi.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:232047
    DOI: 10.1108/JCMS-10-2020-0040
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/232047/1/OA-Corporate-Social-Advocacy.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/JCMS-10-2020-0040?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bash, Ahmad & Alsaifi, Khaled, 2019. "Fear from uncertainty: An event study of Khashoggi and stock market returns," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 54-58.
    2. Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez‐de‐Silanes & Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 2000. "Agency Problems and Dividend Policies around the World," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(1), pages 1-33, February.
    3. Lorenzo Patelli & Matteo Pedrini, 2014. "Is the Optimism in CEO’s Letters to Shareholders Sincere? Impression Management Versus Communicative Action During the Economic Crisis," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 124(1), pages 19-34, September.
    4. Ning Ding & Jerry T. Parwada & Jianfeng Shen & Shan Zhou, 2020. "When Does a Stock Boycott Work? Evidence from a Clinical Study of the Sudan Divestment Campaign," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 507-527, May.
    5. Michael J. Lenox & Charles E. Eesley, 2009. "Private Environmental Activism and the Selection and Response of Firm Targets," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(1), pages 45-73, March.
    6. Aït-Sahalia, Yacine & Andritzky, Jochen & Jobst, Andreas & Nowak, Sylwia & Tamirisa, Natalia, 2012. "Market response to policy initiatives during the global financial crisis," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 162-177.
    7. Ronald W. Masulis & Syed Walid Reza, 2015. "Agency Problems of Corporate Philanthropy," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 28(2), pages 592-636.
    8. Spence, Michael, 1974. "Competitive and optimal responses to signals: An analysis of efficiency and distribution," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 296-332, March.
    9. Ju, Keyi & Zhou, Dequn & Zhou, P. & Wu, Junmin, 2014. "Macroeconomic effects of oil price shocks in China: An empirical study based on Hilbert–Huang transform and event study," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 1053-1066.
    10. Kasaundra M. Tomlin, 2019. "Assessing the Efficacy of Consumer Boycotts of U.S. Target Firms: A Shareholder Wealth Analysis," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(2), pages 503-529, October.
    11. Kenneth R. Ahern & Amy K. Dittmar, 2012. "The Changing of the Boards: The Impact on Firm Valuation of Mandated Female Board Representation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 127(1), pages 137-197.
    12. Martha A. Starr, 2014. "Qualitative And Mixed-Methods Research In Economics: Surprising Growth, Promising Future," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(2), pages 238-264, April.
    13. Heilmann, Kilian, 2016. "Does political conflict hurt trade? Evidence from consumer boycotts," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 179-191.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ferrell, Allen & Liang, Hao & Renneboog, Luc, 2016. "Socially responsible firms," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(3), pages 585-606.
    2. Shiyu Lu & Bo Cheng, 2023. "Roses given, fragrance in hand: Charity law and corporate philanthropy—Evidence from a quasi‐natural experiment in China," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(2), pages 988-1003, March.
    3. Tan, Youchao & Xiao, Jason & (Colin) Zeng, Cheng & Zou, Hong, 2021. "What's in a name? The valuation effect of directors’ sharing of surnames," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    4. Sila, Vathunyoo & Gonzalez, Angelica & Hagendorff, Jens, 2016. "Women on board: Does boardroom gender diversity affect firm risk?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 26-53.
    5. Mohammed Benlemlih, 2017. "Corporate Social Responsibility and Firm Debt Maturity," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 144(3), pages 491-517, September.
    6. Kathy Fogel & Liping Ma & Randall Morck, 2021. "Powerful independent directors," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 50(4), pages 935-983, December.
    7. Giovanni Cardillo & Ennio Bendinelli & Giuseppe Torluccio, 2023. "COVID‐19, ESG investing, and the resilience of more sustainable stocks: Evidence from European firms," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(1), pages 602-623, January.
    8. Ferrell, A. & Liang, Hao & Renneboog, Luc, 2016. "Socially responsible firms," Other publications TiSEM 07e115ac-fdcb-4c4b-a0b8-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    9. Ye, Dezhu & Deng, Jie & Liu, Yi & Szewczyk, Samuel H. & Chen, Xiao, 2019. "Does board gender diversity increase dividend payouts? Analysis of global evidence," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 1-26.
    10. Shi, Wei & Wei, Jingran, 2023. "In the crossfire: Multinational companies and consumer boycotts," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    11. Mohammad Shahidul Islam, 2018. "Dividend Practices In Listed Banks Of Bangladesh," Copernican Journal of Finance & Accounting, Uniwersytet Mikolaja Kopernika, vol. 7(2), pages 43-61.
    12. Kong, Dongmin & Ji, Mianmian & Zhang, Fan, 2022. "Individual investors’ dividend tax reform and corporate social responsibility," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    13. Rizzo, Emanuele, 2018. "Essays on corporate governance and the impact of regulation on financial markets," Other publications TiSEM b5158260-ea13-4763-b992-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    14. Claire Economidou & Dimitrios Gounopoulos & Dimitrios Konstantios & Emmanuel Tsiritakis, 2023. "Is sustainability rating material to the market?," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 52(1), pages 127-179, March.
    15. Contessi, Silvio & De Pace, Pierangelo & Guidolin, Massimo, 2020. "Mildly explosive dynamics in U.S. fixed income markets," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 287(2), pages 712-724.
    16. Benkraiem, Ramzi & Boubaker, Sabri & Brinette, Souad & Khemiri, Sabrina, 2021. "Board feminization and innovation through corporate venture capital investments: The moderating effects of independence and management skills," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    17. Owen, Ann L. & Temesvary, Judit, 2018. "The performance effects of gender diversity on bank boards," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 50-63.
    18. Charléty, Patricia & Romelli, Davide & Santacreu-Vasut, Estefania, 2017. "Appointments to central bank boards: Does gender matter?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 59-61.
    19. Caroline Flammer & Michael W. Toffel & Kala Viswanathan, 2021. "Shareholder activism and firms' voluntary disclosure of climate change risks," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(10), pages 1850-1879, October.
    20. Ilhan-Nas, Tulay & Okan, Tarhan & Tatoglu, Ekrem & Demirbag, Mehmet & Wood, Geoffrey & Glaister, Keith W., 2018. "Board composition, family ownership, institutional distance and the foreign equity ownership strategies of Turkish MNEs," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 53(6), pages 862-879.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Abnormal return; Content analysis; Event study; Boycotts; Corporate social advocacy; Signalling effect;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G10 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - General (includes Measurement and Data)
    • G14 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Information and Market Efficiency; Event Studies; Insider Trading
    • M14 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Corporate Culture; Diversity; Social Responsibility

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:232047. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.