“But the Emperor has no clothes!” empirical validation of the nonmarket integrated strategy model

Corporate political activity (CPA) scholarship has long held the notion that firms can improve their performance by combining CPA and market activities, the so-called nonmarket integrated strategy model (NISM). Yet, the relationships embedded in the NISM have not been subjected to thorough empirical investigation beyond a handful of case studies or analyses limited to regulated firms. We step into this void and empirically evaluate whether the performance benefits of integration ever manifest. Our comprehensive analysis of over 2,200 publicly traded firms from 1998 to 2018 convincingly shows that the firms combining their CPA and market activities do not outperform their counterparts not using this combined strategy. Instead, the overall pattern of findings provides a nuanced picture of firms’ abilities to benefit financially from integration. We offer four interpretations of these novel findings, related to strategic control limitations, policy opportunity windows, visibility via market activities, and limited integration mimicry, advancing our theoretical knowledge of nonmarket integrated strategy.