Fake, Faulty, and Authentic Stand-Taking

What Determines the Legitimacy of Corporate Social Advocacy

Bibliographic Data

ID12800536
AuthorsMyungok Chris Yim (0000-0001-6776-3959, Loyola University Chicago, corresponding author)
Year2021
Volume15
Issue1
Pages60-76
Publication date2021-01-01
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueInternational Journal of Strategic Communication (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1553-118X • E-ISSN: 1553-1198
PublisherTaylor & Francis (PUBLISHER • GB)
DOI10.1080/1553118x.2020.1856853
OpenAlexW3118378753
LanguageEN
Citations received23
References cited72

This study experimentally interrogates the critical preconditions of how an organization legitimizes its corporate social advocacy (CSA) initiatives as an integral part of strategic communication. A 2 × 2 factorial design survey (N = 398) indicates that companies must find a way to bridge two perceptual gaps −a factual gap and a conformity gap. The factual gap refers to perceived inconsistency of values – that is, that the company may not walk its talk on moral values. In contrast, the conformity gap refers to values incongruity between public expectations and corporate performance. Using these two conceptual constructs, we classify CSA initiatives into authentic, faulty, and fake. Authentic CSA initiatives project clear corporate moral values and meet public value expectations; unsurprisingly, they are found to generate more substantial perceptions of legitimacy and more positive behavioral willingness than other types of CSA initiative. Previously, few attempts to measure experimentally the legitimacy gaps that frequently arise between public expectations and companies’ actual CSA performance. The authentic CSA could not only fulfill corporate strategic communication missions but also generate the legitimate end of mutual understanding between the organization and the publics

Bridge (graph theory · Business · Conformity · Corporate branding · Corporate social responsibility · Legitimacy · Perception · Political science · Politics · Public relations · Publics · Sociology · Strategic Communication · Value (mathematics · Corporate Social Responsibility Reporting · Ethics in Business and Education · Law · Psychology · Public Relations and Crisis Communication · Social Psychology · Marketing

Tools

Open DOI