Publication Type
Journal Article
Version
acceptedVersion
Publication Date
1-2016
Abstract
This study extends the literature on symbolic management by incorporating the role of stakeholder perceptions into the context of corporate philanthropy. In particular, we differentiate between the quantitative (generous giving) and qualitative (innovative giving) aspects of giving. We argue that although stakeholders may perceive both types of giving as being substantive rather than symbolic, innovative giving is likely to be perceived as more substantive than generous giving is and, thus, has a greater impact on firm value. Furthermore, stakeholder perceptions of corporate philanthropy as being more symbolic or substantive are influenced by firm characteristics—the type of products or services that a firm provides and the life-cycle stage that the firm is in—which provide stakeholders with a context to better assess the nature of a firm’s philanthropic actions and the substantiveness of its giving. We find support for our predictions using a sample covering U.S. firms’ philanthropic activities over a 19-year period.
Keywords
philanthropy, symbolic management, stakeholders perceptions, financial performance
Discipline
Business Law, Public Responsibility, and Ethics | Strategic Management Policy
Research Areas
Strategy and Organisation
Publication
Organization Science
Volume
27
Issue
1
First Page
173
Last Page
188
ISSN
1047-7039
Identifier
10.1287/orsc.2015.1030
Publisher
INFORMS
Embargo Period
2-9-2016
Citation
CUYPERS, Ilya R. P.; KOH, Ping-Sheng; and WANG, Heli.
Sincerity in corporate philanthropy, stakeholder perceptions and firm value. (2016). Organization Science. 27, (1), 173-188.
Available at: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/4876
Copyright Owner and License
Authors
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 International License.
Additional URL
https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2015.1030
Included in
Business Law, Public Responsibility, and Ethics Commons, Strategic Management Policy Commons