Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine how legitimacy is gained, maintained or repaired through direct action with salient stakeholders and/or through external reporting, by using a number of empirical case vignettes within a single case study organisation.Design/methodology/approachThe study investigates a foreign affiliate of a large multinational organisation involved in an environmentally sensitive industry. Data collection included semi-structured interviews with 26 participants, organisational reports and participation in the organisation’s annual environmental management seminar and a stakeholder engagement meeting.FindingsFour vignettes featuring environmental issues illustrate the complexity of organisational responses. Issue visibility, stakeholder salience and stakeholder interconnectedness influence a company’s action to manage legitimacy. In the short-term, environmental issues which affected salient stakeholders resulted in swift and direct action to protect pragmatic legitimacy, but external reporting did not feature in legitimacy management efforts. Highly visible issues to the public, regulators and the media, however, resulted in direct action together with external reporting to manage wider stakeholder perceptions. External reporting was used superficially, along with a broad suite of communication strategies, to gain legitimacy in the long-term decision about the company’s future in New Zealand.Research limitations/implicationsThis paper outlines how episodic encounters to manage strategic legitimacy with salient stakeholders in the short-term are theoretically distinct, but nonetheless linked to continual efforts to maintain institutional legitimacy. Case vignettes highlight how pragmatic legitimacy via dispositional legitimacy can be managed with direct action in the short-term to influence a limited range of salient stakeholders. The way external reporting features in legitimacy management is limited, although this has predominantly been the focus of prior research. Only where an environmental incident damages legitimacy to a larger number of stakeholders is external reporting also used to buttress community support.Originality/valueThe concept of legitimacy is comprehensively applied, linking the strategic and institutional arms of legitimacy and illustrating how episodic actions are taken to manage legitimacy in the short-term with continual efforts to manage legitimacy in the long-term. Stakeholder salience and networks are brought in as novel theoretical extensions to provide a deeper understanding of the interrelationships between these key concepts with a unique case study.

Highlights

  • The purpose of this paper is to examine how a company responds to environmental issues and legitimacy threats through direct actions and/or external reporting

  • Case vignettes highlight how pragmatic legitimacy via dispositional legitimacy can be managed with direct action in the short-term to influence a limited range of salient stakeholders

  • The way external reporting features in legitimacy management is limited, this has predominantly been the focus of prior research

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The purpose of this paper is to examine how a company responds to environmental issues and legitimacy threats through direct actions and/or external reporting. The present study takes a fresh perspective, by exploring the behaviour of a company in response to real environmental issues uncovered during the case study investigation It illustrates how direct action and/or external reporting are strategic choices to manage organisational legitimacy in response to stakeholder salience. Suchman (1995) introduced two broad strands of legitimacy theory involving strategic and institutional approaches Our study brings these strands together, illustrating the way that a company can strategically manage its response behaviours to achieve a more institutionally defined sense of legitimacy. This advances perspectives into understanding “strategic and institutional aspects of legitimacy theory as two sides of the same coin” This study extends Suchman’s (1995) framework by discussing the linkages between more short-term (episodic) efforts to manage strategic legitimacy which establish a long-term (continual) sense of institutional legitimacy in conforming to social norms, customs and behaviours (Deegan, 2002)

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.