Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

“Why Should We Care about Marriage Equality?”: Political Advocacy as a Part of Corporate Responsibility

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

More and more companies are publicly taking a stand on social and political issues such as gay marriage legislation. This paper argues that this type of engagement, which can be called “corporate political advocacy,” raises new conceptual and normative challenges especially for theories of corporate responsibility. Furthermore, it poses practical challenges for managers who are confronted with it. This paper addresses all three challenges: first, it defines and conceptualizes corporate political advocacy and distinguishes it from other forms of corporate political involvement. Second, it makes normative sense of corporate advocacy as an element of corporate responsibility. Third, it reflects on the practical implications for managers dealing with this issue.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/6125277/Ben-and-Jerrys-renames-ice-cream-Hubby-Hubby-in-celebration-of-gay-marriage.html, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  2. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/22/starbucks-gay-marriage-support-hrc-nom-protest_n_1372500.html, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  3. http://seattletimes.com/html/politicsnorthwest/2017323520_starbucks_supports_gay_marriag.html, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  4. http://www.npr.org/2013/03/26/175350841/its-bad-for-business-employers-side-with-doma-opponents, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  5. http://www.examiner.com/article/google-announces-legalize-love-campaign-support-of-gay-marriage-1, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  6. http://www.business-humanrights.org/Documents/GlobalWitnessDoddFrank, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  7. http://grprofessionals.org/join-all/code-of-ethics/, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  8. http://www.ethicalcorp.com/environment/rio20-blog-business-initiatives-set-summit-scene, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  9. See http://www.us-cap.org.

  10. http://us-cap.org/USCAPCallForAction.pdf, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  11. http://googleblog.blogspot.ch/2008/09/our-position-on-californias-no-on-8.html, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  12. http://googleblog.blogspot.ch/2008/09/our-position-on-californias-no-on-8.html, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  13. http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2012/06/06/daily-circuit-businesses-gay-marriage/, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  14. Similarly, the above-mentioned amicus brief of 278 companies to the Supreme Court largely, but not exclusively, stresses the burdens and expenses which DOMA imposes upon employers.

  15. For more detailed elaborations on the relation between advocacy, political CSR, and CPA, see Baur & Wettstein (forthcoming).

  16. Another term for essentially the same strand of research is Corporate Political Strategy (CPS) (see e.g., Hillman and Hitt 1999).

  17. See http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/09/01/ben-and-jerrys-hubby-hubby-ice-cream-celebrates-same-sex-marriage/ for the opinion of a brand expert on this issue.

  18. However, stakeholder dialogs do not have to be entirely irrelevant to advocacy. After all, advocacy can either occur as a stand-alone activity, for example, if a corporation expresses support for a cause through advertising as in Ben and Jerry’s case (so-called issue or advocacy advertising (see Stark 2010) or as collective action, that is in the form of coalitions with other corporations or non-profit organizations. Thus, MSIs can play a role in advocacy, namely if they act as a unitary political actor toward the outside. However, it has to be noted that the degree of political exposure of corporations as part of an MSI is of course always less distinctive than if they do so on a stand-alone basis.

  19. Apple Sweatshops & Twitter Censorship: A Defining Moment for CSR. <http://www.csrwire.com/blog/posts/294-apple-s-supplier-woes-a-defining-moment-for-csr>, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  20. Brief of 278 Employers and Organizations Representing Employers as Amici Curiae in Support of Respondent Edith Schlain Windsor (Merits Brief), p. 35, The United States of America v. Edith Schlain Windsor and Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group of the United States House of Representatives, No. 12-307.

  21. http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2012/06/06/daily-circuit-businesses-gay-marriage/, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  22. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/feb/14/texas-executions-threatened-stocks-run-low, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  23. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2042738/Manuel-Valle-execution-Drug-maker-Staffan-Schuberg-urges-Florida-NOT-use-product.html, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  24. Hussain (2012, p. 113) advances a similar distinction in regard to ethical consumerism. He distinguishes what he calls “social change ethical consumerism” from “clean hands ethical consumerism.” Consumers engage in the latter if they want to avoid being implicated as a participant in the immoral practices through which it was produced. Thus, their aim is not to change those practices, but merely not to become personally linked to them. The aim of social change ethical consumerism, on the other hand, is to force and catalyze changes in production practices.

  25. Independently of Lundbeck’s measures, the European Commission put in place such new restrictions on the export of anesthetics used to execute people in the US in December 2011. As a result, many states, such as Texas, are currently running out of the drug. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/20/death-penalty-drugs-european-commission, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  26. http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/wordofmouth/2009/sep/03/ben-jerrys-gay-marriage-hubby, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  27. http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/02/03/us-jcpenney-ellendegeneres-idUSTRE8121VK20120203, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  28. http://www.examiner.com/article/google-announces-legalize-love-campaign-support-of-gay-marriage-1, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  29. http://www.examiner.com/article/google-announces-legalize-love-campaign-support-of-gay-marriage-1, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  30. http://www.examiner.com/article/google-announces-legalize-love-campaign-support-of-gay-marriage-1, last accessed July 15, 2014.

  31. http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/wordofmouth/2009/sep/03/ben-jerrys-gay-marriage-hubby, last accessed July 15, 2014.

References

  • Aguilera, R. V., Rupp, D. E., Williams, C. A., & Ganapathi, J. (2007). Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: A multilevel theory of social change in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 836–863. doi:10.5465/amr.2007.25275678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alzola, M. (2013). Corporate dystopia: The ethics of corporate political spending. Business and Society,. doi:10.1177/0007650312474952.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barley, S. R. (2007). Corporations, democracy, and the public good. Journal of Management Inquiry, 16(3), 201–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Basu, K., & Palazzo, G. (2008). Corporate social responsibility: A process model of sensemaking. Academy of Management Review, 33(1), 122–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baur, D. (2011). NGOs as legitimate partners of corporations. A political conceptualization. Dordrecht: Springer.

  • Baur, D., & Palazzo, G. (2011). The moral legitimacy of NGOs as partners of corporations. Business Ethics Quarterly, 21(4), 579–604.

  • Baur, D., & Wettstein, F. (forthcoming). CSR's new challenge: Corporate political advocacy. In M. C. Coutinho de Arruda & B. Rok (Eds.), The virtue of responsibility. Springer.

  • Baysinger, B. (1984). Domain maintenance as an objective of business political activity: An expanded typology. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 248–258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonardi, J.-P., & Keim, G. D. (2005). Corporate political strategies for widely salient issues. The Academy of Management Review, 30(3), 555–576.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brenn, P. S., & Vidaver-Cohen, D. (2009). Corporate motives for social initiative: Legitimacy, sustainability, or the bottom line? Journal of Business Ethics, 87(1), 91–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, D. L., Vetterlein, A., & Roemer-Mahler, A. (2010). Theorizing transnational corporations as social actors: An analysis of corporate motivations. Business & Politics, 12(1), 1–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, S. L. (1997). The new federalism: Implications for the legitimacy of corporate political activity. Business Ethics Quarterly, 7(3), 81–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ciulla, J. B. (2005). Integrating leadership with ethics: Is good leadership contrary to human nature? In J. Doh & S. Stumpf (Eds.), Handbook on responsible leadership and governance in global business (pp. 159–179). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, R. (1985). Social forces, states and world orders. Beyond international relations theory. In R. O. Keohane (Ed.), Neorealism and its critics (pp. 204–254). New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Den Hond, F., Rehbein, K. A., Bakker, F. G., & van Lankveld, H. K. (2013). Playing on two chessboards: Reputation effects between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate political activity (CPA). Journal of Management Studies, 51(5), 790–813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edgett, R. (2002). Toward an ethical framework for advocacy in public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, 14(1), 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E., Harrison, J. S., Wicks, A. C., Parmar, B. L., & De Colle, S. (2010). Stakeholder theory: The state of the art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Getz, K. A. (1997). Research in corporate political action. Business and Society, 36(1), 32–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodpaster, K. E. (2007). Conscience and corporate culture. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graafland, J., & van de Ven, B. (2006). Strategic and moral motivation for corporate social responsibility. Journal of Corporate Citizenship, 22, 111–123.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, C. W. L., & Jones, T. M. (1992). Stakeholder-agency theory. Journal of Management Studies, 29(2), 131–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A. J., & Hitt, M. A. (1999). Corporate political strategy formulation: A model of approach, participation, and strategy decisions. Academy of Management Review, 24(4), 825–842.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A. J., Keim, G. D., & Schuler, D. (2004). Corporate political activity: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 30(6), 837–857.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollender, J. (2004). What matters most: Corporate values and social responsibility. California Management Review, 46(4), 111–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hussain, W. (2012). Is ethical consumerism an impermissible form of vigilantism? Philosophy & Public Affairs, 40(2), 111–143. doi:10.1111/j.1088-4963.2012.01218.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarzabkowski, P., & Fenton, E. (2006). Strategizing and organizing in pluralistic contexts. Long Range Planning, 39(6), 631–648. doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2006.11.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaptein, M. (2004). Business codes of multinational firms: What do they say? Journal of Business Ethics, 50(1), 13–31. doi:10.1023/B:BUSI.0000021051.53460.da.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keffer, J. M., & Hill, R. P. (1997). An ethical approach to lobbying activities of businesses in the United States. Journal of Business Ethics, 16(12/13), 1371–1379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keim, G. D., & Zeithaml, C. P. (1986). Corporate political strategy and legislative decision making: A review and contingency approach. The Academy of Management Review, 11(4), 828–843.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kobrin, S. J. (2009). Private political authority and public responsibility: Transnational Politics, transnational firms, and human rights. Business Ethics Quarterly, 19(3), 349–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Love, E. G., & Kraatz, M. (2009). Character, conformity, or the bottom line? How and why downsizing affected corporate reputation. Academy of Management Journal, 52(2), 314–335. doi:10.5465/amj.2009.37308247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maignan, I., Ferrell, O. C., & Ferrell, L. (2005). A stakeholder model for implementing social responsibility in marketing. European Journal of Marketing, 39(9/10), 956–977.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mathews, J. T. (1997). Power shift. Foreign Affairs, 76(1), 50–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matten, D., & Crane, A. (2005). Corporate citizenship: Toward an extended theoretical conceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 30(1), 166–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matten, D., & Moon, J. (2008). “Implicit” and “Explicit” CSR: A conceptual framework for a comparative understanding of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 404–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McAlister, D. T., & Ferrell, L. (2002). The role of strategic philanthropy in marketing strategy. European Journal of Marketing, 36(5), 689–705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moon, J., Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2005). Can corporations be citizens? Corporate citizenship as a metaphor for business participation in society. Business Ethics Quarterly, 15(3), 429–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Néron, P.-Y. (2010). Business and the polis: What does it mean to see corporations as political actors? Journal of Business Ethics, 94(3), 333–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Néron, P.-Y., & Norman, W. (2008a). Citizenship, Inc. Business Ethics Quarterly, 18(1), 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Néron, P.-Y., & Norman, W. (2008b). Corporations as citizens: Political not metaphorical. Business Ethics Quarterly, 18(1), 61–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oberman, W. D. (2004). A framework for the ethical analysis of corporate political activity. Business and Society Review, 109(2), 245–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paine, L. S. (1994). Managing for organizational integrity. Harvard Business Review, 72(2), 106–117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, K., & Pfitzer, M. (2009). Lobbying for good. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 7(1), 44–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, R. (2003). Stakeholder legitimacy. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(1), 25–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rehbein, K. A., & Schuler, D. A. (1999). Testing the firm as a filter of corporate political action. Business and Society, 38(2), 144–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rehbein, K., & Schuler, D. A. (2013). Linking corporate community programs and political strategies: A resource-based view. Business and Society,. doi:10.1177/0007650313478024.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, A. G., Baumann-Pauly, D., & Schneider, A. (2013). Democratizing corporate governance: Compensating for the democratic deficit of corporate political activity and corporate citizenship. Business and Society, 52(3), 473–514. doi:10.1177/0007650312446931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. (2007). Toward a political conception of corporate responsibility—business and society seen from a Habermasian perspective. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1096–1120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, A. G., & Palazzo, G. (2011). The new political role of business in a globalized world: A review of a new perspective on CSR and its implications for the firm, governance, and democracy. Journal of Management Studies, 48(4), 899–931.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuler, D. A. (1996). Corporate political strategy and foreign competition: The case of the steel industry. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 720–737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuler, D. A. (2008). Peering in from corporate political activity. Journal of Management Inquiry, 17(3), 162–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, S. P. (1979). Institutional/image advertising and idea/issue advertising as marketing tools: Some public policy issues. The Journal of Marketing, 43(1), 68–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, S. P., & Williams, O. F. (2000). Creating and implementing global codes of conduct: An assessment of the sullivan principles as a role model for developing international codes of conduct—lessons learned and unlearned. Business and Society Review, 105(2), 169–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stark, A. (2010). Business in politics: Lobbying and corporate campaign contributions. In G. G. Brenkert & T. L. Beauchamp (Eds.), The oxford handbook of business ethics (pp. 501–532). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tian, Z., Gao, H., & Cone, M. (2008). A study of the ethical issues of private entrepreneurs participating in politics in China. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(3), 627–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, P. (2008). Integrative economic ethics. Foundations of a civilized market economy. Cambridge (UK) et al.: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • United Nations. (2008a). Clarifying the concepts of ‘Sphere of Influence’ and ‘Complicity.’ A/HRC/8/16.

  • United Nations. (2008b). Protect respect and remedy: A framework for business and human rights. A/HRC/8/5.

  • United Nations. (2011). Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Implementing the United Nations ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’ Framework. A/HRC/17/31.

  • Valente, M., & Crane, A. (2010). Public responsibility and private enterprise in developing countries. California Management Review, 52(3), 52–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, D. (2005). The market for virtue: The potential and limits of corporate social responsibility. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, D. (2008a). Private global business regulation. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 261–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogel, D. (2008b). Socially responsible lobbying. Harvard Business Review, 86(2), 41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S., & Rasche, A. (2012). Building the responsible enterprise. Where vision and values add value. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, J. P. (2005). Review: book review essay: taking stock of stakeholder management. Academy of Management Review, 30(2), 426–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. (1963). Objectivity in social science and social policy. In M. Natanson (Ed.), Philosophy of the social sciences (pp. 355–418). New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Werner, T. (2012). Public forces and private politics in American big business. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.  

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wettstein, F. (2009). Multinational Corporations and Global Justice. Human Rights Obligations of a Quasi-Governmental Institution. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

  • Windsor, D. (2007). Toward a global theory of cross-border and multilevel corporate political activity. Business and Society, 46(2), 253–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Business Ethics, University of St. Gallen, Girtannerstrasse 8, 9010, St. Gallen, Switzerland

    Florian Wettstein & Dorothea Baur

Authors
  1. Florian Wettstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dorothea Baur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Florian Wettstein.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wettstein, F., Baur, D. “Why Should We Care about Marriage Equality?”: Political Advocacy as a Part of Corporate Responsibility. J Bus Ethics 138, 199–213 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2631-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2631-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation