Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How CEO narcissism affects corporate social responsibility choice?

  • Published:
Asia Pacific Journal of Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study aims to explore how CEO narcissism affects firms’ CSR choice given that the relationship between chief executive officer (CEO) narcissism and corporate social responsibility (CSR) has yielded inconclusive results. On the basis of upper echelon theory and the attention-based view, we first propose that narcissistic CEOs allocate more attention to peripheral CSR and less attention to embedded CSR. We then explore the boundary conditions that may affect CEO narcissism and CSR choice. We find that CEO narcissism is positively related to peripheral CSR and negatively related to embedded CSR via a sample of 4792 firm-year observations in the manufacturing industry of Chinese A-share listed firms. Results show that family ownership weakens the negative relation between CEO narcissism and embedded CSR. Moreover, CEO duality strengthens the positive relation between CEO narcissism and peripheral CSR and strengthens the negative relation between CEO narcissism and embedded CSR. These findings have significant implications for the CSR literature, narcissism research, and the attention-based view.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aguinis, H. 2011. Organizational responsibility: Doing good and doing well. Washington, DC:American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. 2013. Embedded versus peripheral corporate social responsibility: Psychological foundations. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 6(04): 314–332.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aguinis, H., & Glavas, A. 2017. On corporate social responsibility, Sensemaking, and the search for meaningfulness through work. Journal of Management, 45(3): 1057–1086.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alshammari, M. 2017. CEO narcissism. Prior Experience, Board Prior Experience, And Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR):An Integrated Framework Using Upper Echelons Theory, Stakeholders’ Theory, And A Decomposed Measure Of CSR, The University of Texas Arlington, Arlington.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, M. L. 2008. An attention-based view of real options reasoning. Academy of Management Review, 33(3): 606–628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berrone, P., Cruz, C., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. 2012. Socioemotional wealth in family firms. Family Business Review, 25(3): 258–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berrone, P., Cruz, C., Gomez-Mejia, L. R., & Larraza-Kintana, M. 2010. Socioemotional wealth and corporate responses to institutional pressures: Do family-controlled firms pollute less? Administrative Science Quarterly, 55(1): 82–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, W. O., Helland, E., & Smith, J. K. 2006. Corporate philanthropic practices. Journal of corporate finance, 12(5): 855–877.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. L. 2007. Why would corporations behave in socially responsible ways? An institutional theory of corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3): 946–967.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, R. J., Jeong, S.-H., & Graffin, S. D. 2019. Born to take risk? The effect of CEO birth order on strategic risk taking. Academy of Management Journal, 62(4): 1278–1306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, W. K., & Miller, J. D. 2011. The handbook of narcissism and narcissistic personality disorder: Theoretical approaches, empirical findings, and treatments: John Wiley & Sons.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Campopiano, G., De Massis, A., & Chirico, F. 2014. Firm philanthropy in small- and medium-sized family firms. Family Business Review, 27(3): 244–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cennamo, C., Berrone, P., Cruz, C., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. 2012. Socioemotional wealth and proactive stakeholder engagement: Why family-controlled firms care more about their stakeholders. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(6): 1153–1173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatterjee, A., & Hambrick, D. C. 2007. It's all about me: Narcissistic chief executive officers and their effects on company strategy and performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(3): 351–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y.-S. 2008. The driver of green innovation and green image–green core competence. Journal of Business Ethics, 81(3): 531–543.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y.-S., Lai, S.-B., & Wen, C.-T. 2006. The influence of green innovation performance on corporate advantage in Taiwan. Journal of Business Ethics, 67(4): 331–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chin, M., Hambrick, D. C., & Treviño, L. K. 2013. Political ideologies of CEOs: The influence of executives’ values on corporate social responsibility. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(2): 197–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, T. S., & Hambrick, D. C. 2006. Attention as the mediator between top management team characteristics and strategic change: The case of airline deregulation. Organization Science, 17(4): 453–469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chrisman, J. J., & Patel, P. C. 2012. Variations in R&D Investments of Family and Nonfamily Firms: Behavioral agency and myopic loss aversion perspectives. Academy of Management Journal, 55(4): 976–997.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Claessens, S., Djankov, S., & Lang, L. H. 2000. The separation of ownership and control in east Asian corporations. Journal of Financial Economics, 58(1–2): 81–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • David, P., Bloom, M., & Hillman, A. J. 2007. Investor activism, managerial responsiveness, and corporate social performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(1): 91–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Vries, M. F. K., & Miller, D. 1986. Personality, culture, and organization. Academy of Management Review, 11(2): 266–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deephouse, D. L., & Jaskiewicz, P. 2013. Do family firms have better reputations than non-family firms? An integration of Socioemotional wealth and social identity theories. Journal of Management Studies, 50(3): 337–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delmas, M. A., & Gergaud, O. 2014. Sustainable certification for future generations. Family Business Review, 27(3): 228–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein, S., & D'aveni, R. A. 1994. CEO duality as a double-edged sword: How boards of directors balance entrenchment avoidance and unity of command. Academy of Management Journal, 37(5): 1079–1108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garg, V. K., Walters, B. A., & Priem, R. L. 2003. Chief executive scanning emphases, environmental dynamism, and manufacturing firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 24(8): 725–744.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ge, J., & Micelotta, E. 2019. When does the family matter? Institutional pressures and corporate philanthropy in China. Organization Studies, 017084061983670.

  • Ge, J., & Zhao, W. 2017. Institutional linkages with the state and organizational practices in corporate social responsibility: Evidence from China. Management and Organization Review, 13(3): 539–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerstner, W.-C., König, A., Enders, A., & Hambrick, D. C. 2013. CEO narcissism, audience engagement, and organizational adoption of technological discontinuities. Administrative Science Quarterly, 58(2): 257–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gomez-Mejia, L. R., Cruz, C., Berrone, P., & De Castro, J. 2011. The bind that ties: Socioemotional wealth preservation in family firms. The Academy of Management Annals, 5(1): 653–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gómez-Mejía, L. R., Haynes, K. T., Núñez-Nickel, M., Jacobson, K. J. L., & Moyano-Fuentes, J. 2007. Socioemotional wealth and business risks in family-controlled firms: Evidence from Spanish olive oil Mills. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52(1): 106–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, A., Nadkarni, S., & Mariam, M. 2018. Dispositional sources of managerial discretion: CEO ideology, CEO personality, and firm strategies. Administrative Science Quarterly, 000183921879312.

  • Ham, C., Lang, M., Seybert, N., & Wang, S. 2017a. CFO narcissism and financial reporting quality. Journal of Accounting Research, 55(5): 1089–1135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ham, C., Seybert, N., & Wang, S. 2017b. Narcissism is a bad sign: CEO signature size, investment, and performance. Review of Accounting Studies, 23(1): 234–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick, D. C. 2007. Upper echelons theory: An update. Academy of Management Review, 32(2): 334–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. 1984. Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review, 9(2): 193–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hengst, I.-A., Jarzabkowski, P., Hoegl, M., & Muethel, M. 2019. Toward a process theory of making sustainability strategies legitimate in action. Academy of management journal(ja).

  • Hirshleifer, D., Low, A., & Teoh, S. H. 2012. Are overconfident CEOs better innovators? The Journal of Finance, 67(4): 1457–1498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iyengar, R. J., & Zampelli, E. M. 2009. Self-selection, endogeneity, and the relationship between CEO duality and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 30(10): 1092–1112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jia, M., & Zhang, Z. 2012. Critical mass of women on BODs, multiple identities, and corporate philanthropic disaster response: Evidence from privately owned Chinese firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 118(2): 303–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Judge, T. A., LePine, J. A., & Rich, B. L. 2006. Loving yourself abundantly: Relationship of the narcissistic personality to self- and other perceptions of workplace deviance, leadership, and task and contextual performance. J Appl Psychol, 91(4): 762–776.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kammerlander, N., & Ganter, M. 2015. An attention-based view of family firm adaptation to discontinuous technological change: Exploring the role of family CEOs’ noneconomic goals. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 32(3): 361–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, K.-H., Kim, M., & Qian, C. 2018. Effects of corporate social responsibility on corporate financial performance: A competitive-action perspective. Journal of Management, 44(3): 1079–1118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohut, H., Wolf, E., & S. 1978. The disorders of the self and their treatment: An outline. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 59: 413–425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laszlo, C., & Zhexembayeva, N. 2011. Embedded sustainability: The next big competitive advantage: Stanford business books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lin, H., Sui, Y., Ma, H., Wang, L., & Zeng, S. 2018. CEO narcissism, public concern, and megaproject social responsibility: Moderated mediating examination. Journal of Management in Engineering, 34(4): 04018018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, H., Chiang, J. T., Fehr, R., Xu, M., & Wang, S. 2017. How do leaders react when treated unfairly? Leader narcissism and self-interested behavior in response to unfair treatment. J Appl Psychol, 102(11): 1590–1599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luo, X. R., Wang, D., & Zhang, J. 2017. Whose call to answer: Institutional complexity and firms’ CSR reporting. Academy of Management Journal, 60(1): 321–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mallette, P., & Fowler, K. L. 1992. Effects of board composition and stock ownership on the adoption of “poison pills”. Academy of Management Journal, 35(5): 1010–1035.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marquez-Illescas, G., Zebedee, A. A., & Zhou, L. 2019. Hear me write: Does CEO narcissism affect disclosure? Journal of Business Ethics, 159(2): 401–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marquis, C., Glynn, M. A., & Davis, G. F. 2007. Community isomorphism and corporate social action. Academy of Management Review, 32(3): 925–945.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marquis, C., & Lee, M. 2013. Who is governing whom? Executives, governance, and the structure of generosity in large US firms. Strategic Management Journal, 34(4): 483–497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marquis, C., & Qian, C. 2014. Corporate social responsibility reporting in China: Symbol or substance? Organization Science, 25(1): 127–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, P., & Schmidt, G. B. 2013. Unfortunately, ambiguities still abound in how we conceptualize corporate social responsibility. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 6(04): 379–383.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morf, C. C., & Rhodewalt, F. 2001. Unraveling the paradoxes of narcissism: A dynamic self-regulatory processing model. Psychological Inquiry, 12(4): 177–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morf, C. C., Weir, C., & Davidov, M. 2000. Narcissism and intrinsic motivation: The role of goal congruence. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36(4): 424–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nadkarni, S., & Barr, P. S. 2008. Environmental context, managerial cognition, and strategic action: An integrated view. Strategic Management Journal, 29(13): 1395–1427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ocasio, W. 1997. Towards an attention-based view of the firm. Strategic Management Journal, 18(S1): 187–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsen, K. J., & Stekelberg, J. 2015. CEO narcissism and corporate tax sheltering. The Journal of the American Taxation Association, 38(1): 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky, M., & Shen, J. 2013. Corporate social responsibility, industry, and strategy. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 6(04): 346–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, J.-H., Kim, C., Chang, Y. K., Lee, D.-H., & Sung, Y.-D. 2015. CEO hubris and firm performance: Exploring the moderating roles of CEO power and board vigilance. Journal of Business Ethics, 147(4): 919–933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patel, P. C., & Cooper, D. 2014. The harder they fall, the faster they rise: Approach and avoidance focus in narcissistic CEOs. Strategic Management Journal, 35(10): 1528–1540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peng, L., & Xiong, W. 2006. Investor attention, overconfidence and category learning. Journal of Financial Economics, 80(3): 563–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peng, M. W., & Jiang, Y. 2010. Institutions behind family ownership and control in large firms. Journal of Management Studies, 47(2): 253–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petrenko, O. V., Aime, F., Ridge, J., & Hill, A. 2016. Corporate social responsibility or CEO narcissism? CSR motivations and organizational performance. Strategic Management Journal, 37(2): 262–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robert, R., & Terry, H. 1988. A principal-components analysis of the narcissistic personality inventory and further evidence of its construct validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(5): 890–902.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarason, Y., & Hanley, G. 2013. Embedded corporate social responsibility: Can't we do better than GE, Intel, and IBM? How about a benefit corporation? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 6(04): 354–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, Y., Li, J., & Yang, H. 2012. What I see, what I do. Journal of Management, 41(6): 1698–1723.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, Y., Mack, D. Z., & Chen, G. 2018. The differential effects of CEO narcissism and hubris on corporate social responsibility. Strategic Management Journal.

  • Tang, Y., Qian, C., Chen, G., & Shen, R. 2015. How CEO hubris affects corporate social (ir)responsibility. Strategic Management Journal, 36(9): 1338–1357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tobin, J. 1958. Estimation of relationships for limited dependent variables. Econometrica, 26(1): 24–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuggle, C. S., Schnatterly, K., & Johnson, R. A. 2010a. Attention patterns in the boardroom: How board composition and processes affect discussion of entrepreneurial issues. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3): 550–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuggle, C. S., Sirmon, D. G., Reutzel, C. R., & Bierman, L. 2010b. Commanding board of director attention: Investigating how organizational performance and CEO duality affect board members’ attention to monitoring. Strategic Management Journal, 30(10): 946–968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, H. M., & Baumeister, R. F. 2002. The performance of narcissists rises and falls with perceived opportunity for glory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(5): 819–834.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, G., DeGhetto, K., Ellen, B. P., & Lamont, B. T. 2018. Board antecedents of CEO duality and the moderating role of country-level managerial discretion: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Management Studies, 56(1): 172–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, H., Tong, L., Takeuchi, R., & George, G. 2016. Corporate social responsibility: An overview and new research directions: Thematic issue on corporate social responsibility.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yates, M., & Hollensbe, E. 2013. On the positives of peripheral corporate social responsibility. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 6(04): 368–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zamir, F., & Saeed, A. 2018. Location matters: Impact of geographical proximity to financial centers on corporate social responsibility (CSR) disclosure in emerging economies. Asia Pacific Journal of Management.

  • Zhang, H., Ou, A. Y., Tsui, A. S., & Wang, H. 2017. CEO humility, narcissism and firm innovation: A paradox perspective on CEO traits. The Leadership Quarterly, 28(5): 585–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We sincerely acknowledge editor Maoliang Bu and the two anonymous reviewers for their constructive suggestions and excellent contributions to this manuscript. This study is funded by grants from National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No.71672139) and (Grant No.71932007) and is sponsored by Humanities and Social Science Talent Plan of Shaanxi University.

Funding

This study was funded by grants from National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No.71672139) and (Grant No.71932007), and was sponsored by Humanities and Social Science Talent Plan of Shaanxi University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Management, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, 710049, Shannxi, China

    Jing Chen & Zhe Zhang

  2. School of Management, Northwestern Polytechnical University, Xi’an, 710072, Shannxi, China

    Ming Jia

Authors
  1. Jing Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Zhe Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ming Jia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jing Chen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Author Jing Chen declares that she has no conflict of interest. Author Zhe Zhang declares that she has no conflict of interest. Author Ming Jia declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1

Table 4 Robustness check of replacing family dummy with family shareholding ratio
Full size table

Appendix 2

Table 5 Robustness check of removing the first 2 years of CEO tenure
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, J., Zhang, Z. & Jia, M. How CEO narcissism affects corporate social responsibility choice?. Asia Pac J Manag 38, 897–924 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-019-09698-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10490-019-09698-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation