冲突的偶然性作用:股东参与中的协商互动与分歧

IF 3.4 2区哲学 Q2 BUSINESS

Business Ethics Quarterly Pub Date : 2022-02-10 DOI:10.1017/beq.2021.46

I. Beccarini, Daniel Beunza, F. Ferraro, Andreas G. F. Hoepner

{"title":"冲突的偶然性作用:股东参与中的协商互动与分歧","authors":"I. Beccarini, Daniel Beunza, F. Ferraro, Andreas G. F. Hoepner","doi":"10.1017/beq.2021.46","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How is the tension between conflict and deliberation resolved in shareholder engagement? We address this question by studying shareholder engagement as a deliberative process with three stages: establishing dialogue, solution development, and solution implementation. We theorize that two interactionist mechanisms, deliberative interaction and the voicing of disagreement, play different roles at different stages of the process. We test our hypotheses with a proprietary database of 169 environmental, social, and governance engagements with US public companies over 2007–12. We find that while deliberative interaction does not help advance the engagement process, it positively moderates the effect of disagreement in the solution development stage. By contrast, in the solution implementation stage, deliberative interaction amplifies the negative effect of disagreement, thus hindering progress in the engagement. Our article contributes to shareholder engagement, deliberation theory, and interactionist organization theory by establishing that engagement effectiveness is an interactional achievement shaped by both deliberation and disagreement.","PeriodicalId":48031,"journal":{"name":"Business Ethics Quarterly","volume":"33 1","pages":"26 - 66"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Contingent Role of Conflict: Deliberative Interaction and Disagreement in Shareholder Engagement\",\"authors\":\"I. Beccarini, Daniel Beunza, F. Ferraro, Andreas G. F. Hoepner\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/beq.2021.46\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"How is the tension between conflict and deliberation resolved in shareholder engagement? We address this question by studying shareholder engagement as a deliberative process with three stages: establishing dialogue, solution development, and solution implementation. We theorize that two interactionist mechanisms, deliberative interaction and the voicing of disagreement, play different roles at different stages of the process. We test our hypotheses with a proprietary database of 169 environmental, social, and governance engagements with US public companies over 2007–12. We find that while deliberative interaction does not help advance the engagement process, it positively moderates the effect of disagreement in the solution development stage. By contrast, in the solution implementation stage, deliberative interaction amplifies the negative effect of disagreement, thus hindering progress in the engagement. Our article contributes to shareholder engagement, deliberation theory, and interactionist organization theory by establishing that engagement effectiveness is an interactional achievement shaped by both deliberation and disagreement.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48031,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Business Ethics Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"26 - 66\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Business Ethics Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2021.46\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Business Ethics Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/beq.2021.46","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 11

摘要

在股东参与中，冲突和审议之间的紧张关系是如何解决的？我们通过将股东参与作为一个审议过程来解决这个问题，该审议过程分为三个阶段：建立对话、制定解决方案和实施解决方案。我们认为，两种互动机制，审议互动和表达分歧，在过程的不同阶段发挥着不同的作用。我们使用一个专有数据库来测试我们的假设，该数据库包含2007-12年间与美国上市公司的169项环境、社会和治理活动。我们发现，虽然协商互动无助于推进参与过程，但它在解决方案开发阶段积极调节了分歧的影响。相比之下，在解决方案实施阶段，协商互动放大了分歧的负面影响，从而阻碍了参与的进展。本文通过确立参与有效性是由商议和分歧共同形成的互动成果，对股东参与、商议理论和互动组织理论做出了贡献。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

The Contingent Role of Conflict: Deliberative Interaction and Disagreement in Shareholder Engagement

How is the tension between conflict and deliberation resolved in shareholder engagement? We address this question by studying shareholder engagement as a deliberative process with three stages: establishing dialogue, solution development, and solution implementation. We theorize that two interactionist mechanisms, deliberative interaction and the voicing of disagreement, play different roles at different stages of the process. We test our hypotheses with a proprietary database of 169 environmental, social, and governance engagements with US public companies over 2007–12. We find that while deliberative interaction does not help advance the engagement process, it positively moderates the effect of disagreement in the solution development stage. By contrast, in the solution implementation stage, deliberative interaction amplifies the negative effect of disagreement, thus hindering progress in the engagement. Our article contributes to shareholder engagement, deliberation theory, and interactionist organization theory by establishing that engagement effectiveness is an interactional achievement shaped by both deliberation and disagreement.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Business Ethics Quarterly Multiple-

CiteScore

6.20

自引率

10.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Business Ethics Quarterly (BEQ) is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal that publishes theoretical and empirical research relevant to the ethics of business. Since 1991 this multidisciplinary journal has published articles and reviews on a broad range of topics, including the internal ethics of business organizations, the role of business organizations in larger social, political and cultural frameworks, and the ethical quality of market-based societies and market-based relationships. It recognizes that contributions to the better understanding of business ethics can come from any quarter and therefore publishes scholarship rooted in the humanities, social sciences, and professional fields.