Creating Common Ground

A Communicative Action Model of Dialogue in Shareholder Engagement

Fabrizio Ferraro, Daniel Beunza

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

14 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Despite growing empirical evidence on the effectiveness of dialogue between activists and corporations in stakeholder engagement, scholars have not fully accounted for the mechanisms that explain its success. We address this gap by leveraging Habermas’s theory of communicative action. In our longitudinal qualitative study, we explore the dialogue on climate change between the Interfaith Centre for Corporate Responsibility, a coalition of faith-based investors, Ford, and General Motors. We find that communicative action can emerge from strategic action as a result of three cycles of interaction: establishing dialogue, framing, and deliberation. Our study contributes to the literature on shareholder engagement by integrating communicative and strategic action, thereby offering a new interpretation of how reputational threat and dialogue come together to produce a common ground between activists and companies.
Original languageEnglish
JournalOrganization Science
Volume29
Issue number6
Pages (from-to)1187-1207
Number of pages21
ISSN1047-7039
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2018

Bibliographical note

Published online: 8 Oct 2018

Keywords

  • Social responsibility
  • Sustainability/corporate environmentalism
  • Corporate governance
  • Qualitative research

Cite this

@article{ba98b82dc11045828c16f2b8e4d6fe05,
title = "Creating Common Ground: A Communicative Action Model of Dialogue in Shareholder Engagement",
abstract = "Despite growing empirical evidence on the effectiveness of dialogue between activists and corporations in stakeholder engagement, scholars have not fully accounted for the mechanisms that explain its success. We address this gap by leveraging Habermas’s theory of communicative action. In our longitudinal qualitative study, we explore the dialogue on climate change between the Interfaith Centre for Corporate Responsibility, a coalition of faith-based investors, Ford, and General Motors. We find that communicative action can emerge from strategic action as a result of three cycles of interaction: establishing dialogue, framing, and deliberation. Our study contributes to the literature on shareholder engagement by integrating communicative and strategic action, thereby offering a new interpretation of how reputational threat and dialogue come together to produce a common ground between activists and companies.",
keywords = "Social responsibility, Sustainability/corporate environmentalism, Corporate governance, Qualitative research, Social responsibility, Sustainability/corporate environmentalism, Corporate governance, Qualitative research",
author = "Fabrizio Ferraro and Daniel Beunza",
note = "Published online: 8 Oct 2018",
year = "2018",
doi = "10.1287/orsc.2018.1226",
language = "English",
volume = "29",
pages = "1187--1207",
journal = "Organization Science",
issn = "1047-7039",
publisher = "Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences",
number = "6",

}

Creating Common Ground : A Communicative Action Model of Dialogue in Shareholder Engagement. / Ferraro, Fabrizio; Beunza, Daniel .

In: Organization Science, Vol. 29, No. 6, 2018, p. 1187-1207.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Creating Common Ground

T2 - A Communicative Action Model of Dialogue in Shareholder Engagement

AU - Ferraro, Fabrizio

AU - Beunza, Daniel

N1 - Published online: 8 Oct 2018

PY - 2018

Y1 - 2018

N2 - Despite growing empirical evidence on the effectiveness of dialogue between activists and corporations in stakeholder engagement, scholars have not fully accounted for the mechanisms that explain its success. We address this gap by leveraging Habermas’s theory of communicative action. In our longitudinal qualitative study, we explore the dialogue on climate change between the Interfaith Centre for Corporate Responsibility, a coalition of faith-based investors, Ford, and General Motors. We find that communicative action can emerge from strategic action as a result of three cycles of interaction: establishing dialogue, framing, and deliberation. Our study contributes to the literature on shareholder engagement by integrating communicative and strategic action, thereby offering a new interpretation of how reputational threat and dialogue come together to produce a common ground between activists and companies.

AB - Despite growing empirical evidence on the effectiveness of dialogue between activists and corporations in stakeholder engagement, scholars have not fully accounted for the mechanisms that explain its success. We address this gap by leveraging Habermas’s theory of communicative action. In our longitudinal qualitative study, we explore the dialogue on climate change between the Interfaith Centre for Corporate Responsibility, a coalition of faith-based investors, Ford, and General Motors. We find that communicative action can emerge from strategic action as a result of three cycles of interaction: establishing dialogue, framing, and deliberation. Our study contributes to the literature on shareholder engagement by integrating communicative and strategic action, thereby offering a new interpretation of how reputational threat and dialogue come together to produce a common ground between activists and companies.

KW - Social responsibility

KW - Sustainability/corporate environmentalism

KW - Corporate governance

KW - Qualitative research

KW - Social responsibility

KW - Sustainability/corporate environmentalism

KW - Corporate governance

KW - Qualitative research

UR - https://sfx-45cbs.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/45cbs?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rfr_id=info:sid/sfxit.com:azlist&sfx.ignore_date_threshold=1&rft.object_id=954921418483&rft.object_portfolio_id=&svc.holdings=yes&svc.fulltext=yes

U2 - 10.1287/orsc.2018.1226

DO - 10.1287/orsc.2018.1226

M3 - Journal article

VL - 29

SP - 1187

EP - 1207

JO - Organization Science

JF - Organization Science

SN - 1047-7039

IS - 6

ER -