search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
MARKETING AND MANAGEMENT COMMUNICATION


When (not) to talk politics in business: Experimental


evidence Strategic Management Journal, 46, 5, May 2025 LINK TO PAPER


TOMASSO BONDI ASSISTANT PROFESSOR


Samuel Curtis Johnson Graduate School of Management


Cornell SC Johnson College of Business Cornell University


Co-authors • Tomasso Bondi


Assistant professor, Samuel Curtis Johnson Graduate School of Management, Cornell SC Johnson College of Business, Cornell University


• Vanessa C. Burbano, Columbia Business School, Columbia University • Fabrizio Dell’Acqua, Harvard Business School and Digital Data Design Institute, Harvard University


Summary Chief executive officer (CEO) activism, wherein firm leaders communicate


public stances on social and political issues unrelated to their core business, has increased in recent years. Tis includes CEOs’ public endorsement of, or opposition to, political candidates, policies, or laws, such as Disney’s commu- nications about the Florida HB 1557 law, referenced by some as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill. At the same time, other firm leaders have made public statements indicating that they will not take a stance (in either ideological direction) on political issues.


Te strategic implications of these approaches remain unclear. Te authors conduct two survey-based experiments to shed light on how individuals respond to CEO activism, differentiating between communicating an apolit- ical stance versus saying nothing. Tey also examine whether characteristics that could influence perceived credibility of the position have an influence on responses. Tis paper sheds light on how individuals respond to firms’ communicating an apolitical stance or taking an ideological stance in either direction on a political issue, and how this varies depending on whether the stance is perceived as consistent with expecations and whether it is backed by monetary commitment. It thus helps managers navigate stance-taking on polical issues.


CONTENTS TO MAIN


| RESEARCH WITH IMPACT: CORNELL SC JOHNSON COLLEGE OF BUSINESS • 2025 EDITION


35


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100