ABSTRACT

This study experimentally interrogates the critical preconditions of how an organization legitimizes its corporate social advocacy (CSA) initiatives as an integral part of strategic communication. A 2 × 2 factorial design survey (N = 398) indicates that companies must find a way to bridge two perceptual gaps $-$a factual gap and a conformity gap. The factual gap refers to perceived inconsistency of values – that is, that the company may not walk its talk on moral values. In contrast, the conformity gap refers to values incongruity between public expectations and corporate performance. Using these two conceptual constructs, we classify CSA initiatives into authentic, faulty, and fake. Authentic CSA initiatives project clear corporate moral values and meet public value expectations; unsurprisingly, they are found to generate more substantial perceptions of legitimacy and more positive behavioral willingness than other types of CSA initiative. Previously, few attempts to measure experimentally the legitimacy gaps that frequently arise between public expectations and companies’ actual CSA performance. The authentic CSA could not only fulfill corporate strategic communication missions but also generate the legitimate end of mutual understanding between the organization and the publics.

摘要

这项研究实验性地询问了一个关键前提，即组织如何将其公司的社会倡导（CSA）计划合法化，作为战略沟通的组成部分。2×2析因设计调查（N = 398）表明，公司必须找到一种方法来弥合两个感知差距$-$一个事实间隙和一个符合间隙。事实上的差距指的是价值观念上的不一致-也就是说，公司可能不会继续讲道德价值观。相反，整合差距是指公众期望与公司绩效之间的价值观不一致。使用这两种概念构造，我们将CSA举措分类为真实，错误和伪造。真实的CSA计划可体现清晰的企业道德价值观并达到公众价值期望；毫不奇怪，与其他类型的CSA计划相比，它们产生了更多的合法性感知和更积极的行为意愿。以前，很少有实验性地测量公众期望与公司实际CSA绩效之间经常出现的合法性差距的尝试。真实的CSA不仅可以履行公司的战略沟通任务，而且可以在组织与公众之间建立合法的相互理解终点。