ABSTRACT

This study examines how the notions of moral and pragmatic legitimacy explain the role of the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX) corporate governance guidelines on anti-bribery disclosure practices by Australian companies. In particular, by focusing on the largest 100 ASX-listed companies between 2001 and 2011, we aim to explore how the competing notions of pragmatic and moral legitimacy explain anti-bribery disclosure practices and how, during moments of crisis, managers, via anti-bribery disclosures, create a deficit of moral legitimacy in pursuing pragmatic legitimacy. This paper finds that generally anti-bribery disclosures respond to the ASX corporate governance disclosure guidelines – the norms that the broader community expects to be in place for businesses to be socially and ethically accountable. In particular, we find that when responding to the disclosure guidelines, managers are inclined to avoid disclosing actual incidents of bribery that have already been reported by the news media, consistent with avoiding possible financial penalties and protecting managerial and shareholders’ interests. Such a corporate response is a compromise between maintaining moral legitimacy and gaining pragmatic legitimacy. The lack of corporate response to incidents of bribery, in turn creates a deficit in moral legitimacy.

摘要

本研究探讨了道德和务实合法性的概念如何解释澳大利亚证券交易所 (ASX) 公司治理指南对澳大利亚公司的反贿赂披露做法的作用。特别是，通过关注 2001 年至 2011 年间最大的 100 家 ASX 上市公司，我们旨在探索务实和道德合法性的竞争概念如何解释反贿赂披露实践，以及在危机时刻，管理者如何通过反贿赂贿赂披露，在追求务实合法性方面造成道德合法性缺失。本文发现，反贿赂披露通常是对 ASX 公司治理披露准则的回应——更广泛的社区期望为企业承担社会和道德责任而制定的规范。特别是，我们发现，在回应披露指南时，管理者倾向于避免披露新闻媒体已经报道的实际贿赂事件，这与避免可能的经济处罚和保护管理层和股东的利益是一致的。这样的企业回应是在维护道德合法性和获得务实合法性之间的妥协。企业对贿赂事件缺乏反应，反过来又会造成道德合法性的缺陷。这样的企业回应是在维护道德合法性和获得务实合法性之间的妥协。企业对贿赂事件缺乏反应，反过来又会造成道德合法性的缺陷。这样的企业回应是在维护道德合法性和获得务实合法性之间的妥协。企业对贿赂事件缺乏反应，反过来又会造成道德合法性的缺陷。