Research

Journal Articles

Reputational judgments of foreign MNEs’ societal impact in frontier markets: the role of compatible, crossed, and conflicting signals (with Erin Makarius, Aloysius Kahindi and Charles Stevens)

Journal of International Business Studies. Volume 56, Issue 7: 901-920, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-025-00795-x 

Abstract: How do host country stakeholders evaluate foreign MNEs’ local impact? Although MNEs’ desire for a reputation for positive societal impact is well-established in the literature, much less is known about how to actually obtain one—especially in less developed frontier markets. In this inductive, qualitative study across seven countries in sub-Saharan Africa, we examine why host country stakeholders deem some foreign MNEs to have a better reputation for societal impact than others and how firms’ actions and attributes influence these stakeholder perceptions. Leveraging signaling theory, we identify three distinct types of signals (compatible, crossed, and conflicting) and three critical factors (benefit diffusion, empowerment, and hybrid solutions) that shape MNEs’ reputation for societal impact. We also shed light on the role of contextual factors at the country, industry, and community levels. In addition to these theoretical contributions, our study also yields practical implications for MNEs of including local stakeholders’ perspectives when crafting market and nonmarket strategies, fostering constructive communication between headquarters and subsidiaries as well as between expatriate and local actors, and finding ways of going beyond ‘fitting in’ to instead ‘stand out’ in order to gain a reputation for providing tangible and intangible forms of societal impact in frontier markets.

How to Deliver on ESG Initiatives in Emerging Markets (with Charles Stevens, Erin Makarius and Aloysius Kahindi)

Harvard Business Review. March 16, 2026. https://hbr.org/2026/03/how-to-deliver-on-esg-initiatives-in-emerging-market 

Abstract: Multinational firms face growing pressure to demonstrate positive societal impact in the frontier markets where they operate, yet many ESG and CSR initiatives fail to earn local trust—and sometimes provoke backlash. Drawing on six years of field research and 853 interviews across seven East African countries, this study finds that local stakeholders evaluate corporate impact very differently from firms’ headquarters or global investors. Rather than focusing on formal policies or philanthropic projects, communities look for tangible signals: whether firms build useful skills, distribute benefits broadly, empower local partners, tailor solutions to local realities, and integrate impact into core strategy. Companies that understand and respond to these locally grounded expectations are far more likely to gain legitimacy and build durable reputations for positive impact.

Working Papers

Do Investors Influence Corporate Lobbying? Evidence from Private Firms in the United States from 2000 to 2024 (with Tony L. He and Markus Taussig)

Under review at Strategic Management Journal.

Abstract: While research traditionally emphasizes the firm-specific origins of corporate lobbying, recent scholarship documents a role for investor-driven strategy. Using data on the ownership histories of 4,637 U.S. private firms from 2000 to 2024, we add to this literature, finding that firms connected through common owners become more aligned in their lobbying priorities. This alignment appears even among firms in different industries, states, and size categories, where political priorities would not otherwise be expected to converge, and when regulatory demands on firms are low. Different investor types are associated with distinct issues: private equity with innovation-related lobbying, hedge funds with tax-related lobbying, and venture capital with environmental lobbying. Our results shed light on investors as potential political principals who shape corporate political activity across portfolio firms. 

Embedding Sustainability in Complex Supply Chains: The Impact of Localized Sustainability Expertise in Mitigating Emissions (with Tony L. He)

Abstract: Multinational enterprises (MNEs) face challenges in balancing climate action with supply chain resilience. While strategies such as redundancy and geographic diversification enhance resilience, they can also undermine sustainability by increasing inefficiencies. We propose that to navigate this tension, firms must develop dynamic capabilities to address location-specific environmental opportunities and risks by embedding sustainability expertise within the local regions where a firm’s supply chain operates. To test this hypothesis, we analyze 2,320 MNEs with data on global supplier networks, hiring patterns, and firm-level greenhouse gas emissions. While supply chain complexity has increased over the past decade, we observe no direct association, on average, between this complexity and emissions intensity. However, we find that firms that align their supply chain expansion with a greater dispersion of sustainability-focused human capital achieve significantly lower direct and indirect emissions intensity. This effect is driven by firms headquartered in, and sourcing from, countries with the most stringent climate policies, highlighting the role of regulatory frameworks in complementing corporate sustainability efforts. Our findings demonstrate that the integration of sustainability expertise across global operations can help to align resilience with environmental performance, underscoring the importance of localized knowledge and on-the-ground implementation in advancing sustainable outcomes.

Stakeholder Engagement in Contested Sociopolitical Issues (with Charles Stevens)

Abstract: How do firms engage contested sociopolitical issues when opposing demands arise from rival factions within the same stakeholder group? Drawing on signaling theory, we develop a framework that shifts attention from whether firms speak or stay silent to how they calibrate the visibility of their nonmarket engagement. We argue that as intra-stakeholder polarization increases, firms are more likely to rely on covert rather than overt signals because less visible engagement allows them to address stakeholder demands while reducing the risk of audience spillover and countermobilization. We further theorize that this relationship is stronger for highly visible firms, when stakeholder demands are radical or broad in scope, and when contested issues are highly salient. This paper contributes to research on nonmarket strategy, stakeholder engagement, and corporate sociopolitical activism by conceptualizing signal visibility as a key strategic choice in polarized environments.

Work In Progress

Owners Without Markets: Isolating the Ownership Channel in Stakeholder Disinvestment

Initial Summary: Why do firms sacrifice stakeholders under financial pressure? Research on short-termism and shareholder pressure suggests that firms facing financial pressures often reduce employment, long-term investment, and other stakeholder commitments to improve short-term performance. Yet this evidence comes overwhelmingly from publicly traded firms, leaving it unclear whether these reductions are a consequence of public equity markets. Using a novel panel of 25,106 U.S. private firms from 2017 to 2025, I identify transitions into private equity and venture capital ownership using acquisitions and financing histories and employ a staggered difference-in-differences design to examine how these ownership changes affect stakeholder investment and welfare, capturing both firms' allocation of resources to employees and employees' experienced workplace outcomes. I further exploit exogenous increases in state minimum wages to examine how financially oriented owners allocate the costs of external pressures, and whether they shift those costs to stakeholders to prioritize short-term financial performance over stakeholder investment.