Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Looking Good in the Eyes of Stakeholders: Corporate Giving and Corporate Acquisitions

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study we examine how a firm’s corporate philanthropic behavior may affect its subsequent acquisitions. Drawing upon stakeholder theory, we argue that firms may strategically use philanthropic donations to obtain support or approval from stakeholders so as to advance subsequent acquisitions, suggesting a positive relationship between corporate giving and corporate acquisitions in terms of both acquisition number and value. We further contend that stakeholders’ support for acquisitions would be even more critical for firms with negative or conservative attitudes to external stakeholders. Therefore, it is expected that both negative media coverage and controversial industry sectors will strengthen the positive relationship between corporate giving and subsequent corporate acquisitions. Analyses of publicly listed manufacturing firms in China during 2004–2015 largely support our predictions. This study deepens our understanding about the drivers of corporate giving and highlights its role in corporate acquisitions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We conducted additional analyses by excluding metals, oil, or both from the list of controversial industries, given their important role in the national economy. We found that the results are qualitatively consistent.

  2. We did not report the detailed results here to save space. They are available upon request.

References

  • Andrade, G., Mitchell, M., & Stafford, E. (2001). New evidence and perspectives on mergers. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15(2), 103–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arouri, M., Gomes, M., & Pukthuanthong, K. (2019). Corporate social responsibility and M&A uncertainty. Journal of Corporate Finance, 56, 176–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bae, S., Masud, M., & Kim, J. (2018). A cross-country investigation of corporate governance and corporate sustainability disclosure: A signaling theory perspective. Sustainability, 10(8), 2611–2611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, S. B., & Bonnefous, A. M. (2011). Stakeholder management and sustainability strategies in the French nuclear industry. Business Strategy and the Environment, 20(2), 124–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barkema, H. G., & Schijven, M. (2008). How do firms learn to make acquisitions? A review of past research and an agenda for the future. Journal of Management, 34(3), 594–634.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, M. L. (2007). Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32(3), 794–816.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, M. L., & Salomon, R. M. (2012). Does it pay to be really good? Addressing the shape of the relationship between social and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 33(11), 1304–1320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, D. P. (1995). Integrated strategy: Market and nonmarket components. California Management Review, 37(2), 47–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barth, J. R., Lin, C., Lin, P., & Song, F. M. (2009). Corruption in bank lending to firms: Cross-country micro evidence on the beneficial role of competition and information sharing. Journal of Financial Economics, 91(3), 361–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bettinazzi, E. L., & Zollo, M. (2017). Stakeholder orientation and acquisition performance. Strategic Management Journal, 38(12), 2465–2485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2008). Does it pay to be different? An analysis of the relationship between corporate social and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 29(12), 1325–1343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cai, Y., Jo, H., & Pan, C. (2012). Doing well while doing bad? CSR in controversial industry sectors. Journal of Business Ethics, 108(4), 467–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capron, L. (1999). The long-term performance of horizontal acquisitions. Strategic Management Journal, 20(11), 987–1018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chahine, S., Dbouk, W., & El-Helaly, M. (2021). M&As and political uncertainty: Evidence from the 2016 US presidential election. Journal of Financial Stability, 54, 100866.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, L., Xie, E., Fang, J., & Mei, N. (2022). Performance feedback and firms’ relative strategic emphasis: The moderating effects of board independence and media coverage. Journal of Business Research, 139, 218–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiu, S. C., & Sharfman, M. (2011). Legitimacy, visibility and the antecedents of corporate social performance: An investigation of the instrumental perspective. Journal of Management, 37, 1558–1585.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, C. H., & Patten, D. M. (2007). The role of environmental disclosures as tools of legitimacy: A research note. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 32(7–8), 639–647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croson, R. T., Gomes, A., McGinn, K. L., & Nöth, M. (2004). Mergers and acquisitions: An experimental analysis of synergies, externalities and dynamics. Review of Finance, 8(4), 481–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dai, Y., & Kong, D. (2016). Getting attention through corporate giving. Emerging Markets Finance and Trade, 52(10), 2364–2378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Degbey, W. Y., & Pelto, E. (2015). Uncovering different forms of customer network changes in M&A. Management Research Review, 38(11), 1191–1212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deng, X., Kang, J. K., & Low, B. S. (2013). Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder value maximization: Evidence from mergers. Journal of Financial Economics, 110(1), 87–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desai, V. M. (2011). Mass media and massive failures: Determining organizational efforts to defend field legitimacy following crises. Academy of Management Journal, 54(2), 263–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devers, C. E., Dewett, T., Mishina, Y., & Belsito, C. A. (2009). A general theory of organizational stigma. Organization Science, 20(1), 154–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20, 65–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dyck, A., & Zingales, L. (2002). The corporate governance role of the media. In R. Islam (Ed.), The right to tell: The role of mass media in economic development (pp. 107–137). World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyck, A., Volchkova, N., & Zingales, L. (2008). The corporate governance role of the media: Evidence from Russia. Journal of Finance, 63(3), 1093–1135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elsbach, K. D., & Bhattacharya, C. B. (2001). Defining who you are by what you’re not: A study of organizational disidentification and the NRA. Organization Science, 12(4), 393–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fabozzi, F. J., Ma, K. C., & Oliphant, B. J. (2008). Sin stock returns. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 35(1), 82–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fang, L., & Peress, J. (2009). Media coverage and the cross-section of stock returns. Journal of Finance, 64(5), 2023–2052.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferris, S. P., Houston, R., & Javakhadze, D. (2016). Friends in the right places: The effect of political connections on corporate merger activity. Journal of Corporate Finance, 41, 81–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Firth, M., Fung, P. M., & Rui, O. M. (2006). Firm performance, governance structure, and top management turnover in a transitional economy. Journal of Management Studies, 43(6), 1289–1330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun, C. J. (1996). Reputation: Realizing value from the corporate image. Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fransen, L. (2013). The embeddedness of responsible business practice: Exploring the interaction between national-institutional environments and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 115(2), 213–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach. Pitman Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fuller, K., Netter, J., & Stegemoller, M. (2002). What do returns to acquiring firms tell us? Evidence from firms that make many acquisitions. Journal of Finance, 57(4), 1763–1793.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galvin, T. L., Ventresca, M. J., & Hudson, B. A. (2005). Contested industry dynamics: New directions in the study of legitimacy. International Studies of Management and Organization, 34(4), 56–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gamache, D. L., McNamara, G., Mannor, M. J., & Johnson, R. E. (2015). Motivated to acquire? The impact of CEO regulatory focus on firm acquisitions. Academy of Management Journal, 58(4), 1261–1282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gao, Y., & Yang, H. (2016). Do employees support corporate giving? Evidence from Chinese listed companies. Management and Organization Review, 12(4), 747–768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardberg, N. A., & Fombrun, C. J. (2006). Corporate citizenship: Creating intangible assets across institutional environments. Academy of Management Review, 31(2), 329–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey, P. C. (2005). The relationship between corporate giving and shareholder wealth: A risk management perspective. Academy of Management Review, 30(4), 777–798.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, M., & Freeman, R. E. (2018). Deepening ethical analysis in business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 147(1), 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greve, H. R., & Zhang, C. M. (2017). Institutional logics and power sources: Merger and acquisition decisions. Academy of Management Journal, 60(2), 671–694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groening, C., & Kanuri, V. K. (2018). Investor reactions to concurrent positive and negative stakeholder news. Journal of Business Ethics, 149, 833–856.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grougiou, V., Dedoulis, E., & Leventis, S. (2016). Corporate social responsibility reporting and organizational stigma: The case of “sin” industries. Journal of Business Research, 69(2), 905–914.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hackbarth, D., & Morellec, E. (2008). Stock returns in mergers and acquisitions. Journal of Finance, 63(3), 1213–1252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hagendorff, J., & Keasey, K. (2012). The value of board diversity in banking: Evidence from the market for corporate control. European Journal of Finance, 18(1), 41–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haleblian, J., Devers, C. E., McNamara, G., Carpenter, M. A., & Davison, R. B. (2009). Taking stock of what we know about mergers and acquisitions: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 35(3), 469–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haleblian, J., Kim, J. Y., & Rajagopalan, N. (2006). The influence of acquisition experience and performance on acquisition behavior: Evidence from the US commercial banking industry. Academy of Management Journal, 49(2), 357–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haleblian, J., McNamara, G., Devers, C. E., & Yoder, M. E. (2013). Do they walk the talk? Gauging acquiring CEO and director confidence in the value creation potential of announced acquisitions. Academy of Management Journal, 56(6), 1679–1702.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartzell, J. C., & Starks, L. T. (2003). Institutional investors and executive compensation. Journal of Finance, 58(6), 2351–2374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haspeslagh, P. C., & Jemison, D. B. (1991). The challenge of renewal through acquisitions. Strategy & Leadership, 19(2), 27–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawn, O. V. (2013). Organizational legitimacy: Different sources–different outcomes? Doctoral dissertation, Duke University.

  • Hitt, M. A., Harrison, J. S., & Ireland, R. D. (2001). Mergers & acquisitions: A guide to creating value for stakeholders. Oxford University Press.

  • Hmaittane, A., Bouslah, K., & M’Zali, B. (2019). Does corporate social responsibility affect the cost of equity in controversial industry sectors? Review of Accounting and Finance, 18(4), 635–662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, B. A. (2008). Against all odds: A consideration of core-stigmatized organizations. Academy of Management Review, 33(1), 252–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Husted, B. W., Jamali, D., & Saffar, W. (2016). Near and dear? The role of location in CSR engagement. Strategic Management Journal, 37(10), 2050–2070.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Islam, G., & Greenwood, M. (2021). Reconnecting to the social in business ethics. Journal of Business Ethics, 170, 1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Janofsky, M. (2005). Million years of safety are sought for a-waste. The New York Times.

  • Jenkins, H., & Yakovleva, N. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in the mining industry: Exploring trends in social and environmental disclosure. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14(3–4), 271–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ji, J., Huang, Z., & Li, Q. (2021). Guilt and corporate philanthropy: The case of the privatization in China. Academy of Management Journal, 64(6), 1969–1995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jia, M., Tong, L., Viswanath, P. V., & Zhang, Z. (2016). Word power: The impact of negative media coverage on disciplining corporate pollution. Journal of Business Ethics, 138, 437–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jin, L., & He, H. (2018). How the frequency and amount of corporate donations affect consumer perception and behavioral responses. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 46, 1072–1088.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jo, H., & Na, H. (2012). Does CSR reduce firm risk? Evidence from controversial industry sectors. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(4), 441–456.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. M. (1995). Instrumental stakeholder theory: A synthesis of ethics and economics. Academy of Management Review, 20, 404–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, T. M., Harrison, J. S., & Felps, W. (2018). How applying instrumental stakeholder theory can provide sustainable competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review, 43(3), 371–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jost, S. P., Erben, S., Ottenstein, P., & Zülch, H. (2021). Does corporate social responsibility impact mergers & acquisition premia? New International Evidence. Finance Research Letters. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2021.102237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kilduff, G. J., Galinsky, A. D., Gallo, E., & Reade, J. J. (2016). Whatever it takes to win: Rivalry increases unethical behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 59(5), 1508–1534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, D. R., Dalton, D. R., Daily, C. M., & Covin, J. G. (2004). Meta-analyses of post-acquisition performance: Indications of unidentified moderators. Strategic Management Journal, 25(2), 187–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koehn, D., & Ueng, J. (2010). Is philanthropy used by corporate wrongdoer to buy good will? Journal of Management and Governance, 14, 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kotchen, M., & Moon, J. J. (2012). Corporate social responsibility for irresponsibility. The b.e. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 12(1), 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krishnamurti, C., Shams, S., & Chowdhury, H. (2021). Evidence on the trade-off between corporate social responsibility and mergers and acquisitions investment. Australian Journal of Management, 46(3), 466–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krüger, P. (2015). Corporate goodness and shareholder wealth. Journal of Financial Economics, 115, 304–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumar, M. S., Dixit, J., & Francis, B. (2015). The impact of prior stock market reactions on risk taking in acquisitions. Strategic Management Journal, 36(13), 2111–2121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lebedev, S., Peng, M. W., Xie, E., & Stevens, C. E. (2015). Mergers and acquisitions in and out of emerging economies. Journal of World Business, 50(4), 651–662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leventis, S., Iftekhar, H., & Dedoulis, E. (2013). The cost of sin: The effect of social norms on audit pricing. International Review of Financial Analysis, 29, 152–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levi, M., Li, K., & Zhang, F. (2014). Director gender and mergers and acquisitions. Journal of Corporate Finance, 28, 185–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liebman, B. L., & Milhaupt, C. J. (2008). Reputational sanctions in China’s securities market. Columbia Law Review, 108(4), 929–983.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindgreen, A., Maon, F., Reast, J., & Yani-De-Soriano, M. (2012). Guest editorial: Corporate social responsibility in controversial industry sectors. Journal of Business Ethics, 110(4), 393–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, B., & McConnell, J. J. (2013). The role of the media in corporate governance: Do the media influence managers’ capital allocation decisions? Journal of Financial Economics, 110(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maksimovic, V., & Phillips, G. (2001). The market for corporate assets: Who engages in mergers and asset sales and are there efficiency gains? Journal of Finance, 56(6), 2019–2065.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malhotra, S., Reus, T. H., Zhu, P., & Roelofsen, E. M. (2018). The acquisitive nature of extraverted CEOs. Administrative Science Quarterly, 63(2), 370–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McWilliams, A., Van Fleet, D. D., & Cory, K. D. (2002). Raising rivals’ costs through political strategy: An extension of resource-based theory. Journal of Management Studies, 39(5), 707–724.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, G. S. (2006). The press as a watchdog for accounting fraud. Journal of Accounting Research, 44(5), 1001–1033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22, 853–886.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moeller, S. B., Schlingemann, F. P., & Stulz, R. M. (2005). Wealth destruction on a massive scale? A study of acquiring-firm returns in the recent merger wave. Journal of Finance, 60(2), 757–782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nayyar, P. R. (1992). Performance effects of three foci in service firms. Academy of Management Journal, 35(5), 985–1009.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oh, H., Bae, J., & Kim, S. (2017). Can sinful firms benefit from advertising their CSR efforts? Adverse effect of advertising sinful firms’ CSR engagements on firm performance. Journal of Business Ethics, 143, 643–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parker, V. R. (Ed.). (2005). Managing Hedge Fund Risk: Strategies and Insights from Investors, Counterparties, Hedge Funds and Regulators. Risk Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petersen, M. A. (2009). Estimating standard errors in finance panel data sets: Comparing approaches. Review of Financial Studies, 22(1), 435–480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollock, T. G., & Rindova, V. P. (2003). Media legitimation effects in the market for initial public offerings. Academy of Management Journal, 46(5), 631–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollock, T. G., Rindova, V., & Maggitti, P. G. (2008). Market watch: Information and availability cascades among the media and investors in the U.S. IPO Market. Academy of Management Journal, 51, 335–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M. E., & Kramer, M. R. (2002). The competitive advantage of corporate giving. Harvard Business Review, 80(12), 56–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rahim, N., & Ananaba, A. J. (2000). An examination of the diversification motive of conglomerate mergers. Academy of Accounting & Financial Studies Journal, 4(2), 37–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reverte, C. (2009). Determinants of corporate social responsibility disclosure ratings by Spanish listed firms. Journal of Business Ethics, 88(2), 351–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rindova, V. P., Pollock, T. G., & Hayward, M. L. A. (2006). Celebrity firms: The social construction of market popularity. Academy of Management Review, 31, 50–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Risberg, A., & Meglio, O. (2012). Merger and acquisition outcomes–is it meaningful to talk about high failure rates? In Handbook of Research on Mergers and Acquisitions. Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, S. G. (1997). A survey of research relating accounting numbers to systematic equity risk, with implications for risk disclosure policy and future research. Accounting Horizons, 11(2), 85–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shi, W., Sun, J., & Prescott, J. E. (2012). A temporal perspective of merger and acquisition and strategic alliance initiatives: Review and future direction. Journal of Management, 38(1), 164–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shi, W., Zhang, Y., & Hoskisson, R. E. (2017). Ripple effects of CEO awards: Investigating the acquisition activities of superstar CEOs’ competitors. Strategic Management Journal, 38(10), 2080–2102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siege, D. S. (2009). Green management matters only if it yields more green: An economic/strategic perspective. Academy of Management Perspectives, 23(3), 5–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tetlock, P. C. (2007). Giving content to investor sentiment: The role of media in the stock market. Journal of Finance, 62(3), 1139–1168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waller, D. S. (2006). A proposed response model for controversial advertising. Journal of Promotion Management, 11(2–3), 3–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, H. L., & Qian, C. L. (2011). Corporate giving and corporate financial performance: The roles of stakeholder response and political access. Academy of Management Journal, 54(6), 1159–1181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, H. L., Choi, J., & Li, J. (2008). Too little or too much? Untangling the relationship between corporate giving and firm financial performance. Organization Science, 19(1), 143–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisbach, M. S. (1988). Outside directors and CEO turnover. Journal of Financial Economics, 20, 431–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, R. J., & Barrett, J. D. (2000). Corporate giving, criminal activity, and firm reputation: Is there a link? Journal of Business Ethics, 26, 341–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, A., & West, C. (1981). The marketing of unmentionables. Harvard Business Review, 59(1), 91–102.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yen, T. Y., & André, P. (2019). Market reaction to the effect of corporate social responsibility on mergers and acquisitions: Evidence on emerging markets. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 71, 114–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yermack, D. (1996). Higher market valuation of companies with a small board of directors. Journal of Financial Economics, 40(2), 185–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, T., Sengul, M., & Lester, R. H. (2008). Misery loves company: The spread of negative impacts resulting from an organizational crisis. Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 452–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, M., Ma, L., Su, J., & Zhang, W. (2014). Do suppliers applaud corporate social performance? Journal of Business Ethics, 121(4), 543–557.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, M., Xie, L., & Xu, H. (2016). Corporate giving and stock price crash risk: Evidence from China. Journal of Business Ethics, 139, 595–617.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zyglidopoulos, S. C., Georgiadis, A. P., Carroll, C. E., & Siegel, D. S. (2012). Does media attention drive corporate social responsibility? Journal of Business Research, 65(11), 1622–1627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors are grateful to the financial support from the Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) (No. 71772071), Social Science Foundation of China (No. 20&ZD072) and Hong Kong Research Grants Council (CUHK 11507120).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Management, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan City, People’s Republic of China

    Yongqiang Gao & Miaohan Zhang

  2. Department of Management, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, N. T., Hong Kong

    Haibin Yang

Authors
  1. Yongqiang Gao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Miaohan Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Haibin Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yongqiang Gao.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 33 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gao, Y., Zhang, M. & Yang, H. Looking Good in the Eyes of Stakeholders: Corporate Giving and Corporate Acquisitions. J Bus Ethics 185, 375–396 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05178-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-022-05178-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation