• 东华esball备用官网esball备用官网
  • 联络中心
  • English
20240622美国德克萨斯esball备用官网esball备用官网达拉斯分校Jun Xia教授esball备用官网术报告


报告主题:Love well, whip well: A competing view of political affinity between countries for ESG-violating firms



报告人:Jun Xia教授

主持人:杨帅 教授


Jun Xia, Ph.D. in Management graduated from the Texas Tech University, is a professor in management and strategy at the University of Texas at Dallas. His research interests include resource dependence, institutional theory, social networks, and corporate strategies. His work has been published in the Strategic Management Journal, Academy Journal of Management, Organization Science, Journal of Management, Journal of Management Studies, and Organizational Research Methods. He is a Senior Editor of Management and Organization Review and a review board member of Academy of Management Review and Journal of International Business Studies.


The prevailing literature on political affinity and multinational corporations’ (MNCs’) global operation commonly views political affinity as a protective shield, suggesting that the closer the relationship between the two countries, the greater the protection for MNCs. This perspective, however, is usually limited to the context of MNCs operating under normal conditions. This posits that political affinity may act as a double-edged sword in environmental, social, and governance (ESG) misconduct. While political affinity can provide an “insurance-like effect” by mobilizing home-country stakeholders to shield MNCs overseas, it may simultaneously provoke a “domestic-like penalty,” diminishing their inclination to offer protection and amplifying the reputational penalties for the offending firm. We further propose that shared language and bilateral commercial ties reinforce the domestic-like effects, intensifying the negative side of political affinity on the firm’s reputation. On the contrary, an MNC’s past ESG performance helps maintain domestic stakeholders’ confidence in the firm, intensifying the positive side of political affinity on reputational penalties. Using a sample of 9,153 ESG-violating incidents by 547 U.S. firms in different countries, our study unveils fresh insights into the double-edged sword role of political affinity.