Anna Jasinenko

Title

Prof. Dr.

Last Name

Jasinenko

First name

Anna

anna.jasinenko@unisg.ch

ORCID

0000-0002-8376-2558

Phone

+41 71 224 3463

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4

Some of the metrics are blocked by your
consent settings
Mirror Versus Substitute: How Institutional Context Affects Individual Motivation for Corporate Social Responsibility
(SAGE Publications, 2024-12-11)
Anna Jasinenko
;
Steven A. Brieger
;
Patrick Haack
The institutional perspective on corporate social responsibility (CSR) has discussed two diametrically opposed hypotheses about how institutional context influences CSR. Whereas the mirror hypothesis suggests that CSR is stronger in institutional contexts with stringent CSR-related regulations, the substitute hypothesis posits that CSR is stronger in weakly regulated contexts. Drawing on the micro-CSR literature, we propose that examining individual CSR motivation can help to better understand the effect of institutional context on CSR because it makes focusing on substantively motivated CSR possible, and it can shed light on the hitherto neglected psychological moderators in this relationship. We conducted three studies, obtaining results indicating that institutional trust is an important moderator of the institutional effect on individual CSR motivation. Overall, we found the highest individual CSR motivation when regulatory stringency and institutional trust were high, supporting the mirror hypothesis. However, in contexts of low institutional trust, this positive effect of a strong institutional context was reduced or even reversed. Our study contributes to the literature on the institutional perspective on CSR, micro-CSR, and institutional theory, and it has important practical implications for CSR management.
Type:journal article
Journal:Journal of Management
DOI:10.1177/01492063241299403
URI:https://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/handle/20.500.14171/121768
Scopus© Citations 10
Some of the metrics are blocked by your
consent settings
COVID-19’s Effect on Citizens’ Legitimacy Perceptions of Business Regulation
(2023)
Anna Jasinenko
;
Patrick Haack
;
Derek Harmon
Stricter business regulation regarding human rights and environmental misbehavior is a promising approach for a transition to a more just and sustainable economy. A major crisis, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, can strongly affect how individuals form their legitimacy beliefs about this kind of regulation. However, the current literature proposes two opposing effects of crises on the legitimacy beliefs about business regulation. The system justification theory suggests that the pandemic will lead to a decline in the legitimacy perceptions because individuals are highly risk averse and status-quo supporting, when they feel threatened. Conversely, the moral identification theory implies a positive effect of COVID-19 on regulatory legitimacy beliefs because a global problem, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, increases the identification with global humanity and thereby the motivation to help people in distant countries for which stricter business regulation would be most helpful. We conducted four studies to test the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on citizens’ legitimacy perceptions of stricter business regulation. We differentiate between propriety and validity beliefs based on multilevel legitimacy theory to understand the full spectrum of legitimacy beliefs. Consistent with the system justification theory, we find that the propriety beliefs declined during the pandemic. However, the pandemic had a positive effect on validity beliefs. The bias blind spot effect explains the divergence of the validity beliefs from propriety beliefs. Our findings contribute to a better understanding of the change of legitimacy beliefs, which consist of propriety and validity beliefs, during a crisis. We contribute to the theory of legitimacy as perception, system justification, and citizens’ support for a more sustainable future.
Type:conference contribution
Journal:Academy of Management annual meeting proceedings
URL:https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/AMPROC.2023.18110abstract
DOI:10.5465/AMPROC.2023.18110abstract
URI:https://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/handle/20.500.14171/118012
Some of the metrics are blocked by your
consent settings
The Role of Consensus in Legitimation through Deliberation: An Experimental Approach
(2022)
Anna Jasinenko
;
André Bächtiger
;
Patrick Haack
Previous research has advanced scholarly understandings of legitimacy formation at the individual level, yet has not taken into account that individuals develop their legitimacy beliefs in communication activities with others. Our study seeks to address this shortcoming by advancing a dialogical approach which construes legitimacy formation as an outcome of social interaction. We study the legitimacy formation process in the context of a deliberation experiment where we asked participants to discuss in small groups a controversial topic (i.e., the Swiss Responsible Business Initiative). Before and after the deliberation we measured participants’ legitimacy beliefs, as well as their behavioral intentions to assess the degree to which these variables changed during the deliberation. Additionally, we manipulated the level of agreement within the deliberation groups to understand how group consensus affects the impact of deliberation on legitimacy formation. Overall, we find that deliberation results in a stronger change of legitimacy beliefs and behavioral intentions if participants deliberate in a low compared to a high consensus group. Our study contributes to legitimacy theory by conceptualizing and empirically testing legitimacy formation as a dialogical process. Moreover, we present and apply the deliberation experiment as a promising novel method for testing cause-and-effect relationships in the process of legitimacy formation.
Type:conference contribution
Journal:Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings
URL:https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/AMBPP.2022.17289abstract
DOI:10.5465/AMBPP.2022.17289abstract
URI:https://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/handle/20.500.14171/118013
Some of the metrics are blocked by your
consent settings
Institutional mirror versus substitute: How regulations affect explicit CSR motivation
(2021)
Anna Jasinenko
;
Steven A. Brieger
;
Patrick Haack
Prior literature proposes two opposing hypotheses of how national regulations could influence CSR motivation. The mirror hypothesis suggests that corporations will be more motivated to invest in CSR if there are strong and well enforced national CSR-related regulations because such institutional settings pressure CSR not only by direct regulations but also with normative pressures important for an organization’s reputation and legitimacy. On the contrary, the substitute hypothesis proposes that there will be more CSR motivation in countries of lax CSR-related regulations because corporations would feel the need to fill the institutional void or to avoid stricter regulations in the future. We apply a multi-method design focusing on the micro-foundations of CSR motivation to further examine and resolve this contradiction. Specifically, we examine how institutional regulations affect individual-level CSR motivation and elaborate on the role of trust in regulating institutions as a crucial psychological variable in this process. We find that explicit CSR motivation is generally high in laxly regulated contexts but can be equally high in stringently regulated contexts if the trust in regulatory institutions is high. With our findings, we underline and clarify the strong role of regulatory institutions on CSR and the crucial role of trust in regulatory institutions in this process. We discuss theoretical and practical contributions for CSR management, the field of business and society, as well as international business.
Type:conference contribution
Journal:Academy of Management Annual Meeting Proceedings
URL:https://journals.aom.org/doi/abs/10.5465/AMBPP.2021.15588abstract
DOI:10.5465/AMBPP.2021.15588abstract
URI:https://www.alexandria.unisg.ch/handle/20.500.14171/118015

Anna Jasinenko

Filters

Settings

Sort By

Results per page