Published Online:

In the issue-selling literature, little attention has been paid to the struggles of those managers who try to sell social issues to potential issue buyers who are not particularly sensitive to the normative elements of these social issues. In this study, we examine the case of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and concomitant dynamics of selling social issues and address two interrelated questions. First, how do the sellers of social issues perceive themselves and their organizational roles, and how does this motivate them to engage in selling social issues in the first place? Second, how do these perceptions influence the strategies that issue sellers use to win over skeptics? To answer these questions, we focus on the relationships that issue sellers build with buyers and on the role of this form of engagement in overcoming resistance to social issues. Our findings shed new light on the motivation, aspirations, and strategies of issue sellers and suggest that a relational approach can provide important insights into understanding selling and buying social issues within organizational contexts. Furthermore, our findings pave the way for future research on selling social issues as a relational endeavor.

Whiteboard Video Abstract


  • Aguilera R. V., Rupp D., Williams C. A., & Ganapathi J. 2007. Putting the S back in corporate social responsibility: A multi-level theory of social change in organisations. Academy of Management Review, 32: 836–863.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Aguinis H., & Glavas A. 2012. What we know and don’t know about corporate social responsibility: A review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 38: 932–968. Google Scholar
  • Alt E., & Craig J. B. 2016. Selling issues with solutions: Igniting social intrapreneurship in for-profit organizations. Journal of Management Studies, 53: 794–820. Google Scholar
  • Andersson L. M., & Bateman T. S. 2000. Individual environmental initiative: Championing natural environmental issues in US business organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 43: 548–570. Google Scholar
  • Ashford S. J., & Barton M. A. 2007. Identity-based issue selling. In C. A. BartelS. BladerA. Wrzesniewski (Eds.), Identity and the modern organization, 223–244. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Google Scholar
  • Ashford S. J., Sutcliffe K. E., & Christianson M. K. 2009. Speaking up and speaking out: The leadership dynamics of voice in organizations. In J. GreenbergM. S. Edwards (Eds.), Voice and silence in organizations, 175–202. Bingley, UK: Emerald. Google Scholar
  • Bansal P. 2003. From issues to actions: The importance of individual concerns and organizational values in responding to natural environmental issues. Organization Science, 14: 510–527. Google Scholar
  • Baumann-Pauly D., Wickert C., Spence L. J., & Scherer A. G. 2013. Organizing corporate social responsibility in small and large firms: Size matters. Journal of Business Ethics, 115: 693–705. Google Scholar
  • Briscoe F., & Safford S. 2008. The Nixon-in-China effect: Activism, imitation, and the institutionalization of contentious practices. Administrative Science Quarterly, 53: 460–491. Google Scholar
  • Briscoe F., & Gupta A. 2016. Social activism in and around organizations. Academy of Management Annals, 10: 671–727.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Corbin J., & Strauss A. 2008. Basics of qualitative research 3rd ed.. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Google Scholar
  • Crane A., Palazzo G., Spence L. J., & Matten D. 2014. Contesting the value of “Creating Shared Value”. California Management Review, 56: 130–153. Google Scholar
  • Daudigeos T. 2013. In their profession’s service: How staff professionals exert influence in their organization. Journal of Management Studies, 50: 722–749. Google Scholar
  • Davis M. S. 1971. That’s interesting: Towards a phenomenology of sociology and a sociology of phenomenology. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 1: 309–344. Google Scholar
  • de Bakker F. G. A., Groenewegen P., & den Hond F. 2005. A bibliometric analysis of 30 years of research and theory on corporate social responsibility and corporate social performance. Business & Society, 44: 283–317. Google Scholar
  • de Dreu C. K. W. 2006. Rational self-interest and other orientation in organizational behavior: A critical appraisal and extension of Meglino and Korsgaard (2004). Journal of Applied Psychology, 91: 1245–1252. Google Scholar
  • Detert J. R., & Burris E. R. 2007. Leadership behavior and employee voice: Is the door really open? Academy of Management Journal, 50: 869–884.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Dutton J. E., Ashford S. J., Lawrence K. A., & Miner-Rubino K. 2002. Red light, green light: making sense of the organizational context for issue selling. Organization Science, 13: 355–369. Google Scholar
  • Dutton J. R., & Jackson S. E. 1987. Categorizing strategic issues: Links to organizational action. Academy of Management Review, 12: 76–90.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Dutton J. R., & Ashford S. J. 1993. Selling issues to top management. Academy of Management Review, 18: 397–428.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Dutton J. R., Ashford S. J., O’Neill R. M., Hayes E., & Wierba E. E. 1997. Reading the wind: How middle managers assess the context for selling issues to top managers. Strategic Management Journal, 18: 407–425. Google Scholar
  • Dutton J. R., Ashford S. J., O’Neill R. M., & Lawrence K. A. 2001. Moves that matter: Issue selling and organizational change. Academy of Management Journal, 44: 716–736.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Erez A., & Judge T. A. 2001. Relationship of core self-evaluations to goal setting, motivation, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86: 1270–1279. Google Scholar
  • Gioia D. A., Corley K. G., & Hamilton A. L. 2013. Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16: 15–31. Google Scholar
  • Golan M. E., & Bamberger P. A. 2015. Mapping the emergent choreography of assistance: The dynamics of dyadic peer helping relations in organizations. Academy of Management Discoveries, 1: 124–149.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Grant A. M., & Berry J. W. 2011. The necessity of others is the mother of invention: Intrinsic and prosocial motivations, perspective taking, and creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 54: 73–96.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Green S. E. 2004. A rhetorical theory of diffusion. Academy of Management Review, 29: 653–669.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Haack P., Schoeneborn D., & Wickert C. 2012. Talking the talk, moral entrapment, creeping commitment? Exploring narrative dynamics in corporate responsibility standardization. Organization Studies, 33: 815–845. Google Scholar
  • Habermas J. 1971. Knowledge and human interests. Boston: Beacon Press. Google Scholar
  • Hemingway C., & Maclagan P. 2004. Managers’ personal values as drivers of corporate social responsibility. Journal of Business Ethics, 50: 33–44. Google Scholar
  • Hiss S. 2009. From implicit to explicit corporate social responsibility: Institutional change as a fight for myths. Business Ethics Quarterly, 19: 433–451. Google Scholar
  • Howard-Grenville J. A. 2007. Developing issue-selling effectiveness over time: Issue selling as resourcing. Organization Science, 18: 560–577. Google Scholar
  • Johnson G., & Scholes K. 2002. Exploring corporate strategy 6th ed.. Essex: Pearson. Google Scholar
  • Ling Y., Floyd S. W., & Baldridge D. C. 2005. Toward a model of issue-selling by subsidiary managers in multinational organizations. Journal of International Business Studies, 36: 637–654. Google Scholar
  • Locke K. D. 2001. Grounded theory in management research. London: Sage. Google Scholar
  • Lyneis J., & Sterman J. 2016. How to save a leaky ship: Capability traps and the failure of win-win investments in sustainability and social responsibility. Academy of Management Discoveries, 2: 2–32. Google Scholar
  • Maak T., Pless N. M., & Voegtlin C. 2016. Business statesman or shareholder advocate? CEO responsible leadership styles and the micro-foundations of political CSR. Journal of Management Studies, 53: 463–493. Google Scholar
  • Maon F., Lindgreen A., & Swaen V. 2009. Designing and implementing corporate social responsibility: An integrative framework grounded in theory and practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 87: 71–89. Google Scholar
  • Martin P. Y., & Turner B. A. 1986. Grounded theory and organizational research. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 22: 141–147. Google Scholar
  • Maurer C. C., Bansal P., & Crossan M. M. 2011. Creating economic value through social values: Introducing a culturally informed resource-based view. Organization Science, 22: 432–448. Google Scholar
  • Melé D. 2003. The challenge of humanistic management. Journal of Business Ethics, 44: 77–88. Google Scholar
  • Meyerson D. E. 2001. Tempered radicals: How people use difference to inspire change at work. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Google Scholar
  • Meyerson D. E., & Scully M. A. 1995. Tempered radicalism and the politics of ambivalence and change. Organization Science, 6: 585–600. Google Scholar
  • Morris T., & Lancaster Z. 2006. Translating management ideas. Organization Studies, 27: 207–233. Google Scholar
  • Parker S. K., & Axtell C. M. 2001. Seeing another viewpoint: Antecedents and outcomes of employee perspective taking. Academy of Management Journal, 44: 1085–1100.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Risi D., & Wickert C. 2017. Reconsidering the ‘symmetry’ between institutionalization and professionalization: The case of corporate social responsibility managers. Journal of Management Studies, 54: 613–646. Google Scholar
  • Rouleau L. 2005. Micro-practices of strategic sensemaking and sensegiving: How middle managers interpret and sell change every day. Journal of Management Studies, 42: 1413–1441. Google Scholar
  • Scully M. A., & Segal A. 2002. Passion with an umbrella: Grassroots activists in the workplace. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 19: 125–168. Google Scholar
  • Sonenshein S. 2006. Crafting social issues at work. Academy of Management Journal, 49: 1158–1172.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Sonenshein S. 2009. Emergence of ethical issues during strategic change implementation. Organization Science, 20: 223–239. Google Scholar
  • Sonenshein S. 2016. How corporations overcome issue illegitimacy and issue equivocality to address social welfare: The role of the social change agent. Academy of Management Review, 41: 349–366.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Sonenshein S., DeCelles K. A., & Dutton J. E. 2014. It’s not easy being green: The role of self-evaluations in explaining support of environmental issues. Academy of Management Journal, 57: 7–37.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Suchman M. 1995. Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20: 571–610.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Strand R. 2013. The chief officer of corporate social responsibility: A study of its presence in top management teams. Journal of Business Ethics, 112: 721–734. Google Scholar
  • Vidal N., Kozak R., & Hansen E. 2015. Adoption and implementation of corporate responsibility practices: A proposed framework. Business & Society, 54: 701–717. Google Scholar
  • Waldman D. A., Siegel D. S., & Javidan M. 2006. Components of CEO transformational leadership and corporate social responsibility. Journal of Management Studies, 43: 1703–1725. Google Scholar
  • Wang H., Tong L., Takeuchi R., & George G. 2016. Corporate social responsibility: An overview and new research directions. Academy of Management Journal, 59: 534–544.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Weick K. E. 1984. Small wins: Redefining the scale of social problems. American Psychologist, 39: 40–49. Google Scholar
  • Whiteman G., & Cooper W. H. 2016. Decoupling rape. Academy of Management Discoveries, 2: 115–154.LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Wickert C., & Schaefer S. M. 2015. Towards a progressive understanding of performativity in critical management studies. Human Relations, 68: 107–130. Google Scholar
  • Wickert C., Scherer A. G., & Spence L. J. 2016. Walking and talking corporate social responsibility: Implications of firm size and organizational cost. Journal of Management Studies, 53: 1169–1196. Google Scholar
  • Willmott H. 2003. Organization theory as a critical science? In H. TsoukasC. Knudsen (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Organization Theory, 88–112. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
  • Wright C., & Nyberg D. 2012. Working with passion: Emotionology, corporate environmentalism and climate change. Human Relations, 65: 1561–1587. Google Scholar
  • Zald M., & Berger M. 1978. Social movements in organizations: Coup d’etat, insurgency, and mass movements. American Journal of Sociology, 83: 823–861. Google Scholar
  Academy of Management
  555 Pleasantville Road, Suite N200
  Briarcliff Manor, NY 10510-8020, USA
  Phone: +1 (914) 326-1800
  Fax: +1 (914) 326-1900
Academy of Management