Just How Prepared Are You? An Application of Marketing Segmentation and Theory of Planned Behavior for Disaster Preparation

The threat of a disaster is very real for many, and preparation is vital. To identify differences in how people respond to disaster preparation, a segmentation approach may be useful. Based on a survey, cluster analysis and application of the theory of planned behavior, this study finds four segments in the population. The unprepared and uninterested segment may be encouraged by associating preparation tasks with benefits other than disaster resilience. Willing but could do more may respond to information highlighting that government support may not be enough in a disaster. For it’s just too difficult, barriers need to be addressed, lowering costs of preparation and changing perceptions of difficulty. Those in knowing, interested, and prepared could be encouraged to help spread the word of the importance of preparation. Further recommendations are made for the wider public policy context, including a call for more segmentation approaches to build understanding and resilience.     

Social Capital Initiatives: Employees and Communication Managers Leading the Way?

Organizations’ development of social capital and their decision to give back to society are becoming increasingly important to the business of managing organizations as much more than profit-driven entities. This article focuses on the rationale for an Australian–Canadian study on employees’ involvement in social capital initiatives and the communication management of these initiatives. As employees are key stakeholders, they play a vital part in achieving organizational goals. This study, a work in progress, highlights an in-depth, qualitative analysis of two organizations—one in Canada and one in Australia—committed to funding community projects as part of their corporate social responsibility development and commitment. The importance of a qualitative study that focuses on subjective components of social capital is that it develops understanding of employees’ attitudes, feelings, and viewpoints. It also begins to investigate why employees might/might not be committed, to organizations’ social capital initiatives. Using an interpretative analysis lens, an understanding of the moral, relational, and communication dynamics is explored. Questions surrounding concepts such as the moral fiber of social capital are highlighted and critiqued in the context of community engagement and what organizations’ social capital investments mean as part of their responsibility to society.     

Perceptions of Affirmative Action Based on Socioeconomic Status: A Comparison with Traditional Affirmative Action

Past research has examined reactions to traditional, gender- and ethnicity-based affirmative action programs. However, research has not examined reactions to affirmative action based on socioeconomic status (SES), even though such programs are promoted by the U.S. government (e.g., Work Opportunity Tax Credit) and thus act as a de facto supplement to traditional affirmative action. Based in theories of self-interest, Study 1 compared reactions of men and women to a traditional affirmative action program and a hypothetical, SES-based affirmative action program in terms of general perceptions of such programs and organizational attractiveness. While women had more positive reactions to traditional affirmative action, men had more positive reactions to SES-based affirmative action. Study 2 took a different approach, examining the reactions of potential job applicants to four hypothetical job ads which included different types of diversity statements. We found that job ads that mentioned any type of specific diversity statement - either based on race and gender or based on SES - were perceived as less fair than job ads that did not include specific diversity statements. Results of the studies are discussed in terms of self-interest theories of affirmative action and considerations of SES-based programs as a supplement to traditional affirmative action.     

The strategic use of corporate insurance in China

We use the agency theory to conduct a novel test of the strategic use of property insurance in China's corporate sector. With regard to our main test hypotheses, we find that the incidence of property insurance purchased is directly related to the degree of product–market competitiveness, and positively related to market liquidity and firms’ growth opportunities. However, the homogeneity of market operations is not statistically significant. In our second-stage Cragg regression, market liquidity becomes insignificant while firms’ growth opportunities are now inversely related to the amount of insurance purchased. Additionally, the homogeneity of market operations becomes significantly related to the corporate purchase of property insurance. Therefore, different factors (e.g. cost considerations) may influence the decisions to purchase property insurance and subsequently, the level of coverage provided. We argue that our results are relevant for companies in other emerging markets such as Eastern Europe and companies operating in more developed Western economies such as the European Union (EU).     

Acquirer-target social ties and merger outcomes

This article investigates the effect of social ties between acquirers and targets on merger performance. We find that the extent of cross-firm social connection between directors and senior executives at the acquiring and the target firms has a significantly negative effect on the abnormal returns to the acquirer and to the combined entity upon merger announcement. Moreover, acquirer-target social ties significantly increase the likelihood that the target firm?s chief executive officer (CEO) and a larger fraction of the target firm?s pre-acquisition board of directors remain on the board of the combined firm after the merger. In addition, we find that acquirer CEOs are more likely to receive bonuses and are more richly compensated for completing mergers with targets that are highly connected to the acquiring firms, that acquisitions are more likely to take place between two firms that are well connected to each other through social ties, and that such acquisitions are more likely to subsequently be divested for performance-related reasons. Taken together, our results suggest that social ties between the acquirer and the target lead to poorer decision making and lower value creation for shareholders overall.