Research summary: The importance of firm‐stakeholder relationships is gaining increasing attention. Although a theory of the drivers and consequences of stakeholder pressure has been developing, it focuses on pressures from organized stakeholders such as shareholders, NGOs, and activists, and does not incorporate the emerging possibility that individual voices may matter. By exploring corporate Twitter, which facilitates movement of individual stakeholders such as customers to a higher stakeholder class by providing them with a greater sense of power and urgency, we study the circumstances under which customer voices significantly affect analyst stock recommendations. We find that favorable reactions to firm‐initiated messages matter, directly or indirectly, depending on the messages' growth implications. Customer‐initiated negative messages have a significant impact only with high volume and formal institutions that support customer opinions. Managerial summary: Social media is increasingly used by firms for disclosing information and engaging stakeholders. Yet, we know little about whether and how social media usage matters. We show how corporate Twitter usage may influence analyst stock recommendations. Our interviews of securities analysts suggest that social media is not institutionalized yet, but increasingly used as a source of channel checks, especially for vibes, validations, and so on. Our analyses of corporate Twitter accounts show that both firm‐initiated and customer‐initiated tweets can have significant impact on analyst recommendations under certain conditions. For firm‐initiated tweets, the extent of retweets is an important factor, along with the content of tweets, in particular, growth implications. For customer‐initiated tweets, negative tweets matter, but only with high volume and regulatory structure that supports customer protection. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

This study contributes to understanding stakeholder engagement strategies by examining competitive responses alongside sociopolitical implications after a major exogenous shock—the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) between the “Big Four” U.S. tobacco firms and 46 state attorneys general. We compare the different stakeholder engagement strategies of the two remaining U.S. tobacco manufacturers, Philip Morris (PM) and R. J. Reynolds (RJR), between 1998 and 2017. Implications for stakeholder theory from a relatively rare natural experiment highlight the importance of simultaneously managing multiple stakeholders, inclusive of domestic and international sociopolitical and value chain stakeholders over time, for sustained value creation. Although PM and RJR initially pursued heterogeneous strategies by re-configuring relationships with relevant stakeholders, each firm’s growth prospects for the first decade post-MSA were exacerbated by various stakeholders through withholding and selective engagement strategies. Implications for how multiple, simultaneous stakeholder relationships can serve as important resources for achieving or limiting sustained growth are discussed.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract