Categorical Stigma and Firm Disengagement: Nuclear Power Generation in the United States, 1970–2000

Abstract

How do organizations react to stakeholder disapproval of a category to which they belong? In this paper, we draw on the categorization, stigma, and identity literatures in building a theory to predict whether firms that are involved in stigmatized activities will choose to reduce or terminate their involvement in them, as opposed to resorting to less drastic measures such as defensive practice adoption or impression management techniques. Conceptualizing groups of organizations involved in such contentious practices as stigmatized categories in the eyes of an audience, we argue that organizational responses rest on three elements: (1) the intensity of stigma targeting the category, (2) the media exposure of the category, and (3) the extent to which an organization is a member of the category. A quantitative study of proposed new nuclear reactor units in the United States between 1970 and 2000, in the face of mounting opposition to atomic power, provides empirical support for our claims.

When Does Medici Hurt Da Vinci? Mitigating the Signaling Effect of Extraneous Stakeholder Relationships in the Field of Cultural Production

“…Finally, we show that there is a variance within the group of negatively perceived stakeholders: some industries are more tainted than others and this fact accentuates the negative perception of the organizations exhibiting a link with them. These findings indicate that stakeholder theory will benefit from further integrating the concept of organizational stigma (Piazza & Perretti, 2015;Roulet, 2015) and stakeholders' "mental representations" (Bridoux & Stoelhorst, 2016).…”

“…In short, the boundary conditions for the applicability of our theory are the existence of a dominant logic and the relative isolation of the field from external actors. Contested industries and stigmatized fields could be good candidates for further exploration of those questions in other contexts (Helms & Patterson, 2014;Piazza & Perretti, 2015;Roulet, 2015). It would also be interesting for future research to test our theory in other national contexts and domains that do not fit those boundary conditions.…”

“…This encapsulates the negative valence associated with the stakeholder relationship, which also moderates the negative bias against cultural organizations connected to corporate donors. Considering the variance in the perception of stigmatized stakeholder groups (Durand & Vergne, 2015;Piazza & Perretti, 2015), we argue that there are variations in the way extraneous stakeholders are perceived by stakeholders within the field. Bourdieu (1993) draws qualitative distinctions between commercially oriented actors and acknowledges the multiplicity of their objectives.…”

How Organizations Move from Stigma to Legitimacy: The Case of Cook’s Travel Agency in Victorian Britain

“…By contrast, core-stigma arises due to a perceived major flaw in an organization's fundamental operations on the part of one or more audiences (Hudson, 2008). The intense pressure associated with it may force organizations to exit stigmatized operations (Piazza & Perretti, 2015). Organizations that are core-stigmatized are vulnerable because some audiences condemn their very essence.…”

Spoils from the Spoiled: Strategies for Entering Stigmatized Markets

“…Helms and Patterson (2014) identify mixed martial arts as a market with a core stigma arising from the violence inherent in the physical fights central to this category. Piazza and Perretti (2015) examine the stigmatization over time of the nuclear power market. Dioun (2016) traces the evolution of the stigma associated with the medical marijuana market.…”