Search results

Most of the studies in entrepreneurship depend on single-source rating methods to collect data on both predictors and criteria. The threat to effect sizes as a result of using single-source ratings is particularly relevant to psychology-based entrepreneurship research. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to explore the prospects of applying 360-degree feedback to the field of entrepreneurship and to discuss a set of cases regarding how 360-degree feedback may boost effect sizes in entrepreneurship research.

A qualitative review of current literature was performed.

The review indicated that the effect sizes in psychology-based entrepreneurship research are mostly small and the use of single-source ratings is prevalent; some preliminary findings supported the utility of 360-degree feedback in entrepreneurship research; entrepreneurial orientation (EO) research may benefit from 360-degree feedback; and members of top management teams, employees from research and product development, sales agents, retail buying agents, store sales clerks, and consumers are all valid informants to provide ratings of EO.

The present study provided theoretical explanations and used empirical evidence to elucidate how 360-degree feedback may benefit the field of entrepreneurship. In addition, recommendations for future research using 360-degree feedback in entrepreneurship research were offered and discussed. A sample research study on EO using 360-degree feedback was delineated.

The study aims to determine whether a relationship exists between the potential significance of corporate controversies for stakeholders and how organisations respond to them in their annual and sustainability reports.

This paper employs content analysis on annual and sustainability reports of 48 listed companies from the Refinitiv database. The logit regression was used to estimate the model.

The study revealed that the main factors increasing the probability of a controversial issue being addressed in a corporate report are the controversy’s potential significance, companies’ financial performance and lawsuits.

Our study has three major limitations. These are a relatively small sample of companies and reports, focusing on disclosures made in corporate reports and omitting other channels of communication, for example, social media, and a certain amount of subjectivity in the process of coding information.

Former studies show that corporations face a serious risk of their hypocritical strategies becoming too evident for stakeholder groups. Our findings suggest that the risk is already materialising and may undermine the idea of CSR and sustainability reporting.

Our research focuses on high-profile adverse incidents widely reported in the media, the omission of which from corporate reports seems to constitute a particular case of organised hypocrite. It also demonstrates that companies use an impression management strategy to defuse adverse publicity and that major controversies cause minor ones to be omitted from their reports.