IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ods/journl/v2y2013i2p83-86.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Investing in L3C Organizations: Indicators of Legitimacy

Author

Listed:
  • Gregory G. De Blasio
  • Emma K. Woeste

    (Northern Kentucky University, USA
    Northern Kentucky University, USA)

Abstract

Organizations are cautioned to avoid favoring one stakeholder group over others when establishing policy and engaging in public discourse. Corporations are often crit-icized for privileging investors or shareholders. Non-profits, however, typically main-tain strong connections to community stakeholders and operate with visible educa-tional, heath care, or other institutional affiliation. With the recent and ongoing crea-tion of a new legal entity, the low-profit, limited liability L3C company, organization-stakeholder relations will need to be reconceptualized. The L3C is charged with a pri-mary purpose of practicing charity and social good, and yet is permitted to generate low profit and to court investors. The L3C investors expect a financial return much in the same way an investment in a large for-profit organization would be expected to grow. How, then, does the L3C organization fulfill its obligation to do charitable work and meet the institutional demands of social transformation while pursuing profit and answering to investors? In other words, how does L3C remain legitimate? The L3C places a new form of strain on stakeholder relations. An examination of a social circus organization in its formative stages helps to answer how stakeholder relations are re-considered for the hybrid L3C low-profit entity. The concepts of civic engagement and institutional affiliation were found to be factors in the legitimation process.

Suggested Citation

  • Gregory G. De Blasio & Emma K. Woeste, 2013. "Investing in L3C Organizations: Indicators of Legitimacy," Journal of Applied Management and Investments, Department of Business Administration and Corporate Security, International Humanitarian University, vol. 2(2), pages 83-86.
    • Handle: RePEc:ods:journl:v:2:y:2013:i:2:p:83-86
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.jami.org.ua/Papers/JAMI_2_2_83-86.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Guido Palazzo & Andreas Scherer, 2006. "Corporate Legitimacy as Deliberation: A Communicative Framework," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 66(1), pages 71-88, June.
    2. Gregory Blasio, 2007. "Coffee as a Medium for Ethical, Social, and Political Messages: Organizational Legitimacy and Communication," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 47-59, April.
    3. E. DuPuis & Sean Gillon, 2009. "Alternative modes of governance: organic as civic engagement," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 26(1), pages 43-56, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jianhong Zhang & David L. Deephouse & Désirée van Gorp & Haico Ebbers, 2022. "Individuals’ Perceptions of the Legitimacy of Emerging Market Multinationals: Ethical Foundations and Construct Validation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 176(4), pages 801-825, April.
    2. Rajat Panwar & Karen Paul & Erlend Nybakk & Eric Hansen & Derek Thompson, 2014. "The Legitimacy of CSR Actions of Publicly Traded Companies Versus Family-Owned Companies," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 125(3), pages 481-496, December.
    3. Vitaliy Roud & Thomas Wolfgang Thurner, 2018. "The Influence of State‐Ownership on Eco‐Innovations in Russian Manufacturing Firms," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 22(5), pages 1213-1227, October.
    4. Irene Chu & Mai Chi Vu, 2022. "The Nature of the Self, Self-regulation and Moral Action: Implications from the Confucian Relational Self and Buddhist Non-self," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 180(1), pages 245-262, September.
    5. Islam, Muhammad Azizul & Deegan, Craig & Haque, Shamima, 2021. "Corporate human rights performance and moral power: A study of retail MNCs’ supply chains in Bangladesh," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    6. Antonio Martos-Pedrero & David Jiménez-Castillo & Francisco Joaquín Cortés-García, 2022. "Examining drivers and outcomes of corporate social responsibility in agri-food firms," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 68(3), pages 79-86.
    7. Veronica Devenin & Constanza Bianchi, 2018. "Soccer fields? What for? Effectiveness of corporate social responsibility initiatives in the mining industry," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(5), pages 866-879, September.
    8. Amal Aouadi & Sylvain Marsat, 2018. "Do ESG Controversies Matter for Firm Value? Evidence from International Data," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 151(4), pages 1027-1047, September.
    9. Gordon Liu & Catherine Liston-Heyes & Wai-Wai Ko, 2010. "Employee Participation in Cause-Related Marketing Strategies: A Study of Management Perceptions from British Consumer Service Industries," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 92(2), pages 195-210, March.
    10. Gagalyuk, Taras & Chatalova, Lioudmila & Kalyuzhnyy, Oleksandr & Ostapchuk, Igor, 2021. "Broadening the scope of instrumental motivations for CSR disclosure: An illustration for agroholdings in transition economies," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 24(4), pages 717-737.
    11. Fabio La Rosa & Sergio Paternostro & Francesca Bernini, 2023. "Corporate and regional governance antecedents of the Legality Rating of private Italian companies," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 27(1), pages 297-329, March.
    12. Giorgia Miotto & Marc Polo López & Josep Rom Rodríguez, 2019. "Gender Equality and UN Sustainable Development Goals: Priorities and Correlations in the Top Business Schools’ Communication and Legitimation Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-18, January.
    13. Andrew Crane & Sarah Glozer, 2016. "Researching Corporate Social Responsibility Communication: Themes, Opportunities and Challenges," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(7), pages 1223-1252, November.
    14. Jia Xu & Jiuchang Wei & Liangdong Lu, 2019. "Strategic stakeholder management, environmental corporate social responsibility engagement, and financial performance of stigmatized firms derived from Chinese special environmental policy," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(6), pages 1027-1044, September.
    15. Wang, Quan-Jing & Wang, Hai-Jie & Chang, Chun-Ping, 2022. "Environmental performance, green finance and green innovation: What's the long-run relationships among variables?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    16. Mutch, Nicola & Aitken, Robert, 2009. "Being fair and being seen to be fair: Corporate reputation and CSR partnerships," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 92-98.
    17. Daniel Jaffee, 2010. "Fair Trade Standards, Corporate Participation, and Social Movement Responses in the United States," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 92(2), pages 267-285, April.
    18. Anselm Schneider, 2015. "Reflexivity in Sustainability Accounting and Management: Transcending the Economic Focus of Corporate Sustainability," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 127(3), pages 525-536, March.
    19. Arno Kourula & Guillaume Delalieux, 2016. "The Micro-level Foundations and Dynamics of Political Corporate Social Responsibility: Hegemony and Passive Revolution through Civil Society," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 135(4), pages 769-785, June.
    20. Hadi Al-Abrrow & Jaber Ali & Alhamzah Alnoor, 2022. "Multilevel Influence of Routine Redesigning, Legitimacy and Functional Affordance on Sustainability Accounting: Mediating Role of Organizational Sense-making," Global Business Review, International Management Institute, vol. 23(2), pages 287-312, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ods:journl:v:2:y:2013:i:2:p:83-86. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Anatoliy G. Goncharuk (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dmonaua.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.