Scholarlink

<p>Executives’ dark personality traits—narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy—have been increasingly linked to corporate social behavior, yet existing research remains fragmented, with a critical gap in explaining how the same underlying dispositions drive both corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate social irresponsibility (CSI). This study addresses this gap by systematically reviewing 69 journal&#xa0;articles and conducting a reflexive thematic analysis, supported by relationship effect size identification. We surface a structured configuration of mediators and moderators that shape when and how dark traits result in socially constructive versus harmful outcomes. Contrary to binary moral assumptions, we show that CSR and CSI are not opposites in mechanism: both are cognitively strategic and shaped by impression management, instrumental rationalization, and moral framing. However, they diverge in affective tone and temporal focus—with CSR linked to image-building and stakeholder responsiveness, and CSI associated with short-termism, moral disengagement, and opportunistic exploitation. From this, we introduce <i>moral elasticity</i>: the capacity of executives to fluidly toggle between CSR and CSI behaviors in response to changing incentives, constraints, and reputational concerns. These insights challenge static trait–behavior assumptions and advance a dynamic theory of dark personality as context-responsive and morally ambivalent. The study has significant implications for leadership theory, governance design, and stakeholder vigilance in discerning when dark traits serve legitimacy construction versus reputational cover for irresponsibility.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Executive Moral Elasticity: How Dark Personality Traits Shape Corporate Social Responsibility and Irresponsibility

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月13日

查看全文
  • Pier Luigi Giardino,
  • Matteo Cristofaro,
  • Oleg V. Petrenko

摘要

Executives’ dark personality traits—narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy—have been increasingly linked to corporate social behavior, yet existing research remains fragmented, with a critical gap in explaining how the same underlying dispositions drive both corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate social irresponsibility (CSI). This study addresses this gap by systematically reviewing 69 journal articles and conducting a reflexive thematic analysis, supported by relationship effect size identification. We surface a structured configuration of mediators and moderators that shape when and how dark traits result in socially constructive versus harmful outcomes. Contrary to binary moral assumptions, we show that CSR and CSI are not opposites in mechanism: both are cognitively strategic and shaped by impression management, instrumental rationalization, and moral framing. However, they diverge in affective tone and temporal focus—with CSR linked to image-building and stakeholder responsiveness, and CSI associated with short-termism, moral disengagement, and opportunistic exploitation. From this, we introduce moral elasticity: the capacity of executives to fluidly toggle between CSR and CSI behaviors in response to changing incentives, constraints, and reputational concerns. These insights challenge static trait–behavior assumptions and advance a dynamic theory of dark personality as context-responsive and morally ambivalent. The study has significant implications for leadership theory, governance design, and stakeholder vigilance in discerning when dark traits serve legitimacy construction versus reputational cover for irresponsibility.