Abstract
Research on corporate social responsibility (CSR) and corporate social irresponsibility (CSIR) has long argued both affect firms' legitimacy, for good or bad. Such research has ignored how ex-ante corporate trustworthiness and associated attributions affect the association of CSR and CSIR on corporate normative legitimacy. Focusing on two unique aspects of corporate normative legitimacy evaluations – affect and misconduct – we argue that ex-ante perceptions of firm trustworthiness moderate the associations among CSR and CSIR and different aspects of normative legitimacy. Utilizing comprehensive panel-data analytical approaches for S&P 500 firms from 2000 to 2015, MSCI-KLD data, mass-media-based measures of firm trustworthiness, including normative affect-based legitimacy, and normative misconduct-related-legitimacy, our proposition is mostly supported, with surprising caveats. A post-hoc analysis shows these associations vary based on public versus investors' affective-legitimacy views. The findings of this study critically challenge extant scholarship and call for a nuanced view of the impact of CSR and CSIR on firm legitimacy.