Broken promises? : understanding the reputational effects of scaling back corporate sustainability commitments

This study investigates how attribution strategies and the severity of sustainability goal adjustments shape stakeholder perceptions of crisis responsibility, corporate hypocrisy, and organizational reputation. The findings show that internal attributions increase perceived responsibility, whereas external attributions – particularly when goals are suspended – heighten perceptions of hypocrisy. Corporate hypocrisy emerges as the strongest driver of reputational damage. The results suggest that stakeholder evaluations are shaped less by the adjustment itself than by the perceived coherence and appropriateness of the explanation. Reactions depend on whether the attribution aligns with the severity of the change and signals a credible and sincere justification.