FACULTY AND RESEARCH

Public accusations of misconduct by environmental organizations exert reputational pressure on firms. The targeted firms are thus faced with the decision of responding accommodatively or defensively. Situational crisis communication theory (SCCT) holds that such accusations require an accommodative response to reduce the reputational threat. However, defensive response behavior is frequently observed, and insights from the sociocognitive perspective explain that corporate conceptualizations of the contested practice (and hence threat) shape targets' responses. We integrate and extend prior research by (1) explicating the need for attention to the condition of contested practice complexity and (2) theoretically developing and empirically testing (using a sample of palm oil producers accused of illegal deforestation by Greenpeace) the impact of targeted firms' engagement in environmental alliances and past environmental misconduct experience, two key manifestation variables of practice meaningfulness. Overall, in line with calls for a more comprehensive understanding, we provide new insights into the question of when and why targeted firms respond accommodatively or defensively to environmental organizations' demands that they change their practices.