Corporate social performance (CSP) is one of the main drivers of corporate reputation. The main aim of this study is to analyze the moderating effect of corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting quality on the relation of CSP and corporate reputation through two effects. First, it may enhance the firm's credibility because CSR reporting favors CSP consistency by reducing managers' CSR discretion and easing CSP comparability along the time. Second, it may increase the visibility of CSR actions beyond direct stakeholders involved in them. Analyzing an international sample of 132 companies from nine countries for the period 2011-2016, we show that all of the CSP dimensions (social, environmental, and economic) positively affect corporate reputation. We also find that good CSR reporting quality increases the intensity of the environmental and social performance effects on corporate reputation. Results provide a new perspective of the role CSR reporting quality that managers have to deal to get better impacts of CSP on corporate reputation. K E Y W O R D S corporate reputation, corporate social responsibility performance, corporate social responsibility reporting, stakeholder-agency theory

The conceptual closeness between corporate social performance (CSP) 60 -72.

No abstract

Research on how managers influence firm outcomes has generated promising explanations of differences in organizational strategies and performance within a given industry, but has largely ignored the role of emotions in shaping managers' strategic choices. This article analyzes the influence of the affective traits of CEOs-their long-term tendency to experience positive or negative moods or emotions-on strategy and performance conformity in a sample of Spanish banks and savings banks. Our results show that managers' negative affective traits are related to more conformist strategies and more typical performance, whereas positive affective traits seem to promote outcomes that deviate from the central tendencies of the industry. Results also show that strategic conformity mediates the relationship between CEO negative affective traits and typical performance.

Researchers have traditionally addressed the influence of corporate reputation on firm performance, but have not considered the influence of corporate reputation on firm risk. This research develops hypotheses regarding the opposing influence of corporate reputation on a firm's systematic risk, unsystematic risk and total risk, as well as the moderation effect of firm size and industry concentration. Using a panel data method, these relationships are analysed, controlling for the effects of endogeneity, for a sample of Spanish quoted firms in the period 2001-2007. Specifically, two complementary analyses are performed. The first distinguishes firms included and not included in the MERCO index of the most reputable firms. The second analyses the impact of corporate reputation for the sub-sample of most reputable firms. Being reputable reduces a firm's unsystematic risk and total risk, but increases systematic risk. In addition, firm size weakens these influences of corporate reputation on firm risk. However, among the most reputable firms, differences in reputation score have a lower effect on risk. Specifically, the corporate reputation level only influences firm unsystematic risk. It seems that what matters is not the degree of corporate reputation, but whether being or not being reputable is the question in terms of risk.