Scholarship on reputation in and of organizations has been going on for decades, and it always has separated along level of analysis issues, whereby the separate literatures on individual, group/team/unit, and organization reputation fail to acknowledge each other. This sends the implicit message that reputation is a fundamentally different phenomenon at the three different levels of analysis. We tested the validity of this implicit assumption by conducting a multilevel review of the reputation literature, and drawing conclusions about the "level-specific" or "level-generic" nature of the reputation construct. The review results permitted the conclusion that reputation phenomena are essentially the same at all levels of analysis. Based on this, we frame a future agenda for theory and research on reputation. No less attention has been devoted to reputation in and of organizations over the years. For many years, Fortune magazine has published the results of its reputation index, and companies all over carefully monitor how they are perceived by their various constituencies, which include customers, financial investors, and the labor market. Unfortunately, there has been no systematic attempt to critically review and organize the vast literature on reputation in and of organizations to date, despite its recognized importance to the fundamental understanding of organizational behavior.In 2003, Ferris and his colleagues addressed the need for research in reputation, but they focused only at the individual level of analysis, specifically on "personal reputation in organizations." In the present paper, we argue that reputation phenomena are essentially the same across levels of analysis, and we conduct a comprehensive critical analysis of the literature, organized by several key issues in this area of inquiry. Although the work of Ferris, Blass, Douglas, Kolodinsky, and Treadway (2003) serves as a foundation for our review, we also draw upon the work of numerous reputation scholars at the individual, unit/team, and organizational levels of analysis. From this broad perspective, we extract the common and defining characteristics of reputation, and then we draw conclusions about what we know and don't know, and present these conclusions as a basis for developing important directions for future research. 242 GERALD R. FERRIS ET AL.

No abstract

Given the expediency with which some U.S. governors have reopened their states to tourists, this research focuses on residents' responses to pro-tourism behaviour within the State of Georgia-one such state where contentious perspectives have been voiced. This work tests a social exchange model which includes four potential predictors of residents' pro-tourism behaviour. Eight of the 11 proposed model hypotheses were supported. Though perceived risk of COVID-19 was not a significant predictor, perceived positive and negative tourism impacts were the strongest. Local and state destination marketing organizations will be best served in applying our findings in efforts to continually monitor residents' perspectives as more individuals receive the COVID-19 vaccination.

Purpose – Many organizations hold the traditional view that due to the potential of higher job dissatisfaction and employee turnover rates, hiring overqualified job candidates is risky. The purpose of this paper is to take an alternative perspective, using Human Capital and Resource-based theories to propose that hiring overqualified job candidates adds to a firm’s human capital depth. This additional human capital depth, in turn, enables firms to improve near term organizational effectiveness, and ultimately, build long-term competitive advantage. However, the ability of the firm to sustain this competitive advantage is dependent upon the retention of the overqualified human capital. The authors propose that job and career development opportunities made available to the overqualified will increase commitment and reduce turnover intentions, resulting in a long-term competitive advantage. Thus, the conceptual framework makes reference to deployment of the overqualified as an under used source of human capital. Finally, the implications of the proposed conceptualization and directions for future research are discussed. Design/methodology/approach – This paper reviews theory and proposes a conceptual framework for reimaging overqualified human resources. Findings – There are powerful benefits to hiring overqualified job candidates, but by not hiring overqualified job candidates, organizations are missing out on a large, easily available, and potentially lower cost source of highly skilled human capital. Practical implications – The authors propose that job and career development opportunities made available to the overqualified will increase commitment and reduce turnover intentions, resulting in a long-term competitive advantage. Thus, the conceptual framework makes reference to deployment of the overqualified as an under used source of human capital. Originality/value – This paper uses Human Capital and Resource-Based theory to propose a conceptual framework which makes four key contributions. First, the authors propose that hiring overqualified job candidates increases an organization’s human capital depth. Next, this increased human capital leads to near term improvements in employee performance and organizational effectiveness. In turn, firms using career development exercises such as job crafting, mentoring, and/or informal leadership to retain overqualified human capital are more likely to covert near term organizational effectiveness into long-term competitive advantage. Finally, the authors offer a conceptual framework that bridges the overqualification and strategic human resources management literatures.

No abstract