Examining corporate reputation judgments with generalizability theory.

Abstract

The researchers used generalizability theory to examine whether reputation judgments about corporations function in a manner consistent with contemporary theory in the corporate-reputation literature. University professors (n = 86) of finance, marketing, and human resources management made repeated judgments about the general reputations of highly visible American companies. Minimal variability in the judgments is explained by items, time, persons, and field of specialization. Moreover, experts from the different specializations reveal considerable agreement in how they weigh different aspects of corporate performance in arriving at their global reputation judgments. The results generally support the theory of the reputation construct and suggest that stable estimates of global reputation can be achieved with a small number of items and experts.

Governance of Eco-Labels: Expert Opinion and Media Coverage

“…In short, we found that individual experts may differ on the relative importance of specific assurance practices, but there was no evidence of any bias based on their professional background. This observation is similar to that of Highhouse et al (2009). The quotes in Appendix A illustrate these three observations.…”

“…We also reached out to individuals who we were familiar with, and identified further experts through interviews, referrals, and web search. We aimed to have at least 10 experts in each category, following the advice of Highhouse et al (2009) that ''reasonably stable estimates'' are gained with 5 experts, and ''little incremental gain'' is achieved with more than 10 experts. Anticipating a 20 % response rate we sought to identify approximately 50 experts in each category.…”

The Impact of Internal Control Quality on CFO Turnover

“…Future research can explore whether and how restating companies with initial weak internal controls can improve their reputations by signaling improved financial reporting quality in the post-restatement era. We know that prior research uses various measures of corporate reputation, but America's Most Admired Companies List is by far the most widely used measure (Highhouse et al 2009;Riahi-Belkaoui 2001;Flanagan and O'Shaughnessy 2005;Fombrun and Shanley 1990). Researchers can use America's Most Admired Companies List as a proxy for corporate reputation.…”

The Impact of Reputation on Corporate Financial Performance: Median Regression Approach

“…Since in their paper, Highhouse et al (2009) suggest that "stable estimates of global reputation can be achieved with a small number of items", Klopotan (2016) reduces the instrument of reputation measurement to three dimensions which consist of a total of nine questions: (1) Company reputation: Products and services (Guarantee for products and services, development of innovative services, quality of products and services, level of products and services for the given price -value for money); (2) Company reputation: Vision (Company management, vision for the future, quality of leadership); and (3) Company reputation: Working condition (Company quality as a job provider, Quality of the employees) which are the subject of research in this paper.…”