Meeting Expectations: A Role-Theoretic Perspective on Reputation

Jensen, Michael C.; Kim, Heeyon; Kim, Bo Kyung

doi:10.2139/ssrn.1915798

Cited by 20 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Lange et al (2011) argued that organizational reputation is informed by observer's familiarity with the firm, the beliefs about what to expect from the firm in the future, and a generalized impression of favorability. The importance of a reputation may vary across audiences, however (Jensen, Kim, & Kim, 2012). Indeed, recent work on the topic argues that a given reputation is both attribute specific and audience specific (Jensen et al, 2012).…”

Section: The Direction and Importance Of An Actor's Reputation To A Gmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The importance of a reputation may vary across audiences, however (Jensen, Kim, & Kim, 2012). Indeed, recent work on the topic argues that a given reputation is both attribute specific and audience specific (Jensen et al, 2012). For instance, Wal-Mart's reputation regarding the attribute of low prices will have little influence on how labor groups evaluate the firm in terms of how it treats its employees.…”

Section: The Direction and Importance Of An Actor's Reputation To A Gmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For instance, Wal-Mart's reputation regarding the attribute of low prices will have little influence on how labor groups evaluate the firm in terms of how it treats its employees. To help make better sense of such cases, we argue that the impact of a reputation to a given audience will depend on the attributes upon which that reputation is built and the expectations of the audience that is making the evaluation (Jensen et al, 2012).…”

Section: The Direction and Importance Of An Actor's Reputation To A Gmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A second dimension upon which the influence of a given reputation may vary is how well the reputation matches the expectations of a given audience (Jensen et al, 2012). Some reputations are based on attributes that match the expectations of a given audience, while others are based on attributes that are not related to the audience's expectations.…”

Section: The Direction and Importance Of An Actor's Reputation To A Gmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One of the most active areas in this stream of research focuses on one particular type of social evaluation: reputation (Lange, Lee, & Dai, 2011). We define reputation as a collective social judgment regarding the quality or capabilities of a focal actor within a specific domain, which is consistent with recent literature on the topic (Jensen, Kim, & Kim, 2012;Lange et al, 2011). 1 This research suggests that an actor's reputation influences numerous outcomes, including an organization's performance (e.g., Deephouse, 2000;Rindova, Williamson, Petkova, & Sever, 2005) and executive compensation (e.g., Milbourn, 2003;Wade, Porac, Pollock, & Graffin, 2006).…”

mentioning

confidence: 92%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Understanding the Direction, Magnitude, and Joint Effects of Reputation When Multiple Actors’ Reputations Collide

Boivie

Graffin²,

Gentry

2016

AMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite extensive research efforts into the effects of reputation, virtually all of it has examined the effect of one type of reputation on one or more specific outcomes. But, how, for example, might the reputations of analysts, CEOs, and firms individually and jointly affect firm outcomes? To answer this question, the present study focuses on a context in which reputations are particularly relevant: changes in analyst recommendations and the effect of those changes on stock market reactions. Our study contributes to the increasing reputation literature by being one of the first to recognize and measure how the market accounts for multiple reputations. Further, we argue and find that the reputations of different actors interact with each other when determining particular firm outcomes. We also find that different actor's reputations influence the reactions of observers. 1 While we recognize that there are other related constructs, such as status or prestige, that are conceptually similar to reputation, reputation is the focus of our study. A number of recent articles have undertaken to clarify distinctions among these constructs (e.g.,

show abstract

Section: The Direction and Importance Of An Actor's Reputation To A Gmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Direction and Importance Of An Actor's Reputation To A Gmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Direction and Importance Of An Actor's Reputation To A Gmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Direction and Importance Of An Actor's Reputation To A Gmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 92%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Understanding the Direction, Magnitude, and Joint Effects of Reputation When Multiple Actors’ Reputations Collide

Boivie

Graffin²,

Gentry

2016

AMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

When the role fits: How firm status differentials affect corporate takeovers

Shen

Tang

Chen

2013

Strategic Management Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study explores the implications of interfirm status differentials for firm behaviors in corporate takeover transactions. We argue that the more the status differential between two firms is aligned with expectations of their roles embedded in the specific economic activity, the easier it is for them to agree on the appropriate means to reach consensus on the transaction. Using the empirical context of the U.S. corporate takeover market, we found that the greater the status differential between an acquirer and a target, the more positively the market reacts to both the acquirer and the target upon the announcement of the acquisition deal, the more likely it is for the deal to be completed, and the more likely the acquirer is to achieve better post‐acquisition performance. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Stepping across for social approval: Ties to independent foundations' boards after financial restatement

Lungeanu

Paruchuri

Tsai

2018

Strategic Management Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research Summary: Integrating research on independent philanthropy and organizational misconduct, we argue that affiliations with independent foundations provide social approval benefits for firms that restate their financials. We use a panel of S&P 500 companies from 2004 to 2011 to investigate the addition of foundation board ties by restating firms. CEOs of restating firms add more new foundation board ties than CEOs of non‐restating firms, while existing corporate philanthropy and greater corporate reputation diminish this effect. We also find that new ties to foundations boards influences media tenor for restating firms more than it does for non‐restating peers. Our study offers a nuanced analysis of the post‐crisis actions of restating firms relative to non‐restating peers and highlights the relevance of ties to nonprofit boards for corporate governance. Managerial Summary: Firms oftentimes fire their top executives in the aftermath of misconduct, but such response is itself disruptive for the firm's operations. Instead, we suggest that forging ties to independent foundations can help firms in such contexts without unsettling effects. Our results show that, after a restatement event, CEOs of misconduct firms are especially likely to join new foundation boards as trustees and thus seem to be aware of the benefits of these associations. CEOs from firms with existing in‐house philanthropy or a high reputation do not join as many new foundations' boards of trustees. We also find that new firm‐foundation links are promptly and positively evaluated by the media, thus helping misconduct firms regain social approval.

show abstract

Meeting Expectations: A Role-Theoretic Perspective on Reputation

Cited by 20 publications

References 0 publications

Understanding the Direction, Magnitude, and Joint Effects of Reputation When Multiple Actors’ Reputations Collide

Understanding the Direction, Magnitude, and Joint Effects of Reputation When Multiple Actors’ Reputations Collide

When the role fits: How firm status differentials affect corporate takeovers

Stepping across for social approval: Ties to independent foundations' boards after financial restatement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About