Toward a Better Understanding of Organizational Efforts to Rebuild Reputation Following an Ethical Scandal

Sims, Ronald R.

doi:10.1007/s10551-009-0058-4

Cited by 91 publications

(71 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This reputational damage can manifest in several different ways. Reduction of present customers and limited access to future customers [39] as well as lost advantages in terms of costs [40] are consequences of reputational damage that can lead the organization to a difficult process of organizational reputation reconstruction [41], even jeopardizing the organization's survival [42].…”

Section: Reputation As a Risk Sourcementioning

confidence: 99%

Reputation, Game Theory and Entrepreneurial Sustainability

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:This manuscript provides a novel approach to reputational management as a driver of entrepreneurial sustainability, using game theory to integrate three dimensions of reputation. First, if the entrepreneur perceives reputation as a risk source, the analysis is framed as a prisoner's dilemma schema that is solved by protecting against reputational threats from entrepreneurial sustainability. Second, if the entrepreneur perceives reputation as a competitive advantage, the analysis is framed as an innovator's dilemma that is solved by getting reputational opportunities from entrepreneurial sustainability. Third, if reputation is perceived as a strategic asset, the analysis is framed as a coordination game schema that results in the development of a reputational intelligence skill that has the potential to become crucial for success in entrepreneurial sustainability. Consequently, this manuscript provides an original multidisciplinary analysis of reputational management by relating well-known theoretical results from game theory to organizational realities.

show abstract

Section: Reputation As a Risk Sourcementioning

confidence: 99%

Reputation, Game Theory and Entrepreneurial Sustainability

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, others have not found any impact (Bernardi and Guptill 2008). Corporate reputation has also been described as an excellent marketing tool and a favorable channel of positive word of mouth (Fombrun 1996;Reichheld 2003;Sims 2009). …”

Section: H3: Business Ethics Scholars Have Focused On the Negative Simentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a consequence, corporate reputation (CR) has become a fashionable concept. Many scholars from different perspectives -Economics, Marketing, Accounting, Sociology, Communication, Organizational Behavior, Strategy, etc.-have underlined its crucial role as a key element of business strategy (Carlisle and Faulkner 2005;Fombrun 1996); a proven wealth generator (Rindova et al 2005;Sims 2009); a driver of growth (Reichheld 2003); and as a tool that reduces uncertainty, orienting to consumers, suppliers, and partners (Fombrun 1996;Rindova et al 2005). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Corporate Reputation and Corporate Ethics: Looking Good or Doing Well

Leiva-Soto

Ferrero-Muñoz²,

Calderón-Cuadrado

2014

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Corporate reputation (CR) has become a fashionable topic due, among other reasons, to the recent financial and economic crisis and spreading corporate scandals. Given its interdisciplinary character and intangible nature, CR has been a frequent issue in many disciplines, but scarcely present in the business ethics field. This neglect is odd since a good reputation is one of the most valuable consequences of doing the right things and the things right. In this paper, we intend to explain this absence through three hypotheses: a) business ethics literature largely identifies corporate reputation and corporate social responsibility; b) corporate reputation overlaps with corporate image and corporate identity, resulting interchangeable constructs; and c) business ethics scholars have focused on the negative side of the reputation phenomenon, highlighting reputational risk more than benefits.Based on a bibliometric analysis of the top journal of business ethics literature over a recent decade (2002)(2003)(2004)(2005)(2006)(2007)(2008)(2009)(2010)(2011), we finally confirmed the three hypotheses although c) only partially. In addition, the findings of this study will allow for a deeper understanding of the link between looking good and doing well. Ricardo Leiva AbstractCorporate reputation (CR) has become a fashionable topic due, among other reasons, to the recent financial and economic crisis and spreading corporate scandals. Given its interdisciplinary character and intangible nature, CR has been a frequent issue in many disciplines, but scarcely present in the business ethics field. This neglect is odd since a good reputation is one of the most valuable consequences of doing the right things and the things right. In this paper, we intend to explain this absence through three hypotheses: a) business ethics literature largely identifies corporate reputation and corporate social responsibility; b) corporate reputation overlaps with corporate image and corporate identity, resulting interchangeable constructs; and c) business ethics scholars have focused on the negative side of the reputation phenomenon, highlighting reputational risk more than benefits.Based on a bibliometric analysis of the top journal of business ethics literature over a recent decade (2002-2011), we finally confirmed the three hypotheses although c) only partially. In addition, the findings of this study will allow for a deeper understanding of the link between looking good and doing well.

show abstract

“…It is not only important for business organizations to become ethical (Goodstein et al 2014;Sims 2009), but also to remain ethical. Organizations may start slipping when existing ethical norms become less embedded, but an ethics gap between what ought to be done and what is done can also arise when new ethical norms emerge, which are subsequently not fully embedded in the organization.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Battle for Business Ethics: A Struggle Theory

Kaptein

2015

J Bus Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To be and to remain ethical requires struggle from organizations. Struggling is necessary due to the pressures and temptations management and employees encounter in and around organizations. As the relevance of struggle for business ethics has not yet been analyzed systematically in the scientific literature, this paper develops a theory of struggle that elaborates on the meaning and dimensions of struggle in organizations, why and when it is needed, and what its antecedents and consequences are. An important conclusion is that the greater the ethics gap and opposing forces, the greater the struggle required. Viewing business ethics as struggle has several implications for theory and practice.

show abstract

Toward a Better Understanding of Organizational Efforts to Rebuild Reputation Following an Ethical Scandal

Abstract: reputation management, reputation rebuilding process,

Cited by 91 publications

References 44 publications

Reputation, Game Theory and Entrepreneurial Sustainability

Reputation, Game Theory and Entrepreneurial Sustainability

Corporate Reputation and Corporate Ethics: Looking Good or Doing Well

The Battle for Business Ethics: A Struggle Theory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About