Well Known or Well Liked? The Effects of Corporate Reputation on Firm Value at the Onset of a Corporate Crisis

Research summary : We study how two dimensions of reputation (i.e., generalized favorability and being known) and attribution of crisis responsibility affect firm value at the onset of a crisis. Analyzing 126 corporate crises befalling publicly listed firms in China from 2008 to 2014, we find that generalized favorability serves as a buffer, while being known can be a burden, in influencing firm value. We also find that the buffering effect of generalized favorability is stronger when the attribution of crisis responsibility is low (vs. high). In addition, there is a negative interaction effect between the two dimensions of reputation such that the buffering effect of generalized favorability weakens when firms are better known. We discuss our contributions to research on corporate reputation and crisis management. Managerial summary : Corporate reputation is an intangible asset, especially at the onset of a corporate crisis. This research sheds light on the “double‐edged sword” of corporate reputation by examining the effects of two reputation dimensions (i.e., being liked and being known) on firm value. Our results suggest that well‐liked firms can leverage their generalized favorability among stakeholders to assuage firm value loss, whereas well‐known firms may have to better communicate with stakeholders to overcome the burden of stakeholders' attention that escalates firm value loss. To better cope with the onset of a crisis, firms should therefore enhance their generalized favorability and simultaneously avert stakeholders' excessive attention. In addition, well‐liked firms can further buffer against the loss in firm value by reducing the perceived intentionality of a crisis. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Understanding the impact of symbolic and substantive environmental actions on organizational reputation

Research in corporate environmental practices has shown that stakeholders impose coercive and normative forces that drive firms to perform environmental protection actions. However, limited attention has been placed on how different constituents of stakeholders value the firm's environmental actions. By focusing on industry peers as a constituent of stakeholders, we examine how the firm's environmental actions impact its reputation. Based on institutional theory and signaling theory we propose that symbolic environmental actions negatively affect reputation, whereas substantive actions improve firm's reputation among its peers. Building on the notion of signaling process, the authors also observe that a firm's reporting practices moderate positively the negative effect of symbolic actions. Data from a sample of 213 publicly traded firms operating in polluting industries from 2006 to 2013 support these results. The findings emphasize the danger of using symbolic actions to signal environmental commitment in a context of high-involvement information search and opportunistic behaviors.     

Exploring reputation of B2B partnerships: Extending the study of reputation from the perception of single firms to the perception of inter-firm partnerships

Reputation is a concept that has been widely studied in terms of the perceptions of characteristics of single firms. We argue that there is merit in extending the study of reputation to the perception of characteristics of inter-firm partnerships. Cases of business-to-business partnerships are used to explore the notion of partnership reputation and its associated characteristics. Insights from the study of corporate reputation are used to develop a conceptual model and propositions that specify some of the characteristics and outcomes of partnership reputation. We propose that partnership reputation includes perceptions of mutual understanding, flexibility of interaction and synergy. The benefits of partnership reputation are then explored in terms of the positive behaviours such a reputation may engender with stakeholders. The paper concludes by discussing limitations and outlining directions for future research.     

Understanding corporate B2B web sites' effectiveness from North American and European perspective

The globalization of economic activities has led multinational business-to-business (B2B) firms to use their corporate web sites extensively to communicate with their stakeholders. Using a field study of 368 business customers, this paper examines three factors of information that influence corporate web sites' effectiveness in a B2B context and whether these factors differ by web site user's national origin. Results indicate that informativeness of a corporate web site is important for both North American and European visitors. Quality of information is important for European users but not an important aspect for North American users. Usability is the most important factor for North American users but it is not important for European users. Implications of these results are discussed for managerial practices and further research.     

Is doing more doing better? The relationship between responsible supply chain management and corporate reputation

Responsible supply chain management (RSCM) can help protect a firm's corporate reputation by shielding it from negative media attention and consumer boycotts. RSCM can also enhance a firm's corporate reputation, which allows firms to secure business contracts and penetrate new market segments successfully. This study empirically examines: (i) the extent to which responsible supply chain management practices is driven by a desire to protect corporate reputation; and (ii) whether responsible supply chain management can enhance corporate reputation and thereby generate competitive advantage to the firm. We draw on primary and secondary datasets across seven firms, spanning the publishing, technology, beverage, tobacco, finance and home improvement sectors. We find compelling evidence to suggest that firms often engage in RSCM due to a desire to protect corporate reputation. Similarly, we find empirical evidence to suggest that responsible supply chain practices can enhance reputation and thereby create competitive benefits, although this link is not as profound as the relationship between RSCM and reputation protection and there are significant variations across industries. These findings have significant implications for marketing theory and, in particular, industrial marketers, who are increasingly expected to implement responsible supply chain practices.     

Corporate reputation and customer behavioral intentions: The roles of trust, identification and commitment

How does corporate reputation influence customer behavioral intentions? This article proposes a model with customer trust, customer identification and customer commitment as the key intervening factors between corporate reputation and customer purchase intention and willingness to pay a price premium. We test the model by using data from 351 customers of three Chinese B2B service firms. Results indicate that corporate reputation has positive influence on both customer trust and customer identification. Customer commitment mediates the relationships between the two relational constructs (customer trust and customer identification) and behavioral intentions. Customer identification and customer commitment relate closely, but they are distinct constructs in the B2B setting.     

With greater power comes greater responsibility? takeover protection and corporate attention to stakeholders

Using takeover protection as an indicator of corporate governance, this study examines how an exogenous shift in power from shareholders to managers affects corporate attention to non‐shareholding stakeholders. Two competing hypotheses are entertained. The shareholder view predicts that stronger takeover protection will lead to a decrease in corporate attention to shareholders and non‐shareholding stakeholders alike, as managers divert resources from shareholders to the pursuit of their private interests. The stakeholder view, in contrast, predicts that stronger takeover protection will increase corporate attention to non‐shareholding stakeholders. Because catering to non‐shareholding stakeholders contributes to the long‐term value of the firm, managers will be more likely to attend to those stakeholders when relieved from short‐termism triggered by the threat of hostile takeovers. Using a sample of 878 U.S. firms from 1991 to 2002, the study finds that an exogenous increase in takeover protection leads to higher corporate attention to community and the natural environment, but has no impact on corporate attention to employees, minorities, and customers. Additional analyses show that firms that increase their attention to stakeholders experience an increase in long‐term shareholder value. These findings provide additional evidence that relief from short‐termism is a likely source of the increase in corporate attention to non‐shareholding stakeholders following the increase in takeover protection. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Corporate reputation and sustained superior financial performance

Good corporate reputations are critical because of their potential for value creation, but also because their intangible character makes replication by competing firms considerably more difficult. Existing empirical research confirms that there is a positive relationship between reputation and financial performance. This paper complements these findings by showing that firms with relatively good reputations are better able to sustain superior profit outcomes over time. In particular, we undertake an analysis of the relationship between corporate reputation and the dynamics of financial performance using two complementary dynamic models. We also decompose overall reputation into a component that is predicted by previous financial performance, and that which is ‘left over’, and find that each (orthogonal) element supports the persistence of above‐average profits over time. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Winning us with trifles: Adverse selection in the use of philanthropy as insurance

Research Summary: We study the use of corporate philanthropy as a form of reputation insurance, developing a formal model of such insurance to examine how the terms of insurance in equilibrium change under different assumptions about the firm and its stakeholders. We then test the predictions from this model in the U.S. petroleum industry and find that philanthropic donations offer insurance‐like benefits, but are also positively associated with subsequent oil spills—firms that give more, spill more—with this association being stronger for spills that are under firms’ control and in states with low civic capacity. These results are consistent with an adverse selection/moral hazard equilibrium and suggest that the use of philanthropy as reputation insurance may benefit firms at the cost of society. Managerial Summary: Firms that donate to social causes develop a reputation for being socially responsible, and are often given the benefit of doubt when negative information about them comes to light. But are philanthropic firms truly more responsible? We argue that firms that donate more may be more likely to do harm—those that expect to do harm later are likely to give more now, and those that know their reputation protects them may become less careful. Evidence from the U.S. petroleum industry is consistent with this argument, with firms that give more having more subsequent oil spills, but only the type of spills that are under the firm's control, and only in states where the firm faces weaker scrutiny.     

“Green” supply chain management: The role of trust and top management in B2B and B2C markets

“Green” supply chain management (GSCM) has often been associated with highly visible companies (Bowen, 2000) and firms within consumer-focused industries (Buysse & Verbeke, 2003; Hall, 2000; Roht-Arriaza, 1996). As such, GSCM has partly been led by development of consumer awareness of environmental issues (Beamon, 1999; Zhu et al., 2005). This suggest that firms operating in business-to-consumer (B2C) markets have strong incentives to implement GSCM, due to both institutional and stakeholder pressure. However, this leaves the role of GSCM in business-to-business (B2B) sectors relatively unexplored and to-date little is known about: 1) the relative engagement with GSCM among firms in business-to-consumer and business-to-business sectors; 2) the conditions that are necessary for successful implementation of “green” practices in B2B supply chains. This study addresses these issues within the context of 340 buyer–supplier relationships in the United Kingdom, using an innovative research methodology that captures firms' engagement with GSCM practices and minimizes social desirability and common source biases. Our results show that GSCM is relatively limited among firms in B2B markets compared to firms in B2C markets. At the same time, we show that developing trust with supply chain partners, while also having top management support, is a crucial driver of engagement with GSCM among firms in B2B sector but less important among firms in B2C sector. These findings provide considerable insights to managers and marketers of B2B supply chains that seek to respond to a growing interest of environmental performance of supply chain.     

An exploratory study into brand alignment in B2B relationships

B2B relationships are characterized by strategic partnerships between firms and the suppliers of goods and services integral to their offerings. Failure to choose the right partner could jeopardize the survival of both partners. While a number of studies suggest that partnering firms need to be aligned operationally, few studies look at whether there should be alignment between the brands of firms and their suppliers. Therefore, we build on existing studies on sexual selection to develop a theory of whether similarity in brand attributes affects the success of B2B relationships. We propose that firms wishing to portray particular brand images to their customers choose suppliers whose images mirror their own. To develop our proposition, we investigate the brand personality alignment between well-known firms and their suppliers in four industries. The findings of our analysis have significant implications for scholars and managers interested in the nature and success of B2B partnerships.     

Weak links and the management of reputational interdependencies

This paper builds on a growing literature that takes into account the fact that firms in an industry may be interdependent with regard to their corporate reputations, thus sharing a “reputation commons.” We argue that the theory of public goods can help us to understand the interdependencies that link corporate reputations and to frame the contexts and requirements for collective action that they induce. In particular, we suggest that more and more frequently these interdependencies make industry reputation a “weak link” public good. We show that this raises new challenges for the strategic management of industry reputation by communities of firms. The discussion of these challenges is based on the case study of the collective action of the European chlorine companies towards restoring their reputation after being accused of not being safe, and on a model of the production of reputation by companies. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Corporate brand identity co-creation in business-to-business contexts

Traditionally, corporate brand identity was considered to be directed and controlled by managers. However, more recent research has begun to recognize the limits of this view, which has led to the emergence of a stakeholder-driven, dynamic perspective, in which multiple stakeholders co-create diverse corporate brand meanings. This perspective argues that while managers have influence over the essence of the corporate brand, other stakeholders imprint and share their own interpretations. To better understand the process of corporate brand identity co-creation, we used a case study method with multiple cases, involving five small and medium sized business-to-business (B2B) corporate brands. We specifically chose B2B corporate brands, because they are often built on long-term and close relationships with diverse stakeholders, serving as a solid ground for illustrating the process of co-creation. To obtain the necessary depth of insight, we conducted 37 semi-structured interviews. Our research shows that corporate brand identity co-creation in B2B contexts is an ongoing dynamic process where multiple internal and external stakeholders engage in four different but interrelated performances: communicating; internalizing; contesting; and elucidating.     

Board reform versus profits: The impact of ratings on the adoption of governance practices

Research summary: External stakeholders frequently attempt to influence organizations' adoption of new practices through the creation of public ratings. Based on the insights of performance feedback theory, we develop the theory of organizational reactions to external ratings to explain how firms' behaviors depend on their rating scores and their profitability. A central issue in our theory is the conflict between established internal goals and goals introduced by public ratings, with public ratings receiving lower priority than established profitability goals. Our theory suggests that, contrary to the expectations of the external stakeholders, firms targeted for criticism by ratings become less likely to adopt corresponding practices when their profitability is below aspirations. These arguments are supported in data on the diffusion of corporate governance practices in Canada. Managerial summary: Firms and their products are rated and ranked by external agencies ranging from Consumer Reports to magazine rankings of admired, environmental, or well‐governed companies. We investigate whether such ratings affect firm behaviors, and especially whether they can incentivize poorly rated firms to improve their ranking when these firms' profitability is also low. Using the leading corporate governance ranking in Canada, we find that rankings could have adverse effects: when firms have both poor governance ranking and poor profitability they are less likely to adopt governance practices, contrary to the ranking creators' intentions. The findings show that there is a hierarchy of firms' goals, where the goal of profitability comes ahead of other goals imposed by external agencies through ratings and rankings. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Sustainably superior versus greenwasher: A scale measure of B2B sustainability positioning

Business-to-business (B2B) buyers are finding it increasingly difficult to judge the true sustainability of supply chain partners (Oruezabala & Rico, 2012). Yet three-quarters of buyers in the OECD report they will dismiss potential supply chain partners who fail to meet sustainability criteria (Pierre, 2008). B2B firms then, cannot afford any confusion over their sustainability practices and positioning. Unfortunately, there are no sustainability positioning measures for firms to assess this, and there is no agreed upon operationalization of a highly sustainable firm vs a weakly sustainable firm. As such, this research creates a B2B sustainability positioning scale and taxonomy. First, interviews with buyers and marketing managers determine perceptions of supplier sustainability practices and defines B2B levels of sustainability. Second, exploratory and confirmatory scale development studies are conducted with 578 experienced industrial buyers. The resulting B2B sustainability positioning scale shows that a sustainably superior positioning for B2B addresses five key factors: (1) sustainability credibility, (2) concern for environmental impact, (3) a careful consideration of stakeholders, (4) resource efficiency, and (5) a holistic philosophy. This scale is intended as a tool to help B2B marketers understand and better leverage their sustainability practices and communications around sustainability.“We're trying to be cleaner and greener: We recycle waste and switch things off. We use paper from responsibly managed forests whenever possible. We ask our printers to actively reduce waste and energy consumption. We check out our suppliers' working conditions...”– The back jacket of books from DK Publishers, 2018.     

Enterprise logic: explaining corporate attention to stakeholders from the ‘inside‐out’

Why are some firms more effective than others at addressing stakeholder concerns? Conventional stakeholder theories focus on variables in the external environment and cannot adequately explain variance across firms operating in the same context. Our matched‐pair study of eight global corporations goes inside the firm and investigates the role of managerial cognition on corporate attention to stakeholders. We find that top management's conceptualization of the firm's relationship with society—which we name enterprise logic—prompts distinct foci of attention and potentially constrains how well a single firm can simultaneously attend to multiple stakeholders. These findings highlight the value of an ‘inside‐out’ perspective, centered on managerial cognition, in explaining why some firms address stakeholder concerns more effectively than their peers. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

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

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.     

The contingent effect of product relatedness on B2B firms pricing strategy. Evidence from India

This paper empirically examines the contingent effect of product-related diversification on B2B firms' pricing strategy. Drawing our arguments from the recent advances in corporate strategy (i.e., resource-based view of the firm and product diversification strategy) and industrial marketing literatures, we argue that product-related diversifiers are more capable in adopting a high rather than a low pricing strategy. We also contend that this relationship will be positively moderated by a number of firm-specific factors, namely a firm's ability to establish high barriers to entry in its focal industry, as well as its strategic decision to invest in promotion strategy. We test our hypotheses against primary data collected from India. The data consists of a cross section from 127 domestic firms and subsidiaries of foreign MNEs operating in the chemicals / pharmaceuticals and the electronics industry. The results provide support for all the aforementioned hypotheses.     

The effects of corporate reputation perceptions of the general public on shareholder value

Superior corporate reputations can have strategic value for firms. Of the “multiple reputations” associated with each firm, we focus on the perceptions of the general public. The public represents the most widely defined stakeholder group but has attracted the least amount of research interest to date. Drawing on data for German firms, this study demonstrates that superior reputation perceptions issued by the general public increase shareholder value, as measured by future stock returns. This study provides a more nuanced understanding for this novel finding. Applying a conceptualization of reputation that balances both its affective and cognitive components, we find that reputation perceptions that are driven by nonfinancial aspects are more value relevant in the future than reputation perceptions that are driven by previous financial performance. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The relationship between legitimacy,reputation, sustainability and branding for companies and their supply chains

This paper aims at filling a gap that we perceive to exist in the scientific literature as to legitimacy, reputation and sustainability and their interrelationship to corporate and supply chain branding. A series of innovative theoretical frameworks are provided interrelating companies and their value (supply) chains with legitimacy, reputation, and branding which are essential conditions to achieve sustainability and competitive advantage based on dyadic and social context consonance to the benefit of society and all stakeholders involved. An urgently required better understanding of the concepts and their interrelations is enhanced by a synthesized explanatory basis entailing an eclectic mosaic of interdisciplinary theories (institutionalist, neo-institutionalist theories, the viable system approach, isomorphism and identity) to improve corporate and supply chain performance. To better inform managerial practice the theoretical considerations are spiced with case studies among which especially the currently debated supply chain case of the European horse meat scandal is illuminated suggesting concrete managerial cross-functional implications in the food industry. The paper culminates in the call for a newly to-be-established marketing stream we call ‘Sustainable and Curative Marketing’.