We measure the influence of reputation rankings on individuals’ perceptions of firms. Through experimental design, we vary whether and how participants are exposed to a reputation ranking alongside other information about a firm. We find that rankings influence perceptions when they are negative and congruent with other information about the firm. These findings help explain how a firm’s reputation can change even if its characteristics remain constant and why change in a firm’s characteristics can be slow to produce change in its reputation.
AakerD.KellerK. L. (1990). Consumer evaluations of brand extensions. Journal of Marketing, 54, 27-41.
2.
AguinisH.BradleyK. J. (2014). Best practice recommendations for designing and implementing experimental vignette methodology studies. Organizational Research Methods, 17, 351-371.
3.
AikenL. S.WestS. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
4.
AtzmullerC.SteinerP. M. (2010). Experimental vignette studies in survey research. Methodology, 6, 128-138.
5.
BarnettM. L. (2007). Stakeholder influence capacity and the variability of financial returns to corporate social responsibility. Academy of Management Review, 32, 794-816.
6.
BarnettM. L. (2014). Why stakeholders ignore firm misconduct: A cognitive view. Journal of Management, 40, 676-702.
7.
BarnettM. L.JermierJ. M.LaffertyB. A. (2006). Corporate reputation: The definitional landscape. Corporate Reputation Review, 9, 26-38.
8.
BarnettM. L.SalomonR. M. (2012). Does it pay to be really good? Addressing the shape of the relationship between social and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 33, 1304-1320.
9.
BarneyJ. B. (1991). Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. Journal of Management, 17, 99-120.
10.
BlockR. A.ZakayD. (1997). Prospective and retrospective duration judgments: A meta analytic review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4, 184-197.
11.
BowmanN. A.BastedoM. N. (2011). Anchoring effects on world university rankings: Exploring biases in reputation scores. Higher Education, 61, 431-444.
12.
BromleyD. (2002). Comparing corporate reputations: League tables, quotients, benchmarks, or case studies?Corporate Reputation Review, 5, 35-51.
13.
CarterS. M.RuefliT. W. (2006). Intra-industry reputation dynamics under a resource-based framework: Assessing the durability factor. Corporate Reputation Review, 9, 3-25.
14.
ChatterjiA. K.LevineD. I.ToffelM. W. (2009). How well do social ratings actually measure corporate social responsibility?Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 18, 125-169.
15.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
16.
CohenK. J.CyertR. M. (1965). Simulation and organizational behavior. In MarchJ. G. (Ed.), Handbook of organizations (pp. 305-334). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
17.
DeephouseD. L. (2000). Media reputation as a strategic resource: An integration of mass communication and resource-based theories. Journal of Management, 26, 1091-1112.
18.
DeutschM.GerardH. (1955). A study of normative and informational influence upon individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629-636.
19.
ElsbachK. D.KramerR. M. (1996). Members’ responses to organizational identity threats: Encountering and countering the Business Week rankings. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 442-476.
20.
EspelandW. N.SauderM. (2007). The reactivity of rankings: How public measures recreate social worlds. American Journal of Sociology, 113, 1-40.
21.
FestingerL. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.
22.
FestingerL. (1962). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
23.
FombrunC. J. (1996). Reputation: Realizing value from the corporate image. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
24.
FombrunC. J.GardbergN. A.BarnettM. L. (2000). Opportunity platforms and safety nets: Corporate citizenship and reputational risk. Business and Society Review, 105, 85-106.
25.
GardbergN.DowlingG. (2012). Keeping score: The challenges of measuring corporate reputation. In BarnettM.PollockT. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of corporate reputation (pp. 34-68). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
26.
GarudR.DunbarR. L. M.RaghuramS. (1996). Run, rabbit, run! But can you survive?Journal of Management Inquiry, 5, 168-175.
27.
GioiaD. A.CorleyK. G. (2002). Being good vs. looking good: Business school rankings and the Circian transformation from substance to image. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 1, 107-120.
28.
GreenhouseS. W.GeisserS. (1959). On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika, 24, 95-112.
29.
HovlandC. L. (1959). Reconciling conflicting results derived from experimental and survey studies of attitude change. American Psychologist, 14, 8-17.
30.
KoehlerJ. J. (1993). The influence of prior beliefs on scientific judgments of evidence quality. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 56, 28-55.
31.
LaponceJ. (1966). An experimental method to measure the tendency to equibalance in a political system. American Political Science Review, 60, 982-993.
32.
LittleR. J. A.RubinD. B. (1987). Statistical analysis with missing data. New York, NY: Willey.
33.
LoveE. G.KraatzM. (2009). Character, conformity, or the bottom line? How and why downsizing affected corporate reputation. Academy of Management Journal, 52, 314-335.
34.
MarchJ. G.SimonH. A. (1958). Organizations. Oxford, UK: John Wiley.
35.
MartinsL. L. (2005). A model of the effects of reputational rankings on organizational change. Organization Science, 16, 701-720.
36.
MertonR. K. (1948). The self-fulfilling prophecy. Antioch Review, 8, 193-210.
37.
MishinaY.BlockE. S.MannorM. J. (2012). The path dependence of organizational reputation: How social judgment influences assessments of capability and character. Strategic Management Journal, 33, 459-477.
PopeD. G. (2009). Reacting to rankings: Evidence from “America’s best hospitals.”Journal of Health Economics, 28, 1154-1165.
40.
RynesS. L.LawlerJ. (1983). A policy-capturing investigation of the role of expectancies in decisions to pursue job alternatives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 620-631.
41.
SalganikM. J.WattsD. J. (2008). Leading the herd astray: An experimental study of self- fulfilling prophecies in an artificial cultural market. Social Psychology Quarterly, 71, 338-355.
42.
SauderM.LancasterR. (2006). Do rankings matter? The effects of U.S. News & World Report rankings on the admission process of law schools. Law & Society Review, 40, 105-134.
43.
SawyerA.BallD. (1981). Statistical power and effect size in marketing research. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 275-290.
44.
SorensenA. T. (2007). Bestseller lists and product variety. Journal of Industrial Economics, 55, 715-738.
45.
StorbeckJ.CloreG. L. (2011). Affect influences false memories at encoding: Evidence from recognition data. Emotion, 11, 981-989.
46.
TaylorS. E. (1991). Asymmetrical effects of positive and negative events: The mobilization-minimization hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 67-85.
47.
WartickS. L. (2002). Measuring corporate reputation: Definition and data. Business & Society, 41, 371-393.
48.
WebsterJ.TrevinoL. (1995). Rational and social theories as complementary explanations of communication media choices: Two policy-capturing studies. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 1544-1572.
49.
WeickK. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
50.
ZedeckS. (1977). An information processing model and approach to the study of motivation. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 18, 47-77.
