000			02505nam a22002777a 4500
003			ZW-GwMSU
005			20240523062850.0
008			240523b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
022			_a0001-4273
040			_aMSU _bEnglish _cMSU _erda
050	0	0	_aHD28 ACA
100	1		_aZavyalova, Anastasiya _eauthor
245			_aReputation and status: _bexpanding the role of social evaluations in management research/ _ccreated by Anastasiya Zavyalova, Michael D. Pfarrer, Rhonda K. Reger and Timothy D. Hubbard
264	1		_aBriarcliff Manor: _bAcademy of Management, _c2016.
336			_2rdacontent _atext _btxt
337			_2rdamedia _aunmediated _bn
338			_2rdacarrier _avolume _bnc
440			_aAcademy of management journal _vVolume 59, number 1
520	3		_aResearch about the effects of an organization’s general reputation following a negative event remains equivocal: Some studies have found that high reputation is a benefit because of the stock of social capital and goodwill it generates; others have found it to be a burden because of the greater stakeholder attention and violation of expectations associated with a negative event. We theorize that stakeholders’ level of organizational identification helps explain which mechanisms are more dominant. We test our hypotheses on a sample of legislative references associated with National Collegiate Athletic Association major infractions from 1999–2009. Our results indicate that high reputation is a burden for an organization when considering low-identification stakeholder support: As the number of legislative references increases, a high-reputation university will receive fewer donations from non-alumni donors compared to universities without this asset. In contrast, high reputation is a benefit when considering high-identification stakeholder support: As the number of legislative references increases, a high-reputation university will receive more donations from alumni donors compared to universities without this asset. However, an exploratory investigation reveals that alumni donations to high-reputation universities decline as the number of legislative references increases, suggesting that the benefit of a high reputation has a limit.
650			_aReputation _vFundraising _xStakeholder _zUnited States
700	1		_aPfarrer, Michael D. _eco author
700	1		_aReger, Rhonda Kay _eco author
700	1		_aHubbard, Timothy D. _eco author
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2013.0611
942			_2lcc _cJA
999			_c165616 _d165616