Editing Reputation (section)

=== Connections to related, company-level concepts ===
Like any social construct, reputation is similar to (i.e., [[Convergent validity|convergent]] with) certain concepts and different (i.e., [[Discriminant validity|discriminant]]) from others. Reputation can be compared to other "social evaluation" or "social judgment" constructs. For instance, reputation is said to be '''convergent with''' adjacent concepts like corporate image, identity, celebrity, status, legitimacy, social approval (likability), and visibility (prominence), but '''discriminant from''' related constructs like stigma and infamy.<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":4">{{Cite book|last=Roulet, Thomas (Thomas J.)|url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1143840507|title=The power of being divisive : understanding negative social evaluations|date=September 2020|isbn=978-1-5036-1390-4|location=Stanford, California|oclc=1143840507}}</ref> Reputation is often considered to be a pragmatic evaluation – actors determine whether the target of the evaluation can be seen as useful to them.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Suchman|first=Mark C.|author-link=Mark C. Suchman|date=July 1995|title=Managing Legitimacy: Strategic and Institutional Approaches|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331|journal=Academy of Management Review|volume=20|issue=3|pages=571–610|doi=10.5465/amr.1995.9508080331|s2cid=168050730 |issn=0363-7425|url-access=subscription}}</ref>

Until recently, the relationships with these adjacent constructs were merely theoretical; that is, they were not formally tested or empirically validated<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=MacKenzie|first1=Scott B.|last2=Podsakoff|first2=Philip|author2-link=Philip Podsakoff|last3=Podsakoff|first3=Nathan|date=2011-06-01|title=Construct measurement and validation procedures in MIS and behavioral research|url=https://dl.acm.org/doi/abs/10.5555/2017507.2017510|journal=MIS Quarterly|volume=35|issue=2|pages=293–334|doi=10.2307/23044045|jstor=23044045|language=EN|url-access=subscription}}</ref> for their "[[Nomological network|nomological]] relationships" with these other, related constructs.

*'''''Conceptual relationships:''''' In 2012, the ''Oxford Handbook of Corporate Reputation''<ref name=":1" /> was released to provide some clarity to the increasingly fragmented field of social evaluation constructs, all of which had been referred to (either implicitly or explicitly) under an umbrella of "reputation" concepts. In 2020, the introductory part of ''The Power of Being Divisive: Understanding Negative Evaluations'',<ref name=":4" /> develops a framework to disentangle a variety of concepts in the field of social evaluations – in particular making the point that negative and positive evaluations can be on different continua, and social actors can be both positively and negatively evaluated at the same time. In this opus and in the Oxford handbook, scholars made incremental efforts to distinguish between handfuls of these constructs, such as:
** reputation vs. celebrity<ref name=":7" />
** reputation vs. status<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Stern|first1=Ithai|last2=Dukerich|first2=Janet M.|last3=Zajac|first3=Edward|date=2014|title=Unmixed signals: How reputation and status affect alliance formation|journal=Strategic Management Journal|language=en|volume=35|issue=4|pages=512–531|doi=10.1002/smj.2116|issn=1097-0266}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Pollock|first1=Timothy G.|last2=Lee|first2=Peggy M.|last3=Jin|first3=Kyuho|last4=Lashley|first4=Kisha|date=2015-09-01|title=(Un)Tangled: Exploring the Asymmetric Coevolution of New Venture Capital Firms' Reputation and Status|journal=Administrative Science Quarterly|language=en|volume=60|issue=3|pages=482–517|doi=10.1177/0001839215585602|s2cid=54640595|issn=0001-8392}}</ref>
** reputation vs. legitimacy vs. status<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Bitektine|first=Alex|date=2011-01-01|title=Toward a Theory of Social Judgments of Organizations: The Case of Legitimacy, Reputation, and Status|journal=Academy of Management Review|volume=36|issue=1|pages=151–179|doi=10.5465/amr.2009.0382|issn=0363-7425}}</ref>
** reputation vs. social approval<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Bundy|first1=Jonathan|last2=Pfarrer|first2=Michael D.|date=2014-10-16|title=A Burden of Responsibility: The Role of Social Approval at the Onset of a Crisis|journal=Academy of Management Review|volume=40|issue=3|pages=345–369|doi=10.5465/amr.2013.0027|issn=0363-7425}}</ref>
** reputation vs. stigma<ref>{{Cite web|last1=Mishina|first1=Yuri|last2=Devers|first2=Cynthia E|editor2-first=Michael L|editor2-last=Barnett|editor1-first=Timothy G|editor1-last=Pollock|date=2012-07-19|title=On Being Bad: Why Stigma is not the Same as a Bad Reputation|url=https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199596706.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199596706-e-10|access-date=2020-08-25|website=The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Reputation|language=en|doi=10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199596706.001.0001|isbn=9780199596706}}</ref>
** reputation vs. status vs. celebrity vs. stigma<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Pollock|first1=Timothy G.|last2=Lashley|first2=Kisha|last3=Rindova|first3=Violina P.|last4=Han|first4=Jung-Hoon|date=2019-04-08|title=Which of These Things Are Not Like the Others? Comparing the Rational, Emotional, and Moral Aspects of Reputation, Status, Celebrity, and Stigma|journal=Academy of Management Annals|volume=13|issue=2|pages=444–478|doi=10.5465/annals.2017.0086|s2cid=150762458|issn=1941-6520}}</ref>
*'''''Empirical relationships:''''' In 2020, Bitektine and colleagues<ref name=":9">{{Cite journal|last1=Bitektine|first1=Alex|last2=Hill|first2=Kevin|last3=Song|first3=Fei|last4=Vandenberghe|first4=Christian|date=2018-09-25|title=Organizational Legitimacy, Reputation, and Status: Insights from Micro-Level Measurement|journal=Academy of Management Discoveries|volume=6|issue=1|pages=107–136|doi=10.5465/amd.2017.0007|s2cid=149754189}}</ref> conducted the first major construct validation study to: (a) create scales for the constructs of reputation, cognitive legitimacy, sociopolitical legitimacy, and status, and (b) empirically distinguish between them by undertaking a multiple studies involving several [[Confirmatory factor analysis|confirmatory factor analyses]]. 
** This construct validation effort addressed the "broad view" of reputation as a company-level evaluation (not an evaluation for specific attributes).<ref name=":6" /> The scale items for reputation that resulted from this effort, as evaluated by an audience of respondents representing the general public, included: "The reputation of this company is excellent", "[this] is a reputable company", and "[this] is a dependable company".<ref name=":9" />
** There still exists no construct validation effort for the "specific view" of reputation (i.e., that reputation is best understood as a specific audience's view of the company with respect to a specific attribute<ref name=":8" />).