The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Interaction of Top Management Group, Stakeholder, and Situational Factors on Certain Corporate Reputation Management Activities*
Abstract
abstract This study examines when a firm's members are most likely to promote and defend its reputation. Building on past research in impression management theory and the upper‐echelons perspective, I argue that firms facing increased visibility among different stakeholder groups will increase corporate reputation management activities towards those groups and decrease activities towards other groups. I further argue that top management group characteristics will moderate these relationships, suggesting that certain top management groups are more attuned to the situational needs of reputation management. A set of hypotheses are tested using pooled cross‐sectional time‐series data on a set of Fortune 500 companies. Results indicate that firms generally directed reputation management activities towards their more visible stakeholders. However, the type and extent of reputation management behaviour varied. Specifically, for firms whose top management groups were more highly educated or output oriented, highly visible situations with the media were more likely to be associated with a higher use of press releases. Moreover, those same firms devoted more resources to mass media advertising under situations of high consumer visibility compared to firms whose top management groups were less educated or throughput oriented.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage
Barney, J. (1991) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639101700108 · Cited by 48,334
Specification Tests in Econometrics
Hausman, J. A. (1978) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1913827 · Cited by 18,820
Impression management: A literature review and two-component model.
Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.1.34 · Cited by 3,334
The Double-Edge of Organizational Legitimation
Ashforth, B. E., & Gibbs, B. W. (1990) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1.2.177 · Cited by 2,228
Top executive commitment to the status quo: Some tests of its determinants
Hambrick, D. C., Geletkanycz, M. A., & Fredrickson, J. W. (1993) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250140602 · Cited by 1,058
Cited by
Signaling Theory: A Review and Assessment
Connelly, B. L., Certo, S. T., Ireland, R. D., & Reutzel, C. R. (2011) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206310388419 · Cited by 6,735
Organizational Reputation: A Review
Lange, D., Lee, P. M., & Dai, Y. (2011) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/0149206310390963 · Cited by 960
Hewett, K., Rand, W., Rust, R. T., & van Heerde, H. J. (2016) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1509/jm.15.0033 · Cited by 366
Exploring Corporate Reputation and Crisis Communication
Nuortimo, K., Harkonen, J., & Breznik, K. (2026) · Journal of Marketing Analytics · doi:10.1057/s41270-024-00353-8 · Cited by 39
Metadata
- Authors
- Carter, S. M.
- Venue
- Journal of Management Studies
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-06-20
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1145-1176
- ISSN
- 0022-2380 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-6486
- OpenAlex
- W2161779351
- Cited by
- 267
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 20.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Interaction of Top Management Group, Stakeholder, and Situational Factors on Certain Corporate Reputation Management Activities*. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00632.x
- The paper
- Carter, S. M. (2006). The Interaction of Top Management Group, Stakeholder, and Situational Factors on Certain Corporate Reputation Management Activities*. Journal of Management Studies. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2006.00632.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.