The Liability of Good Reputation: A Study of Product Recalls in the U.S. Automobile Industry
Abstract
In this paper, we explore opposing theoretical claims about how organizational reputation affects market reactions to product defects. On the one hand, good reputation could be a disadvantage because expectations about product quality are more likely to be violated by defects in highly reputed products. On the other hand, a good reputation could be an advantage because of strong inertial effects on reputation orderings. We empirically test these competing hypotheses using data on product recalls in the U.S. automobile industry from 1975 to 1999. Our results support for the idea that reputation can be an organizational liability in that highly reputed firms suffer more market penalty as a result of their product recalls. We also propose that the reputational effects are moderated by two important factors: substitutability and generalism/specialism. Our results show that having few substitutes with an equivalent level of reputation, or a focused product identity stemming from specialism, buffers the negative market reactions to product recalls. We conclude with a discussion on the implications of these results for institutional, reputation, and status theories.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
An organization with a strong domain-specific reputation receives more severe punishments and greater media attention than peers for similar wrongdoing, especially when the threat contradicts expectations from its reputation in that domain.
“an organization with a strong domain-specific reputation receives more-severe punishments and greater media attention than its peers for similar episodes of wrongdoing”
From Strategic Silence: Withholding Certification Status as a Hypocrisy Avoidance Tactic (2018) · cites this paper as Rhee and Haunschild, 2006
Organizations with strong generalized reputations are generally more visible and disproportionately celebrated by the public and media.
“Organizations that have established strong generalized reputations are generally more visible than their peers and are disproportionately celebrated by the public”
From Strategic Silence: Withholding Certification Status as a Hypocrisy Avoidance Tactic (2018) · cites this paper as Rhee and Haunschild, 2006
Cites
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 · Cited by 28,810 · see citing works
Regression Diagnostics: Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity
Belsley, D. A., Kuh, E., & Welsch, R. E. (1980) · Wiley Series in Probability and Statistics · doi:10.1002/0471725153 · Cited by 7,297 · see citing works
Modeling Loss Aversion and Reference Dependence Effects on Brand Choice
Hardie, B. G. S., Johnson, E. J., & Fader, P. S. (1993) · Marketing Science · doi:10.1287/mksc.12.4.378 · Cited by 903 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Also, losing quality is generally quite aversive to consumers (Hardie et al. 1993) and is more likely to occur at the higher end of the quality distribution than the lower end (Simonson and Tversky 1992).”
BackgroundSine, W. D., Shane, S., & Gregorio, D. D. (2003) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.49.4.478.14416 · Cited by 330 · cited 1× · see citing works
“Organizational status, however, is essentially concerned with perceptions of an organization’s standing relative to others (Sine et al. 2003) and is often defined relative to the standing of network partners (Podolny and Phillips 1996).”
Background
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Strategic Silence: Withholding Certification Status as a Hypocrisy Avoidance Tactic
Carlos, W. C., & Lewis, B. W. (2018) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.1177/0001839217695089 · Cited by 393 · see citing works
Challenges for global supply chain sustainability: evidence from conflict minerals reports
Kim, Y. H., & Davis, G. F. (2016) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2015.0770 · Cited by 293 · see citing works
Sine, W. D., David, R. J., & Mitsuhashi, H. (2007) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1070.0300 · Cited by 241 · see citing works
Gatzert, N. (2015) · European Management Journal · doi:10.1016/j.emj.2015.10.001 · Cited by 256 · see citing works
Reputation and Status: Expanding the Role of Social Evaluations in Management Research
George, G., Dahlander, L., Graffin, S. D., & Sim, S. (2016) · Academy of Management Journal · doi:10.5465/amj.2016.4001 · Cited by 161 · see citing works
Exploring the impact of social axioms on firm reputation: a stakeholder perspective
West, B., Hillenbrand, C., Money, K., Ghobadian, A., & Ireland, R. D. (2016) · British Journal of Management · doi:10.1111/1467-8551.12153 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
Barakat Ali, M. A. (2022) · International Business Research · doi:10.5539/ibr.v15n7p30 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
McDonnell, M.-H., & King, B. (2014) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2373974 · Cited by 5 · see citing works
- Authors
- Rhee, M., & Haunschild, P. R.
- Affiliations
- University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa (US)
- The University of Texas at Austin (US)
- ORCID
- Rhee, Mooweon
- Venue
- Organization Science
- Published
- 2006-02
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 101-117
- ISSN
- 1047-7039 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5455
- OpenAlex
- W2110405866
- Cited by
- 743
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 42 · 2025: 42 · 2024: 46 · 2023: 50 · 2022: 56 · 2021: 55 · 2020: 41 · 2019: 49 · 2018: 49 · 2017: 51 · 2016: 47 · 2015: 46 · 2014: 39 · 2013: 30 · 2012: 23
- FWCI
- 35.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Organization Science (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Corporate Identity and Reputation
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Marketing › Consumer Behavior in Brand Consumption and Identification
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Customer Service Quality and Loyalty
- Keywords
- organizational reputation, product recall, automotive industry, defective products, market reaction, product substitutability, firm specialization, status theory, institutional theory, reputation theory
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