Being good or being known : an empirical examination of the dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of organizational reputation

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim http://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml/schema/MARC21slim.xsd">
  <record>
    <leader>00000nab a2200000 i 4500</leader>
    <controlfield tag="001">MAP20071507742</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="003">MAP</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="005">20080418125632.0</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="007">hzruuu---uuuu</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="008">060310e20051201usa||||    | |00010|eng d</controlfield>
    <datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="a">MAP</subfield>
      <subfield code="b">spa</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="a">922.15</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0">
      <subfield code="a">Being good or being known</subfield>
      <subfield code="b">: an empirical examination of the dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of organizational reputation</subfield>
      <subfield code="c">Violina P. Rindova... [et. al]</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="520" ind1="8" ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="a">This study examines the extent to which organizations' reputations encompass different types of stakeholders' perceptions, which may have differential effects on economic outcomes. It proposes that reputation consists of two dimensions: the prominence in the minds of stakeholders, and the stakeholders' perceptions of an organization as able to produce quality goods. The results suggest that prominence, which derives from the choices of influential third parties vis-à-vis an organization, contributes significantly to the price premium associated with having a favorable reputation</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="1">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080568863</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Estados Unidos</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1="1" ind2="1">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080591960</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Métodos de análisis</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1="1" ind2="1">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080605087</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Colegios profesionales</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="1">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080606176</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Excelencia empresarial</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="1">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080613815</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Diseño de organizaciones</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1="1" ind2="1">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080588403</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Títulos académicos</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="1">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080610739</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Estructura organizativa</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1="0" ind2="1">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080614027</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Evaluación de la calidad</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080253646</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Rindova, Violina P.</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="w">MAP20077100482</subfield>
      <subfield code="t">Academy of management journal</subfield>
      <subfield code="d">New York</subfield>
      <subfield code="g">Vol. 48, nº 6, December 2005 ; p. 1033-1049</subfield>
    </datafield>
  </record>
</collection>