Search results

Organizational reputation and status are similar yet distinct constructs, serving as signals conveying information about an organization and its products and thus constituting audiences' perceptions about the organization. However, compared to status, reputation tends to change more dynamically over time. In this study, the authors argue that the dynamic traits of reputation – particularly, its momentum and volatility – may serve as additional signals and/or noises, influencing potential exchange partners' perception about the organization and thereby determining its status.

The authors test our hypotheses in the context of the US venture capital firms between 1990 and 2010. The authors collected 8,793 firm-year observations of 1,186 VC firms and used the Arellano–Bover/Blundell–Bond dynamic panel estimation method to estimate their model.

The authors’ findings show that reputation momentum has a positive effect on status, whereas reputation volatility does not have a significant direct effect. However, the authors found that volatility has indirect effects on status, serving as a noise weakening the signaling effects of reputation and its momentum.

This paper contributes to the literature on organizational reputation and status by suggesting the importance of considering the dynamic traits of organizational reputation, which are indeed the crucial factors that distinguish reputation from status. Also, this study provides managerial implications for the organizations that aim to enhance their status through managing their reputation.

This paper investigates how a firm's status moderates the performance of its investment portfolio diversification strategy. We combine the investment diversification literature with the organizational status theory, arguing that status would weaken the benefits of a specialist strategy in their niche industry of investments while strengthening the positive consequences of a generalist strategy across various industries.

We collected our data using the Securities Data Company (SDC) Platinum VentureXpert database. A fixed-effects spline regression analysis for 2,201 US venture capital firms between 1969 and 2016 was used to test for a nonlinear relationship between the level of portfolio diversification and firm performance.

We found that status differences exist in the performance of a specialist strategy but not in that of a generalist strategy. Our results indicate that portfolio specialization in fewer number of industries has little impact on low-status firms, whereas high-status firms suffer significantly lower IPO success rates. In contrast, above-median portfolio diversification was found to be beneficial to both high- and low-status firms.

We specifically identify the impact of status on the performance of investment diversification strategies, an area of research which has received little attention. Further, our findings provide some practical implications for managers making investment decisions between specialist and generalist investment strategies, given their status within the market. Implications for understanding the roles of firm status in portfolio diversification strategies are discussed.