Search results
1 – 5 of 5Leopold Ringel, Wendy Espeland, Michael Sauder and Tobias Werron
Rankings have become a popular topic in the social sciences over the past two decades. Adding to these debates, the present volume assembles studies that explore a variety of…
Abstract
Rankings have become a popular topic in the social sciences over the past two decades. Adding to these debates, the present volume assembles studies that explore a variety of empirical settings, emphasizing the importance of acknowledging that there are multiple “Worlds of Rankings.” To this end, the first part of the chapter addresses the implications of two modes of criticism that characterize much of the scholarly work on rankings and summarizes extant conceptual debates. Taking stock of what we know, the second part distinguishes three areas of empirical research. The first area concerns the activities of those who produce rankings, such as the collection of data or different business strategies. Studies in the second area focus on inter-organizational, field-level, or discursive phenomena, particularly how rankings are received, interpreted, and institutionalized. The third area covers the manifold effects that research has unveiled, ranging from the diffusion of practices and changes in organizational identities to emotional distress. Taken together, the contributions to this volume expand our knowledge in all three areas, inviting new debates and suggesting pathways forward.
Details
Keywords
Denise Bedford, Ira Chalphin, Karen Dietz and Karla Phlypo
Vijay Gondhalekar and Kevin Lehnert
This study examines share price reaction to the enrollment by companies in the Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative. We find that, on average, in the month of…
Abstract
This study examines share price reaction to the enrollment by companies in the Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative. We find that, on average, in the month of enrollment, shareholders of companies that join the CFBAI experience abnormal return of −3% and so do the shareholders of the immediate competitors that do not join the initiative. However, over the subsequent five years, while the shareholders of companies enrolled in the initiative experience an average abnormal return of +16.6%, that of non-enrolled competitors experience a further abnormal return of −34%. The abnormal returns for the two groups (at the time of enrollment and over the subsequent five years) are uncorrelated and so benefitting at the expense of competitors does not appear to be the motive for enrolling in the CFBAI. The study also provides comparison of number of employees and other important financial ratios before and after enrollment in the CFBAI for the two groups.
Details