CONTACT INFORMATION
- tel +82-2-740-1834
- mail junghoonhan@skku.edu
-
location
International Hall 3F 90330
Publications
- Han, J. (2019). Which of these things are not like the others? Comparing the rational, emotional, and moral aspects of reputation, status, celebrity, and stigma. Academy of Management Annals, 13(2).
- Han, J. (2021a). Salient expectations? Incongruence across capability and integrity signals and investor reactions to organizational misconduct. Academy of Management Journal, 64(2).
- Han, J. (2021b). The two towers (or somewhere in between): The behavioral consequences of positional inconsistency across status hierarchies. Academy of Management Journal, 64(1).
- Han, J. (2023). Goofus or gallant? An attribution-based theory of misconduct spillover valence. Research in the Sociology of Organizations, 85(1).
- Han, J. (2024a). Now you see me: How status and categorical proximity shape misconduct scandalization. Academy of Management Journal, 67(1).
- Han, J. (2024b). Public enemies? The differential effects of reputation and celebrity on corporate misconduct scandalization. Strategic Management Journal, 45(13).
Research Summary
- [Management] JungHoon Han - Now You See Me: How Status and Categorical Proximity Shape Misconduct Scandalization
- Prof. Jung-Hoon Han of Sungkyunkwan University’s SKK GSB(Graduate School of Business) has published a paper in the prestigious Academy of Management Journal, shedding light on when misconduct by high-status firms escalates into scandals. Prof. Han and Professors Timothy G. Pollock (University of Tennessee, Knoxville) and Scott Graffin (University of Georgia) analyzed 2015–2018 data breaches involving publicly traded U.S. firms.<br /> <br /> Abstract<br /> <br /> Despite the formidable consequences for firms of having their misconduct publicized—and thus scandalized—we know little about why only some misconduct instances become scandals beyond the idea that high-status firms’ transgressions are scandalized more often. Focusing on the media’s essential role in scandalizing misconduct, we take a media routines perspective to theorize how the status of past transgressors inside and outside the focal transgressor’s industry creates different contexts that shape the likelihood of scandalization. We argue that the prevalence of past transgressions by high-status firms within the industry leads journalists to scrutinize the misconduct more, amplifying the effect of the focal firm’s status by highlighting its commonalities with past transgressors. Conversely, the prevalence of transgressions by high-status firms outside the industry attenuates the firm status effect on scandalization by directing media attention outside the industry, limiting the information that can be inferred from firm status. Past transgressors’ status and their categorical proximity to current transgressors serve as boundary conditions for the scandalizing effect of status. Our contribution lies in elucidating contextual factors that influence how status acts as an antecedent of scandals, and explaining how status and categories feed media routines that influence the likelihood of firm misconduct being scandalized.
scandalization , firm status , media routines , categorical proximity , management
- [Management] JungHoon Han - Public enemies? The differential effects of reputation and celebrity on corporate misconduct scandalization
- Professor Jung-Hoon Han of Sungkyunkwan University’s SKK GSB has published a paper in the prestigious Strategic Management Journal, revealing how media and public interest in corporate misconduct is determined. Prof. Han, with co-authors Timothy G. Pollock (University of Tennessee – Knoxville) and Srikanth Paruchuri (Texas A&M University), recently published a research paper titled “Public enemies? The differential effects of reputation and celebrity on corporate misconduct scandalization” in the Strategic Management Journal.<br /> <br /> Abstract<br /> We explore misconduct scandalization's antecedents by focusing on the rational and emotional bases underlying reputation and celebrity, and considering how they can enhance or reduce the likelihood misconduct is scandalized as a function of the misconduct's objective and perceived severity. Specifically, we argue the quantifiable nature of objective misconduct severity enhances reputation's rational influence, but attenuates celebrity's emotion-based appeal. Conversely, perceived misconduct severity reduces reputation's influence, while enhancing the media-driven interest in celebrity firms' behaviors. Our findings based on corporate data breaches confirm that objective severity amplifies reputation's effect and attenuates celebrity's effect, while perceived severity amplifies celebrity's effect and attenuates reputation's effect. Our findings highlight the importance of social evaluations' sociocognitive content in understanding why only some misconduct becomes scandalized.<br /> <br /> Committing misconduct is costly; having it scandalized is devastating. Yet little is known about how social evaluations influence why only some firms' misconduct is scandalized, beyond the vague notion that prominent firms' misconduct attracts media attention. We find that the rational and emotional bases of firms' evaluations matter. High reputation, based on the rational assessment of firms' capabilities, increases the likelihood of scandalization for objectively severe misconduct, and the influence of celebrity—originating from audiences' emotional resonance with firms' unconventional traits and behaviors—weakens as objective severity increases. Conversely, reputation's influence weakens, and celebrity's influence strengthens, as media “availability cascades” grow and increase perceived severity. In addition to providing a more realistic portrayal of media behavior, we offer insights into post-misconduct communications and remedial actions.
high reputation , management , misconduct , scandalization , hidden truth
Awards & Honors
No awards registered.
ADDITIONAL INFOMATION