{"title":"Intermediary Perception of Narcissistic and Humble CEO Traits","authors":"Johannes Brunzel","doi":"10.1057/s41299-024-00182-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The media plays a key role in bridging information asymmetries between parties such as CEOs and third-party observers. However, current research suggest that the media is not just a carrier of information but can actively shape the impression of the audience. An open question remains, hence, whether media reporting is affected by certain CEO traits such as narcissism or humility, two key constructs in the literature. For instance, narcissistic CEOs’ belief in their own superiority may spillover to the media, thereby distorting the function as information carrier and favoring directly or indirectly certain CEO traits. Therefore, by drawing on the differential effects that narcissism and humility can have on the impression of an audience, the study employs a computer-aided content analysis of factual narcissistic and humble CEOs, identified via a video metric approach, and their evaluation through three key journalistic intermediaries (New York Times, Washington Post, and Financial Times). The quantitative data suggest that actual CEO narcissism is related negatively to external performance evaluations of CEOs in subsequent years. In addition, the data suggest that narcissism as well as humility scores increase the emotional tone employed depending on the journalistic orientation of the media outlet. Humble CEOs receive on average more media attention than narcissistic CEOs yet this result is insignificant, providing limited evidence for a systematic (i.e., number of articles) bias across and within journalistic outlets towards either narcissistic or humble CEOs. This suggests that widely considered “quality” media outlets resist to portray CEO traits in an overly positive/negative light.</p>","PeriodicalId":47317,"journal":{"name":"CORPORATE REPUTATION REVIEW","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CORPORATE REPUTATION REVIEW","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1057/s41299-024-00182-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The media plays a key role in bridging information asymmetries between parties such as CEOs and third-party observers. However, current research suggest that the media is not just a carrier of information but can actively shape the impression of the audience. An open question remains, hence, whether media reporting is affected by certain CEO traits such as narcissism or humility, two key constructs in the literature. For instance, narcissistic CEOs’ belief in their own superiority may spillover to the media, thereby distorting the function as information carrier and favoring directly or indirectly certain CEO traits. Therefore, by drawing on the differential effects that narcissism and humility can have on the impression of an audience, the study employs a computer-aided content analysis of factual narcissistic and humble CEOs, identified via a video metric approach, and their evaluation through three key journalistic intermediaries (New York Times, Washington Post, and Financial Times). The quantitative data suggest that actual CEO narcissism is related negatively to external performance evaluations of CEOs in subsequent years. In addition, the data suggest that narcissism as well as humility scores increase the emotional tone employed depending on the journalistic orientation of the media outlet. Humble CEOs receive on average more media attention than narcissistic CEOs yet this result is insignificant, providing limited evidence for a systematic (i.e., number of articles) bias across and within journalistic outlets towards either narcissistic or humble CEOs. This suggests that widely considered “quality” media outlets resist to portray CEO traits in an overly positive/negative light.
媒体在弥合首席执行官和第三方观察者等各方之间的信息不对称方面发挥着关键作用。然而,目前的研究表明,媒体不仅仅是信息的载体,还能积极塑造受众的印象。因此,一个悬而未决的问题是,媒体报道是否会受到某些首席执行官特质的影响,如自恋或谦逊这两个文献中的关键概念。例如,自恋型 CEO 对自身优越性的信念可能会波及媒体,从而扭曲媒体作为信息载体的功能,直接或间接地偏向某些 CEO 特质。因此,借鉴自恋和谦逊对受众印象可能产生的不同影响,本研究采用计算机辅助内容分析的方法,通过视频度量方法识别事实自恋和谦逊的首席执行官,并通过三家重要的新闻中介机构(《纽约时报》、《华盛顿邮报》和《金融时报》)对他们进行评价。定量数据表明,实际的首席执行官自恋与首席执行官随后几年的外部绩效评估呈负相关。此外,数据还表明,自恋和谦逊的得分会增加所采用的情感基调,这取决于媒体的新闻取向。谦逊的首席执行官平均比自恋的首席执行官受到更多的媒体关注,但这一结果并不显著,只能提供有限的证据,证明在不同的新闻机构之间以及新闻机构内部,对自恋或谦逊的首席执行官存在系统性的偏见(即文章数量)。这表明,被广泛认为是 "优质 "的媒体不会对首席执行官的特质进行过于正面或负面的描述。
期刊介绍:
Corporate Reputation Review is the leading international journal for all scholars and academics concerned with managing and measuring corporate reputation.The Journal is reviewed by a distinguished editorial board, under the guidance of Guido Berens (Erasmus University, The Netherlands). Corporate Reputation Review provides a forum for rigorous, practically relevant academic research into reputations and reputation management, as well as related concepts such as identity and corporate communication.