For this special issue, we sought rigorous academic studies that demonstrated the existence and dynamics of reputation beyond the corporate level, outlined specific instances of how firms managed their reputational interdependence and linked such management practices to the performance and survival of participating firms. We were fortunate to find five papers that covered all these bases from a combination of theoretical and empirical perspectives.
Reputation Management Definition Pdf Download
Download File: https://cinurl.com/2vAQsK
In the second paper, Managing industry reputation: The dynamic tension between collective and competitive reputation management strategies, Monika Winn, Patricia McDonald and Charlene Zietsma move us from a focus on the phenomena of reputation spillovers to a focus on the intra-industry dynamics of such spillovers as well as the active strategies firms can use to affect them. Using a qualitative, longitudinal comparative study of two Canadian industries (forestry and salmon fishing in British Columbia), the authors describe strategies companies used to cope with reputational spillovers created by corporate social responsibility (CSR) crises after being attacked by environmental stakeholders. The authors show that, over time, companies balance collective reputation management with competitive reputation management, and part of the strategy for managing reputational interdependence is to partition the industry into sub-groups. Thus, the authors explore the mixed-motives of collective and competitive reputation management within an industry sub-group.
According to the Internet Advertising Bureau, brand safety ensures that advertisements, their content, and any content shared by brands are appropriate and not associated with topics of consumer opinions that may be negative. Although somewhat similar concepts, brand safety falls into brand reputation management.
Develop a standard tone guide that you will use when responding, and aim to stick to it. It can also be helpful to have a crisis management plan in place within your reputation plan to take action during situations that escalate quickly, are difficult to control, and may leave responsible parties frantic and not adhering to standard guidelines.
The cloud-based reputation and review management software also allows you to track trending issues and topics to show you the bigger picture around customer issues and provides competitor tracking and performance analytics.
To conduct regular audits, you might use one of the software tools listed above. Additionally, you can use reputation management software to check for inconsistencies, such as Yext. Alternatively, there are tools such as Express Update or My Business Listing Manager that help you monitor for outdated information (check out A Comprehensive Guide to Local SEO in 2021 to learn more).
The purpose of this paper is to review the academic and trade literature on the concept of reputation, in particular as it relates to the effective practice of communications, and then to build from this literature a proposed approach that will have value to the communications practitioner. We will not attempt to cover the literature or comment extensively on trust, ethics and crisis management, even though these topics are interrelated with reputation. These topics have already been well covered in other Essential Knowledge sections.
While the communications profession touts the importance of reputation and wants to lead these efforts within organizations, there is little universal agreement within the profession on the definition of reputation, how one goes about building a reputation, and the role of communications with regard to reputation management. Communications professionals have, historically, focused on messages and programs with external stakeholders to build trust and reputation. We agree with The Authentic Enterprise (2008) publication of the Arthur W. Page Society that corporate communicators need to move from being reactive and responsive to becoming strategic and proactive. As this document notes, the current and future needs will be for corporate communicators who are able to work across the enterprise to influence values, not just articulate them, and to become full-fledged members of the senior management, strategy team. If communications professionals are to take the lead for their organizations on reputation, they will need to: 1) enhance their ability to work across disciplines, and 2) understand how reputation is seen from the perspectives of management strategy, financial management, marketing strategy, and other disciplines that are the educational backgrounds of most of the management team.
Bringing these various definitions together, we would suggest that there are two definitions of reputation, one from the perspective of the company and the other from the perspective of stakeholders. It is important, we believe, that organizations keep these two perspectives in mind:
Organizational market value has been moving from tangible to intangible assets. According to a study by Cap Gemini Ernst & Young (2003), between 80-85 percent of the market value of the S&P 500 was comprised of intangible assets versus only 15 percent from tangible assets. It is widely accepted in financial management that organizational reputation is an intangible asset (Barney, 1991; Ferguson et al., 2000; Fombrun et al., 1990; Fombrun, 1996; Aqueveque and Ravasi, 2006). Consistent with this perspective, reputation is a socially complex intangible resource that is valuable and non-transferable, and in which history plays a substantial role in its creation (Mahon, 2002). As such, it has proven to lead to persistent performance differences (Carmeli & Tishler, 2004; Roberts & Dowling, 2002). This view of organizational reputation suggests that reputation is a result of interactions and experiences of firm and organizational stakeholders over time.
Despite these findings of the link between reputation and financial performance, the case for the communications professional with senior management, particularly those from the financial and accounting fields remains difficult. Gu and Lev (2001) highlighted the difficulties in making the case for the value of intangible assets, noting that the financial and accounting management of such assets are illusive due to normal accounting rules which do not allow intangible assets, other than goodwill, to appear on the balance sheet.
N.V. Philips of the Netherlands is one company that has put into practice an integrated, enterprise-side program with an objective to enhance corporate reputation. Philips has integrated its vision and strategy, brand and marketing, technology and innovations, values, and financial and performance goals toward common reputation objectives The company has put in place a Corporate Communications Council with responsibility for global management of communications, and for addressing strategic issues from the business sectors. (Fombrun and Van Riel, 2004: 231-233).The Relationship between Organizational Value and Reputation
Reputation is a holistic responsibility within the firm and may be the most important asset entrusted to the CEO by the board and shareholders. However, the management of the day-to-day operations of reputation is often a matter of debate between public relations and marketing. There has been a constant battle in many organizations between communications and marketing over responsibility for reputation. Marketers believe that they are responsible for the 4Ps: Product, Price, Place and Promotion. As such, they feel that not managing reputation divorces them from fulfilling their responsibilities to the organization.
Public relations professionals have typically eschewed the term brand, perceiving it as a term marketing uses for products. This reluctance to understand and adopt brand management thinking may be a limiting factor in allowing the communications practitioner to have a greater leadership role in the reputation process. In addition, the focus of public relations on tactical issues like CSR, philanthropy and crisis management rather than on reputation as a strategic process, severely limits the ability to compete head-on with marketing for a greater leadership role.
The rise of Web 2.0 also makes it critical that communicators work closely with their marketing colleagues. Marketing, like communications, is experimenting and learning from the new media. The lines between marketing, advertising and public relations are becoming blurred. As marketing looks for new ways to reach customers, they may well inadvertently do damage to the corporate reputation. For example, on-line ads are found to not only be ineffective, but also annoying. In addition, many marketers who are interested in using cell phone advertising to reach target audiences. With the capabilities offered by GPS systems, marketers can know exactly where a customer is at a given point in time and advertise to them. How this fits with the reputation management approach of the company will need to be considered.
By focusing on reputation management, practitioners can build real value for their organizations through relationships, trust and positive business results, as well as enhancing their own capabilities vis-à-vis their organizations.
Reputation may be the most important asset entrusted by shareholders and boards to the CEO and management team. As an intangible asset, reputation can help frame and manage expectations, needs and interests of stakeholders, and can be used to create barriers to competition. Squandered, it is an asset that is difficult to rebuild since it is based primarily on perceptions and realized or unrealized expectations.
While communications is an important part of reputation management, the most important way an organization builds reputation is through its actions. In this regard, everyone in the organization must understand the reputation objectives and have the willingness and the ability to act in support of these objectives. 2ff7e9595c
Comments