Table of contents(12 chapters)
Section I Managing a Global Reputation
In this chapter, we explore the multilevel nature of reputation from a shared value perspective. Building on a large body of literature surrounding corporate reputation, we discuss how the creation of reputational value at the firm level may also lead to value shared by the industries and countries in which a firm operates, and vice versa. In examining the recursive and dynamic relationships, strategic implications emerge with regard to managing reputations globally. We argue that the value of reputation is determined by the ability to meet the expectations of stakeholders with respect to what they as an audience perceive as important. Stakeholders’ expectations and perceptions of what is valuable fluctuate across different markets and the more heterogeneous the markets in which a firm diversifies internationally, the more difficult it will be to manage all these expectations. By building on our understanding of firm, industry, and country reputation, and the recursive relationships between them, we contend that creating shared value (CSV), as part of the global reputation management process (GRM), is likely to be easier when there is contextual similarity and limited product diversification. Building on previous frameworks, and employing signaling theory, we create a simplified model of GRM that highlights CSV in the form of multilevel reputation. Distinctions are drawn between being efficient and effective as part of the GRM process and a corresponding typology is created. The chapter concludes with a discussion of strategic implications, alongside a few recommendations, and possible directions for future research.
This chapter examines how leaders can utilize a clear values framework to signal what they want their organization’s reputation to be as well as design their organization to help ensure that what happens in the organization lives up to those espoused values. Reputations are, of course, built up among both internal and external audiences, and work must be done to ensure that neither audience develops negative impressions about the organization’s reputation.
Key to this reputation development and management is consistency between espoused values and enacted values. While many organizations have espoused values, it can be difficult to embed them into the foundational practices of an organization; if they are not enacted, this can lead to direct reputational harm. Building them in fully means clearly enacting the espoused values with structures (the systems and rules), people (who is hired, supported, and excluded), and culture (the environment in which the organization operates). Values frameworks are therefore posited as the foundation upon which to build organizations which can lead to warding off potential reputational calamities in the first place, minimizing the impacts of reputational harms that do take place, and bouncing back more strongly in the wake of hits to an organization’s reputation.
Organizations are increasingly required to take up extended responsibilities for social and environmental outcomes, including in global value chains. To address these challenges, the organization must call upon stakeholders to engage, contribute, and innovate, and in turn, this requires the organization to have a stronger social basis for its relationships. An integrative model of global value chain management based on social cooperation shifts the focus from corporate reputation to value chain reputation, from a firm-centric view of corporate reputation to a multistakeholder conception of value chain reputation. This approach conceptualizes reputation as a dynamic and potentially vulnerable organizational feature which cannot always be managed by public relations but requires a more stable notion grounded in something more permanent in the organization’s character, history, and the quality of its relationships with stakeholders. We consider the prospects for attending to organizational integrity as a stabilizing force for its public reputation. Integrity may be adopted as a hypernorm for motivating stakeholders who share a concern for the organization’s reputation. Co-creating reputation depends upon a social bond of cooperation developed by stakeholders caring about the organization and in turn, the organization caring about its stakeholders. This socialized understanding of reputation-building is grounded in an ethic of care and manifested through joint purposes, boundary-crossing processes, collaboration practices, and a division of labor into which value chain members are integrated and brought into relation with one another. We propose a model of global value chain management that discusses organizational capabilities required for such an approach.
Section II National Context and Reputation
Corporate reputation is a strategic asset leading to numerous positive firm-level outcomes. Motivated by the prediction that the translation of customer-based corporate reputation to customer-level outcomes (trust, customer–company identification, and word-of-mouth intentions) might be highly context-dependent, we investigate the moderating role of national culture (particularly, individualism–collectivism dimension) and individual trait (self-construal) in the association between reputational dimensions (product and service efficacy, market prominence, and societal ethicality) and their outcomes. Using survey data from two countries (US and India, N = 812), we estimate the effects of corporate reputation on focal outcomes, moderated by country as a proxy for individualism/collectivism and independent self-construal (IND)/interdependent self-construal (INTER). The results strongly suggest that when individual-level variables are taken into account, the country-level variable does not affect the translation of reputational dimensions to customer-level outcomes. Moreover, individuals high on IND are more responsive to utilitarian (egoistic) reputational dimensions of product and service efficacy, whereas individuals high on INTER are more sensitive to the group-oriented reputation for market prominence and society-oriented reputation for social ethicality. The reported findings have major implications for cross-country reputational research and global reputation management strategies.
National Culture Characteristics for Managing Corporate Reputation and Brand Image Using Social Media
The study provides explanations and empirical answers to (1) What country-level factors influence the formation of reputation as a strategic asset and (2) how can businesses better manage their reputations on a global basis? The study examines the effects of a national culture on managing global aspects of corporate reputation and brand image using social media (SM) with the use of Hall’s low versus high-context classification of culture. Using longitudinal time series approach, two surveys were conducted in 2011 and again in 2015. The study involved a total of 326 listed companies in the global stock exchange markets of: the United States – the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), Japan – the Tokyo Stock Exchange (TSE), and China – the Hong Kong Stock Exchange (HKSE). The study employs non-parametric inferential statistical methods. The results of the study show that the low-context culture group is more responsive and responds more quickly. It was clear that a nation’s culture directly affects SM ownership, reply time, and response styles (attitude). The findings may help multinational companies predict adoption of SM for their brand image and online reputation management and formulate more effective public relations marketing strategies by accommodating cultural influences.
The overall objective of this chapter is measuring the effect of key economic indicators and trends on the media reputation of an emergent country. The case analyzed is that of Chile, since 1990–2015. To deal with our objective, we measured the media reputation of Chile following validated criteria by Deephouse (2000).
A regression analysis was conducted to test our hypothesis that the coefficient of media favorableness (CoMF) of a country depends on the favorable or unfavorable trend of key economic indicators of the country. The dependent variable of our model was the Chilean CoMF. Independent variables were the monthly GDP variation, the monthly unemployment rate, the monthly average of the stock exchange index, the monthly average fuel price, and the monthly average copper price (a very important commodity to Chile).
Our results demonstrate that key economic indicators have a significant positive bearing on the media reputation of an emergent country as Chile, that is, when an emergent country is doing well economically, the press with a global scope tends to improve the reputation of that country, showing a more favorable image about it. In consequence, our hypothesis is supported. In the case of an emergent and small Western country as Chile, the price of commodities appears as the most important predictive indicator of its favorable or unfavorable country reputation. Other implications are discussed in the study.
Section III The Nature of Reputation Measurement
This study reviews the academic literature on global reputations and its implications for meritocracy. Over the years, systems of measuring and visualizing reputation have proliferated globally with organizations competing for talented employees, clients, and resources in a situation of limited supply, resulting in the emergence of reputation systems as a device to position businesses in the international market and to contend cross-nationally for prestige. Yet, the tangible utilities of these systems for promoting a meritocratic culture remain contested. Notwithstanding their utility as cognitive heuristics, global reputation systems can distort information and become dysfunctional when consumers embedded in vastly different cultures and institutional environments navigate these systems. This chapter identifies gaps in extant knowledge and suggests number of ways of improving our theoretical and analytical frameworks on the association between reputation and meritocracy. Specifically, it advances the concept of “reputation work” to understand how reputations are built, evaluated, maintained, communicated, consumed, and deconstructed and calls for attention to each of these dimensions to forge a stronger coupling between reputations and meritocracy.
The chapter focuses on two interrelated research questions: why are museums so popular? and what can commercial enterprises learn from them? The chapter explains the popularity of museums by elaborating on the special characteristics of the cultural and economic roles of these institutions in society based on evidence in academic research and in policy documents. The chapter then provides data from a survey of 6,419 visitors and 5,065 non-visitors of the 18 most well-known (art) museums spread among 10 countries around the world. It provides evidence regarding what factors differentiate the reputations of the most reputed museums from those that are less appreciated based on museum-related factors, along with factors related to the country and city where the museum resides. The chapter concludes by examining reputation management lessons, the business can draw from the way museums operate and how they are perceived.
The Reputation of Companies across Different Countries: Some Keys to Validating the Comparison of Results
Economic globalization is leading large companies to focus on international strategic management. Nowadays, the assets referred to as “corporate intangibles,” such as corporate reputation, are becoming increasingly important because they are considered a key factor for the viability of an organization, and companies therefore need to incorporate them into their scorecards for management. The problem is that their measurement is subjective and latent. These two characteristics impede direct international comparison and require demonstrating the accuracy of comparison via a minimum of two tests – construct equivalence and metric equivalence. As regards corporate reputation, construct equivalence was verified by Naomi Gardberg (2006). However, the subsequent studies did not address metric equivalence. Based on the results of a survey provided by the Reputation Institute (n = 5,950, 50 firms evaluated in 17 countries in the Americas, Europe, Asia and Australia), the degree of RepTrak metric equivalence has been tested, using two different methodologies, multigroup analysis (structural equation model), and a new technique from 2016, the Measurement Invariance of Composite Model procedure from the Partial Least Square Path Modeling family. As one would expect from other cross-cultural studies, reputation metrics do not meet the full metric equivalence, which is why they require standardization processes to ensure international comparability. Both methodologies have identified the same correction parameters, which have allowed validation of the mean and variance of response style by country.