Search results

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.

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 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.

Drawing on an interdisciplinary scholarship, this study seeks to explore and explain the nature and characteristics of the emerging phenomenon of “consumer nationalism” and its critical impact on corporate reputation in the global marketplace.

The paper sets out to define the concept of consumer nationalism and then formulate an analytical framework of consumer nationalism dynamics that provides a deeper, more precise understanding of the various elements at play in a consumer nationalism crisis and the process by which multinational businesses and their corporate reputation might be affected by such nationalistic advocacy. Based on the proposed model, the paper identifies and discusses management options to protect and maintain corporate reputation in the event of consumer nationalistic outbursts. In conclusion, the paper outlines general recommendations for pursuing public/corporate diplomacy and for proactively managing consumers' perception of brands' national association as part of pre‐crisis communication strategy.

As nationalism goes hand‐in‐hand with globalization, consumer nationalism cannot be ignored.

The study provides a deeper understanding of what consumer nationalism is and how it may affect multinational businesses. It offers a comprehensive account of this emerging phenomenon by integrating existing perspectives on the nationalistic consumer base and “focusing events”, and introduces the concept of corporate susceptibility and its components. The study also highlights the centrality of corporate reputation during consumer nationalistic outbursts, and offers suggestions as to how multinational businesses may take steps to fend off the damage consumer nationalism events may do to their reputation.

This paper aims to present a case for the practical management of corporate reputation, in relation to two groups of concepts: communication, identity, and trust; and communication, identity, and image.

A review of the current knowledge of corporate reputation, personality, identity, and image leads to development of a strategy framework to enhance/protect corporate reputation. A case study involving a corporate logo introduced into a developed market by an emerging multinational corporation (EMNC) is presented.

The paper identifies that credibility and trust are significant elements which must be managed and communicated to maintain the firm's corporate image and reputation.

A conceptual model is presented illustrating a series of internal and external factors affecting communication and trust, which influence the customer and assist in shaping corporate reputation. The case of the EMNC Chinese corporation Haier to introduce its brand into a developed market may enlighten others pursuing this path.

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.

This study aims to develop a measurement model to help hotels manage their reputation within the context of online reviews and ratings platforms and evaluate the impact of this reputation management on the benefits derived by the hotels, as perceived by their managers.

Partial least squares was used to assess the model and make a causal predictive analysis, using data from a survey of a random sample of 335 Spanish hotel managers and personnel involved in reputation management.

This study shows the operationalization of hotel reputation management as a superordinate second-order construct affecting six individual first-order dimensions, strongly impacting on three key benefits as perceived by hotel managers (i.e. financial benefits, customer relationship benefits and customer-based brand benefits), within the context of online review platforms.

Based on the results of this study, hotel managers can improve the effectiveness of their management of ratings and reviews. They can also learn which aspects they should focus on when managing ratings and reviews.

Based on the opinions of hotel managers, a causal model for managing online reviews was developed and validated. This study shows how reputation management affects the benefits derived by hotels as perceived by their managers.

If major corporations struggle to define and place a value on reputation and reputational risk, what hope is there for small‐ and medium‐sized enterprises (SMEs)? It is assumed here that large corporations have greater resources available to them to do this and stronger imperatives to do so in the form of a greater number of external stakeholders, most notably shareholders and analysts. Is a structured approach to managing corporate reputation the exclusive preserve of companies with communications departments? Is corporate social responsibility (CSR), in as much as it is a voluntary activity, “good value” for SMEs and is cost versus benefit the only way to evaluate CSR? This paper reviews a spectrum of views on reputation and CSR and argues that searching for a definitive, value‐for‐money‐based formula for reputation management and CSR is at odds with stakeholder expectations, and that much evidence exists to suggest that truly effective CSR is the result more of pragmatism than theory or corporate strategy and in some ways SMEs are better placed to take advantage of CSR programmes.