Search results

The purpose of this study is to understand the effect of governance structure alignment, property rights protection, and reputation in generating efficiency in dairy agro-industrial system in Paraná, Brazil, and Midi-Pyrénées, France.

Descriptive qualitative research, comprising semi-structured interviews with producers, processors and key agents of the dairy agrindustrial system in Brazil and France, in 2016/2017.

As a result, it was identified that measurement generates information about transacted dimensions and when it is shared can generate affect reputation in transactions that leads to system improvement. It was also observed that, in the dairy agro-industrial system, reputation acquired does not reduce all the measurement costs, as the product requires measurement in each all collection, regardless of the reputation created.

As a limitation of the study, there is a difference in the moments when the interviews were done. In 2016, in France, the context was low prices, while in 2017, in Brazil, there was a rise in prices. This difference could have influenced some responses to the interviews, mainly about efficiency by producers.

Reputation, protecion of property rights by measurement and information sharing allows reduction costs (transaction, measurement and negotiation costs). This efficiency implies improvement to the system, in cases of milk producers and processors.

Improvements in the dairy system can have repercussions on several other improvements such as better distribution of income among agents in the chain; better-paid producers, which implies the improving quality of lives of these people; better products offered to consumers.

From a complementary perspective of transaction cost economics and measurement cost economics, reputation and protection of property rights are discussed with a focus on efficiency. Empirically, the paper contains heterogeneous data collected from two countries: Brasil and France.

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the different approaches to the corporate reputation construct, in order to identify a comprehensive definition that can be used for measurement purposes, gaps identified by previous literature identified.

This is a theoretical essay. The authors analyzed studies that involve the relationship between corporate reputation and organizational performance, and the attributes of national and international corporate reputation ratings.

The authors identified a more comprehensive definition for the reputation construct, and indicated courses for the construct’s measurement, by considering: the judgment by the stakeholders (internal, suppliers, clients and the financial market); periodical evaluations under different organizational perspectives; attention to theoretical assumptions, among other aspects.

The study is a theoretical paper that presents that the research field has many definitions that cannot be used interchangeably. It indicated how the reputation construct should be operationalized for measurement purposes. This study presented a reflection on the relationship between corporate reputation and performance, showing that it is not a settled topic in the academy.

The study advances the understanding of the reputation construct measurement, considering the adopted definition and the discussion of the attributes of the main ratings on corporate reputation. The adoption of a measurement method that takes into account the definition used in this study and the features of the methodologies discussed will improve the corporate reputation assessment.

Literature indicates that a good corporate reputation can affect organizational performance and the inverse relationship is also true. As a social implication, it is extremely relevant to improve the understanding the definition and measurement methods of this construct.

This study discusses one of the most important intangible resources for organizations, contributing to the understanding of the difference between the market value and the book value of public companies. Besides it should be considered that there is one lack of a definition directly related to the measurement of the reputation construct in the literature, a gap in which this study contributes.

The purpose of this paper is to develop and validate a reliable and valid alternative scale to measure customer-based corporate reputation (CBCR) specific to the banking industry only, where high risks and uncertainties of choosing a service provider exist.

Both qualitative and quantitative methods were employed to develop and validate an alternative scale to measure CBCR in the banking industry. Following Churchill’s (1979) paradigm and other prominent scale development studies, a scale development procedure was generated, which consists of three main stages: scale generation and initial purification, scale refinement and scale validation.

As a consequence of the current study, a reliable and valid multidimensional scale was obtained, consisting of 20 items and four dimensions to measure CBCR in banking industry: financial performance and financially strong company, customer orientation, social and environmental responsibility and trust.

This study provides insight to managers to comprehend and manage their CBCR. Since this study has empirically demonstrated that the four dimensions of the CBCR are associated with the five important customer outcome variables, the study provides further support toward the importance of corporate reputation in strategic marketing decisions in the banking industry.

Numerous different disciplines have focused on corporate reputation measurement by adapting different perspectives and approaches. However, a reliable and valid measurement tool has been proposed here to evaluate corporate reputation from customers’ perspective specific to banking industry.

The purpose of this study is to develop a valid and reliable instrument to measure the corporate reputation of large service organizations. The validity of a discipline’s constructs is a prerequisite for effective theory development and testing. Construct validity thus lies at the very heart of both decision-making and scientific progress in marketing. The use of marketing instruments that do not demonstrate sufficient evidence of construct validity can lead to invalid results, erroneous conclusions and poor decision-making. Despite several attempts to develop an instrument to measure the corporate reputation of service organizations effectively, lingering doubts remain about the construct validity of several published instruments.

Empirical data were collected from the clients of service organization using an online survey during three waves of data collection and scale purification. Invariance testing in two different service industries confirmed that the final instrument is completely invariant, suggesting that the measurement parameters of the measurement model are the same in both samples.

Rigorous scale development led to the development of a 19-item instrument that effectively measures a large service organization’s corporate reputation along five dimensions, namely, emotional appeal, corporate performance, social engagement, good employer and service points.

The study was limited to the measurement of the corporate reputation of large service organizations.

Given the fact that corporate reputation has been described as “the ultimate determinant of competitiveness” by some executives, the outcome of this study is a proposal that large service organizations measure this intangible asset along five dimensions, namely, emotional appeal, corporate performance, social engagement, good employer and service points.

Despite several attempts to do so, a valid and reliable instrument to effectively measure the corporate reputation of service firms (particularly large ones) has remained elusive. After more than two decades after the first attempts at measurement, there are many who now call for improved methodologies and more valid instruments to measure corporate reputation, based on more rigorous theoretical and conceptual development. This study addresses a matter of concern for many managers and academics.

The corporate reputation of a firm and reputation risk is becoming increasingly important because of the rise of social media and the ongoing globalization. While defining and measuring corporate reputation and reputation risk represent the first steps in corporate reputation (risk) management, there is no general agreement in defining and measuring these two terms. Hence, this paper aims to give an overview of the existing literature in this regard, discuss it with respect to the operability in corporate reputation (risk) management and, based on this, present a holistic and consistent approach to define and measure corporate reputation and reputation risk.

The paper gives an overview of the literature regarding definitions and measurement methods of corporate reputation and reputation risk. Moreover, it discusses such definitions and measurement methods with respect to the operability in corporate reputation (risk) management.

Based on an overview of the literature regarding definitions and measurement methods of corporate reputation and reputation risk, the authors present a holistic and consistent approach to define and measure corporate reputation and reputation risk.

The authors present an holistic and consistent approach to define and measure corporate reputation and reputation risk with focus on (risk) management purposes.

Corporate reputation (CR), the new buzz word has created many waves in the business world and thereby has become a topic of interest of many researchers. CR is often addressed as an intangible asset that brings with itself lots of advantages and benefits that may build the company and push it forward or may bring a company completely down. CR is a multidisciplinary concept generating parallel interpretations, and as a consequence, disagreements arise regarding its definition and its measurement techniques.

This paper attempted to address this issue by bringing in more clarity to the concept and objectivity in its measurement. To address this issue a new comprehensive definition of CR is developed by reviewing the semi-centennial evolution of the construct. By bringing a critical analysis of the currently followed methods of measurement the paper has classified them into the five broad categories on the basis of the guiding definition, methodology and data sources, multiple stakeholders emphasised and the extent of objectivity inherent in the methodology. Establishing linkage between different concepts a model is developed for better understanding of the process of corporate reputation building.

Based on the renewed understanding, a new method has been suggested for measuring corporate reputation from the perspective of multiple stakeholders.

This method is claimed to be superior as it is founded on a comprehensive meaning of the concept and designed to use easily available and accessible objective data.

No psychometrically sound measurement scale exists to effectively measure sports team reputation. The current study proposed and developed the Spectator-based Sports Team Reputation (SSTR) by considering the most important stakeholder groups - spectators. The results indicated that SSTR had a positive and direct impact on team identification and trust towards a team. The most significant theoretical contribution of this study is the conceptualisation and development of the SSTR scale, with a multi-dimensional approach from the spectator perspective.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the possible congruence of an academic organization’s reputation among various stakeholder groups. A potential measure of reputation that can be applied across multiple stakeholder groups gives an opportunity to compare their perceptions and therefore work toward a consistent reputation. The authors also tested the model of academic reputation as a multidimensional concept.

The qualitative stage included 25 in-depth interviews with members of key stakeholder groups. In the quantitative stage, the initial questionnaire was based on the reputational quotient of academic institutions, comprised of 26 items representing eight dimensions of reputation. It was administered among three key stakeholder groups, the general public (n=400), employees of the business school that was the focus of the study (n=154), and fourth year students of the school (n=446).

Confirmatory factor analysis indicated that criteria applied by various stakeholder groups were similar, but the model of academic reputations as a multidimensional concept was not confirmed. The theoretical assumption of an eight factor solution for the concept of academic institutions was not supported. It seems that, in this particular case, only one main dimension emerged. Theoretically, that implies a general factor determining overall reputations across stakeholders.

Future research should apply a new, reduced questionnaire in multiple academic organizations and try to avoid some of the limitations such as differing methods of data collection, and ensure complete anonymity for all respondents.

This study offers input for the development of a robust and general questionnaire that could be developed to be used across organizations and their publics.

The study demonstrates that reputation is a unidimensional construct and that it should also be measured as such.

Users often struggle to select choosing among similar online services. To help them make informed decisions, it is important to establish a service reputation measurement mechanism. User-provided feedback ratings serve as a primary source of information for this mechanism, and ensuring the credibility of user feedback is crucial for a reliable reputation measurement. Most of the previous studies use passive detection to identify false feedback without creating incentives for honest reporting. Therefore, this study aims to develop a reputation measure for online services that can provide incentives for users to report honestly.

In this paper, the authors present a method that uses a peer prediction mechanism to evaluate user credibility, which evaluates users’ credibility with their reports by applying the strictly proper scoring rule. Considering the heterogeneity among users, the authors measure user similarity, identify similar users as peers to assess credibility and calculate service reputation using an improved expectation-maximization algorithm based on user credibility.

Theoretical analysis and experimental results verify that the proposed method motivates truthful reporting, effectively identifies malicious users and achieves high service rating accuracy.

The proposed method has significant practical value in evaluating the authenticity of user feedback and promoting honest reporting.

Based on impression management theory, the authors ask how marketing activities build organizational reputation and examine the mediating mechanisms of desired impressions, and the moderating impact of national culture. Specifically, and in the context of higher education (HE) institutions, the authors examine the influence of relational marketing and traditional advertising on organizational reputation through the mediation of desired impressions (e.g. quality of learning, career prospects and extracurricular activities) across countries and specify the moderation role of cultural variables.

This study estimates empirical models using a survey data set comprising 1,890 student responses from 10 universities in 8 countries. The authors use confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and measurement invariance models, as well as ordinary least squares with robust standard errors to test the hypotheses.

The results indicate that marketing activities affect organizational reputation through the mediation of desired impressions in line with our theoretical reasoning. Specifically, the results show that (1) relational marketing has direct and indirect effects on organizational reputation; (2) relational marketing has a higher influence on organizational reputation in countries with lower individualism and lower masculinity scores; (3) quality of learning mediates the relationship between traditional advertising and organizational reputation; (4) quality of learning also mediates the association between relational marketing and organizational reputation; (5) career prospects mediate the relationship between relational marketing and organizational reputation; (6) traditional advertising does not have a direct but only an indirect effect on organizational reputation; and (7) these findings are net of the effect of respondents', universities', and countries' characteristics.

The findings contribute to the body of knowledge on the antecedents of organizational reputation, from an international marketing perspective. The results extend the impression management by integrating constructs that have been studied independently into a cohesive framework that links marketing activities, desired impressions and organizational reputation. With the study, impression management theory provides a framework to study the impact of marketing activities on organizational reputation not only in domestic but also in international markets.

By asking the target market about the importance of different marketing activities, their expectations of the organization and its reputation, HE administrators can employ the model proposed in this study to assess the relevant marketing strategies that will drive desired impressions which in turn will influence reputation.

While there are studies that focus on the impact of several constructs on organizational reputation in an international context, it is striking to observe that extant research is silent on how (via what mediating mechanisms) marketing activities work as an antecedent of organizational reputation. To address this gap, we examine marketing activities as antecedents of organizational reputation in an international, cross-country context, and specify the moderation role of cultural variables.