Search results

The chapter proposes to investigate online reputation of hospitality brands and its measurements. Brand reputation is generally defined as an overall appraisal of a company by its stakeholders, which is the result of the company's past actions and predictions about the company's future (Ferguson, Deephouse, & Ferguson, 2000). Being viewed as the opinion shared among a group of stakeholders (Dowling, 2008), it plays an important role in the tourism industry. With the progress of Information Communication Technologies (ICTs), reviews and user-generated contents of destinations and of hospitality companies together with the related emerging brand reputation can influence consumers' behaviors and choices. Brand reputation analysis could be more useful in the hospitality brand management when integrated with brand image and brand identity analysis, mainly because in tourism businesses and destinations, brands are typically affected by an inherent fragility determined by the service nature of products (Casarin, 1996). According to Biel (1991), the meanings that consumers assign to a brand are synthesized into brand associations formed by the components perceived to underlie the brand's image. As well as brand reputation, strong, positive and unique associations reinforce a brand and increase its equity that requires significant internal brand identity efforts, which should create a corresponding brand image through integration in overall marketing programmes (Keller, 2003). It makes sense to develop an analytical research approach that compares online brand reputation (OBR) with brand association matching as a measure of the alignment between brand identity and brand image in hospitality companies. This comparative analysis emerging from brand reputation, brand image and brand identity analysis can reveal divergent situations (i.e., high brand reputation and low brand association matching) and orient brand managers in reviewing online brand communication. Brand reputation and brand image analysis will be contextualized in an online community as a social setting that is considered to be a new type of market (Muniz & O'Guinn, 2001). We focus on hospitality online communities populated by consumers and other actors such as influencers and bloggers: their brand perception could be separately compared with brand identity that we will extract from company communications including presentational information and brand-related press releases found on websites, nonfinancial narrative from annual reports, and interviews with managers published in mainstream media sources. In our analysis we will focalize on a cluster of luxury hospitality companies integrating a netnographic and text-mining techniques. We will use both the techniques in order to (1) extract and study brand associations in terms of brand reputation, brand image, and brand identity; (2) develop indicators of brand reputation and brand association matching; and (3) discuss their utility in the management of the hospitality company brands.

Scholarship on reputation in and of organizations has been going on for decades, and it always has separated along level of analysis issues, whereby the separate literatures on individual, group/team/unit, and organization reputation fail to acknowledge each other. This sends the implicit message that reputation is a fundamentally different phenomenon at the three different levels of analysis. We tested the validity of this implicit assumption by conducting a multilevel review of the reputation literature, and drawing conclusions about the “level-specific” or “level-generic” nature of the reputation construct. The review results permitted the conclusion that reputation phenomena are essentially the same at all levels of analysis. Based on this, we frame a future agenda for theory and research on reputation.

Purpose – In business environment, corporate social responsibility (CSR) is becoming increasingly an important issue for every stakeholder. Organizations are being reputable through CSR activities. The aim of this chapter is to examine the relationship between CSR and corporate reputation, and determine the role of CSR activities in corporate reputation building process.Design/methodology/approach – An extensive literature research is conducted in order to develop the theoretical framework that supports the positive role of CSR activities on corporate reputation.Findings – As CSR activities affect the consequences that have a positive impact on corporate reputation, findings show that CSR enables firms to improve reputation with a broad range of stakeholders including employees (internal customers), customers (external customers), suppliers, competitors, bankers, and investors.Research limitations/Implications – However this research is a theoretical study, for further studies an empirical research model may be developed for investigating the relationship between CSR and corporate reputation. These dimensions should be measured and the hypothesis about the positive relationship between CSR and corporate reputation may be statistically tested.Practical implications – This theoretical study may be useful for the board of directors and managers since they should become aware of the importance of one of the growing areas of corporate reputation and CSR. They are also increasingly being encouraged to engage CSR activities into their organization's vision, identity, brand, and reputation. Based on societal expectations of stakeholders, organizations should develop and improve their CSR programs and reflect these developments to their reputation mechanisms.Originality/Value of the paper – This study is valuable to understand the corporate reputation practices that enhance and demonstrate the value of reputable organizations. It is also attractive to compare other dimensions of corporate reputation such as emotional appeal, workplace environment, and corporate reputation with CSR.

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.

Research on acquisition performance has not considered the customer perspective for a long time. Based on associative network theory, we propose two spillover effects – forward and reverse – to reflect the effect of acquirer and target reputation on customer responses toward a horizontal acquisition. The reputation of both the acquirer and target can transfer to acquisition and affect customer attitudes toward the post-merged corporation and target customer retentions. However, the influence of the acquirer reputation (forward spillover effect) is stronger than that of the target reputation (reverse spillover effect). Because of asymmetric spillover effects from the acquirer and target, we suggest that the performance effects of A acquiring B may not be the same as that of B acquiring A, given that A and B are highly related firms. The level of post-acquisition brand integration moderates the asymmetric spillover effect on acquisition performance. A higher level of post-acquisition brand integration indicates a stronger asymmetric spillover effect on acquisition performance.

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.

Companies in all industries are searching for new sources of competitive advantage since the competition in their marketplace is becoming increasingly intensive. The resource-based view of the firm explains the sources of sustainable competitive advantages. From a resource-based view perspective, relational based assets (i.e., the assets resulting from firm contacts in the marketplace) enable competitive advantage. The relational based assets examined in this work are brand image and corporate reputation, as components of brand equity, and customer value. This paper explores how they create value. Despite the relatively large amount of literature describing the benefits of firms in having strong brand equity and delivering customer value, no research validated the linkage of brand equity components, brand image, and corporate reputation, simultaneously in the customer value–customer loyalty chain. This work presents a model of testing these relationships in consumer goods, in a business-to-business context. The results demonstrate the differential roles of brand image and corporate reputation on perceived quality, customer value, and customer loyalty. Brand image influences the perception of quality of the products and the additional services, whereas corporate reputation actions beyond brand image, estimating the customer value and customer loyalty. The effects of corporate reputation are also validated on different samples. The results demonstrate the importance of managing brand equity facets, brand image, and corporate reputation since their differential impacts on perceived quality, customer value, and customer loyalty. The results also demonstrate that companies should not limit to invest only in brand image. Maintaining and enhancing corporate reputation can have a stronger impact on customer value and customer loyalty, and can create differential competitive advantage.