Search results

Digital influencers, besides being a personal branding phenomenon, constitute, nowadays, important partners for brands in the digital environment. Despite the benefits for both parties, the brand and the endorser, there is a risk when the individuals or the brand take part in some scandal or questionable activity, which causes a loss of credibility and reputation. The contagious effect of personal or corporate brand crisis with the partners is well reported in the literature. However, there are no studies about such occurrence in the digital environment, considering that the phenomenon of digital influence has some particularities differing from traditional celebrity endorsement. This chapter focuses on the research of the consequences of a change in the credibility of influencers or brands, after the occurrence of a negative situation, and the way in which this change affects the two parties involved, the brand and the influencer. We conducted a netnographic study of the social media pages of three digital influencers and the social media pages of a recognized fast fashion brand recognized in the digital world. We analyzed 1500 social media comments from their audiences and found that influencers suffer from a loss in sympathy and credibility by scandals while crisis communication strategies in corporate brands can prevent such damages. Strategic implications for brand managers and digital influencers managing their endorsements are addressed in the discussion.

Universities are considered as learning institutions and their output is knowledge. Their main objectives are to promote knowledge and to integrate three main roles: (1) teaching and learning toward an award; (2) research and publication; and (3) activities centred toward work-based learning. Researchers generally categorize knowledge in three dimensions, cognitive, functional and social competence which are clearly consistent with the French paradigm- savoir, savoir faire, and savoir être. Delamare Le Deist and Winterton (2007) acknowledged that knowledge, that is, understanding is captured by cognitive competence, skills are captured by functional competence and behavioral and attitudinal competencies are captured by social competencies. This chapter describes some basic concepts of social competence in the tertiary education and examines the relationship that exists among knowledge, knowledge management, and social competence. Achieving personal goals and at the same time maintaining positive relationship over time and across situations is one of the main definition of social competence, as brought forward by Rubin and Rose-krasner (1992). Social competence also embraces all the social, emotional and cognitive knowledge and skills individuals require to achieve their goals and to be effective in their relations with others (Kostlenik et al., 2014).

Appearance has two meanings. On the one hand, appearance is about the physical qualities of a person being of certain height, weight, complexion and having a particular hair, eye and skin colour as well as choice and style of dress and attire. On the other hand, appearance has a social dimension, as those physical qualities of a person are interpreted, rated and judged, and attributed varied meanings and values across different settings. Appearances can influence the experiences of individuals in the workplace in both positive and negative ways: Positive, when they are mobilised as a resource that increases the influence and advantage of individuals on others; and negative, when individuals are discriminated or disadvantaged on the basis of their appearance. Drawing on a Bourdieusian conceptual repertoire, this chapter delves into this duality of appearance and frames appearance both as a resource (a form of carnal capital) and a source of symbolic violence. As appearance is an aspect of an individual's self-identity in the workplace, this chapter explores appearance and intersectionality across gender, ethnicity, class and sexual orientation at work. Appearance is examined as a cross cutting category of diversity as both privilege (carnal capital) and disadvantage (symbolic violence).