How to Develop Key Stakeholders Trust in Terms of Corporate Reputation

Abstract

In scientific literature, the trust of key stakeholders is considered to be the base for the survival of organizations. In the context of the relation between corporate reputation and the trust of stakeholders, scientists agree on evident importance of corporate reputation for the development of stakeholder trust in the organization; however, there is a lack of recommendations suggesting how an organization should develop the trust of key stakeholders using corporate reputation. The article presents a summarized view on the relationship between the main dimensions of corporate reputation and the factors of key stakeholder trust in the organization. Such relationships reveal that it is purposeful to invoke corporate reputation in order to develop trust of key stakeholders. Also, the article states the relation between the factors determining different stakeholders' trust in the organization and different dimensions of corporate reputation based on which the trust of the key stakeholders of the organization should be developed. The result of the theoretical study is a developed conceptual model of key stakeholder trust development in terms of corporate reputation. The model will be applied in further empirical studies on the development of trust of the key stakeholders: customers, employees, shareholders and suppliers.

Integrating Corporate Social Responsibility and Corporate Governance at the Company Level. Towards a Conceptual Model

“…Recently, CSR has been viewed as a concept whereby companies voluntarily integrate social, ethical, and environmental concerns into their business operations and core strategy in close cooperation with their stakeholders. It aims at maximising the creation of shared value (Porter & Kramer, 2011;Matuleviciene & Stravinskiene, 2016) for owners/shareholders and for other stakeholders and society at large, as well as identifying, preventing, and mitigating their possible adverse impacts (COM, 2011). It is based on the traditional assumptions of CSR (Carroll, 1979;Wood, 1991) and on the proposals put forward by the authors of alternative approaches such as corporate sustainability (Marrewijk, 2003), triple bottom line (Elkington, 1997), corporate citizenship (Matten et al, 2003) and shared value (Porter & Kramer, 2011).…”

“…Recently, a growing number of authors convinced that CSR should play a strategic role in business (Husted & Allen 2007) show that its activity leads to innovation, cost reduction, increased effectiveness, the best employee retention, or increased attractiveness in the eyes of investors (Porter & Kramer, 2011). Stakeholder management, which is seen by many authors (Dahlsrud, 2008;Marrewijk, 2003) as an essential element of CSR, is a strategic management process, which implies that the interests of key stakeholders should be integrated with the company's basic goals (Freeman & McVea, 2001;Matuleviciene & Stravinskiene, 2016). CSR based on stakeholder management and linked to the core business strategy enables firms to develop rare, hard to imitate, and customer valued resources, such as ethical awareness, ability to manage social and environmental issues and relational resources (Husted & Allen, 2007).…”

Antecedents of internal reputation and its consequences on organizational outcomes: a systematic review

“…Furthermore, Esenyel and Emeagwali’s (2019) study on multiple small and medium enterprises of various sectors in North Cyprus uncovered that trust in manager ensued as a result of a positive perceived reputation by employees. In Matuleviciene and Stravinskiene’s (2016, p. 472) words: “the trust of key stakeholders is considered to be the base for the survival of organizations”. Hon and Grunig (1999) described trust as a complicated concept with multiple underlying dimensions, including integrity, dependability and competence.…”

Shared meaning at the intersection of NPO reputation and trust: a personification perspective

“…As seen in the Appendix, the relationship between constructs attracts considerable academic attention. A few studies are of a conceptual nature (Van Der Merwe and Puth, 2014; Matuleviciene and Stravinskiene, 2016), while the majority provide empirical evidence that reputation and trust are different, but not entirely independent. In the light of the compiled results (see Appendix), five categories emerge.…”