The role of the stakeholder perspective in measuring corporate reputation

Abstract

If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information. About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation. AbstractPurpose -The aim of this paper is to develop an effective measure of corporate reputation when stakeholders are faced with different decision situations. Design/methodology/approach -The study research question was addressed using survey data from 500 respondents involved in four decision situations: purchasing products from a company, seeking employment, purchasing shares and supporting the operations of a company in their community.Findings -The findings suggest that corporate reputation is a situational construct which is continuously redefined by stakeholders according to the decision they are considering. Thus, companies may not have the same reputation when seeking different kind of support from stakeholders. Research limitations/implications -In order to generalise the findings, the collection of data by means of surveys of larger random samples from multiple countries are strongly encouraged. Practical implications -The paper contributes to the development of effective measures of corporate reputation for individuals who may have hybrid stakeholder identity and are involved in diverse decisions regarding companies. This contribution is valuable in that it can be used by managers and companies to establish more effective corporate communication strategies, which directly address the information needs of individuals considering different relationships with firms. Originality/value -The paper identifies the value placed on various reputation dimensions when individuals consider different relationships with companies. By doing so, we provide an innovative tool that can be utilised by marketing managers to measure the attractiveness of companies to potential consumers, employees, investors and community members.

The search for alignment of board gender diversity, the adoption of environmental management systems, and the association with firm performance in Asian firms

“…In line with the views that females are more receptive to expert advice (Kagzi & Guha, 2018), they also see ethical decisions as "beyond business" and outside of ego (Puncheva-Michelotti & Michelotti, 2010;Ryan & Deci, 2017) and their role is more pronounced in firm policies (Chen, Ni et al, 2016); the study associates their presence with EMS adoption. As the study discussed earlier, female directors are greener.…”

“…On the other hand, women see ethical decisions as "beyond business" and outside of ego (Puncheva-Michelotti & Michelotti, 2010;Ryan & Deci, 2017). When women believe there is real potential to collectively change things, they always keep themselves in the game (Ibrahim et al, 2009).…”

The Link Between Responsibility and Legitimacy: The Case of De Beers in Namibia

“…In some studies on the impact of CSR practices, the concept of reputation was used as an alternative (e.g. Surroca et al 2010;Puncheva-Michelotti and Michelotti 2010). Castelló and Lozane (2011) and Sonpar et al (2010) conducted empirical studies on organisational legitimacy using a conceptual framework proposed by Suchman (1995) that distinguishes between a cognitive, relational and moral dimension of legitimacy.…”

University Reputation: Scale Development and Validation

“…Since reputation is commonly defined as the overall perception of all the stakeholders in a company, there is a general tendency in most reputation measurement studies to combine the impressions of a company in the minds of its key stakeholder groups (Puncheva-Michelotti and Michelotti, 2010). According to Wartick (2002), the aggregation of the reputation perceptions of different stakeholders inevitably leads to the deterioration of the quality of information obtained from these multiple groups surveyed.…”

“…The second frequently employed measure is Fombrun et al (2000) Reputation Quotient (RQ), which consists of 20 items that are grouped under six dimensions (i.e., emotional appeal, products and services, vision and leadership, workplace environment, social and environmental responsibility, and financial performance). Emphasizing the importance of customers as the major stakeholder group, Walsh and Beatty also (2007) developed a customer-based corporate reputation (CBR) measurement under five dimensions of customer orientation, good employer, reliable and financially strong company, product and service quality and social and environmental responsibility.Since reputation is commonly defined as the overall perception of all the stakeholders in a company, there is a general tendency in most reputation measurement studies to combine the impressions of a company in the minds of its key stakeholder groups (Puncheva-Michelotti and Michelotti, 2010). According to Wartick (2002), the aggregation of the reputation perceptions of different stakeholders inevitably leads to the 54 BOGAZICI JOURNAL deterioration of the quality of information obtained from these multiple groups surveyed.…”