Corporate Reputation Management: Measuring Excellence and Measuring Corporate Excellence

Introduction to Corporate Reputation Management

• Corporate Reputation must be built effectively to prevent the loss of energy during the "defense phase."

• Cited Definition: "Good corporate reputations are critical because of their potential for value creation, but also because their intangible character makes replication by competing firms considerably more difficult" (X, R., $2022b$, September $6$).

• The Lifecycle of Corporate Reputation:

  • Build: involves multiple different things for different people.

  • Maintain: It takes $20$ years to build a reputation and only $5$ minutes to ruin it.

  • Defend: Must be prepared to defend at any moment and any place; defenses must remain congruent with corporate values.

Stakeholder Identification and Engagement

• Methods for Identification:

  • Utilize Simon Sinek’s Golden Circle.

  • Reference Edward Capaldi’s "Extensive list" for identification.

• Analyzing Stakeholders:

  • Identify who they are.

  • Determine their expectations and "Jobs To Be Done" (JTBD).

  • Assess why they engage, how they engage, and what they engage with.

  • Understand their level of influence.

• Stakeholder Engagement Spectrum:

  • Reactive: Acting only when forced to do so.

  • Inactive: Choosing to ignore issues or connecting with stakeholders only sporadically.

  • Proactive: Connecting with stakeholders as a standard rule.

  • Interactive: Engagement on an ongoing basis characterized by respect, openness, and trust.

Theoretical Frameworks: JTBD and The Golden Circle

• Jobs To Be Done (JTBD):

  • Based on Edward Capaldi’s $2016$ work "Understanding the Job."

  • For context, players such as students, lecturers, and directors must be considered when defining the "job" the institution performs.

• Simon Sinek’s Golden Circle:

  • Why: The motivation behind why companies or people do what they do. This is a purpose, cause, or belief. It identifies WHY they do what they do.

  • How: The process by which the company accomplishes the "What." This is often referred to as a "differentiating proprietary process" or a "unique value proposition."

  • What: The specific product or service a company sells or an employee's specific task. While the "What" is easiest to understand, it is often superficial.

Learning from Corporate Reputational Damages

• Analyzing scandals that make history involves several steps:

  • Identify what the scandal was about.

  • Determine which specific aspects of corporate reputation were damaged.

  • Reflect and provide advice based on findings.

  • Present these findings to a group to establish key takeaways.

Qualitative Measurement of Corporate Reputation

• Multi-Step Development Approach:

  1. Stakeholder identification.

  2. Stakeholder mapping.

  3. Qualitative assessment of stakeholder expectations.

  4. Quantitative assessment.

• Accuracy in reputation management lies in talking to stakeholders directly to learn what they need rather than assuming.

• Internal Discussion Factors:

  • Mission and Vision.

  • Strategic orientation and values.

  • Maintaining a stakeholder longlist and map.

  • Recognizing that importance does not always equal relevance.

  • Distinguishing between objective and subjective data.

  • Noting the difference between "verbiage stakeholders" (the language stakeholders use) versus "company verbiage."

  • Comparing internal data with external desk research.

Quantitative Measurement of Corporate Reputation

• Research Strategy and Skills:

  • Stakeholders typically do not state what they think directly; they reveal thoughts through actions and interactions with other stakeholders.

  • Researchers must make people comfortable enough to speak as they would to a third party to reveal true thoughts and feelings.

  • Researchers must avoid bias to get answers as close to the truth as possible.

  • Use a $360\, \text{degree}$ perspective.

  • Look for questions that all stakeholders have in common.

  • Follow GDPR guidelines, including ensuring anonymity.

  • Always test-run the questionnaire.

• The Structure of the Questionnaire:

  • Step 1: Demographics: Identify age, country, sector, job role, years in function, province, and family composition.

  • Step 2: Segmentation Variables: Look for descriptives, behavioral parameters, attitudes toward the category, and purchase habits (e.g., channel usage, trial periods).

  • Step 3: Awareness: Measure spontaneous and aided awareness, information channels, and the importance and relevance of sources. Defining the correct frame of reference is the most difficult part of research development.

  • Step 4: Image: Evaluate the competitive set using items found in literature, mission/vision statements, and values. Identify what statements best describe the company and the level of agreement with those statements. Use trade-off techniques if necessary.

  • Step 5: Purchase: Identify decision-makers and influencers from initiation to the final decision. Evaluate key factors in choice against the competitive set.

  • Step 6: Loyalty: Measure the last purchase, switching behavior, and the likelihood to buy/change brands in the next $X \, \text{months}$. Evaluate value for money and service/product offerings.

  • Step 7: Advocacy: Measure how likely a stakeholder is to recommend the product or service to friends or family.

The Reputation Quotient Model: Criteria for Measurement

• The following $20$ items are rated on a scale of $1$ to $10$ to determine the Reputation Quotient:

• Emotional Appeal:

  1. Good feeling about the company.

  2. Admire and respect the company.

  3. Trust the company.

• Products and Services:

  4. Stands behind products/services.

  5. Offers high-quality products/services.

  6. Develops innovative products/services.

  7. Offers products/services that are good value.

• Vision and Leadership:

  8. Has excellent leadership.

  9. Has a clear vision for the future.

  10. Recognizes/takes advantage of market opportunities.

• Workplace Environment:

  11. Is well managed.

  12. Looks like a good company to work for.

  13. Looks like it has good employees.

• Financial Performance:

  14. Record of profitability.

  15. Looks like a low-risk investment.

  16. Strong prospects for future growth.

  17. Tends to outperform its competitors.

• Social Responsibility:

  18. Supports good causes.

  19. Environmentally responsible.

  20. Treats people well.

Stakeholder Influence Mapping: Closing the Loop

• Stakeholder Expectations Analysis:

  • List stakeholders and identify their expectations critical to success.

  • Evaluate current orientation or attention given to them.

  • Determine their degree of influence.

• Stakeholders Influence Map:

  • A matrix plotting "Importance" against "Power."

  • Both axes range from "Low" to "High."

• Case Study Application:

  • Define where $5$ specific stakeholders sit on the influence map in the event of a safety incident involving a student.

Questions & Discussion

• Break-out Session 1 ($10 \, \text{minutes}$ discussion): Discuss which scandals make history, what the scandal was about, and which reputation aspects were damaged.

• Break-out Session 2 ($10 \, \text{minutes}$ discussion): Envision $3$ different stakeholders and list $5$ to $10$ questions to ask them. In a second round, change perspective to a different stakeholder.

• Break-out Session 3 ($10 \, \text{minutes}$ discussion): Formulate a common set of closed-ended criteria for measurement.

• Stakeholders Mapping Discussion: Define mapping for $5$ stakeholders regarding a safety incident.