관계적 명성의 활용 : 실내악 연주회에 의한 연주 전문가 집단의 명성의 활용 방법

이상묵 한국인사조직학회 2009 인사조직연구 Vol.17 No.4

본 연구는 실내악 연주회가 대중매체를 통해 소비자에게 선택적으로 소개되는 정도에 영향을 주는 연주자 명성의 활용 방법에 대해 분석한다. 명성의 가치와 유용성은 경제활동을 다루는 다양한 분야의 연구들을 통해 오랫동안 논의되어 왔다. 그러나 명성에 대한 기존의 연구들은 명성의 유용성을 밝히는 데에는 크게 기여한 반면, 명성의 구체적인 활용방법에 대해서는 상대적으로 적은 관심을 보이고 있다. 이에 본 연구는 개인이나 조직이 활용가능한 명성이 각 경제주체가 직접 보유한 명성에만 한정되는 것이 아니라, 이들의 경제/사회적 관계로 연결 가능한 다른 개인이나 조직의 명성에까지 확대된다고 본다. 또한 이러한 명성의 활용가능성은 직접적인 관련성을 지닌 명성만이 아닌 논리적 납득가능성에 의해 간접적인 관련성을 지닌 명성에까지 확대된다고 본다. 이 경우 경제행위자는 자신의 경제/사회적 관계에 근거해 다양한 유형의 명성의 활용방법을 구사할 수 있으며, 그러한 활용방법의 차이에 따라 명성의 활용가치는 상대적인 이점과 약점을 지닌다는 것이 본 연구의 핵심적인 주장이다. 이러한 주장을 실증모형을 통해 검증하기 위해, 본 연구는 2003년에 시행된 실내악 연주회 자료를 활용하여, 새로운 실내악 연주회가 대중매체를 통해 소비자에게 선택적으로 소개되는 현상을 분석한다. 412개의 실내악 연주회 자료를 이용한 실증모형의 검증결과 본 연구가 제안하는 명성의 활용 방법은 모두 실내악 연주회가 대중매체의 의해 소개될 가능성에 유의한 영향을 주는 것으로 나타났다. 본 연구의 결과는 개인이나 조직의 명성이 경제행위의 성과에 미치는 과정을 구체적으로 논의함으로써, 다양한 명성의 활용가능성을 탐구하는 기반 논리를 제공하는 데에 기여할 것이다. This study examines the effect of selective strategies using reputations of musicians in chamber music concerts to attract more attention from mass media. The value and usefulness of reputation have been discussed widely in various fields which are dealing with economic phenomena. For examples, in Economics, company’s reputation was regarded to have great influences on the choice of experience good through market signaling process, and reputation has been considered as strategic asset to give organizationalaction legitimacy in Strategic Management. These approaches contributed to clarify the value and use of reputation; however, there has been a little concern about practical strategy to use reputation, relatively. Previously studies on reputation limits its understanding of value and use of reputation in two ways. First, they assume that reputation can only be created by continuous economic behavior except the possibility of temporal organization or event to manipulate the reputation. On the other hands, it is possible for temporal organization to get reputation and to use it. This indicates that they can borrow the reputation temporarily without building reputation by themselves. Second, if reputation is assumed to be monopolistic asset of economic actor, it is solely estimated by how much reputation they have. In reality, there is an organization which utilizes same reputation more effectively through strategic action. It is said that reputation should be considered by not only level of reputation but also its structural factors to utilize. In this research, I assume economic actors can use not only their own reputation but also logically related reputation of others as market signal to legitimate their behavior. I call these kinds of reputation as ‘relational reputation.’ Relational reputation can also be utilized by others who are socially connected to focal actor who actually built the reputation. In this case, social resource such as relations and social positions is the leverage to bring those reputations from others. In this research, I examine how this leveraging process of using these relational reputation by economic actor could be utilized for strategic reason. We empirically test our argument with an original dataset of chamber music concerts at 2003 in Korea. We examine the causal relation that chamber music concerts are chosen selectively by mass media through strategic reasons. The supply of classical music concerts in Korea has been always abundant since 2000. Moreover, local governments and business enterprises of Korea have competitively constructed concert halls of various sizes since the late 1990s. However, like most other countries, classical music in Korea has recently faced difficulties in attracting the masses to concert halls. Due to the oversupply problem, while player would have more chance to play and try diverse repertoire, audience did not grow enough to fill all these concerts. Underdeveloped consumer side of chamber music concerts is caused by the characteristics of classic industry which is one of high culture cultivated through long-time education or learning, and of temporal performance. Unlike Pop-culture, classic is learning-based enter- tainment tospend more time and effort to enjoy the qualitative value. While classic record industry is able to overcome the time and spatial limit, chamber music concert can not reproduce the same performance for other audiences exceptone at the concert hall. Furthermore, chamber music concerts are mostly organized for temporary occasion without much name value compared to orchestra. Therefore chamber music concert has certain limit to build reputation by repetitive performance with exact same players and is hard to be exposed to mass media with their past record which is of their owns. The chamber music group is not a stable organization rather temporal and project-based group, so the performance of concert is not easily expected. Due to the...

WILL YOU STILL LOVE ME REGARDLESS OF MY REPUTATION? A STUDY ON THE INFLUENCE OF CORPORATE REPUTATION ON CUSTOMER BRAND PERCEPTION AND PURCHASE DECISION

Caroline Tan 글로벌지식마케팅경영학회 2015 Global Fashion Management Conference Vol.2015 No.06

This research was conducted in order to examine the influence of corporate reputation in terms of as an employer towards both brand reputation and customer purchase decisions represented by brand perception, purchase frequency and category of items purchased. In this study, customers’ perception of the brand was also explored to identify the core blocks that form customers’ perception of the brand. The results indicate that corporate reputation did not have a strong influence on brand reputation, as customers viewed them as separate entities. Customers tended to form their brand perception based on the product features as opposed to the corporate reputation. In terms of purchase decision, the results showed that they were made and driven based on the customers’ brand perception with category of items purchased reflecting aspects of the brand perception. The study demonstrates that customers’ awareness of the corporate reputation does not affect purchase behavior, while brand perception is hardly impacted by the awareness of corporate reputation based on a survey focusing on a renowned domestic fashion-clothing retailer conducted among Japanese shoppers. Reputation is formed from a synthesis of the perception, opinions and attitudes of an organization’s stakeholders including employees, customers and community (Post and Griffin, 1997). It basically is a perceptual representation of a company’s past actions and future prospects that describe the firm’s appeal to all of its key constituents (Fombrun, 1966). Corporate reputations and brands are important assets in enabling organizations to exploit opportunities and mitigate threats (Argenti and Druckenmiller, 2004). A favourable reputation correlates with superior overall returns (Robert and Dowling, 1997; Vergin and Qoronfleh, 1998) as it encourages investments from shareholders, attracts good staff and retains customers (Markham, 1972). While corporate reputation is a stakeholder’s perception and evaluation of the organization over an extended period of time, corporate brands involve the organization’s efforts and initiatives in the form of corporate expression. Literature states that corporate brand comprises of two aspects: first corporate expression, which covers all mechanisms employed by the organization to express its identity and second, stakeholder images that are formed from interaction and experience with the brand (Abratt and Kleyn, 2011). Consumers judge brands based on trust that is developed from the way consumers view brand reputation, brand competence and brand constituent (Lau and Lee, 1999). The intricate relationship between reputation and brands leads to the heart of the study whether both are positively correlated, where the more positive the reputation, the stronger the brand is. In the fashion industry, labels play an important role hence among other aspects this study covers an interesting point where it looks at a fashion brand that has a fairly bad reputation and examines the extent of which the reputation is able to influence the brand perception as well as the customers’ purchase decisions.

지각된 가치에 기반 한 브랜드 명성에 관한 실증적 연구

박효정,김준석 한국기업경영학회 2015 기업경영연구 Vol.22 No.1

In a study of existing brand reputation and brand reputation is high, low, good, bad, positive, negative, and explains that the absolute level of reputation and brand levels compared with competing brands. Such a level that previous studies have confirmed the presence of brand reputation, brand reputation, theoretically proven that description, the lack of research on the factors that lead to brand reputation, a strategy utilizing the brand reputation and brand reputation management has limitations have. So this study overcomes the limitations of existing research, the, to be able to develop and utilize strategies and manage brand reputation in the development theory, many researchers have commonly perceived value that describes the brand reputation is causing the brand reputation cause as a component of brand reputation that will be explained to the empirical validation. For the formative indicator in the structural equation model, the indicators can be defined in the properties of the latent variables, as the cause of the difference of latent variables which severity indicators that verification is possible. Therefore, this study was to utilize the formative indicator to verify that the indicators for the four perceived value (quality, price, emotional, and social) can be defined by the characteristics of the brand reputation to cause a brand reputation. In order to verify the formative indicators AMOS shall be verified through the formative indicators and reflective indicator in mixed MIMIC model. And the results are verified by the MIMIC model was verified by leveraging Two-Construct models to ensure that you have a theoretical construct validity. Questionnaire for this study was carried out by direct survey approach targeting two weeks, Kyung Hee University undergraduate and graduate students. 198 of 216 survey questionnaires are available utilizing the proportion of women (63.6%) was higher than in men (36.4%). Results are four kinds of perceived value (quality, price, emotional, social) have been identified as factors explaining the nature of the brand configured to cause a renowned brand reputation. Even theoretically correct perceived value factors identified factors that lead to brand reputation through a proven brand trust, brand reputation has been confirmed to have a positive impact on the brand you trust. Important factors for the four perceived value to induce brand reputation ranking of importance (quality, price, emotional, and social) are perceived quality, perceived social, perceived price, perceived feelings were confirmed by the order. Perceived value is a perception that the product level for the price the consumer wants, in previous studies of higher quality, perceived value positively asserted that higher prices higher perceived negatively. Perceived price identified as an important factor in causing the brand reputation is negative (-) by indicating the direction of the case to induce the brand reputation and quality without the high price because the perceived positive perception of social status, build brand reputation is negatively that it can be can be inferred from the findings. This was based on the perceived value of brand reputation is the result of empirical studies is that consumers think the price or brand reputation functionally superior quality than the emotional part, and it was confirmed that there is a greater significance to strengthen the social status. If the symbol of excellent features and social status through the results of this study and of the products that increase the quality products and trusted brands such as car less sensitive to price, on a positive impact on the purchasing process for consumers to take advantage of brand reputation is important as a marketing strategy must have been identified. And brand managers as a result that can contribute to the brand reputation management through the identification and comparison of competing brands on the main causes that ... 기존 브랜드 명성의 연구에서는 브랜드 명성을 높고, 낮고, 좋고, 나쁘고, 긍정적이고, 부정적이라는 절대적 수준이나 경쟁브랜드와 비교하는 수준으로 브랜드 명성을 설명하고 있다. 이런 기존 연구들은 브랜드 명성을 확인하는 것 외에 브랜드 명성을 활용한 전략 수립이나 브랜드 명성 관리를 위해 활용하는 데는 한계점을 가지고 있다. 그래서 본 연구는 지각된 가치 4가지(품질, 가격, 감정, 사회) 측정지표가 브랜드 명성을 야기하는 중요한 구성 요인으로 브랜드 신뢰에도 영향을 미치는 것을 MIMIC 모형과 Two - Construct 모형을 통해 실증적으로 검증하였다. 지각된 가치 4가지(품질, 가격, 감정, 사회) 차원이 브랜드 명성을 유발하는 구성 요인임이 검증되었으며, 브랜드 명성을 유발하는 지각된 가치 4가지(품질, 가격, 감정, 사회) 차원 중 중요도 순위는 지각된 품질, 지각된 사회, 지각된 가격, 지각된 감정 순으로 확인되었다. 본 연구 결과는 선행 연구에서 검증되었던 지각된 품질 뿐 아니라 브랜드 명성을 유발하는 원인으로 지각된 사회도 소비자들에게 중요하게 지각됨이 확인되었으며, 부(-)의 방향이 나온 지각된 가격의 경우 품질과 사회의 긍정적 지각없이 높은 가격만으로는 긍정적 브랜드 명성을 구축 할 수 없음을 유추 해 볼 수 있다. 이 연구 결과는 브랜드 명성을 유발하는 요인으로 검증 된 지각된 가치 4가기(품질, 가격, 감정, 사회)를 통해 브랜드 관리자들은 자신의 브랜드 명성 구축에 영향을 주는 주요 원인에 대한 파악 및 경쟁 브랜드와의 비교가 가능하여 브랜드 명성에 대한 이론 및 실무적 기여가 클 것이라 예상한다.

MANAGING CORPORATE REPUTATION: MEDIA COVERAGE ABOUT SIX DIFFERENT CSR FACETS AS A KEY FACTOR IN THE FORMATION OF REPUTATION PERCEPTIONS

Tobias Morath,Manfred Schwaiger 글로벌지식마케팅경영학회 2018 Global Marketing Conference Vol.2018 No.07

Corporate reputation – the central antecedent of trust – bears the potential to create sustainable competitive advantage. However, far too many examples of companies’ socially irresponsible behavior over the past years led to a severe crisis of confidence. Disgraced companies suffer from the adverse effects of their misbehaviors at all levels. As a consequence, one of the top priorities for both practitioners and business scholars is the identification of opportunities to (re)build corporate reputation. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR), a key driver of reputation perceptions, is a very promising one. However, as CSR is a multidimensional construct that comprises a wide range of activities, the selection of the “right” ones deems a major challenge. Based on a literature review, we advocate that news media data should be utilized to analyze which CSR dimensions are particularly likely to affect reputation perceptions. As journalists rely on companies’ press releases as a starting point for their business articles, companies need to carefully evaluate which CSR dimensions they emphasize in their communication strategy. Based on superior measures of reputation and CSR, this study utilizes reputation and news media coverage data on companies listed in the German DAX30 between 2005 and 2011. The panel data regression encompasses the multidimensional concept of CSR, presenting a six-dimensional CSR construct including environment, employee relations, community, product issues, corporate culture and corporate governance. Relevant moderating variables, namely firm and stakeholder characteristics, are investigated. In this context, the results show that the relevance of each of those six distinct dimensions differs for the formation of reputation judgements and varies across investigated stakeholder and company types: across all model specifications, negative media coverage addressing employee relations and community affects reputation perceptions. The general public primarily perceives negative news coverage as relevant for their reputation judgements. Opinion leaders seem to be less dependent on the media to learn about CSR dimensions, as only four out of twelve independent variables exert a significant impact on their reputation judgments. News coverage about product issues only constitutes a key role in the formation of reputation judgements of firms that are predominantly known from direct experiences. A particularly large amount of variation can be explained for reputation ratings of these companies as well as for reputation perceptions of opinion leaders.

Big 4 Reputation Effects on Market Premiums and Audit Fees

( In Man Song ),( Yeon Hee Park ),( Sung Jin Park ) 한국회계학회 2014 會計學硏究 Vol.39 No.2

The relation between audit firm size and audit quality has been a crucial issue. Many studies presented evidence that audit quality is associated with larger audit firm size. However, few studies researched the effects of Big 4 audit firms` audit quality and reputation on market premium or audit fees, until recently. Perhaps this is because it is difficult to distinguish the premium created by an audit firm`s reputation since the market premium is created from various sources, including audit quality and audit firm reputation. This study has three purposes. First, it compares the audit quality of Big 4 audit firms and non. Big 4 audit firms. It is a preliminary process for achieving this study`s second and main purpose. Second, this study tests whether a market premium due to audit firm reputation exists in the capital markets. For this purpose, this study divides the market premium into two sources; one from audit quality and another from audit firm reputation. Third, if a market premium is created by audit firm reputation in the market, then reputable audit firms are likely to require additional audit fees. Therefore, this study tests whether audit fees are affected by the audit firm reputation itself, above and beyond audit quality. Empirical findings are summarized as follows. First, the audit quality of Big 4 audit firms is better than that of non. Big 4 audit firms. Moreover, Big 4 audit firms have a fee premium, even after differences in audit quality are controlled for. This finding indicates that a fee premium is created by audit firm reputation, aside from audit quality. In addition, the results indicate that companies may pay additional audit fees that are due to audit firm reputation, as well as audit quality. This study differs from previous research in the following aspects. First, it verifies that the determinant factors of the market premium are either audit quality or simply Big 4 reputation beyond the audit quality of Big 4 audit firms, a topic that most domestic studies have not pursued. Second, this study presents evidence that sheds light on stock assessment by verifying that a market premium is produced by high audit quality and/or market recognition of Big 4 reputation. Third, this study examines constrains on audit quality and market premiums and verifies how the market premium is related to them after the audit quality is controlled for. Finally, this study examines whether companies will pay additional audit fees in the capital markets corresponding to a premium due to Big 4 reputation, besides any premiums for audit quality.

Big 4 Reputation Effects on Market Premiums and Audit Fees

송인만,박연희,박성진 한국회계학회 2014 會計學硏究 Vol.39 No.2

The relation between audit firm size and audit quality has been a crucial issue. Many studies presented evidence that audit quality is associated with larger audit firm size. However, few studies researched the effects of Big 4 audit firms’ audit quality and reputation on market premium or audit fees, until recently. Perhaps this is because it is difficult to distinguish the premium created by an audit firm’s reputation since the market premium is created from various sources, including audit quality and audit firm reputation. This study has three purposes. First, it compares the audit quality of Big 4 audit firms and non–Big 4 audit firms. It is a preliminary process for achieving this study’s second and main purpose. Second, this study tests whether a market premium due to audit firm reputation exists in the capital markets. For this purpose, this study divides the market premium into two sources; one from audit quality and another from audit firm reputation. Third, if a market premium is created by audit firm reputation in the market, then reputable audit firms are likely to require additional audit fees. Therefore, this study tests whether audit fees are affected by the audit firm reputation itself, above and beyond audit quality. Empirical findings are summarized as follows. First, the audit quality of Big 4 audit firms is better than that of non–Big 4 audit firms. Moreover, Big 4 audit firms have a fee premium, even after differences in audit quality are controlled for. This finding indicates that a fee premium is created by audit firm reputation, aside from audit quality. In addition, the results indicate that companies may pay additional audit fees that are due to audit firm reputation, as well as audit quality. This study differs from previous research in the following aspects. First, it verifies that the determinant factors of the market premium are either audit quality or simply Big 4 reputation beyond the audit quality of Big 4 audit firms, a topic that most domestic studies have not pursued. Second, this study presents evidence that sheds light on stock assessment by verifying that a market premium is produced by high audit quality and/or market recognition of Big 4 reputation. Third, this study examines constrains on audit quality and market premiums and verifies how the market premium is related to them after the audit quality is controlled for. Finally, this study examines whether companies will pay additional audit fees in the capital markets corresponding to a premium due to Big 4 reputation, besides any premiums for audit quality.

지각된 회사평판과 지각된 부서평판이 조직유효성에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구-지각된 부서평판의 매개효과를 중심으로-

박승배,김종완,김용재 한국기업경영학회 2011 기업경영연구 Vol.18 No.2

This study was to investigate the relations of perceived organization reputation, organizational commitment,and job satisfaction. Perceived organization reputation was categorized into perceived company reputation and division reputation, and the effects of which on organizational commitment were determined. In particular, this study investigated perceived division reputation as a mediator in the relationship between perceived company reputation and organizational commitment. On the basis of theoretical background, hypotheses and conceptual model were established. Data were collected by using a set of questionnaires. The samples consist of 296 survey data from Korean employees in a company. The analysis was done with SPSS 12.0 for Window statistics package using the analysis techniques of frequency analysis, reliability analysis, factor analysis, and correlation analysis. In addition,structural equation modeling was conducted using AMOS 5.0. This study conducted factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis for the validity test and Cronbach's alpha for the reliability test. Moreover, structural equation modeling(SEM) was used to analyze the hypothesized relationships in the conceptual model. This study showed that the proposed model was reasonably fit to the actual data. The analyses provided strong supports for all the hypotheses. From these analyses, the following results were obtained. First, we found that perceived organization reputation was divided into perceived company reputation and perceived division reputation. Perceived company reputation affect perceived division reputation. Therefore, perceived division reputation can be improved through management of company reputation management. Second, perceived company reputation and perceived division reputation seemed to have effects on organizational commitment. Especially, it showed perceived division reputation as a mediator on the relationship between perceived company reputation and organizational commitment. Perceive Perceived division reputation affect organizational commitment, too. But, we found that perceived company reputation was more affect organizational commitment. Third, organizational commitment seemed to have effects on job satisfaction. These results indicate that not only the affective attachment, objective condition of job,and objective situation of job effect on organizational commitment and job satisfaction, but also the organizational reputation as social relationship effect on organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Based on the results, we also discussed theoretical and practical implications and limitations of this study, and described future research directions. 본 연구의 목적은 지각된 조직평판이 조직몰입과 직무만족에 미치는 영향을 살펴보는 것에 있다. 특히, 조직구조에 따라 조직평판을 회사평판과 부서평판으로 구분하고 조직몰입에 미치는 상호영향력을살펴보는 것이다. 실증연구를 위해 전문가 집단인 건설엔지니어링 기업의 ‘엔지니어’를 중심으로 296명으로부터 자료를 수집하고 회사평판, 부서평판, 조직몰입 그리고 직무만족의 관계에 대하여 구조방정식모형을 실시하였다. 실증분석 결과를 요약하면 다음과 같다. 첫째, 회사평판은 조직몰입에 정(+)의 영향을 주는 것으로 나타났다. 둘째, 회사평판은 부서평판에 정(+)의 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 셋째, 회사평판이 부서평판보다 조직몰입에 더 큰 정(+)의 영향을 미치며, 부서평판은 회사평판과 조직몰입의 관계에서 매개역할을 하는 것으로 나타났다. 넷째, 조직몰입이 직무만족에 영향을 미치는 관계를 확인하고 있다. 이러한 연구결과들은 지각된 조직평판이 회사평판과 부서평판으로 구분될 수 있으며 직무만족과 조직몰입에 미치는 영향요소들이 조직평판이라는 사회적인 관계에도 영향을 받을 수 있다는 것을 나타내 준다.

WAR FOR TALENT: DETERMINANTS OF BUSINESS SCHOOL REPUTATION BY PRACTITIONERS AND ITS IMPACT ON RECRUITMENT

Sandra C. S. Männel 글로벌지식마케팅경영학회 2016 Global Marketing Conference Vol.2016 No.7

This paper proposes a conceptual model for understanding the determinants of business school reputation from a company’s perspective, and further, investigates the potential effect that business school reputation has during the recruitment process. Although extant research enhanced the knowledge of business school reputation enormously (e.g. Corley & Gioia, 2000; Rindova, Williamson, & Petkova, 2010), business school reputation from the stakeholder perspective of practitioners has been largely underrepresented. Instead researchers have focused on examining business school education from students’ and academics’ perspectives (e.g. Baden-Fuller, Ravazzolo, & Schweizer, 2000). However, only few studies examine all three constituencies: students, firms and academics (e.g. Safón, 2009; Vidaver-Cohen, 2007). Reputation is pertinent as it reduces uncertainty among stakeholders and foremost, serves as signal to evaluate the quality of a product or service (Fombrun & Shanley, 1990, p. 237). For example, in the context of business schools recruiters assess the quality of graduates by recruiting candidates directly “off campus”. Thus, practitioners are regarded as a stakeholder group that exerts a powerful influence on business schools (Safón, 2007, p. 218). That is, successful alumni not only influence the perception of prospective and current students directly, but more generally contribute to external perceptions as part of rankings and media (e.g. Glick, 2008, p. 19). Hence, it is pivotal for business school management to know what drives the reputation of the institution in order to invest in and leverage on the most important determinants. Responding to a more holistic approach of business school reputation (e.g. Safon, 2009), the proposed conceptualization of business school reputation moves beyond prior literature to an understanding of multiple factors, internal and external, that influence business school reputation. Based on empirical qualitative data from semi-structured interviews with 12 recruiters from multidisciplinary backgrounds, in terms of industry and experience and extant literature, four main determinants of business school reputation were identified. These determinants include Media Coverage, Quality, Alumni and the Institution itself and are in line with prior research findings (e.g. Armstrong & Sperry, 1994; Sweitzer & Volkwein, 2009). Adding to the above, it is also evident that business school reputation has an influence on the selection process during recruitment (e.g. Safon, 2009). Therefore, this study not only contributes to the discussion on business school reputation from a multiple stakeholder perspective in identifying main drivers of reputation, but also on its influence on the recruitment process. Thus, the scarcity of research on business school reputation from practitioner’s perspective calls for a theory-based conceptual model for further foundation of research. By addressing these research gaps, this study makes several contributions. First, examining business school reputation from a practitioner’s perspective expands existing literature on business school reputation. Second, the proposed conceptual framework advances the importance of business school reputation from a management perspective with regard to its influence on the recruitment process.

CUSTOMER-BASED ONLINE REPUTATION: A CAUSAL MODEL

Chebli Youness,Pierre Valette-Florence 글로벌지식마케팅경영학회 2018 Global Marketing Conference Vol.2018 No.07

With the development of e-commerce, firms have now a greater interest than before in investing in intangible assets, especially their e-reputation. The literature review shows that studies in the field of e-reputation are still limited. Furthermore, existing studies (e.g. Walsh et al., 2009) tend to focus on antecedents and consequences of reputation that are associated with the offline context, but do not analyze variables related to e-consumer behavior. The objectives of this paper are hence twofold: (1) examining the dimensions of the customer-based online reputation; (2) introducing a causal model that associates online reputation with some key antecedents and consequences. Our results show that a high level of trust positively impacts the online reputation. The same is true for heritage, but with less impact, maybe because the online commerce is relatively new, and e-commerce websites do not have a heritage yet compared to well-established brick and mortar companies. In terms of consequences, a favorable reputation increases the customer commitment toward the website, meaning that online customers will have a higher desire to maintain this valued relationship. In addition, the positive influence on WOM is very important especially in our digital era where brand choices and personal influences are increasingly taking place online. As for the measure of e-reputation, our results confirm that it can be assessed through 8 specific factors: Customer orientation, Reliable Delivery, Innovativity and Singularity, High Standard Offerings, Price, Social and Environmental Responsibility, Good employer, and Financially Strong Company. From an operational point of view, the customer-based e-reputation scale could be used repeatedly as a barometer enabling to periodically asses the e-reputation of diverse online companies. Our results also point out some potential managerial implications as far as improving customer-based online reputation is concerned. From the perspective of antecedents, increasing trust should be the choice in order to improve online reputation. With regards to the consequences, online reputation is a significant indicator of customer commitment to the website and spreading a positive word-of-mouth. Hence, and in order to have a positive e-WOM, managers should focus on enhancing their online reputation.

제약 기업 명성 척도 개발에 대한 연구

유선욱 ( Sun-wook Yoo ),박혜영 ( Hyeyoung Park ) 한국PR학회 2017 PR연구 Vol.21 No.5

The purpose of this study is to develop a reputation scale of pharmaceutical companies through discussing factors compromising reputation. Through literature research, this study discusses the reputation scale generally applied to corporations and reputation factors required to pharmaceutical companies for their sustainability. As a result of the scale development, three reputation factors are finalized with 29 items. Those are 'corporate sustainability management', 'R&D leadership' and 'patient-centricity'. They have been confirmed as a reliable and valid scale by conforming confirmatory factor analysis and nomological network analysis. This study extends the researches on corporate reputation by deriving reputation factors related to characteristics, social roles, and corporate values of pharmaceutical companies from a specific industrial point of view. In particular, the reputation scale of pharmaceutical companies finalized in this study includes R&D leadership and patient-centricity dimensions, which have emerged as important factors in pharmaceutical industry in recent years. It is meaningful that this study is to develop integrated quotient to measure the reputation of pharmaceutical companies from ‘corporate’ and ‘patient-centric’ perspective. This reputation quotient can be applied to the reputation enhancement strategy and business model for pharmaceutical companies.