Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Challenges in Measuring Corporate Reputation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Reputation Management

Part of the book series: Management for Professionals ((MANAGPROF))

Abstract

In the second chapter, Helm and Klode describe the “Challenges in Measuring Corporate Reputation” which most communication professionals should be aware of when selecting a measurement tool. The authors expand on the pros and cons of single versus multiple-item measurement concepts, discuss formative versus reflective models, and evaluate the benefits of low and higher order factors. In a second part, Helm and Klode introduce common measurement tools used both by practitioners and in academia and discuss the need for nonstandardized tools.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Due to identification problems within the covariance-based structural equation modeling approach, an additional single-item measure of reputation can be used to achieve identification (Jarvis et al. 2005).

  2. 2.

    Aaker (1997) identified Sincerity, Excitement, Competence, Sophistication, Ruggedness as first-order factors; Davies et al. (2003) identified Agreeableness, Competence, Enterprise, Chic, Ruthlessness, Machismo, Informality as second-order factors; Fombrun et al. (2000) identified Products & Services, Innovation, Workplace, Governance, Citizenship, Leadership, and Performance as first-order factors of reputation.

  3. 3.

    A detailed description of all kinds of combinations is given by Jarvis et al. (2005).

  4. 4.

    Technically spoken: reputation is – when measured via formative mode – a latent dependent metric index variable estimated by using multiple regression analysis.

  5. 5.

    Within reflective measurement models all items have to be highly correlated. A conceptual problem can occur if an increase in e.g., product quality must not necessarily be accompanied by an increase of, e.g., wise use of financial assets.

  6. 6.

    http://www.money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/mostadmired (download 2008-01-23).

  7. 7.

    http://www.reputationinstitute.com/reptrakpulse (download 2008-01-23).

  8. 8.

    http://www.reputationinstitute.com/reptrakpulse (download of Global RepTrak Pulse 2007 report, 2008-01-23).

  9. 9.

    Helm (2007b, p. 239) describes three perspectives of the definition and measurement of stakeholder perceptions of corporate reputation, namely (1) the existence of an attitude in the mind of individuals; (2) perceptions that are matched within stakeholder groups; and (3) certain reputational perceptions forming a general reputation of the firm across (all) stakeholder groups.

References

  • Aaker JL (1997) Dimensions of brand personality. J Mark Res 34:347–356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagozzi RP (1994) Structural equation models in marketing research: basic principles. In: Bagozzi RP (ed) Principles of marketing research. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 317–385

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett ML, Jermier JM, Lafferty BA (2006) Corporate reputation: the definitional landscape. Corp Reput Rev 9(1):26–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney J (1991) Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J Manag 17(1):99–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berens G, van Riel CBM (2004) Corporate associations in the academic literature: three main streams of thought in the reputation measurement literature. Corp Reput Rev 7(2):161–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergkvist L, Rossiter JR (2007) The predictive validity of multiple-item versus single-item measures of the same constructs. J Mark Res 44(2):175–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bromley D (2002) Comparing corporate reputations: league tables, quotients, benchmarks, or case studies? Corp Reput Rev 5(1):35–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caruana A, Chircop S (2000) Measuring corporate reputation: a case example. Corp Reput Rev 3(1):43–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chun R (2005) Corporate reputation: meaning and measurement. Int J Manag Rev 7(2):91–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Churchill GA (1979) A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs. J Mark Res 16:64–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies G, Chun R, Vinhas da Silva R, Roper S (2001) The personification metaphor as a measurement approach for corporate reputation. Corp Reput Rev 4(2):113–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies G, Chun R, Vinhas da Silva R, Roper S (2003) Corporate reputation and competitiveness. Routledge, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • de Castro GM, López JEN, Sáez PL (2006) Business and social reputation: exploring the concept and main dimensions of corporate reputation. J Bus Ethics 63(4):361–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamantopoulos A, Winklhofer HM (2001) Index construction with formative indicators: an alternative to scale development. J Mark Res 38:269–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dollinger MJ, Golden PA, Saxton T (1997) The effect of reputation on the decision to joint venture. Strat Manag J 18(2):127–140

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dowling G (2001) Creating corporate reputations: identity, image, and performance. Oxford Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowling G (2004) Journalists’ evaluation of corporate reputations. Corp Reput Rev 7(2):196–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiedler L, Kirchgeorg M (2006) Impact of brand image components on behavioral intentions of stakeholders: insights for corporate branding strategies. In: Proceedings of the AMA Conference 2006, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishbein M, Ajzen I (1975) Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: an introduction to theory and research. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun C, van Riel C (1997) The reputational landscape. Corp Reputation Rev 1(1):5–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun CJ (2007) List of lists: a compilation of international corporate reputation ratings. Corp Reput Rev 10(2):144–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun CJ, Shanley M (1990) What’s in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy. Acad Manag J 33(2):233–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun CJ, Gardberg N, Sever JM (2000) The reputation quotientSM: a multi-stakeholder measure of corporate reputation. J Brand Manag 4(7):241–255

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardberg N, Fombrun C (2002) The global reputation quotient project: first steps towards a cross-nationally valid measure of corporate reputation. Corp Reput Rev 4(4):303–315

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helm S (2005) Designing a formative measure for corporate reputation. Corp Reput Rev 8(2):95–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helm S (2007a) One reputation or many? Comparing stakeholders’ perception of corporate reputation. Corp Commun 12(3):238–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helm S (2007b) The role of corporate reputation in determining investor satisfaction and loyalty. Corp Reput Rev 10(1):22–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Helm S (2007c) Exploring the impact of corporate reputation on consumer satisfaction and loyalty. J Consum Behav 5:59–80

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis SB, Podaskoff PM, MacKenzie SB (2005) The problem of measurement model misspecification in behavioral and organizational research and some recommended solutions. J Appl Psychol 90(4):710–730

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larkin J (2003) Strategic reputation risk management. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewellyn PG (2002) Corporate reputation. Focusing the zeitgeist. Bus Soc 41(4):446–455

    Google Scholar 

  • MacMillan K, Money K, Downing S, Hillenbrand C (2005) Reputation in relationships: measuring experiences, emotions and behaviors. Corp Reput Rev 8(3):214–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Money K, Hillenbrand C (2006) Using reputation measurement to create value: an analysis and integration of existing measures. J Gen Manag 32(1):1–12

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagy M (2002) Using a single-item approach to measure facet job satisfaction. J Occup Organ Psychol 75(1):77–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neville BA, Bell SJ, Mengüç B (2005) Corporate reputation, stakeholders and the social performance-financial performance relationship. Eur J Mark 39(9/10):1184–1198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newell SJ, Goldsmith RE (2001) The development of a scale to measure perceived corporate credibility. J Bus Res 52(3):235–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riezebos R, Riezebos HJ, Kist B, Kootstra G (2003) Brand management: a theoretical and practical approach. Pearson, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossiter JR (2002) The C-OAR-SE procedure for scale development in marketing. Int J Res Mark 19:305–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz M, Mouritsen J, Gabrielsen G (2001) Sticky reputation: analyzing a ranking system. Corp Reput Rev 4(1):24–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwaiger M (2004) Components and parameters of corporate reputation – an empirical study. Schmalenbach Bus Rev 56(1):46–71

    Google Scholar 

  • Sjovall AM, Talk AC (2004) From actions to impressions: cognitive attribution theory and the formation of corporate reputation. Corp Reput Rev 7(3):269–281

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thorndike EL (1920) A constant error in psychological rating. Journal of Applied Psychology 4:25–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Riel CBM, Stroeker NE, Maathuis OJM (1998) Measuring corporate images. Corp Reput Rev 1(4):313–326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh G, Wiedmann KP (2004) A conceptualisation of corporate reputation in Germany: an evaluation and extension of the RQ. Corp Reput Rev 1(4):304–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wartick SL (2002) Measuring corporate reputation. Bus Soc 41:371–392

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany

    Sabrina Helm

  2. Institute for Research Information and Quality Assurance (iFQ), Bonn, Germany

    Christian Klode

Authors
  1. Sabrina Helm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christian Klode
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sabrina Helm .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Retailing and Consumer Sciences, The University of Arizona, North Park Avenue 650, Tucson, 85721-0078, Arizona, USA

    Sabrina Helm

  2. , Strategieberatung für Kommunikation GmbH, Hering Schuppener Consulting, Kreuzstr. 60, Duesseldorf, 40210, Germany

    Kerstin Liehr-Gobbers

  3. , Strategieberatung für Kommunikation GmbH, Hering Schuppener Consulting, Kreuzstr. 60, Duesseldorf, 40210, Germany

    Christopher Storck

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Helm, S., Klode, C. (2011). Challenges in Measuring Corporate Reputation. In: Helm, S., Liehr-Gobbers, K., Storck, C. (eds) Reputation Management. Management for Professionals. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-19266-1_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation