Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ansatzpunkte zur Messung der Unternehmensreputation als Grundlage einer Erfolg versprechenden Reputationsmanagementplanung – Das RepTrak-Konzept als Ausgangspunkt und Skizzen zur relevanten Weiterentwicklung

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Corporate Reputation Management

Zusammenfassung

Um eine Unternehmensreputation aufzubauen und zu steuern, bedarf es eines ausgefeilten Messkonzeptes, um zu ermitteln, ob die angestrebten Wirkungen tatsächlich auch erzielt wurden. Im Mittelpunkt dieses Beitrags wird ein innovatives Messkonzept präsentiert, welches dem Management der Corporate Reputation zugrunde gelegt werden sollte. Gleichzeitig wird beispielhaft verdeutlicht, welche Reputation ausgewählte Unternehmen erzielt haben und welche Schlussfolgerungen sich davon ableiten lassen.

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 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight 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

Literaturverzeichnis

  • Brown St, Kozinets RV, Sherry JF Jr (2003a) Sell me the old, old story: Retromarketing management and the art of brand revival. J Customer Behav 2(2):133–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown St, Kozinets RV, Sherry JF Jr (2003b) Teaching old brands new tricks: Retro branding and revival meaning. J Marketing 67(3):19–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buß E (2007) Geschichte und Tradition – die Eckpfeiler der Unternehmensreputation. Archiv Wirtschaft 40(2):72–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Davies G, Chun R (2002) Gaps between the internal and external perceptions of the corporate brand. Corp Repu Rev 5(2/3):144–158

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies G, Chun R, da Silva R, Roper S (2002) Corporate reputation and competitiveness. London und New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamantopolous A, Winklhofer H (2001) Index construction with formative indicators: An alternative to scale development. J Mark Res 37:269–277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diamantopolous A, Siguaw JA (2006) Formative versus reflective indicators in organizational measure development: A comparison and empirical illustration. Brit J Manage 17:263–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun CJ, van Riel C (1997) The reputational landscape. Corp Repu Rev 1–2:5–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun CJ, van Riel C (2004)Fame & fortune: How successful companies build winning reputations. New York et al.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun CJ, Wiedmann K-P (2001) Reputation Quotient – Analyse und Gestaltung der Unternehmensreputation auf Basis fundierter Erkenntnisse, Schriftenreihe Marketing. Hannover

    Google Scholar 

  • Helm S (2007) Unternehmensreputation und Stakeholder-Loyalität. Wiesbaden

    Google Scholar 

  • Liebrenz-Himes M, Shamma H, Dyer RF (2007) Heritage brands—treasured inheritance or „Over the Hill,“ in CHARM (Conference on historical analysis and research in marketing) Proceedings, Vol. 13/2007, Leighann Neilson, ed., Hamden, CT: CHARM, S. 140–145

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper KR (1977) The logic of scientific discovery, routledge, 14th Printing, 1977. First English Ed., Hutchinson, 1959. First published as Logik der Forschung in Vienna: Springer, Vienna, 1934

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper KR (1986) The poverty of historicism, routledge. Taylor & Francis Group Ltd., Abindon Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Urde M, Greyser St. A, Balmer JMT (2007) Corporate Brands with a Heritage. J Brand Manage 15(1):4–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Riel CBM, Berens G, Dijkstra M (2008) Stimulating strategically aligned behaviour among employees. ERIM report series research in management. Rotterdam

    Google Scholar 

  • Vester F (2007) Die Kunst vernetzt zu denken, 6. Aufl. dtv, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh G (2006) Das Management von Unternehmensreputation: Grundlagen, Messung und Gestaltungsperspektiven am Beispiel von Unternehmen des liberalisierten Gasmarktes. Shaker, Aachen

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiedmann K-P (1994) Markenpolitik und Corporate Identity. In: Bruhn M (Hrsg) Handbuch Markenartikel, Anforderungen an die Markenpolitik aus der Sicht von Wissenschaft und Praxis, Band II: Markentechnik – Markenintegration – Markenkontrolle. Stuttgart, S. 1033–1054

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiedmann K-P (2004) Managing a company’s brand leadership activities: Framework and discussion. J Int Bus Entrepreneurship Dev 2(2):64–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiedmann K-P (2006) RQ-Messkonzept als Basis einer differenzierten Erfassung der Unternehmensreputation. WiSt (Wirtschaftswissenschaftliches Studium) 35(3):147–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiedmann K-P (2008a) Messung von Unternehmensreputation als Grundlage eines effizienten Reputationsmanagement, Schriftenreihe Marketing und Management. Hannover

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiedmann K-P (2008b) Corporate Identity und Corporate Branding – Modell eines integrierten Managementkonzeptes und Skizzen zu zentralen Gestaltungsansätzen. Hermanns A, Ringle T, van Overloop PC (Hrsg) Handbuch Markenkommunikation. München, S. 31–52

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiedmann K-P (2008c) Der Wert von Unternehmensmarken – Konzeptionelle Überlegungen und empirische Erkenntnisse zur Beurteilung des Unternehmensmarkenwertes auf der Basis von Reputationsstudien. in: Bauer HH, Huber F, Albrecht C-M (Hrsg) Erfolgsfaktoren der Markenführung. München, S. 35–58

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiedmann K-P (2008d) Reputation im globalen Wettbewerb. Nicht-materielle Vermögenswerte (“Intangible Asstes“) als eine Herausforderung an die Ökonomik der Zukunft. Unimagazin, Zeitschrift der Leibniz Universität, Hannover (03)/04:34–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiedmann K-P (2010) „Strategic Alignment“ als Zielgröße der internen Kommunikation und als Voraussetzung für ein erfolgreiches Bestehen im Wettbewerb, Vortragreihe der VW Auto Uni, Mobile Life Campus. Wolfsburg

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiedmann K-P (2011) Re-thinking research methods and statistical analysis in reputation research. Paper presented at the 2011 AMS World Marketing Congress. Reims, France

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiedmann K-P, Fombrun ChJ, Riel CB v (2005) Reputation messen und vergleichen. In: Pfannenberg J, Zerfaß A (Hrsg) Wertschöpfung durch Kommunikation. Frankfurt a. M., S. 48–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiedmann K-P, Fombrun Ch, van Riel CBM (2006) Ansatzpunkte zur Messung der Reputation von Unternehmen. der markt 45(177):98–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiedmann K-P, Wüstefeld T, Bachmann F (2009) Markentradition als Erfolgsfaktor in der Automobilbranche – Gestaltungsperspektiven auf Basis einer empirischen Studie. In: Wiedmann K-P (Hrsg) Ganzheitliches Marketing und Management. Saarbrücken

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiedmann K-P, Bachmann F, Wüstefeld T (2010) Management von Tradition – Marketingpotentiale am Beispiel der Automobilbranche. WiSt (Wissenschaftliches Studium) 39(12):582–586

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiedmann K-P, Buckler F (2008) Neuronale Netze. In: Herrmann A, Homburg Ch, Klarmann M (Hrsg) Handbuch der Marktforschung, 3. vollständig überarbeitete und erweiterte Auflage. Wiesbaden, S. 713–741

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiedmann K-P, Hennigs N, Schmidt S, Wüstefeld T (2011a) Drivers and outcomes of brand heritage: Consumers’ perception of heritage brands in the automotive industry. J Market Theor Praxis. The Use of Partial Least Squares (PLS) to Address Marketing Management Topics, Special Issue, (forthcoming).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiedmann K-P, Hennigs N, Schmidt S, Wüstefeld T (2011b) The importance of brand heritage as a key performance driver in marketing management. J Brand Manage Corp Branding in a Turbulent Environ, Special Issue, (forthcoming).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Universität Hannover, Institut für Marketing und Management, Königsworther Platz 1, 30167, Hannover, Deutschland

    Prof. Dr. Klaus-Peter Wiedmann

Authors
  1. Prof. Dr. Klaus-Peter Wiedmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Klaus-Peter Wiedmann .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Eichstraße 30, Salzburg, 5023, Austria

    Cornelia Wüst

  2. Hochschule für Wirtschaft und Recht, Badensche Straße 50-51, Berlin, 10825, Germany

    Ralf T. Kreutzer

Appendices

Anhang 1: Global RepTrak™ Pulse – Studiensteckbrief

1.1 Fact Sheet – 2011 RepTrak™ Pulse: Wave 1

1.1.1 Data collection

  • Time: January and February 2011

  • Totals: The first phase of the study or the ‘RepTrak™ Pulse’ is a localized country-specific study which is the result of over

    • Roughly 85,000 consumers

    • Over 100,000 interviews

    • 41 countries

    • More than 250,000 ratings were collected to develop reliable measurements of the ‚corporate reputation‘ of over 2,500 + companies from around the world

  • Data Collection method:

    • Conducted online using web based questionnaires

    • CATI or face-to-face conducted in the following Markets: Australia, Bolivia, Columbia, Greece, Mexico, New Zealand, Puerto Rico, and South Africa

  • Sample:

    • Each company was rated by at least 100 members of the general public familiar with the company

    • Respondent distribution was balanced to the country population on age, gender and region

    • Familiarity: all respondents are at least „somewhat“ or „very“ familiar with at least one company

1.1.2 Global RepTrak™ Pulse Scores

  • RepTrak™ Pulse Scores: are based on questions measuring Trust, Admiration & Respect, Good Feeling and Overall Esteem (captured in the Pulse score on a 0-100 scale).

  • Dimension Scores: Single dimension statements are used measure perceptions of: Products/services, Innovation, Workplace, Citizenship Governance, Leadership, and Performance.

1.1.3 Score Reporting

  • RepTrak™ Pulse scores are reported on a 100-point scale with a global mean of 64.2

  • RepTrak™ Pulse scores of 60–69 are considered ‘average’, above 80 ‘excellent’, and below 40 ‘poor’

  • Differences of + /- 0.5 are statistically significant at a 95 % confidence level

  • Standardized: To enable cross-country analysis of corporate reputations, RI standardizes its ratings. This is done in a two step process through which raw scores are first adjusted by the overall mean score in the country and its standard deviation, and second are scaled back to the global distribution. Scores released from 2006 to 2010, were standardized based on the statistical properties of the distribution of scores obtained in 2006 –the base year of the study. In 2011, RI re-examined the global and country distributions of reputation ratings obtained when we cumulated all annual surveys conducted from 2006 to 2010 and rebased all past scores [see note below].

1.1.4 Company Selection: Local Market

  • Each local market study’s list selection criteria have been determined locally. For any specific questions regarding a particular market please contact Caroline Cohen

  • Country report dataset will be consistent with published list of „Most Reputable Companies in [Country]“ OR „[Country’s] # Most Reputable Companies“

1.1.5 2011 Pulse Score Rebasing

  • Standard Note: All reputation scores have been globally adjusted to correct for cross-country biases that were calculated using RI’s longitudinal database of more than 400,000 respondents interviewed in 31 countries since 2005.

  • In 2011, RI re-examined the global and country distributions of reputation ratings obtained when we cumulated all of our annual surveys conducted from 2006 to 2010. Among the 35 countries, 6 showed slight changes in country parameters. To ensure the complete accuracy of future results, RI recognized the need to rebase forward all scores going using the improved estimates of country parameters obtained from the cumulative database of scores. As a result, all reputation scores released in prior years were revised:

    1. 1.

      In most countries, RepTrak™ Pulse scores were relatively unchanged

    2. 2.

      In a handful of countries, RepTrak™ Pulse scores either rose or fell uniformly by a 3–5 points, with no effect on the relative ranking of companies in the country.

    3. 3.

      The largest adjustments had to be made to past RepTrak™ Pulse scores of companies in South Africa (where scores were uniformly raised) and companies in Brazil, Norway, and Italy (where scores were uniformly lowered).

1.1.6 Re-Branding of Reputation Institute’s Analytical Tools

  • All RI products will be endorsed using the RepTrak™ trademark.

  • The ™ superscript will be applied on all mentions of the RepTrak™ name.

  • Wave 1– Local market studies should be referenced as [COUNTRY] RepTrak™ Pulse

*(No reference to „Global RepTrak™ Pulse“ should be made at the country level)

  • The correct tagline used for 2011 Wave 1 studies should stay consistent with the following:

    • [COUNTRY ’ S] Most Reputable Companies: Part of the World ’ s Largest Study on Corporate Reputation

1.1.7 What „questions“ were asked in the survey?

A: RI uses attribute statements that are rated on a scale of 1 to 7, 1 being „I Strong disagree“ and 7 being „I strongly agree“ by respondents. Additional batteries of questions are added to the questionnaire for other research purposes.

1.1.8 Data Collection Partners:

  • Survey Sampling International (SSI): Austria, Belgium, Brazil, China, Chile, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, India, Japan, Mexico, Poland, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, and United Kingdom

  • Toluna: Canada and the United States.

Anhang 2:

1.1 Steckbrief der Studie Germany RepTrak™ Pulse 2011

  • Germany Respondent Profile:

  • A total of 18,803 ratings of the 157 selected companies were obtained from a sample of 5,118 online consumers in Germany in January and February 2011. Each respondent was allowed to rate a maximum of five companies with which they were familiar. All companies were rated by at least 100 respondents.

  • Ratings are statistically significant at a 95 % confidence level with a margin of error + /- 0.5. In other words, companies within countries have significantly different results when their Pulse is greater than 0.5 points apart.

  • Respondents distribution was balanced to the country population on age and gender

  • To be included in Reputation Institute’s „Germany“s 157 Most Reputable Companies’ list, all companies had to meet the following criteria:

  • Among the Top 100 German companies by total revenues (source: Süddeutschen Zeitung – Top 100 in Deutschland)

  • Among the 30 companies included in DAX, the German stock exchange index

  • Among the 30 Largest Family-owned companies in Germany (source: Handelsblatt)

  • Multinational companies operating in Germany that have high familiarity to Germany’s general public

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Wiedmann, KP. (2012). Ansatzpunkte zur Messung der Unternehmensreputation als Grundlage einer Erfolg versprechenden Reputationsmanagementplanung – Das RepTrak-Konzept als Ausgangspunkt und Skizzen zur relevanten Weiterentwicklung. In: Wüst, C., Kreutzer, R. (eds) Corporate Reputation Management. Gabler Verlag, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8349-3720-9_2

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-8349-3720-9_2

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Gabler Verlag, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-8349-3043-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-8349-3720-9

  • eBook Packages: Business and Economics (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation