The student with above candidate number determines to work on the assignment 1. According to the requirement of the assignment 1, the writer would like to present definitions of the terms reputation, issue management and crisis communication in relation to organisation. The definitions are reflection of the books and recent journal articles. Then brief and critical discussion will take place to understand the link between these three terms. Therefore, this is going to explore the idea on how an organisation can use issue management to build and maintain its’ reputation. Further, the objective of the second part of the assignment is to make a clear understanding of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and various approaches of CSR. Finally, to conclude the assignment, the writer discussed critically the relationship between CSR and Corporate Reputation along with example based on lecture notes and previous empirical studies.
Barnett, Jermier & Lafferty, 2006 in their definitional landscape article, reviewed about fifty unique sources and defined corporate reputation by clusters of three individuals, such as: awareness, assessment and asset (Barnett, Jermier, & Lafferty, 2006).
Awareness: By the term awareness of as firm, Barnett, Jermier & Lafferty, 2006, mean that, corporate reputation is accumulation of perceptions, latent perceptions, net perceptions, global perceptions, perceptual representations and overall collective representations (Barnett et al., 2006). They farther add, “…references to corporate reputation as representations of knowledge or emotions since these indicate an awareness of the firm.”
Assessment: The second cluster is reputation as assessment (Barnett et al., 2006). In the assessment cluster, they include the terms, indicators and languages, which all the stakeholder groups use to assess the status of the organization. In this criterion, they include the references to organizational reputation “as Judgment, an evaluation or a gauge” (Barnett et al., 2006). They suggest adding the term opinion and belief as the definition is as judgmental in nature.
Asset: The authors call asset of the organization as the last cluster of corporate reputation, which is something valuable and particularly significant to the firm (Barnett et al., 2006). In this group, the authors add the references to the term ‘as a resource or as an intangible, financial or economic asset.’ (Barnett et al., 2006).
Clardy, A. 2012, in the article about organizational reputation agree on these cluster based definition and present a similar definition to elaborate that issues in conceptualize and measurement (Clardy, 2012). The frame of three individuals has a real value for reputation of an organization (Clardy, 2012). The author clarify by explaining that, these clusters may overlap in some situation but they are relatively distinctive, ‘… awareness doesn’t imply an assessment; assessment doesn’t imply transformation into asset.’ (Clardy, 2012).
Kent Walker, 2010 in the empirical study reveals a systematic review of corporate reputation. Firstly, the author differentiated from the organizational identity and image. Secondly, the evaluation of corporate reputation depend on length (Walker, 2010). Walker mentions about the interconnectedness between the variables of around the corporate reputation. Because, it is important to follow specific definition, then the situation will define the other independent issues, which are influencing corporate reputation (Walker, 2010).
2. Issue Management
First, I would like to mention that, it was not easy to get a specific recent research on the definition of issue management. However, Brad, H. & Max, M. 1989 in their empirical survey study on ‘how corporations define issue management’ found two elements such as identification of an issue and the influence combined the issue management (Hainsworth & Meng, 1989). If a management can identify an issue beforehand, that may have impact upon organization’s operations, then if the management adopt the proper action, thus, there is a perfect influence on the development of the issue (Hainsworth & Meng, 1989). In their survey, respondents of four corporations indicated three aspects to the strategic response, such as, analysis of the position of the organization, strategic plan to influence the issue and implementation with continuous evaluation according to the organizational expectations (Hainsworth & Meng, 1989). The researchers conclude by mentioning that issue management as an action oriented management policy that seeks to ‘…identify potential or emerging issues …’ issues can be ‘…legislative, regulatory, political, or social...’ which has impact the organization “and then mobilizes and coordinates organizational resources to strategically influence the development of those issues. The ultimate goal of issues management should be to shape public policy to the benefit of the organization” (Hainsworth & Meng, 1989).
Robert & Kenneth, 1990 describe about the four significant individuals are necessary for issue management. The four elements are:
1) Smart Planning and Operations: Things which must follow to analyze public policy in the strategic business planning and operations management (Heath & Cousino, 1990).
2) Tough Defense and Smart Offense: Delivering the correct messages to the correct persons or groups with right intention of the affect (Heath & Cousino, 1990).
3) Getting the House in Order: The requirement to achieve the corporate social responsibility (Heath & Cousino, 1990).
4) Scouting the Terrain: The functions which need to discover and make sense of the changing issues (Heath & Cousino, 1990).
3. Crisis Communication
Spence, Lachlan, Griffin, 2007 in the empirical research define crisis as generally particular, unanticipated incident or sequence of events that appears as high level of uncertainty and warnings for high-prioritized goals of organization (Spence, Lachlan, & Griffin, 2007). In this perception, they add the life security and property, more general individual or community too. Therefore, researchers define crisis communication as the target to prevent and reducing the opposite bad outcomes, which arise because of the appeared crisis. Thus, the crisis communication inform the situation in order to encourage the receiver to adopt particular step to save the organization from the damage by creating a rational understanding of the risk factors clearly (Spence et al., 2007).
Meer, Toni, & Joost 2014, in a very recent article on the emotional crisis communication provides a starting points of further exploration for crisis communication by citing many of the previous researches.
- Quote paper
- Jobaire Alam (Author), 2014, Organizational Identity and Corporate Communication, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/413353