IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cir/cirbur/2012rb-01.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Corporate Reputation: Is Your Most Strategic Asset at Risk?

Author

Listed:
  • Nathalie de Marcellis-Warin
  • Serban Teodoresco

Abstract

Corporate reputation is increasingly identified as the most important strategic asset in value creation for a company. Scholarly interest in the concept of corporate reputation has led to a five-fold increase in the number of peer-reviewed articles and studies over the past decade (Barnett et al., 2006). Yet, there is no commonly accepted definition. We propose a definition of corporate reputation based on a number of academic sources as well as work by practitioners. Corporate reputation is an intangible asset that is built up over time and represents the value and trust that stakeholders have for the company. It is a key asset, which favours the achievement of strategic objectives such as value creation, profitable growth, and sustainable competitive advantage. Companies' reputations are more vulnerable than ever today because of globalization, increasing business complexity, economic and financial turbulence, the exponential growth of social media, and the speed of the news cycle. These factors can provoke difficult to predict crises which can destroy even the most carefully built reputations. Recently, both corporate board members and risk management professionals identified risk to reputation as the number one risk facing companies (EisnerAmper, 2011; Economist Intelligence Unit, 2005). We are all aware of crises that have severely damaged well established corporate reputations, causing at the same time a dramatic loss of stock market value. One example is Canada's largest, most prestigious tech company, Research In Motion. RIM began 2011 as Canada's fifth most admired company in ratings established by Canadian Business magazine and the Reputation Institute (Canadian Business, May 19, 2011). Then, a failed product launch and a disastrous loss of service to millions of Blackberry users set the company on a steep slide in value. The loss of trust in RIM intensified when company executives waited three days before offering a public explanation and apology for the loss of service. RIM shares dropped 75 percent in value between March and December of 2011 (Canadian Business, January 19, 2012). A more recent case, in February 2012, is that of Canada's most respected engineering firm SNC-Lavalin, which has seen its shares drop by over 20 percent due to issues of questionable expenses. This report combines the authors' exploratory study of Quebec's top companies with the review of most of the current studies and research on corporate reputation published over the last 12 years. Our Quebec survey shows that only half the companies surveyed recognize the importance of reputation. None appear to be managing reputation in a proactive way. CIRANO and Preventa will introduce a framework and processes to improve the way organizations manage their most valuable asset. This report provides a road map for companies to make the transition from reactive management to proactive management of reputation. The report will be available soon

Suggested Citation

  • Nathalie de Marcellis-Warin & Serban Teodoresco, 2012. "Corporate Reputation: Is Your Most Strategic Asset at Risk?," CIRANO Burgundy Reports 2012rb-01, CIRANO.
  • Handle: RePEc:cir:cirbur:2012rb-01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cirano.qc.ca/files/publications/2012RB-01.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dostie Benoit & Jayaraman Rajshri, 2012. "Organizational Redesign, Information Technologies and Workplace Productivity," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-41, February.
    2. Atzeni, Gianfranco E. & Carboni, Oliviero A., 2006. "ICT productivity and firm propensity to innovative investment: Evidence from Italian microdata," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 139-156, June.
    3. Tai-Hsin Huang, 2005. "A Study on the Productivities of IT Capital and Computer Labor: Firm-level Evidence from Taiwan’s Banking Industry," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 241-257, November.
    4. Stephen D. Oliner & Daniel E. Sichel, 2000. "The Resurgence of Growth in the Late 1990s: Is Information Technology the Story?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 3-22, Fall.
    5. Sinan Aral & Erik Brynjolfsson & Marshall Van Alstyne, 2007. "Information, Technology and Information Worker Productivity: Task Level Evidence," NBER Working Papers 13172, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Erik Brynjolfsson & Lorin M. Hitt, 2000. "Beyond Computation: Information Technology, Organizational Transformation and Business Performance," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 23-48, Fall.
    7. Berndt, Ernst R. & Morrison, Catherine J., 1995. "High-tech capital formation and economic performance in U.S. manufacturing industries An exploratory analysis," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 9-43, January.
    8. Gilbert Cette & Jacques Mairesse & Yusuf Kocoglu, 2002. "Diffusion of ICTs and Growth of the French Economy over the Long-term, 1980-2000," Post-Print hal-01297986, HAL.
    9. Kevin J. Stiroh, 2001. "Investing in information technology: productivity payoffs for U.S. industries," Current Issues in Economics and Finance, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, vol. 7(Jun).
    10. Bart van Ark & Robert Inklaar & Robert H. McGuckin, 2003. "The Contribution of ICT-Producing and ICT-Using Industries to Productivity Growth: A Comparison of Canada, Europe and the United States," International Productivity Monitor, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, vol. 6, pages 56-63, Spring.
    11. Andrew Sharpe, 2006. "The Relationship between ICT Investment and Productivity in the Canadian Economy: A Review of the Evidence," CSLS Research Reports 2006-05, Centre for the Study of Living Standards.
    12. Tridas Mukhopadhyay & Surendra Rajiv & Kannan Srinivasan, 1997. "Information Technology Impact on Process Output and Quality," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(12), pages 1645-1659, December.
    13. Gilbert Cette & Jacques Mairesse & Yusuf Kocoglu, 2002. "The Diffusion of ICTs and Growth of the French Economy over the Long-term, 1980-2000," International Productivity Monitor, Centre for the Study of Living Standards, vol. 4, pages 27-38, Spring.
    14. Nicholas Oulton & Sylaja Srinivasan, 2005. "Productivity growth in UK industries, 1970-2000: structural change and the role of ICT," Bank of England working papers 259, Bank of England.
    15. Luc SOETE, 2001. "ICTs, knowledge work and employment: The challenges to Europe," International Labour Review, International Labour Organization, vol. 140(2), pages 143-163, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Thierry Warin & Nathalie De Marcellis-Warin & William Sanger & Bertrand Nembot & Venus Hosseinali Mirza, 2015. "Corporate reputation and social media: a game theory approach," International Journal of Economics and Business Research, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, pages 1-22.
    2. Aykut Beduk & M.Kemal Unsacar & Kemalettin Eryesil, 2016. "The Relationship between Organizational Justice and Corporate Reputation in Footwear Manufacturing Company," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 6(12), pages 530-542, December.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cir:cirbur:2012rb-01. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Webmaster). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/ciranca.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.