Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Typical Tools for Assessment of Communicative Performance

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Corporate Reputation Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Concepts like reputation, recognition, legitimacy, visibility, image, popularity, trust and others are frequently used in describing how successful an organization’s communication has been in describing properties and qualities of its activities. In this paper we seek to schematically address some of these concepts as they often appear in current communication/PR, organizational and sociological research to examine what qualities and criteria these concepts tend to refer to. By way of situating our discussion in a broader context of how a neo-institutional perspective understands organizational performance, we seek to identify and suggest some of the central qualities of the most popular concepts. We combine then the different qualities these concepts invoke and suggest a model that can be used in a more accurate discussion of an organization’s communication.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aaker, D. A. and Joachimsthaler, E. (2000) ‘The brand relationship spectrum: The key to the brand architecture challenge’, California Management Review, 42 (4), 8–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Altheide, D.L. and Snow, R.P. (1979) Media Logic, Sage, Beverly Hills.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahn, J. and Ferle, C. L. (2008) ‘Enhancing recall and recognition for brand names and body copy: A mixed-language approach’, Journal of Advertising, 37 (3), 107–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, H. K., Powell, G. E. and Weaver, D. G. (1999) ‘Does NYSE listing affect firm visibility?’ Financial Management, 46–54.

  • Bansal, P. and Clelland, I. (2004) ‘Talking trash: Legitimacy, impression management, and unsystematic risk in the context of the natural environment’, Academy of Management Journal, 47 (1), 93–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, J.L., Frostenson, M. and Pallas, J. (2013) ‘Reputation rankings, certifications and accreditations’, in C.E. Carroll (ed.), The Handbook of Communication and Corporate Reputation, Wiley & Blackwell, Chichester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, U. (1998) Risksamhället. På väg mot en annan modernitet, Daidalos, Göteborg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin, B. A. and Prodolny, J. M. (1999) ‘Status, quality, and social order in the California wine industry’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 563–589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bitektine, A. (2011) ‘Toward a theory of social judgments of organizations: The case of legitimacy, reputation, and status’, Academy of Management Review, 36 (1), 151–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boli, J. (2006) ‘The rationalization of virtue and virtuosity in world society’, in M.-L. Djelic and K. Sahlin-Andersson (eds.), Transnational Governance: Institutional Dynamics of Regulation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 95–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brammer, S.J. and Pavelin, S. (2006) ‘Corporate reputation and social performance: The importance of fit’, Journal of Management Studies, 43 (3), 435–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brønn, P. (2010) ‘Reputation, communication, and the corporate brand’, Handbook of Public Relations, 307–320.

  • Brunsson, N., Rasche, A. and Seidl, D. (2012) ‘The dynamics of standardization: Three perspectives on standards in organization studies’, Organization Studies, 33 (5–6), 613–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunsson, N. and Sahlin-Andersson, K. (2000) ‘Constructing organizations: The example of public sector reform’, Organization Studies, 21 (4), 721–746.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capriotti, P. (2009) ‘Economic and social roles of companies in the mass media. The impact media visibility has on businesses' being recognized as economic and social actors’, Business & Society, 48, 225–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, C.E. (2013) The Handbook of Communication and Corporate Reputation. Vol. 49, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, S.M. (2006) ‘The interaction of top management group, stakeholder, and situational factors on certain corporate reputation management activities’, Journal of Management Studies, 43 (5), 1145–1176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caruana, A. (1997) ‘Corporate reputation: Concept and measurement’, Journal of Product & Brand Management, 6 (2), 109–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, L.T., Morsing, M. and Cheney, G. (2008) Corporate Communications: Convention, Complexity, and Critique, SAGE, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cillessen, A. H. and Rose, A. J. (2005) ‘Understanding popularity in the peer system’, Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 102–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clegg, S.R., Kornberger, M. and Rhodes, C. (2004) ‘Noise, parasites and translation: Theory and practice in management consulting’, Management Learning, 35 (1), 31–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coombs, W. T. and Holladay, S. J. (2010) PR Strategy and Application: Managing Influence, Wiley-Blackwell, Malden, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, A. (2005) ‘Media effects and the active elite audience: A study of media in financial markets’, European Journal of Communications, 20 (3), 303–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deephouse, D. and Suchman, M. (2008) ‘Legitimacy in organizational institutionalism’, in R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, K. Sahlin and R. Suddaby (eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Organisational Institutionalism, Sage, London, pp. 49–77.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Deephouse, D.L. and Carter, S.M. (2005) ‘An examination of differences between organizational legitimacy and organizational reputation’, Journal of Management Studies, 42 (2), 329–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P.J. and Powell, W.W. (1983) ‘The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organization fields’, American Sociological Review, 48 (2), 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Downs, C.W. and Adrian, A.D. (2012) Assessing Organizational Communication: Strategic Communication Audits, Guilford Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elsbach, K.D. (1994) ‘Managing organizational legitimacy in the california cattle industry: The construction and effectiveness of verbal accounts’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 39 (1), 57–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elsbach, K.D. and Kramer, R.M. (1996) ‘Members’ responses to organizational identity threats: Encountering and countering the business week rankings’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 41 (3), 442–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Espeland, W.N. and Sauder, M. (2007) ‘Rankings and reactivity: How public measures recreate social worlds1’, American Journal of Sociology, 113 (1), 1–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Espeland, W.N. and Stevens, M.L. (1998) ‘Commensuration as a social process’, Annual Review of Sociology, 24 (1), 313–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun, C. (1998) ‘Indices of corporate reputation: An analysis of media rankings and social monitors’ ratings’, Corporate Reputation Review, 1 (4), 327–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun, C. J. (2004) Fame & Fortune: How Successful Companies Build Winning Reputations, FT Press, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun, C. and van Riel, CBM. (1997) ‘The reputational landscape’, Corporate Reputation Review, 1–16.

  • Fredriksson, M., Pallas, J. and Wehmeier, S. (2013) ‘Public relations and neo-institutional theory’, Public Relations Inquiry, 2 (2), 183–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaines-Ross, L. (1997) ‘Part III: Measuring and valuing reputations: Leveraging corporate equity’, Corporate Reputation Review, 1, 51–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gioia, D. A., Schultz, M. and Corley, K. G. (2000) ‘Organizational identity, image, and adaptive instability’, Academy of Management Review, 25, 63–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grinin, L. (2009) ‘People of celebrity’as a new social stratum and elite’, Hierarchy and Power in the History of Civilizations: Cultural Dimensions, URSS, Moscow.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grunig, J.E.R. (1992) Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers, Hillsdale.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grunig, J. E. and White, J. (1992) ‘The effect of worldviews on public relations theory and practice’, Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management, pp. 31–64.

  • Hatch, M. J. and Schultz, M. (2003) ‘Bringing the corporation into corporate branding’, European Journal of Marketing, 37, 1041–1064.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heath, R.L. (2006) ‘Onward into more fog: Thoughts on public relations’ research directions’, Journal of Public relations Research, 18 (2), 93–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heath, R.L., Toth, E. and Waymer, D. (2009) Public Relations II – Critical and Rhetorical Perspective, Routledge, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, P. W. and Cote, J. A. (1998) ‘Guidelines for selecting or modifying logos’, Journal of Marketing, 62 (2), 14–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, W. and Hallström, K.T. (2007) ‘Standardization, globalization and rationalities of government’, Organization, 14 (5), 685–704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joachimsthaler, E. and Aaker, D.A. (1996) ‘Building brands without mass media’, Harvard Business Review, 75 (1), 39–41, 36–44, 48–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawson-Borders, G. and Kirk, R. (2005) ‘Blogs in campaign communication’, American Behavioral Scientist, 49 (4), 548–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lees-Marshment, J. (2008) Political Marketing and British Political Parties, Manchester University Press, Manchester.

    Google Scholar 

  • L'Etang, J. (2006) Public Relations, Wiley Online Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, P. D. (1997) Celebrity and Power: Fame in Contemporary Culture, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazza, C. (1998) ‘The popularization of business knowledge: From academic knowledge to popular culture?’ in J.L. Alvarez (ed.), The Diffusion and Consumption of Business Knowledge, Palgrave Macmillan Press, London, pp. 164–181.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J.W. and Rowan, B. (1977) ‘Institutionalized organizations – formal-structure as myth and ceremony’, American Journal of Sociology, 83 (2), 340–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monaco, J. (1978) Celebrity: The Media as Image Makers, Dell Publishers, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noble, P. (1999) ‘Towards an inclusive evaluation methodology’, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 4 (1), 14–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pallas, J. and Fredriksson, M. (2014) ‘Institutional constraints for strategic communication’, in D. Holtzhausen and A. Zerfass (eds.), Handbook of Strategic Communication, Routledge, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pallas, J., Jonsson, S. and Strannegård, L. (2014) Organizations and the Media: Organizing in a Mediatized World, Routledge, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pallas, J. and Wedlin, L. (2013) ‘Governance of science in mediatized society: Media rankings and the translation of global governance models for universities’, in G.S. Drori, M.A. Höllerer and P. Walgenbach (eds.), Global Themes and Local Variations in Organization and Management: Perspectives on Glocalization, Routledge, New York, pp. 295–308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J. and Salancik, G.R. (1978) The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependency Perspective, Harper & Row Publishers, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollock, T.G. and Rindova, V.P. (2003) ‘Media legitimation effects in the market for initial public offerings’, Academy of Management Journal, 46 (5), 631–642.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Power, M. (1997) Audit Society: Rituals of Verification, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Power, M. (2007) Organized Uncertainty: Designing a World of Risk Management, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Power, M., Scheytt, T., Soin, K. and Sahlin, K. (2009) ‘Reputational risk as a logic of organizing in late modernity’, Organization Studies, 30 (3), 301–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rao, H. (1994) ‘The social construction of reputation: Certification contests, legitimation, and the survival of organizations in the American automobile industry: 1895–1912’, Strategic Management Journal, 15 (S1), 29–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rindova, V.P., Pollock, T.G. and Hayward, M.L. (2006) ‘Celebrity firms: The social construction of market popularity’, Academy of Management Review, 31 (1), 50–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rojek, C. (2001) Celebrity, Reaktion Books, New Jersey.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruef, M. and Scott, W. R. (1998) ‘A multidimensional model of organizational legitimacy: Hospital survival in changing institutional environments’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 43 (4), 877–904.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sahlin-Andersson, K. and Engwall, L. (eds.) (2002) The Expansion of Management Knowledge: Carriers, Flows, and Sources, Stanford University Press, Stanford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sauder, M. and Espeland, W.N. (2009) ‘The discipline of rankings: Tight coupling and organizational change’, American Sociological Review, 74 (1), 63–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, B. A. and Judge, T. A. (2009) ‘The popularity contest at work: Who wins, why, and what do they receive?’ Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, N. and Patterson, P.G. (1999) ‘The impact of communication effectiveness and service quality on relationship commitment in consumer, professional services’, Journal of Services Marketing, 13 (2), 151–170.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smidts, A., Pruyn, A.T.H. and Van Riel, C.B. (2001) ‘The impact of employee communication and perceived external prestige on organizational identification’, Academy of Management Journal, 44 (5), 1051–1062.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strathern, M. (1996) ‘Cutting the network’, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 2 (3), 517–535.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Suchman, M.C. (1995) ‘Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches’, Academy of Management Review, 20 (3), 571–610.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J.B. (2005) ‘The new visibility’, Theory, Culture & Society, 22 (6), 31–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, G. (2013) Understanding Celebrity, Sage, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Ruler, B., Vercic, A.T. and Vercic, D. (2008) Public Relations Metrics: Research and Evaluation, Routledge, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Washington, M. and Zajac, E.J. (2005) ‘Status evolution and competition: Theory and evidence’, Academy of Management Journal, 48 (2), 282–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wedlin, L. (2006) Ranking Business Schools: Forming Fields, Identities, and Boundaries in International Management Education, Edward Elgar Pub, Northhampton, MA.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. (1922/1978) Economy and Society, University of California Press, Berkeley.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, J. and Chernatony, L. D. (2002) ‘New labour: A study of the creation, development and demise of a political brand’, Journal of Political Marketing, 1 (2-3), 45–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Peter B. Gustavson School of Business, University of Victoria, Canada and Professor Roy Suddaby who provided them with support while finalizing the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Business Studies, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

    Josef Pallas

  2. Department of Informatics and Media, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

    Emma Svensson

Authors
  1. Josef Pallas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Emma Svensson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pallas, J., Svensson, E. Typical Tools for Assessment of Communicative Performance. Corp Reputation Rev 19, 47–58 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1057/crr.2015.25

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/crr.2015.25

Keywords

Search

Navigation