Reputation Management for Scientific Organisations — Framework Development and Exemplification

Open access


Reputation Management deals with establishing, maintaining and strengthening a positive reputation for an object in order to build trust, commitment and lasting relationships. Positive reputation is considered a major intangible asset of companies as it contributes to their value creation. Reputation and reputation management, therefore, are well-established perspectives in marketing theory. This paper examines reputation in matters of scientific organisations. Drawing on conventional (commercial marketing) models of reputation management and derived characteristics of scientific organisations, a modified framework is deduced, named the Scientific Organisations Reputation Model (SORM). As this model widely fits the specific requirements of this type of organisation it will be useful for the complex task of marketing scientific organisations. Using the SORM framework, scientific organisations will be able to understand the formation of their own reputation in a more comprehensive way and will be able to improve their reputation-relevant management processes. The framework is exemplified and examined more closely using the case of DHBW, the unique German cooperate state university as the interplay of stakeholder patterns and the integration of multi-level marketing activities are carved out and main effects on reputation are demonstrated.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Alessandri S.W.; Yang S.-U.; Kinsey D.F. (2006). An Integrative Approach to University Visual Identity and Reputation. Corporate Reputation Review 9(4) 258-270.

  • 2. Balmer J.M.T. (1997). Corporate identity: what of it why the confusion and what’s next? Corporate Reputation Review 1(1/2) 183-188.

  • 3. Barnett M. L.; Jermier J.M.; Lafferty B.A. (2006) Corporate reputation: the definitional landscape Corporate Reputation Review 9(1) 26-38.

  • 4 Bromley D.B. (1993). Reputation Image and Impression Management. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.

  • 5. Brown B.; Perry S. (1994). Removing the financial performance halo from Fortune´s ´most admired´ companies Academy of Management Journal 37(5) 1347-1360.

  • 6. Calas M.; Smircich L. (1999). Past postmodernism? Reflections and tentative directions. Academy of Management Review 24(4) 649-671.

  • 7. Callon M. (1991). Techno-economic networks and irreversibility? In: Law. J. (Ed.). A Sociology of Monsters? (132-161) London: Routledge.

  • 8. Chen C.-C.; Otubanjo O. (2013). A functional perspective to the meaning of corporate reputation. The Marketing Review 13(4) 329-345.

  • 9. Chun R. (2005). Corporate reputation: Meaning and measurement. International Journal of Management Reviews 7(2) 91-109.

  • 10. Courtney J.; Croasdell D.; Paradice D. (1998). Inquiring Organisations. Australasian Journal of Information Systems 6(1) 3-14.

  • 11. Davies G.; Chun R.; da Silva R.; Roper S. (2002). Corporate reputation and competiveness. London: Routledge.

  • 12. Deephouse D.L. (2000). Media reputation as a strategic resource Journal of Management 26(6) 1091-1112.

  • 13. Devine I.; Halpern P. (2001). Implicit Claims: the Role of Corporate Reputation in Value Creation. Corporate Reputation Review 4(1) 42-49.

  • 14. Dowling G.; Moran P. (2012). Corporate Reputations: Built In or Bolted On? California Management Review 54(2) 25-42.

  • 15. Duton J.E.; Dukerich J.M. (1991). Keeping an eye on the mirror: image and identity in organizational adaptation. Academy of Management Journal 34(3) 517-554.

  • 16. Eichhorn P. (1991). Konstitutive Merkmale von Non Profit Unternehmen. In: D. Witt et al. (red.). Non-Profit-Unternehmen im Aufwind? (45-52). Wiesbaden: Deutscher Universitätsverlag.

  • 17. Erhardt D. (2011). Hochschulen im strategischen Wettbewerb - Empirische Analyse der horizontalen Differenzierung deutscher Hochschulen. Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag.

  • 18. Finholt T.A. (2003). Collaboratories as a new form of scientific organization Economics of Innovation and New Technology 12(1) 5-25.

  • 19. Fombrun C.J. (1996). Reputation: Realizing Value from the Corporate Image. Cambridge MA: Harvard Business School Press.

  • 20. Fombrun C.J.; van Riel C.B. (2003). Reputation und Unternehmensergebnis - zentrale Resultate einer empirischen Studie. In: Wiedmann K.-P.: Heckemüller C. (ed.). Ganzheitliches Corporate Finance Management (pp. 291-298). Wiesbaden: Gabler.

  • 21. Fombrun C.J.; Shanley M. (1990). What’s in a name? Reputation building and corporate strategy. Academy of Management Journal 33(2) pp. 233-258.

  • 22. Fombrun C.; Wiedmann K.P. (2001). Reputation quotient (RQ). Analyse und Gestaltung der Unternehmensreputation auf der Basis fundierter Erkenntnisse. Hannover: Schriftenreihe Marketing Management.

  • 23. Formbrun C.; Gardberg N.A.; Sever J.W. (2000). The Reputation Quotient: A multi-stakeholder measure of corporate reputation. The Journal of Brand Management 7(4) pp. 241-255.

  • 24. Freeman R.E. (1984). Strategic Management. A Stakeholder Approach. Boston: Pitman.

  • 25. Fryxell G.F.; Wang J. (1994). The Fortune corporate reputation index: Reputation for what? Journal of Management 20(1) 1-14.

  • 26. Gibbons M.; Limoges C.; Nowotny H.; Schwartzmann S.; Scott P.; Trow M. (1994). The New Production of Knowledge. The dynamic of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.

  • 27. Gibson D.; Gonzales J.L.; Castanon J. (2006). The importance of reputation and the role of public relations. Public Relations Quarterly 51(3) 15-18.

  • 27. Gotsi M.; Wilson A.M. (2001). Corporate reputation: Seeking a definition. Corporate Communications 6(1) 24-30.

  • 28. Gray E.R. (1986). Managing the Corporate Image. Westport: Quorum.

  • 29. Gray E.R.; Balmer J.M.R. (1998). Managing corporate image and corporate reputation Long Range Planning 31(5) 695-702.

  • 30. Grochla E. (1972). Unternehmensorganisation Neue Ansätze und Konzeptionen. Reinbek: Rowohlt Verlag.

  • 31. Grunig J.E.; Hung C.F. (2002). The effect of relationships on reputation and reputation on relationships: A cognitive behavioural study. Paper presented at the PRSA Educator’s Academy 5th Annual International Interdisciplinary Public Relations Research Conference. Miami.

  • 32. Gutenberg A. (1983). Grundlagen der Betriebswirtschaftslehre Band 1: Die Produktion. 24. Ed. Berlin: Springer.

  • 33. Hoyle E. (1982). Micropolitics of Educational Organisations Educational Management and Administration 10 87-98.

  • 34. Institute of Directors (IOD) (1999). Reputation Management: Strategies for Protecting Companies their Brands and their Directors. London: Directors Publications.

  • 35. Kehm B. (2012). Hochschulen als besondere und unvollständige Organisation? Neue Theorien zur „Organisation Hochschule”. In: U. Wilkesmann C.J. Schmid (Ed.) (2012). Hochschule als Organisation (17-25). Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag.

  • 36. Kieser A.; Kubicek H. Organisationstheorien I + II. Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel-Verlag.

  • 37. Kieser A.; Walgenbach P. (2010). Organisation. 6. Ed. Stuttgart: Schäffer Poeschel-Verlag.

  • 38. Kosiol E. (1962). Organisation der Unternehmung. Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag.

  • 39. Kotler P.; Fox K.F. (1985). Strategic marketing for educational institutions. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.

  • 40. Latour B. (1987). Science in action. Harvard: Harvard University Press.

  • 41. Law J. (1992). Notes on the theory of the actor-network: ordering strategy and heterogeneity. Systems Practice 54 379-393.

  • 42. Luhmann N. (1987). Soziale Systeme. Grundriß einer allgemeinen Theorie. 1. Ed. Frankfurt/M: Suhrkamp.

  • 43. Mayntz R. (1963). Soziologie der Organisation. Reinbek: Rowohlt Verlag.

  • 44. Middleton S.; Hanson D. (2003). Corporate Reputation and Scientific Reputation: The Mysterious Case of Girad and Agassiz. Corporate Reputation Review 6(2) 147-160.

  • 45. Müller-Jentsch W. (2003). Organisationssoziologie. Frankfurt: Campus-Verlag.

  • 46. Musselin C. (2006). Are Universities Specific Organisations? In: Krücken G.; Kosmützky A. Torka M. (Ed.) Towards a Multiversity. Universities between Global Trends and National Traditions (pp. 63-84) Bielefeld: Transcript Publishers.

  • 47. Musselin C. (2006). Are Universities specific organisations?. In: G. Krücken A. Kosmützky M. Torka (Eds.). Towards a Multiversity? Universities between Globoal Trends and national Traditions (63-84). Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag.

  • 48. Nickel S. (2012). Engere Kopplung von Wissenschaft und Verwaltung und ihre Folgen für die Ausübung professioneller Rollen in Hochschulen (279-292). In: U. Wilkesmann C.J. Schmid. (2012). Hochschule als Organisation. Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag.

  • 49. Rao H. (1994). The social construction of reputation: Certification contests legitimation and the survival of organizations in the American automobile industry. Strategic Management Journal 15 29-44.

  • 50. Redler J. (2013). Grundzüge des Marketings [Fundamentals of Marketing]. Berlin: BWV.

  • 51. Ressler J.; Abratt R. (2009). Assessing the impact of university reputation on stakeholder intentions. Journal of General Management 35(1) 35-45.

  • 52. Schimank U. (2000). Handeln und Strukturen. Einführung in die akteurstheoretische Soziologie. 2. Ed. Weinheim: Juventa.

  • 53. Schimank U. (2001). Organisationsgesellschaft. In: G. Kneer A. Nassehi M. Schroer (Ed.). Klassische Gesellschaftsbegriffe der Soziologie (278-307). München: UTB.

  • 54. Schimank U. (2002). Organisationen: Akteurskonstellationen - korporative Akteure - Sozialsysteme. In: J. Allmendinger; T. Hinz (red.). Organisationssoziologie. Sonderheft 42 der Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie (29-54). Wiesbaden: WV.

  • 55. Schimank U. (2003). Handeln in Institutionen und handelnde Institutionen (293-307). In: F. Jaeger; F. J. Straub (red.). Handbuch der Kulturwissenschaften. Bd. 2. Stuttgart: Metzler.

  • 56. Schimank U. (2007). Organisationstheorien (200-211). In: A. Benz U. Schimank U. S. Lütz (Ed.): Handbuch Governance. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.

  • 57. Schreyögg G. (2008). Organisation. Grundlagen moderner Organisationsgestaltung. 5. Ed. Wiesbaden: Gabler Verlag.

  • 58. Schultz M.; Mouritsen J.; Gabrielsen G. (2001). Sticky reputation: analyzing a ranking system. Corporate Reputation Review 4(1) 24-41.

  • 59. Smith E. R. (1998). Mental representation and memory (391). In: D. Gilbert; S. Fiske; G. Lindzey (Ed.). The handbook of social psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • 60. Sojkin B. (2015). Determinant factors of the marketing activity of scientific and research institutions MINIB Marketing of Science and Research Organizations 15(1) 19-32 online on:

  • 61. Terblance N.S. (2009). Customer experiences interactions relationships and corporate reputation: a conceptual approach. Journal of General Management 35(1) 5-17.

  • 62. Theus K.T. (1993). Academic reputations: The process of formation and decay. Public Relations Review 19(3) 277-291.

  • 63. Vahs D. (2012). Organisation. 8. Ed. Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel-Verlag.

  • 64. Walker K. (2010). A systematic Review of the Corporate Reputation Literature: Definition Measurement and Theory. Corporate Reputation Review 12(4) 357-387.

  • 65. Walsh G.; Mitchell V.-W.; Jackson P.R.; Beatty S.E. (2008). Examining the Antecedents and Consequences of Corporate Reputation: A Customer Perspective. British Academy of Management 20 187-203.

  • 66. Walsh G.; Wiedmann K.-P. (2004). A Conceptualization of Corporate Reputation in Germany: An Evaluation and Extension of the RQ. Corporate Reputation Review 6(4) 304-312.

  • 67. Wiedmann K.-P. (2014). Erkenntnisse des Reputationmanagement als Basis für ein Controlling des Corporate Brand Management nutzen. In: F.-R. Esch; T. Tomczak; J. Kernstock; T. Langner; J. Redler (Eds.). Corporate Brand Management. Wiesbaden: Springer-Gabler 607-629.

  • 68. Wiedmann K.-P.; Prauschke C. (2005). The Relationship between Corporate Reputation and Intangible Assets. Hannover: Schriftenreihe Marketing Management.

  • 69. Yang S.-U.; Grunig J.E. (2005). Decomposing organisational reputation: The effects of organisation-public relationship outcomes on cognitive representations of organisations and evaluations of organisational performance. Journal of Communication Management 9(4) 305-325.

  • 70. Zechlin L. (2012). Zwischen Interessenorganisation und Arbeitsorganisation? Wissenschaftsfreiheit Hierarchie und Partizipation in der „unternehmerischen Hochschule” (41-60). In: U. Wilkesmann; C.J. Schmid (red.) (2012). Hochschule als Organisation. Wiesbaden: VS-Verlag.

Journal information
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 218 87 4
PDF Downloads 105 40 3