“LeveragingOrganizational Innovation for Strategic Reputation Management” was published in volume 12 of the Corporate Reputation Review. This is a theory testing article that offers a “genre based, rhetorical model of corporate reputation management (Courtright 251).”
The
articles rhetorical model of corporate reputation management (see below) utilizes
components of the ‘adoptive curve.’
 |
| Genre Based: rhetorical model of corporate reputation management |
The
article points out that one of the major issues with innovation and the measure
of innovation, is that not everyone defines it the same. Corporations,
government, and the public define and measure innovation differently.
With
multiple views (organizational and market) and multiples ways to communicate
innovation, this article seeks out to analyze the top five companies rated (from
the Reputation Institute) in innovation and the five lowest ranked companies.
The analysis focused on three ways to communicate: websites, annual reports,
and new releases.
“How the communication of organizational innovation is
framed is important to that innovation’s success. Rogers’ 2003 work emphasizes
the importance of organizations presenting innovations to influence audiences.
He advanced the idea of the ‘adoption curve’ (Courtright 247).”
The
article discusses how new releases, annual reports, and website content help
create a reputation for the company, and how the reputation affects the view of
the companies ‘innovativeness.’ ie a business with an out of date website does
not give the impression of a highly innovative company.
News Releases
News
releases are direct reflections of how the company’s want to be portrayed. They
are able to present the company the way they would like, and only release
information they believe will portray the company in a good light. After
reviewing 1,029 new releases from the ten companies they were able to see a
common form. They were also able to recognize four functions that were acquired
when the company was able to be the speaker.
·
Language intensity
o
Top performers dramatize
their actions, while lower performers list awards won
·
Image and
reputation building
o
Top performers utilizes
quotes from outside the company, while lower performers rely on quotes from
inside the company
·
Announcing what
the organization is doing
o
All feature
innovations in the heading
·
What the
organization does
o
Top performers play up what good the company is doing,
while lower performers are often late at announcing
Annual Reports
Annual
reports reflect the company’s ethics and values. The letter to the shareholders
is a direct reflection of the company. Some differences in top and lower
innovative performers are:
·
Top performers showcased
their innovativeness in featured content, while the lower companies featured
less innovative content
·
Top performers included
visually appealing (graphics and pictures), while some lower companies
presented information in black and white with low visual appeal.
·
Top performers
again utilized language intensity
Websites
The
article did not include how the website was designed, but rather the content of
the website.
·
All websites had
animations and links
·
Top performers utilized
things like highlighting links, while the lower performers did not
·
Top performers provided
links that provided information on the companies cultures while the lower performers
did not provide such information
The
article concludes that factors such as the above have an effect on the
reputation of the company’s innovativeness.
Works Cited
Courtright,
Jeffrey L, and Peter M Smudde. "Leveraging Organizational Innovation For
Strategic Reputation Management." Corporate Reputation Review 12.3
(2009): 245-269. Business Source Complete. Web. 24 June 2012.
No comments:
Post a Comment