The  An Understanding of How Stakeholder Relationships May Affect the Reputation of a Corporation

This study aimed to examine the relationship between stakeholder relationships and a company's reputation in the field of public relations. Responses from industry stakeholders in public relations were analyzed using an interview-based qualitative research technique. There were a few particular aspects that were examined in terms of corporate reputation, such as stakeholder management, stakeholder communication, stakeholder power analysis, corporate reputation, mutual trust, and reputation and stakeholders. From the study, it was discovered that trust between the corporation and its stakeholders creates value and loyalty for better and stronger strategic decision-making.

Previous article

Next article

© 2022 Clement Lee Wei Siang. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Share and Cite

ACS Styles

APA Styles

Lee Wei Siang, C. (2022). The An Understanding of How Stakeholder Relationships May Affect the Reputation of a Corporation. Journal of Digital Marketing and Communication, 2(1), 20–24. https://doi.org/10.53623/jdmc.v2i1.71

MLA Styles

Find Other Styles

References

Neville, B.A.; Bell, S.J.; Mengüç, B. (2005). Corporate Reputation, Stakeholders and the Social Performance-Financial Performance Relationship. European Journal of Marketing, 39, 1194-1198. http://doi.org/10.1108/03090560510610798.

Capriotti, P. (2007). 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. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0007650307305724.

Jonker, J.; Foster, D. (2002). Stakeholder Excellence? Framing the Evolution and Complexity of a Stakeholder Perspective of the Firm. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 9, 187–195. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.23.

Grunig, J.E.; Grunig, L.A. (1992). Models of Public Relations and Communication. In Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management; Grunig, J.E.; Lawrence Erbalum Associate: New Jersey, USA; pp. 285–325.

Guðlaugsson, B.; Fazeli, R.; Gunnarsdóttir, I.; Davidsdottir, B.; Stefansson, G. (2020). Classification of Stakeholders of Sustainable Energy Development in Iceland: Utilizing a PowerInterest Matrix and Fuzzy Logic Theory. Energy for Sustainable Development, 57, 168–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2020.06.006.

Adeyinka-Ojo, S. (2021). Discussion Board Tool and Student Engagement in a Digital Learning Space. Journal of Digital Marketing and Communication, 1, 7-12. https://doi.org/10.53623/jdmc.v1i1.48.

Dickinson-Delaporte, S. (2010). Building corporate reputation with stakeholders: Exploring the role of message ambiguity for social marketers. European Journal of Marketing, 44, 1856-1874. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/03090561011079918.

Wern, R.W. (2021). The Relationship Between Stakeholders and Corporate Reputation in the Education Industry. Journal of Digital Marketing and Communication, 1, 13-18. https://doi.org/10.53623/jdmc.v1i1.43.

Adamu, A.A.; Mohamad, B.; Putri, K.Y.S. (2021). Predicting Communicative Behavior of Higher Institutions Employees during COVID-19 Pandemic: A Conceptual Assessment. Journal of Digital Marketing and Communication 1, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.53623/jdmc.v1i1.37.

How Your Employees Can Impact Your Reputation. (accessed on 1 March 2022) Available online: https://aisintl.com.au/employees-can-impact-reputation/.

Rokka, J.; Karlsson, K.; Tienari, J. (2014). Balancing acts: Managing employees and reputation in social media. Journal of Marketing Management, 30, 802:827. http://doi.org/10.1080/.U4h8bSgcqBg.

Article Metrics

For more information on the journal statistics, click here.

The following definitions may be helpful to you for understanding the variety of statistics tracked by this journal.

Page view: the landing page for an article, containing the title, author information, abstract, DOI, and links to any article full-text galleys. Also known as the “article page” or “landing page.” This page is normally used as the point of record for the article for DOIs or other hyperlinks: Crossref DOIs resolve to article abstract pages, as opposed to galley files, for example, as would most other indexing services.
Article view: within the statistics framework, any reference to an “article view” means a single unique view of the article abstract page by a visitor. This is not an aggregate count of all article and file downloads - it refers to abstract views only.
Article download: within the statistics framework, any reference to a “article download” means a single unique view or download of the a specific file by a visitor.
Multi-clicks: the process (accidental or nefarious) of increasing usage counts by clicking on an abstract page or download file multiple times in quick succession. We identify and remove these attempts from its usage metrics, as per the Project COUNTER Code of Practice.
Project COUNTER Code of Practice: a set of practices developed by COUNTER to establish a means to report on usage metrics for electronic resources in a consistent way. The Code provides rules on what should be counted as a view, including specific rules for robot usage and multi-click abuse. We filter metrics through these rules.
Robots, crawlers, bots: nonhuman site visitors who may still view and download article data. These are usually identified as such to the server, and we do not count them in its usage metrics, as per the Project COUNTER Code of Practice.

Article ID 71

Article Menu

Article Menu

Article Overview

Article Overview

Related Info Links

More by Authors Links

on DOAJ

on Google Scholar