https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/ccij.2012.16817aaa.

002/full/html

Corporate identity, image and reputation management: a further analysis

T.C. Melewar, Marko Sarstedt, Christine Hallier

Corporate Communications: An International Journal
ISSN: 1356-3289
Article publication date: 27 January 2012
DOWNLOADS
10371
 Corporate identity, image and reputation management: a further analysis
Citation
Melewar, T.C., Sarstedt, M. and Hallier, C. (2012), "Corporate identity, image and reputation
management: a further analysis", Corporate Communications: An International Journal, Vol. 17
No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1108/ccij.2012.16817aaa.002
Download as .RIS
Publisher
:
Emerald Group Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2012, Emerald Group Publishing Limited

Corporate identity, image and reputation management: a further analysis

Article Type: Introduction to special section From: Corporate Communications: An
International Journal, Volume 17, Issue 1

Individuals increase their control over the outcomes of an interaction by presenting information
about themselves selectively. Every day individuals create an identity by the way they dress,
their behaviour, and in the language they use. This phenomenon of self-presentation can also be
observed at a company level. However, companies’ social encounters are not directly observable
and are more complex than interactions on an individual level. A wide range of activities and
actors represent a company’s identity, which is understood by various groups of stakeholders.
Each group has different types of contacts, beliefs, feelings, knowledge, experiences and
impressions about a company, and so they form different images about it (Abratt, 1989;
Bernstein, 1984; Brown, 1998; Dowling, 1988; Gray, 1986; Spector, 1961; Topalian, 1984).

Corporate identity and image have been identified as constructs of growing importance,
evidenced by numerous studies proposing that they can lead to lasting company success.
Companies are creating identities in order to form a favourable image. Their persona is known as
corporate identity and has been studied by many scholars. There are a multitude of definitions,
dimensions and measurements for corporate identity (e.g. Van Riel and Balmer, 1997; Balmer
and Gray, 2000; Melewar and Saunders, 2000; Van Rekom and Van Riel, 2000; Melewar and
Jenkins, 2002; Melewar and Smith, 2003; Melewar and Akel, 2005; Balmer and Greyser, 2006),
as well as a breadth of studies about corporate image (e.g. Bristol, 1960; Spector, 1961; Cohen,
1967; Enis, 1967; Margulies, 1977; Grönroos, 1984; Dichter, 1985; Dowling, 1986; Van Riel,
1998; Christensen and Askegaard, 2001). Despite all these definitions and divergent views as to
what corporate identity or corporate image are, it is commonly agreed that “identity and image
are typically seen as opposite ends of the communication process” (Christensen and Askegaard,
2001, p. 296).

The construct of corporate identity originates from visual systems such as flags, ensigns and
emblems. Olins (1989) calls those visual systems the “traditions”. One of the first developments
of a corporate identity was observed in the early twentieth century. The German company AEG,
employed the architect Peter Behrens, to align the design of the turbine manufacturing shop in
Berlin with other design elements such as a letterhead, exhibits, equivalents and the like (Argenti
and Forman, 2002).

Even if the roots of corporate identity can be found in corporate design, today the definition of
corporate identity incorporates many other elements (Melewar and Karaosmanoglu, 2006).
Corporate identity is a broad term and has been defined as “a key element, which gives a
business identity its distinctiveness and relates to the attitudes and beliefs of those within the
organisation” (Balmer, 2001, p. 254). A product or a service is only one means among many to
disseminate the company’s “fingerprints” among its various environments. Thus, corporate
identity is a multidisciplinary construct with several elements. Melewar and Karaosmanoglu
(2006) have defined the following elements of corporate identity: corporate communication
(controlled, uncontrolled and indirect communication); corporate design (corporate visual
identity system (CVIS) and applications of CVIS); corporate culture (philosophy, values,
mission, principles, guidelines, history, founder of the company, country of origin, subculture);
behaviour (corporate behaviour, employee behaviour, management behaviour); corporate
structure (brand structure, organisational structure); industry identity and corporate strategy
(differentiation and positioning strategy).

Many authors have analysed the impact of various dimensions of corporate identity and image on
stakeholder-related constructs such as customer satisfaction, brand image, and intention to
purchase, whereas others have concentrated on the direct impact on business and marketing
performance measures (e.g. Schwaiger et al., 2010; Sarstedt et al., 2012). Corporate image
shapes customer behaviour (Boulding, 1956; Barich and Kotler, 1991; Cohen, 1967), has an
influence on buyer attitude towards a company’s sales person and product (Brown, 1998), and
impacts new product evaluation (Aaker and Keller, 1993). Furthermore, corporate image
provides a competitive advantage that cannot easily be imitated (Brown, 1998) and leads
individuals to buy a company’s product, to invest into the company, or to work for the company
(Balmer, 1995; Van Riel, 1995). In addition, corporate image increases security and maintains
the public’s trust (Gray, 1986). These noted strengths of corporate image underline how
important it is for a company to work on the various elements of its identity in order to create a
positive image.

The idea of corporate image is certainly not new. Research on corporate image can be traced
back to Gardner and Levy (1955), who introduced the concept of image. In addition Boulding’s
(1956) seminal work, in which he conceptualised corporate image, should also be mentioned.
Boulding suggests that rather than relying on reality, people rely on their perceived images (De
Chernatony et al., 2000). Companies have carried out institutional advertising for many years,
and in sophisticated public relations people have long stressed the significance of many kinds of
effort in building up a general reservoir of goodwill for a company. But the concept of a
corporate image has given much greater meaning to these endeavours. Against the backdrop of
brand images and product-area images, the corporate image offers something new, distinct, and
valuable. In a remarkably short space of time, the goals of advertising and marketing in the
consumer field have been broadened past the functional stages (Balmer and Greyser, 2003).

The two main characteristics of corporate image are the functional and the emotional (Kennedy,
1977; Martineau, 1958). Functional characteristics are tangible and can be easily measured,
while emotional characteristics are based on psychological dimensions, such as attitude or
feelings toward a company. Therefore, corporate image can be said to be an aggregation of
attributes, which have been evaluated by customers (Kennedy, 1977; Martineau, 1958).

As mentioned an image comprises a number of attributes and theorists use different points of
view to define the concept of corporate image. Cornelissen (2000, p.120) proposes that “an
image is a perception of a receiver of his or her received projection of the corporate identity and
own reflections of interpretations of various attributes from various sources”. Another definition,
suggested by Barich and Kotler (1991, p.95) states that: “We use the term ‘image’ to represent
the sum of beliefs, attitudes, and impressions that a person or group has of an object. The object
may be a company, product, brand, place, or person. The impressions may be true or false, real
or imagined”.

In conclusion, it can be said that a company has multiple audiences, each of which perceive a
company in their own way. Companies try to generate a positive corporate image for each of
those stakeholder groups. An image is composed of a number of attributes and theorists use
different points of view to define the concept of corporate image.

The following two empirical studies address the dimensions of those two important concepts:
corporate identity and corporate image. The first study discusses why corporate and regional
identity, as well as image, play an important role for stakeholder dialogue in higher education.
The second study investigates its effects on perceived corporate social responsibility (CSR).

The first study, addressing corporate identity formation in higher education, highlights the fact
that in today’s competitive markets of higher education, universities need to create distinct
profiles to strengthen their identity and thus reach a clear position in the market. The authors’
ideas are summed up by the claim that multidisciplinary universities need to highlight different
identities across the organisation in order to effectively listen and speak to different stakeholder
groups. The study presents attributes of universities’ identities that need to be addressed in order
to create clearly defined profiles.

In this first study identity has been explained through different research traditions.
Organisational behaviourists only discussed organisational identity and marketing researcher
corporate identity, whereas the authors stress both the differences and similarities of those
different views on identity and their relationships to corporate brand and corporate image.
The second study deals with an important concept, namely corporate social responsibility (CSR).
CSR is said to have an impact on corporate image and reputation (Schwaiger et al., 2010).
Today’s well-informed and mature customers ask for more than mere products and services.
They view a company as a persona that has to take responsibility for its behaviour and take care
of its social and environmental surroundings.

Companies have been quick to grasp the importance of CSR issues and respond to this trend in
many ways. Companies such as Body Shop have even built their core strategy around
environmental protection and project their responsible behaviour towards social and
environmental issues. In doing so, they hope to foster a positive image and gain a favourable
reputation. Various studies have shown that CSR contributes to a positive reputation.

Corporate social responsibility can be classified under company ethics, whereas company ethics
is a part of the field of applied ethics (Pieper, 2003). In 1953 Bowen published a paper in which
he coined the term corporate social responsibility. He posits that companies have the
responsibility to orientate their expectations, objectives and values to the ones of the society
(Bassen et al., 2005).

An often cited definition of CSR is from the World Business Council for Sustainable
Development, which reads as follows: “Corporate social responsibility is the commitment of
business to contribute to sustainable economic development, working with employees, their
families, the local community and society at large to improve their quality of life” (World
Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), 2000, p. 10). MacMillan (2004)
changed the term “corporate social responsibility” to only “corporate responsibility” with the
following rational: “The term corporate responsibility drops the word social so popular in
previous language development to reflect the emerging sense that responsibilities are integral to
corporate actions, decisions, behaviours and impacts […] CR implies responsibility in all the
activities of a business” (MacMillan, 2004, cited in Van Dijken, 2009, p. 142).

The second study discusses visual priming of pharmaceutical advertising disclosure, and its
effects on perceived corporate social responsibility. It has often been asked if consumers exposed
to a visual primed pharmaceutical advertising disclosure will notice the disclosure more than
consumers exposed to a pharmaceutical advertising disclosure without visual priming. The study
argues that visual priming in advertising may influence consumers’ perceptions to a company’s
social responsibility and increase their perceived trust about its advertising. To examine the
study’s hypothesis a one-way (visual priming versus no visual priming) quasi-experimental
design was used.

These two studies highlight the importance of different dimensions of corporate identity and how
they impact stakeholders’ perceptions of the companies. Despite the fact that there are many
studies addressing all kind of elements of corporate identity and corporate image, far more
studies are needed to explain the magnitude of all dimensions. According to Topalian (2003) “a
successful corporate identity is a ‘living’ identity: a tangible reality that is a true representation
of an organisation and its aspiration which ‘breathes’ and changes with that organisation over
time” (p. 1120). This statement underlines how important it is for scholars to undertake further
investigation into the different facets of corporate identity and corporate image so that companies
can strengthen their stakeholder dialogue.

T.C. MelewarBrunel Business School, Brunel University, London, UK

Marko SarstedtInstitute for Market-based Management, Ludwig-Maximilians-University,

Munich, Germany

Christine HallierSchool of Management and Law, Zurich University of Applied Sciences,

Switzerland
References
Aaker, D.A. and Keller, L.K. (1993), “Interpreting cross-cultural replications of brand
extensions”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 55–9

Abratt, R. (1989), “A new approach to the corporate image management process”, Journal of
Marketing Management, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 63–76

Argenti, P. and Forman, J. (2002), The Power of Corporate Communication, McGraw-Hill,

Maidenhead

Balmer, J.M.T. (1995), “Corporate branding and connoisseurship”, Journal of General

Management, Vol. 1, pp. 24–46

Balmer, J.M.T. (2001), “Corporate identity, corporate branding and corporate marketing: seeing
through the fog”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35 Nos 3/5, pp. 248–91

Balmer, J.M.T. and Gray, E.R. (2000), “Corporate identity and corporate communication:
creating a competitive advantage”, Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol. 32 No. 7, pp. 256–
61

Balmer, J.M.T. and Greyser, S.A. (2003), Revealing the Corporation: Perspectives on Identity,
Image, Reputation and Corporate Branding, and Corporate-Level Marketing, Routledge, New
York, NY

Balmer, J.M.T. and Greyser, S.A. (2006), “Corporate marketing: integrating corporate identity,
corporate branding, corporate communications, corporate image and corporate
reputation”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 40 Nos 7/8, pp. 730–41

Barich, H. and Kotler, P. (1991), “A framework for marketing image management”, Sloan
Management Review, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 94–104

Bassen, A., Jastram, S. and Meyer, K. (2005), “Corporate social responsibility. Eine
Begriffserläuterung”, ZFWU, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 231–6

Bernstein, D. (1984), Corporate Image and Reality: A Critique of Corporate Communications,

Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Austin, TX
Boulding, K.E. (1956), The Image: Knowledge in Life and Society, University of Michigan
Press, Ann Arbor, MI

Bristol, L.H. (1960), Developing the Corporate Image: A Management Guide to Public
Relations, Scribner, New York, NY

Brown, T.J. (1998), “Corporate associations in marketing: antecedents and

consequences”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 215–33

Christensen, L.T. and Askegaard, S. (2001), “Corporate identity and corporate image revisited: a
semiotic perspective”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 35 Nos 3/4, pp. 292–315

Cohen, L. (1967), “The differentiation ratio in corporate image research”, Journal of Advertising
Research, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 32–6

Cornelissen, J. (2000), “Corporate image: an audience centred model”, Corporate

Communications, Vol. 5 No. 2, pp. 119–25

De Chernatony, L., Harris, F. and Dall’Olmo Riley, F. (2000), “Added value: its nature, roles
and sustainability”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 34 Nos 1/2, pp. 39–56

Dichter, E. (1985), “What’s in an image”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 2, Winter, pp.
75–81

Dowling, G.R. (1986), “Managing your corporate image”, Industrial Marketing Management,
Vol. 15 No. 2, May

Dowling, G.R. (1988), “Measuring corporate images: a review of alternative

approaches”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 27–34

Enis, B.M. (1967), “An analytical approach to the concept of image”, California Management
Review, Vol. 9, Summer, pp. 51–8

Gardner, B.B. and Levy, S.J. (1955), “The product and the brand”, Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 33, April, pp. 33–9

Gray, J. (1986), Managing the Corporate Image, Quorum Books, London

Grönroos, C. (1984), “A service quality model and its marketing implications”, European Journal
of Marketing, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 36–44

Kennedy, S.H. (1977), “Nurturing corporate images - total communications or ego

trip?”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 120–64

MacMillan, A. (2004), “Goodwill and the third place – business or society?”, Journal of General
Management, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 99–112
Margulies, W.P. (1977), “Make the most of your corporate identity”, Harvard Business Review,
Vol. 55, July-August, pp. 66–74

Martineau, P. (1958), “Sharper focus for the corporate image”, Harvard Business Review, Vol.
36 No. 6, pp. 49–58

Melewar, T.C. and Akel, S. (2005), “The role of corporate identity in the higher education
sector”, Corporate Communications, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 41–57

Melewar, T.C. and Jenkins, E. (2002), “Defining the corporate identity construct”, Corporate
Reputation Review, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 76–90

Melewar, T.C. and Karaosmanoglu, E. (2006), “Seven dimensions of corporate

identity”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 40 Nos 7/8, pp. 846–69

Melewar, T.C. and Saunders, J. (2000), “Global corporate visual identity systems: using an
extended marketing mix”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 34 Nos 5/6, pp. 538–45

Melewar, T.C. and Smith, N. (2003), “The internet revolution: some global marketing
implications”, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 363–9

Olins, W. (1989), Corporate Identity: Making Business Strategy Visible through Design, Thames
and Hudson, London

Pieper, A. (2003), Einführung in die Ethik, 5th ed. , A. Franke, Tübingen

Sarstedt, M., Wilczynski, P. and Melewar, T.C. (2012), “A comparison of selected reputation
measures’ convergent and criterion validities”, Journal of World Business, (forthcoming)

Schwaiger, M., Sarstedt, M. and Taylor, C.R. (2010), “Art for the sake of the corporation: Audi,
BMW Group, DaimlerChrysler, Montblanc, Siemens, and Volkswagen help explore the effect of
sponsorship on corporate reputations”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 77–
90

Spector, A.J. (1961), “Basic dimensions of the corporate image”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 25
No. 6, pp. 47–51

Topalian, A. (1984), “Corporate identity: beyond the visual overstatements”, International

Journal of Advertising, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 55–62

Topalian, A. (2003), “Experienced reality: the development of corporate identity in the digital
era”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 37 Nos 7/8, pp. 1119–32

Van Dijken, F. (2009), “Corporate social responsibility: market regulation and the
evidence”, Managerial Law, Vol. 49 No. 4, p. 141
Van Rekom, J. and Van Riel, C.B.M. (2000), “Operational measures of organizational identity: a
review of existing methods”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 3 No. 4, pp. 334–50

Van Riel, C.B.M. (1995), Principles of Corporate Communications, Prentice Hall, London

Van Riel, C.B.M. (1998), “Measuring corporate images”, Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 1
No. 4, pp. 313–26

Van Riel, C.B.M. and Balmer, J.M.T. (1997), “Corporate identity: the concept, its measurement
and management”, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 31 Nos 5/6, pp. 340–9

World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) (2000), “Corporate social
responsibility. Making good business sense”, available
at: www.wbcsd.ch/DocRoot/lunSPdIKvmYH5HjbN4XC/csr2000.pdf (accessed 14 July 2005)