ปัจจัยที่มีอิทธิพลต่อชื่อเสียงองค์กรและการจัดการชื่อเสียงองค์กรธุรกิจในประเทศไทย

Main Article Content

กฤชณัท แสนทวี
รุ่งนภา พิตรปรีชา

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to examine corporate reputation management in Thailand and to develop and test the relationship of the measurement model of the result model of corporate reputation. In the first part, the qualitative research was conducted using the in-depth interview with 5 public relation executives from 5 prototype companies, who are the keys informant selected via the methods of purposive sampling. According to the study, it was found that all of the companies have the trend in corporate reputation management, with symmetric public relations, corporate identity and corporate image, issue and crisis management and corporate social responsibility, while considering the level of importance of the company’s stakeholders. Additionally, the findings revealed that the important factor influencing corporate reputation management in Thailand was the Monarchy Loyalty. In the second part, the qualitative research was conducted to develop and test the relationship of the measurement model and the result model of corporate reputation. The sample consisted 927 respondents. 327 respondents are employees and 600 are customers. In the casual model of corporate reputation in mix group, the two way symmetrical communication best describes corporate reputation at 87 percent. On the other hand, the result model or corporate reputation capital, the Strategy describes corporate reputation at most. However, the findings from testing for invariance of the casual model across the employees and customers revealed that not all coefficients are equivalent across the two groups. The employees are more concerned with corporate reputation and corporate reputation capital than customers.

Article Details

Section
Articles
Author Biographies

กฤชณัท แสนทวี

กฤชณัท แสนทวี (นศ.ด. นิเทศศาสตร์, จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย, 2555) ปัจจุบันเป็นอาจารย์ประจำวิทยาลัยนวัตกรรมสื่อสารสังคม มหาวิทยาลัยศรีนครินวิโรฒ ประสานมิตร

รุ่งนภา พิตรปรีชา, คณะนิเทศศาสตร์ จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย

รุ่งนภา พิตรปรีชา (M.A., Fairfield University, USA., 1982) ปัจจุบันดำรงตำแหน่งหัวหน้าภาควิชาการประชาสัมพันธ์ และรองศาสตราจารย์ประจำสาขาวิชาการประชาสัมพันธ์ คณะนิเทศศาสตร์ จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย

References

ภาษาไทย
สมาคมส่งเสริมสถาบันกรรมการบริษัทไทย. (2002). การกำกับดูแลกิจการที่ดีหัวใจสำคัญในการระดมทุน. กรุงเทพมหานคร.

ภาษาอังกฤษ
Barnett, L., Jermier, M. & Lafferty, A. (2006). Corporate reputation: The definitional landscape. University of South Florida. USA.
Barton, L. (2001). Crisis in organization. 2nd edn. College Divisions South-Western, Cincintati, OH.
Bryson, M. (2004). What to do when stakeholder matter: Stakeholder identification analysis technique. Public Management Review. Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 21-53.
Coomb, T. (2004). Protecting organization reputations during a crisis: The development and application of situational crisis communication theory. Corporate Reputation Review. Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 163-176.
Coomb, T. & Holladay, J. (2005). Exploratory study of stakeholder emotion: Affect and Crisis. Research on emotion in Organizations. Elsevier: New York.
Daslsrud, A. (2006). How corporate social responsibility is define: An analysis of 37 definitions. John Wiley InterScience.
Davis, D. (2007). Corporate reputation management. The Wal-Mart Way: Exploring Effective Strategies in the Global Market Place. Office of Honors Programs & Academic Scholarships Texas A&M University.
Davies, G., Chun, R., Da Silva, V., & S. Roper. (2003). Corporate reputation and competitiveness. Routledge: London and New York.
Dowling, R. (2001). Create corporate reputation: Identity, image and performance. Oxford University Press. New York.
Dowling, R. (1994). Corporate reputation. Longman Professional Publishing: Melbourne.
Fombrun, C. J. & van Riel, Cees B. M. (2004). Fame and fortune: How successful companies build winning reputation. New Jersey: Pearson Education.
Griffin, J., Neuwirth, K., Dunwoody, S. & Giese, J. (2004). Information sufficiency and Risk communication. Media Psychology, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 23-61
Grunig, E. (1989). Symmetrical presuppositions as a framework of public relations theory, Cites In Botan, H. & Hazelzon, V. Lawrence Erlbaum Assiciates.
Hillenbrand. C., & Money, K. (2007). Corporate responsibility and corporate reputation: two separate concepts or two sides of the same coin. Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 10, No. 4. pp. 261-277.
Kakabadse, N., Rozuel, O., & Lee-Davies, L. (2005). Corporate social responsibility and stakeholder approach: a conceptual review. Business Governance and Ethics. Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 277-302.
Morley, M. (1998). How to manage your global reputation. Macmillian, Basingstoke, UK.
Radulescu, C. (2009). From image to reputation: The importance of ethics in public relations activities. The Faculty of Business and Administration, University of Bucharest.
Rayner, J. (2003). Managing reputation risk: curbing threats, leveraging opportunities. The institute of Internal Auditors. UK and Ireland.
Silberhorn, D. & Warren, R. (2007). Definition corporate social responsibility: A view from big companies in Germany and the UK. European Business Review. Vol. 19, No. 5, pp. 352-372.
Siltaoja, M. (2000s). Linking corporate reputation with social responsibility. School of Business and Economics, University of Jyvaskyla, Finland.
Smaizien, I. & OrZekauskas, P. (2006). Corporate image audit. Vaduba / Management, Vol. 1, No.10, Nr.
Unerman, J. (2008). Strategic reputation risk management and corporate social responsibility reporting. Accounting Auditing & Accountability Journal, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 362-364.
Weiner, D. (2006). Crisis communications: Managing corporate reputation in the court of public opinion. Ivey Business Journal Online. www.iveybusinessjournal.com
Wilcox. L., Ault, H. & Agee, K. (1995). Public relations strategies and tactics. Harper Collins College Publishers. New York.