Samenvatting
Topic: Organisations in the media - EXAM SUMMARY Grade 9.2
The summary consists of ALL the required readings for this topic. By studying only from these notes I received a grad of 9.2 for the exam.
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 3 van de 29 pagina's
Voorbeeld 3 van de 29 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
1 beoordeling
Door: jungwonlee • 1 jaar geleden
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
TOPIC EXAMLecture 1: Organisations and Corporate Reputation
• Understanding the functioning or organisations helps us
• To understand their behaviour
• To improve their strategic communication and media relations
• To understand and improve their interaction with stakeholders and society at large
• An organisation is
• A group of people working together to reach a goal
• By using their environment
• They accomplish tasks and use technologies
• They encounter uncertainties
• They need leadership: leaders develop strategies that help to reach goals
• An organisation is
• Structures and processes help with coordinating these tasks
• Structures: are relatively stable, observable distributions of work and responsibilities across the
divisions of an organisation
• Processes are the less directly observable dynamic activities
• Incentives make (groups of) individuals work within these structures and processes
Differences between organisations
• Contingency theory: Organisations differ from each other because they have to adapt to different
circumstances
- Internal: tasks, size, and strategic decisions
- External: technological, legal, economical, political, demographical, ecological, and cultural
developments
- … including the media landscape
• Other differences: goal, ownership, financing, size etc.
Why are media relevant to organisations?
• The organisation’s environments influences the organisation
• Media are an autonomous aspect of this environment as well as an intermediate between other parts of
the environment and the organisation
Media in the organisational environment
• Media report in a critical, neutral or favourable way
• They (thus) inform stakeholder such as citizens/clients, competitors, the political realm, investors etc.
• They also can lead to organisation anticipation: the possibility of coverage is taken into account for
decision making (the org anticipates/thinks about media coverage during decision making)
Reputation
• The public constructs a reputation based on direct experiences and information on organisations and their
competitors (Gotsi & Wilson, 2001)
- Sum of attributes
Consequences of a favourable reputation (Fombrun & Shanley, 1990)
• Influence the organisations survival
• Organisational stability
• Possibility to increase product prices
• More profit
• Lower organisational costs
• Loyal employees
• Attracting applicants
• Attracting investors and clients
• Satisfied clients/citizens/stakeholders
Reputation and media
• Stakeholders construct reputation on the basis of information
• Media are important to organisations as they can help to interact with stakeholders
• “We found that stakeholders depend more on the news media to learn about reputation dimensions that
are difficult to directly experience or observe and for which the news media are the main source of
information (Einwiller, Korn & Carroll, 2010)
The effects of media visibility and tone of coverage
• Rooted in agenda-setting theory
Public versus private organisations
, Public Private
Ownership Government (citizens) Entrepreneurs/shareholders
Financing (Predominantly) taxes Customers/clients
Primary source of control Politics Market
Why is this difference relevant?
• No sharp difference between ‘public’ and ‘private’: many mixed or in-between organisations exist and the
exact definition of differences is complex
• ‘Publicness’ and ‘privateness’ influence media coverage, reputation, and the possibilities for external
communication and media relations
• Organisations can learn from each other’s communicative successes and failures
Reputation in the public sector
• Measurement is often designed for companies -> difficult to apply in the public sector
• “The thinking is that good deeds should speak for themselves” (Luoma-aho, 2007)
• “Force of law”: you cannot choose for the competitor
• Growing importance of reputation: more managerial ways of working and political pressure lead to higher
importance of a ‘good reputation’
• A good reputation protects organisations in times of budget cuts
• “Consistent public policies and neutral, trustworthy behaviour create a reserve of consistent behaviour
that adds to a reputation of trustworthiness” (Luoma-aho, 2008)
Article 1: Jonkman et al (2019): Buffering Negative News: Individual-level Effects of Company
Visibility, Tone and Pre-existing Attitudes on Corporate Reputation
1. What is corporate reputation?
- The way in which members of the public, or specific organisational stakeholders, evaluate a firm
2. How are media visibility and reputation related, according to the findings of this article?
- Mere visibility refers to first level agenda setting (something more prominent on media agenda will be
more prominent on public agenda)
- Mere exposure to corporations negatively affects reputation
3. How are the tone of news coverage and reputation related, according to the findings of this article?
- Second level agenda relates to the notion that the salience of object attributes in company news (such as
tone) leads to the salience of those attributes in the public agenda (can influence attitudes)
- Tone has a positive effect on reputation
- The effect of negative news is three times larger than the effect of positive news
- However the results also show that mere visibility of a copout actor may also assert a direct effect on
attitudes toward that object (blurring between first and second level agenda setting)
- The tone of company news is structurally skewed towards the negative; more negative news in general
- Provides explanation of why visibility and tone are strongly correlated; exposure to more company news
in most cases means exposure to more negative company news
4. How does pre-existing reputation affect the effect of the tone of news coverage on corporate reputation?
- A positive prior reputation may function as a buffer against future negative news coverage
- The negative effects of news coverage on reputation are less powerful for corporations with better prior
reputations
- Corporations with good reputations are arguably more likely to attract positive coverage, whereas firms
with bad reputations tend to receive more negative coverage
- Reputational spiral effect: firms with good reputations benefit from good coverage, whereas coverage is
mainly disadvantageous for companies of poor repute
Article 2: Etter, Ravasi & Colleoni (2019): Social Media and The Formation Of Organisational
Reputation
1. Explain figure 1 in your own words
Current assumptions about media reputation and its influence on collective judgments
- Top down communications: the gatekeeping role and influence of news media
, - Conceptualise the dissemination of media evaluations as a top down process enacted through a
broadcasting mode of diffusion (one to many) whereby few media outlets spread evaluations about
organisation among a broad audience
- Assumption consistent with idea that news media enjoy exclusive formal and informal access to elite
sources
- People look at journalists as authorities sources with superiority in evaluating firms
- Relative homogeneity of sources, content and style of news media evaluations
- News organisations reinforce the uniformity and consistency of publicly available evaluations of
organisations
- Justifies the treatment of media reputation as a monolithic entity with strong influence on collective
judgments; media with privilege to diffuse converging evaluations -> shape judgments
- Makes sense when we consider the isomorphic pressures, professional routines, informal and formal
control mechanisms that characterise the field of new production -> lead to fairly inform content and
style evaluation disseminated by the media (journalists genre)
- Influence of Organisations Over the Media
- Content the news disseminate draws heavily in corporate communications
- They fear to disseminate negative evaluations of organisation because they don’t want to loose access
to information, worry of legal actions, and economic dependence on them
- News media might produce negative content but only if the events are already in the public domain and
usually offer organisations a voice to explain themselves
2. Explain figure 2 in your own words
3. How does the rise of social media challenge current assumptions about media reputation?
- PAST: The influence of traditional news media on collective judgements as a unidirectional process
where the evaluations made available to individuals by these media converged, rarely questioned images
projected by organisations and largely shaped the collective perception of audiences that generally
assumed neutrality, facticity, and credibility of the representations they were offered (Figure 1)
- Social media are shifting the dynamics of media reputations
From vertical broadcasting to horizontal information flows and coproduction
- No longer one to many; discussions, commenting, exchange of information, views, and experiences
- Bottom up organised coproduction sites; expose and discuss corporate actions (such as wrongdoing)
- Status and structural position versus sharing
- Individual evaluations may now gain attention regardless of status/structural position of sender
(authority doesn’t play that big of a role anymore although some still have it - followers)
- More active role of audience/users
- Sharing content allows users without status and structural position comparable to traditional news to
gain large scale attention
- Coproduction and networked narratives
- Users as both senders and receivers of evaluations and collective coproduction of these evaluations
- News media even rely on users for sources
- No longer a structural distinction between the senders (the media) and receivers (the audience), it is not
situational; any member of the audience is also a potential sender of content and vice versa
From homogeneity to heterogeneity of public available evaluations
- Media reputation no longer a monolithic entity
- New channels for the horizontal dissemination of information that allows audience to question the
content of news media and corporate communications and offer alternative evaluations
- Diminishing influence of organisation over production and dissemination of information
- Increased chance that audience is exposed to evaluations different from official corporate
communications and news media report
- Heterogeneity of sources of information
- Social media make a plurality of experiences, opinions and topic visible and potentially heard -> not
shaped by commercial news criteria and prepackaged information received from organisations
- Word of mouth outlet
- Other users opinions or reviews have “experiential credibility” - first hand experience with topic or
situation -> ordinary suers more trustworthy due to independence from organisation
- Heterogeneity of motives
- Not only conventional assessment of newsworthiness
- Used to express and enact individual, social and organisational identities through individuals
highlighting and commenting on organisational events and actions that resonate with or violate their
personal values and beliefs
Dit zijn jouw voordelen als je samenvattingen koopt bij Stuvia:
Bewezen kwaliteit door reviews
Studenten hebben al meer dan 850.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet jij zeker dat je de beste keuze maakt!
In een paar klikken geregeld
Geen gedoe — betaal gewoon eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of je Stuvia-tegoed en je bent klaar. Geen abonnement nodig.
Direct to-the-point
Studenten maken samenvattingen voor studenten. Dat betekent: actuele inhoud waar jij écht wat aan hebt. Geen overbodige details!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper juliakozinska99. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €6,48. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 68175 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 15 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen