All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Exploring the Link Between the Concepts of Organization-Public Relationships and Organizational Reputations
Unformatted Document Text:  Tracking Number: ICA-15-10266 24 Summary of Results The study explored the link between the concepts of organization-public relationships and organizational reputation with three research questions. Specifically, this study explored how participants’ different degree of experience with the case organization affects the link between the concepts of relationships and reputations. This study found that, according to their different degree of experience with the organization, participants’ evaluation of relationships and perception of reputations is differently linked. First, participants with direct experience tended to hold their cognitive representations (i.e., reputation) based relationships they evaluated (see Figure 1). J. Grunig and Hung (2002, p. 20) conceptualized these “experiential” cognitive representations and “experiential” relationships, respectively. On the contrary, participants without prior relationship history tended to evaluate their relationships based on cognitive representations they had of the organization, often influenced by the media (see Figure 1). J. Grunig and Hung (2002, p. 20) called these “reputational” relationships and “reputational” cognitive representations, respectively. According to the results of this study, intuitively participants having experiential relationships (i.e., relationships based on direct experience) offered the most detail for measuring relationships and reputation, as Bromley (1993, 2000) and J. Grunig and Hung (2002) found in their research. On the other hand, participants having reputational relationships often limit their responses in what they heard from others and through the media, when evaluating relationships and perceiving reputation. Finally, participants having no information with the case study organization virtually could not evaluate relationships, or evaluate their relationships based on a sheer speculation or generalization of reputations. Beyond these core findings, the study identified a relationship between relationship outcomes and the type of relationships. As long as participants evaluated relationship outcomes negatively, they tended to respond that their relationships are rather exchange relationships than communal relationships. Additionally, participants that reported having reputational relationships (i.e., participants without direct relationship history) were most likely to rely on their reputation when they evaluated the dimensions of trust and satisfaction, although their evaluation of these dimensions was generally superficial. Implications Since the effectiveness of public relations is often indirect and the function of public relations is to save costs rather than to generate profits, scholars suggested that the value of

Authors: Yang, SungUn. and Mallabo, Jose.
first   previous   Page 24 of 35   next   last



background image
Tracking Number: ICA-15-10266
24
Summary of Results
The study explored the link between the concepts of organization-public relationships
and organizational reputation with three research questions. Specifically, this study explored
how participants’ different degree of experience with the case organization affects the link
between the concepts of relationships and reputations.
This study found that, according to their different degree of experience with the
organization, participants’ evaluation of relationships and perception of reputations is
differently linked. First, participants with direct experience tended to hold their cognitive
representations (i.e., reputation) based relationships they evaluated (see Figure 1). J. Grunig
and Hung (2002, p. 20) conceptualized these “experiential” cognitive representations and
“experiential” relationships, respectively. On the contrary, participants without prior
relationship history tended to evaluate their relationships based on cognitive representations
they had of the organization, often influenced by the media (see Figure 1). J. Grunig and
Hung (2002, p. 20) called these “reputational” relationships and “reputational” cognitive
representations, respectively.
According to the results of this study, intuitively participants having experiential
relationships (i.e., relationships based on direct experience) offered the most detail for
measuring relationships and reputation, as Bromley (1993, 2000) and J. Grunig and Hung
(2002) found in their research. On the other hand, participants having reputational
relationships often limit their responses in what they heard from others and through the
media, when evaluating relationships and perceiving reputation. Finally, participants having
no information with the case study organization virtually could not evaluate relationships, or
evaluate their relationships based on a sheer speculation or generalization of reputations.
Beyond these core findings, the study identified a relationship between relationship
outcomes and the type of relationships. As long as participants evaluated relationship
outcomes negatively, they tended to respond that their relationships are rather exchange
relationships than communal relationships. Additionally, participants that reported having
reputational relationships (i.e., participants without direct relationship history) were most
likely to rely on their reputation when they evaluated the dimensions of trust and satisfaction,
although their evaluation of these dimensions was generally superficial.
Implications
Since the effectiveness of public relations is often indirect and the function of public
relations is to save costs rather than to generate profits, scholars suggested that the value of


Convention
Convention is an application service for managing large or small academic conferences, annual meetings, and other types of events!
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 24 of 35   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.