Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Identity, intended image, construed image, and gnreputation: An interdisciplinary framework and suggested terminology

  • Published:
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many scholars across various academic disciplines are investigating the following questions: What do individuals know or believe about an organization? How does a focal organization (and/or other interested entity) develop, use, and/or change this information? and How do individuals respond to what they know or believe about an organization? Cross-disciplinary research that centers on these questions is desirable and could be enhanced if researchers identify and develop consistent terminology for framing these questions. The authors work toward that end by identifying four central ‘viewpoints’ of an organization and proposing labels to represent each of these viewpoints:identity, intended image, construed image, andreputation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albert, Stuart, Blake E. Ashforth, and Jane E. Dutton, Eds. 2000.Academy of Management Review 25 (1).

  • Albert, Stuart and David A. Whetten. 1985. “Organizational Identity.” InResearch in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 7. Eds. L. L. Cummings and B. M. Staw. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 263–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, John R. 1983. “A Spreading Activation Theory of Memory.”Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior 22:261–295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashforth, Blake E. and Scott Johnson. 2001. “Which Hat to Wear? The Relative Salience of Multiple Identities in Organizational Contexts.” InSocial Identity Processes in Organizational Contexts. Eds. M. Hogg and D. J. Terry. Philadelphia: Psychology Press, 31–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • — and Fred A. Mael. 1989. “Social Identity Theory and the Organization.”Academy of Management Review 14(1): 20–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barich, Howard and Philip Kotler. 1991. “A Framework for Marketing Image Management.”Sloan Management Review 32 (2): 94–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berens, Guido, Cees B. M. van Riel, and Gerrit H. van Bruggen. 2005. “Corporate Associations and Consumer Product Responses: The Moderating Role of Corporate Brand Dominance.”Journal of Marketing 69 (July): 35–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharya, C. B., Hayagreeva Rao, and Mary Ann Glynn. 1995. “Understanding the Bond of Identification: An Investigation of Its Correlates Among Art Museum Members.”Journal of Marketing 59 (4): 46–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and Sankar Sen. 2003. “Consumer-Company Identification: A Framework for Understanding Consumers— Relationship With Companies.”Journal of Marketing 67 (April): 76–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolger, John F, Jr. 1959. “How to Evaluate Your Company Image.”Journal of Marketing 24 (October): 7–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Britt, Steuart Henderson. 1971. “The Right Marketing Mix for the Corporate Imagery Mix.”Business Horizons 14 (February): 87–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, Tom J. 1998. “Corporate Associations in Marketing: Antecedents and Consequences.”Corporate Reputation Review 1 (3): 215–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and Peter A. Dacin. 1997. “The Company and the Product: Corporate Associations and Consumer Product Responses.”Journal of Marketing 61 (January): 68–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dacin, Peter A. and Tom J. Brown. 2002. “Corporate Identity and Corporate Associations: A Framework for Future Research.”Corporate Reputation Review 5 (2/3): 254–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davies, Gary, with Rosa Chun, Rui Vinhas da Silva, and Stuart Roper. 2003.Corporate Reputation and Competitiveness. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dichter, Ernest. 1985. “What’s in an Image.”Journal of Consumer Marketing 2 (Winter): 75–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dutton, Jane E. and Janet M. Dukerich. 1991. “Keeping an Eye on the Mirror: Image and Identity in Organizational Adaptation.”Academy of Management Journal 34 (3): 517–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —, and Celia V. Harquail. 1994. “Organizational Images and Member Identification.”Administrative Science Quarterly 39 (2): 239–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Enis, Ben M. 1967. “An Analytical Approach to the Concept of Image.”California Management Review 9 (Summer): 51–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fombrun, Charles J. 1996.Reputation: Realizing Value From the Corporate Image. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gatewood, Robert D., Mary A. Gowan, and Gary J. Lautenschlager. 1993. “Corporate Image, Recruitment Image, andInitial Job Choice Decisions.”Academy of Management Journal 36 (2): 414–427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gioia, Dennis A., Majken Schultz, and Kevin G. Corley. 2000. “Organizational Identity, Image, andAdaptive Instability.”Academy of Management Review 25 (January): 63–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, Marvin E. and Jon Hartwick. 1990. “The Effects of Advertiser Reputation and Extremity of Advertising Claim on Advertising Effectiveness.”Journal of Consumer Research 17 (September): 172–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gronroos, Christian. 1984. “A Service Quality Model and Its Marketing Implications.”European Journal of Marketing 18 (4): 36–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guedes, Jose and Roch Parayre. 1997. “Managerial Reputation and Divisional Sell-Offs: A Model and Empirical Test.”Journal of Banking and Finance 21 (8): 1985–2006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gurhan-Canli, Zeynep and Rajeev Batra. 2004. “When Corporate Image Affects Product Evaluations: The Moderating Role of Perceived Risk.”Journal of Marketing Research 41 (May): 197–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatch, Mary Jo and Majken Schultz. 1997. “Relations Between Organizational Culture, Identity and Image.”European Journal of Marketing 31 (5/6): 356–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and —. 2000. “Scaling the Tower of Babel: Relational Differences Between Identity, Image, andCulture.” InThe Expressive Organization. Eds. M. Schultz, M. J. Hatch, and M. Larsen. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 11–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, Edward W. 1962. “Corporate Images Are Not Stereotypes.”Journal of Marketing 26 (January): 72–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, Kevin L., and David A. Aaker. 1998. “The Impact of Corporate Marketing on a Company’s Brand Extensions.”Corporate Reputation Review 1 (Summer): 356–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leary, Mark R. and June Price Tangney. Eds. 2003.Handbook of Self and Identity. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markwick, Nigel and Chris Fill. 1997. “Towards a Framework for Managing Corporate Identity.”European Journal of Marketing 31 (5/6): 396–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moingeon, Bertrand, and Guillaume Soenen. Eds. 2002.Corporate and Organizational Identity: Integrating Strategy, Marketing, Communication and Organizational Perspectives. Chicago: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neadle, Dexter. 1964. “The Relationship of Corporate Image to Product Behavior.”Public Opinion Quarterly 28 (Summer): 293–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orlitzky, Marc, Frank L. Schmidt, and Sara L. Rynes. 2003. “Corporate Social and Financial Performance: A Meta-Analysis.”Organization Studies 24 (3): 403–441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, Michael G. 1998. “To Be or Not to Be: Central Questions in Organizational Identification.” InIdentity in Organizations: Developing Theory Through Conversations. Eds. D. Whetten and P. Godfrey. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 171–208.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 2003. “Disentangling Collective Identity.” InIdentity Issues in Groups: Research in Managing Groups and Teams, Vol. 5. Eds. J. Polzer, E. Mannix, and M. Neale. Stamford, CT: Elsevier Science, 161–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • — and Peter O. Foreman. 2000a. “The Beauty of and Barriers to Organizational Theories of Identity.”Academy of Management Review 25 (January): 141–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and —. 2000b. “Classifying Managerial Responses to Multiple Organizational Identities.”Academy Management Review 25 (January): 18–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rindova, Violina P. 1997. “The Image Cascade and the Formation of Corporate Reputations.”Corporate Reputation Review 1 (Summer/Fall): 188–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, Peter W. and Grahame R. Dowling. 2002. “Corporate Reputation and Sustained Superior Financial Performance.”Strategic Management Journal 23 (December): 1077–1093.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, Majken, Mary Jo Hatch, and M. Larsen. Eds. 2000.The Expressive Organization. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwoerer, Catherine and Benson Rosen. 1989. “Effects of Employmentat-Will Policies and Compensation Policies on Corporate Image and Job Pursuit Intentions.”Journal of Applied Psychology 74 (4): 653–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scott, Susanne G. and Vicki R. Lane. 2000. “A Stakeholder Approach to Organizational Identity.”Academy of Management Review 25 (January): 43–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sen, Sankar and C. B. Bhattacharya. 2001. “Does Doing Good Always Lead to Doing Better? Consumer Reactions to Corporate Social Responsibility.”Journal of Marketing Research 38 (May): 43–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smidts, Ale, Ad T. H. Pruyn, and Cees B. M. van Riel. 2001. “The Impact of Employee Communication and Perceived External Prestige on Organizational Identification.”Academy of Management Journal 49 (5): 1051–1062.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • “Special Issue: Corporate Identity.” 1997.European Journal of Marketing 31 (5).

  • van Riel, Cees B. M. 1997. “Research in Corporate Communication: An Overview of an Emerging Field.”Management Communication Quarterly 11 (November): 288–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and John M. T. Balmer. 1997. “Corporate Identity: The Concept, Its Measurement and Management.”European Journal of Marketing 31 (5/6): 340–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Rekom, Johan. 1997. “Deriving an Operational Measure of Corporate Identity.”European Journal of Marketing 31 (5/6): 410–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whetten, David A. 1997. “Theory Development and the Study of Corporate Reputation.”Corporate Reputation Review 1 (Summer/Fall): 26–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whetten, David A. In press. “Albert and Whetten + 20 Years: Strengthening the Concept of Organizational Identity.”Journal of Management Inquiry.

  • — and Paul C. Godfrey. Eds. 1998.Identity in Organizations: Building Theory Through Conversations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • — and Alison Mackey. 2002. “A Social Actor Conception of Organization and Identity and Its Implications for the Study of Organizational Reputation.”Business and Society 41 (4): 393–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Oklahoma State University, Oklahoma, USA

    Tom J. Brown

  2. Queen’s University, Kingston, Canada

    Peter A. Dacin

  3. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana-Champaign, USA

    Michael G. Pratt

  4. Brigham Young University, Provo, USA

    David A. Whetten

Authors
  1. Tom J. Brown
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter A. Dacin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael G. Pratt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. David A. Whetten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Tom J. Brown (tomb@okstate.edu) is Ardmore Professor of Business Administration and a professor of marketing at Oklahoma State University. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. His articles have appeared in leading marketing journals, including theJournal of Marketing Research, theJournal of Marketing, theJournal of Consumer Research, and theJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science. His current research interests include the causes and effects of corporate associations and the customer orientation of service workers. He is cofounder (with Peter Dacin) of the Corporate Identity/Associations Research Group. Dr. Brown’s teaching interests include marketing research, services marketing, and corporate communications. He is a coauthor (with Gilbert A. Churchill, Jr.) ofBasic Marketing Research (5th ed.), Southwestern, 2004).

Peter A. Dacin (pdacin@business.queensu.ca) is the Nabisco Brands Professor of Marketing at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, Canada. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Toronto. His primary teaching and research interests lie in the areas of corporate associations, identity and reputation, consumer and managerial judgment formation, andresearch methods and design. He has also published in the area of sales force management. His research has appeared in several leading journals, including theJournal of Marketing, theJournal of Marketing Research, theJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science, and theJournal of Consumer Research. In addition, he has published in numerous conference proceedings. He has served as the chair of the American Marketing Association’s Consumer Behavior Special Interest Group, serves on the Academic Council of the American Marketing Association, andis cofounder (with Tom Brown) of the Corporate Identity/Associations Research Group.

Michael G. Pratt (mpratt@uiuc.edu) is a James F. Towey Fellow and an associate professor of management at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He earned his Ph.D. at the University of Michigan. His articles have appeared in leading management outiets, includingAdministrative Science Quarterly, theAcademy of Management Journal, theAcademy of Management Review, andResearch in Organizational Behavior. He recently coedited (with Anat Rafaeli) a book titledArtifacts and Organizations: Beyond Mere Symbolism (Lawrence Erlbaum, 2006). His current research examines issues of organizational attachment (e.g.), identification and commitment), multiple identities and meaning, andintuition. Dr. Pratt’s work focuses largely on professionals in both traditional and dispersed work contexts.

David A. Whetten (d_whetten@byu.edu) is the Jack Wheatley Professor of Organizational Studies and director of the Faculty Center at Brigham Young University. Prior to joining the Marriott School of Management in 1994, he was at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign for 20 years, where he served as the Harry Gray Professor of Business Administration and director of the Office of Organizational Research. He was the founding editor ofFoundations for Organizational Science and served as editor of theAcademy of Management Review. His published scholarship has focused on interorganizational relations, organizational effectiveness, organizational decline, organizational identity, corporate social performance and theory development. His pioneering and award-winning management text,Developing Management Skills (Prentice Hall, 2005), coauthored with Kim Cameron, is entering its seventh edition. He has been very active in the Academy of Management. In 1994, he received the Academy’s Distinguished Service Award, andin 2000 he served as its president.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brown, T.J., Dacin, P.A., Pratt, M.G. et al. Identity, intended image, construed image, and gnreputation: An interdisciplinary framework and suggested terminology. JAMS 34, 99–106 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070305284969

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070305284969

Keywords

Search

Navigation