Stakeholder Perspectives on Organizational Identity: Searching for a Relationship Approach

Abstract

The present paper discusses the substantial difference for practice of current models of organizational identity which consider directly and indirectly the looking-glass process of organizational identity. The paper pinpoints that some models represent a first useful step for an analysis of external interpretations of the organizations and that others represent an in-depth view of external images with consequences on the organization. Examples of the usefulness of the models are developed as they are reread in the light of three different approaches of stakeholder theory which provide an understanding of the different levels of analysis of stakeholders' external interpretations of the organization: the broad, the narrow a priori and the narrow situational. An exploration of the interrelations between identity and stakeholder fields is therefore provided.2

Multiple Audiences as Text Stakeholders: A Conceptual Framework for Analyzing Complex Rhetorical Situations

“…An 20 Other studies in the field of business communication have underlined the strict relationship existing between the different stakes that different categories of stakeholders have in a corporation and the different form the dialogue between stakeholders and corporation assumes (Johansen and Nielsen 2011). However, these studies remain bound to the corporate management view of stakeholders as actors related to the organization and its internal and external image (see Illia and Lurati 2006) and do not correspond to different roles in communicative terms. audience is homogenous if it is composed of one person or of a group of people who share the same goals and commitments within the interaction field and thus have similar starting points.…”

When less is more: The effect of devolution on HR's strategic role and construed image

“…Some stakeholder groups included in aggregated reputational data may not have any direct relationship with the HR unit or any direct consequence for it (Illia & Lurati, 2006). But line managers are one of the most important constituents for an HR unit (Heraly & Morley, 1995;Tsui, 1987;Ulrich & Brockbank, 2005).…”

An Italian Business Model for Engaging Organisations to Social Wellness: A Focus on the for Benefit Companies

“…So, one could argue that the fBComp does not represent a new business approach, but rather a development towards the socialization/legitimacy of traditional business models. According to reputation researches, the perception stakeholders mature as a consequence of corporate communication actions, refers to four areas (social, financial, product and employment) and is aimed to differentiate the company from its competitors (Gioia, Schultz, and Corley, 2000;Pruzan, 2001;Fombrun and Van Riel, 2003;Illia and Lurati, 2006;Van Riel and Fombrun, 2007). However, according to the studies about legitimacy and reputation, fBComp conformity to contextual rules, norms and cultural values could support both the development of the fBComp in a competitive context and a cognitive legitimacy positioning (Abratt and Kleyn, 2012;Suchman, 1995).…”