Company reputation is a primary success factor. Charles Fombrun, founder and chairman of the Reputation Institute, states that “a good reputation produces tangible benefits: premium prices for products, lower costs for capital and labor, improved loyalty from employees, greater latitude in decision making, and a cushion of goodwill when crises hit”. Literature presents many studies about such a subject: both theoretical and empiric researches agree with Fombrun’s words. Leading organizations strongly support their image in order to get the best judgments from their stakeholders, and the reputational risk is normally felt as a prominent one. Many frameworks are available in order to determine the company reputation level through interviews and focus groups. The most famous output of them is probably the Global Most Admired Companies Rank by “Fortune”. This document introduces a model to estimate the company reputation, thanks to quantitative data, and value reputational losses in case of accidents. The model hierarchical structure has on the top the stakeholder groups, whose feelings are based on specific reputational drivers representing the stakeholder’s interest areas (i.e. Environmental credibility or Workplace quality or Financial credibility). When the model is used to estimate the company reputation level, each reputational driver value comes from groups of indicators mainly derived from company published materials (i.e. % Recyclde waist or % Local suppliers or ROI). When the model is used to determine the loss of reputation in case of accident each reputational driver value comes from groups of risk factors found in newspaper’s articles and authority’s documents (i.e. Money laundering or Pollution level or Operating errors). We have tested our model by examining three cases: BP and the 2010 Gulf of Mexico disaster (estimate of reputational loss), Shell in Alaska and Eni in Val d’Agri (reputation measure). The test has been successful and we do believe that the model could be applied also to other reality belonging to other operating sectors provided you define specific shareholders, reputational drivers, indicators and risk factors.
Una buona reputazione è di primaria importanza per l’impresa. Charles Fombrun, fondatore e presidente del Reputation Institute, è convinto che “da una buona reputazione discendono benefici tangibili, quali: premi di prezzo per i prodotti, minori costi dei capitali e del lavoro, maggiore fedeltà dei dipendenti, ampia confidenza nel processo decisionale, e un salvagente nei momenti di difficoltà”. In letteratura sono disponibili svariati studi sull’argomento, sia teorici sia sperimentali, tutti concordi con il pensiero di Fombrun. Le organizzazioni curano attentamente la propria immagine, per ottenere buoni giudizi da parte degli stakeholder, e il rischio reputazionale è generalmente sentito come uno dei principali da monitorare. Vi sono molti framework per la determinazione del livello reputazionale d’impresa attraverso interviste e focus group. Tra i risultati della loro applicazione, quello probabilmente più noto è il Global Most Admired Companies Rank di “Fortune”. Questo documento presenta un modello per la stima della reputazione aziendale, attraverso elementi quantitativi, e l’abbattimento del livello reputazionale in caso di incidente. La gerarchia della struttura considerata vede al massimo livello gli stakeholders, influenzati da reputational drivers, quali la percentuale di scarti riciclati o il ROI. Nella stima della reputazione aziendale i valori dei reputational driver derivano da gruppi di indicatori valorizzati mediante i dati delle pubblicazioni aziendali. Nella stima della perdita reputazionale, i valori dei reputational driver derivano da gruppi di risk factors originati da articoli di giornale e documenti governativi (esempi di risk factor sono: il riciclaggio di denaro sporco, il livello di inquinamento, gli errori operativi). Abbiamo provato il modello su tre casi: BP e il disastro del Golfo del Messico del 2010 (stima della perdita di reputazione); Shell in Alaska ed Eni in Val d’Agri (misura della reputazione). Il modello si è dimostrato versatile e per questo siamo sicuri di poterlo impiegare anche per aziende di altri settori merceologici, previa definizione di stakehoder, reputational driver, indicatori e risk factor specifici.
Il rischio reputazionale per le aziende oil & gas
CATTANEO, RINALDO
2012/2013
Abstract
Company reputation is a primary success factor. Charles Fombrun, founder and chairman of the Reputation Institute, states that “a good reputation produces tangible benefits: premium prices for products, lower costs for capital and labor, improved loyalty from employees, greater latitude in decision making, and a cushion of goodwill when crises hit”. Literature presents many studies about such a subject: both theoretical and empiric researches agree with Fombrun’s words. Leading organizations strongly support their image in order to get the best judgments from their stakeholders, and the reputational risk is normally felt as a prominent one. Many frameworks are available in order to determine the company reputation level through interviews and focus groups. The most famous output of them is probably the Global Most Admired Companies Rank by “Fortune”. This document introduces a model to estimate the company reputation, thanks to quantitative data, and value reputational losses in case of accidents. The model hierarchical structure has on the top the stakeholder groups, whose feelings are based on specific reputational drivers representing the stakeholder’s interest areas (i.e. Environmental credibility or Workplace quality or Financial credibility). When the model is used to estimate the company reputation level, each reputational driver value comes from groups of indicators mainly derived from company published materials (i.e. % Recyclde waist or % Local suppliers or ROI). When the model is used to determine the loss of reputation in case of accident each reputational driver value comes from groups of risk factors found in newspaper’s articles and authority’s documents (i.e. Money laundering or Pollution level or Operating errors). We have tested our model by examining three cases: BP and the 2010 Gulf of Mexico disaster (estimate of reputational loss), Shell in Alaska and Eni in Val d’Agri (reputation measure). The test has been successful and we do believe that the model could be applied also to other reality belonging to other operating sectors provided you define specific shareholders, reputational drivers, indicators and risk factors.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
2013_10_Cattaneo.PDF
accessibile in internet per tutti
Descrizione: Testo della tesi
Dimensione
4.87 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
4.87 MB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
I documenti in POLITesi sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
https://hdl.handle.net/10589/83344