Corporate Reputation Review

Volume 5 Number 1

Defining the Corporate Identity Construct

T. C. Melewar and Elizabeth Jenkins Warwick Business School, University of Warwick, UK

ABSTRACT Both practitioners and academics alike have directed increasing attention to the eld of corporate identity. Despite signicant contributions in the last several years towards understanding and identifying this concept, a denitive construct of corporate identity and its measurements does not yet exist. Much anecdotal literature and many case studies surround this area of study, but to date no research study has empirically tested the domain of this construct. This paper examines the denitions, models, and specic elements of corporate identity through a review of literature. Based on this review, a holistic corporate identity model is developed. This paper also discusses the challenges in developing the corporate identity construct. INTRODUCTION Firms have become increasingly aware of the importance of developing and managing their corporate identity. The identity of a corporation has been recognized as a strategic resource and source of competitive advantage. Eective management of corporate identity can serve to address the needs of the rms important stakeholders by, for example, motivating employees, and by generally inspiring condence in the company to all target groups (van Riel, 1995). Academic research into corporate identity is still very much linked to practice. Corporate identity research is an emerging discipline which increasingly recognizes that the corporate brand is fundamentally dierent from the principles that guide classic brand management, since the corporate identity must be designed to

Corporate Reputation Review, Vol. 5, No. 1, 2002, pp. 7690 # Henry Stewart Publications, 13633589

appeal to all of the rms stakeholders (Baker and Balmer, 1997; Melewar and Saunders, 2000). Despite the attention given to corporate identity over the past two decades, the actual denition of corporate identity is highly contentious and many have opted not to dene the term precisely. A lack of consensus on the denitive notion of corporate identity as a construct has led to confusion with the usage of the term. The obvious implication for management of corporate identity is that it is very dicult to manage what cannot be precisely dened. According to a 1992 Mori survey, corporate identity was a major concern of CEOs, but many executives admit that they do not know how to manage, control, or even precisely dene the term (Olins, 1995). The importance of corporate identity and its links to image and strategy are synthesized by van Rekom (1997): In the long term, management can inuence the organizations identity, and, depending on managements chosen corporate strategy, can realize an improved or repositioned corporate image (p. 412). The purpose of this paper is to review the literature dealing with the denition and identication of corporate identity and then to develop a model encompassing the dimensions that comprise this construct. In doing so, several challenges arise: the rst is to create a model that suciently encompasses the salient aspects of corporate identity and is, at the same time, simple enough to be of use for both academic and research purposes; the second is to derive a model that can be tested empirically and

Page 76

Melewar and Jenkins

can thus be of more scientic value than those based strictly on anecdotal evidence. Determining those variables that have a direct correlation with corporate identity, thus, has signicant practical implications. A nal consideration is to limit the discussion to those dimensions that are signicantly related to corporate identity.
DEFINITIONS OF CORPORATE IDENTITY In an extensive review of the literature, Balmer and Soenen (1996) reach several conclusions about the eld of corporate identity: rst, though there is a consensus on the need for a multidisciplinary approach to the study of corporate identity, there is no single view as to what elements compose the corporate identity mix; and secondly, though there is no signicant split between the perspective of practitioners and academics, there is a division on the approach taken to the most emphasized elements of the mix. Practitioners take a more process-oriented approach whereas academics seem more concerned with the structure. Balmer and Soenen also emphasize the greater diversity on the part of academics, due primarily to the interdisciplinary nature of the eld. Their nal observation is that the various approaches do not consider all elements of the corporate identity mix. Balmer (1998) examines the history of the growing eld of corporate identity and outlines an emerging consensus on three distinguishing features of corporate identity. First, corporate identity is fundamentally concerned with reality and what an organization is, that is, its strategy, philosophy, history, business scope, the range and type of products and services oered, and its communication, both formal and informal (Balmer, 1995; Schmidt, 1995; van Riel, 1995; Moingeon and Ramanantsoa, 1997). Secondly, corporate identity is a multidisciplinary eld. Thirdly, corporate identity is based on the corporate personal-

ity of the organization. Table 1 gives a summary of denitions.

Practitioner-based Denitions As mentioned above, practitioners denitions of corporate identity tend to focus on the more tangible aspects of identity, particularly those that are relatively easy to manage. Balmer and Soenen (1998) show that practitioners tend to focus on visual aspects of identity to the neglect of other factors. Olins (1995) denes corporate identity as the explicit management of all the ways in which the organization presents itself through experiences and perceptions to all its audiences (p. 3). In Olins view, the key element of this denition is the term explicit. Although Olins denition is more concerned with the management elements of corporate identity, it is also illuminating because the very word explicit can be helpful in distinguishing identity from image in the strategic orientation perspective. Markwick and Fill (1997) emphasize the distinguishing component of corporate identity as the organizations presentation of itself to its various stakeholders and the means by which it distinguishes itself from all other organizations (p. 397). Another denition of corporate identity is that corporate identity is the visible manifestation of the corporate image, where it is the net result of the interaction of all experiences, impressions, beliefs, feelings and knowledge that people have about a company (or church, political party, NGO or any other corporate body) (Anonymous). Corporate image, thus, is explained as consisting of four dimensions: product class image, brand image, brand user image and corporate image, and image of the nationality of the corporate body. Academic-based Denitions The French school of corporate identity denes the term as the set of interdepen-

Page 77

Dening the Corporate Identity Construct

Table 1:
Author(s)

Denitions and components summary

Cited in Denition Elements Related Aspects and Research Signicance Brand image, strategy, uniqueness First to classify identity types into monolithic, branded, and endorsed Review of literature, emphasis on multidisciplinary aspects

Wolf Olins

Olins, 1995

the explicit management of all the ways in which the organization presents itself through experiences and perceptions to all its audiences None explicit see Strathclyde Statement the way in which an organizations identity is revealed through behavior, communications, as well as through symbolism to internal and external audiences refers to an organizations unique characteristics which are rooted in the behavior of the members of the organization what an organization is the set of meanings by which an object allows itself to be known and through which it allows people to describe, remember and relate to it.

Areas that stakeholders can see: products, services, environments, communications, behavior Corporate Identity Mix: behavior, communications, symbolism

Consensus

van Riel and Balmer, 1997

Dowling, 1986 van Rekom, 1997

van Rekom, 1997 van Rekom, 1997

Albert and van Rekom, Whetten, 1985 1997 van Rekom, van Riel, Wierenga, 1991

Schmitt, Simonson, Marcus, 1995 Markwick, Fill, 1997

Claimed central character, distinctiveness, and temporal continuity Corporate Identity is the whole of an organizations actions, as far as these actions satisfy the criteria of : sameness across situations and interaction partners, continuity over time, specicity to the organization the degree to which the rm has achieved a distinct and coherent image in its aesthetic output the organizations presentation of itself to its various stakeholders and the means by which it

Expansion on Albert and Whetten (1985), means-ends theory and laddering techniques to determine centrality, concentration on factual identity No universal measurable properties Expansion on Albert, Whetten (1985), exploration of theoretical foundations of identity

Focus on aesthetics, management

Variety of cues and planned communications; unintentional or

Development of a framework for corporate identity management process,

Page 78

Melewar and Jenkins

Table 1:
Author(s)

Continued
Cited in Denition Elements Related Aspects and Research Signicance how corporate communication is used for projection of image

Balmer and Soenen, 1998

emergent messages distinguishes itself from all also have inuence other organizations the articulation of what the organization is, what it does, and how it does it and is linked to the way an organization goes about its business and the strategies it adopts the mind, soul, and voice Vision, philosophy, strategy, performance, brand architecture, nature of ownership, history, values, subculture mix, employee anities, internal images, uncontrolled communication, controllable communication, symbolism, behavior, indirect communication

a set of interdependent characteristics of the organization that give it specicity, stability, and coherence and thus make it identiable Moingeon and Moingeon and the identity goes back to the Ramanantsoa, Ramanantsoa existence of a system of characteristics which has a 1997 1995 pattern and which gives the company its specicity, its stability and its coherence. van Riel, 1997 the self presentation of an organization, rooted in the behavior of individual organizational members, expressing the organizations sameness over time or continuity, distinctiveness, and centrality Hatch and Schultz, 1997 Moingeon and Larcon and Reitter, 1979; Ramanantsoa 1997 Reitter and Ramanantsoa, 1985

French school

French school, emphasis on links to organizational culture

Relationship between organizational culture and identity

Page 79

Dening the Corporate Identity Construct

dent characteristics of the organization that give it specicity, stability, and coherence and thus make it identiable (Larcon and Reitter, 1979; Reitter and Ramanantsoa, 1985). Moingeon and Ramanantsoa (1995) give an even more precise denition of identity: The existence of a system of characteristics which has a pattern which gives the company its specicity, its stability and its coherence (p. 253). They emphasize that it is the pattern or combination, not the characteristics themselves, which constitutes the identity of the organization. Van Riel (1997) denes corporate identity as the self presentation of an organization, rooted in the behavior of individual organizational members, expressing the organizations sameness over time or continuity, distinctiveness, and centrality (p. 290).
DIMENSIONS OF THE CORPORATE IDENTITY CONSTRUCT The following section seeks to evaluate critically the dimensions that have been considered as part of corporate identity. The major challenge is to determine, not only those components considered most relevant to corporate identity, but also to identify whether the variables are dependent, independent, or interrelated. Baker and Balmer (1997) contend that while there are diering views as to what elements constitute the corporate identity mix, there is consensus that culture is the most important part; visual identity, therefore, is only one component of the mix (Melewar and Saunders, 1999). Figure 1 illustrates the corporate identity construct. The Corporate Identity Mix Van Rekom et al. (1991) dene corporate identity mix as the self-presentation of an organization; it consists of the cues which an organization oers about itself via the behavior, communication, and symbolism which are its forms of expression. Simi-

larly, van Riel and Balmer (1997) dene the corporate identity mix as the way in which an organizations identity is revealed through behavior [and] communications, as well as through symbolism to internal and external audiences.
Mind, Soul, and Voice The New Corporate Identity Mix? Balmer and Soenen (1998) propose an organically inspired new corporate identity mix as being composed of the mind, soul, and voice. The mind consists of managerial vision, corporate philosophy, strategy, performance, brand architecture, nature of corporate ownership, and organizational history. The soul consists of the subjective elements including the distinct values, mix of sub-cultures, employee anities, and internal images. The voice is the total corporate communication and consists of its uncontrolled communication, controllable communication, symbolism, employee and corporate behavior, and indirect (external/ third party) communication. This denition of the corporate identity mix represents an interesting departure from the previous classications of behavior, communications, and symbols. Perhaps the authors most signicant contribution is the re-classication of symbols with communication. The voice takes on a much wider meaning and refers to elements of verbal and non-verbal, explicit and implicit communication. Extending Balmer and Soenens analogy, it might also be worth emphasizing the physical, tangible aspects of identity by including the body in the corporate identity mix (Melewar and Saunders, 2000). Items such as the type of building and location of the company, including nationality, might also be relevant subconstructs. The Dimensions in Depth For simplistic purposes, the following elements will be examined according to an

Page 80

Melewar and Jenkins

Figure 1:

Corporate identity and its subconstructs

Corporate communications Uncontrollable communication Architecture and location Corporate visual identity Corporate behavior

Communication and visual identity

Management behavior

Behavior

Employee behavior Corporate identity Goals, philosophies and principles Nationality Corporate culture

Organizational imagery and history Nature of industry Market conditions Corporate/marketing strategies

aggregation and modication of the classication schemes of corporate identity measurement proposed by several dierent authors (Schmidt 1995; Balmer and Soenen, 1996, 1998; van Riel and Balmer, 1997; Stuart, 1999). The most problematic area of classication appears to be corporate communication and behavior. Behavior, in a sense, is the non-verbal, intangible aspect to communication. It is, to extend the organic analogy of Balmer and Soenen (1998) again, the body lan-

guage of the organization. In the following scheme, therefore, behavior includes actions on the part of the organization and its employees.
Communication and Visual Identity: Corporate Communication Van Riel (1995) denes corporate communication as an instrument of management by means of which all consciously used forms of internal and external communications are harmonized as eectively and e-

Page 81

Dening the Corporate Identity Construct

ciently as possible, so as to create a favorable basis for relationships upon which the company is dependent (p. 26). Corporate communication encompasses management communication, marketing communication, and organizational communication. Of the three, management communication is the most important, as it is the primary means by which top level managers disseminate the goals and objectives of the organization to internal stakeholders. The existence of celebrity CEOs and the attention given to them also illustrates the importance of this type of communication (Pfeer and Salancik, 1978). Management communication is also a form of communication that emerges from the interaction of the organizational members where managers are part of the players in the game. Surprisingly, marketing communication is probably given the most attention and certainly the highest proportion of the budget. Organizational communication, traditionally thought of as public relations and public aairs, has undergone a certain degree of fragmentation with several functional areas, such as nance and human resources, now being responsible for various aspects of organizational communication, such as investor relations and labor relations respectively. There has been considerable discussion in the literature as to the benets of integration of corporate communication (van Riel, 1995, 1997). But as van Riel (1997) puts it, co-ordination is not a goal in itself, but a means to nd a solution for problems of eciency and eectiveness in the organization (p. 416). Much emphasis has been given to consistent content in messages that a corporation sends to its stakeholders (Markwick and Fill, 1997).
Uncontrollable Communication Very little of the literature examined dealt explicitly with uncontrollable communication. Balmer and Soenen (1998) however,

do address the role of unplanned/unauthorized or informal communication on the part of employees with outsiders, as well as the role of third party reports. In an age where companies are increasingly under media scrutiny, it would seem that this type of communication would play a role in the development and shaping of corporate identity. Business ethics literature and public relations journals, when they consider the role of organizational deviants such as whistle-blowers, may provide some insight into this area. Markwick and Fill (1997) point out that both planned cues and unintentional or emergent messages have an impact on the deliberate cues. Accidents, such as the Exxon oil spill in the Arctic, and the behavior of supply chain partners, the employment of child labor for the production of clothing for major brands, for example, are two situations in which the behavior is beyond the companys direct control.
Architecture and Location Olins (1995) cites not only the actual structure of the organization but also its physical location as being a component of corporate identity. Reference to location is missing in the literature, which seems puzzling in that rms spend a lot of money on attaining key locations to project the appropriate image. Renewed interest in architecture is illustrated by the attention that rms give to the inuence of architecture on how their identity is perceived. In their article dealing with corporate identity in the Asia Pacic region, Schmitt and Pan (1994) outline the importance of considering feng-shui: a companys image and reputation as well as the success of its brands can depend crucially on whether or not the company takes feng-shui seriously (p. 42). This practice is very prevalent in Hong Kong but also is spreading to other parts of the world as well.

Page 82

Melewar and Jenkins

Corporate Visual Identity To many, corporate identity is synonymous with what is known as visual identity, which, in turn, has traditionally been associated with the symbols of the organization. Melewar and Saunders (1998) state that corporate visual identity consists of the corporate name, logotype and/or symbol, typography, and color. Although visual identity remains an important aspect of corporate identity, it is nonetheless only a component of corporate identity (Melewar and Saunders, 2000). Olins (1995) states that the purpose of the symbol is to present the central idea of the organization with impact, brevity and immediacy (p. 11). The increased global scope in which companies now operate raises new challenges for the way in which corporate communications are formulated. Schmitt (1995) outlines some of these challenges by discussing the importance of name and visual symbols in East Asia. One of the most signicant of these is that the brand must have visual as well as phonological appeal. Another related issue is the signicance of color associations. In terms of corporate identity measurement, this may mean that dierent measures, or at least dierent weights to these measures, must be considered when measuring corporate identity on a global scale. Bernstein (1986), Dowling (1986), and Melewar et al. (2000) state that it is not the symbol itself but what the symbol represents that has value. It is this representation that marks the importance of visual identity to the overall corporate identity. Melewar and Saunders (1998) emphasize that the rate of technological change means that consumers are increasingly relying upon the reputation communicated by the rms corporate visual identity to guide purchase decisions. For many marketing communications, legal and consumer dierences limit the opportunity to benet from stan-

dardization. The corporate visual identity is an exception. Its standardization produces benets, local managers favor its application, and its nature lends itself to centralization and control. After decades of having a highly successful, even generically used brand name, Xerox had image problems when faced with new competition from Japan. A detailed survey of Xeroxs customers revealed that failure to respond to changing environment had had a negative impact on the brand. In reaction to this, Xerox rst sought to re-energize the brand name, made use of a powerful graphic image, and changed its colors from blue to red in order to symbolize this re-energization (Peacock, 1997).
Behavior: Corporate Behavior Several authors emphasize the importance of the actions of the corporation in determining its identity. As Moingeon and Ramanantsoa (1997) state, the organization communicates by sending signals that have not been created in a deliberate and conscious way. Behavior, although relatively more tangible perhaps than certain (other) aspects of organizational culture, nonetheless remains dicult to measure. Van Rekom (1997) found that intended actions are by far more important than unintended actions. On the notion of the social psychology of organizing, Weick (1979) emphasizes that organizational behavior is always performed by individuals in the rm. Management Behavior Hatch and Schultz (1997) argue that organizational identity and image are being increasingly inuenced by the behavior of top management due to the increased interaction between the organization and its stakeholders and the multiplicity of roles that stakeholders now play. In addition, the misinterpretation or failure to internalize

Page 83

Dening the Corporate Identity Construct

and identify with corporate requirements could result in an inconsistency in behavior, and on occasions result in management displaying characteristics that an organization would not approve of as representative of the rm. The fact that every day employees get sacked for such reasons seems to be sucient proof. In addition, management behavior also arises from the interaction of organizational members including the managers.
Employee Behavior Van Rekom (1997) considers the issue of centrality in corporate identity and provides measures to determine those activities that are important not only to individual job classications or departments but are also their link to the entire organization. He explores the linkages between employee actions and organizational goals. Through laddering techniques of meansends theory, he postulates that between individual specic jobs and organizational generalities a level must exist that meets the criteria of both centrality and distinctiveness. As other researches have stated, Practices in general tend to be more organizational specic than values (Hofstede et al., 1990). Kiriakidou and Millward (2000) focus strongly on the employees behavior and suggest that it is by these means that the unique characteristics of the organization are exhibited to external stakeholders, supposedly reecting how the corporation thinks, feels and behaves. Corporate Culture Many authors refer to corporate culture, although they dier on the precise nature of the relationship between corporate culture and corporate identity. For example, Downey (1986, 1987) contends that corporate culture which has been described as a companys shared values, beliefs and behavior in fact ows from and is the consequence of corporate identity. Hatch

and Schultz (1997), on the other hand, argue that organizational culture is not a determinant or variable of corporate identity, but is in fact a context within which interpretations of organizational identity are formed and intentions to inuence organizational image are formulated (p. 357). In discussing internal corporate identity issues in the airline industry, Ludlow (1997) suggests that because services cannot be standardized to the particular nature of the industry, dierentiation must come from the culture of the organization.
Goals, Philosophies, and Principles As van Rekom (1997) illustrates, there has been a proliferation of statements of corporate beliefs through corporate philosophies and statements of corporate principles. The presumption of this proliferation would seem to be that such statements are a means to dierentiate a particular corporation from others. Studies have shown, however, a great deal of consensus in the contents of the statements of dierent companies (Berg and Gagliardi, 1985). Such statements may therefore lack the distinctiveness outlined earlier as a criterion for corporate identity and may therefore reect what society accepts as basic principles for good management rather than being genuine expressions of the companys fundamental identity (van Rekom, 1997, p. 414). Nationality As companies expand their global operations, the role of the nationality of the company and its perceived attributes have become more important. Dierent strengths and weaknesses are associated with dierent countries (Avison, 1997). This does, of course, change over time as the economic structure of the company changes. For example, few people in the 1950s would have believed that Japanese electronics and autos were associated with high quality and high value products. However, Avison

Page 84

Melewar and Jenkins

(1997) contends that consumers in general are much more receptive today to brands from dierent countries. Ludlow (1997), after explaining how national airlines built on the reputation of their respective countries to project their corporate identity, shows how British Airlines changed its positioning from local to global-oriented positioning by replacing the British ag with multi-cultural motifs to reect the changing demographics of Britain.
Organizational Imagery and History Moingeon and Ramanantsoa (1997) argue that rites, myths, and taboos the common organizational imagery constitute the visual part of the identity or the culture of the organization. They further contend that this imagery is made up of basic assumptions, impulses, and values which govern (not necessary consciously) the behaviors of organization members (p. 386), and note that imagery is one of the most dicult aspects of corporate identity to measure. They also point out that, while history plays a part in dening the corporate identity, the identity also inuences history by contributing to the development of perceptions and actions of the organization members (Moingeon and Ramanantsoa, 1997). Market Conditions Nature of the Industry Studies of corporate identity in the banking industry illustrate the diculty in projecting an individual identity when the generic industry identity remains so strong (Morrison, 1997). Other generic industries, such as oil exploration and production, have consistently been constrained as to how much they can eect changes to their identities because the industry itself, in the view of many stakeholders, is generally associated with the negative connotations of pollution. This signies the important role

the nature of the industry plays in shaping an organizations identity. In their study on strategic group identity, Peteraf and Shanley (1997) posit that members, through history, discourse, and interactions, have come to understand the behaviors of other members. They further argue that strategic groups emerge in an industry that can aect organizational behaviors and outcomes. In sum, strategic groups encourage the development of a group identity in an industry and explain the retention of the identity once it has been developed.
Corporate and Marketing Strategies Markwick and Fill (1997) argue that it is the corporate strategy process, not the content, that retains some sort of continuity over time and thus is germane to the personality, which has deep roots embedded within the whole spectrum of its corporate activities (p. 400). For example, 3M Corporation has recently re-emphasized the importance of storytelling in its organization and contends that this storytelling should be extended to the process by which strategy is presented in order to be more consistent with the culture of the organization (Shaw et al., 1998). Bickerton (2000) holds that corporate branding is a top-down organization focus which can be a valuable asset and which, by its very nature, is intrinsically linked to internal factors such as corporate strategy and culture and externally to reputation and competitive positioning. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS An examination of numerous works dealing with corporate identity has indicated not only the absence of a single denition of the term, but also dierent emphases on those components that are viewed as determinants of the concept. These diering views are partially explained by the multidisciplinary nature of the eld and by practical as

Page 85

Dening the Corporate Identity Construct

opposed to academic approaches to the subject, as well as by the use of related concepts such as image and reputation. The review of literature revealed four subconstructs or dimensions of corporate identity, each of which contained dierent items. The subconstructs found are: communication/visual identity behavior corporate culture market conditions.

Categorizing the elements of corporate identity has proved to be one of the most challenging tasks in the eld. We propose three reasons for this diculty. First, as mentioned above, the multidisciplinary nature of the subject has meant that there are dierent approaches to the denition of corporate identity marketing researchers and organizational behavior researchers, for example, will naturally bring with them those perspectives that are specic to their respective elds of study. Secondly, a great deal of overlap and inter-relatedness exists between the subconstructs and the items they contain communication and behavior, for instance, are separated in the model proposed by this paper, though behavior can be seen as a nonverbal form of communication; thus the division seems somewhat articial, but is perhaps necessary in order to develop a model simple enough to be useful in explaining the concept. Thirdly, the existence of related but distinct concepts such as image, reputation, personality, and corporate identity management has resulted in some degree of confusion of the terms, though recent literature suggests that signicant eorts are being made to remedy this problem.
Managerial Implications Managers are becoming increasingly aware of the responsibility they have for steward-

ship of the corporate brand in order to differentiate their product and to gain competitive advantage. Although corporate identity and corporate identity management are distinct concepts, it is essential that corporate identity be further explored and dened to determine what specic elements are the most salient to the concept and thus identify areas on which to focus. The development of a comprehensive corporate identity model whose elements can be tested empirically would signicantly benet rms that are trying to establish strong corporate brands and achieve competitive advantage.
Academic Implications Corporate identity is central to the existence of the organization and this is reected in the current interest in corporate identity management, reputation, and image in both the academic journals and the trade press. In the future we will develop appropriate indicators of corporate identity in accordance with the measure development literature. Measurement always involves numbers, and the virtue of any system of measurement is determined by empirical data. In a technical sense, the process of measurement or operationalization concerns rules for assigning numbers to objects to represent quantities of attributes. An adapted version of the procedure suggested by Churchill (1979) by which measure of constructs of interests to researchers can be generated can be seen in Figure 2. The focus of this procedure is on developing measures (see Appendix 1) which have desirable reliability and validity attributes and properties. Several scholars have emphasized the need for paying explicit attention the validity and reliability of measure used in marketing research (Jacoby, 1978; Churchill, 1979; Peter, 1979, 1981; Zaichkowsky, 1985; Bearden et al, 1989; Lichtenstein et al, 1990; Kotabe, 1990; Melewar and Saunders, 1999). Thus, it is important that the corporate identity measures

Page 86

Melewar and Jenkins

Figure 2:

Procedure for developing better measures

Recommended Techniques

Specify domain of construct

Literature search Experience Survey

Generate sample of items

Literature search Experience surveys

Collect data

Purify measure

Coefficient alpha

Collect data

Assess reliability

Coefficient alpha

Assess validity

Content validity Construct validity

used in this research study are developed and investigated for their reliability and validity properties before the main study is conducted.

REFERENCES
Avison, S. (1997) The race to go global: brand development in new markets, Journal of Brand Management, 5 (1): 2839.

Page 87

Dening the Corporate Identity Construct

Balmer, J. (1995) Corporate branding and connoisseurship, Journal of General Management, 21 (1): 2446. Balmer, J. (1998) Corporate identity and the advent of corporate marketing, Journal of Marketing Management, 14: 963996. Balmer, J., and Soenen, G. (1998) A new approach to corporate identity management, International Centre for Corporate Identity Studies, Working Paper, 1998/5. Balmer, J., and Soenen, G. (1996) Rethinking the corporate identity mix, The Transatlantic Identity Study, Enterprise Group. Baker, M., and Balmer, J. (1997) Visual identity, trappings or substance?, European Journal of Marketing, 31, (5/6): 366382. Bearden, W.O., Netemeyer, R.G. and Teel, J.E. (1989) Measurement of consumer susceptibility to interpersonal inuence, Journal of Consumer Research, 15: 47381. Berg, P.O and Gagliardi, P. (1985) Corporate images: a symbolic perspective of the organization-environment interface, paper presented at the Conference on Corporate Images SCOS, Antibes. Bernstein, D. (1986) Company Image And Reality: A Critique Of Corporate Communications, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Eastbourne, UK. Bickerton, D. (2000) Corporate reputation versus corporate branding: the realist debate, Corporate Communications, 5 (1): 4248. Churchill, G.A. (1979) A paradigm for developing measures of marketing constructs, Journal of Marketing Research, February: 6473. Dowling, G.R. (1986) Managing your corporate images, Industrial Marketing Management, 15: 109 15. Downey, S.M. (1986) The relationship between corporate culture and corporate identity, Public Relations Quarterly, 31, 4: 712. Hatch, M., and Schultz, M. (1997) Relations between organizational culture, identity, and image, European Journal of Marketing, 31, (5/6): 356365. Hofstede, G., Nueijen, B., Daval Ohavy, D. and Sanders, G. (1990) Measuring organizational cultures: a qualitative and quantitative study across twenty cases, Administrative Science Quarterly, June: 286316. Jacoby, J. (1978) Consumer research: a state of the art review, Journal of Marketing, April: 8796. Kiriakidou, O. and Millward, L. J. (2000) Corporate identity; external reality or internal t, Corporate Communications, 5 (1): 4958. Kotabe, M. (1990) Corporate product policy and innovative behavior of European and Japanese

multinationals: an empirical investigation, Journal of Marketing, 54, April: 1933. Larcon, J.P. and Reitter, R. (1984) Corporate imagery and corporate identity, In Kets de Vries, M (Ed.), The Irrational Executive. Psychoanalytic Explorations in Management: 34455, International University Press, New York, NY. Lichtenstein, D.R., Netemeyer, R.G. and Burton, S. (1990) Distinguishing coupon proneness from value consciousness: an acquisition-transaction utility theory perspective, Journal of Marketing, 54: 5467. Ludlow, C. (1997) The global identity crisis in the airline industry, Journal of Brand Management, 5 (2): 8591. Markwick, N., and Fill, C. (1997) Towards a framework for managing corporate identity, European Journal of Marketing, 31 (5/6): 396409. Melewar, T.C. and Saunders, J. (1998) Global corporate visual identity systems: standardization, control and benets, International Marketing Review, 15 (4): 291308. Melewar, T.C. and Saunders, J. (1999) International corporate visual identity: standardization or localization?, Journal of International Business Studies, 30 (3): 583598. Melewar, T.C. and Saunders, J. (2000) Global corporate visual identity: using an extended marketing mix, European Journal of Marketing, 34 (5/6): 538550. Melewar, T.C., Saunders, J. and Balmer, J. (2000) The saliency of Olins visual identity structure in relation to UK companies operating in Malaysia, Corporate Reputation Review, 3 (3): 194200. Moingeon, B. and Ramanantsoa, B. (1997) Understanding corporate identity: the French school of thought, European Journal of Marketing, 31 (5/ 6): 383395. Moingeon, B. and Ramanantsoa, B. (1995) An identity study of rm mergers: the case of a French savings bank, In Klein, H.E. (Ed), Case Method Research and Application, Volume VII, WACRA, Needham, MA, 25360. Morrison, I. (1997) Breaking the monolithic mould, International Journal of Bank Marketing, 15 (5): 153162. Olins, W. (1995) The New Guide To Identity Wol Olins. Gower, Hampshire. Peacock, R. (1997) Rebuilding the value of the Xerox brand: brand development and positioning for The Document Company, Journal of Brand Management, 5 (1) 2327. Peter, J.P. (1979) Reliability: a review of psychometric basics and recent marketing practices, Journal of Marketing Research, XVI, 611.

Page 88

Melewar and Jenkins

Peter, J.P. (1981) Construct validity: a review of basic issues and marketing practices, Journal of Marketing Research, May: 13345. Peteraf, M. and Shanley, M. (1997) Getting to Know You: A Theory of Strategic Group Identity, Strategic Management Journal, 18, Summer: 165186. Pfeer, J. and Salancik, G. R. (1978) The External Control of Organization: A Resource Dependence Perspective, Harper and Row, Boston, MA. Reitter, R. and Ramanantsoa, B. (1985) Pouvoir et Politique. Au dela de la culture denterprise, McGraw Hill, Paris. Schmidt, K. (1995) The Quest for Identity: Corporate Identity, Strategies, Methods and Examples, Cassell, London. Schmitt, B. (1995) Language and visual imagery: issues of corporate identity in East Asia, The Columbia Journal of World Business, Winter: 2836. Schmitt, B. and Pan, Y. (1994) Managing corporate and brand identities in the Asia-Pacic Region, California Management Review, Summer: 3248. Shaw, G., Brown, R. and Bromiley, P. (1998) Strategic stories: how 3M is rewriting business planning, Harvard Business Review, MayJune: 4150. Stuart, H. (1999) Towards a denitive model of the

corporate identity management process, Corporate Communications, 4 (4) 200207. van Rekom, J. (1997) Deriving an operational measure of corporate identity, European Journal of Marketing, 31 (5/6) 410422. van Rekom, J., van Riel, C.B.M. and Wierenga, B. (1991), Corporate identity. Van vaag concept naar hard feitenmateriaal, Working Paper, Corporate Communication Centre, Erasmus University Rotterdam. van Riel, C. and Balmer, J. (1997) Corporate identity: the concept, its measurement and management, European Journal of Marketing, 31 (5/6) 340355. van Riel, C. (1995) Principles Of Corporate Communication, Prentice Hall, New York. van Riel, C. (1997) Protecting the corporate brand by orchestrated communication, Journal of Brand Management, 4 (6): 409418. van Riel, C. (1997) Research in corporate communication an overview of an emerging eld, Management Communication Quarterly, 1 (2): 288 309. Weick, K. E. (1979) The Social Psychology of Organizing, Addision-Wesley, Reading, MA. Zaichkowsky, J.L. (1985) Measuring the involvement construct, Journal of Consumer Research, 12: 341352.

Page 89

Dening the Corporate Identity Construct

APPENDIX 1: THE CORPORATE IDENTITY CONSTRUCT

Sub construct Communication and visual identity

Sample of items generated from literature Corporate communication (van Riel, 1995; Baker and Balmer, 1997) management communication (Olins, 1995; Pfeer and Salancik, 1978) marketing communication (van Riel, 1995; Dowling, 1986) organizational communication (Hatch and Schultz 1997; Bernstein, 1986) Uncontrollable communication (Moingeon and Ramanantsoa, 1997; Markwick and Fill, 1997) Architecture and location (Schmitt and Pan, 1994; Olins, 1995) Corporate visual identity and its application (Melewar and Saunders, 1998; Peacock, 1997) Corporate behavior (van Rekom, 1997; Weick, 1979) Management behavior (Hatch and Schultz, 1997; Peteraf and Shanley, 1997) Employee behavior (Hofstede et al, 1990; Kiriakidou and Millward, 2000) Corporate goals (van Rekom, 1997; Berg and Gagliardi, 1985) Corporate philosophy (Balmer, 1995; Bernstein, 1986) Corporate principles (Schmidt, 1995; Olins, 1995; Bernstein, 1986) Nationality of rm (Avison, 1997; Ludlow, 1997) Organizational imagery (Moingeon and Ramanantsoa, 1997; Reitter and Ramanantsoa, 1985) Corporate history (Peteraf and Shanley, 1997; Larcon and Ramanantsoa, 1997) Nature of industry (Peteraf and Shanley, 1997; Morrison, 1997) Corporate strategies (Shaw et al, 1998; Markwick and Fill, 1997) Marketing strategies (Bickerton, 2000; Balmer and Soenen, 1996)

Behavior

Corporate culture

Market conditions

Page 90