Article Critique: Corporate Reputation Analysis

This essay provides a detailed critique of Ronald J. Alsop's article on corporate reputation, focusing on its deep but fragile nature. The analysis summarizes Alsop's key arguments, including the importance of distinguishing between corporate social responsibility and reputation, the impact of negative reputation, and the need for effective reputation management. The essay also identifies the strengths of the article, such as its emphasis on the correct definition of reputation and the role of stakeholders. It also points out weaknesses, such as the one-sided view of reputation and the lack of discussion on ways to rectify damaged reputation. The essay concludes by highlighting the societal implications of the article, emphasizing the shared responsibility of companies and society in managing corporate reputation.

0Running head: ARTICLE CRITIQUE
ARTICLE CRITIQUE: CORPORATE REPUTATION: ANYTHING BUT SUPERFICIAL – THE DEEP BUT
FRAGILE
NATURE OF CORPORATE REPUTATION
Name of the student
Name of the university
Author note

1ARTICLE CRITIQUE
Table of Contents
Summary.....................................................................................................................................................2
Strengths.....................................................................................................................................................3
Weakness....................................................................................................................................................3
Implication for society.................................................................................................................................4
Conclusion...................................................................................................................................................4

2ARTICLE CRITIQUE
CORPORATE REPUTATION: ANYTHING BUT SUPERFICIAL – THE DEEP BUT FRAGILE NATURE OF
CORPORATE REPUTATION
Summary
The article, Corporate reputation: Anything but superficial – the deep but fragile nature
of corporate reputation, the author Ronald J. Alsop has provided a detailed discussion on some
very valuable assets that are every significant for corporate development. His article on the
importance of corporate reputation has been hailed as very significant for educating the corporate
sector of the importance of corporate reputation. In this article, Alsop has critiqued the nature
and implication of corporate business. He has effectively pointed out that the importance of
corporate reputation has increased however, what needs to be understood that people are more
concerned with superficial nature of reputation. This has made the situation worse and this is
because companies associate reputation with characteristics that actually do not define their
reputation. As rightly pointed by Alsop, reputation has been associated with a totalitarian
mindset. He has demonstrated how the misdeeds of a single company affect the others in an
industry. Many businesses have to pay the price due to the fraudulent measures of other
companies. This accounts for and unfair practice and that reflects the superficiality of corporate
reputation. Alsop has refined the principles of reputation in this article and had argued that
reputation demands extreme vigilance for reputation management. The reputation management,
as pointed by him is more significant due to the globalization and the extensive scrutiny that
businesses are exposed to under the scanner of media. Alsop has pointed that there are
differences between social responsibility and reputation of a company. Reputation should be
described by the product quality, workplace, service and financial performance and not through
its degree of corporate social responsibility. The social responsibility determines the ethics and
values and not reputation of a company. The reputation is created and monitored by the

3ARTICLE CRITIQUE
leadership, activities and vision. Alsop has also hinted towards the association between
stakeholders and companies in reputation management.
Strengths
 The stress given on the correct definition and scope of reputation in the corporate
scenario.
 The importance given to the need for differentiation between corporate social
responsibility and reputation
 The discussion of the impact of negative reputation of one company on others in an
industry
 The stress given by the author on reputation management and to inculcate values in the
work culture to ensure better reputation
 The stress given on the association of companies and stakeholders in the fostering of
constructive reputation
Weakness
 The author’s observation has been one sided. The negative effect of reputation has been
stressed too much and thus the positive impact of reputation has been totally eclipsed.
This has made the discussion unbalanced and one-dimensional.
 The author has not overtly discussed the ways or reputation management. The
implications of reputation management have not been discussed.
 One of the potholes in this article has been with the importance given to reputation
management but ways for rectification of damaged reputation has not been hinted at. This
makes the discussion incomplete and vague and also raises pertinent issues.

4ARTICLE CRITIQUE
Implication for society
The author has pointed out various significant observations that would be very effective
for the corporate arena. As it has been seen the scope of the article is very extensive and covers
the general image of companies in the corporate sector. However, the observations have been
significant for general implications in the society as well. The concept of reputation management
can be of great importance for the individuals in the society as well. It can be said that reputation
can be constructed and destroyed by the society and thus this hints towards the greater
responsibility of the society in the reputation management of companies in the corporate sector.
The superficiality of reputation exists due to the faulty associations of the society with reputation
and their generalization. Thus the social responsibility of the society is equally important as that
of the companies towards the society. The article has stressed on the unimportance of superficial
image advertising by companies and clever public relation management ploys for protecting the
interests of the society.
Conclusion
The suggestion that has been given by the author for reputation management would have
great impact on giving more depth to reputation and its functioning. The responsibility of
corporate image is in the hands of the company as well as the society. The managerial activities
should be aimed at improving the reputation of the company and this can be done if the
employees are satisfied in the workplace and the society in general.