Written by Edward Tse at Strategy+Business (http://www.strategy-business.com/article/00011?pg=all#authors) writes an extensive article on how and why ”[...] Executives should track Internet commentary in China to protect their company’s reputation — and market position” (full article at http://www.strategy-business.com/article/00011?rssid=all_updates&gko=9f718&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+StrategyBusiness-AllUpdates+%28strategy%2Bbusiness+-+All+Updates%29).
I think on line reputation is becoming more a threat than an opportunity, not only in China, but throughout the world.
I think everyone agrees that company reputation is one of the biggest assets a company owns: being innovator or having a bunch of assets in the barn is nothing valuable (or at least seems so) if company has a bad reputation.
The only difference is that with globalization and the internet, what in the past was limited to a city, state, continent (depending on company size and spreading) now has a worldwide dimension.
But who decides that a company reputation is good or bad? People.
But what makes the difference between people with solid facts for or against a company and those saying false things? In our world only the number of people involved. Sometimes is percieved as more credible a Social networked group (just because has a lot of people), rather than an informed opinion of some “gurus”.
I think most of us remember some urban legends saying (without scientific basis) that some ingredients used in bath foams were cancer developers. And what happened? People stopped buying products and companies lost reputation. Just because of a wrong spread of mouth.
What I’m saying is that online reputation should always be evaluated together with solid facts for a company and never shoul prevail on real facts, because is too easy to be manipulated
Recent Comments