Η φήμη μιας επιχείρησης εξαρτάται από τη διοίκηση των κρίσεων

Nottingham Trent University
Athens Graduate School of Management

Dissertation
: .
: N 0168681

2008
1 109
Executive Summary
,
. ,
.

, .
, ,
,
.

,
. ,

.
87%
87%, ,
,

.
(97%)

(
6,27 7- Lickert),
.

.
,
.
20 5
2 109
.
.
3 109
4 109
Executive Summary .......................................................................................................1

...................................................................................................................5
1. ...................................................................................................................8
2. .................................................................................................11
2.1 ...........................................................................................................11
2.2 ......................................................................11
3. ..............................................................................14
3.1 ...........................................................................................................14
3.2 .....................................................................15
4. ...........................................................................................18
4.1 ...........................................................................................................18
4.2 .......................................................................................18
4.3 ...........................................................................................19
4.4 ......................................................................22
4.5 ................................................................24
5. ......................................................................................28
5.1 ...........................................................................................................28
.28
5.2 ....................................................................................29
5.2.1. 29
5.2.2 . 30
5.2.3. 33
5.3.1 .. 38
6. - ...............................................................43
6.1 ..............................43
6.2 ..................................................................45
6.3 ..................................................................83
7. ................................................................................................................86
8. / .........................................................................89
..89

5 109
.89
/ ........................................................................................92
...........................................................................................................................94
...............................................................................................................97
6 109
7 109
1.

. ,
,

.
1993 Barton , ,
. ,
, ,
, .
.
( - stakeholders) ,
.
(John Dalton Managing Corporate Reputation)
,
,
. ,
,
, .

.
.
,
.
1.000.000 .

.
, ,
.

, .

8 109

.
.
,
,
, ,
, .
,
.
.
; ( )
;

;
,
. ,

(stakeholders). ,

.
9 109
10
109
2.
2.1
.

, , ..

.
2.2
, Aaker D & Day G. & Kumar (1990),
,
.

.

.
:
1.
;
2. ;
3. ;
4. ;
5. ;
6. ;
,
(face to face) (in-depth) ,
11
109
()
.

.
(email) .

,
. ,
,

( )
.

. ,
.
,
,

.
,

,
.
12
109
13
109
3.
3.1

-, ,
: 25%
, 25% , 24%
22%
. (, 3 24
. 2007 - )
-
.
, , ,
. , 2002 24,4%
,
16,1%.
2003 (1.461
), 49 (51
2002), 2003
. , 96% 250
, 48% 22%
2001-03. ,

, . ( ,
2008)
14
109
3.2
-, ,
. :
,
,
,
,
,
, ,
,
, , , ( )
.
,
, & ,
, , , , .
, 75%
,
-.

. , ,
,
:

.
.

15
109

.
(, 3 24 . 2007 - )

,
, ,
,
. ,
.
16
109
17
109
4.
4.1
,
.
.
.

.
4.2
.
.
Foster (1980)
,
,
.
Rosenthal Pijnenburg (1991) .
,
, .
, (2008),

. ,
,
.
.
:

18
109
/ ,
.(Heath R., 2005)

. .

.
,
.

( ,
2008). ' ,
, Robert Heath (2005)
.
.
,

.
4.3

.
,
,
.

.
,
, ,
.
,
19
109
,
(2008).
Heath Robert (2005)

,
,
( ) .

. ,
:
Reduction ()
Readiness ()
Response ()
Recovery ()
4R.

.
.
. ,

.

.
,

, 1999.
20
109

.
, ,
. ,
. Green
(1992)
,
. ,
.
,
. , ,
,
(Heath R, 2005). ,
. ,

( . ., 2008).
,
. ,
-
(CEOs) -

. ,
.

,
.
Gonzalez-Herrero,

. ,
.
21
109

.
(CEOs)
. Bill Patterson,
CEO : CEOs
. ,
.
,
. , "
" .
.
4.4

.
(stakeholders) ,
, , , .
HB Schultz A Werner
:

, , ,
.
.
:
.

.

, .
22
109
, Dr. Gary H. Jones, Dr. Beth H. Jones Dr. Philip Little

, " "
, Hess,
Nikolai Thomas (2002).

, , ,
.
, ,
.
.

. ,
. (Corporate
Reputation Watch, 2003).

. ' , .
(Batchelor, 1999; Bromley, 1993; Brouillard, 1983; Caminiti, 1992; Fombrun, 1996;
Hall, 1992; Holmes, 1995; Sobol, et al., 1992; Weigelt and Camerer, 1988).
.
, , ,
.
, ,
(Bromley
1993, Fombrun Shanley, 1990).
,
(Brouillard, 1983 Sobol et Al,
1992). ,
(Camaniti, 1992 Fombrun Shanley,
23
109
1990), - " " (Bromley, 1993),

(Knipes, 1989; Riahi-Belkaoui and Pavlik, 1992).
(Brouillard,
1983). Sobol et Al (1992)
: , ,
/, , Fombrun (1996)
. ,
. , Sobol et Al (1992)
, , ,
, . ,
(Benoit, 1995; Fombrun, 1996).

(Jay Wang, 2005).
4.5
,
. Green (1992)

, .
.
Green
.
. ,
.
Heath (2005), ,
, ,
,

24
109
.
,
.
,
. ,
.

: ,
. ,

. ,
. ,

.
Heath (2005), ,
. :
, .

, Heath, :
,
:

25
109

, Paul Holmes (1995)

marketing, . Holmes
,
,
, , Hall (1993,)
" ".
26
109
27
109
5.
5.1

.
2
, :

.
:

,
, ,

(, 2006).
28
109

. ,
.
:
-
-
-
5.2

.

.

. , (exploratory
research), (descriptive research)
(causal research).
,
,
, .

.
,
, ,
.
5.2.1.

.
29
109
: , ,
(. 2001). (2006),

.

.
( 2006).

.

.

.

(face to face).
5.2.2
. (2001),
, ,
.

. ,
.

:
30
109
(structured).
.
(semi-structured).
.
(free discussion).
.

.
.
:
Panels
Hall tests
,
.
,
,
,
. ,
.

31
109
, , , follow-up
.

. ,
.
32
109
5.2.3.

:
, , ;
; ,
, , , .
;
; ;
;
,
;
(Pilot test).
7 Lickert
. 13
33
.

, .
Lickert
.

. 7
33
109
.
.
:
, ,
( )
,
,
. ,

(pilot test). Pilot test
.
(, , )
, ,
. ,
( .
., 2000).
,

.

.

34
109

.
130
. 60
.

,
,
,

.
S.P.S.S. (Statistical Package for Social Science)

EXCEL. S.P.S.S.
EXCEL o S.P.S.S. ,
EXCEL (, 2008).
(cross-tabulation)
.

,

(structural equation
modeling). r
-1 1. Pearson r.
Karl S. Pearson.
;
35
109
(r = 1) : +1 ,
.
.
, ( ,
, ).
(0 < r < 1) : ( )
,
. 1
0
.
(r = 0) : 0
.
(-1 < r < 0) : ( )
,
. -1
0
.
(r = -1) : , (
)
(George D. & Mallery P, 2003).
, (
)
. ( p)
.
0.05 (p < 0.05) 5%
.
36
109
.
.
.
,
.
EXOY T (T TEST)
(t test)

. , t
, (
).
. t
. :
t .

t ,
. ,
.

t
,
one-tailed
two-tailed. two-tailed
,
( ) . one-tailed
.
37
109
(One-Way ANOVA)

.
t. t ,
(George D. & Mallery P, 2003).
. CROSSTABS.
,
. ,
, ,
. Crosstabs (cross
tabulation)

5.3.1
.
,
, (, 2006).

.

(In depth interview).
, ,
.
: , (
), , ,
,
38
109
,
.

:
, , , ,
, , .
: ,
, .
:

.
(
.
- :
Case study

.

:
; ;
39
109
;
;
/ ;

.
marketing
.
(well informants) ,
,
.

, .

.
.

.

.

40
109
41
109
42
109
6. -
6.1
,
.
marketing
.
.

. ,
.

.
,
.
,
,
.
.
,

.
,
,
.
.

. ,
43
109
internet ,
.

. ,
,
.
,
, , .

.
,
, ,
,
.
,
,
.
.
,
.
,
,
.

.

.
44
109
,
,

.
,
.

.
6.2

,
( )
-
SPSS.
.
1. ;
Cumulative
Valid
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
NAI
44
73.3
73.3
73.3
OXI
16
26.7
26.7
100.0
Total
60
100.0
100.0
45
109
OXI
27%
NAI
73%
27% ,
,
.
4. /
;

Cumulative
Valid
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
OXI
48
80.0
80.0
80.0
NAI
12
20.0
20.0
100.0
Total
60
100.0
100.0
NAI
20%
OXI
80%
46
109

Cumulative
Valid
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
OXI
13.3
13.3
13.3
NAI
52
86.7
86.7
100.0
Total
60
100.0
100.0
OXI
13%
NAI
87%

Cumulative
Valid
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
OXI
54
90.0
90.0
90.0
NAI
10.0
10.0
100.0
Total
60
100.0
100.0
NAI
10%
OXI
90%
47
109
Cumulative
Valid
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
OXI
48
80.0
80.0
80.0
NAI
12
20.0
20.0
100.0
Total
60
100.0
100.0
NAI
20%
OXI
80%
,
,
.
6)
;
Cumulative
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
NAI
13.3
13.3
13.3
OXI
52
86.7
86.7
100.0
Total
60
100.0
100.0
48
109
NAI
13%
OXI
87%
6) ;
Cumulative
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
NAI
58
96.7
96.7
96.7
OXI
3.3
3.3
100.0
Total
60
100.0
100.0
OXI
3%
NAI
97%
8)
;
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
12
20.0
20.0
20.0
1%
10
16.7
16.7
36.7
1%-5%
16
26.7
26.7
63.3
5%-10%
6.7
6.7
70.0
18
30.0
30.0
100.0
Total
60
100.0
100.0
49
109
20%
29%
17%
27%
7%
1%
1%-5%
5%-10%
8)
;
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
26
43.3
43.3
43.3
1%
10.0
10.0
53.3
1%-5%
10
16.7
16.7
70.0
5%-10%
3.3
3.3
73.3
16
26.7
26.7
100.0
Total
60
100.0
100.0
27%
43%
3%
17%
10%
1%
1%-5%
5%-10%
9. :
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
18
30.0
30.0
30.0
38
63.3
63.3
93.3
50
109
6.7
6.7
60
100.0
100.0
100.0
/
Total
7%
30%
63%
12. ;

Frequency
Valid
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
OXI
22
36.7
36.7
36.7
NAI
38
63.3
63.3
100.0
Total
60
100.0
100.0
OXI
37%
NAI
63%

Cumulative
Frequency
Valid
OXI
Percent
44
73.3
Valid Percent
73.3
Percent
73.3
51
109
NAI
16
26.7
26.7
Total
60
100.0
100.0
100.0
NAI
27%
OXI
73%
/ /

Cumulative
Frequency
Valid
OXI
48
NAI
12
Total
60
Percent
Valid Percent
80.0
Percent
80.0
80.0
20.0
20.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
NAI
20%
OXI
80%
52
109

Cumulative
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
OXI
38
63.3
63.3
63.3
NAI
22
36.7
36.7
100.0
Total
60
100.0
100.0
NAI
37%
OXI
63%
media
Cumulative
Frequency
Valid
OXI
26
NAI
34
Total
60
Percent
43.3
Valid Percent
Percent
43.3
43.3
56.7
56.7
100.0
100.0
100.0
OXI
43%
NAI
57%
53
109
,
Cumulative
Frequency
Valid
OXI
44
NAI
16
Total
60
Percent
73.3
Valid Percent
Percent
73.3
73.3
26.7
26.7
100.0
100.0
100.0
NAI
27%
OXI
73%
Cumulative
Frequency
Valid
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
48
80.0
80.0
80.0
12
20.0
20.0
100.0
Total
60
100.0
100.0
54
109
20%
80%
Cumulative
Frequency
Valid
Missing
Percent
Valid Percent
Percent
25-35
20
33.3
34.5
34.5
36-45
26
43.3
44.8
79.3
46-55
10.0
10.3
89.7
56+
10.0
10.3
100.0
Total
58
96.7
100.0
999
3.3
60
100.0
Total
10%
10%
34%
46%
25-35
36-45
46-55
56+
Frequency
Valid
Percent
8
13.3
Valid
Cumulative
Percent
Percent
13.8
55
109
13.8
Missing
16
26.7
27.6
41.4
34
56.7
58.6
100.0
Total
58
96.7
100.0
999
3.3
60
100.0
Total
14%
58%
/
28%
,
58% .
2 , :
4,12
-
/ /

5,29
,
.
5,5
6,38
m edia ""

6,5
7

/
, 6,38 7.
56
109
3
, :
1,00
2,34

m edia ""

2,97
3,07

/
/
4,90
5,24
-
,

5,66
1
5
, :
5,7
5,89
6,17
6,83
1
7
,
:
57
109
(

V, , )
3,83
4,61
/
.
10 ,
5,20 1 7.
5,2
11
, 4,80 1 7.
58
109
4,8
, 13
,
6,27 1 7.
6,27
Independent Samples Test 2

Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances
Equal variances
assumed
t-test for Equality of Means

Sig. (2-
Mean
Sig.
df
tailed)
Difference
2.17
0.16
2.97
14.00
0.01
3.57
8.09
13.00
0.00
3.57
4.65
10.00
0.00
4.20
Equal variances
not assumed
Equal variances
assumed
3.50
0.09
59
109
Equal variances
not assumed
10.80
9.00
0.00
4.20

.
Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances
F
Equal
variances
assumed
Equal
variances
not assumed
Sig.
7.31
0.01
df
Sig. (2-
Mean
tailed)
Difference
2.06
56.00
0.04
1.13
1.64
13.75
0.12
1.13
-2.34
56
0.02
-1.3
-2.02
14.37
0.06
-1.30
Equal
media ""
variances
assumed
Equal
variances
1.24
0.27
not assumed

, .
Levene's Test
t-test for Equality of
for Equality of
Means
Variances
60
109
Equal
variances

Sig.
4.53
assumed
0.04
df
Sig. (2-
Mean
tailed)
Difference
1.92
52.00
0.06
1.11
1.43
10.63
0.18
1.11
Equal
variances not
assumed
-
.
Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances
F
Equal variances
assumed
Sig.
8.85
0.00
df
Sig. (2-
Mean
tailed)
Difference
-3.99
58.00
0.00
-1.63
-6.51
48.34
0.00
-1.63
Equal variances
not assumed
.
Independent Samples Test 2 6
Levene's Test for
Equality of
Variances
F
Equal variances
assumed
20.59
Sig.
0.00
t
2.59
df
14.00
Sig. (2-
Mean
tailed)
Difference
0.02
2.50
61
109
Equal variances
4.60
11.00
0.00
2.50
-2.66
56.00
0.01
-1.53
-5.47
39.11
0.00
-1.53
not assumed
Equal variances
assumed
Equal variances
not assumed
13.22
0.00

.
Levene's Test for
Equality of
Means
Variances
F

Equal variances
Sig.
3.07
0.09
df
Sig. (2-
Mean
tailed)
Difference
-1.87
56.00
0.07
-0.98
-2.55
13.11
0.02
-0.98
2.20
56.00
0.03
1.17
3.12
13.96
0.01
1.17
-4.27
56.00
0.00
-2.21
-2.09
7.22
0.07
-2.21
assumed
Equal variances
not assumed
-
Equal variances
assumed
0.74
0.39
Equal variances
not assumed

Equal variances
assumed
Equal variances
not assumed
67.05
0.00

, ,
.
.
Levene's Test for
Equality of
Means
Variances
62
109
Equal
variances
assumed
3.25

Sig.
0.08
Equal
df
Sig. (2-
Mean
tailed)
Difference
2.55
56.00
0.01
1.65
3.43
12.81
0.00
1.65
variances not
assumed

/
.
Levene's Test for
Equality of
Variances
F
Equal
variances
assumed
39.69
Sig.
0.00
Equal
df
Sig. (2-
Mean
tailed)
Difference
-2.10
58.00
0.04
-1.10
-1.25
7.49
0.25
-1.10
variances not
assumed
63
109

Levene's Test
for Equality of
Means
Variances
F
Equal
variances
assumed
Sig.
2.96
0.09
df
Sig. (2-
Mean
tailed)
Difference
1.59
56.00
0.12
1.96
8.46
55.00
0.00
1.96
5.06
56.00
0.00
4.39
27.0
55.00
0.00
4.39
1.55
56.00
0.13
1.71
8.30
55.00
0.00
1.71
Equal
variances not
assumed
Equal
variances
4.06
0.05
assumed
Equal
variances not
assumed

Equal
variances
assumed
Equal
1.29
0.26
variances not
assumed
64
109

Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances
F
Equal variances
assumed
Equal variances
Sig.
0.93
0.34
df
Sig. (2-
Mean
tailed)
Difference
2.77
58.00
0.01
0.86
15.02
57.00
0.00
0.86
1.03
58.00
0.31
1.03
5.57
57.00
0.00
1.03
1.47
52.00
0.15
1.77
7.56
51.00
0.00
1.77
not assumed
Equal variances
assumed
Equal variances
not assumed
Equal variances
assumed
2.65
2.38
0.11
0.13
Equal variances
not assumed
-,
-

Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances
F

Equal
variances
assumed
Equal
variances not
2.66
Sig.
0.11
df
Sig. (2-
Mean
tailed)
Difference
3.68
58.00
0.00
2.90
19.99
57.00
0.00
2.90
assumed
65
109

Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances
F
Sig.
2.47
Equal
variances
assumed
0.12
df
Sig. (2-
Mean
tailed)
Difference
0.44
58.00
0.66
0.28
2.40
57.00
0.02
0.28
Equal
variances not
assumed

.
.
ANOVA 2
Sum of Squares

df
Mean Square
Between Groups
47.417
15.806
Within Groups
10.333
12
.861
Total
57.750
15
F
18.355

Duncan
Subset for alpha = .05
25-35
1.00
46-55
2.50
56+
5.00
36-45
5.67
Sig.
.056
.365
66
109
Sig.
.000
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.

a Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 3.429.
b The group sizes are unequal. The harmonic mean of the group sizes is used. Type I error levels are
not guaranteed.
25-35 46-55
36-45 56+.
ANOVA 3
Sum of Squares

Between Groups
df
Mean Square
22.157
7.386
Within Groups
119.200
52
2.292
Total
141.357
55
35.014
11.671
136.700
52
2.629
171.714
55
Between Groups
media ""
Within Groups
Total
Sig.
3.222
.030
4.440
.007

Duncan
56+
2
1.33
25-35
20
3.20
36-45
24
3.33
46-55
3.67
Sig.
1.000
.534

not guaranteed.
67
109
56+
.
68
109
media ""
Duncan
56+
2.00
36-45
24
2.25
25-35
20
46-55
2.25
3.70
3.70
4.00
Sig.
.739
.058
.690

not guaranteed.
56+
media "" ,
46-55.
ANOVA 5
Sum of Squares
Between Groups
df
Mean Square
8.948
2.983
Within Groups
49.949
54
.925
Total
58.897
57
Between Groups
43.314
14.438
Within Groups
106.917
48
2.227
Total
150.231
51
F
3.225
.030
6.482
.001

Duncan
46-55
5.33
25-35
20
6.00
36-45
26
6.23
6.23
69
109
Sig.

56+

7.00
Sig.
.059
.087

not guaranteed.
46-55 25-35

56+.
-
Duncan
25-35
16
36-45
24
6.25
46-55
6.33
56+
6.67
Sig.
4.38
1.000
.579

not guaranteed.
25-35
.
ANOVA 7
Sum of Squares
/
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
df
Mean Square
25.157
8.386
148.200
52
2.850
173.357
55
F
2.942
70
109
Sig.
.041
71
109
/
Duncan
36-45
24
3.33
46-55
3.33
25-35
20
4.30
56+
4.30
5.33
Sig.
.248
.190

not guaranteed.
36-55
/
56+.
ANOVA 11
Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
Between Groups
14.409
4.803
Within Groups
69.867
54
1.294
Total
84.276
57
F
3.712
;
Duncan
25-35
20
4.20
36-45
26
5.00
5.00
56+
5.33
46-55
5.67
Sig.
.131
.235

72
109
Sig.
.017
not guaranteed.
25-35
46+.
ANOVA 2
Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
Between Groups
22.750
11.375
Within Groups
35.000
13
2.692
Total
57.750
15
Sig.
4.225
.039

Duncan
12
4.50
5.00
Sig.
1.00
1.000
.726

not guaranteed.
.
ANOVA 3
Sum of Squares

Between Groups
Mean Square
22.887
11.443
Within Groups
118.471
53
2.235
Total
141.357
55
Between Groups
15.441
7.721
Within Groups
91.987
53
1.736
107.429
55
21.630
Total
-
df
Between Groups
10.815
F
5.119
.009
4.448
.016
5.983
.005
73
109
Sig.
Within Groups
Total
Between Groups
Within Groups
Total
95.798
53
1.808
117.429
55
18.382
9.191
114.975
53
2.169
133.357
55
4.237
.020

Duncan
14
34
3.47
3.50
Sig.
2.00
1.000
.960

not guaranteed.
/

.

Duncan
14
1.57
1.75
Sig.
1.75
34
2.71
.728
.067

not guaranteed.
/
.
74
109
-
Duncan
34
4.82
5.00
14
6.29
Sig.
.736
1.000

not guaranteed.

-
/.
,
Duncan
14
4.71
34
5.76
5.76
Sig.
6.50
.072
.204

not guaranteed.
/
,
.
ANOVA 5
Sum of Squares
-
Between Groups
Within Groups
df
Mean Square
21.697
10.849
128.533
49
2.623
Sig.
4.136
75
109
.022
Total
150.231
51
-
Duncan
4.33
30
5.60
16
5.60
6.50
Sig.
.068
.190

not guaranteed.

-
/.
ANOVA 10
Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
Between Groups
20.132
10.066
Within Groups
90.765
55
1.650
Total
110.897
57
Sig.
6.100
.004

Duncan
16
34
5.35
6.00
Sig.
4.25
1.000
.191

not guaranteed.
76
109
/
.
ANOVA 11
Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
Between Groups
12.555
6.278
Within Groups
71.721
55
1.304
Total
84.276
57
F
4.814
Sig.
.012
;
Duncan
34
4.47
16
5.13
5.13
5.75
Sig.
.138
.156

not guaranteed.

.
ANOVA 2 9
Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
Between Groups
5.083
2.542
Within Groups
2.667
13
.205
Total
7.750
15
Between Groups
24.150
12.075
Within Groups
33.600
13
2.585
Total
57.750
15
F
12.391
.001
4.672
.030
77
109
Sig.
/
Duncan

:

N
1
2
2
5.00
6.00
12
6.67
/

Sig.
1.000
.107

not guaranteed.

Duncan

:

N
10
3.20
5.00
5.00
6.00
/
Sig.
.161
.424

not guaranteed.
Sum of Squares
-
Between Groups
Within Groups
df
Mean Square
13.621
6.810
105.000
55
1.909
F
3.567
78
109
Sig.
.035
Total
118.621
57
Between Groups
94.437
47.218
Within Groups
42.667
55
.776
137.103
57
Total
60.867
.000
-
Duncan
:

1
36
5.06
18
5.22
7.00
Sig.
.799
1.000

not guaranteed.
,
Duncan

:

N
1.00
36
5.89
18
Sig.
6.22
1.000
.426

not guaranteed.
79
109
Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
Between Groups
52.547
26.274
Within Groups
65.053
57
1.141
Total
117.600
59
F
23.021
Sig.
.000

Duncan

:

N
2.00
38
5.16
18
6.00

Sig.
1.000
.099

not guaranteed.
(Correlation)

;

Pearson Correlation
.243
Sig. (2-tailed)
.061
60
6,1%
, (Pearson correlation = 0.243)
.

80
109

.
Pearson Correlation
.402
Sig. (2-tailed)
.001
60
0,1%
.

;

Pearson Correlation
.281
Sig. (2-tailed)
.030
60
3%
, (Pearson
correlation = 0.281)
.
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
N
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
Pearson
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)
.000
.261(*)
.017
-.192
.118
1.000
.044
.897
.156
.397
60
60
60
56
54
.185
.306(*)
.321(*)
-.091
.491(**)
.158
.017
.012
.507
.000
60
60
60
56
54
.029
.260(*)
.365(**)
.216
.348(**)
.828
.045
.004
.110
.010
60
60
60
56
54
81
109
4,4%

.
1,7%
,
(Pearson correlation = 0.261)
.
1,2%
,
(Pearson correlation = 0.261)
.
0%
,
(Pearson correlation = 0.491) -
.
4,5%


.
1,2%


.
0%

82
109

- .
6.3

,
, ,
.

. ,
,

.
,
, .
97%
13% . 97%

13%
.

/ ,
.
,
,
.

.
.

83
109
,
.

.
,
.
.

.
, .

.
,

marketing .

. ,
.

,
.

, .
,
.
,
,
.

84
109
, ,
.

. ,
( )
.

, .

,
. ,
, .

.
, .
, ,

,
.

.
85
109
7.

,
. ,

.

, ,
. ,
,
.

.
(2008),
.

.

. ,
(
) .
,

. ,
()
.
86
109
, (,
, marketing ),
, .

.

, ,
, ,
.

.
,

.
,
.
.
,
,
, .
87
109
88
109
8. /

,

. ,
, , ,
...

(,
2006).

. ,
.
.

.
.

.

.
(
)

.

.

89
109
,
,
.
90
109
91
109
/
1. Barton L, Crisis in organizations: Managing and Communicating in the Heat Of
Chaos, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1993, South-Western
2. Batchelor, A. 1999. "Is the balance sheet outdated?" Accountancy International,
123(1266), p.81
3. Benoit, W.L, Accounts, Excuses, and Apologies: A Theory of Image
Restoration, 1995, State University of New York Press, Albany, NY.
4. Bromley, D.B. 1993. Reputation, Image and Impression Management.
Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
5. Brouillard, 1983. "Corporate reputation counts". Advertising Age, 54(2), M46
6. Caminiti, S. 1992. "The payoff from a good reputation". Fortune, (February 10)
74-77
7. Corporate Reputation Watch, An annual survey by Hill and Knowlton and
Korn/Ferry International, 2003
8. Fombrun, C.J., Reputation: Realizing Value from the Corporate Image, 1996,
Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA.
9. Fombrun, C., & Shanley, M. 1990. "What's in a name? Reputation building and
corporate strategy". Academy of Management Journal, 33, 233-258
10. Foster H. D., Disaster Planning: The Preservation of Life and Property, New
York, 1980, Springer Verlag
11. George D. Mallery P. (2003), SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple
Guide and Reference 11.0 Update, Pearson Education Inc.
12. Gonzalez-Herrero, Alfonso, and Cornelius B. Pratt. How to Manage a Crisis
Before - or Whenever- it Hits. 1995, Public Relations Quarterly, Spring
13. Green, P. S., Reputation Risk Management, , 1992,
Pitma/Financial Times
14. Gary H. Jones - Beth H. Jones - Philip Little, REPUTATION AS
RESERVOIR: The Value of Corporate Goodwill as a Buffer Against Loss in
Times of Economic Crisis, Corporate Reputation Review, Volume 3, Number 1,
1 January 2000 , pp. 21-29(9), Palgrave Macmillan

92
109
15. Hall, R. 1992. "The strategic analysis of intangible resources". Strategic

Management Journal, 13, 135-144
16. Hall, R. 1993. "A framework linking intangible resources and capabilities to
sustainable competitive advantage". Strategic Management Journal, 14, 607618
17. Heath Robert, , , 2005,
18. Hess David Rogovsky Nikolai Dunfee W. Thomas, The Next Wave of
Corporate Community Involvement, , 2002, California Management
Review 44(2):110-125
19. Holmes 1995. "Reputation management: Earning a reputation and leveraging
it for success". Reputation Management, 1, 9-16
20. Knipes, B. J. 1989. "Corporate reputation and strategic performance".
Dissertation Abstracts International, 49, 2304A
21. Riahi-Belkaoui, A., & Pavlik, E. L. 1992. Accounting for Corporate
Reputation. Westport, Connecticut: Dryden
22. Rosenthal U. and Pijnenburg B, Crisis Management and Decision Making:
Simulation Oriented Scenarios, Dordrecht, 1991, Kluwer
23. , , , 2008,
.
24. Sobol, M. G., Farrelly, G. E., & Taper, J. S. 1992. Shaping the Corporate
Image: An Analytical Guide for Executive Decision Makers. New York:
Quorum
25. Shockley J. Ellen, Reputation Management: The Effect of CEO Behavior
During a Crisis, 2000, Rowan University August 1
26. Wang Jay, Consumer nationalism and corporate reputation management in the
global era, Corporate Communications: An International Journal Vol. 10 No. 3,
2005 pp. 223-239
27. Weigelt, K., & Camerer, C. "Reputation and corporate strategy: A review of
recent theory 1988.and applications". Strategic Management Journal, 9, 443454
93
109
28. . .,
, , , 2000
29. , Marketing ,
2006,
30. , , 2006,
.
31. , , 2001,
32. , AGSM, 2008
1. http://www.bep.gr/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=876&Itemid
=192
2. http://photo.kathimerini.gr/xtra/files/Meletes/doc/Mel2803062.doc
3. www.bep.gr/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=875&Itemid=192
4. http://www.statistics.gr/gr_tables/S1201_SBR_1_TB_AN_02_5_Y.pdf
94
109
95
109
96
109
Dissertation
27 2008
/ /

Nottingham Trent
University. :

, 13 ,
,
.

.
10 15

.

: ydivis@yahoo.gr y_divis@hotmail.com fax 2105596377
( ).
6947703488.
.
,

97
109
1. ;
( )
( 2)
2. ;
( )

/ /

-
media

,
.
...................................................................
98
109
3.
;

/ /

media
..........................................
99
109
4. /
;
( )

5.
; ( )
-

-
6. )
;
) ;
100
109
7.
;
( )
(

V, , )
/

/
8. )
;

1%
1%-5%
5%-10%
10%-20%
20%

)
;

1%
1%-5%
5%-10%
10%-20%
20%

101
109
9. :
)
) /

) /

10.
( 1= 7=)
1
11. ;
( 1= 7=)
1
12. ;
( )

/ /

-
102
109
media
,
...........................................................................
13.
.
(1= 7= )
1
25-35
36-45
46-55
56+
:
103
109
104
109
&
FOUNDATION FOR ECONOMIC & INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH
11, 117 42 , T.: 210 92 11 200-10, Fax:210 92 33 977
11 Tsami Karatasi, 117 42 Athens, Greece, Tel.: +30-10-9211 200-10, Fax: +30-10-92 33 977
24 2007

-
-
().
2006
, , ,
: 25% ,
25% , 24%
22%
.
20% .
, ,
:
,
. ,
. ,
,
105
109
.
,

, 2000 2006

.
-
2006 , -
2006 3,4%
, 2005 .
,
,
,
,
,
.
, ,
. ,

, .

.

,

.
106
109

,
,

.

, ,
. ,

.
,
, .

,
,

. :

.

14% , -
,
2005, 815 . 4 .
. ,
(279.000 282.000).
,
107
109
,
.

, , :
- ,
,

- .
,
, , ,
.
,
.
,
,

-
.
,
, .

108
109
,

(tariffs) .
109
109

Η φήμη μιας επιχείρησης εξαρτάται από τη διοίκηση των κρίσεων

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Η φήμη μιας επιχείρησης εξαρτάται από τη διοίκηση των κρίσεων

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Executive Summary .......................................................................................................1

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

, Dr. Gary H. Jones, Dr. Beth H. Jones Dr. Philip Little

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

1990), - " " (Bromley, 1993),

(Benoit, 1995; Fombrun, 1996).

(Jay Wang, 2005).

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management

Nottingham Trent University

Athens Graduate School of Management