How do marketing activities influence organizational reputation in higher education institutions? An impression management perspective across eight countries
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Based on impression management theory, the authors ask how marketing activities build organizational reputation and examine the mediating mechanisms of desired impressions, and the moderating impact of national culture. Specifically, and in the context of higher education (HE) institutions, the authors examine the influence of relational marketing and traditional advertising on organizational reputation through the mediation of desired impressions (e.g. quality of learning, career prospects and extracurricular activities) across countries and specify the moderation role of cultural variables. Design/methodology/approach This study estimates empirical models using a survey data set comprising 1,890 student responses from 10 universities in 8 countries. The authors use confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and measurement invariance models, as well as ordinary least squares with robust standard errors to test the hypotheses. Findings The results indicate that marketing activities affect organizational reputation through the mediation of desired impressions in line with our theoretical reasoning. Specifically, the results show that (1) relational marketing has direct and indirect effects on organizational reputation; (2) relational marketing has a higher influence on organizational reputation in countries with lower individualism and lower masculinity scores; (3) quality of learning mediates the relationship between traditional advertising and organizational reputation; (4) quality of learning also mediates the association between relational marketing and organizational reputation; (5) career prospects mediate the relationship between relational marketing and organizational reputation; (6) traditional advertising does not have a direct but only an indirect effect on organizational reputation; and (7) these findings are net of the effect of respondents', universities', and countries' characteristics. Research limitations/implications The findings contribute to the body of knowledge on the antecedents of organizational reputation, from an international marketing perspective. The results extend the impression management by integrating constructs that have been studied independently into a cohesive framework that links marketing activities, desired impressions and organizational reputation. With the study, impression management theory provides a framework to study the impact of marketing activities on organizational reputation not only in domestic but also in international markets. Practical implications By asking the target market about the importance of different marketing activities, their expectations of the organization and its reputation, HE administrators can employ the model proposed in this study to assess the relevant marketing strategies that will drive desired impressions which in turn will influence reputation. Originality/value While there are studies that focus on the impact of several constructs on organizational reputation in an international context, it is striking to observe that extant research is silent on how (via what mediating mechanisms) marketing activities work as an antecedent of organizational reputation. To address this gap, we examine marketing activities as antecedents of organizational reputation in an international, cross-country context, and specify the moderation role of cultural variables.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it