According to estimates, the reputation of a company accounts for more than 50 percent of its total assets, making the reputation or the image much more valuable for a company than patents or trademarks. If a company has a good image, it will be considerably easier for it to gain and retain clients, to attract new and qualified employees and to generally act and be accepted in public, be it financially or officially. Companies that slacken the reins when it comes to their image run the risk of being punished by their clients or by the public. This is why more and more companies define concise goals for not only keeping, but also improving their good reputation by having it analyzed, evaluated and benchmarked. The competition for the best image, the most flawless reputation is clearly on – and has been for some time – making reputation management an indispensable part of a contemporary corporate governance.

The refined art of reputation management is to come up with a very clear and distinct description of what the company and its stakeholders are representing. But this is not an easy task as many factors – especially the demeanor and the actions of the corporate management – will influence public opinion. Today, a vital role in the perception of a company as rather good or rather bad is played by the way it handles its corporate responsibility. It can be a rather painful experience for a company and its management to see that its reputation won’t improve of its own volition just because corporate responsibility activities have been increased. One assumes to do everything right, but stakeholders and public either don’t notice or misconceive it.

A professional communication with all relevant stakeholders as well as a refined theme management is therefore an essential prerequisite for being heard and being perceived in the right way. Thus, the key to the success of a reputation management is the way how projects and strategies of a company are communicated.

Last, but not least, a decisive factor in this is the perfect interaction of internal and external communication. In external communications, stakeholders expect transparency, continuity and sustainability. Through its own communication style, a company can greatly contribute to its own reputation. At the same time it is essential to prepare and sensitize employees, by means of internal communication, for their role as ambassadors for the company. A statement given by an employee often carries a lot more credibility in the public perception than an official declaration by someone from the board level. This is also one of the reasons why Web 2.0 has become a noteworthy factor in the competition for the best image. What is published over blogs or Twitter is deemed to be much closer to the truth than an official statement issued by the company itself. There is reason to doubt the credibility of news that has been spread over digital social networks; there is no reason, however, to doubt that a company can benefit from taking these new ways of communication seriously and using it for its own reputation management. Because once news has made it around the world, it doesn’t matter anymore if it was right or wrong – it’s out there.