Reputation and Image from the Perspective of Management Sociology

Introduction. The digital world is reshaping established realities by enabling social entities to manifest in the online world. Within this evolving framework, reputation increasingly detaches from the individual being assessed, influencing both the dynamics of social interactions and the norms that develop through these exchanges. Concurrently, an individual’s virtual identity has gained prominence, often rivaling the importance of their real-world image. As research interest in concepts of image and reputation grows, the tendency to use these terms interchangeably becomes notable. This convergence highlights the need to clarify and differentiate the meanings of these abstractions under examination.

Methodology and sources. This study employs sociological, socio-psychological, linguistic, and interdisciplinary methodologies, drawing on specialized literature, scientific research, and online resources. These sources facilitate an examination of the concepts of image and reputation within the digital society, analyzed through the lens of management sociology.

Results and discussion. The analysis of the concept of “image” reveals its intrinsic connection to visual perception and its role as a purposefully constructed and relatively stable phenomenon, based on stereotypes of mass consciousness. Image, as an artificially created symbolic construct, is directed at a specific audience, aiming to guide the perception of that audience in a predetermined manner. Its function is to distinctly define and differentiate an object, while simultaneously shaping audience expectations. In contrast, reputation is not entirely within the subject’s control and cannot be deliberately crafted. It emerges organically from the exchange of opinions and public discourse, serving primarily as an evaluation based on comparing expectations and the outcomes of interactions with individuals or organizations.

Conclusion. A sociological examination of the concepts of image and reputation has uncovered intersections across multidisciplinary research and highlighted the distinct sociological dimensions of each. An image, in essence, functions as a simulacrum crafted by the subject to position its object as desirable and engaging for the public. In contrast, reputation emerges as a verbalized evaluation shaped through social interaction within a pragmatic context, acting in the digital society as a tool for modulating control. The image functions as an “entry point”, drawing attention from audiences unfamiliar with its subject. Within a culturally and pragmatically relevant context, image and reputation can synergize effectively to advance the agent's interests. However, conflicts between symbols that image conveys, the expectations it constructs, and the experiences informing reputation may undermine the latter.

1. Gubanov, D.A. (2009), Obzor onlainovykh sistem reputatsii/doveriya [Review of online reputation/ trust systems], IPU RAN, Mosocw, RUS, available at: http://ubs.mtas.ru/bitrix/components/bitrix/forum.interface/show_file.php?fid=1671 (accessed 10.07.2024).

2. Sviridova, D.Yu. (2018), “On the Specifics of Developing a Digital Image of a Musical Group”, Bulletin of Katanov Khakass State Univ., no. 26, pp. 85–87.

3. Mamina, R.I. and Yakupova, S.V. (2024), “Self-Presentational Communication in Context Digital Realities of Modern Society”, DISCOURSE, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 27–42. DOI: 10.32603/2412-8562-2024-10-4-27-42.

4. Strel'nikova, L.V. (2003), “Social capital: typology of foreign approaches”, Social Sciences and Contemporary World, no. 2, pp. 31–41.

5. Knyazev, D.V. (2008), “Social Assets as Force of Control”, Sociology of Power, no. 5, pp. 151–157.

6. Pochebut, L.G., Sventsitskii, A.L., Mararitsa, L.V. et al. (2014), Sotsial'nyi kapital lichnosti [Social capital of the individual], INFRA-M, Moscow, RUS.

7. Patnem, R. (1996), Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy, Transl. by Zakharov, A., Ad Marginem, Moscow, RUS.

8. Stone, W. (2001), Measuring Social Capital: Toward a theoretically informed measurement framework for researching social capital in family and community life, Australian Institute of Family Studies, Melbourne, AUS.

9. Fukuyama, F. (2004), Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity, Transl. by Pavlov, D., Kiryushchenko, V. and Kolopotin, М., AST: Ermak, Moscow, RUS.

10. Coleman, Jo. (2001), “Social and Human Capital”, Social Sciences and Contemporary World, no. 3, pp. 122–139.

11. Tishkevich, M.Ya. (2020), “Image component of social capital: socio-cultural approach”, Mnogomernost' i polifunktsional'nost' kul'tury [Multidimensionality and polyfunctionality of culture], Gomel'skii gos. un-t im. Frantsiska Skoriny, Gomel', BLR, pp. 103–108.

12. Maolidah, M.K., Al Amin, N.K. and Imanuel, V. (2023), “The Relationship Between Intellectual Capital, Human Capital, Public Relation Strategy, AI Integration, Corporate Social Responsibility, And Company Image”, Sammajiva: Jurnal Penelitian Bisnis dan Manajemen, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 94–105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47861/sammajiva.v1i1.926.

13. “Image“, Bol'shoi Entsiklopedicheskii slovar' [The Great Encyclopedic Dictionary], available at: https://rus-big-enc-dict.slovaronline.com/search?s=имидж (accessed 10.07.2024).

14. “Image“, Osnovnye sotsiologicheskie terminy [Basic Sociological Terms], available at: https://rusmain-soc-terms.slovaronline.com/94-имидж (accessed 10.07.2024).

15. “Image“, Entsiklopediya sotsiologii [Encyclopedia of Sociology], available at: https://rus-mainsoc-terms.slovaronline.com/94-имидж (accessed 10.07.2024).

16. Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (2015), Pearson Education Ltd., Harlow, UK.

17. Concise Oxford Thesaurus (2007), 3rd ed., Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, UK.

18. Severskaya, O. and Saakyan, L. (2020), “The image, reputation of a politician in language and current political discourse (an experience of corpus research)”, Przegląd Wschodnioeuropejsk, vol. XI, no. 2, pp. 357–571.

19. Matveeva, L.V., Anikeeva, T.Ya. and Mochalova, Yu.V. (2002), Psikhologiya televizionnoi kommunikatsii [Psychology of television communication], RIP-Kholding, Moscow, RUS.

20. Politicheskaya imidzhelogiya [Political imageology] (2006), in Derkach, A.A., Perelygina, E.B. et al. (eds.), Aspekt-Press, Moscow, RUS.

21. Shepel', V.M. (2002), Imidzhelogiya. Kak nravit'sya lyudyam [Imageology. How to please people], Narodnoe obrazovanie, Moscow, RUS.

22. Leontiev, D.A. (2000), “From Image to Image. Psychosemantic Branding”, Reklama i zhizn' [Advertising and life], no. 1, pp. 19–22.

23. Panasyuk, A.Yu. (2009), Formirovanie imidzha: strategiya, psikhotekhnologii, psikhotekhniki [Formation of the image: strategy, psychology, psychology], Omega-L, Moscow, RUS.

24. Katynskaya, M.V. (2016), “Image as a Prototype Category”, Vestnik of Kostroma State Univ., vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 173–178.

25. “Image“, Sotsiologicheskaya entsiklopediya [Sociological Encyclopedia], available at: https://russocial-enc.slovaronline.com/382-имидж (accessed 10.07.2024).

26. Ul'yanovskii, A.V. (2008), Korporativnyi imidzh: tekhnologii formirovaniya dlya maksimal'nogo rosta biznesa [Corporate image: technologies of formation for maximum business growth], Eksmo, Moscow, RUS.

27. Feofanov, O.A. (1980), “Stereotype and “image” in bourgeois propaganda”, Voprosy filosofii, no. 6, pp. 89–100.

28. Pocheptsov, G.G. (2000), Imidzhelogiya [Imageology], Refl-buk, Moscow, RUS.

29. Perelygina, E.B. (2002), Psikhologiya imidzha: uch. Posobie [Psychology of image: teaching aid], Aspekt-press, Moscow, RUS.

30. Baudrillard, J. (2006), La Societe de Consommation. Ses mythes, ses structures, Transl. by Samarskaya, E., Respublika: Kul'turnaya revolyutsiya, Moscow, RUS.

31. Sotsiologicheskaya entsiklopediya [Sociological encyclopedia] (2003), in 2 vol., Mysl', Moscow, RUS.

32. “Reputation”, Entsiklopediya sotsiologii [Encyclopedia of Sociology], available at: https://russociologia.slovaronline.com/search?s=репутация (accessed 10.07.2024).

33. Zubova, I.I. (2020), “Personal Reputation and its Automatic Identification”, Izvestia: Herzen Univ. J. of Humanities & Sciences, no. 197, pp. 189–200. DOI: 10.33910/1992-6464-2020-197-189-200.

34. Kuznetsov, S.A. (1998), Bol'shoi tolkovyi slovar' russkogo yazyka [Large explanatory dictionary of the Russian language], Norint, SPb., RUS.

35. Mikhailova, O.A. and Shashmurina, E.L. (2019), “Image vs. reputation: axiological potential of borrowed words”, Aksiologicheskie aspekty sovremennykh filologicheskikh issledovanii [Axiological aspects of modern philological studies], Ekaterinburg, RUS, 15–17 Oct. 2019, pp. 92–94.

36. Milinski, M. (2016), “Reputation, a universal currency for human social interactions”, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, vol. 371, iss. 1687: 20150100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0100.

37. Raihani, N.J. and Bshary, R. (2015), “The reputation of punishers”, Trends in Ecology & Evolution, vol. 30, iss. 2, pp. 98–103. DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2014.12.003.

38. Selivanyuk, A.R. (2021), “Factors in the formation of a company's business reputation”, Communication in social and humanitarian knowledge, economics, education – 2021, Materials of the V Intern. scient.-practical. conf., Minsk, BLR, 13–15 May 2021, pp. 164–170.

39. Jensen, M., Kim, H. and Kim, B.K. (2012), “Meeting Expectations: A Role-Theoretic Perspective on Reputation”, The Oxford Handbook of Corporate Reputation, Barnett, M.L. and Pollock, T. (eds.), Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, UK, pp. 140–159.

40. Dorokhova, M.S. (2009), “Social and psychological mechanism of reputation formation in conditions of market relations”, Can. Sci. (Psychological) Thesis, GUU, Moscow, RUS.

41. Komolikova, S.S. (2013), “Concept of Reputation Ousing in Culturological Aspect”, Bulletin of Chelyabinsk State Univ., no. 33 (324), pp. 63–67.

42. Origgi, G. (2020), Trust and Reputation. The Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy of Trust, available at: https://hal.science/ijn_03046522/document (accessed 09.07.2024).

43. Hearn, A. (2010), “Structuring Feeling: Web 2.0, Online Ranking and Rating, and the Digital ‘Reputation’”, Ephemera: theory & politics in organization, vol. 10, no. 3/4, pp. 421–438.

44. Kurbangalieva, D.L. (2019), “Comparative Characteristics of the Terms “Image”, “Brand” and “Corporate Reputation” in the Theory of Reputation Economy”, Electronic Economic Newsletter of the Republic of Tatarstan, no. 4, p. 44–51.

45. Korol, A.N. (2017), “Image and business reputation of the manager as tools of marketing communications”, Modern problems of economic development of enterprises, industries, complexes, territories, Materials of the International Scientific and Practical conf., in 2 vols., vol. 1, Khabarovsk, RUS, 27 April 2017, pp. 378–381.

46. Yankovskaya, V.I. and Khaydarov, R.R. (2015), “The Influence of Rating Characteristics of the Organization Leader on the Quality of the Working Life of the Employees”, Vlast’, no. 4, pp. 145–151.

47. Ragouet, P. (2000), “Notoriété professionnelle et organisation scientifique”, Cahiers Internationaux De Sociologie, vol. 109, pp. 317–341.

48. Conte, R. and Paolucci, M. (2002), Reputation in artificial societies: Social beliefs for social order, Springer, NY, USA. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-1159-5.

49. Salnikova, L.S. (2017), “image or Reputation? Substitution of Concepts”, Strategicheskie kommunikatsii v biznese i politike [Strategic Communications in Business and Politics], no. 3, pp. 76–79