The voice of the CEO on social media : how to effectively measure their personal online reputation efforts

(1)

The voice of the CEO on social media: how to effectively measure their personal online

reputation efforts

Abstract

Online reputation is a topic that has received only limited and fragmented theoretical treatment (Sarstedt, Wilczynski and Melewar, 2013). The purpose of this study is to create a dashboard which helps academics measure the online reputation management efforts of CEO’s, as well as contribute to the existing literature on personal reputation. Following the statement of Barger and Labreque (2013) that metrics should fit with the right objectives in order to execute an effective communication strategy combined with the client data of a reputation firm called MyReputationLab, three different dashboards have been developed to measure success of online reputation efforts of CEO’s: (1) the Activist dashboard, (2) the Broadcaster dashboard and (3) the Networker dashboard. Each dashboard represents a different objective and can help managers keep track of their communication strategy efforts. Moreover, this study emphasizes on the idea that the CEO can influence their own online reputation by being active online, which has not been taken into account by previous research on reputation management.

Eileen van Vliet – 10549218 University of Amsterdam

Master Business Administration – Digital Business Supervisor: dhr. prof. dr. Hans Borgman

(2)

Statement of Originality

This document is written by Eileen van Vliet who declares to take full responsibility for the contents of this document.

I declare that the text and the work presented in this document are original and that no sources other than those mentioned in the text and its references have been used in creating it.

(3)

Table of contents

1. Introduction 4

2. Literature Research 6

2.1 CEO’s and their personal brand 6

2.2 Online reputation management 7

2.3 Online communication metrics 8

3. Methodology 8

3.1 Sample and data collection 8

3.2 Research through design 9

3.3 Dashboard 9 4. The dashboards 10 4.1 The Activist 11 4.2 The Broadcaster 13 4.3 The Networker 15 5. Discussion 18

5.1 Summary of the findings 18

5.2 Theoretical and practical implications 19

5.3 Limitations and future research 19

References 21

(4)

1. Introduction

“Your network is your net-worth” – Gale, 2013. Online social networking has become an integral part of many people’s daily lives (Yang, 2016). The Internet has transformed our society towards a digital and hyper-connected one, in which online users can create, interact and collaborate with each other and are taking an active role in producing and publishing content instead of being merely passive consumers of online content which is offered by professionals. Nowadays, individuals also use the Internet as a medium to express themselves by presenting themselves through different platforms, relaying their personal opinion to a broad audience and meeting new people through social networking sites (Yang, 2016).

In the last years, social media has acquired an important role in the communication strategies of many institutions and companies (Capriotti & Ruesja, 2018). Social media has created a demand for real-time, two-way communication programs that develop

relationships and engage publics based on the conversation (Lewis & Nichols, 2010). Information can be shared through social networking sites and sharing on the World Wide Web has become almost a daily activity. As a result, there is an increasing amount of personal data available online and therefore it has become easier to find personal data on the World Wide Web (WWW). Not only have these trails of information resulted in branding of corporations, but also branding of individuals (Lampel & Bhalla, 2007). This is called ‘personal branding’, which Montoya and Vandehey (2002) define as “a personal identity that stimulates precise, meaningful perceptions in its audience about the values and qualities that person stands for”. Labrecque, Markos and Milne (2010) state that a personal brand is subjectively created and maintained in the minds of the others, based on the behavior of the branded individual and any other related piece of information. Managing a personal brand is valuable to individuals as it raises awareness about oneself and showcases expertise among others (Montoya & Vandehey, 2002). Personal branding can also occur in an offline context, but since social media provides a relatively cheap opportunity to promote oneself and enables an efficient reach of a large audience, it is argued to be an excellent online platform and marketing tool for personal brand management (Schwabel, 2009).

Because of the rise of social media networks and online personal branding, the CEO has become an even more visible part of the company. The way we perceive a firm’s top leader influences the way we see the firm (Love, Lim & Bednar, 2017). Several studies show that the presence of a CEO in social networks benefits the organization and the own CEO’s reputation, principally because it shows the ‘human’ side of the company, social media engagement makes CEO’s more effective leaders, makes the brand more trustworthy and honest, it helps to connect with customers and employees, can make the company a more attractive place to work and it is a good way of sharing news and information about the company (Capriotti & Ruesja, 2018). Personal branding can have a significant impact on the credibility on terms of the CEO’s intellect and competence (Labrecque et al., 2010). Being the most visible asset of the company, the CEO’s reputation can influence the corporate image. When a crisis occurs, the CEO’s image has the greatest effect on how the public

(5)

perceives the organization (House, Spangler & Woijke, 1991). Capriotti and Ruesja (2018) argue that despite the importance of the CEO’s online presence, the online communication of the CEO has become a communication issue for many organizations. Therefore, it is important for corporate leaders to know how to effectively communicate on social networking sites.

Despite the increasing rate of global adoption of social media, there is still a lack of empirical research on online personal

branding and online reputation management (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010), and specifically on the CEO’s personal branding. The majority of research on personal branding is focused on graduates (Mallan, 2009) or employees and their online behavior (Harris & Rae, 2011). There’s barely any research on the online behavior corporate leaders, such as CEO’s, even though online presence of CEO’s has a direct impact on their personal image and the image of the corporation (Shandwick, 2012). In order to track and improve their personal reputation, CEO’s will need to adequately measure their reputation and the dimensions that influence it. Such understanding is critical, because when the CEO’s personal brand is managed insufficiently, it can damage the CEO’s reputation and also the organization’s image (Love et al., 2017). There exists a lack of management approaches on an individuals’ online reputation, which is considered to be a big barrier to an effective reputation management (Sarstedt, Wilczynski and Melewar, 2013). Moreover, Edelman’s Global Trust Barometer presents a strong shift in trust from governments, media and brands towards individuals (Edelman Global Trust Barometer, 2018). When leaders would use their voice online to express how the work of their companies is benefitting society, they could greatly improve their employer brand, positive sentiment and share of voice against competitors.

The aim of this research will be to design a tool (dashboard) which demonstrates the effect of online social media presence on different platforms and the activity on those platforms on online reputation and which gives insight in how the success of online

reputation management can be measured. This will be achieved by answering the following question:

RQ: How can you measure online reputation management success of a corporate leader on social media?

By examining this question, this study provides guidance for their reasonable application in business research and practice. Countless prior brand studies have focused on both the creation and impact of strong business brands; however, parallel research is heretofore lacking in the field of the “personal brand” of the CEO. This study aims to characterize and develop a measurement dashboard with respect to a CEO’s personal online activity.

The creation of a dashboard tool can provide researchers with guidelines to measure online reputation, both for academic and applied purposes. This study aims to contribute to management research that focuses on CEO’s and top management-teams, as well as research that is concerned with personal branding and online reputation. Former research has acknowledged that CEO’s are a valuable

(6)

asset for the company (Capriotti & Ruesja, 2018) and can influence their firms’ reputation (Love et al., 2017). However, when it comes to the reputation of the CEO’s Love et al. (2013) only take into account whether the CEO’s received awards or whether they received any media coverage, and how this affects corporate reputation. The researchers do not take into consideration that CEO’s can influence their own reputation by being present online. The current study aims to expand our understanding of online reputation management, as research about this topic is lacking. By developing and testing dashboards which measure the efforts of CEO’s being active online, this study intents to broaden the conceptions of the fundamentals that make up online reputation management, and therefore has to be included when talking about the reputation of a CEO. Findings of this study will also be of practical relevance. Personal branding on social media is becoming increasingly popular, yet not many CEO’s or other corporate leaders are active on social media platforms. This study helps form objectives and strategies for CEO’s and their organizations to effectively manage their online presence and can alter and optimize the social media behavior of the CEO.

The next section provides a literature review which highlights research about personal branding of CEO’s and online reputation management. Secondly, the methodology consists of a description of the research design and the procedure of developing the

dashboards. Then, the results are provided followed by a discussion, which includes theoretical and practical implications as well as study limitations and proposed suggestions for future research.

2. Literature research

2.1 CEO’s and their personal brand

Chief Executive Officers are increasingly recognized as high profile figureheads for their company. Nowadays, there is an increasing public recognition that individuals, and therefore CEO’s, can be brands (Bendisch et al., 2013). Being present on social media can have great benefits for the CEO’s and the company they work for. When managed effectively, personal branding on social media can boost the CEO’s credibility and competence (Labrecque et al., 2010). According to Chen and Chung (2016), the CEO’s personal brand should be considered to be a high-value intangible asset and therefore should be managed by the company as it can also have competitive advantage: it can attract valuable employees to an organization and enhance the firms’ brand image (Dowling, 2016). Dowling (2016) discusses Lange et al.’s (2011) conceptualization of corporate reputation (which can be transferred to personal reputation), namely that the nature for [corporate] reputation is to be well known, be known for something and to have generalized favorability. However, when talking about reputation authors mostly emphasize on the ‘generalized favorability’ aspect, as the

contending views on reputation are that it is about a social evaluation [of a company or person], which is either a collective or a social evaluation (Dowling, 2016). What if CEO’s start using social media as a tool to influence these social evaluations by communicating their

(7)

social and corporate values online? Even though social media use is only increasing, not many companies seem to realize the positive effects the online presence of their CEO can have. Moreover, not many research has been done about how to effectively influence, manage and measure online reputation.

2.2 Online reputation management

Research about personal reputation mainly focused on the effect of media coverage on the CEO’s reputation (Love, Lim & Bednar, 2017). While Love et al. (2017) found out that highly regarded CEO’s enhance their firms’ reputations, and CEOs who receive negative press coverage damage their firms’ reputations, they only take into account whether CEOs received any awards or whether they received any media coverage which could possibly influence the CEOs/firms reputation. Edelman and Salsberg (2010) describe different types of media, of which the three main types are paid, owned and earned media. They define paid media as “paying for media space or for a third party to promote your products”. Owned media is when your company uses or creates its own new channels to advertise, and when consumers create or share media your company created it will be classified as earned media. Love et al. (2017) are discussing the online reputation of the CEO based on ‘earned media’, namely whether the CEO has received any awards or media coverage. However, earned media is extremely difficult to manage. Moreover, not only do CEO’s act as their firms’ chief spokespersons only through earned media coverage, but they can actually initiate to create their own content on the online social network and express themselves and their leadership approach through these channels. Then you can purposefully craft and post messages, while media coverage about one person is oftentimes out of the person’s control as other persons are writing or posting about him or her. As

mentioned before, the (online) communication of the CEO should continue being worked on by the communications departments more than ever. This means that it is necessary to have a clear decision-making protocol that can be implemented strategically. Therefore, I would like to research how CEO’s and managers can use ‘owned media’ (specifically by using online social networks) in order to improve and manage their online reputation.

Erdogmus and Esen (2017) proved that the CEO’s impression management, career background, leadership in change and firm brand became the determinants for the CEO’s brand building process. However, they do not explain what this implies for CEO’s

reputation management and therefore how CEO’s can influence their reputation online and how to manage it in an online environment. Another research about personal reputation management of the CEO has been done by Chen and Chung (2016). They also specifically highlight that there has not been definite research towards constructs of an evaluative scale of business CEO personal brands, aiming to measure whether the capacities of their CEO’s meet the expectations of their enterprise. Thus, this research would be

(8)

more useful when recruiting CEO’s. Again, these authors do not take online reputation or online personal branding of CEO’s into account, but merely look at their offline appearance and their implications.

Yang & Albers (2013) highlight the importance for individuals to measure their online prominence, and the need for support analysis and evaluations of the information which is publicly available about them. They propose that research should be done on online reputation management analysis and evaluation, especially for individuals as this research is currently rarely available.

So, there is still a lack of understanding on reputation management in an online world, specifically when it comes to CEO’s. Understanding how to influence, manage and measure online reputation is critical considering that it can greatly benefit the CEO’s personal image and their company.

2.3 Online communication metrics

Online metrics are fundamental for developing and evaluating strategic marketing communication programs (Kitchen, Kim and Schulz, 2008). These are specific, measurable tasks and can be achieved by using advertising or other forms of communication. According to Barger and Labrecque (2013), metrics should (1) establish baselines for communications objectives and (2) track progress towards achieving each objective. The selection of metrics is therefore dependent on the objectives. Examples of different long-term communication strategy objectives could be creating [brand] awareness, fostering community, improving customer satisfaction and building relationships (Barger & Labrecque, 2013). As online reputation management is also a form of online

communications, it is therefore suggested that metrics should fit with the objectives of the online presence of the CEO to measure online reputation.

3. Methodology

3.1 Sample and data collection

To date, there is no standardized way to measure online reputation success. The aim of this research will be to create a dashboard which can be used to measure online reputation management, both for academic researchers as for communication managers of corporate leaders, which matches the objectives of the CEO’s online activity. I will examine this in collaboration with a company called MyReputationLab, a reputation management firm that is managing online social profiles of CEO’s and corporate leaders (n = 14). Their clients are active in different countries such as Germany, Turkey, the Netherlands and France, and have been a client of MyReputationLab between 2015-2018. The data which MyReputationLab receives from managing those profiles will be used to develop

(9)

a dashboard which can be used to optimize the measurement of online reputation management. Therefore, the sampling technique which is used is a convenience sample, as the data will be collected from clients at MyReputationLab.

3.2 Research through design

I am going to create a dashboard by applying a design-research method, which is often used to bridge the gap between practice and theoretical research (Winter, Zhao and Aier, 2010). Often, design research is described as an iterative, generative and evaluative research approach which constructs an artefact. In this research, the artefact takes the form of a reputation-measuring dashboard. Telier et al. (2011) describe design research as “the process through which new things are created”. Schön (1987) defines design as “a kind of making which requires the ability to put things together and bring new things into being”. The possibility of creating something new and challenge the current way of measuring reputation has been crucial to choosing design research within this thesis.

3.3 Dashboard

When collecting metrics for managers to complete their goals, creating a dashboard can be a very helpful tool (Peters et al., 2013). Pauwels et al. (2008) define a dashboard as “a relatively small collection of interconnected key performance metrics and

underlying performance drivers that reflects both short- and long-term interests to be viewed in common [throughout the organization]”. Even though this definition applies to an organization, this definition can also be transferred to completing strategic goals for individuals. For a dashboard to be effective, it should reflect a shared definition of outcomes and key drivers within the organization, it should

diagnose poor or excellent performance, enable reflection and learning and support decision-making to improve performance (Barger & Labrecque, 2013). Designing appropriate dashboards has become a challenge with the recent fragmentation of social media, as it is also dependent on having an organized dataset. Usually, designing dashboards requires processing vast amounts of data.

To arrive at appropriate metrics for a CEO’s personal online reputation dashboard, I first require identifying different objectives for CEO’s to strategically optimize and use their online profiles. Having a clear overview of the different objectives serves as a foundation to enable the derivation of appropriate key performance metrics. Accordingly, I then design the dashboard per different objective.

(10)

4. The dashboards

Via this study, I have developed three different dashboards for measuring online reputation management success of a corporate leader on social media platforms. First, the objectives of the different clients of MyReputationLab (n = 20) were listed and analyzed, together with their key performance indicators (see table 1). Consequently, three main objectives were identified: (1) creating awareness (“the Activist”), (2) representing the company (“the Broadcaster”) and (3) building relationships (“the Networker”).

When analyzing the overview of different clients and their key performance indicator, the metrics could be divided into (1)

engagement metrics and (2) network metrics. Engagement mostly refers to when a consumer “takes action beyond viewing or reading”, such as liking a post, commenting or replying to content or sharing a post with their own social network (Barger & Labrecque, 2013). Tracking the different engagement metrics per post can indicate whether your audience is interested in the content of the post, and thus whether they agree with your statement. It can also indicate the overall level of interest in the message. As the organic reach of a post might differ per post, MyReputationLab works with an engagement rate which tracks the overall engagement relative to the number of views. When having a low engagement rate, people are merely acknowledging an agreement or preference for the content (Neiger et al., 2013). High engagement relates to when a high frequency of people (relative to the organic reach) like, comment and share your content. Neiger et al. (2012) relate to organic reach as exposure, which measures the impressions or number of times the content on a social media platform is viewed. Having high exposure also relates to having a broad network. When someone has many followers or connections in their social media platforms, more people are being exposed to someone’s posts. However, this does not always have to be true. Social media algorithms do not show your content to every follower, but first displays them to a fraction of those. If the people who see the content first react well to it, the algorithm will expand the exposure of the content. When it comes to networking online, there are some differences between social media platforms. The aim of this research is to create a dashboard which can be used for every platform. On LinkedIn it is possible to add someone to your network by ‘connecting’ to someone, while on Twitter connecting to someone means ‘following’ someone. At MyReputationLab, we strategically optimize the network of our clients by either working on the network quality or on the network quantity.

Network optimization:

o Network growth: how many followers/connections do you have per social media platform?

o Network quality: when growing your network (and therefore your reach on social media), how many of those are also interested in the same topics as you are, or at the same level/position as you are or even at a higher position?

The difference between the two has to do with whom you are inviting to your profile, and for what purpose you are inviting them. Do you want to reach as many people possible (quantity) or would you want to bring people to your network with a specific employer

(11)

level or position, so you can start to engage with them? Thus, whether the network optimization strategy is emphasized on network growth or network quality depends on the objectives the CEO has.

4.1 The Activist

The first objective which a CEO can have to improve their online reputation is to increase awareness, by being known as an activist regarding a subject that they highly care about. Some CEO’s work for companies that are highly involved in acting sustainably and doing good for the environment. They want to position themselves as do-good leaders or founders of a company and want to reach and influence as many people as possible. Their goal is to inspire others to do good as well, or simply activate others by giving them a wake-up call about topics that they perceive should gain more attention. For example, one client of MyReputationLab is a leader of an organization which helps other businesses to become more sustainable by consulting about circular economy. He Is passionate about sustainability, waste management and circular economy and wants to inspire other people and businesses to optimize their activities regarding sustainability. Thus, the main objective of the Activist is to create personal brand awareness.

When it comes to metrics to measure an Activists’ online reputation success, the progress towards network growth, exposure and the amount of likes and shares are shown in the dashboard in Figure 1. As their objective is to increase awareness, the dashboard visualizes a progress towards increase of connections within one’s network. These connections do not have to be targeted specifically on job title, function or industry, but the connections added should be active on social media. Looking at the dashboard, the Activists can see how many people they have reached and potentially influenced with their posts (on a weekly average), how much their network has grown within a week and the (weekly) average number of likes and shares, and how these numbers have improved over the last week. The key performance indicator of the desired number of connections is also shown in the dashboard. Next to this number, the number of connections that are still needed to reach this KPI are presented, as well as the number of connections that should be added each month in order to reach the KPI.

(12)

(13)

4.2 The Broadcaster

Another objective, which is most common among CEO’s, is to use social media platforms as a channel for CEO’s to represent their company online. Moreover, they would like to use social media as a platform to generate more leads for their company, and thereby position themselves as a leader within their own field. However, these people usually do not want to be in the spotlight

themselves. They know that being present and active online can result in many benefits for the company, which is the main reason why they would like to expose themselves in order to gain success for the company. Therefore, the main objective of the Broadcaster is to represent their company to gain more leads.

For the Broadcaster, it is important to measure whether people are interested in their content and therefore engage with it. It is also important for them to specifically target new connections strategically by position or company to increase the chance of getting business leads out of it. Therefore, the network strategy will be focusing on network quality instead of network quantity, which the Activist is focusing on. In the dashboard (Figure 2), the current network breakdown is shown as a pie chart, which shows the

percentage of people from a specific category (which has been identified earlier by the company) are currently in the CEO’s network. Examples of categories for a CEO interested in tech, digital transformation and brand building are (1) CEO’s of innovative digital/tech startups, (2) Chief Technical Officers, Chief Digital Officers or Chief Marketing Officers of large, global companies, (3) IT directors of innovative companies, (4) Vice Presidents of digital marketing departments and (5) Influencers on tech and digital transformation

content. As the network strategy is very targeted on specific categories, the increase in network growth per category is also shown. This gives an overview on whether a CEO has the desired amount of people of a specific category within their network. The weekly average engagement rate is also shown, as it gives a good overview of whether your network likes your content. To elaborate on that, the total weekly number of likes, comments and shares are also shown. The small numbers represent the increase (or decrease) in numbers and percentages compared to the previous week.

(14)

(15)

4.3 The Networker

Lastly, another objective is to connect to likeminded people that are passionate about the same (work-related) interests and topics as the CEO. They like to position themselves as someone who is an expert within their own field and would like to get in touch with others within their own field to inspire them and to exchange insights. Therefore, the main objective of the Networker is to build relationships and foster community.

The network strategy of the Networker is mainly focused on network quality, by increasing their network by targeting people that are interested in specific topics. Just as for the Broadcaster dashboard, the Networker dashboard includes a current network breakdown pie-chart. However, the pie-chart does not show the percentage of specific categories of people but includes the percentage of people that are interested in specific topics. For a CEO that is interested in marketing and would like to exchange insights with his network on the future of marketing, examples of topics that his audience should relate to are (1) digital and online marketing, (2) brand building and (3) innovative marketing trends. The effectiveness of the network can be shown by visualizing the engagement rate on the dashboard. It shows whether the direct audience is overall interested in the content which the CEO shares. Therefore, the total weekly number of likes, shares and comments are shown, together with the engagement rate. The number of added followers or connection is also shown in the bar graph. The small numbers represent the increase (or decrease) in numbers and percentages compared to the previous week.

(16)

(17)

Table 2 provides an overview of the three different dashboards. Table 2: The Dashboards

Dashboard #1: The Activist Dashboard #2: The Broadcaster Dashboard #3: The Networker Main goals: - Want to use social media to share

their own voice and to make a difference in the world

- .. and to reach as many people and influence them with their thoughts, beliefs and values - Usually philanthropists, corporate

leaders that value circular economy and sustainability

- Leader of a corporate firm who would like to use social media as a platform to generate more leads - .. and to position

themselves as a leader in their own field (whether it is digital, IT or marketing). - Don’t like to be in the

spotlight but would like to expose themselves to gain success for the company.

- Corporate leaders that are really

passionate about the field they’re in and would like to connect with likeminded people within their own field

- Get in touch with others to inspire them and get inspired, and to exchange insights. Main components to measure success Network: - Network quantity • Number of current connections

• Key performance indicator which shows the targeted network growth for 12 months

➢ The progress towards the KPI is shown as well as the number of

connections needed per month in order to

achieve the KPI

Network: - Network quality • Current network breakdown based on network categories • Increase in growth per network category Engagement: - Engagement rate

- Online activity (number of posts per week)

Network:

- Network quality

• Current network breakdown based on network topics • Network growth over the past

months Engagement:

- Engagement rate

(18)

• Network growth over the past months

Engagement:

- Weekly exposure

- Number of likes, shares and comments

5. Discussion

5.1 Summary of the findings

Traditional research about reputation management of CEO’s has focused on the effect of media coverage on reputation (Love et al., 2017); however, research about online reputation and how to measure online reputation management efforts heretofore have been lacking. As the use in social media platforms emerged, more individuals started using these platforms as a tool to present themselves as personal brand. However, how these efforts of influencing online reputation of a CEO could be measured has been neglected.

This study has gathered formative information from the data of MyReputationLab as well as the literature, and from that gleaning there were three initial measurement dashboards developed: The Activist dashboard, the Broadcaster dashboard and the Networker dashboard. Each of these dashboards represent different objectives which a CEO can have when wanting to become active on social media. On each dashboard, different network and engagement related metrics are presented as each set represents a different

objective. The identification of these different objectives and the matching metrics within each dashboard can help CEO’s manage their online reputation by showing the progress towards their goals and highlighting the effect of being active online. Online presence of a CEO can greatly benefit the organizational reputation as well. Therefore, these dashboards were created to identify whether the online efforts of the CEO are successful.

(19)

5.2 Theoretical and practical implications

This research contributes to academic literature, as the dashboards represent a first effort into developing a measurable

approach towards the online reputation efforts of a CEO. Labrecque et al. (2013) examined that being present on social media can have great benefits for the CEO’s and the company they work for. Personal branding on social media can boost the CEO’s credibility and competence when managed effectively (Labrecque et al., 2010). However, there was a lack of research on management approaches on an individuals’ online reputation (Sarstedt, Wilczynski and Melewar, 2013). Yang & Albers (2013) also stated that it is important for individuals to measure their online prominence, and that there exists a need for support analysis. This research aimed to solve this problem, by answering the question of how online reputation management success of a corporate leader on social media can me measured. Barger and Labrecque (2013) explained that metrics of effective communication strategies should be linked to different objectives. My research suggests that the dashboards that have been developed are in fact unique, and clearly distinguishes different objectives for online activity. The dashboards can also be a valuable tool for other academics when researching online reputation management, as it gives a clear insight in how online reputation management practitioners can measure online reputation. CEO’s or managers can develop an effective online reputation strategy based on these dashboards and their objectives.

5.3 Limitations and future research

Considering the explicit study focus of this research, it is important to acknowledge the research limitations while addressing potential research issues that have evolved from this study. One issue concerns the convenience sample which has been used for this research. Although the dashboards are designed and developed within a business context, it has not been applied to other types of public venues and persona’s, such as students or employers. The sample of CEO’s represents the clients of MyReputationLab, which solely works with individuals that are at C-level and either in do-good businesses or would like to position themselves online in a way that it is not egoistic or egocentric but serves a higher purpose. Moreover, this research conducts of an inductive approach whereby

objectives of 14 clients were analyzed. This is a relatively small sample. Therefore, this research design is limited in terms of

generalization. It is therefore recommended to execute expanded research with a larger sample size which increases the reliability of the dashboards and increases the understanding of personal reputation management of CEO’s.

Another issue concerns the variety of social media platforms, as this research only integrated Twitter and LinkedIn in the dashboards. These social media platforms are most commonly used for clients of MyReputationLab, as LinkedIn is a social media platform that focuses on the professional environment and Twitter provides a great platform to exchange insights with others. But, there

(20)

are more social media platforms which can be used for online reputation management, like Instagram or Facebook. Follow-up research could be conducted in order to research the possibilities of generalizing these dashboards to other platforms.

Moreover, this research does not examine whether the attitude of the audience towards the CEO has changed after

implementing the dashboard for a period of time. Dowling (2016) states that reputation includes being well known, being known for something and having generalized favorability. The first and the latter have not been included in this research. However, this research attempts to measure the online attempts of a CEO for “being known for something”, and therefore does contribute partly to the online reputation management research. Therefore, another avenue for future research regards how the generalized favorability of the

audience can be implemented in the online reputation management dashboard, for example through sentiment analysis. Nevertheless, due to the limitations, the results of this study need further specification and elaboration in order to extend the creation of dashboards to construct a measurable approach towards online reputation management. Therefore, I encourage other researchers to challenge my results and extend my research.

(21)

References

Barger, V. A., & Labrecque, L. (2013). An integrated marketing communications perspective on social media metrics.

Burkhardt, R. (2008). Reputation Management in Small and Medium-sized Enterprises: Analysis and evaluation of the use of Reputation Management. A survey of Small and Medium-sized Enterprises in Germany. Diplom.de.

Capriotti, P., & Ruesja, L. (2018). How CEOs use Twitter: A comparative analysis of Global and Latin American companies. International Journal of Information Management, 39, 242-248

Chen, H. M., & Chung, H. M. (2016). How to measure personal brand of a business CEO. Journal of Human Resource and Sustainability Studies, 4(04), 305.

Chiang, J. K. H., & Suen, H. Y. (2015). Self-presentation and hiring recommendations in online communities: Lessons from LinkedIn. Computers in Human Behavior, 48, 516-524.

Claybaugh, C. C., & Haseman, W. D. (2013). Understanding professional connections in LinkedIn —a question of trust. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 54(1), 94-105.

Edelman, D., & Salsberg, B. (2010). Beyond paid media: Marketing’s new vocabulary. McKinsey Quarterly, 1-8. 2018 Edelman Trust Barometer (2018, June 8th_{). Retrieved from https://www.edelman.com/trust-barometer.}

Erdoğmuş, N., & Esen, E. Constructing the CEO Personal Brand: The Case of Four Pioneering CEOs in Turkey. Corporate Reputation Review, 1-13.

(22)

Gale, P. (2013). Your network is your net worth: Unlock the hidden power of connections for wealth, success, and happiness in the digital age. Simon and Schuster.

Grund, N. E. (1996). Reputation: Realizing value from the corporate image.

Harris, L., &, Rae, A. (2011). Building a personal brand through social networking. Journal of Business Strategy, 32(5), 14-21.

House, R. J., Spangler, W. D., & Woycke, J. (1991). Personality and charisma in the US presidency: A psychological theory of leader effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly, 364-396.

Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59-68.

Labrecque, L. I., Markos, E., & Milne, G. R. (2011). Online personal branding: Processes, challenges, and implications. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 25(1), 37-50.

Labrecque, L. I., vor dem Esche, J., Mathwick, C., Novak, T. P., & Hofacker, C. F. (2013). Consumer power: Evolution in the digital age. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 27(4), 257-269.

Lampel, J., & Bhalla, A. (2007). The role of status seeking in online communities: Giving the gift of experience. Journal of Computer‐ Mediated Communication, 12(2), 434-455.

Lewis, B. K., & Nichols, C. (2010). Social media and strategic communication: A three- year study of attitudes and perceptions about social media among college students. Public Relations Journal, 10(1).

Love, E. G., Lim, J., & Bednar, M. K. (2017). The face of the firm: The influence of CEOs on corporate reputation. Academy of Management Journal, 60(4), 1462-1481.

(23)

Mallan, K. (2009). Look at me! Look at me! Self-representation and self-exposure through online networks. Digital Culture and Education, 1(1), 51.

March, S. T., & Smith, G. F. (1995). Design and natural science research on information technology. Decision Support Systems, 15(4), 251-266.

Montoya, P., & Vandehey, T. (2002). The personal branding phenomenon: realize greater influence, explosive income growth and rapid career advancement by applying the branding techniques of Michael, Martha & Oprah. Peter Montoya.

Neiger, B. L., Thackeray, R., Van Wagenen, S. A., Hanson, C. L., West, J. H., Barnes, M. D., & Fagen, M. C. (2012). Use of social media in health promotion: purposes, key performance indicators, and evaluation metrics. Health promotion practice, 13(2), 159-164. Peffers, K., Tuunanen, T., Rothenberger, M. A., & Chatterjee, S. (2007). A design science research methodology for information systems research. Journal Of Management Information Systems, 24(3), 45-77.

Peters, K., Chen, Y., Kaplan, A. M., Ognibeni, B., & Pauwels, K. (2013). Social media metrics—A framework and guidelines for managing social media. Journal Of Interactive Marketing, 27(4), 281-298.

Sarstedt, M., Wilczynski, P., & Melewar, T. C. (2013). Measuring reputation in global markets—A comparison of reputation measures’ convergent and criterion validities. Journal of World Business, 48(3), 329-339.

Sievers, K., Wodzicki, K., Aberle, I., Keckeisen, M., & Cress, U. (2015). Self-presentation in professional networks: More than just window dressing. Computers in Human Behavior, 50, 25-30.

Winter, R., Zhao, J. L., & Aier, S. (Eds.). (2010). Global Perspectives on Design Science Research: 5th International Conference, DESRIST 2010, St. Gallen, Switzerland, June 4-5, 2010. Proceedings (Vol. 6105). Springer.

(24)

Yang, S., & Albers, A. (2013). Overcoming information overload in online reputation management: a systematic literature review. Yang, S. (2015). Understanding Personal Online Reputation Management: A Grounded Theory Study. In PACIS (p. 66).

Yang, S. (2016, January). Understanding the Pain: Examining Individuals' Online Reputation Management Behaviour and Its Obstacles - A Grounded Theory. In System Sciences (HICSS), 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on (pp. 3898-3907). IEEE.

(25)

Appendix

Table 1: Client/KPI/Metrics Overview (MyReputationLab)

Client Company Platform KPI’s Metrics

1 A LinkedIn Capitalize on strong network to position Client 1 as futurist and digital trend thought leader

- 2000 connections

- 50 average weekly profile views - 1000 average weekly impressions - 70%+ of new connections will be

either Senior or Experts Twitter Establish a stable following to exchange

insights with other thought leaders and people in the industry. Amplify Company A content and messages.

- 500 followers

- 150 average weekly profile visits - 1500 average weekly impressions - 75%+ will be followers interested in

the key topics we defined

2 B LinkedIn Build up the network with relevant

professionals. Position Client 2 as an expert on digital/tech innovations and position Company B as an innovative company.

- 4000 connections

- 50+ average weekly profile views - 10000+ average weekly

impressions

- 70%+ of new connections will be either C-Level, Senior or Experts Twitter Establish a stable following to exchange

insights with other thought leaders and people in the industry.

- 1000+ followers

- 50+ average weekly profile visits - 5000+ average weekly

impressions

- 75%+ will be followers interested in the key topics we defined

(26)

3 C LinkedIn Establish Client 3 as a key voice on his main topics. Build up network with valuable connections in circular economy,

sustainability, conservation and renewable energy, and increase awareness on these topics

- 2500 connections

- 45 average weekly profile views - 3000 average weekly impressions - 90%+ of new connections will

match at least one category

Twitter Establish a stable following to exchange insights with other thought leaders and

circular society enthusiasts. Amplify Company C content

- 1000 followers

digital, innovation and future trends

4 D LinkedIn Increase network and bring more C-Level

Executives for potential lead generation. Position as thought leader on digital transformation.

- 1400 Connections

- 70%+ of new connections will be C-Level Executives

- 3+ new recommendations Twitter Establish Twitter presence and become a

source of strong and consistent content on digital transformation and digital trends

- 1000 followers

- 50%+ will be followers interested in digital transformation or financing - Ratio of 1:3 of Following to

Followers

5 E LinkedIn Objectives:

• Spread updates on Company E and Fashion.

• Attract attention from potential buyers

(27)

• Add influential connections in the Fashion Industry

Twitter - Focus ONLY on Company E + Fashion (i.e. On Materials Silk, Leather,

Cashmere) - Start promoting

- Spread updates about the new collections for Company E

- Maintain Twitter as a visual platform / publish more videos

- 4000 followers

6 F LinkedIn Build up the network with relevant

professionals. Position Client 6 and Company F as cutting edge packaging experts in France.

- 1500 connections

- 30 average weekly profile views - 2500 average weekly impressions - 70%+ of new connections will be

either Senior or Experts Twitter Establish a stable following to exchange

insights with other thought leaders and people in the industry. Amplify Company F content and messages.

- 500 followers

the key topics we defined

7 G LinkedIn Become a well known thought leader on the

topic of sustainability. Grow network to at least 10.000 followers

- 10.000 connections

- 2000 average weekly impressions Twitter Establish a stable following to exchange

(28)

in the industry. Focus on sustainability topics and increasing awareness.

8 H LinkedIn Become a well known thought leader on the

topic of sustainability. Grow network to at least 10.000 followers

- 10.000 connections

- 2000 average weekly impressions Twitter Establish a stable following to exchange

insights with other thought leaders and people in the industry. Focus on sustainability topics and increasing awareness.

- 2000 followers

- 150 average weekly profile visits

9 I LinkedIn Reactive LinkedIn and network in a targeted way to other CEOs and leaders

•

- +200 connections minimum - 40+ average weekly profile views - 2000+ average weekly

impressions

- 70%+ of new connections will be either Director and above level Twitter Establish a stable “follower base” to exchange

insights with other thought leaders and digital transformation enthusiasts

- 1000 followers

- 150 average weekly profile visits - 2000+ average weekly

impressions

- 50%+ will be followers interested in digital, Wi-Fi and future trends 10 I LinkedIn Reactive LinkedIn and network in a targeted

way to other CEOs and leaders:

(29)

- 70%+ of new connections will be either Director and above level Twitter Establish a stable “follower base” to exchange

insights with other thought leaders and digital transformation enthusiasts

- 1000 followers

impressions

way to other CEOs and leaders: •

impressions

- 70%+ of new connections will be either Director and above level

Twitter Establish a stable “follower base” to exchange insights with other thought leaders and digital transformation enthusiasts

- 1000 followers

(30)

way to other CEOs and leaders: •

impressions

- 70%+ of new connections will be either Director and above level

Twitter Establish a stable “follower base” to exchange insights with other thought leaders and digital transformation enthusiasts

- 1000 followers

impressions

- 50%+ will be followers interested in digital, Wi-Fi and future trends

13 J LinkedIn Increase in impressions/engagement - 3500 connections

- Increase in

impressions/engagement Twitter Increase in impressions/engagement - 900 followers

- Increase in

impressions/engagement 14 K LinkedIn Grow network with relevant professionals.

Position Client 14 as a leading expert on leadership development, corporate governance and executive psychology. Amplify events.

- 3000 connections (currently 1000) - 50 average weekly profile views - 10000+ average weekly

(31)

- Connections will always be within the agreed categories.