Stakeholders, Publics and Organisational Reputation

Introduction

Public relations management is fundamentally concerned with relationships between an organisation and the groups that affect, or are affected by, its decisions. Organisations do not communicate with a single undifferentiated “public”. They operate within networks of employees, customers, investors, regulators, suppliers, journalists, communities, advocacy groups, professional bodies, digital creators and many others. These groups differ in their expectations, resources, legal standing, emotional investment and ability to influence organisational outcomes.

Effective public relations therefore begins with disciplined analysis. Practitioners must identify relevant stakeholders, distinguish stakeholders from publics, understand competing expectations, assess power and legitimacy, and decide which relationships require immediate attention. They must also connect communication activity with organisational identity, image, trust, legitimacy and reputation. These concepts are related but not interchangeable. Confusing them can lead to poor strategy—for example, attempting to repair a reputation problem through visual rebranding when the underlying issue is unethical conduct.

This chapter presents an integrated framework for stakeholder and public analysis. It also examines reputation as a strategic and ethical resource, provides tools for prioritisation and engagement, and considers the effects of digital media, artificial intelligence and increasing demands for transparency.

Learning Objectives

By the end of this chapter, students should be able to:

1. Distinguish stakeholders, publics, audiences and communities.
2. Identify and classify an organisation’s internal and external stakeholders.
3. Analyse stakeholder expectations, power, legitimacy, urgency and influence.
4. Prioritise publics for communication and relationship-management purposes.
5. Explain the relationships among identity, image, trust, legitimacy and reputation.
6. Apply stakeholder and reputation frameworks to a practical organisational problem.
7. Evaluate ethical, governance and technological issues in reputation management.

1. Stakeholders, Publics and Audiences

1.1 Stakeholders

A stakeholder is an individual, group or institution that can affect, or be affected by, an organisation’s objectives, decisions or operations. The concept is broader than the shareholder or investor. Employees, for example, may influence service quality and organisational culture; regulators can impose sanctions; local communities may support or obstruct development; and customers can influence revenue and reputation through reviews and word-of-mouth communication.

Stakeholders may be:

• Internal, such as employees, managers, directors and owners.
• External, such as customers, suppliers, regulators, media organisations and communities.
• Primary, whose continuing support is essential to organisational survival.
• Secondary, who may not transact directly with the organisation but can influence its social environment, legitimacy or reputation.
• Voluntary, such as investors, members or employees who choose to associate with the organisation.
• Involuntary, such as residents affected by pollution, traffic or a construction project without having chosen the relationship.

Stakeholder theory, associated particularly with R. Edward Freeman, argues that organisations should be managed with consideration for the interests of relevant stakeholders rather than treating financial owners as the only legitimate constituency. This does not mean that all interests are identical or that every demand can be satisfied. It means that managerial decisions should recognise the consequences and responsibilities associated with organisational interdependence.

1.2 Publics

In public relations, a public is a group that recognises a common issue or consequence and becomes capable of communication and collective action around it. A stakeholder may exist without actively communicating about an issue. A public emerges when a group perceives a problem, discusses it and potentially acts.

For example, residents living near a factory are stakeholders because factory operations affect their environment. They become an active public when they organise around air quality, contact journalists, attend public meetings or campaign for regulatory action.

James E. Grunig’s situational theory of publics identifies publics according to three conditions:

• Problem recognition: whether people recognise that an issue exists.
• Constraint recognition: whether they believe obstacles limit their ability to act.
• Level of involvement: how personally important the issue is to them.

This helps explain why a large stakeholder group may not be an active public. A company’s entire customer base may be affected by a data breach, but only some customers may recognise the problem, feel personally involved and organise a response.

1.3 Audiences, communities and networks

An audience is generally a group at which a message or communication activity is directed. The term can imply a relatively passive role. A community is a group connected by place, identity, interest or shared experience. A network is a set of interconnected actors through which information, influence and resources circulate.

These distinctions are practically important. A press release treats journalists as a distribution audience; a media-relations strategy recognises them as independent actors with professional norms. A social-media campaign may target an audience, but its results depend on networks that reinterpret, share, challenge or parody the message.

2. Mapping the Stakeholder Environment

Stakeholder analysis should begin before communication tactics are selected. The purpose is not to create a decorative list but to understand relationships, dependencies, conflicts and potential change.

2.1 The stakeholder inventory

A useful inventory asks:

1. Who provides resources the organisation needs?
2. Who receives or experiences the organisation’s outputs?
3. Who can enable, constrain or sanction organisational activity?
4. Who possesses relevant knowledge or expertise?
5. Who may suffer direct or indirect harm?
6. Who shapes public interpretation of the organisation?
7. Which groups are currently silent but could become active publics?

A stakeholder register can record the group, its interests, current relationship, communication needs, influence, risks and responsible organisational department.

2.2 Stakeholder salience

A widely used framework by Mitchell, Agle and Wood assesses stakeholder salience through three attributes:

• Power: the capacity to influence organisational decisions or outcomes.
• Legitimacy: the perceived validity or appropriateness of the stakeholder’s relationship or claim.
• Urgency: the degree to which a claim requires immediate attention.

The attributes are not moral absolutes. Power may arise from legal authority, control of resources, expertise, numbers, media access or the ability to disrupt operations. Legitimacy may arise from law, contract, social norms, rights or direct exposure to consequences. Urgency may arise from time sensitivity, severity or escalating public concern.

A regulator may possess power and legitimacy. A small community group may have limited formal power but strong legitimacy and high urgency during an environmental incident. A viral online account may have substantial temporary influence but uncertain legitimacy. Professional judgement is needed because the three attributes can change rapidly.

2.3 Power-interest analysis

A simple power-interest matrix assists prioritisation:

The matrix should not be used mechanically. Groups with low formal power may possess strong moral legitimacy or may become influential through coalition-building. It is also unethical to interpret “low power” as permission to ignore vulnerable people. A stakeholder’s vulnerability can justify intensive engagement even when its immediate influence is limited.

2.4 Influence and relationship quality

Influence is multidimensional. A group may influence an organisation by:

• controlling resources or market access;
• exercising legal or regulatory authority;
• shaping public opinion;
• providing technical knowledge;
• mobilising employees, customers or communities;
• initiating litigation or political action; or
• affecting organisational morale and culture.

A relationship assessment should also consider history, trust, dependency and conflict. Two stakeholders with equal formal power may require different approaches because one has a cooperative history and the other has experienced repeated broken promises.

3. Expectations, Interests and Competing Claims

Stakeholder expectations may be explicit, implicit or evolving. A contract may explicitly require delivery by a certain date. Employees may implicitly expect respectful treatment. A community may increasingly expect climate disclosure even if no local law yet requires it.

Expectations can be classified as:

• Instrumental: concerned with benefits, resources or performance.
• Relational: concerned with respect, dialogue, fairness and recognition.
• Normative: concerned with rights, duties, justice or public welfare.
• Informational: concerned with accuracy, timeliness, accessibility and explanation.

Conflict arises when satisfying one stakeholder affects another. A cost-reduction programme may satisfy investors but threaten employee security and customer service. A rapid product launch may satisfy customers seeking innovation while increasing regulatory and safety concerns.

Public relations management cannot resolve every conflict through messaging. It must help decision-makers understand whose interests are affected, what duties apply, what trade-offs are unavoidable and how decisions can be explained honestly. Communication is most credible when organisational action is consistent with stated values.

4. Organisational Identity, Image and Reputation

4.1 Organisational identity

Organisational identity refers to how an organisation understands and expresses what it is. It includes purpose, values, culture, history, leadership style, behaviour, symbols and distinctive competencies. Identity has both internal and external dimensions. Employees experience identity through everyday management practices, not merely through a logo or mission statement.

A useful distinction is between:

• Actual identity: the organisation’s underlying characteristics and practices.
• Communicated identity: what it deliberately says and shows.
• Desired identity: what leaders want the organisation to become or be known for.
• Ideal identity: what is considered strategically appropriate in the wider environment.

Misalignment among these forms creates risk. If an organisation communicates inclusion while employees experience discrimination, the problem is not primarily a design problem; it is an identity and conduct problem.

4.2 Organisational image

Image is the immediate or relatively short-term perception held by a particular stakeholder or public at a particular time. Different groups may hold different images of the same organisation. Customers may see innovation, employees may see pressure, regulators may see incomplete compliance and journalists may see controversy.

Images are shaped by direct experience, organisational communication, media coverage, third-party commentary and broader cultural narratives. They can change quickly after an event.

4.3 Reputation

Reputation is a more enduring, collective evaluation of an organisation based on accumulated experiences, interpretations and expectations. It is not simply the sum of publicity. Reputation develops through repeated behaviour and the credibility assigned to that behaviour by relevant stakeholders.

Reputation is often described as an intangible asset because it can support recruitment, customer preference, investor confidence, partnership formation and resilience during crises. However, it is not fully owned or controlled by the organisation. It is co-produced through interactions between organisational conduct and stakeholder judgement.

A useful conceptual relationship is:

Identity → communication and behaviour → stakeholder experiences and interpretations → image and reputation

This is not a mechanical equation. Reputation can be affected by external events, misinformation, historical injustice and sector-wide associations. Nevertheless, the sequence highlights why behaviour and experience are central.

4.4 Trust and legitimacy

Trust is the willingness to accept vulnerability based on expectations about another actor’s competence, integrity and benevolence. A customer trusts an organisation to protect payment data; an employee trusts management to apply policies fairly; a community trusts a company to report environmental impacts honestly.

Trust has at least three dimensions:

• Competence: can the organisation perform reliably?
• Integrity: does it keep commitments and follow principles?
• Benevolence or care: does it consider the interests of others?

Legitimacy is the perceived appropriateness, acceptability or rightfulness of an organisation and its actions within a social system. Suchman distinguishes pragmatic legitimacy, based on stakeholder self-interest; moral legitimacy, based on normative approval; and cognitive legitimacy, based on whether the organisation appears understandable and taken for granted.

Trust and legitimacy overlap but differ. A stakeholder may trust an organisation’s technical ability while questioning its moral legitimacy. Conversely, an organisation may have legitimate authority but low interpersonal trust because it communicates poorly.

5. Managing Reputation Strategically

Reputation management is not the manufacture of favourable impressions regardless of reality. It is the coordinated management of conduct, relationships, information and expectations so that organisational behaviour is responsible and can be understood as such.

5.1 The reputation process

A practical process includes:

1. Diagnose current perceptions, experiences and expectations.
2. Define the organisation’s purpose, values and desired relationship standards.
3. Align policies, operations, leadership behaviour and communication.
4. Engage stakeholders through listening, dialogue and participation.
5. Demonstrate performance with evidence rather than slogans.
6. Monitor changes in sentiment, trust, issues and stakeholder power.
7. Respond and learn when gaps or failures are identified.

Reputation objectives should be specific. “Improve reputation” is too vague. A stronger objective might be: “Within twelve months, improve employee confidence that safety concerns are acted upon, while reducing unresolved complaints and publishing independently verified safety performance.”

5.2 Reputation dimensions

Reputation can be assessed through dimensions such as:

• quality of products or services;
• innovation and adaptability;
• leadership and governance;
• workplace and employee treatment;
• social and environmental responsibility;
• financial strength and reliability; and
• transparency and responsiveness.

Measurement should combine quantitative and qualitative evidence. Surveys may indicate perceived trust, but interviews, complaint records, employee turnover, media analysis, stakeholder forums and operational data reveal why perceptions exist.

A simple perception-gap analysis compares the organisation’s intended identity with stakeholder experience:

This is a conceptual diagnostic, not a numerical law. The terms cannot be subtracted in a strict mathematical sense unless a valid measurement scale has been designed. The expression means that larger divergence between promises and experiences indicates greater reputation risk.

5.3 Communication and relationship management

Communication should be adapted to stakeholder needs without becoming manipulative. Important practices include:

• use plain language and accessible formats;
• distinguish facts, estimates, opinions and commitments;
• disclose material limitations and uncertainties;
• provide channels for questions and complaints;
• respond within realistic timeframes;
• give evidence of corrective action;
• ensure spokespersons are informed and authorised; and
• record feedback and demonstrate how it influenced decisions.

Dialogue is not simply allowing comments. It requires the possibility that stakeholder input can affect organisational decisions. If consultation cannot change anything, it should be described accurately as information provision rather than participation.

6. A Practical Prioritisation Framework

A professional team can use a weighted assessment to support, not replace, judgement. For each stakeholder group, rate power, legitimacy, urgency, vulnerability and relationship criticality on a consistent scale, such as 1 to 5. The scores should be justified with evidence.

For example, a team may calculate a priority index as:

Where:

• P = priority index;
• W = power score;
• L = legitimacy score;
• U = urgency score;
• V = vulnerability score; and
• R = relationship-criticality score.

Each score ranges from 1 to 5. The coefficients are weights that sum to 1.00, so P also ranges from 1 to 5. This is an illustrative managerial tool, not a universally validated formula. The weights must be adapted to the organisation and disclosed internally. Vulnerability is included to prevent a purely power-based system from neglecting people who may be seriously affected but have limited influence.

Suppose a local residents’ group receives scores of W = 2, L = 5, U = 5, V = 5 and R = 4. Then:

A score of 4.15 indicates high priority under this organisation’s chosen criteria. The calculation does not prove that the residents’ group is more important than every other group. It makes the reasoning visible and encourages discussion about assumptions.

7. Case Study: The Riverside Transit Extension

This is an illustrative case.

Background

MetroLink, a regional transport authority, proposes a new transit extension through Riverside, a mixed-income neighbourhood. The project promises shorter commuting times, construction employment and reduced traffic. It also requires tree removal, temporary road closures and acquisition of several properties.

Problem

MetroLink initially communicates the project through technical documents and a media announcement. Residents complain that consultation meetings were scheduled during working hours and that information was difficult to understand. A local environmental association alleges that the authority has understated ecological impacts. A community video attracts widespread attention online, and elected representatives request an independent review.

Analysis

The stakeholder inventory includes residents, affected property owners, daily commuters, employees, construction contractors, environmental organisations, local businesses, elected officials, transport regulators, journalists and future passengers.

The authority initially treated future passengers and elected officials as high-priority publics, while treating residents mainly as an information audience. This was a strategic error. Affected residents had high legitimacy and urgency, even though their formal power appeared limited. Their ability to mobilise media, legal advice, elected representatives and public sympathy gave them substantial influence.

The case also reveals an identity-image gap. MetroLink’s desired identity is a transparent, community-oriented public service. Its actual consultation process suggested administrative convenience rather than meaningful participation. The reputational issue was therefore connected to process design, not only message content.

Approach and solution

MetroLink appointed an independent engagement lead and changed the process in five ways:

1. It published a plain-language impact summary alongside the technical assessment.
2. It held meetings at varied times, provided translation and offered accessible online and offline channels.
3. It created a residents’ reference panel with a published remit and clear decision points.
4. It commissioned an independent ecological review and released both the findings and the authority’s response.
5. It established a complaints and remedy process for property owners and businesses affected by construction.

The authority did not accept every demand. It explained which design changes were feasible, which were not, and why. It revised the construction schedule, protected additional trees and created a monitoring group including residents and environmental representatives.

Outcome

Opposition did not disappear, but the dispute became more evidence-based and less distrustful. Media coverage shifted from claims of secrecy to discussion of trade-offs. The project experienced a delay, but MetroLink reduced legal uncertainty and improved community acceptance. Internally, the authority adopted a stakeholder-engagement standard for future infrastructure projects.

Learning points

The case demonstrates that:

• stakeholders can become publics when they recognise a shared issue;
• legitimacy and vulnerability matter even when formal power is limited;
• consultation must provide meaningful opportunities for influence;
• independent evidence strengthens credibility;
• reputation is affected by organisational processes, not merely publicity; and
• accepting some delay may protect long-term legitimacy and implementation capacity.

8. Ethical, Governance and Regulatory Issues

Stakeholder and reputation management involves ethical choices about representation, disclosure and power. Practitioners should avoid treating stakeholders as instruments for image enhancement. Ethical practice requires respect for autonomy, fairness, accuracy and accountability.

Key issues include:

Transparency and material information

Organisations should disclose information that could reasonably affect stakeholder decisions, safety or rights. Selective disclosure, technically true but misleading claims, hidden sponsorship and strategic omission can damage trust and may breach law or professional codes.

Greenwashing and purpose-washing

Greenwashing occurs when environmental claims exaggerate or misrepresent performance. Purpose-washing similarly presents social purpose as a communication theme without corresponding action. Claims should be specific, evidence-based, comparable and open to verification.

Privacy and data governance

Stakeholder research, social listening and customer databases involve personal data. Organisations should collect only necessary information, explain its use, protect it, control access and comply with applicable data-protection requirements. Monitoring public posts does not remove all ethical obligations.

Representation and inclusion

Stakeholder maps can reproduce organisational bias by privileging articulate, well-resourced groups. Practitioners should actively seek perspectives from marginalised, disabled, linguistically diverse and otherwise underrepresented people. Accessibility is a condition of meaningful participation.

Conflicts of interest and independence

Public relations professionals should disclose material conflicts, distinguish paid advocacy from independent opinion and avoid creating apparently grassroots support that is actually organised or financed by an interested party. Astroturfing undermines democratic communication and long-term legitimacy.

Crisis communication

During crises, speed matters, but accuracy and care matter more than premature certainty. Organisations should acknowledge what is known, identify what is being investigated, state immediate protective actions and provide regular updates. Blame-shifting, silence and defensive attacks often deepen reputational harm.

9. Digital Media, AI and Contemporary Developments

Digital media have changed the relationship between organisations and publics. Stakeholders can publish evidence, coordinate action and challenge official narratives without waiting for journalistic gatekeepers. Hashtags, review platforms, livestreams and creator networks can make local issues visible nationally or internationally.

The practical consequences include:

• reputation is continuously observed rather than periodically assessed;
• employees and customers may become influential communicators;
• visual evidence can spread before verification is complete;
• algorithms can amplify emotionally engaging content;
• crisis boundaries between internal and external communication are weaker; and
• organisations must respond to networks rather than only to formal institutions.

Artificial intelligence can assist with issue monitoring, theme detection, translation, accessibility, stakeholder database management and scenario analysis. However, AI-generated summaries may misclassify irony, minority viewpoints or culturally specific language. Automated sentiment scores can conceal sampling bias and should not be treated as direct measures of public truth.

AI governance should include human review, documentation of data sources, privacy safeguards, bias testing, clear accountability and disclosure where automated systems materially affect stakeholders. Generative AI should not fabricate testimonials, create false grassroots identities or produce misleading images and statements. Efficiency cannot justify deception.

10. Challenges and Limitations of Stakeholder Management

First, stakeholder categories are unstable. A group’s power and urgency may change rapidly after an incident, election, court decision or viral post.

Second, prioritisation can create ethical blind spots. A numerical score may give false precision and may privilege groups already visible to management. Qualitative judgement and impact assessment remain essential.

Third, organisations cannot satisfy all expectations. Genuine conflicts require transparent reasoning, fair procedures and sometimes compensation or remedy—not merely more communication.

Fourth, reputation measures are culturally and contextually dependent. A survey result from one region, language group or platform cannot automatically represent all stakeholders.

Fifth, reputation can become overemphasised at the expense of substance. An organisation may focus on protecting its name rather than correcting harm. Responsible public relations places public interest, organisational accountability and relationship quality before superficial approval.

Best-Practice Checklist

A public relations manager should be able to answer the following questions:

• Have all materially affected groups been identified?
• Which stakeholders are active publics, and which could become active?
• What evidence supports our assessment of power, legitimacy and urgency?
• Have vulnerable and less visible groups been included?
• Are our promises consistent with actual organisational behaviour?
• Is communication two-way, accessible and capable of influencing decisions?
• Are claims supported by reliable evidence?
• Are privacy, consent and conflicts of interest being managed?
• What indicators will show whether trust and legitimacy are improving?
• What will the organisation change if stakeholder evidence reveals a problem?

Chapter Summary

Stakeholders are individuals and groups that affect or are affected by an organisation, while publics emerge when people recognise a shared issue and become capable of communication or collective action. Effective analysis distinguishes internal and external, primary and secondary, voluntary and involuntary stakeholders and recognises that audiences, communities and networks play different roles.

Stakeholder prioritisation should consider power, legitimacy and urgency, while also recognising vulnerability, relationship criticality, history and changing influence. Power-interest matrices and stakeholder registers are useful tools, but they should support rather than replace ethical and professional judgement.

Organisational identity concerns what an organisation is and how it understands itself; image is a stakeholder’s relatively immediate perception; reputation is a more enduring collective evaluation. Trust concerns expectations of competence, integrity and care, whereas legitimacy concerns perceived appropriateness and rightfulness. Reputation is strengthened when organisational conduct, stakeholder experience and communication are aligned.

Strategic reputation management involves diagnosis, identity definition, organisational alignment, meaningful engagement, evidence-based communication, monitoring and learning. Digital media make reputation more dynamic and enable publics to create and circulate their own interpretations. AI can support analysis, but it introduces risks involving bias, privacy, accountability and deception. Ultimately, reputation cannot be manufactured sustainably through messages alone: it is earned through responsible performance and credible relationships.

Key Terms

Stakeholder: An individual, group or institution that can affect or is affected by an organisation.

Public: A group that recognises a shared issue and may communicate or act collectively.

Audience: A group at which a communication message or activity is directed.

Community: A group connected by place, identity, interest or shared experience.

Stakeholder salience: The degree of priority assigned according to attributes such as power, legitimacy and urgency.

Power: The capacity to influence organisational decisions or outcomes.

Legitimacy: Perceived appropriateness, acceptability or rightfulness of a claim or organisation.

Urgency: The time sensitivity and criticality of a stakeholder claim.

Vulnerability: The degree to which a stakeholder may suffer harm or lack capacity to protect its interests.

Organisational identity: The organisation’s understanding and expression of what it is.

Organisational image: A relatively immediate perception held by a stakeholder or public.

Reputation: An enduring collective evaluation based on accumulated experiences and interpretations.

Trust: Willingness to accept vulnerability based on expectations of competence, integrity and care.

Relational communication: Communication focused on mutual understanding, interaction and relationship quality.

Social licence: Informal community acceptance that allows an organisation to operate with legitimacy.

Greenwashing: Misleading or exaggerated communication about environmental performance.

Astroturfing: Deceptive presentation of organised or sponsored advocacy as grassroots support.

Stakeholder mapping: The systematic identification and classification of relevant stakeholder groups.

Reputation risk: The possibility that organisational conduct or communication will reduce trust, legitimacy or favourable evaluation.

Review Questions

Short Answer Questions

1. Define a stakeholder and distinguish the concept from a public.
2. What are the three attributes in the stakeholder-salience framework?
3. Explain one difference between organisational image and reputation.
4. Identify the three main dimensions of trust discussed in this chapter.
5. Why should vulnerability be considered in stakeholder prioritisation?

Long Answer Questions

1. Explain how stakeholder mapping can support public relations strategy. Include the limitations of a power-interest matrix.
2. Discuss the relationship among organisational identity, communication, stakeholder experience, image and reputation.
3. Compare trust and legitimacy, and explain why an organisation may possess one without fully possessing the other.
4. Describe an ethical process for managing a reputational crisis in a digitally connected environment.
5. Evaluate the opportunities and risks of using artificial intelligence for stakeholder and reputation management.

Analytical / Application Questions

1. A university plans to introduce facial-recognition access controls. Identify the relevant stakeholders and publics, classify their likely power, legitimacy and urgency, and recommend an engagement approach.
2. A food company advertises itself as sustainable while suppliers report poor labour conditions. Analyse the identity-image-reputation gap and propose operational and communication responses.
3. Using the illustrative priority formula in this chapter, calculate the priority index for a stakeholder with W = 4, L = 4, U = 3, V = 2 and R = 5. Interpret the result and explain why the score should not be treated as an objective truth.

Multiple Choice Questions with Answers

Question 1

Which statement best distinguishes a public from a stakeholder?

A. A public is always an internal group, while a stakeholder is always external.

B. A public recognises a shared issue and may act collectively, while a stakeholder may exist without active issue engagement.

C. A public has legal ownership, while a stakeholder has no organisational relationship.

D. A public receives paid messages, while a stakeholder produces advertising.

Correct Answer: B. A public recognises a shared issue and may act collectively, while a stakeholder may exist without active issue engagement.

Question 2

Which attribute refers to the perceived appropriateness or rightfulness of a stakeholder’s claim?

A. Power

B. Urgency

C. Legitimacy

D. Visibility

Correct Answer: C. Legitimacy

Question 3

Which combination is central to Mitchell, Agle and Wood’s stakeholder-salience framework?

A. Cost, quality and speed

B. Power, legitimacy and urgency

C. Reach, frequency and engagement

D. Identity, image and publicity

Correct Answer: B. Power, legitimacy and urgency

Question 4

What is organisational image?

A. A stakeholder’s relatively immediate perception of an organisation

B. The organisation’s legally registered name

C. The permanent values held by employees

D. A government classification of an organisation

Correct Answer: A. A stakeholder’s relatively immediate perception of an organisation

Question 5

Which practice is most likely to strengthen reputational credibility?

A. Making broad claims without supporting evidence

B. Suppressing complaints from vulnerable groups

C. Aligning organisational conduct with transparent, evidence-based communication

D. Using automated sentiment scores as the only source of insight

Correct Answer: C. Aligning organisational conduct with transparent, evidence-based communication

Question 6

In the illustrative priority formula, what is the priority index when W = 4, L = 4, U = 3, V = 2 and R = 5?

A. 3.20

B. 3.45

C. 3.65

D. 4.00

Correct Answer: B. 3.45

Question 7

Which example best illustrates a stakeholder becoming an active public?

A. A customer exists in a company database but never considers an issue.

B. A supplier signs a routine contract.

C. Residents organise around pollution concerns and campaign for regulatory action.

D. A logo is redesigned by the communications department.

Correct Answer: C. Residents organise around pollution concerns and campaign for regulatory action.

Question 8

Which statement about trust is most accurate?

A. Trust depends only on an organisation’s visual identity.

B. Trust involves expectations of competence, integrity and care.

C. Trust is identical to legal compliance.

D. Trust can be created permanently through one publicity campaign.

Correct Answer: B. Trust involves expectations of competence, integrity and care.

Question 9

What is greenwashing?

A. A verified environmental audit

B. A community consultation process

C. Misleading or exaggerated communication about environmental performance

D. A method of recycling media materials

Correct Answer: C. Misleading or exaggerated communication about environmental performance

Question 10

Which is an important safeguard when using AI for stakeholder analysis?

A. Removing all human review

B. Using only data that produces positive sentiment

C. Ignoring privacy because online information is public

D. Testing for bias and maintaining human accountability

Correct Answer: D. Testing for bias and maintaining human accountability