Tools
Tools
Minning, Holger (2020) The Reputational Landscape of Medical Device Companies: A Hospital Procurement Manager's Perspective. Doctoral thesis, University of Gloucestershire. doi:10.46289/BUSM2389
|
Text (Final thesis)
9989 Minning, Holger (2020) The Reputational Landscape of Medical Device Companies - A Hospital Procurement Managers.pdf - Accepted Version Available under License All Rights Reserved. Download (9MB) | Preview |
Abstract
Corporate reputation is one of the key intangible assets of a company. Previous studies clarified that it has strategic economic value, provides a competitive advantage and supports the purchase decision of customers. This study explicates and applies the ‘many reputations’ approach which offers a definition for explaining reputation in a specific context: Corporate reputation is defined as a relatively stable representation of a company based on attribute-specific judgement by a stakeholder group. There is only limited research about corporate reputation in the healthcare supply chain context, and the reputation of medical device companies has only been investigated in the patient stakeholder group. Thus, this thesis explains the reputational landscape from the perspective of hospital procurement managers, the most important customer group for medical device suppliers, for the first time. Following a critical realist methodology, medical device company reputation is conceptualized as a structure with antecedents, attributes, consequences and mechanisms. In a first empirical phase, an initial concept was derived from academic and managerial literature. This concept was then discussed in two interview phases with one manager of a group purchasing organization and eleven hospital procurement managers in Germany, resulting in explanations about the individual constituents of reputation and their interactions. In the eyes of hospital procurement managers, medical device company reputation consists of generalized attractiveness, products, safety, transparency, services, customer focus, innovation, financial stability and responsibility. The reputational impression is caused by the hospital procurement managers’ experience, by medical device company representatives, by procurement networks, regulations and company characteristics. The reputational impacts are advocacy, purchase decision and the suppliers’ performance. The study also identified important reputation influencers from outside the reputation construct and major internal reputation agents. The findings confirm the research direction and support the ‘many reputations’ approach, that reputations are designed by the representation of a specific industry among specific stakeholders in a defined region. Based on the refined concept, academics can further examine the evolutionary nature of reputation and the reputation of related industries, among similar stakeholders or in other countries. Managers of medical device companies benefit from having a concise composition available to use for measuring, analysing and managing their company’s reputation.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thesis Advisors: |
|
|||||||||
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Corporate reputation; Critical realism; Germany; Medical device company; Medical device industry; Hospital procurement; | |||||||||
| Subjects: | H Social Sciences > HD Industries. Land use. Labor > HD28 Management. Industrial Management > HD60 Social responsibility in business H Social Sciences > HD Industries. Land use. Labor > HD28 Management. Industrial Management > HD61 Risk in industry. Risk management H Social Sciences > HF Commerce > HF5001 Business > HF5387 Business Ethics |
|||||||||
| Divisions: | Schools and Research Institutes > School of Business, Computing and Social Sciences | |||||||||
| Depositing User: | Susan Turner | |||||||||
| Date Deposited: | 22 Jul 2021 14:08 | |||||||||
| Last Modified: | 20 Dec 2022 15:23 | |||||||||
| URI: | https://eprints.glos.ac.uk/id/eprint/9989 |
University Staff: Request a correction | Repository Editors: Update this record
