Corporate image and reputation in the shipping industry in four Asian countries: Republic of Korea, China, Japan, and Thailand

Chia sẻ: _ _ | Ngày: | Loại File: PDF | Số trang:14

Thêm vào BST

Báo xấu

3
lượt xem 1
download

Download Vui lòng tải xuống để xem tài liệu đầy đủ

This study aims to analyze the perceptions regarding shipping companies’ corporate image and reputation in Republic of Korea, China, Japan, and Thailand. For this study, the shipping industry is confined to the bulk and container shipping sectors to prevent confusion arising from the different sectors.

Chủ đề:

Bình luận(0) Đăng nhập để gửi bình luận!

Lưu

Nội dung Text: Corporate image and reputation in the shipping industry in four Asian countries: Republic of Korea, China, Japan, and Thailand

1065 Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 3, June 2019 Corporate Image and Reputation in the Shipping Industry in Four Asian Countries: Republic of Korea, China, Japan, and Thailand Hyunmi Jang#1, Ho Park2, Sang Youl Kim#3, Pairach Piboonrungroj4 # Graduate School of International Studies, Pusan National University 2, Busandaehak-ro 63beon-gil, Geumjeong-gu, Busan 609-735, Republic of Korea jangh01@pusan.ac.kr ksy@pusan.ac.kr 2 Department of Logistics, Kunsan National University 558 Daehak-ro, Gunsan-si 54150, Republic of Korea hpark0321@kunsan.ac.kr (Corresponding Author) 4 Supply Chain Economic Research Centre (SCERC), Chiang Mai University 239, Huay Kaew Road, Muang District, Chiang mai, 50200, Thailand me@pairach.com Abstract— This study aims to analyze the perceptions 1. Introduction regarding shipping companies’ corporate image and reputation in Republic of Korea, China, Japan, and In recent years, corporate image and Thailand. For this study, the shipping industry is confined to the bulk and container shipping sectors to reputation have come to play an important prevent confusion arising from the different sectors. role in corporate competitiveness. Having An international questionnaire survey was a superior image and reputation can administered in each country. The participants were asked to report their perceptions on eight indicators increase a firm’s profit margin, trust, of corporate image and seven indicators of corporate employee confidence, loyalty, investor reputation relating to the shipping companies. support, and community favor, leading to Descriptive analyses and a one-way between-groups analysis of variance (ANOVA) were conducted using outstanding relationships with customers SPSS 20. Findings show that there are significant and business partners. The shipping differences in perceptions concerning corporate industry, however, has a very low image, image and reputation among four countries. Some cases show significant differences in the analyses in and can even be said to suffer from a line with demographic characteristics. While China negative image created by poor operation shows the highest scores in most variables, Korea is with inferior vessels and unprofessional revealed to have the lowest scores. The results indicate the need to develop programs for improving seafarers. According to [24], investigation the external positive perceptions of the shipping of the image of shipping as reported by companies, as well as to broaden the scope of some media, shipping-related events seem marketing activities targeting the general public. This study is of critical importance as it discusses to be generally ignored as press headlines. relatively ignored but important issues by conducting In other words, journalists in the general comparative research in four major Asian countries media are likely to be indifferent towards comprehensively, particularly targeting samples rarely considered in the empirical shipping-related reporting incidents from the shipping studies despite their significance to academic sector, except for disasters in coastal development. Further research is required to shipping and ferry industries in certain demonstrate the effectiveness of the findings by applying the measures in different national contexts situations. Considering the tremendous with a more diverse group of samples. contribution of shipping to global trade and economy, it is essential for it to Keywords— Corporate Image, Corporate Reputation, Comparative Analysis, ANOVA, Shipping Industry develop a favorable image as a sustainable transport mode attractive to not only ______________________________________________________________ stakeholders but also the general public, International Journal of Supply Chain Management who show no interest in shipping. IJSCM, ISSN: 2050-7399 (Online), 2051-3771 (Print) Copyright © ExcelingTech Pub, UK (http://excelingtech.co.uk/)
1066 Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 3, June 2019 For these reasons, [13] carried out a Shipping Group, in 2015. Japan’s shipping comparative study on upper secondary industry showed strong growth in the school students in Greece, Sweden, and 1950s and 1960s; hence, it can be said that Norway to measure their image in terms of Japan has the longest history of shipping shipping as a future career. In this study, industry involvement among the three important image constructs were countries. During this period, the shipping developed, including (1) rewards, (2) business in Japan has been diversified into significance of industry, (3) ships as a container, bulk, tankers, and car carriers, place of work and living, (4) environment, compared with that in Korea and China (5) CSR of the shipping industry, (6) [15]. family, (7) career shift, (8) risk, and (9) employer–employee relations, suggesting In contrast, Thailand’s fleet is growing that “reward” and “ships as a place of fastest among the Southeast Asian work and living” are the most important countries. However, they have limitations criteria for all pupils while students in due to shipping-related laws that allow Norway have a better attitude towards only Thai flagged vessels to operate in the shipping than those in Sweden and Greece. domestic freight transport, as well as In addition to image, despite the necessity regulations on Thai people’s share in of improving reputation in the shipping domestic shipping companies in the era of industry, few studies have examined these global competition. Despite this, Thailand factors in the shipping industry in is inclined to be stable during the difficult exploratory or thorough ways. period due to their policies. Considering the different situations prevailing in these Since the Asian shipping industry is four countries, a cross-comparison of their significantly superior position than other respective shipping industries can shed market players, four Asian countries were light on larger issues of economic growth. chosen to identify and compare By doing this, from an academic perceptions of the shipping companies’ perspective, a variety of educational image and reputation, that is, three major curricula can be formed to strengthen shipping countries in Northeast Asia— shipping companies’ image and reputation, Republic of Korea (hereafter Korea), and from the practical perspective, the China, and Japan in addition to Thailand, scope of shipping companies’ marketing one of the leading shipping countries in strategies, which are currently limited to Southeast Asia. In terms of each country’s the B2B context, can be broadened to the shipping industry, Korea, China, and Japan general public. were found to have common features; shipping industry growth has mainly The basic aim of this study is to coincided with each country’s period of evaluate and compare the perceptions of strong economic growth. For instance, the university students about shipping majority of Korean shipping companies, companies’ image and reputation in Korea, except for Hanjin Shipping, were China, Japan, and Thailand. The general established under the 1960–1970 era of background of this study is introduced in economic growth, whereas Chinese the first section of the research, followed shipping companies were founded, led by by the theoretical second section, which the Chinese government, starting in the discusses the literatures on corporate 1980s. In particular, China is gaining a image and reputation. The third section of competitive advantage over other countries this study outlines research method, and in global bulk and container markets the main empirical analysis results are through the merger of two state-owned presented in the fourth section. The last shipping companies, COSCO and China section is a conclusion including
1067 Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 3, June 2019 implications. image are ultimately associated with higher profits. For example, it has been found that the impact of corporate image 2. Literature Review on customer loyalty is influenced by high switching costs [27]. [18] confirmed that a 2.1 Corporate Image strongly positive corporate image Corporate image can refer to either (1) the associated with corporate reputation actual corporate image, focusing on the increases customer loyalty. In addition, [8] real perception of external stakeholders identified that a corporate image tends to from the marketing viewpoint or (2) the be more favorable when associated with a desired image concentrating on the firm’s positive company’s corporate logo, as goals regarding how external stakeholders portrayed by the corporate name, design, recognize the firm [9]. While defining and and typeface. [19] analyzed the influence operationalizing the concept of corporate of service brand extensions, empirically image continues to face inconsistencies, proving that a corporate brand’s image corporate image is generally described as changes according to perceived service “the overall impression made on the minds extension quality. of the public about a firm” [18, p.228] and “an evaluative judgment of the total 2.2 Corporate Reputation perception of the corporation” [16, p.515]. Corporate image is said to be composed of Together with corporate image, the functional attributes related to tangible concept of corporate reputation has characteristics and emotional attributes garnered more interest in the past few reflecting psychological characteristics decades as a source of competitive [14]. Feelings and attitudes towards a firm advantages. Corporate reputation refers to derived from the emotional attributes are a “an estimation of the consistency over time result of individual experiences with a firm of an attribute of an entity” [10, p.18] and and the information processing of “a perceptual representation of a functional indicators of image: people company’s past actions and future create a corporate image through analyzing prospects that describes the firm’s overall and combining firm’s attributes. A appeal to all of its key constituents when uniform image is preferable for each compared with other leading rivals” [7, company, but stakeholders, including p.72], highlighting the cumulative and shareholders, employees, and customers, relative features of the definition. possess different images even within the Considering the existence of various same market according to their definitions and types, corporate reputation experiences and interactions with the can be evaluated subjectively based on company [4]. Therefore, various individual aggregate experience regarding communication channels need to be how people interact with a firm about its provided to produce coherent and product and service quality over time, a favorable images [20]. firm’s marketing activities, corporate image or identity built already. In this A positive corporate image would regard, corporate reputation of a company generate higher customer willingness to is not the same among its interested use the company’s products and services parties, depending on who assesses it and and also to increase customer satisfaction in what context. and loyalty to their firm [1]. It positively impacts future investment and recruitment Growing interest among researchers on and can also be used to control the impact the concept of corporate reputation can be of competitors. The benefits of a corporate seen in numerous studies carried out in
1068 Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 3, June 2019 various fields, such as those focusing on 3. Method measurement issues [21] and [26] and in particular, the causal relationships with For this study, container and bulk shipping other constructs [11, 17, 28, 18]. For sectors that dominate the maritime trades instance, [11] empirically verified the were targeted to prevent variations arising positive association between advertising from different perceptions of diverse effects, composed of persuasive and sectors, including cruises and ferries, in the informative aspects of CSR initiatives, and shipping industry. Despite the fact that corporate reputation as well as brand container shipping companies are equity using data collected from 421 increasingly paying attention to corporate policyholders with major life insurance image and reputation, it is argued that companies in Taiwan. [17] demonstrated more efforts are needed. In particular, bulk the significant effects of corporate shipping companies tend to emphasize on reputation with CSR on industrial brand reducing operating costs while other equity and brand performance by actions that can prevent negative investigating 179 purchasing managers of externalities, including environmental and manufacturing and service companies. social damage, were overlooked, Corporate reputation is demonstrated to consequently producing adverse public play a significant role in customer perceptions toward the industry [6]. By relationship management (CRM) limiting the sectors studied, the internal performance according to [28], who validity and reliability of the results can studied customers of Chinese stock also be enhanced [25]. broking firms and a bank. [18] revealed that higher corporate reputation and image Although a quantitative technique was are correlated with higher degrees of mainly employed as a data-collection customer loyalty. method, a qualitative technique, i.e., expert interviews, was supplemented to improve Similar to corporate image, a positive the validity of the study. The questionnaire reputation takes time to develop, as it was constructed effectively following the depends on continuous successful nine-step approach of development of relationships with a firm’s targeting group. validation of a questionnaire suggested by However, reputation can be easily and [2]. The questionnaire can be mainly quickly damaged from negative actions. divided into two sections: (1) respondent Thus, building credibility is essential to information, including gender, educational meeting external expectations and can be background, major, and shipping industry achieved by fulfilling declared promises experience and (2) an evaluation part, and meeting stated intentions [18]. containing two key constructs. The Compared with corporate image, which measures for corporate image and can be built in a short time, corporate reputation found from relevant literatures reputation requires relatively more time to were validated by interviews. Eight items generate. As a crucial intangible asset, a for image and seven items for reputation positive corporate reputation brings many were drawn from [18, 19, 28, 26, 17, 27, competitive advantages, eventually leading 11, 16, 21, 5, 8] and then modified for to higher profits, as well as build barriers clarity. to competitors. In addition to these elements, trust, word-of-mouth, A total of 538 students were participated commitment, and customer willingness to in this study from four countries. The help the firm and other customers have students’ perceptions, which have seldom been adopted in previous studies as been investigated in shipping industry- outcomes of having a favorable reputation. related studies, are significant in many
1069 Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 3, June 2019 aspects. It can be an opportunity for However, the trait of ethical operations students to explain their opinions has been selected as the least satisfactory regarding shipping companies’ image and attribute in Korea. This result might be reputation based on their experience, for influenced by the fraud and corruption educators to diagnose their teaching associated with the April 2014 ferry quality and find ways to improve accident that occurred in Korea. In China, educational effectiveness, and for shipping companies have a lower image practitioners working for shipping than in other industries. In China, companies to acquire important data on construction, media, automobiles, and their activities [13]. manufacturing are gaining much importance as major industries that make up almost 44% of China’s GDP and create 4. Results 11% of China’s jobs. As a result, it can be said that the shipping industry’s image is 4.1 Ranking relatively lower than the images of these The results are demonstrated in Table 1. In industries considering GDP ratios and job- terms of corporate image, IMAGE8, creation portion. In the case of Japan and “Shipping companies are professional,” Thailand, the lowest score was found for attained the highest mean score for all attributes related to having an innovative countries except Thailand, whose first- and pioneering image. This reflects the ranked attributes are IMAGE5, “Shipping nature of the shipping industry having a companies are successful and self- derived demand to support the national confident,” and IMAGE7, “Shipping strategic industry. companies are open and responsive to their customers,” with the same average of 3.63. In measuring the mean for corporate This result supports the conclusion that reputation, REPU2, “Shipping companies students from major shipping countries in are highly reputable,” for Korea, REPU3, Northeast Asia have a different perspective “Shipping companies are reliable,” for of the shipping industry from students in China, and REPU1, “I have a good feeling Thailand, one of the major Southeast about the shipping companies,” for both Asian countries. Because of the B2B Japan and Thailand were selected as the nature of the shipping industry, students most satisfactory attributes. While second- could not possess full understanding of and third-ranked attributes differ among this industry. However, students seem to the four countries, it is remarkable that regard the shipping industry as being REPU5, “Shipping companies offer high professional due to the well-known fierce quality service,” has been selected as one competition between the three countries in of the top three attributes for China and Northeast Asia and its significant Korea but the lowest attribute in Japan’s contribution to each country’s economy. In case. As revealed in the result of REPU7, addition, this result may also be attributed which has been selected as third highest, to the necessity of graduating from Thailand has better reputation than other Maritime University to become marine industries while this attribute has the officers. lowest score in China. Notably, REPU4,
1070 Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 3, June 2019 Table 1. Ranking Korea China Japan Thailand Variable M R M R M R M R Shipping companies are companies IMAGE1 3.11 4 3.73 3 3.51 2 3.60 3 with a good image. Shipping companies provide a safe IMAGE2 3.30 2 4.05 2 3.51 2 3.48 5 form of transportation. Shipping companies have a better IMAGE3 image than other companies in different 3.08 5 3.28 8 3.35 5 3.46 6 industries. Shipping companies are innovative and Corporate IMAGE4 2.98 6 3.38 7 2.77 8 3.34 8 pioneering. Image Shipping companies are successful and IMAGE5 3.19 3 3.50 5 3.45 4 3.63 1 self-confident. Shipping companies conduct their IMAGE6 2.84 8 3.66 4 3.15 7 3.49 4 business in an ethical way. Shipping companies are open and IMAGE7 2.85 7 3.49 6 3.17 6 3.63 1 responsive to their customers. IMAGE8 Shipping companies are professional. 3.84 1 4.19 1 4.15 1 3.43 7 Average 3.15 3.66 3.38 3.51 I have a good feeling about shipping REPU1 3.37 2 3.67 3 3.83 1 3.57 1 companies. Shipping companies are highly REPU2 3.38 1 3.56 5 3.57 4 3.44 4 reputable. REPU3 Shipping companies are reliable. 3.15 4 3.83 1 3.74 2 3.56 2 Shipping companies are REPU4 2.94 7 3.37 6 3.51 5 3.31 7 environmentally responsible. Corporate Reputation Shipping companies offer high-quality REPU5 3.28 3 3.68 2 3.34 7 3.42 5 services. Shipping companies are socially REPU6 3.02 6 3.59 4 3.72 3 3.42 5 responsible. I believe that the reputation of shipping REPU7 companies is better than that of other 3.08 5 3.32 7 3.36 6 3.52 3 companies in different industries. Average 3.17 3.57 3.58 3.46 Note: M: Mean, R: Ranking “Shipping companies are environmentally widely. responsible,” did not reach the top three attributes in any examined country. 4.2 Differences Compared with a company’s image, ANOVA was conducted to explore the reputation takes a relatively longer time to differences in corporate image among the build. Thus, according to the results, it is four countries. The results of comparing necessary to build a better reputation in the means of eight attributes across the Korea and Thailand through eco-friendly four countries, as shown in Table 2, activities. In addition, shipping companies revealed the following: in China must build a reputation together with image by emphasizing the industry’s  For IMAGE1, China had the importance to the Chinese economy highest average of 3.73 while through comparison with other industries. Korea had the lowest average of Shipping firms in Japan need to try to 3.11 build a reputation associated with  For IMAGE2, China also had the differentiated services tailored to customer highest average of 4.05 while needs as well as promote their services Korea again had the lowest
1071 Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 3, June 2019 average of 3.3 comparisons were then made with  For IMAGE3, Thailand had the Scheffe’s test (p < 0.05 significance level). highest average of 3.46 while The result proved that Korea is Korea had the lowest average of significantly different from China, Japan, 3.08 and Thailand whereas Japan and Thailand  For IMAGE4, China had the do not vary significantly from each other. highest average of 3.38 while Japan had the lowest average of Table 2. Mean Difference of Corporate Image 2.77 F-value Attribute K C J T (p-value)  For IMAGE5, Thailand had the IMAGE1 3.11 3.73 3.51 3.6 17.67(0.001) highest average of 3.63 while IMAGE2 3.3 4.05 3.51 3.48 18(0.001) Korea had the lowest average of IMAGE3 3.08 3.28 3.35 3.46 6.69(0.001) IMAGE4 2.98 3.38 2.77 3.34 8.3(0.001) 3.19 IMAGE5 3.19 3.5 3.45 3.63 7.75(0.001)  For IMAGE6, China had the IMAGE6 2.84 3.66 3.15 3.49 30.32(0.001) highest average of 3.66 while IMAGE7 2.85 3.49 3.17 3.63 25.35(0.001) Korea had the lowest average of IMAGE8 3.84 4.19 4.15 3.43 13(0.001) Average 3.15c 3.66a 3.38b 3.51b 53.3(0.001) 2.84 Note:abcdindicatetheresultsofScheffe’s test(Sig.level α=0.05),  For IMAGE7, Thailand had the K:Korea,C:China,J: Japan, T:Thailand highest average of 3.63 while Korea had the lowest average of ANOVA was conducted to explore the 2.85 differences of corporate reputation among  For IMAGE8, the average of China the four countries. According to the results is highest with 4.19 while of comparing the means of 7 attributes Thailand has the lowest average of across four countries, indicated in Table 3, 3.43 the following results can be presented: Above all, most scores on image-related attributes in China are highest except for  For REPU1, Japan had the highest three image attributes (i.e., IMAGE3, 5, average of 3.83 while Korea had and 7). Korea was found to have the the lowest average of 3.37 lowest scores for image attributes, except  For REPU2, Japan had the highest for IMAGE4, which was lowest in Japan, average of 3.57 while Korea had and IMAGE8, which was lowest in the lowest average of 3.38 Thailand. These results can be utilized for  For REPU3, China had the highest each country to develop specific marketing average of 3.83 while Korea had strategies to improve the industry’s poor the lowest average of 3.15 image in each country by targeting the  For REPU4, Japan had the highest country-specific areas of poor perceptions. average of 3.51 while Korea had the lowest average of 2.94 Statistically significant differences were  For REPU5, China had the highest found at the p < 0.05 level for all attributes average of 3.68 while Korea had in the four countries, with different F- the lowest average of 3.28 values. The comparison of the overall  For REPU6, Japan had the highest average of eight image attributes across the average of 3.72 while Korea had four countries indicated that China has the the lowest average of 3.02 highest score of 3.66, followed by  For REPU7, Thailand had the Thailand (3.51), Japan (3.38), and Korea highest average of 3.52 while (3.15). There was a statistically significant Korea had the lowest average of difference at the p < 0.05 level, with F- 3.08 value = 53.3 and p = 0.001. Post hoc
1072 Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 3, June 2019 Interestingly, most attributes had the 4.3 Differences by Demographic highest scores for reputation (four out of Characteristics seven attributes) in Japan. Considering that Japan’s shipping industry has the longest 4.3.1 Gender Differences history out of the four countries, the results According to the gender difference are quite reasonable as reputation takes a analysis in Table 4, first, regarding longer time to build than image. However, corporate image, the average for men in even if the overall average of Japan is Korea (3.16) and Japan (3.38) is revealed higher than others, it should be noted that to be slightly higher than that for women. it is only slightly higher than China. In In contrast, the average for women in contrast, Korea shows the lowest scores China (3.67) and Thailand (3.54) is shown for all variables. to be slightly higher than that for men. There was no statistically significant There were statistically significant difference at the p < 0.05 level for all four differences at the p < 0.05 level for six countries. In terms of men’s evaluation of attributes in the four countries, with corporate image, China has the highest different F-values; the exception was average of 3.63 while Korea has the lowest REPU2, which showed no statistically average of 3.16. There was a statistically significant difference at the p < 0.05 level significant difference at the p < 0.05 level for the four countries, at F-value = 1.34 for the four countries. In addition, for and p = 0.262. The comparison of the women’s evaluation of corporate image, overall average of seven reputation China has the highest average of 3.67 attributes across the four countries while Korea has the lowest average of indicated that Japan has the highest score 3.11. There was a statistically significant of 3.58, followed by China (3.57), difference at the p
1073 Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 3, June 2019 the p < 0.05 level for the four countries. those in China (3.74) have the highest According to the results of Scheffe’s test, average while those in Korea (2.97) have for men, Korea differs from China and the lowest; this finding is statistically Japan. For women, Korea differs from significant at the p < 0.05 level. For PhD China, Japan, and Thailand but those three students, those in China (3.31) and Japan countries do not differ from each other. (3.31) have the highest averages, while those in Korea (3.00) have the lowest. Table 4. Mean Difference by Gender However, there was no statistically F-value Factor Gender K C J T (p-value) significant difference at the p < 0.05 level. Male 3.16b 3.63a 3.38ab 3.47ab 3.057 (0.045) According to the results of Scheffe’s test, Corporate Female 3.11c 3.67a 3.25bc 3.54ab 6.736 for undergraduate students, China differs Image (0.001) t-value 0.314 −0.209 0.725 −1.133 from Japan and Korea, and Korea differs (p-value) (0.758) (0.838) (0.48) (0.276) from Thailand. For Master’s students, only 6.657 Korea is different from China while there Male 3.22b 3.59a 3.59a 3.42ab (0.002) Corporate 6.417 is no difference between PhD students. Female 3.06b 3.54a 3.52a 3.50a Reputation (0.002) t-value 1.494 0.434 0.396 −1.23 (p-value) (0.161) (0.672) (0.699) (0.242) Regarding corporate reputation, for Note:abcdindicatetheresultsofScheffe’s test(Sig. level α=0.05), Korea, the average of undergraduate K:Korea, C:China, J:Japan, T:Thailand students (3.06) is highest, but no statistically significant difference was 4.3.2 Educational Background found at the p < 0.05 level. For China, the Differences average for undergraduate and Master’s According to the educational background students (3.54) is shown to be highest but difference analysis in Table 5, regarding not statistically significant at the p < 0.05 corporate image, for Korea, the average for level. For Japan, the average for Master’s undergraduate students (3.11) is shown to students (3.71) is highest, and there was a be highest, but no statistically significant statistically significant difference at the p difference was found at the p < 0.05 level. < 0.05 level. However, careful For China, the average for Master’s interpretation is needed as only one students (3.74) is highest, but no Master’s student participated in the survey. statistically significant difference was In case of Thailand, as no PhD students found at the p < 0.05 level. For Japan, participated in this survey, only the Master’s students had the highest average average of undergraduate and Master’s (3.50), but with no statistically significant students were compared, indicating that difference at the p < 0.05 level. In the case Master’s students (3.52) have a higher of Thailand, as no PhD students average than undergraduate students participated in this survey, simply the (3.50), with no statistically significant mean of undergraduate and Master’s difference found at the p < 0.05 level: t = students were compared, and Master’s −0.47, p = 0.653. students (3.61) were found to have a higher average than undergraduate In the analysis according to educational students (3.50), but with no statistically background, undergraduate students in significant difference at the p < 0.05 level. China (3.54) have the highest average while those in Korea (3.06) have the In the analysis according to educational lowest, a finding that was statistically background, undergraduate students in significant at the p < 0.05 level. For China (3.67) have the highest average Master’s students, those in Japan (3.71) while those in Korea (3.11) have the have the highest average while those in lowest, a finding statistically significant at Korea (2.98) have the lowest; again this the p < 0.05 level. For Master’s students, finding was statistically significant at the p
1074 Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 3, June 2019 < 0.05 level. For PhD students, those in while Japan has the lowest average of China (3.41) have the highest average 3.03; in this case, a statistically significant while those in Korea (2.86) have the difference was found at the p < 0.05 level lowest one. However, no statistically for the four countries. According to the significant difference was found at the p < results of Scheffe’s test, for students 0.05 level. According to the results of majoring in shipping, Korea is different Scheffe’s test, for undergraduate students, from all three countries, while there is no Korea differs from China, Japan, and difference between Japan and Thailand. Thailand. For Master’s students, Korea is For students majoring in other subjects, different from China and Japan, while China differs only from Japan. there is no difference between PhD students. For corporate reputation, the average for shipping majors in all four countries is Table 5. Mean Difference by Educational revealed to be higher than that of other Background majors. There was statistically significant Educational F-value Factor Background K C J T (p-value) differences at the p < 0.05 for Japan, Under- 3.11c 3.67a 3.25bc 3.54ab 6.764 whose t-value is 4.398 with p = 0.001, and graduate (0.001) 3.114 Thailand, whose t-value is 2.59 with p = Master 2.97b 3.74a 3.50ab 3.61ab Corporate (0.042) 0.024, but no statistically significant Image 0.994 PhD 3.00a 3.31a 3.31a - (0.387) differences for Korea and China. In terms F/t-value 0.493 2.268 0.202 −1.242 of shipping majors’ evaluation of (p-value) (0.618) (0.128) (0.818) (0.235) Under- 6.458 corporate reputation, Japan has the highest 3.06b 3.54a 3.52a 3.50a graduate (0.002) average of 3.64 while Korea has the lowest 5.818 Corporate Master 2.98b 3.54a 3.71a 3.52ab (0.004) average of 3.20, with a statistically Reputation PhD 2.86a 3.41a 2.93a - 2.606 significant difference found at the p < 0.05 (0.101) F/t-value 2.008 0.785 8.037 −0.47 level for the four countries. In addition, in (p-value) (0.163) (0.471) (0.003) (0.653) other majors’ evaluation of corporate Note:abcdindicatetheresultsofScheffe’s test(Sig. level α=0.05), reputation, China has the highest average K:Korea, C:China, J:Japan, T:Thailand of 3.56 while Korea has the lowest average of 3.07, a statistically significant finding at 4.3.3 Major Differences the p < 0.05 level for the four countries. According to the major difference analysis According to the results of Scheffe’s test, in Table 6, for corporate image, the for students majoring in shipping, Korea average for shipping majors in Korea differs from the other three countries and (3.16) and Japan (3.41) is revealed to be for students majoring in other subjects, higher than those for other majors. In China differs from Korea and Japan while contrast, the average for other majors in Korea is different from Thailand as well. China (3.68) and Thailand (3.52) is shown Table 6. Mean Difference by Major to be higher than that of shipping majors. Factor Major K C J T F-value (p-value) However, no statistically significant 2.772 Shipping 3.16a 3.63c 3.41b 3.43b difference was found at the p < 0.05 level (0.06) for the four countries. In terms of shipping Corporate 4.387 Others 3.07ab 3.68a 3.03b 3.52ab Image (0.012) majors’ evaluation of corporate image, t-value 0.523 −0.296 1.361 −1.26 China has the highest average of 3.63 (p-value) (0.609) (0.771) (0.195) (0.228) 9.279 while Korea has the lowest average of Shipping 3.20b 3.57a 3.64a 3.6a (0.000) 3.16, with no statistically significant Corporate Others 3.07c 3.56a 3.11bc 3.45ab 9.4 Reputation (0.000) difference found at the p < 0.05 level for t-value 1.126 0.109 4.398 2.59 the four countries. In addition, for other (p-value) (0.282) (0.915) (0.000) (0.024) Note:abcdindicatetheresultsofScheffe’s test(Sig.level α=0.05), majors’ evaluation of corporate image, K:Korea, C:China, J:Japan, T:Thailand China has the highest average of 3.68
1075 Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 3, June 2019 4.3.4 Shipping Industry Experience shipping industry experience in Korea Differences (3.18) and Japan (3.59) is higher than that for respondents with shipping industry According to difference analysis of experience. However, similar to China, shipping industry experience in Table 7, there was only one Japanese respondent for corporate image, the average of who has shipping experience joined in the respondents with shipping industry survey. Except for Thailand, whose t-value experience in Japan (3.38), Thailand is 3.326 with p = 0.006, no statistically (3.71), China (4.38) is higher than that of significant differences were found at p < respondents with no shipping industry 0.05. experience. In contrast, the average of respondents with no shipping industry In terms of corporate reputation experience in Korea (3.15) is shown to be evaluations by respondents with prior higher than that of respondents with shipping industry experience, China has shipping industry experience. However, the highest average of 4.00 while Korea the result is limited as only one student has the lowest average of 3.05. A with industry experience in China statistically significant difference at the p participated in the survey. In addition, < 0.05 level was found for the four except for China whose t-value is 3.41 countries. In addition, for corporate with p = 0.005 and Thailand (t = 2.248, p = reputation evaluations by respondents with 0.041), no statistically significant no prior shipping industry experience, differences were found at the p < 0.05. Japan has the highest average of 3.59 while Korea has the lowest average of In terms of corporate image evaluations 3.18. A statistically significant difference made by respondents with prior shipping at the p < 0.05 level was found for the four industry experience, China has the highest countries. According to the results of average of 4.38 while Korea has the lowest Scheffe’s test, for students with prior average of 3.14, a finding with a shipping industry experience, China differs statistically significant difference at the p from Korea, and for students with no prior < 0.05 level for the four countries. In experience, China differs from Korea addition, corporate image evaluations by while Korea also differs from Japan. those without prior shipping industry experience, China has the highest average Table 7. Mean Difference by Shipping Industry of 3.64 while Korea has the lowest average Experience F-value of 3.15; a statistically significant Factor Experience K C J T (p-value) difference was found at the p < 0.05 level 6.995 Yes 3.14b 4.38a 3.38b 3.71ab (0.001) for the four countries. According to the Corporate 3.506 No 3.15b 3.64a 3.37ab 3.49ab results of Scheffe’s test, for students who Image (0.028) t-value −0.042 3.41 0.008 2.248 have prior experience in the shipping (p-value) (0.967) (0.005) (0.994) (0.041) industry before, China differs from Korea Yes 3.05b 4.00a 3.29ab 3.78ab 4.034 (0.019) and Japan, and for students lacking prior Corporate 9.518 No 3.18b 3.56a 3.59a 3.43ab experience in the shipping industry, China Reputation (0.001) t-value −1.673 1.394 −1.034 3.326 is only different from Korea. (p-value) (0.129) (0.189) (0.337) (0.006) Note:abcdindicatetheresultsofScheffe’s test(Sig.level α=0.05), For corporate reputation, the average for K:Korea, C:China, J:Japan, T:Thailand respondents with prior shipping industry experience in China (4.00) and Thailand 5. Conclusion (3.78) is higher than for respondents with no shipping industry experience. On the This exploratory study investigating contrary, the mean for participants without student perceptions of shipping
1076 Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 3, June 2019 companies’ image and reputation is of shipping companies and increase public significant compared with other existing awareness. Social media also makes it studies, which only focus on the three easier and faster to get more frequent major shipping countries in Northeast feedback from the public. Moreover, by Asia, Korea, China, and Japan, because making good use of social media, it is this study expands the scope of existing possible to develop the community in research by including Thailand. Based on which the shipping company operates. the analysis results, this study proposes [12], working for Helix Media Pte. Ltd, implications along two dimensions, one has emphasized the impact of social media for industry and the other for education in shipping industry news, particularly for use. At practical level, first, there is a need negative accidents or crises and also to strengthen marketing strategies by provided ways to use social media wisely extending activities to cover not only other in the shipping context. Again, in this businesses (shippers) but also the general regard, the analysis results can be used to public, including students. This is of major boost the industry’s image in countries significance to attract competitive where its average is low. Thirdly, the most employees who are seeking future careers crucial step is to develop each company’s in shipping, as supported by [13]. For this corporate brand identity beyond PR and type of marketing, shipping companies’ advertising activities. This requires a clear CSR activities can be introduced in definition of the vision, mission, and commercial advertisements at a firm level values of the company. In addition, a and it can be utilized at a national level by distinctive logo and slogan should be developing policies to improve the created that can be used to effectively industry’s image and reputation. communicate with customers. Although Furthermore, well-established and active this is not yet popular in the shipping CSR initiatives from other industries that industry, Maersk and DNV have reflect the shipping industry’s features can developed their own brands, which clearly be benchmarked. For example, [3] convey their respective visions of their developed key CSR performance criteria companies [22]. [23] has also argued that a that can be employed in the international branding strategy is an effective way to maritime shipping sectors. This consists of solve the shipping industries’ low image mainly four areas: environmental and reputation issues. Here, support of responsibility, social responsibility, CSR corporate executives is vital to such governance, and collaborative efforts’ success. responsibility, with 50 specific sub-factors. These areas and factors can be diversified At education level, teaching regarding according to the country-specific the industry’s history and significance to circumstances. Europe has already international trade, highlighting its initiated such an effort as a part of the contribution to each country’s economic KNOWME project. Here, CSR has been development, seems to be a good approach identified as a crucial concept that to improve the shipping industry’s image enhances the shipping companies’ and reputation. Korea, China, and Japan performance. It is also seen as an are fiercely competing to become the important marketing communication logistics hub in Northeast Asia, and strategy for improving the shipping Thailand, as one of the leading shipping industry’s image. industry countries in Southeast Asia, also shows the region’s fastest growth rate in Second, social media is widely used terms of feet. Therefore, efforts to include now among all generations and can be such content in class should be able to actively utilized to increase the appearance raise awareness of the shipping industry.
1077 Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 3, June 2019 Third, practitioners and entrepreneurs responsibility? The case of the Greek- engaged in the shipping industry can be owned short sea shipping companies”, invited to host seminars to present the Marine Policy, Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. latest industry news. This will most likely 412-419, 2006. bring a synergy effect in education. Fourth, [7] Fombrun, C., Reputation, John Wiley academic bridge programs targeting & Sons, Ltd., New York, 1996. students, such as site tours, will be a good [8] Foroudi, P., Melewar, T. C., Gupta, S., idea. Above all, financial support from the “Linking corporate logo, corporate government is necessary for developing a image, and reputation: An new curriculum and materials, as well as examination of consumer perceptions training and retraining faculties. in the financial setting”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 67, No. 11, pp. 2269-2281, 2014. [9] Hatch, M. J., Schultz, M., “Relations References between organizational culture, [1] Andreassen, T. W., Lindestad, B., identity and image”, European Journal “Customer loyalty and complex of Marketing, Vol. 31, No. 5/6, pp. services: The impact of corporate 356-365, 1997. image on quality, customer [10] Herbig, P., Milewicz, J., “The satisfaction and loyalty for customers relationship of reputation and with varying degrees of service credibility to brand success”, Journal expertise”, International Journal of of Consumer Marketing, Vol. 10, No. Service Industry Management, Vol. 9, 3, pp. 18-24, 1993. No. 1, pp. 7-23, 1998. [11] Hsu, K. T., “The advertising effects of [2] Churchill, G. A., Iacobucci, D., corporate social responsibility on Marketing research: methodological corporate reputation and brand foundations, Thomas Learning, South- equity: Evidence from the life Western, 2002. insurance industry in Taiwan”, [3] Coady, L., Lister, J., Strandberg, C., Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 109, Ota, Y., “The role of corporate social No. 2, pp. 189-201, 2012. responsibility (CSR) in the [12] Ion, E. “Social Media and Shipping”, international shipping sector, A phase Article in Helix Media published in 2 research paper”, The Northern August 2014. European Symposium on CSR in [13] Jensen, A. K., Bergqvist, R. Y., Hjelle, Shipping, Copenhagen, Denmark, 12 H. M., Lekakou, M. B., “The image of November, 2013. shipping–perceptions of pupils in [4] Dowling, G. R., “Measuring upper secondary schools in Sweden, corporate images: A review of Norway, and Greece”, International alternative approaches”, Journal of Association of Maritime Economists, Business Research, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. Marseille, France, 3-5 July, 2013. 27-34, 1988. [14] Kennedy, S. H., “Nurturing corporate [5] Eberle, D., Berens, G., Li, T., “The image”, European Journal of impact of interactive corporate social Marketing, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 120- responsibility communication on 164, 1977. corporate reputation”, Journal of [15] Kim, T. S., “Rediscovery of Korea, Business Ethics, Vol. 118, No. 4, pp. China, Japan: Comparison of national 731-746, 2013. economy and industrial [6] Fafaliou, I., Lekakou, M., Theotokas, competitiveness and its implications”, I., “Is the European shipping industry Mirae Asset Research Centre, May aware of corporate social 2015.
1078 Int. J Sup. Chain. Mgt Vol. 8, No. 3, June 2019 [16] Kuo, C. W., Tang, M. L., 2013. “Relationships among service quality, [22] Somerville-Ryan, G., “Building a corporate image, customer shipping brand”, Splash24/7.com, 20 satisfaction, and behavioral intention November, 2013. for the elderly in high speed rail [23] Somerville-Ryan, G., “Marketing 101 services”, Journal of Advanced (Brand Development) for shipping Transportation, Vol. 47, No. 5, pp. companies”, Splash24/7.com, 17 512-525, 2013. February, 2015. [17] Lai, C. S., Chiu, C. J., Yang, C. F., Pai, [24] Theotokas, I., Bissias, I., “A touch of D. C., “The effects of corporate social salt: the image of shipping in responsibility on brand performance: newspapers of the UK”, WMU Journal The mediating effect of industrial of Maritime Affairs, Vol. 13, No. 2, brand equity and corporate pp. 177-190, 2014. reputation”, Journal of Business [25] Voss, G. B., Voss, Z. G., “Strategic Ethics, Vol. 95, No. 3, pp. 457-469, orientation and firm performance in 2010. an artistic environment”, Journal of [18] Nguyen, N., Leblanc, G., “Corporate Marketing, Vol. 64, No. 1, pp. 67-83, image and corporate reputation in 2000. customers’ retention decisions in [26] Walsh, G., Beatty, S. E., Shiu, E. M., services”, Journal of Retailing and “The customer-based corporate Consumer Services, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. reputation scale: Replication and 227-236, 2001. short form”, Journal of Business [19] Pina, J. M., Martinez, E., De Research, Vol. 62, No. 10, pp. 924- Chernatony, L., Drury, S., “The effect 930, 2009. of service brand extensions on [27] Wang, C. Y., “Service quality, corporate image: An empirical model”, perceived value, corporate image, and European Journal of Marketing, Vol. customer loyalty in the context of 40, No. 1/2, pp. 174-197, 2006. varying levels of switching costs”, [20] Plummer, J. T., “How personality Psychology & Marketing, Vol. 27, No. makes a difference”, Journal of 3, pp. 252-262, 2010. Advertising Research, Vol. 40, No. 6, [28] Wang, Y., Kandampully, J. A., Lo, H. pp. 79-83, 2000. P., Shi, G., “The roles of brand equity [21] Sarstedt, M., Wilczynski, P., Melewar, and corporate reputation in CRM: a T. C., “Measuring reputation in Chinese study”, Corporate Reputation global markets—A comparison of Review, Vol. 9, No. 3, pp. 179-197, reputation measures’ convergent and 2006. criterion validities”, Journal of World Business, Vol. 48, No. 3, pp. 329-339,