Contradictions in “reputation management”

Abstract

Purpose“Reputation management” is widely used as a rationale for public relations, although the public relations practice has problems with its own reputation. Public relations is presented in textbooks as a mature management discipline, yet the term “public relations” is rejected by many practitioners and academics. “Reputation management” may have been introduced to counter negative associations and to gain status for the practice. The purpose of this paper is to use critical theory to question the ideas and assumptions underlying “reputation management” and to examine contradictions within the term.Design/methodology/approachThe paper reviews what this theory has to say about public relations and its claim to be a mature management discipline. It examines how public relations practitioners explain their role to internal and external publics.FindingsAn initial literature review suggests that the contradictions within “reputation management” mirror contradictions within public relations practice.Originality/valueThe paper encourages debate in the public relations field.