University of Vaasa - Vaasan yliopisto

Empirical Findings
The first proposition
[P1] A reflected image is more likely to lead to desired results than a
merely pragmatic image.
125
Often the discussions around corporate image/identity take place in the executive
management and are facilitated by an external agency. It was found that in the case
company the CR image building was led by the identity (what the firm is). The idea
for CR came from a manager inside the company, and was thereby internalized into
corporate values. These values led to responsible actions that were then
communicated (reflected) to all stakeholders. When a responsible identity is built
upon the responsible values of the firm, it seems to reflect as a responsible image.
A time delay of approximately three to four years was found between the first CR
actions in 1993 and the stakeholder perception and reaction. “It takes time when the
image adapts”, a key informant of Scandic states. The person continues that “identity
must result as an image. If an image does not correspond with what the firm is, then
it is green-wash”. At Scandic, the reflected image is seen as the only proper way to
achieve long-term success.
Hence the first working proposition receives strong support from the case company
and is supported.
The second proposition
[P2] A key stakeholder oriented firm forms and re-forms its values
according to its key stakeholders’ values.
The case company built its image through shared values with its the key stakeholders
– the team members and the guests of the hotels – which indicates (key) stakeholder
orientation. It was found that to some extent the case company re-forms and modifies
its values according to its external key stakeholders’ (guests) values, and to a great
extent according to its internal key stakeholder’s (team members) values. These
findings support the latter part of the second working proposition (re-forms its
values).
At first, the environmentally responsible values rose from the team members,
especially from the top management. Therefore, it can be stated that the case
company formed its values according to its key stakeholders’ values (as the team
members are a key stakeholder group and as the top management is part of the team
members at Scandic). This reasoning supports the first part of the second working
proposition (forms its values). However, the case company did not form its values in
accordance with the external key stakeholder’s values. Therefore, an informative
revision is made: the case company as a key stakeholder oriented firm, formed its
values according to its internal key stakeholders’ values – and re-forms its values
according to its internal and external key stakeholders’ values.