Architecture of reputation is based upon same principles as classical architecture – it’s a way of organizing space on the principle of trinity of benefit-durability-beauty to create a comfortable living space.
With one addition – “reputational space” is organized in a virtual (information) multidimensional world (where the amount of dimensions equals the number of respondent groups) and in a triune past-present-future time.
As a matter of fact architecture of reputation is the art of building manifestations of object’s mindset (actions) that perceived by external observers as a unified, harmonious whole and is beneficial both for reputation’s owner/carrier and for an external observer. Surely those manifestations have to have a high durability – authenticity – in community’s eyes. And it’s preferable (very preferable) for this manifestations to be harmonious (beautiful).
In our work on architecture of reputation we use reputational matrix and positioning cards.
Primary reputational matrix – description of subject’s mindset – is associated with reputational matrixes of how different respondent groups perceive a subject. It allows to describe “building” – space of reputation – from different points of view (positions) of specific respondent groups and to form programs of building (correction) of reputation in relation to every one of them (or few of them at once).
In the core of architecture of reputation of a subject lays its reputational profile – description of object’s mindset in two- or three-dimensional system of coordinates – reputational matrix (more detailed description can be found in the chapter “Reputational matrix”).
During the reputation design you can use both qualitative and quantitative representation of a matrix (more detailed description can be found in the chapter “Reputation’s measurable parameters”).
Every cell of reputational matrix describes subject’s mindset in basic characteristics. An original list of subject’s characteristics can be supplemented based on results of research of respondent groups’ opinions. Besides the important parameters are openness/closedness of a subject and its dynamic – ability for change.
Design of architecture begins with definition of a subject’s type (functionality). To draw an analogy with classic architecture, first we need to define which type of a “building” (with which functionality) we are designing: “a plant” or “a military base”, “a condo” or “a summer house”…
Of course, one “building” can (and should) have different functionality. However there are mutually exclusive and mutually restricting functionalities. “A house of spiritual growth” can also have functionality of a military base and a university. For example, in Middle Ages religious structures were also doubling as fortresses and universities. However it’s virtually impossible to combine the functionalities of “a plant” and “a modern condo”.
Amongst typical basic characteristics of a subject we can define the following ones:
- Informational durability of a subject – steadiness against informational attacks and spontaneous crisis’.
- Appeal for clients – subject’s products being in demand.
- Appeal for partners and investors – trust and readiness to invest (gift, donate) their resources to a subject.
- Social utility – a degree of integration into social life and subject’s relevance in it.
- Subjectivity – the ability to change the outside world (to influence it).
And other ones…
On the basis of subject’s main functionality its key characteristics (attributes) are formed in every position of a reputational matrix. For example: characteristics from the position of “an idea in the past” or characteristics from the position of “material surroundings in the future”. It creates a reputational profile of a subject. However the characteristics are described both in qualitative (the essence of every characteristic), and in quantitative format – their weight, their power in a uniform system of object’s mindset.
Formed reputational profiles are compared with similar profiles that are built upon the final perception of a subject by different respondent groups. Based on this comparison the programs for correction and perception of subject’s reputation are formed.
In this work it’s very important to define the degree of subject’s interaction with external world – openness/closedness of its architecture. Open architecture of reputation implicates the most active influence by different respondent groups and their participation in its formation. And conversely for the closed one.
Open type of reputation foresees the bigger amount of dialogue formats in interaction with respondent groups.
Closed is the format of monologues (its own and by third parties), that promote subject’s mindset inside respondent groups and form their attitude towards it and its mindset. Both of these approaches equally use both already formed social stereotypes and also the new ones, created in the process of correction of old ones.
Dynamism and ability to transform are equally important parameters of a subject and its reputational profile. As well as the depth of the foundation and the height of reputational profile.
Of course the deeper the foundation of a reputational profile (history of a subject), the firmer the “building” is standing on the ground. The higher it is (the depth of the vision of future), the wider the horizons, seen from “the top floor”. But, on the other hand, the fewer opportunities there are to modernize or adapt reputational profile. It’s important to find the perfect balance between dynamism and the depth of foundation/height of “a building”.