Articulo_7_EN_Doxa_27

brand identity will be passed on, to a greater or lesser extent, to the company’s commercial brands, which are ultimately responsible for spreading messages to consumers and other stakeholders.

Secondly, it is necessary to focus on the impact of corporate brands on the other intangibles. As is clear from the review described in the following scenarios, the relationship between behaviour (identity) and corporate communication is sup-ported by the management of the so-called business intangibles. Corporate social responsibility (CSR), reputation or cor-porate culture departments generate relevant content to be conveyed to the various target audiences, and create brand promises. Consequently, managing intangibles involves integration, complementarity and brand design. The main areas are explained below: corporate reputation is “a set of collective evaluations that is evoked in different audiences by the be-havior of a company and predisposes the audience towards support or resistance” (Carreras et al., 2013: 86), and involves measurement for further development of brand identity and its communication. This will help establish the most appro-priate corporate communications policies, and manage the behaviour of the various departments of intangibles properly.

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is the corporate commitment to sustainable action that companies include in their corporate strategy. It takes stakeholders into account, and seeks to create economic and social value (Lindgreen et al., 2012; Windsor, 2006; Lopez & Fornes, 2015; Lopez & Villagra, 2017). Brands play a prominent role in this area and, if a company wants to be socially responsible, it should align identity and commitments with CSR (Villagra & Lopez, 2013). This means that CSR develops sustainable actions related to corporate brand. These behaviours may be transferred to the public through the use of communication tools. Companies may put the focus of CSR actions on corporate or commercial brands. However, given the need for mainstreaming in business ethics, it is more advisable to bind CSR values to corpo-rate brands as CSR department involves a global understanding of the corporate vision and mission (Monfort & Villagra, 2016).

Organizational culture is related to a pattern of behaviour that a group of individuals (employees) has researched, discov-ered or developed during its learning process to address integration and adaptation (Schein, 1984, p.3), both inside and outside the company. It will turn into a competitive advantage if it develops internal nuances that are valuable, different and difficult to imitate by other companies (Barney, 1986). Companies are more attractive when they are perceived as respectable, with good product image, or as a space that promotes a good working environment (Highhouse et al., 1999). Also, a good perception of the activity sector, profits or familiarity with the company (Cable & Graham, 2000) is key when developing corporate culture, brand identity and the way in which it is communicated to its members (Hatch & Schultz, 2003) are taken into consideration. In short, organizational culture promotes a type of behaviour amongst employees that may be communicated to stakeholders (Galbreath, 2010) and, therefore, improves brand positioning. The expected behaviour in employees will be very much in line with what the company claims to be, through its corporate brand.

Consequently, intangibles and brands provide a set of bidirectional influences. Reputation, social responsibility and cor-porate culture have an impact on brand management and its positioning in terms of communication. Similarly, brand identity will act as a guide for the development of each of the actions carried out by the Reputation Department (the at-tributes to be measured will be related to identity), the CSR Department (identity will define responsible values), and the