Reputation Notebook

Text Messages as the New Press Release?

Fast Company uses the example of Barack Obama's planned VP announcement strategyto suggest that text messaging is a "likely" alternative to the traditional press release.  This is not a new argument; it's a new version of the old disintermediation concept.   It presumes that the intermediary -- the journalist or editor -- provides no value.   After Obama's announcement, I feel confident there will be plenty of commentary by journalists and pundits, with many willing and interested readers.   While the text message strategy definitely is intriguing, what's lacking in the text message in the implied credibility and editorial discernment that the traditional announcement offers.   I applaud the use of text messaging to reach an opt-in audience and as an additional communications channel, but it's far from a public disclosure, and I have yet to find a communicator who is disciplined enough to adhere to the technology's character limits -- much ot the dismay of many editors.  

Most Influential Business Gurus

For future reference:  Added to my blog's "Reputation Resources" section is the Wall Street Journal's published list of "Most Influential Business Thinkers."   While the Resource entry links to the original article, this post also includes links to the guru's  bios -- or in some cases, their blogs, if available.  

Also included in the Reputation Resources section are quick links to Fortune 500, Inc 5000 and Forbes Largest Private companies.   Let me know what else would be helpful for a quick link.

1. Gary Hamel
2. Thomas Friedman
3. Bill Gates
4. Malcolm Gladwell 
5. Howard Gardner
6. Philip Kotler
7. Robert Reich
8. Daniel Goleman
9. Henry Mintzberg
10. Stephen Covey
11. Jeffrey Pfeffer
12. Peter Senge
13. Richard Branson
14. Michael Porter
15. Michael Dell
16. Geert Hofstede
17. Clayton Christensen
18. Jack Welch
19. Tom Peters
20. Myron Scholes
21. Ikujiro Nonaka

Coca-Cola Chairman Describes "The 21st Century Business"

I attended a Chicago Executives' Club presentation by Coca-Cola's CEO Neville Isdell (pictured) that offered a highly insightful global executive's view of the requirements for a successful 21st century business.  

Isdell "humbly submitted"  these principles as a "work in progress," with an acknowledgement of the new pressures facing the plant, such as oil, water and food.    He suggested that in the past government would have been expected to solve the situation, but now consumers have higher expectations for business.

"It is no longer sufficent to be profitable, though it is essential," said Isdell.   "To serve shareholders well, the company must go beyond."

His six requirements:

• Ensuring the communities the business serves are sustainable
• Partnering with government and civil society
• Be a functioning part of every community in which it operates -- both in perception and reality
• Be a responsible employer
• Reflect the diversity of its customers
• Create systems to manage change without disruption

Most interesting was his mandate for the 21st Centurt CEO:  "The new requirements of our times widen the bandwidth of what a CEO has to do.  The new CEO must be a diplomat."

Read the entire speech here:  http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/presscenter/viewpoints_21century.html.

The Price of Being Ethical?

This morning's Wall Street Journal has a very interesting article in its Ethic special section called "Does Being Ethical Pay?" The research done by the article's authors, Remi Trudel and June Cotte, essentially provides additional support for the findings of our own Edelman Trust Barometer, namely that customers will act positively toward a firm that acts responsibly and will punish those that do not.   This morning's article puts a dollar amount on the subject, showing that consumers actually will pay a premium for perceived ethical practices -- not entirely a surprise -- but will also discount the "unethical" product by 30 percent or more. 

"Regardless of their expectations -- consumers were willing to pay more for ethical goods than unethical ones, or ones about which they had no information," say the authors.

These findings further support the case for making clear efforts to adopt responsible business behaviors, but also for communicating those efforts to stakeholders who have the power to act.  Getting information into the hands of customers so they can make a decision about your brand or products is critical for success in the current environment.

Who Succeeds in PR

Last night I attended Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson's address to the Economic Club of Chicago, which provided a range of interesting insights into the financial world, as well as his personal dealings with the president. He offered a thoughtful, common-sense overview that I felt seemed free of partisan bias and long on concern and care for the average individual.

As interesting as the presentation was - and it was quite good -- I must say that I've spent more time thinking about a conversation with one of my dinner companions who devotes his days to using very sophisticated, high power analytics for asset management. In fact, it's probably more than a profession for him; it's more of a passion. He talked about how the financial business is filled with "quants," yet there is a largely untapped opportunity to bring in thinkers from other sciences, like physics or bioscience, who are taught to look at patterns and physical properties, not just hard numbers. We talked about the similarities with the communications business and how some of the best solutions are not created by media-types, but from people with diverse backgrounds. I told him how there was not one "type" that succeeded in our profession any more, but that the industry has evolved to the point where a diversity of perspectives is virtually required now to start and execute good campaigns. Where our clients once focused solely on the PR team's media or financial analyst relationships, there is a growing appreciation for time spent in government, foundations, consulting, academia or industry. Arguments are made with both a rational and emotional appeal, to a wide range of stakeholders. It's exciting to participate in this change and to bring new faces to the table.

Running Across One Screen and On to Another?

Last week Nike revealed a new television commercial for the season that highlights its Nike Plus shoe and leverages a history of running thematic.  The commercial is dramatic and engaging and in line with what you would expect from Nike.   The campaign also is supposed to include video testimonials that will appear on Nike's social networking site, giving people a chance to "post their running resolutions" and let friends track their progress.   Nike's current forum includes a place for runners to issue challenges, learn about marathons and query other passionate runners.   Tapping into the social aspect of the running community will be a big challenge here and it's unclear to me if the commercial will only drive consumers to consider the shoe (not a bad outcome), or if it will somehow get runners to socialize their impressions online and off.    Will the site enable average runners to post their own video testimonials?   How will Nike leverage the ad to get runners to talk to each other about their experiences?   

Small But Vocal Minority Shapes Corporate Policy

Facebook's decision to change its implementation of Beacon's features is notable, not only for the CEO's public apology amid a privacy crisis, but more importantly for the the power wielded by a small group of activist users.   

According to a Wall Street Journal article, in this case, when MoveOn.org Civic Action began to protest the Beacon privacy issue, its members only represented a small portion of the total Facebook universe -- "little more than 0.1 percent of Facebook's 57 million active users."    The MoveOn contingent was large enough, or to be more accurate, vocal enough to apply pressure and start momentum on the privacy issue.   This behavior mirrors the findings of our own Edelman Trust Barometer last year, in which we noted that among a company's stakeholders there are sub-groups that have different views, behaviors and characteristics.  Often, only a minority of a company's universe will be considered "activist," pre-disposed to taking action for or against a policy, however, that small group, armed with the tools of the web, can quickly influence many others.   In this case, Facebook has felt the pressure of the group and subsequently, the pressure of its advertisers, and elected to change course.   All at a time when the firm is trying to raise additional funding.

In every industry there are issues that can quickly ignite the small but vocal  minority and provoke them to act.   Here, Facebook changed its policy and actually was publicly credited by MoveOn.org for taking "a big step in the right direction."  The question now if whether the firm can transform this incident into a platform for more long term socially responsible behavior.

Is Advertising the Right Approach for Siemens?

This morning's Wall Street Journal carries an interesting article by Mike Esterl spotlighting Siemens' plans to launch its "most extensive advertising campaign" to counter the damage done to its reputation by "a massive corruption scandal."   

The article provides detail on the advertising campaign, but fails to mention any other communications steps that the company is taking to reverse its negative momentum, aside from spending big on advertising.   

Hopefully the Siemens communications campaign will be broader than a technology marketing approach and will involve intensive relationship building with investors and policy makers, online conversations with customers and influencers, and employee engagement to restore confidence internally.  The company needs to create a community of believers and get them talking to each other about its future.   A one-way communication is not going to make the impact that this company needs.

If these communications elements are included in the strategy, the article makes no mention of it.   Perhaps the reporter did not ask about them.   I would suggest that these are the dimensions of reputation building that need to be highlighted in such an article-- as much as the ad campaign.

Defining Moments

I attended a speech yesterday by Daniel "Rudy" Ruettiger, the former Notre Dame football player whose 27 seconds of total playing time and relentless pursuit of a childhood dream have become legend -- and also Hollywood fare, made into the movie "Rudy".
It's hard to dislike the Rudy story -- the kid who finally gets his chance at his dream and gets carried off the field in glory. Ruettiger himself said that many people come up to him to say "That's my story, too."
In making connections to the business world, it strikes me that entrepreneurial companies have the same story too: they're trying anything to get an edge in a market where, to use Ruettiger's words, "everyone else is bigger than you, smarter than you, faster than you." They're seeking that one chance to show the world what they've got, the one opportunity that will thrust them onto a bigger stage. In some cases, it's about getting an opportunity; in most, it's about making an opportunity.
We've often talked to clients about the importance of making bold moves that will put their firm's reputation on a new trajectory. I walked away from the Ruettiger talk with an even deeper appreciation for how much those singular opportunities might mean, not just in the life of an individual, but also in the life of a company.
I welcome you thoughts.

Reputation at High Speed

A recent experience with a client facing a crisis situation underscored the importance of speed in responding to public challenges and criticism.   Company executives felt they had time to absorb the events of the day, develop a careful, deliberate and legal-tested response, then issue it in time for "the next news cycle."   What they meant was the next morning's newspapers, but those of us in the communications business know that the news cycle they refer to is a mirage.   Media web sites, citizen journalists and legions or bloggers have reduced the concept to "micro-cycles" in which the news bounces from newswires to online media sites, then to print, to blogs to broadcast and back again within a day -- if not hours.

In PR, we used to think in terms of "day-one stories" and "day-two stories," but I think we've landed in an environment of more intra-day news phases --  morning stories, afternoon stories and overnight stories.   It's just before 11 p.m. in Chicago, but tomorrow's business headlines will become real news in just 90 minutes, just after midnight when the online versions of newspapers go live.  Wire service reporters will read those editions and file stories based on that coverage, even citing their competitors' articles in an effort to stay current.  By the time the Wall Street Journal hits my driveway around 5:30 a.m., the business broadcast shows already will have analyzed the coverage and offered their points of view.   Online media subscribers will have offered their opinions through reader reactions and even on their own blogs.   All this will have taken place before the opening bell of the New York financial exchanges.

For me, these shifts have radically changed what I read, when I read it and what I do with it.  How is this environment changing your media habits?   Your communications strategies?