I have always wondered if those huge advertising ads in airports do their job in reputation building. It is hard not to notice them and they are fairly captivating to me. As I get off the airplane, I look forward to what new campaigns might be up. So I was glad to see some data behind my question. The Ipsos MediaCT U.S. Business Elite Study that was conducted for the American Association of Advertising Agencies (AAAA) found that airport ads are indeed a good way to build reputation and get your message across. Nearly six out of 10 say they notice them.

• Have You Noticed Advertising at the Airport on Your Last Trip?
  Total Business Elite   59%
  C-Suite    59%

As well, the survey answered the question about viewing TV while waiting at the boarding gate. Nearly four out of 10 business executives said they do so. Again, another way to capture this audience although I imagine that the other six out of 10 are watching their blackberries or iphones.

• Have You Watched TV at the Gate on Your Last Trip?
  Total Business Elite   39%
  C-Suite    39%

One other fascinating fact that I picked up from the survey was that the U.S. business elite turn to the Internet first for “helping them in business.” Among CEOs, however, the first place they go to is business magazines. I guess that is why the business publication space is expanding despite the advertising decline over the past several years. In addition to the stalwarts – Fortune, Forbes and BusinessWeek, we now have Portfolio, a new Slate business site coming to us in June I believe and Bloomberg ramping up its business and news coverage once Norm Pearlstine gets in the door.

Clearly, the Internet is a main source of information for the U.S. business elite although national newspapers, cable TV, and business magazines are close competitors. Reputation building online is as important as ever but let’s not lose sight of the power of these other mediums.

Yesterday turned out to be a fun day. I was a panelist at BlogHer Business ’08 conference in New York City. BlogHer is a community of women bloggers and the annual conference has become quite successful. The case studies presented were truly amazing.I was joined by fellow panelists Mary Clare Hunt (www.ecolutionarySelling.com), Janet Eden-Harris (CEO of Umbria) and Tara Anderson (evangelist for Lijit) and moderator Elana Centor (blogger and independent marketing consultant). Our topic was “Who You Are, Not What You Do.” However, it was fairly obvious to all us gals that we do what we are. As panelists, we were passionate about our jobs and what we were advocating (whether it was sustainability, reputation, online research, and start-ups). The audience was equally passionate, engaged and articulate about their entrepreneurial enterprises, blogs, or businesses. Lots of companies were there in support – Google, Hearst Digital, Fast Company, Kodak, Wiggly Wigglers, General Motors, Graco, HP. Although us panelists were not sure how all of our disparate jobs were going to tie together for the panel discussion, Elana made it seamless and fluid. I could tell that we all had fun which surprised us all. Of course, I got to talk about reputation and how to manage it online and offline. My company Weber Shandwick videoed the entire conference so it should be available online shortly. Take a look. I will post the link once I get it.

Recently came upon an interesting job opening for the Academic Director of the Centre for Corporate Reputation at the Said Business School at Oxford University. It was in the Economist (01.03.08). The reason the issue is several weeks old is that I saved the posting from my recent travels toEurope. Among the many qualities that Oxford is looking for (energetic, visionary, inspirational, leadership, networker, research management and scholar, international reputation, and prodigious publisher in prestigious publications) is having a “good media presence.” I found it interesting that the school is only requiring that the candidate be “good” with the media when media-bility would be so important to building a reputation for the Centre and attracting top-notch faculty and students.  I also was struck by the fact that there was no mention of having to be familiar with emerging or social media. Seems that academia is missing the boat by not even mentioning that they would mildly prefer someone with at least “passing” or “decent” familiarity with the rapidly evolving world of online reputation management. Nothing could be hotter. Why not ask for a blogger? I know. I know. Not going to happen. And I was also musing about why the job description did not mention that the preferred individual should be “great” or “electric” in the classroom (maybe they never teach students but I presume they have to be in the classroom at some point) or a talent magnet (how best to keep top talent and attract them). It seems to me that all of these other factors might have been mentioned in the criteria for this prestigious position. Maybe it would be nice to haves while the ones listed are must haves. But of all the factors that should have been noted, online presence or expertise should have been at least a footnote.

Thought you might want to hear about a new book on managing your reputation online. The book written by Andy Beal and Judy Strauss is titled Radically Transparent and here is their seven point guide on online reputation management. I made it my business to read the book (I just received a hard copy in the mail yesterday from amazon). The authors sent me a pre-copy weeks ago which I read with gusto. Lots of great information which got me up-to-speed quickly and smartly. I liked it so much that I was happy to give them a testimonial on the back cover. You might want to get a copy too. As I have said before (and everyone else), online reputation management is the new black.

We all know that there are dog years and human years. Then there are reputation years. An article in PRWeek (UK) has this quote from Dell’s EMEA communications head Kerry Bridge about its reputation emergence from Dell Hell: “We lost sight of the importance of conversations with customers. The ramifications could take us ten years to overcome.” Bridge was referring to Jeff Jarvis’ BuzzMachine Blog criticizing Dell’s customer service that attracted over-the-top media attention. I must applaud Bridge for being realistic about how long it takes to restore reputation. Although our research has shown that it takes about 3.5 years just to get back on your feet, it probably takes a good 7 to 10 years for a company to go from poor to good to great. Reputation years are tiresome because leaders feel every minute of pain and suffering. Ten years probably feels like 20 years when it comes to reputation calendars. However, reputations can be restored. That’s the good news.

I thought this was an insightful statement about online reputation. It was mentioned in a post by Chris Abraham who was quoting Forget Publicists, All the Cool Kids Have Online Reputation Managers. Abraham says that “online reputation management is apparently the new black.” Sure seems that way to me too.

Goes back to that wonderful article in Wired by Clive Thompson about Google being a reputation management system, not a search engine. 

To digress, I read in another article somewhere that corporate responsibility is the new India. I guess this phraseology is catchy. Perhaps I should say something clever like reputation recovery is the new green. Doesn’t have the same ring to it. Worth a try.

A great beginners guide to online reputation management (ORM) can be found at Andy Beal’s Marketing Pilgrim site. I spent some time this holiday reading through his suggestions to managing your online reputation. He has many helpful sites and sources. Definitely worth the time if you want to quickly see what you are missing. Our research found that only one-third of global business executives pay attention to their company’s reputation online. That number will grow in time but it is eye-opening to realize how much chatter about your company is escaping executive vision. (You can also find the research on our reputation-related site, www.reputationRx.com )

Beal has a new book coming out with Dr. Judy Strauss called Radically Transparent. Will be a must-read.

There has been much media coverage about the Pew Internet and American Life Project research (12.16.07) on Americans googling themselves for what I call reptuation checkups. I felt that I could not ignore it since it falls into what I also call my reputation bucket (all things reputation-related).  Afterall, your “good name” is all we have.

Pew found that nearly one-half (47 percent) of Americans have searched for their own names to see whether they were receiving a thumbs up or thumbs down. This name-searching figure has dramatically doubled since 2002 when Pew found only 22 percent targeting themselves online.  I can’t say I blame them. I have searched my own name several times since reputation is my middle name (just kidding).  Interestingly, most Americans don’t search for their names online on a regular basis. Apparently they are not worried about what might be said about them. This bears out in the research — the majority (six out of ten Americans) are not worried about how much information is available about them online. I assume they believe they can manage their reputations well enough. Probably a mistake as privacy gets increasingly scarce.

Interesting tidbits in the Pew report include:

• Only 4 percent found disturbing or inaccurate information online associated with their name
• Most searches are innocuous — looking for someone’s contact info
• Those under 50 were more likely to be interested in their online reputations

As one of the co-author’s wrote: “Nostalgia seems to motivate quite a few Internet users. the most popular search target is someone from the past — an old friend, an old flame, or a former colleague.”

I imagine that name-searching is much higher among business executives who depend on their reputations for career opportunities and advancement and enhancing their own company reputations.  My guess is that the figure would be closer to 85 percent  vs. the 47 percent Pew found.  Either way, reputation checkups are important and will probably soar when Pew does its next research in 2012 (five years from now!).

Listened to a radio program (KQED) this afternoon on online reputation. It was about the light and dark side of online reputation today. There were several call-ins with disturbing examples of reputations ruined – telephone numbers endlessly listed on the Internet due to election campaign donations, unemployment due to criticisms about the accuracy of a school textbook, 1983 article in a college paper that was mis-edited, etc.  While the positive side of online reputation such as ebay seller ratings and the ability to find out information on companies of all sizes and sectors, the increasing negative side of the Internet for managing reputation consumed much of the program. The advice given was quite sound: 1. Take the long view of anything you write today. 2.  Google Early, Google Often.3. Take action (formally and informally) if there is something inflammatory written about you.4.  Monitor yourself carefully. Even the innocent can become victims.  Moderator Dave Iverson interviewed Professor Daniel Solove, law professor at George Washington School of Law, and author of a new book titled The Future of Reputation: Gossip, Rumor and Privacy on the Internet. Timely indeed. The other person interviewed was Michael Fertik, CEO of ReputationDefender, a service that helps individuals manage their online reputations.  Enjoy.