public relations

A few interesting things crossed my mind and desk this week that I thought I would share. All reputation-related of course.

1. The World Economic Forum released its report on the top risks facing the world in 2012. Social unrest and income inequity were at the top. Natural disasters such as the earthquake in Japan were also high on the risk list. And as pointed out, one risk affects another creating a domino effect. “The Internet, meanwhile, can magnify and spread the effects of a disaster in other ways. Rumors, even if incorrect, spread quickly on social networking sites — sometimes more rapidly than emergency services can communicate accurate information. As word of disasters like the terror attacks of Sept. 11 or the earthquake in Japan spreads globally, consumers hunker down in front of their computer screens or televisions, rather than going about their daily lives. This increases the economic effects of a crisis, even in areas far removed from the source.”  Disasters such as the horrific earthquake, tragic 9-11, death-defying financial crisis, massive oil spills and nasty ash clouds coming from Iceland all heighten other risks in some way. And risk spells reputation damage depending on how a company or country responds and solves the problem.

2. The report from WEF also mentioned that risks are on the horizon as leadership transitions are in full force this year. It is not just the U.S. presidential election that poses risk and stirs up emotional angst. There are leadership transitions underway this year in France, Russia and China as well. Add to that the sudden transitions in the Arab world this past year and we see upheaval and uncertainty. When CEO transitions are underway, the first few months can be risky so as we see world leaders change, tighten your seatbelts. The public will be more socially active than ever. We’ve already seen that in Russia.

3. I’ve written here about rankings and so-called “worst of” lists where companies, CEOs and environmental records are put on notice that they are not making the grade. In most Januarys, TripAdvisor.com comes out with its “dirtiest hotels” in the world.  No more. The CEO Stephen Kaufer says, “We want to stay more on the positive side, so we’ll continue to feature the best destinations, the top hotels.  We’re slicing and dicing the ‘best of’ in different ways this year, more than focusing on the negative.”  Although the article where I learned about this says there were potential legal considerations and competitive reasons for abandoning the January list, it also mentioned that the original “worst of” list was done for PR reasons and that TripAdvisor is less interested in that now.  Perhaps there is a reputation-reason afoot here. There is so much negativity online on some of these sites and it is so easy to find what you are looking for that a list of the 10 worst may be hardly worth alienating visitors to your site. Everyone worries about the detractors and the praisers. Maybe it is time to just worry about the average site visitor who does not want snarky comments and lists, but just the plain old straight forward facts to plan a plain old relaxing get-away.

   I always learn something new when I go to the Council of PR Firms Critical Issues Forum. The 2011 event was this past week and Robert Gibbs spoke, the former White House Press Secretary for President Obama. He delivered a perfect keynote presentation — attuned to the audience, well-timed, thoughtful and chock full of good stories and insights.  In my view, he sure shored up his reputation. A few things caught my attention….

• Go where your customers are. Gibbs told the story of how he was told that President Obama had some down time in LA during a visit and how he suggested that the president visit the Jay Leno show. Of course, people thought he was crazy but he underscored the importance of going where your voters (customers) are.
• Use technology strategically. Gibbs decided to use Twitter when he realized he could get a jump on what journalists were thinking before, during and after press conferences.
• Social media reaches more. In the 2012 election, the social media team will be the largest one in the President’s re-election campaign. As he said, it strengthens and grows the brand and insulates it when things go bad. I wanted to tell him that “inoculate” is an even better term to use. Gibbs said to think of this coming year as the Twitter Election. 
• An event is 2 Tweets.  He said that brands must be disciplined today and since Twitter is how news gets made these days, 2 Tweets = event. Interesting concept, right?
• Tough times are just that, tough times. The BP/Gulf of Mexico oil spill was one of the toughest times in the White House. Gibbs said he can think of 100 things that they could have done better now. Hindsight.
• 2008 vs. 2012. Expect to see more story telling from “real” people in the re-election campaign. Stories from real people are powerful validators.
• Which is harder — selling products or politicians? Gibbs says politicians.
• Be careful what you put in writing. This fascinated me. He said that because everything in the White House is archived, people are careful about what they say because it could be totally misunderstood 12 years from now or some such time.  And because of the archiving, no one says anything all that interesting!
• Get out of the bubble. This is the same for CEOs. Find a way to get real and to be in touch with the average person. President Obama reads 10 letters a day from people who send him letters. He answers them and tries to figure out what can be done. But it keeps him in touch with reality which is sorely needed when living in the White House or DC. CEOs should get out of their offices and ride the subway or the bus when they can.
• Politics is “yelling for a living.” I thought that’s exactly right.  And a good note to end on.

  I was on a flight to the West Coast on Sunday when I witnessed a disagreement between a passenger and stewardess. I do not know what happened but it was clear that the passenger had complained about something and really disturbed the stewardess.  At one point, the stewardness made it clear she was not going to take the tirade directed at her and heard something about an arrest. Since the woman was a few seats ahead of me, I could not hear what the problem was. I did see that afterwards, the stewardess brought a handwritten note to the woman and heard her mention that it was from the pilot.  Surprisingly to me, the complaint had escalated to the cockpit.  The pilot’s note was not just a single lined entry but several sentences because I could see that it nearly filled the page. When we finally landed, three police people were at the gate to meet the passenger, her husband and the stewardess to interview them.

The whole incident made me uncomfortable but as I thought about it later, I realized that the pilot had actually taken the time to respond to the passenger’s complaint. And it made me think about how airlines really have their hands full with reputational issues and that leadership communications — from the pilot no less — can make a difference. It seemed like a smart, customer focused attempt to diffuse a situation that was going to go nowhere. Probably not a good use of the pilot’s time but perhaps the pilot’s note kept us from returning to JFK and disrupting all of our travels.

Industry reputation is always changing. One of the major shifts in reputation today is the collateral damage that one company can inflict on its entire industry. Wish there was a more positive incline in how consumers see American business and government. Gallup’s recent analysis is now out and provides a look into who is up and who is down. It is no surprise that the real estate industry reputation has declined preciptiously from 2001. Even my own industry — PR — has witnessed a decline besides the fact that it is doing well.  The computer and Internet industry look like they are surviving the best with positive lifts in reputation among US consumers.  

The drop in perception of government, the deepest decline, seems to the theme of the day. To learn more about why that might be…take a look at our research on Civility in America. It says it all. [Have to add that the CEO of Yahoo, Carol Bartz, was fired via a telephone call. How civil is that? Regardless of what was happening at the company, what happened to the pink slip?]

  I have to take a break from work and post something. I think my mind is going to explode. So I thought I would post about something fun and different that has to do with improving your city reputation. And also about reputation retaliation.  Apologies for being a few weeks behind.

Newsweek wrote a story profiling the top 10 dying American cities [I should add that Newsweek says it appeared pursuant to a content-sharing agreement with a site called Main Street, and that the magazine didn't produce it]. Grand Rapids, Michigan was included in the list of slow deaths which certainly does not do anything good for its reputation, attracting new residents or new businesses to the area.  Hasn’t Michigan had enough grief? So instead of taking the criticism lying down, 1,000 residents of Grand Rapids raised about $40,000 and  fought back. And fought back they did.  Check out this video.  It is delicious to see how cities can redeem their reputation.  Nearly 4 million people have watched the music video, referred to as one big block party,  that lip dubs the classic song American Pie. It is a great diversion and a smart strategy. And falls into my advice about going rogue when it comes to reputation warfare.

This made me think about the article I read awhile back about Detroit needing a statue to repair its reputation and efforts to raise funds for a Robocop statue. I loved the idea but I think it was squashed. (See picture at the start of this blog)

Totally agree. Just read an article about teaching reputation management in business schools. I gather it is not happening. Actually, this topic has been circulating for as many years as I have been in the field of reputation management. How is it possible that nothing has changed?  An analysis of highly ranked MBA programs by the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) found that only 16% offer a single course in crisis management, strategic communications, public relations, or whatever on a company’s most competitive and valuable organizational asset — its reputation. With all the reputation failures we have seen over the past decade or more – starting with Enron, it is hard to believe that business schools are still treating communications as an elective, if at all. [Weber Shandwick's "stumble rate" shows that nearly one out of every two companies lost reputation in their industry last year.  Isn't that enough reason to teach MBA students how to communciate to avoid such reputation disasters?]

The article written by Anthony D’Angelo rightfully says: “One can’t blame organizational leaders for not understanding that the way they operate the business is inseparable from the way they communicate about the business, inside and outside the organization. They’re not educated sufficiently to know these are inextricably linked leadership requirements: You can’t have effective leadership without an effective communications strategy. The latter is based on authenticity and transparency because nothing else works.”

Communications is a requirement of good governance and smart leadership. New CEOs understand very well today the importance of communicating internally when they confront their first 100 days.  Nearly all those I have worked with are eager to communicate with employees and desperate to do it well. There is always a perception that the prior leadership did not do enough to communciate the strategy or to movitate and rally employees. But when does” communications amnesia” set in if they are all so eager on Day One?  It is too late to get the communciations bug when crisis is on the doorstep.

Reputation or communications management is sorely needed in business schools today. What’s keeping it away? Is it the perception that communications is all about excuses and spin? Responsible communications needs to be taught.

 On my way to work today I read an article about the West Wing Week video series which I had forgotten about until now.  The article is focused on Arun Chaudhary who is the White House videographer in charge of capturing the activity of the President every week. He is the first person to hold this job. There are segments that are fun, some serious and some very stately. The aim is to document the presidency for historical purposes and no doubt they will be extremely valuable 25 years from now.

The video is approved by the White House Comms Shop (that is what they call it) before it goes live. Essentially it is what we in the comms business call “owned media.”  The White House is the content provider and is sending the message of an active, friendly, presidential occupant of Pennsylvania Avenue.

What interested me after watching this week’s video was how positive the message was compared to what I tend to read in the press, online and on cable news.  Most of the latter is neutral to negative. The video does a fine job of changing perception, interesting to watch (speechwriter working on board Air Force One, Michelle Obama serving food to military in Germany, Obama and his wife dancing with children in India who pull them in) and a reminder of the stateliness of the office. I get the point that it is put out by the White House but it is more reassuring than what the media delivers to us every day. In fact, it was a relief because the news can be downright depressing.

In an article I wrote on Reputation Warfare appearing in December’s Harvard Business Review, I mention the saliency of video as a way to communicate directly with stakeholders in defending and safeguarding reputation. The best reputation antagonists use video strategically, so why not the President?

Interestingly, in the article and the short video with Arun and the writer, they mention that there is tremendous interest in the West Wing Week video internally. Always a side-benefit that companies should seriously consider…..

Weber Shandwick just issued a research report on Civility in America. We did it with Powell Tate and KRC Research. There is an abundance of interesting information such as the fact that 94% of Americans think that civility is a major problem in the United States and has become worse since the recession. Seventy-two percent of Americans view the political world and government as the most uncivil – the highest percentage recorded in the poll – and the absence of civility appears to be having an impact on participation and interest in the political process among broad swaths of the public.

Nearly half the American people (49%) are “tuning out” of government and politics, and almost two-thirds of those people (63%) cite the general tone and level of civility as a major factor in their decision. A fairly large 46% of people are tuning out opinion pieces and editorials in the media, and 45% cite incivility as a major factor. Over one third (38%) are tuning out news coverage and reporting and half of them (50%) attribute their actions to the lack of civility. How can we be an informed public when growing numbers of us are turning away from what makes America tick?

This is bad enough but what got me is how the public is turning away from companies who desperately need their business to rebuild our economy. A full three-quarters (75%) of Americans believe that companies that are uncivil should be boycotted. In fact, 64% of Americans report that they have advised others not to buy products or services because they felt the company or its representatives were rude or uncivil. Companies clearly need to be closely monitoring and listening to their “badvocates” or critics to make sure they are not overlooking poor customer service or improper commentary. Reputations can be damaged quickly when customers perceive they are not being treated properly. When you think of companies that are extremely courteous, helpful and patient such as Zappos, you realize how important “tone” can be and what drives reputation in some industries. I sure hope you have seen their puppet commercials which take civility to new heights.

Business leaders also have considerable influence, since they are expected to set an example for behaving civilly. Nearly every American (91%) believes that business leaders should set an example for behaving with civility. Not only are business leaders expected to act with civility, but the majority (82%) believe that companies should not tolerate uncivil behavior in the workplace. I always find it remarkable how CEOs are held responsible for everything that goes wrong (as they should often be but not for everything!) and realize that incivility is now being added to their plate.

All in all, how a company and its leaders communicate and engage says it all and with the Internet and 24/7 media, companies must be extra careful. The recent events with Gen. Stanley McChrystal are just a recent example of how the wrong tone and poor choice of words can get you into hot water.

[If you are interested in this topic, you might want to visit Civilination.]

  We at Weber Shandwick just issued a new report on placing senior executives at conferences. As you know, one way of building reputation is to get your senior people, including your CEO, out on the conference trail. Not only is it important for CEOs to be visible in times of economic recovery but the same goes for the senior management teams who can individually support the overall positioning of the company. Years ago I used to refer to the CEO job as that of the narrator CEO — communicating internally and externally about where the company was headed and what the storyline was. Now I have been thinking about reframing that reference to CEO as content provider. It actually makes sense with all the channels available to communicate to employees, customers, media and other stakeholders. Since CEOs have the bully pulpit and are in great demand, they can provide the content that tells your company’s plotline.

I wanted to share some of the findings of our recent research (“From Guessing to Planning: Placing C-Suite Executives in the Most Strategic Forums”) that we did with Vital Speeches of the Day and David Murray, its founder. We both found ourselves at a conference in February on external communications and realized that external executive communications pros appeared anxious about figuring out a process for placing senior executives.  Everyone was seeking the holy grail and asking if someone had a better way to judge if a conference was right for an executive and if they had only limited time, which ones were most important. We decided to do a little more digging and here we are. You can find out more here and don’t miss the executive summary either. Here are some key findings:

• Senior executive participation at business leadership conferences has held steady or grown since the start of the global economic crisis, according to nearly three-quarters (73%) of external communications professionals we surveyed in April.
• CEOs, according to those surveyed, consider speaking engagements prime channels for communicating thought leadership platforms (61%), attracting new business and cultivating customer relationships (58%), and defining or redefining brands (52%).
• CEOs are most interested in speaking at top-tier business media events (44%), public policy conferences (41%), and business school gatherings (31%). Jen Risi, my colleague at Weber Shandwick who runs our Voiceboxx practice on executive visibility and conferences,  says: “Essentially, this new data validates what we’ve been saying to our clients. While financial media continues to be the preferred outlet for enhancing corporate reputation by executives, the strategic use of high-level speaking opportunities is steadily becoming a close second.”
• One of the bigger messages in the survey was that placement is an art, not a science. Clearly the conference business needs greater metrics and better demonstration of ROI to prove that executives are using their time well.  With substantial risk for making a bad recommendation about an appropriate executive conference, communications pros told us they depend upon various resources to confirm their suggestions. Ultimately, they admit that they need to do their own research including networking, monitoring event Web sites, conducting media searches, leveraging agency expertise, and “cold-calling” conference organizations for their schedules. A large 44% report that they have no related processes in place.  Of the remaining 56% who say they have a process, confidence in their system is evenly split – exactly half are confident and half are not. All the more reason to call us……

Hope you find the results useful in getting your CEO out there as content provider. Check in tomorrow for more on executive conferences and social media.

  I often feel that all I hear is bad news about companies losing reputation. When I see or hear the news, it usually is about another dent in a company’s or CEO’s reputation. Of course, that is what news is about — wrongdoing. I understand that companies that are maintaining or lifting their reputations up are not particularly newsy unless something catastrophic had happened to them.

Yesterday I spent in the jury pool in Brooklyn where I live.  As I walked out, I thought to myself how nice it was to participate in a system that had seriously improved its reputation. Years ago, jury duty in Brooklyn (never been to other borough’s courts) was downright depressing. The seating was terrible, the lighting dim and the officers downright rude, grumpy and dismissive. Yesterday was completely different. The seats were comfortable and actually cushioned with distance between each one so that you were not sitting shoulder to shoulder on hard benches with total strangers like on the subway. There were flat screens with the news playing in several areas of the large room where we started our day. I did notice that Fox News was on in the morning but later MSNBC took over.  They balanced even that. There were banks of computers for people to check their emails for free and people were told they could take 10 minute breaks for smoking.  The wireless in the jury room allowed me to work most of the day which was extraordinary too. The court officer announcing how the day was going to go and what our rights were was very funny and made me want to listen to him. People were treated like customers, not potential criminals which is how it used to feel. Most notable, at the end, another very official court officer thanked everyone who was dismissed from jury duty and stood at the door to thank people on the way out.

The customer-friendly welcome was evident in every touchpoint during the day. I was very pleased that if I had to spend a day away from the office after traveling for two weeks, at least I could watch fine reputation-building in action. And, even more to my astonishment, Brooklyn residents are not called back for another eight years. After being called every three years, that’s another reason to live in Brooklyn.