By Chris Genasi, Global Director of Strategy, Weber Shandwick, New York (cgenasi@webershandwick.com)
Why company executives who do not take personal responsibility for communications are failing their shareholders, employees and customers.
Since the publication of my book, "Winning Reputations" in October 2001, I have been subject - from some public relations hard-liners - to the PR equivalent of a fatwa.
My offence was committed in the book's subtitle "how to be your own spin doctor". For many in our industry, an establishment PR practitioner like myself (as opposed to mavericks such as Matthew Freud and Max Clifford), openly using the word "spin", is sacrilege.
What is more, I upset the consultancy community, who saw my book as a blueprint for clients to carry out DIY PR - dispensing with the need for consultancy support ever again.
While this mild controversy was very good for industry debate (not to mention book sales), I was concerned that the real message of my book could be lost. I wanted to convey, based on my 17 years experience of PR consultancy, how essential I feel it is for senior managers to take their communications obligations seriously - and how badly most managers are performing in this area.
While there is no doubt that the importance of good communications and of reputation management is now widely accepted, the implementation is all too often abrogated by senior people and passed to PR departments and company spokespeople.
This is only half baking the cake. Communications and building reputation is not - as many senior people feel - something that you can contract out to PR spokespeople. Of course, PR professionals provide vital advice and support, but to be truly effective, senior leaders must get themselves personally involved in delivering and shaping communications to internal and external audiences.
My book was written to encourage leaders of industry to take on that responsibility more fully than I see happening in many organisations. I want today's leaders to understand that having a good reputation does not happen by accident. You need to work at it. And it is not just about spin - if you want to be a thought leader, you actually need to have some leading thoughts, not just say you do.
It is everyone's right to have the reputation they deserve. And I believe that for those willing to give the time and effort, they will be able to build a reputation that helps their business to win.
Rather than this message being lost, in fact it seems to have struck a chord with a lot of people who have given me feedback since publication. Managers, from all types of companies, relate particularly to the growing importance of the individual (rather than the corporate machine alone) in building reputation and leadership.
Whether it is the CEO or the use of employees in communications - it is clear that people need to be willing to represent their organisations in order to get noticed and avoid the "faceless corporation" tag.
It seems that when it comes to building reputations - real people (not PR people) matter.
However, still too many senior managers hide behind their PR people - preferring to use spokespeople and bland statements rather than personally taking a stance.
I think this amounts to a failure to do one's job properly. A senior manager should be expected to be the face of his or her business; whether that is internally with employees, or externally to the media or other opinion formers. This is especially true at CEO level - where the profile of the CEO can make or break a share price, or mean sink or swim for employee motivation.
A number of studies have been carried out which aim to correlate share price with the positive profile of a CEO. Professor Charles Fombrun of the Stearn School of Business at New York University has for several years been tracking the link between a high reputation rating and share price, which consistently shows that the two are closely tied. Another study, by Burson Marstellar, shows that companies were rated between 10 - 20 per cent more highly if the CEO and the senior management team had a high positive profile.
Whether you believe the figures or not, it seems to me pretty much common sense that it will be beneficial to convince analysts, journalists, employees, regulators and investors that the company is in good hands.
If your audiences are convinced that there is a clear vision, that there is innovative thought behind the business and that it is being run responsibly and in a sustainable manner, then this favorable corporate persona will help open all sorts of doors. One only needs to think of the trust placed in high profile figures, often because they have built a relationship in our minds as capable, trustworthy individuals.
This is more than a pleasant optional extra. As well as helping the share price, this building of trust can support brand expansion, entry into new markets, motivate employees, persuade regulators to grant licenses and approve plans, help create new partnerships and attracts top talent. Put simply, if you can create a "buzz" about your company, more people will want to work for you, invest in you, include you in tender lists, give you the time of day and the benefit of doubt - all of which is extremely valuable in commercial terms.
But while communication is vital, clearly spin alone is hopeless. Another error made by many senior people is believing that a good reputation is just about spinning flax into gold like Rumplestiltskin. But we know that was a fairy story. In reality, good reputations spring from good businesses. There needs to be genuine interest and qualities behind the communications. Many darlings of the financial community have turned from golden geese into ugly ducklings as their businesses lost their way - Enron, Tyco, Rentokil are such examples.
A positive profile meant that the British people believed Richard Branson was to be trusted with running the UK National Lottery, but the authorities chose the solid, but scarred, Camelot for sound business reasons. In this area, Branson could not compete. His reputation overreached his capabilities.
So what should senior management do, if they want to improve their communications? Clearly this is a major area that requires detailed work, but there are three fundamentals that need to be addressed:
1 - Commit to proper training.
Both media training and presentation training on a regular basis (and certainly before each major announcement) is vital. Many senior people avoid talking to the media or other groups because they are concerned that their words will be misunderstood or twisted. This need not be the case if you are well trained and prepared.
2 - Give priority to communications.
Journalists have short deadlines, often asking you to drop everything and travel to a TV studio that evening, or needing 400 words on your view of European enlargement by the end of the day. Make the effort and be responsive and you will reap the benefits in terms of gaining media coverage and journalist appreciation.
3 - Be bold and interesting.
Remember that to strike the pose of a leader, you need to communicate substance in an entertaining and engaging way. Look at your competitors, look at the market and develop a persona and positioning that will interest and appeal to the outside world. Rather than simply talking about how great you think you are - talk about how what you are doing, benefits to your audience.
Since moving to the US, I have noticed that this country is way ahead of the UK and mainland Europe on the use of senior management as the face of business. Here, CEOs are celebrities: Carly Fiorina, Jack Welch, Ted Turner, Steve Jobs - these are major figures in daily US media life.
And companies here are also using other real people far more to make their brands and reputations come to life. For example, GE is running a current ad campaign featuring actual employees talking about their passion for their work and the satisfaction they get from seeing how GE's products make the world a better place.
Wal-Mart features its customers in their ads talking about what Wal-Mart means to them. It helps that in the US most people have shares and follow the stock market the way they follow sports. But nevertheless, Europe could learn a few lessons.
Stellar European CEOs are few and far between. Most are entrepreneurial types like Richard Branson, James Dyson or EasyJet's Stelios. But how many FTSE company CEOs are household names? Some PR professionals have suggested that the problem could be more than British cultural reserve compared to our American friends. I have heard the view expressed a number of times that one of the major problems is that so many CEOs are male.
Generally speaking, it is held to be the case that women are frequently superior to men in the area of communication and have a better innate sense of how to build relationships with internal and external audiences.
Indeed, many of the most memorable CEOs - e.g. Marjorie Scardino of Pearson, Anne Mulcahy of Xerox, Carly Fiorina of HP, Barbara Cassani formerly at BA subsidiary GO, Anita Roddick at The Body Shop, have all been articulate and motivational women.
However, personally I do not hold that good communication skills are strongly influenced by gender. My personal experience is that a combination of humility - looking at things from the audience's point of view - and a willingness to reach out with speed and clarity, are the essential qualities for a good communicator and these can be found (or not) in both men and women.
Whatever the reasons, it is clear to me that many CEOs and senior managers are failing in their duty to communicate. Far too many look for reasons to avoid this responsibility rather than embrace it.
To help spot and counter those that need help in this area, I have carried out a piece of analysis for this article. I have looked at the typical types of (bad) CEOs and senior managers we as a consultancy deal with, and have come up with the following seven deadly sinners:
1) The Slowcoaches - speed is everything in the battle to win PR campaigns - BA took four months to come up with a very dull strategic plan, while Easy Jet responded to criticism from Marconi that it had been wrongly included on its Hall of Shame with corrective ads within 24 hours
2) The Androids - Jargon spouting corporate robots that talk a lot but say nothing (they normally have MBAs and wear regulation chinos, Polo shirt and deck shoes). The best communicators talk in consumer speak - just listen to Tesco or Ryanair.
3) The Invisible men - The CEOs who never talk to the media - What do they think they are there for? A week without placing a media Interview by a CEO is a week wasted
4) The Sir Humphrey - Those CEOs who when they do get in front of a journalist are so convoluted and uncontroversial that they do not utter a single sentence that is newsworthy
5) The Narcissistic - Arrogant CEOs who think they are above the normal rules of society - Gerald Corbett, the Newcastle FC mangers and Brian Souter at Stagecoach are prime examples of men who have come a cropper through self aggrandizement
6) The Mad - A definition of madness is doing the same thing but expecting different results - these CEOs think they can have an interesting profile by "doing more PR". They forget that you also need to say and do interesting things.
7) Those with RNTD syndrome - A frequently found affliction, these CEOs are always keen to identify Reasons Not To Do any communications with the outside world. Normally only treatable by being sacked by shareholders
Any senior manager recognising themselves - or their boss - in this list, should be very concerned. Not least because soon a new law in the UK is coming into force which will oblige companies to account for their PR activity in the annual report and accounts. From now on, big business will have to demonstrate the contribution it makes to consumers, to the environment and to society in general.
All of which means that now, more than ever, CEOs and managers need to work hard to find their corporate voice.
This article was specially commissioned for this Site in mid- 2002. A summary was published in the July 2002 edition of "People Matters".