“Reputation management is coming of age as a boardroom issue in the 2010s”, states the latest Annual Reputation Leaders Survey by the Reputation Institute, a global private consulting firm based in New York and Copenhagen. However, although most companies agree that reputation management is important, relatively few have figured out how to harness its value. Surveying the opinions of over 300 executives in 25 countries, the Reputation Institute finds that there is a great deal of uncertainty in the transition from a customer-centric approach to risk management: “when it comes to stakeholder relationship management” says the introduction to the report, “everything is not under control.” Noting that reputation leaders cover a diversity of job titles “but most frequently the senior communicator, chief marketing officer, or the head of business strategy”, the survey notes that only 20 per cent of reputation leaders say they have the right tools and processes in place to implement reputation thinking into the way the company. The Institute calls for companies to embrace a “reputation-focused agenda”, noting that the main reasons preventing companies from doing so are a lack of a structured process for managing reputation (57 per cent), the inability to leverage internal knowledge about each stakeholder group (45 per cent) and internal silos that prevent cross-functional collaboration (34 per cent). The report draws the conclusion that reputation leaders “have been unable to inspire executive management to build a more workable system designed to meet today’s challenges.” Elsewhere in the report, the survey notes that 94 per cent of companies link reputation priorities to business impact – clearly, the business case for reputation is widely understood. With these kind of results, the question remains: who should take responsibility for implementing a new way of working with audiences from the workplace to the marketplace?
Making the grade when stakeholders rule
Facts & Figures Archive
2019
April -
Calling all young communicators
February -
Does business really care about the SDGs?
2018
December -
The ethics of branded content
November -
Are millennials losing faith in business?
October -
Trends in global employee engagement
April -
In experts we trust... again?
March -
Brave new worlds
February -
Experts regarded more trustworthy than peers
January -
Are you GDPR ready?
2017
December -
Asia-Pacific Communication Monitor 2017
November -
Exploring the new employee economy
September -
Pro-business, but expecting more
July -
Expecting the personal
June -
Employee engagement dips
May -
CEOs worried about trust
February -
Trust in crisis
January -
The drivers of uncertainty in 2017
2016
December -
Digital disconnect in risk management
September -
Companies face employee loyalty challenge
April -
Global perspectives on risk
March -
Digital continues to climb
March -
Digital continues to climb
2015
December -
Asia-Pacific Communication Monitor
December -
The factors at play in risky business
September -
The future of corporate communications
April -
Staying on the front foot
March -
Looking at risk around the world
February -
Trust and innovation
January -
Trust in Asia Pacific
2014
December -
Public affairs salaries in Asia Pacific
November -
Asia-Pacific governance survey
November -
Playing to win in the reputation economy
October -
Busting the digital media myths
August -
Fighting to be heard
June -
Influencing the influencers
February -
The real value of reputation
January -
Communicating employee value
2013
December -
Facing a company crisis
November -
The key to growth
October -
Making the grade when stakeholders rule
August -
Effectiveness in community building
June -
Great expectations for CSR
April -
Journalists on PR
March -
Crisis in leadership
February -
Identifying the champion brands
January -
The big issues
2012
December -
Creativity in PR
October -
Qualifications for communicators
August -
The Rising CCO
April -
The role of business in society
February -
Trust in business