Last week we gathered a group of our most forward thinking communications heads from some of the largest and smartest European companies to have a discussion around challenges facing the function.

One of the debates that really caught my attention was about company reputation. Communications heads are feeling increasingly uncomfortable with their ability to both manage and measure reputation at the very time when it is high on the corporate agenda.

Reputation is a key focus area

There were four top reasons that came out for Communications caring about reputation right now:

1) Feeling exposed. As consumers (of both products and information) have more power and ability to share their views they are quick to hit companies for doing something they disagree with.  There was a feeling that the volatility in the business environment had meant that “the winds have shifted” sentiment against corporate and that feels uncomfortable, and personal, for CEOs. 

2) Focus on Growth in new markets. As developed economies face slow growth many companies are looking at new markets (geographies/products) to support their growth. Company reputation can help or hinder our success in these new markets.

3) CEO focus. There are only so many scandals that Time magazine can cover before the topic of company reputation starts to feel very personal to even the most hardy senior execs. The AON Global Risk Management survey 2011 has ‘damage to reputation/brand’ as the 4^th biggest risk to companies (after economic slowdown, regulatory changes and increased competition).

4) Employee sensitivity. An employee’s personal reputation is intrinsically tied to the company they work for. With many employees sharing their work details on social media sites they are increasingly open to peer questioning.

>>> Access CEC support: 1) reputation risk management) 2)  corporate brand management) 3) influencing stakeholders in a networked environment

Measurement is not up to scratch

Everyone was looking for a silver bullet that both tied communications activities to reputation and demonstrated the impact of reputation on business outcomes.  Most telling was that not one person was satisfied with their current measurement strategy and it’s ability to do either (and stand up to cross-examination from the CFO.)

The challenges we heard were:

• Measurement efforts are silod – “we measure media tone and coverage, company reputation, monitor issues and social media but they are all done independently – it must be better to integrate”
• Comprehensive measurement is cost-prohibitive – “the cost of measuring reputation means that we can only cover a couple of core markets so we can’t get the full picture. In an environment where news and information has no boundaries that is a worry”
• Reputation measures are too high level - “the data we get it too high level to really influence our decision making; it rarely turns up anything we didn’t know already”
• Limited value for forward planning – “with the fast changing stakeholder environment a view looking back at what people thought isn’t always the best for helping us decide what we should do going forward”

So, why do we do it? the answer is that currently most companies feel it’s their only option to put a demonstrable numbers to what we do.

What is the right way forward? Read More »

Traditionally when we (and our business partners) think of Communications tools we think of the various forms of messaging that we create and disseminate through our suite of channels.   This blinkered focus on the outputs that communicators create is undermining our ability to influence our audiences.

We talk at CEC about the distinction between “Big C” and “small c” communication.  Big C are the messages that come from the communications function – presentations, memos, newsletters, videos, posters and the like. Small c is the communication that is happening between stakeholders all the time.  It is the small c communication that is 99% of what stakeholders are exposed to – the everyday back and forth people have with their networks.  So why aren’t we equally weighting this in our communications planning?

Big C communications feels more comfortable for a lot of communicators– we are in control of what is said and how it is distributed. The output is also visibly attributed to Communications so people can see what we’re doing and we get credit for it.  While these are fair justifications they mean many communicators are limiting their potential to drive real business value.

As part of communications planning you should pay equal consideration to the three different roles we as communicators can play:

1. Create Messaging: develop and share communications that is driving a specific audience outcome (i.e., what do we want the audience to think/feel/do as a result of receiving this communication).

• TIP: listen to the audience first to make sure you understand the language they use and current perceptions they have to maximize the chances of the message resonating. Be audience-centric not company-centric in your communications.
• CEC Support: Write in a More Engaging Way (resource center)

2. Enable Others to Communicate: coach or support others to communicate more effectively with the audience. This could be leaders, managers, employees, external advocates or the media. Read More »

Speaking to our network of thousands of communicators you begin to hear a lot of similar themes. Some of the most common revolve around demonstrating the value of communications and moving from a service provider to consultative partner with the business.  While I am cautious to use the term “silver bullet” there is one change you can make that will make serious progress against all of these: the way you take in requests from the business.

I believe there are two different types of communicators: the order-takers and the value-creators. Let’s play out an everyday situation to see if you can identify which one you are.

Situation: A business partner comes to member of the communications team and asks for an employee video to be created around the company’s focus on safety.

• Order-taker: “Absolutely, we’d be delighted to help with this important strategic priority. Let me get an understanding of the key messages you want to send and we’ll use our expertise to create a video that is both engaging and memorable for employees.”

Doesn’t seem too bad.  They are using their expertise in communication channels to help create a much more compelling video than the business partner would do alone.  The main problem here is that the communicator is assuming that a video is the right answer, jumping straight to the solution.

• Value-creator: “Great, happy to help.  Before we start talking about the video, it would be good to get an understanding of what it is we want to achieve and see if there are alternative ways communications can help you reach your goal…”

Read More »

Another month another massive reputation disaster by a major corporation.  Most of the UK and increasingly the US and Europe have been closely following the ongoing drama of the phone hacking scandal that has blighted News Corp over the past month (although it’s been simmering for a lot longer). It’s the stuff of Communicators nightmares and is only spreading as investigations and revelations continue.

So where did News Corp go wrong in their handling of the crisis?

1. The belief they could contain the crisis: Many analysts, and indeed Rupert Murdoch himself, believed that shutting down the News of the World (NoTW) would  limit the damage. As it only represented 1% of News Corp it seemed a worthy sacrifice.  They were wrong. Circulation of News International’s other titles (The Times and The Sun) have been at an all time low; the share price of News Corp has fallen by almost 20% since the scandal started meaning billions of dollars have been wiped off the company’s market value.

2. Leadership failure to take responsibility: Rupert Murdoch IS News Corp and its brands to the public– they were immediately looking to him for a response. He shunned accountability by saying that he could not possibly know what goes on in an invidvidual paper – a comment that made him and News International CEO Rebekah Brooks seem like either incompetent leaders or just acting in their own self interests. Angry staff even recorded and leaked her speech to Sky News.

3. Lack of a credible spokesperson: Initially the media spokesperson, Simon Greenberg, was left to handle the media alone, giving the impression that leadership weren’t taking the issue seriously themselves. He couldn’t respond directly to difficult questions being thrown at him, particularly when public sentiment suddenly turned viciously against them in light of the Milly Dowler and London bombing victim revelations. Read More »

On Wednesday last week we held our first European meeting around  Building a Change-Ready Organization. The attendees were Heads of Communications at companies  ranging from telecoms to pharmaceuticals and media to utilities and with anywhere from 8,000 to 500,000 employees. One thing they all agreed on: change is the new normal and we need to not only get used to it, but to help our organizations embrace it.

The main message was one of helping employees move from being stressed and disrupted by change to feeling in control of the change. We need employees who lean in and adapt to a fast moving marketplace.

There were four themes that I thought were worth sharing: Read More »

Intranets – they spark joy and frustration in equal measure (often tipping in favour of frustration). Joy because we now have an easy and effective way of getting important information to our employees without bombarding them with emails. Frustration because no matter how hard we try, the feedback is still that when employees need something it’s hard to break through the maze.

It’s not like we aren’t trying. Communications teams (in partnership with IT and HR) are always looking for better and smarter ways to leverage this golden tool. What we’re all aiming for is employees who actually use the intranet, on a regular basis, to do their jobs better and faster. But how do we know that it’s really working? Most communicators keep close track of intranet metrics like clicks and views.

However, these volumetrics reveal nothing about what employees may have intended to do on the intranet, or wish they could do. Employee needs and goals are constantly changing, so how do we measure whether we are keeping pace? Read More »

Skills are top of mind right now as we’re doing a lot of work around defining the competencies of the communicator of the future – one that is a true consultative partner to the business.

The Sales function probably isn’t the first place that you’d look when you’re thinking about the skills you want to develop in your Communications team. True, a lot of the job we do IS “selling” – whether it’s selling an idea, our company, or a particular strategy.  However, when we think of sales the first thing that springs to mind is often the silver tongued charmer who could sell ice to Eskimos. Well, that view is of the OLD WORLD sales person. In the current economic climate when more deals are stalling, a new model for rep success is emerging: the Challenger Rep™ profile who can excel at three key skills:

1. teaching the customer
2. tailoring conversations to each stakeholder
3. asserting control over customer interactions.   Read More »

As we are all recovering from a period of over-indulgence and TV re-runs, it is that time of year for a spot of reflection and a look forward at the year ahead.  My long list of resolutions for 2011 range from the practical (avoiding drowning in the mounds of paper on my desk) to the aspirational (learning to cross-country ski so I can take part in an Arctic biathlon for charity).  Beyond personal goals, I think there are also a few things that should be on a list of professional resolutions for 2011.  Here are some ideas for communicators, along with how we plan to help you along in 2011:

1. Make competency development a priority.

Why it’s important: As the demands on the communication function evolve to be less about simply creating and delivering communications to the desired audience and more about “managing the debate” and providing consultative support to business partners – a new competency set is required.  Whether it’s for your own professional development or standardizing and building the skills across your team, few Communications team have a formalized plan for skill development and it’s now more important than ever. Read More »

Ever feel like you are only just starting to get used to a new way of doing things when everything is turned on its head and changed again?  A new leadership team, a new acquisition, a new intranet – it seems everywhere we look, companies are making pretty significant changes to the way they operate.  In fact, CLC Human Resources found that 81% of organizations have undergone major change in the last 12 months.  It’s no wonder that in our recent member survey, employee “change fatigue” was cited as one of the biggest challenges Communicators faced.  Rather than joining our employees in wistfully remembering a time when stability was an option and strategies really did actually last 5 years, we have to accept our fate.  Uncertainty and change are the new normal.

Senior leaders are recognizing this new state of play.  In a recent survey from our sister program the Corporate Strategy Board (CSB) leaders rated “being adaptive” as their number one priority for 2011.  So, what makes companies, and the people within them, good at adapting?  As our CEC 2011 focus, we’re going to be looking into exactly that.  Read More »

One of the most frequent questions that we hear from our members is around demonstrating the value of communications.  The reason behind this is that typically members’ communications focus on long-term perception changes and messaging “about” the business.   Both of which are notoriously hard to link to short term business results.

We’re not saying that longer term outcomes such as employee engagement and reputation are bad (far from it).  It’s just that in defining ourselves by traditional roles, we can restrict our thinking and miss opportunities to add value.  Many of these opportunities are right in front of us.  Look around you – communication breakdowns are likely happening all over your organization.  You can probably think of them within your own team!

An example of such an opportunity: CEB’s operations practice found that culture was the single biggest driver of risk reporting – companies with a culture of integrity outperformed their peers by 16% in shareholder returns!  Now that is a result I’d like to be attached to!

Some leading companies are jumping on these opportunities: one company who has done this to great effect is ITT Corporation.  Courtney Reynolds, Head of Internal Communications at ITT, partnered with Jim Shaffer and one of their regional plants to increase performance, showing a 40% reduce in scrap and 20% increase in on-time delivery, in just a matter of months. Read More »