Respected and senior comms expert and consultant Sandra Stahl, Co-founder of jacobstahl (acquired by Ruder Finn in 2020), writing exclusively for Mediabrief, unpacks the pillars of corporate reputation in India’s business landscape, across navigating challenges, seizing opportunities, and more.
Sandra examines reputation management across common pitfalls and offers strategic insights to help strengthen the mission where process and investment play an equally important role. Sandra navigates the dichotomy of intentions versus actions, saying collective responsibility is critical to reputation management.
A strong and trusted reputation is the holy grail leaders and companies strive for. As India looks to present its growing strength as a global business hub and center of innovation, now is a good time to harness the tenets of reputation, recognize the common stumbling blocks and take the necessary steps to overcome them.
First, the elephants on the table. Elephant number 1: Reputation is only contributed to by companies and their leaders – what they say, do, how they conduct business, handle crises, etc. Corporate reputation is determined by the internal and external stakeholders, including customers, peers, employees, the media, and the public – those who observe, experience—for better or for worse–and potentially benefit from, the words and actions of the companies.
Elephant number 2: While it can take years to build a positive reputation, it can take an hour –or even a few minutes — to lose.
Building a good corporate reputation is hard. Sustaining one is even harder. It takes discipline, financial and human resources, and time. The good news is that when reputation is a priority at a company, it shows. It is the responsibility of many. With ample resources, corporate actions follow stated intentions, and positive results come quickly.
When reputation falls down the priority list and is considered important more in concept than in practice, its management gets silo-ed to one team (e.g. Corporate Comms), under-resourced and under-actioned. Reputation goes from being a ‘must have’ to a ‘nice to have.’ It follows that during these times, positive effects are realized less frequently and under-appreciated.
For decades, I have counseled clients, primarily in the consumer and Rx healthcare space, as a recognized contributor to companies that have built focused and disciplined reputation efforts that pull through the entire organization resulting in individuals at all levels and companies of all sizes recognized for extraordinary things. I’ve also observed companies whose service to building corporate reputation is more lip than active, as well as companies that have deprioritized reputation as ‘soft’ compared to financial and business goals.
Listen to Sandra Stahl on MVP – The Master’s Voice Podcast, in conversation with Pavan R Chawla
This article identifies common obstacles to building and maintaining the kind of positive reputation that is a company’s most valuable and differentiating asset. All four are ways of thinking, misperceptions that can be overcome.
Showing up is enough
The movie director, Woody Allen, famously said, “80% of success in life is just showing up.” As time would prove, this didn’t work out for him. It doesn’t for the rest of us and certainly not for a corporation’s reputation. For companies and leaders, showing up – let’s say at an event or via sponsorship, having a presence on a major platform, or underwriting a cause — is more like 10% of success; the other 90% is what happens while there and afterwards.
Consider the organizations and causes your company will sponsor in the coming year and the speaking engagements you want to arrange for leaders and the events at which your company will have a presence. Include internal company gatherings like town halls and summits.
Ask yourself and your team the following questions:
- What does our presence at this meeting communicate and is it authentic to our values?
- Are we making a commitment at this meeting that we are able to act on in the short term?
- Are we making a commitment here we will act on in the short-term? And if not soon, then when?
- Have we thought through how we will act on the commitments we’ve made?
To understand the worth of such probing, think about experiences you’ve had—professionally or personally—during which commitments made by a leader, friend, company, or brand were revealed to be empty. More talk than action. Did you feel surprised? Let down? Confused? Underwhelmed? Disappointed? On the corporate stage, these feelings are no different – they’re just on an exponentially larger scale.
Our intentions are good
Most companies and leaders act with good intention: to leverage the specific attributes of company skills or brands to contribute something positive to the world, make life better or easier for people, provide a solution to a problem and more. Intentions can also be straightforwardly commercial – -to influence preference or inspire purchase.
However, when corporate actions or leaders’ words cause harm, no matter how inadvertent, are executed without consideration to timing or context, or are another chapter in a history of company actions, leaning on ‘good intentions’ is rarely enough to save reputation.
Consider the brouhaha clothing company Zara experienced at the end of 2023 when it launched an advertising campaign that featured models amidst rubble, plaster and mannequins, some shrouded in white, some wrapped in plastic. Social media immediately exploded with many citing the ad’s resemblance to the war in Gaza. The story was covered by traditional media worldwide for weeks. Zara’s response in a statement included that the campaign was conceived in July and photographed in September, ahead of the October 7 attack on Israel by Hamas. As a further explanation, “Unfortunately, some customers felt offended by these images, which have now been removed, and saw in them something far from what was intended when they were created. Zara regrets that misunderstanding and we affirm our deep respect towards everyone.”
For many, this statement rang hollow given the company’s history of controversy on this topic. (In 2021, one of Zara’s designers was linked to anti-Palestinian comments. The company condemned her statements but took no further action.)
Zara is now a case study in corporate reputation (and crisis communications) with takeaways about the importance of trust, timing and accountability. It is also a reminder that ‘intention’ isn’t enough, and a call to recognize the difference between intention and transparency, authenticity, values, and action—the building blocks of corporate reputation.
We have a strong commitment
Companies make commitments all the time. I believe they are genuine and send an important signal to external and internal stakeholders. Internally, corporate commitments are motivational, infusing employees with purpose – knowing that what they’re creating, developing, improving, marketing, or promoting is linked to a higher cause whether it is cleaner water, safer environment, better oral health, less suffering, cure for currently incurable diseases, higher quality of life. Some corporate commitments to address an unmet need or addressing a well-known pain point.
To be sure, corporate reputations benefit from having clearly stated commitments. These benefits can be compromised when commitments are more words than actions, more aspiration than result. Companies aren’t on the hook to solve the world’s problems, but they are expected to make good on commitments in small steps and big ones.
Consider this example from the pharmaceutical company, Sanofi. The company’s corporate commitment is clear: (We are) “charging ahead to transform the lives of patients, ease the burden of cancer on society and restore hope. We’re determined to develop powerful medicines that are effective with the best possible safety profile for people living with cancer.”
Sanofi has a history of action that pulls through the commitment including Cancer & Work: Acting Together, confidential cancer counseling hubs and regular updates to these initiatives. Just this month, Sanofi announced another tangible benefit: “supporting employees with cancer and other critical illnesses by agreeing to secure their jobs, salaries and benefits for at least 12 months after diagnosis regardless of their location or role” – lifting the financial burden from employees with cancer and their families.
While considering your own company’s reputation, it can be productive to take a step back and critically assess your company’s stated commitment and how it is presented and actioned, and You may want to ask yourself and your team the following questions:
- Do our commitments contribute to our reputation?
- Are our company commitments authentic to our values?
- Are we presenting our company commitments realistically?
- Are we doing enough to bring it to life for internal and external stakeholders? Do our employees know about our commitment? Are they part of it? Do they live it?
- What can and should we be doing to back up our spoken commitments with actions that can have immediate, if not short-term tangible benefits to stakeholders? These can be contributing to better understanding, distilling new insights that can be actioned, or making financial contributions that will have a significant impact?
Let these discussions (and the answers) drive a more informed and productive approach to commitments and how they are woven into corporate reputation.
Not my job
CEOs of companies are often the ‘face’ and the ‘voice’ of companies — the person ultimately responsible for making and communicating the bold decisions that contribute to its reputation. However, companies and company reputation aren’t built on the shoulders of one person. All employees can and should play a role. When they do, they add real power to corporate reputation.
Consider ways to expand the reach and responsibility of corporate reputation beyond the standard activities such as CEO speeches, Thought Leadership bylined articles, quotes in press releases and mission statements on the corporate website. Think about adding communications efforts that widen the circle of leadership to include others in the C-suite as well as employees at different levels of the company.
In an assignment we had to rebuild the R&D reputation of a biotechnology company, we ensured the initiative featured all members of R&D leadership as well as younger scientists. We looped in HR and those from dedicated teams, such as one working to improve diversity and representation in the company’s clinical trials. The result was an expanded feeling of ownership over the R&D reputation rebuild – everyone had skin in the game and felt the benefits when they came quickly and steadily.
As India’s companies and states focus on growing positive reputations on the domestic and world stage, those entrusted with corporate reputation should remember that ‘reputation’ is two parts: conveying what the company stands for and making a difference that is positively experienced by stakeholders. When these are in harmony, guided by a coherent message and supported by actions that make a real impact, you’re on the right path and the company is well positioned to bring about tremendous and positive change.
About Sandra Stahl: Sandra is co-founder of jacobstahl (acquired by Ruder Finn in 2020). She is the author of the award-winning book, The Art & Craft of PR, founding faculty in the Branding + Integrated Communications master’s degree program at The City College of New York, and has lectured at universities including Xavier Institute of Communications (Mumbai), Columbia University (NY) and University of Western England. She has appeared on the MediaBrief podcast (https://mediabrief.com/podcast-sandra-stahl-jacobstahl-new-york/) and been a keynote speaker at the Spectra Conference sponsored by Reputation Today.