Reputation building requires relevance – sometimes that relevance comes from an event in the news, and sometimes it is created and crafted by the choices, statements and actions of individuals. History is filled with examples of reputations ruined in a single action or in a brief news cycle, and 2011 was no different.  (Watch for that blog soon). 

But winning the reputation battle…that is another story altogether.  Here’s my list of reputation winners of 2011 – who would you add?

• NYC as a tech hub – the success of FourSquare, Twitter’s NY office and Facebook’s plan to come to NY in 2012 have put NYC back on the map as a legitimate technology center.
• Tablet Computing – sure, Apple still dominates the category – but the holiday success and popularity of the Kindle Fire and Samsung’s Galaxy Tab have taken Tablets from a product (the iPad) to a category.
• Populism and mass protest – three letters – OWS.  But this wasn’t the only movement that captured attention this year – think about the protests over Russia’s elections, the Arab Spring or even India’s anti-corruption movement. 
• The British Monarchy – there is nothing like a royal wedding to make an out of date institution like the monarchy relevant again.  Will and Kate have captured the hearts of the public in a way we haven’t seen since Princess Diana.
• Social Media – no longer the wild, wild, west – social media’s acceptance in the mainstream world and in the board room makes it a big winner of 2011.
• NCAA Basketball – scandals in college football and an NBA lockout made college basketball the darling of winter sports – where the love of the game rules the day. 
• Steve Jobs – The untimely passing of Steve Jobs, and the insight into the long range plans he left behind for Apple has taken an iconic leader of our time and made him even larger and more iconic than when we was living. 
• Google’s Sergy Brin – taking back the reigns of Google and tackling tough issues like China while restoring Google’s focus on the ideas that work is helping Google get its mojo back.  Let’s watch Google+ in 2012.
• GM, Ford and the American Automotive industry – Once the industry America loved to hate, complete with CEOs taking private jets to Washington to ask for a bailout, the American Automotive industry is on the rise, fueled by bold leadership by CEOs like Dan Akerson, who dares to say out loud what many just think, or Alan Mulalley, who arguably led the industry’s reputation turnaround.
• Lady Gaga – once known simply for her eccentricity (meat dress, anyone?), Lady Gaga has emerged as a leading equality advocate – for LGBT issues and for anti-bullying in general.

cwinters General Corporate Arab Spring, Ford, GM, Google, Lady Gaga, OWS, Social Media, Steve Jobs

Not too long ago, the use of social media by corporations was considered a novelty. Visionaries such as Morgan Johnston at JetBlue and Frank Eliason, then of Comcast, were among the few who responded to customers online early on, and customers were pleasantly surprised to get a response. (Disclosure: JetBlue is an MWW Group client.)

Today, any company that doesn’t actively monitor and engage with consumers online is seen as a dinosaur that doesn’t care about its customers. But social media pioneers know that while this basic “blocking and tackling” of customer engagement is now essential, it’s no longer enough.

To build trust in this new world, companies must understand the new challenges they’ll face:

• An empowered public – Craigslist founder Craig Newmark has called writing online reviews a patriotic duty. New technologies and social media are catalyzing a great power shift in society from large institutions to individuals. The same technology that enabled citizens in the Middle East to organize and overthrow their governments are allowing consumers to band together and speak out against corporate practices or products they don’t like. As David Kirkpatrick recently wrote in a great article in Forbes, “We have entered the age of empowered individuals, who use potent new technologies and harness social media to organize themselves.”  Unhappy customers, who once would tell a handful of friends and family members about their bad experiences are now able to broadcast to the world as part of a permanent online record.
• A cynical public – Thanks to the financial crisis, a growing skepticism of the media, corporate and political scandals, trust in large organizations, from governments to corporations, is at an all-time low.
• Less control of brand – Until a few years ago, companies owned their message and their brand. Today, brands still spend billions of dollars pushing out carefully packaged, focus-tested messaging points. But customers no longer believe or put much stock in these messages. A recent Nielsen study found that 76% of consumers believe recommendations from friends are the most trusted form of advertisement, and increasingly, they’re sharing with their friends using social media.

So what can your company do to be successful in the social media space?

Unless you’re about to come out with the next iPhone model, customers on social media likely aren’t interested in your canned marketing messages. If you think of social media as another way to advertise, you’ll only be tuned out.

To be relevant and part of the social conversation, your messaging must reflect and reinforce that social media is all about community – and that you are an essential, beneficial member of that community. Old-style corporate philanthropy – writing six-figure checks without any engagement – is seen as buying good will (or political favors) rather than building it. Tellingly, many leaders of the biggest web and social media sites – Craig Newmark of Craigslist, Chris Hughes of Facebook, Ev Williams and Biz Stone of Twitter, Pierre Omdiyar of eBay – are now focusing on efforts that benefit the community.

Here are a few ways your company can do this and generate social media buzz:

• Show how your daily operations are important to society.  As one example, with the continued employment crisis, any company that is currently expanding its workforce should actively use social media to recruit candidates.  Of course doing so will not only help show the important role you’re playing in the community by creating jobs but will also help find top candidates.
• Adapt your business to benefit society – but be genuine. Though Wal-Mart has received much criticism in recent years, many environmentalists recognize the enormous positive impact of the retailer’s move to stop selling incandescent light bulbs and switch to more environmentally-friendly packaging for their products.
• Use your company’s unique skills and resources to help. In the immediate aftermath of the earthquake in Haiti, Google’s scientists worked with the State Department to build a “People Finder” database. The company also released Google Earth satellite images to help rescue workers. Similarly, my former employer AT&T as well as Verizon and other U.S. phone companies made all calls to/from Haiti free in the weeks following the earthquake.  Two other examples just announced at the Clinton Global Initiative that are sparking positive online conversations are Pepsi’s public-private partnership in Ethiopia to increase chickpea production, and Microsoft’s “Shape the Future” 3 year initiative to bring computer hardware, software and internet service to 1 million US students from low-income families.
• Find ways to help your community. While a number of companies encourage employees to volunteer, more companies can do well by developing programs that help their customers volunteer and reward them for doing so.
• Don’t think you’re the exception to the rule. As management guru Gary Hamel said in the Kirkpatrick Forbes article, “I don’t think it’s crazy to ask if your CEO is the next Mubarak…. The elites—or managers in companies—no longer control the conversation.”

Your company can be a part of the social business revolution – or get left behind.

About the Author

Richard Robbins, MWW Group Vice President, Senior Digital Strategist, provides senior-level expertise on using digital and social media as an integral part of any successful communications program. He can be reached at rrobbins@mww.com or @rich1.

admin Social Media Craiglist, Employee Engagement, JetBlue, Pepsi, Social Media, Walmart

Now that MWW Group is independent again, it gives us the opportunity to once again become entirely independent in our thought. To serve only one master….our clients. And to rediscover and re-connect with the truly provocative edge that made us successful to begin with. While January often brings the regroup, reset and refresh conversations to an organization, the new year for MWW Group is NEW with a capital N. E. W.

In this self reflection, and analysis of the landscape in which we operate, it is always refreshing, (and OK, maybe a little bit reassuring) to uncover other sources who agree with the counsel you’ve been giving. Take this blog about the Four Keys to Influence, which was written with a social media spin. It tracks with what we’ve been saying at MWW Group long before we Tweeted, GroupOned or otherwise became digitally engaged.

One of the big questions clients always ask is how to be more influential with their key audiences…whether an employee communications program; a new product launch; a reputation management program or a public affairs initiative…it all boils down to influence. Or does it?

The funny thing about influence is that it really all boils down to relevance….what does it mean to me…and why should I care? Because the other elements of influence – trustworthiness, authenticity, authority, connection…are all predicated on relevance.

The world is a crowded, chaotic, noisy place. More and more, we have the ability curate our own content, customize our own stories and filter out what is not important to us. This is, after all, the TiVO generation. Relevance is the point of entry – without it, you aren’t just lacking influence…you are invisible.

I’d love your thoughts on what it takes for a company or a brand to be relevant to you…

cwinters General Corporate GroupOn, Influence, Relevance, Social Media, TiVO, Twitter

A colleague sent me this piece from Mashable about their media predictions for 2011. Here is a shocker…they say social media is going to take over the world. I know a few people who are predicting the end of traditional media – that in the near future all media will be social media. I suppose that depends on your definition of social. If you are talking about new, social media-based methods of delivery of content from the big names in news – The New York Times, 60 Minutes or Time Magazine delivered via a mobile app, perused online and featuring the ability to interact via comments and sharing content with friends, I agree. But the concept that traditional, professional journalists will be entirely replaced by citizen journalists, I am not sure I am buying it.

Mashable takes their predictions in this direction with the suggestion that 2011 will spell the end of the foreign correspondent. They cite a Reuters Institute Study about the significance of local citizenry, and predict a reliance on stringers and social content, rather than the foreign correspondent based in countries, as the way we will learn about world news. One of my clearest memories upon entering this business is tuning in to Peter Jennings’ coverage of the first Gulf War on the nightly news…he is my generation’s Walter Cronkite….and it is hard to believe that human nature has changed so much that when major world events occur, we won’t want a familiar face or voice telling that story…whether on our TV, satellite radio or an iPad.

Time will tell.

cwinters General Corporate Foreign Correspondent, iPad, Mashable, Social Media

One of our latest posts focused on the resurrection, both football and reputation-wise, of Michael Vick, the quarterback of the Philadelphia Eagles. In keeping with a sports theme, this past week saw some heated debate about reputation on the baseball diamond and specifically the vote for Felix Hernandez as the American League Cy Young Award winner.

Despite a mediocre 13-12 win-loss record, albeit for the lowly Seattle Mariners in the less classy American League West, Hernandez bested CC Sabathia of the New York Yankees who had 21 wins and David Price of the Tampa Bay Rays with a 19-6 record both of whom do battle in the powerhouse American League East. It used to be that wins and/or strikeouts made a pitcher’s reputation and secured the prestigious and lucrative Cy Young Award but not anymore.

Commentators pointed to how Mr. Hernandez fared despite the low run production of the Mariners, they pointed to his quality starts, and even his impressive record against the strong American League East teams. ESPN, the masters of useless sports statistics, speculated about whether a pitcher with a losing record could win the Cy Young and trotted out something called Wins Above Replacement to analyze deserving pitchers of the past with so-so records.

As new math is rewriting what makes reputations in sports, advanced algorithms are also having an impact on who’s hot and who’s not in the world of social media. This past week at the Web 2.0 Summit, Twitter co-founder Evan Williams was asked how the company determines what users to suggest for the “who to follow” section. Williams stated that Twitter uses a reputation score that the company’s ‘science and math people’ have come up with that delves into a user’s Tweeting activities and interactions. While Williams did not go into specifics of the math involved, he did hint that in time, the reputational number crunching methodology could be made public.

Perhaps sports and social media could be of help in evolving the reputational analytics of corporations and executives. Can corporate social responsibility, sustainability and employee satisfaction come to the fore such as quality starts and wins above replacement have in baseball? Will quarterly earnings and share price go the way of wins? And can Twitter’s ‘science and math’ guys put together an algorithm for determining what companies and corporate leaders to follow?

rtauberman General Corporate Cy Young, Evan Williams, Felix Hernandez, MLB, Social Media, Twitter

Arizona’s recent approval of a draconian new immigration law has unleashed a tsunami of condemnation from President Obama; a long bipartisan list of legislators across the country; Hispanic, civil rights and public interest groups; the Government of Mexico; and late night talk shows among others, along with, as expected, an energized and often entertaining debate in the blogosphere. Arizona has courted such controversy before with its decision for many years not to recognize Martin Luther King Day. That legislative gambit led to a number of boycotts and the cancellation of a host of convention and tourist visits to the state.

While Arizona’s reputation is taking another hit (and there is likely a blog post or several on that topic), the age of social media has created a whole new set of issues for companies based in Arizona or even trading on the Arizona name. Amid the usual and widespread calls for boycotts of Arizona, there is a groundswell of chatter online (being breathlessly covered by the media) concerning the boycotting of Arizona-based companies and their products. U-Haul, Best Western and Cold Stone Creamery are among the Arizona’s corporate citizens being held out for possible retribution, but the antipathy is extending to companies that even have Arizona in their name.

AriZona Beverages, the makers of AriZona Iced Tea has come under attack even though the company was founded and is headquartered in New York. See Helen Kennedy’s piece in the Daily News and Robert Mackey’s Lede Blog in the New York Times.

As both pieces point out, the assault on AriZona Iced Tea appears to have started on the twitter feeds of Travis Nichols, a Chicagoan who posted a tweet suggesting a boycott because “it is the drink of fascists”. Whether comedic or not, Mr. Travis’ tweet has become a media hit and led AriZona Beverages to post a letter on its website assuring consumers that its only ties to Arizona were in its name and touting its bona fides as a family-run American company.

The Company should be applauded for reacting quickly to the online and media onslaught and trying to set the public record straight (its actual messages can be discussed at a later date). In this era of citizen journalism, where blogs and Twitter feeds make and take the place of news, companies are often confused about how and when to react, who to take seriously and how to enter a social media debate. Unfortunately, there are no clear rules of the online road. The efficacy and crafting of the appropriate response must be done on a case by case basis in consultation with a company’s business leaders, communications professionals and outside advisors. AriZona jumped in quickly to try to protect its brand and reputation. We will wait and see how other companies facing these calls for boycotts react.

Richard Tauberman can be reached at rtauberman@mww.com.

rtauberman Crisis Communications, General Corporate, Social Media Arizona, citizen journalism, Social Media

Companies often find themselves in a dilemma that goes something like this: “I want to connect with people through social media but I’m worried about what I can’t control. People may say bad things about us.” So?

Companies that do the right thing have an understanding of their issues and risks and know in their hearts that they are taking appropriate steps to be good corporate citizens have nothing to fear. And, in fact, have an opportunity to tell their story through social media.

Take the recent palm oil debacle Nestle faced. It’s not as if Nestle didn’t know about Greenpeace’s concerns. Nestle and others in its space have been dealing with activist concerns for decades. And Nestle, like others in its space, have taken numerous steps and made active commitments to protect the environment in communities in which they do business. But, activist groups exist to push companies harder and Nestle knows that. So rather than get defensive — even belligerent — over Greenpeace’s use of social media to push Nestle, why didn’t Nestle use it as an opportunity to tell the story of their efforts to do good.

True, the dialogue would have continued and the activists would have critiqued but both sides of the story would have been aired and the story would have lived out its “news cycle”. Instead, by taking on the activists in a defensive manner, Nestle missed an opportunity. Nestle wouldn’t have handled a live encounter without arming themselves with their positive actions and positive messages, nor would they have dealt with a reporter without having the balanced story at hand. Social media is no different.

Establishing a social media policy — just like the media policy most companies use — is one way to avoid such situations while also taking advantage of the opportunity for transparent dialogue that is the primary value of social engagement.

Ame Wadler can be reached at awadler@mww.com.

awadler Crisis Communications, General Corporate, Social Media Greenpeace, Nestle, Social Media

Would you spend $250 for a bottle of water? How about $750? How about … well, pick a multiple.

Wondering what a simple bottle of water has to do with reputation? Sometimes, it’s everything. Let me explain.

A friend of mine recently traveled to wine country with his wife and 1-year old son. After a long drive, they checked into a lovely boutique hotel that prides itself on customer service. In fact, this particular hotel pledges to deliver “an exceptional customer experience every time.” They infuse this goal in most of their customer-facing marketing efforts, particularly on their Facebook fan page and their Twitter feed.

As they unpacked in their room, their son had one of those meltdowns that all of us parents can relate to. My friend called the desk and asked if a bottle of water could be sent up so they could prepare some baby formula. Sorry, the desk clerk told them. Room service was closed for the evening and there was no way to accommodate the request.

My friend quickly sent out a tweet about his experience to the several hundred people on his Twitter account. After he returned home, he posted a customer review on the popular social media site, Yelp!

So the hotel had a seemingly small misstep over a $1 bottle of water and the incident was chronicled on several social media channels. No big deal, right? After all, this hotel spends thousands of dollars annually on advertising, which will be much more powerful than a post on Twitter and Facebook. Unfortunately, the opposite is true; multiple consumer surveys show that nearly 80 percent of consumers trust peer recommendations, and less than 15 percent trust advertising.

So how much did that bottle of water cost? My friend won’t be returning, which means they lose several future nights of room and restaurant revenue. And an unflattering review on a travel referral site like Yelp! likely will drive others away, meaning more lost revenue. So it’s not hard to imagine that a $1 bottle of water actually cost this hotel $1,000 or more.

In this era of social media and citizen journalists, your reputation balances on a razor’s edge. Simple decisions and rote responses can have a lasting impact on your business. Now more than ever, the devil is in the details and businesses, from the CEO down to the night desk clerk, have to sweat the small stuff.

Bob Silver can be reached at bsilver@mww.com. Follow him on Twitter @Bob_Silver.

bsilver General Corporate citizen journalists, reputation, Social Media, trust, Yelp!

Someone was in a Walmart in Louisiana, and took a picture of a black and white Barbie, the exact same Barbie save for skin tone, sitting side by side on the shelf. The black Barbie was cheaper than the white Barbie.

The photo found its way to a humor website, then to a Latino website, and ultimately, into an ABC News report among others, then cycled back into the blogosphere.

I don’t believe for a second there was a sinister motivation on Walmart’s part. ABC had comment from experts that feel the same. I, like them, think it was just a stupid mistake. Perhaps “smart business,” based on very business-y calculations – inventory, demand, pricing. But not smart business – boneheaded, really – in that it ignored what a customer might think, how it might be perceived, and the challenges facing Walmart’s reputation in general.

Two things are salient here.

One is that social media and mainstream news are increasingly not separate things. It isn’t breaking news, but a customer with a cell phone camera can imperil your reputation. Have you ever watched the news – be it CNN or MSNBC or Fox – in the middle of the day? It’s dotted with reporting , a term I use loosely here, on what a celebrity said on Twitter or what video is ripping hot on YouTube. We have to consider this and think more critically.

The other is the sometimes yawning gap between intention and perception. That’s where reputation much of the time lives. The spokesperson for Walmart said “Pricing like items differently is a part of inventory management in retailing.” No question, makes sense, perfectly reasonable. But I’m sure they understand why in this particular case that’s not the whole story.

Reputation managers must advocate to their company or their client that we are all communicators now, like it or not, and we need to take our thinking one or two steps beyond our job description. Of course, with 20/20 hindsight, an inventory or pricing manager should have recognized the problem here.

We should try for the foresight.

Mike Sacks can be reached at msacks@mww.com.

msacks Crisis Communications, General Corporate Barbie, Crisis, Social Media, Walmart

It is the time of year again to celebrate with friends and family. It is also the time of year where innumerable communications experts posit bold predictions for 2010 that will likely be wrong but hey, no one will remember by this time next year.

It is in this spirit – often wrong, never in doubt – that I give some of my predictions for the reputation management world, in no particular order:

• A company will experience an explosive social media crisis it was totally ill-equipped to respond to, which will then make mainstream news headlines. Social media experts will deride said company for its incompetence and “not getting it” in a characteristically haughty tone.

• Corporate responsibility will play a bigger role in the way stakeholders think about corporate reputation. We are going to see less and less “green” and more and more focus on holistic sustainability. In fact, the smartest companies won’t use the word “green” at all.

• CEOs will communicate more openly, and more often, with employees, understanding that their support and belief in the mission is critical in what will still be a difficult year. It’s the right thing to do, of course, and will also translate into reputational benefits. Happy (relatively) and appreciated troops bolster strong reputation.

• We are going to see a lot of CEO burn out – lots of CEOs stepping down, no doubt exhausted and frustrated. Some of the transitions to successors will be, communications-wise, well-executed. Most will be bumpy, likely because the outgoing honcho is, well, exhausted and frustrated and might not be as willing to put the best face on things. A big name brand or two will get dinged for a poorly handled transition.

• Real, true measurement will be a differentiator for reputation managers. Those that know how to prove value and ROI beyond “impressions” will be sought after. Marketing budgets will still be tight – those that produce reputational evidence get a bigger slice of the pie.

• People will still hate Goldman Sachs. That’s not a solvable problem in 2010 for GS – that reputational rehab is more like a 2011 or 2012 possibility.

• A major national media outlet will find a successful formula for making money off its online content.

Maybe I’ll circle back to this at the end of next year and see how I did. I think I left them vague enough I can claim prescience somehow.

Happy New Year and thanks for reading Return on Reputation.

Mike Sacks can be reached at msacks@mww.com.

admin General Corporate CEO transitions, Reputation Management, Social Media