Expert’s Responses: Forging alliances with key stakeholders

	In this edition of In Touch we quiz our experts on the importance of stakeholder alliances from a client perspective. Sharing their insight with us are Kristen Atkinson, account supervisor within the corporate practice of Weber Shandwick Sydney; Eugenia Koh, an account supervisor in Singapore who works on regional clients such as Microsoft and Mastercard; and Manolo Delgado our business development executive from Peru but based in Hong Kong! Kristen Atkinson account supervisor Sydney Manolo Delgado business development executive Hong Kong Eugenia Koh account supervisor Singapore How can clients benefit from forging alliances with government, officials, NGOs, trade bodies, consumers, media, etc? Kristen: As communications professionals we are charged with moving agendas, changing attitudes and expanding the influence of organisations and brands. An arsenal of government, NGO, industry, media and consumer alliances empowers us with different channels of influence to achieve these client goals. In the same vein, clients can draw upon stakeholders for added support, insight, credibility, access and advocacy. Maintaining robust relationships with key stakeholders is critical to an organisation’s survival and success. Manolo: Government officials, NGOs, trade bodies, consumers, media, etc.—in different magnitudes—shape the world that our clients have to live in and, most importantly, succeed. From a PR perspective, forging alliances with key stakeholders is the number one priority for a client, especially in a world where opinion is moulded through a vast and complex array of advocates’ (and badvocates’) interactions. It’s now up to brands to determine the colour palette with which a stakeholder is painting its portrait in the market. Eugenia: In today’s world of cynicism, public and consumer companies need to cultivate stakeholders to help tell their stories. This is not so much a “good-to-have” but more a “must-have”; audiences are increasingly sophisticated so these stakeholders can provide credibility to the messages a company disseminates. Forging alliances with key stakeholder groups such as government, trade bodies, consumers and media will provide the necessary endorsement that is critical to distinguishing a company from its competitors. What are the challenges of mobilising these coalitions? Kristen: Drawing on our own experience in stakeholder management, perhaps the biggest challenge in mobilising coalitions is driving action from sentiment. Talk is cheap and driving stakeholders to actively support, endorse or outright promote client goals relies on the strength of the relationship—aligning interests, but crucially engendering trust and reassurance in your genuine commitment and integrity. An ongoing commitment to maintaining stakeholder relationships in all climates will ensure a steady platform of support in times of need. Manolo: Stakeholders can be reluctant to mobilise when they perceive clients as “the other side”. This is particularly true when dealing with civil society, say in the form of NGOs. To create an advocate from such a pool of stakeholders, solid engagement and transparent information becomes the path to follow; forging long-running trustful relations is a must. Eugenia: Some of these coalitions (such as consumer groups, watchdog media, etc.) are wary of big business, so organisations need to build trust with these stakeholders before being able to mobilise them. Establishing credibility and transparency is key to gaining this trust. These coalitions need to be engaged in a meaningful manner. While looking at cultivating coalitions as advocates, organisations should be sensitive to the nuances of these groups, so as to be able to fine tune messages specifically for them. It is also important to be aware of the agendas of these stakeholders and what organisations can bring to the table when in discussions with them. How can clients create advocates among key stakeholders? Kristen: Authenticity, credibility and transparency are all essential to forming alliances with stakeholders. Critical to building and maintaining mutually beneficial relationships are open, timely and honest streams of communication between stakeholders. Our work in government particularly has taught us that creating advocates from stakeholders and partners hinges on our ability to provide a forum for them to be heard in, an acknowledgement of their own organisational imperatives and a commitment to advancing their position or profile, amongst our own. Manolo: Key stakeholders, as any target audience, are unique; clients need to understand in depth how to approach them. I believe in the power of a tailored story. Storytelling is becoming a major way to create advocates out of supporters. The sensible experience rather than just the simple cognitive understanding of a clients’ attributes makes a world of difference when an advocate has to recommend, promote or even defend a brand. Let us not just provide them with words, let us make them live those words, too. Eugenia: For stakeholders such as government officials, business leaders and influential journalists, one-on-one meetings are important to establish a connection and explain the organisation’s direction and goals as well as its contributions to society. For stakeholders like consumers, consumer programmes such as events and promotions that deliver an excellent consumer experience help cultivate brand loyalty and create advocates.

	Conscientious multinational values quality over quantity

Albert Shu, managing director, Hong Kong

This August, Albert Shu, managing director of Weber Shandwick in Hong Kong, was interviewed by Rachel Sproston for the “CareerTimes”, an online careers information website. During the interview Albert shared his views about the PR industry in Asia today and some of the challenges currently faced by corporations due to the proliferation of media sources.

Here is an excerpt from the interview:

Mr Shu underlines the fact that controlled advertising is no longer the panacea, as people gather information differently nowadays and changes are occurring at an unprecedented rate, effected by the rise of social media.

People have become savvier about advertising strategies and subsequently more critical. In Mr Shu’s eyes, this has resulted in the current situation where advertising is sometimes ignored and seen as mere wallpaper. He says, "Modern advertising is often discounted because readers know you are just talking about yourself." Even the output-centred measurement of third-party endorsements such as news clippings about a particular brand no longer suffices as a clear indicator of brand success.

Companies today need to therefore go beyond the wallpaper and change the mindset of a target audience using an array of integrated initiatives. Although popular in the West, this perception management process is relatively new in Asia. One major hurdle is convincing successful firms that there is a real need for improved communications. "Unless you establish a measurable or tangible return on investment, many companies are reluctant to employ PR professionals," explains Mr Shu.

Please follow this link to read the interview in full

	Corporate responsibility and reputation in times of disaster

Dr Leslie Gaines-Ross, corporate reputation strategist

By Dr Leslie Gaines-Ross, corporate reputation strategist

In today’s global economy, having a strong record of corporate social and environmental responsibility is high on the corporate agenda. The vast majority of CEOs worldwide recognise the importance of building strong and lasting relationships with civil society and understand that society gives them the license to operate and conduct business. In the context of natural disasters and other tragedies, building such relationships through corporate responsibility efforts is at once particularly sensitive, challenging and immensely important.

The influence of corporate responsibility 
Companies’ reputations are increasingly influenced by responsible societal relations—not just financial performance. A McKinsey & Company study revealed that a large majority of the global business community (84%) believes that high returns to investors should be balanced with contributions to the public at large. Weber Shandwick’s own proprietary research, Safeguarding Reputation™ with KRC Research, also found that the vast majority of global business executives (79%) believe that a strong corporate responsibility record hastens reputation recovery post-crisis.

This belief about contributing to the world at large is increasingly translating into corporate practices and priorities. In its 2008 annual survey released in the Financial Times, the Committee Encouraging Corporate Philanthropy (CECP) reported that large US corporations lifted their charitable giving over the past year by 5.6% despite worsening economic conditions and a slowdown in corporate earnings. In an analysis of global Fortune 100 companies’ CEO Letters to Shareholders from 2003 and 2007 conducted by Weber Shandwick’s corporate responsibility and sustainability team Planet 2050, mentions of corporate responsibility increased a hefty 18%. Clearly, CEOs in the second half of this decade are embracing corporate responsibility as a critical driver of business strategy and reputation-building.

In addition to its growing prevalence and significance, the nature of corporate responsibility has evolved. It is no longer just limited to writing a cheque and charitable giving. Company leaders now recognise that corporate responsibility efforts can go beyond just financial contributions to natural disaster victims to include employee volunteer service and in-kind gifts of products and services. Importantly, corporate responsibility should not be a one-time event. Rather, more and more understand that corporate giving should be deeply embedded in a company’s overall corporate business strategy and values—how it treats its employees, how it communicates its identity to stakeholders, how it relates to its local communities, how it works within its industry, and how it takes care of the environment.

The complexities of corporate responsibility during major crises 
When it comes to helping societies that have suffered any natural disaster or tragedy, a company should have clear and consistent policies, and its values should be embedded in those policies. As natural disasters continue to surface, companies should know who to partner with and how to effectively provide relief efforts on a timely basis.

From what I understand, after the recent and profoundly devastating earthquake in China, many foreign companies were among the first to donate to affected areas. As of early June, the US had donated several billion dollars in earthquake relief money and services to China.

Public perception of corporate responsibility efforts has become a complex issue for companies as the combination of traditional and social media allows for the dissemination of hard facts as well as innuendo, rumour and misinformation.

In the case of China’s earthquake and other disasters, one of the challenges facing companies that provide relief to victims is ensuring that delicate balance of who to tell and how much publicity is too much or not enough. Many companies choose not to call public attention to their giving in these difficult situations because they understand that the act of giving is not about themselves but about the people affected. Sometimes news gets out because companies want to let their employees know that they are contributing and not standing still. Often, employees will themselves blog about their company’s good deeds to help those in need. During the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in the US several years ago, many companies were very quiet about their charitable giving.

Regardless of how much publicity is desired or generated, companies—especially when implementing corporate responsibility initiatives in times of natural disaster or tragedy—increasingly understand that their actions can be misinterpreted online and that bloggers and pundits might not have all the facts at their disposal. It is the job of companies therefore to be alert to what is being said about them and rapidly respond to incorrect information or figure out how to communicate directly with bloggers to correct any misunderstandings. This also applies to media coverage of corporate responsibility efforts in all regions of the world.

As the world has become increasingly global and news spreads instantaneously, companies must constantly choose how much information they want to disclose. The best guide for corporate responsibility decision-making lies with a company’s values and heritage.