Good news for communications executives: A study released by Weber Shandwick, in conjunction with Spencer Stuart and KRC Research, reveals a positive correlation between a
company's corporate communications organization and its ranking on Fortune's "World Most Admired Companies" list. Specifically, the study shows that chief communications
officers (CCOs)--or the executives who lead companies' corporate communications departments--are integral to positively impacting a company's reputation.
PR professionals knew this all along, of course, but this study provides hard evidence that the corporate communications function is an important ally to the CEO and the
leadership team.
According to Leslie Gaines-Ross, chief reputation strategist at Weber Shandwick, "Our research identifies how the corporate communications function can be a critical force in
driving a company's reputation in good times and bad. With the right organizational structure and partnership at the top, the best CCOs can significantly contribute to building
shareholder value and corporate reputation."
The shift of communicators from tacticians to strategists is quantified by the following findings:
-
CCOs' responsibilities will increasingly shift from tactical to strategic. While CCOs are carving out their role as strategic partners at the highest levels of
business, they view work today as predominately tactical (58% tactical, 42% strategic). However, respondents suggest that this imbalance will shift as the tools used to perform
their jobs (including social media) become more important.
-
CCOs hold prominent positions at the world's largest companies. Nearly one-half surveyed report directly to the chief executive officer (48%) and are visible to their
boards (had a median seven interactions with their board during the past year).
-
CCOs and CMOs are friends and rivals. CCOs' dynamic relationship with chief marketing officers (CMOs)--often a main rival and ally--reflects the growing influence of
communications in today's marketing mix. [For more on the PR-marketing rivalry, see pages 1, 7.]
-
Measurement of CCO effectiveness is predominately qualitative. The vast majority of those surveyed report being measured on qualitative measures such as "positive" media
coverage (75%) and CEOs' "gut" feel (73%). They are least likely to be measured by quantitative metrics such as the number of media mentions (35%) and ability to control costs
(32%).
|
HOW CCOs IN MOST ADMIRED COMPANIES DIFFER FROM CCOs IN CONTENDER COMPANIES |
||
|---|---|---|
| CCOs in Most Admired Companies Are MORE
Likely than CCOs in Contender Companies to: |
Most Admired Companies | Contender Companies |
| Have longer tenures |
4 years, 10 months
|
3 years, 5 months
|
| Have prior PR agency experience |
42%
|
32%
|
| Report to CEOs |
53%
|
33%
|
| Have no interdepartmental rivals |
25%
|
9%
|
| Identify reputation management as top priority
in 2008 |
34%
|
21%
|
| Report that future CCO success depends on
global ?expertise |
52%
|
41%
|
| CCOs in Most Admired Companies Are LESS
Likely than CCOs in Contender Companies to: |
||
| Rate talent shortage as a significant challenge |
35%
|
47%
|
| Give themselves six months or less to prove
their worth when a new CEO arrives |
73%
|
85%
|
|
Based on Fortune's 2006 Most Admired Survey (March 19, 2007). In general, Most Admired Companies are the most highly ranked companies in an industry on overall reputation. Contender Companies are ranked in the industry's bottom half. |
||