Deon Binneman on Reputation

Entries from July 2008

Stewart calls on Mosley to quit

July 25, 2008 · Leave a Comment

Ah..Ah..! Finally a senior sports person makes a lasting and thought provoking comment.

BBC SPORT | Motorsport | Formula One | Stewart calls on Mosley to quit

The best is that it is not just Jackie Stewart but Sir Stirling Moss who said this. He said it would be difficult for Mosley to continue in his role.

“He’s done an enormous amount for motor racing around the world, not just Formula One,” the 78-year-old told the BBC. “I can understand how people feel about him, but I like Max. He’s an interesting and amusing person. Sir Stirling Moss reflects on Max Mosley’s tenure as FIA boss “However, I don’t think his position is tenable – he does not hold the stature he held before.”

Interesting isn’t it? If it was one of the FIA’s junior employees who got blamed for acting as a Nazi even if I just wore a ballerina dress…just in a passion play, what would have happened?

Court Martial? Please leave before we push you? Disciplinary hearing and off you go?

It seems as if the Executive market has a short term memory. Just a few years ago after Enron, questions were raised about the role of the CEO in governance.

I mean, does the words CEO mean?

- CEO: Chief Entertainment Officer. Someone that entertains the guests while everyone else do the work?

- Chief Embezzlement Officer? The one who knows every money market definition but cannot spell sustainability?

- Chief Ethics Officer. The one who knows every trick in the book including the local prosecutor you must phone to have the size of your speeding fine reduced.

- Chief Training Officer. The one who unlike Jack Welch, GE are just too busy to attend any training session, never mind show his face. After all an executive should know it all…. then please nail them when they trade in a close period.. they should have known…

Well, I could continue. I could mention leadership qualities, coaching abilities, …..

The point is that an organization’s reputation and that of a current CEO is intertwined. It is sometimes difficult to separate the two. This adds then to the stress levels of a leader. No longer are you separate to what you do.

Trees at the top gets the most wind and pay. Obviously this will add to your stress levels as a CEO…..

Your whole life and other aspects will be scrutinised.

I have in fact a lot of empathy and understanding for Ozzy Osbourne. He has been honest..BLUNLTY so, and no apology. He has messed up and tried to be better. By the way..tonight I phoned the member of a “leading South African metalcore and asked him for his opinion on the matter. This youngster’s words – I do not like Ozzy’s ideas about drugs, but I respect his attempt to be honest….

CEO’s – I hope you are listening?

Mugabe? Moises (Spanish Cyclist implicated  in the Barloworld saga) ? Mosley? Is it it just me or is it all about the MMM”s?

Categories: Corporate Responsibility

THE TOOLS EXIST TO DO DAMAGE

July 24, 2008 · 1 Comment

Fed up with bad service delivery? Shoddy Products? Rude and inattentive staff?

Why despair? Every single morning like any well trained PR practitioner should, I scan the local dailies, only to read about some example by an aggrieved customer. But tonight I have a message to customers and other stakeholders.

The tools exist to do damage. If you are unhappy, use the tools at your disposal. NO! Not your fists! Your intellect!

Mouse  Do you have a mobile? A camera? a Camera phone? Access to the Net? A Mouse?

A Telephone? Friends? A Network?

You have the tools to start an avalanche! Normally I help companies to protect themselves, but sometimes there are just situations that make me think like an activist.

 

I am all for following normal communication channels, decency, protocol and other communication hints, but there is also a time to call FULL STOP!

Most companies profess that they do not like negative publicity, yet do little when you complain. I was shocked tonight when my 26 year old daughter told me about an incident today, when she saw a box of rat poison open on the bottom shelf at a local retailer (a listed one by the way). When she went to report it after she put it on the top shelf, she said to me that she was looked at incredulously and that no-one wrote down the incident or went with her to remove the box.

Obviously I corrected her and asked why she did not do something more when she said : ”Dad, I had to get back to work”‘.

Now this is where it gets interesting. If I was her, I would have taken a photo of this and placed it on my website, blog and Facebook. I would not even have reported it. I would have just written about it.

Could you imagine had she done that! Then she would have gotten some attention. Probably a dispute and an attempt to discredit her. The company responding in normal corporate speak about internal risk management processes …blah..blah…

The lesson from a company and an advisers point of view:

1. Take action. If you are not seen to be taken action, someone will tell someone and a message can spread.

2. Take the customer’s details. Write it down. Investigate. Report and give feedback and implement measures to prevent it from happening again.

3. Nothing is too small. a Small little issue like this could do harm. No? Yes! It can! An investigative journalist can start to dig and show up the organisation’s lack of caring as a pattern and a way of doing things. After all, where there is smoke there is fire, not so?

What really made me very angry about this issue is that a small child could easily put these products in their mouth. Children or Human Life can NEVER be replaced. Human Life is irreplaceable. WE can negotiate salaries or days off , however we cannot negotiate health or safety. FULL STOP.

Nursery school teachers know that by experience. This is not a joke. The particular product can kill a small child.

Yet this same company will write in their Annual Report that they care for people and the environment. Something is clearly wrong. Perception and Reality in this case do not gel. There is no understanding in that organisation about the value of company reputation. They will argue that they are successful.

Fair enough, until it is too late. Reputation Risk can emerge out of the blue and damage any organisation severely. Just ask Barloworld about this year’s Tour de France. However they did not hesitate, they took action. Definitely not the approach of this listed organisation.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/other_sports/cycling/7515524.stm

I am trying to be nice here. As I told Charlene Smith and Denis Beckett, two of South Africa’s foremost journalists today: “I think when I come back (reincarnation), one day, I will come back as an investigative journalist. Reason – I often feel like a preacher using the “Spray and Pray’ method – first I communicate and then hope management will apply the lessons learned.

If only they would! I am also tired after 13 years of consulting trying to be a catalyst, asking and being nice.

Categories: Uncategorized

The Africa launch of the book: "THE A TO Z OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY"

July 24, 2008 · Leave a Comment

I attended a very interesting presentation today called the “Evolution of Corporate Sustainability & Responsibility (CSR)” at KPMG’s Head Office.

The presentation was conducted by Dr Wayne Visser, an international expert on the subject. I found it very thought provoking and it showed that the field is evolving and not evolving. Evolving in that there are a shift in direction, and not evolving in that there is perhaps too much emphasis in many companies on mere compliance with codes and ethics.

As I was sitting there listening to him, I was struck by the notion that this is an ideal opportunity and time for organisations to become leaders and not just be followers. Innovators who set the tone and can show the rest of the world that their reputations are intact and sustainable.

Innovators who implement lasting structural and social changes in the dimensions in which they operate.

He also showed us an outline of the subjects that is covered in the book “THE A TO Z OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY”. With almost 400 definitions and terms and contributions from over a hundred of the world’s leading thinkers, opinion formers, academics and business people, this book looks like it will become one of the seminal works on the subject. The book is published by Wiley with the ISBN number: 978-0-470-05710-0.

This book will need to be on every Reputation Manager, Stakeholder practitioner and Sustainability, Health, Safety & Environment manager’s bookshelf and I will be sure that you will be referring to it time and time again.

From a Communications point of view, it is absolutely vital to ensure that you and your target audience are on the same wavelength, when it comes to terms and definitions. Definitions sets boundaries, removes obstacles and ensures ‘’sharing of meaning”’.

If we can think alike about issues such as sustainability, it will go a long way to ensuring lasting changes that will impact on global warming and environmental issues.

Categories: Corporate Responsibility · Issues Management · Reputation · Stakeholder Management · reputation risk

Powerlines Number 80

July 14, 2008 · Leave a Comment

Powerlines Number 80, my newsletter on Strategic Reputation is now available for your reading pleasure.

It contains articles on the link between Environmental Risk and Reputation, Scandals can damage Reputation, The Power of Social Media – Some Valuable Resources as well as the Danger of Information Drift.

I have also included my latest Public Training Seminar schedule to enable you to plan well in advance when you want to empower yourself with some new knowledge.

powerlines-80-combined-version

Categories: Reputation
Tagged:

The 21st-Century MBA

July 11, 2008 · Leave a Comment

I just read a very thought-provoking article :  The 21st Century MBA – http://www.strategy-business.com/press/article/08209?pg=3

According to this article my Stakeholder Reputation training seminar is not too far off with the prevalent thinking.

” For the MBA program at Washington State University (WSU), “Stakeholder-Focused Leadership for Sustained Business Success,” launched in the fall of 2007, the curriculum’s designers spent three years talking with alumni, business leaders, students, and faculty to gather data, test hypotheses, and evaluate their progress.

Unlike Yale, the school has preserved most of its traditional MBA courses, but has revised each course syllabus to incorporate the views of an organization’s stakeholders and to build on the idea that the core of any firm’s purpose is long-term sustainability, which the school describes as “the process of balancing stakeholder expectations with the strategic plan to achieve the optimal resource mix for long-run performance.”

WSU faculty determined that any effort to integrate a stakeholder orientation into business practice required a rigorous, relevant, and responsible methodology for managing the inevitable trade-off decisions that arise once a company moves beyond the single goal of shareholder value maximization.

They developed stakeholder-focused learning objectives for each of the required courses in the WSU curriculum. These objectives include identifying an organization’s resource needs and the stakeholders who supply or control those resources; the organization’s potential impacts on those stakeholders; and, most importantly, a model for understanding how the organization’s strategy would influence stakeholder relationships and, thus, resource availability.

In every course, students talk explicitly about the ways in which a corporate strategy can succeed in the marketplace and still satisfy the needs of a variety of critical people, including investors, employees, and customers, precisely because it recognizes these groups as resources.

This last sentence I do address in my seminars by using the Clarkson Universal Stakeholder principles. These principles were developed over a 12 year period at 4 multi-national future search type conferences.

Reading this article again just emphasised that I am in touch with latest thinking.

Cool!

Categories: Learning & Development · Stakeholder Management

Workplace misunderstandings cost billions

July 11, 2008 · Leave a Comment

A Recent article on the website Management Issues   – Workplace misunderstandings cost billions seems to be spot on when you take a look at the recent SABC and Landbank debacles that are making headline news in South Africa.

A study by employee assessment firm Cognisco has argued that while organisations are often aware of the costs of misunderstanding, just one in three ever takes any action to close the gap.  Apparently misunderstandings between workers and managers cost firms $37bn a year, yet few firms trouble to do anything about it.

It defines such misunderstandings as actions taken by employees who have misunderstood or misinterpreted (or were misinformed about or lack confidence in their understanding) of company policies, business processes, job function or a combination of the three.

And by ignoring the issue firms put themselves at risk for compliance, public safety and legal problems, it added. The primary cost of such misunderstandings was unplanned downtime, followed by poor procurement or buying and, in the most serious cases, the case of making settlements to industrial tribunals.

In the case of the SABC the Board and the suspended CEO have been in and out of court challenging one another. In the case of the Landbank, the ex-CEO is now involved in a spat with the number one stakeholder – Government.

Both cases seem to indicate lack of understanding of governance principles and independent management.

This got me thinking. How do we avoid misunderstandings in the workplace?

Here is what I believe is absolutely essential strategies and tools to use to reduce workplace misunderstandings.

1. Employee Orientation

What do you call thus process in your organization? Induction or Orientation? Is orientation of a new employee a structured or a laissez-faire process?

It is absolutely essential that a new employee undergoes proper induction. Many studies point to the fact that the first 30 days in an employee’s career with an organization, is the most important time. It is the time that work habits and attitudes are formed.

It is quite interesting to take a look at how military forces around the globe treat this period. They do not call it orientation or induction. They call it indoctrination, which is a totally different process altogether. They do not leave it to chance.

2. Policies and Procedures

Having well documented policies and procedures in place, that has been effectively communicated to all employees are vital.

3. Leadership Training & Development interventions

Training managers and executives in governance and other leadership subjects is an absolute must. Yet many senior managers are appointed, it is immediately assumed that because they have MBA’s and past experience that it is not necessary for them to be exposed to internal training interventions.

4. Understanding the importance of Individual and Organisational Reputation

Why would Warren Buffet say to managers:”If you lose money I will understand, but if you damage our good name I will become ruthless!”. He understands and values his own and company reputation.

As long as executives do not understand the nature and value of their own and organisational reputation, they will not manage that asset appropriately.

5. Understanding Labour Relations

Understanding the legal procedures when it comes to workplace dealings is not sufficient. Many managers believe that they can manage employee stakeholder processes only through legal action. Research shows that this is not enough.

6. Effective Communication

Executives like any other staff member needs education & training in intrapersonal, interpersonal and organizational communication skills.

Workplace misunderstandings such as the SABC and Landbank examples impact on organisational reputation and do not communicate a positive message about the organisation’s ability to build relationships.

After all, who wants to work for an organisation at WAR with itself!

Categories: Corporate Communications · Learning & Development · Reputation · Stakeholder Management · reputation risk

630 Firms kicked off the Global Compact list

July 8, 2008 · Leave a Comment

I see that there are two South African companies named and shamed on the list of companies kicked off the Global Compact list.

What the reasons are for Bell Products and PG Group to be on the list I do not know, but apparently firms that sign up to industry-wide CSR initiatives only to fail to deliver on their commitments have been given a wake-up call after the UN named and shamed the 630 companies it has now kicked out of its Global Compact scheme.

Businesses signing up to the scheme are required to adhere to 10 principles governing corporate behaviour and commit to adopting best practices on human rights, the workplace, the environment and anti-corruption. In return, they are allowed to publicise themselves as a member of the global compact, access UN development resources and share best practices with other signatories to the initiative.

To ensure the “accountability and credibility” of the scheme, firms have two years from joining to issue a “communication” reporting on the progress they are making toward delivering on CSR best practices. Following this first submission, they are then required to issue communications on an annual basis.

Earlier this year, the UN Global Compact Office announced that 394 companies had been removed from the list of participants for failing to communicate their progress and last week an additional 236 firms had been delisted – taking to 630 the number of companies excluded from the scheme.

The list of firms removed from the scheme features a wide range of companies, including Groupe Fiat France and the subsidiaries and affiliates of a number of high-profile multinationals, such as Ernst & Young, Brazil, Barclays Bank of Ghana Ltd, L’Oreal Argentina SA, and Mitsubishi Motors Cebu Corporation.

The UN also revealed that a further 317 companies are currently regarded as “inactive” by the UN and are at risk of being delisted, having missed one deadline for issuing a communication on their progress.

Georg Kell, executive director of the UN Global Compact Office, said the delisting of firms from the initiative was “regrettable”, but argued that it was essential that firms adhere to their CSR commitments. “This helps protect the integrity of the initiative as a whole, while also protecting the engagement of seriously committed companies,” he added.

The UN also insisted that despite the clearout of firms that had failed to adhere to the criteria set out by the initiative, the Global Compact was continuing to expand. It said that during the first six months of the year 701 new firms signed up to the Compact, increasing the total number of business participants to 4,619, and the number of all participants, which includes non-business stakeholders, to 5,982.

From a Reputation management perspective, the issue of alignment is always cardinal. Behavior and action must align to what is written and promised.

It would be interesting to receive comment as to their reasons.

Categories: Corporate Communications · Reputation · reputation risk

A Clean Keyboard – A Sign of a Sick Mind?

July 6, 2008 · Leave a Comment

The picture above first appeared on the website: http://www.geekarmy.com/geeks/Nasty-Keyboard.html

What does your desk look like? Your keyboard?

Is your desk a filing cabinet, a trophy case or a museum?

Did you know that your desk is not just a worktool, but also a reflection of your work habits?

A clean desk falls into a category of Health & Safety called Housekeeping.

Housekeeping is more than just sweeping the floor and wiping dust off a desk, machines and equipment. Cleanliness is only a part of housekeeping. The most critical and most overlooked part of housekeeping is ORDER. A work area is in order when there are no unnecessary objects in the area and when all necessary items are in their proper places.

A workplace is not considered to be in order simply because “there is a place for everything and everything is in its place.”

Do you use your desk area for storage? Do you keep supplies in the area because “they’ll be needed one of these days?” If there is one item in an area that is unnecessary or not in its proper place, then you do not have order. ( Just examine the average offices ).

Order is maintained, not achieved. You cannot put an area in order and then forget about it. A daily conscious effort by everyone working in the area is necessary to maintain order. Order also must be obtained throughout the day. If you wait until the end of the day and then place everything in order, what good did it do you during the day? Disorder wastes time, energy and materials.

Categories: Consulting · Safety

10 of the Deadliest Diseases

July 5, 2008 · Leave a Comment

I just visited a website that scared the daylights out of me.

The 10 Deadliest Diseases

It certainly makes me shudder and think of whether our authorities are really ready to deal with a pandemic and some of these.

And we want to study the water on Mars. What diseases and bacteria do that water hold?

Categories: Crisis Management · Safety

Are meetings really a waste of time?

July 4, 2008 · Leave a Comment

Just saw a quote by John Kenneth Galbraith that “Meetings are indispensable when you don’t want to do anything.”

Are they really that wasteful?

There is often a lot of humour thrown around the issue of meetings. Especially words such as ” It is unfair to compare a Business meeting with a funeral. Funerals have a definite purpose” or ” a meeting is a place where they take minutes and waste hours”.

Research shows that many staff meetings are nothing but boring report back sessions. For the other attendees the meeting is boring, because they are already familiar with the topic or it simply doesn’t involve their work.

The problem with most meetings is that they are seldom assessed in terms of accomplishments other than the money expended in terms of time consumed. Sometimes there may be a tendency to meet on a regular basis as opposed to “as needed” basis.

The question that needs to be asked is how much more effective meetings in the company can be if chairmen and attendees are trained in how to use the medium as it needs to be used. For instance how many Chairmen of meetings know what to do, know how to keep their meetings effective? How many secretaries can take appropriate minutes?

Who trains inexperienced managers to make the most of meetings? Who trains secretaries in minute taking? Given the experience of most people at meetings, these types of gatherings are ready for an overhaul.

Meetings that are effective and does not waste unnecessary time. In the Wall Street Journal a few years back, an article commented that US managers would save 80% of the time they invest in meetings if they would do two things right: have an agenda, and start on time/end on time.

Any training intervention dealing with meeting management training needs to emphasise the following:

  1. The purpose of holding a meeting. Questions such as the following should be asked:Do you need to hold the meeting? Is the meeting schedule appropriate? Every meeting must have a purpose. If the purpose is to share information as opposed to discuss, make a decision, ask questions, reach consensus, and so on, the meeting was unnecessary. The info could have been shared without taking attendees time.
  2. The need for having a desired outcome of the meeting before the meeting so that the meeting can be steered toward the outcome. Outcomes, as an example, are decisions; determine next steps in a project, the evaluation of a current work system and so on.
  3. When to hold a meeting. This includes meeting schedules and agenda preparation – and will include frequency and duration, sample meeting agenda and minute template forms.
  4. The purpose of minutes. Note taking should be brief and emphasize decisions reached, and actions committed to. Unless it is a legal or company requirement I prefer handwritten minutes that are photocopied and distributed on the spot. This reduces organizational resources invested in typing, rewriting, and polishing.
  5. The roles, responsibilities and authority of:· The Chairperson, Committee members, Managers and attendees
  6. Skills needed by the Chairperson – including how to discern between task and interpersonal issues.
  7. Specific tips on how to make meetings work including tips on how to plan and conduct meetings to maximise participation and achieve desired outcomes, organise, and conduct productive meetings.

Here are some tips to prevent meeting mismanagement in your sphere of influence:

For traditional meetings (which are usually discussions), ask the following:

1. What is the purpose of the meeting? If there is no purpose, then cancel the meeting.

2. Is there always an agenda? If not, then don’t attend the meeting.

3. If the meeting is only to disseminate information, then send a memo and cancel the meeting.

4. Eliminate general business from all meeting agendas – if it is not on the agenda then it is not discussed.

Another useful tool is to cost the meetings i.e. work out the cost of running each meeting, wages, on-costs, venue, catering, relief staff, etc. You’ll probably find that it is quite high. Then ask what return you could get on that money if you invested it. The point is that you would expect a return on your investment if it was cash, so expect a return on your investment from every meeting. In other words, there has to be a tangible output. That’s why facilitators are useful for some meetings – to keep everyone focused on producing an output.

For non-traditional meetings (which encourage dialogues):

1. Use the team briefing approach – this greatly facilitates the purpose of meetings.

2. Hold stand-up meetings on the shop-floor and even in administration areas – no chairs.

3. Hold meetings directly before lunch – the participants become very efficient then.

4. Daily/weekly review meetings should not last more than 15 minutes.

5. Make meeting sizes between 5 and 7 members – greatly enhances productivity.

6. Establish group “norms” for each meeting group, otherwise “groupthink” can occur.

Some other tips:

- Start on time

- Stay on track

- Make sure to accomplish something. There is nothing worse than attending a meeting where nothing was decided or accomplished.

- Don’t beat a dead horse. The worse thing to do is discuss the same topic for 15-20 minutes and not come up with a solution if a solution is needed.

- If certain topics go over then shorten the less important topics to help stay on track.

- Try to make sure everyone has a chance to speak if they want.

- Always finish on time or early. People love it if meetings end early.

 

What about the Web 2.0 and meetings? Perhaps you can use Windows Live Messenger (Instant Messenger) instead of calling an unnecessary meeting.

What technologies do you use to alleviate your meeting load? Please let me know!

Categories: Consulting · Corporate Communications · Learning & Development · Stakeholder Management