《PRovoke Media：2024全球聲譽資產指數報告：教育行業如何做好聲譽管理（英文版）（64頁）.pdf》由會員分享，可在線閱讀，更多相關《PRovoke Media：2024全球聲譽資產指數報告：教育行業如何做好聲譽管理（英文版）（64頁）.pdf（64頁珍藏版）》請在三個皮匠報告上搜索。

1、77.577.477.277.076.976.976.876.776.776.676.576.376.276.275.775.675.675.675.375.275.275.275.175.074.974.874.774.774.373.973Sandpiper Global Reputation Capital Index 2024MANAGING REPUTATION AMID DISRUPTIONInform.Create.Shape.Executive Summary 03Profiles of our Respondents 05Key Findings 06Part One:Rep

2、utation landscape in 2024 10Part Two:Global Reputation Capital Index 22Part Three:How reputational risks and weaknesses are impacting organisations 50Part Four:Investment is increasing 57Part Five:Reputation advice falling short of expectations 59Recommendations 62About Sandpiper 632Executive Summar

3、yIn 2024,Reputation Management is more complex than ever.Organisations are beset by issues and risks,and constantly looking to do more with less in uneven economic circumstances.They are operating in a world that is paradoxically more connected yet deeply divided.Amid this landscape,the organisation

4、al leaders we surveyed globally for our inaugural Sandpiper Global Reputation Capital Index are keenly aware of the importance of reputation,with 98%rating it as important to commercial success.At the same time,however,most believe reputation is becoming harder to manage.The survey data shows this i

5、s largely a result of trending issues,such as the rise of misinformation and disinformation,data privacy and cybersecurity issues,and rising geopolitical tensions(among many others).Perceived importance Considered strong Citizenship91%42%Cyber&Data Security96%49%Leadership&Governance94%45%Corporate&

6、Financial Performance95%56%Products&Services94%49%Employee Experience93%43%3Executive summaryWhen managing these issues,a lack of reputational strength can have real impacts.Nearly three quarters(72%)of leaders globally say reputational weaknesses have negatively impacted their organisations in some

7、 way in the past 12 months,including hindering their ability to do business with customers,suffering financial losses,impacting recruitment and talent retention,slowing crisis recovery,and causing issues with managing government and community stakeholder relationships.At the same time,leaders feel s

8、omewhat disempowered in reputational matters,with only 67%of CEOs and 44%of Corporate Affairs Leaders feeling a high level of responsibility for their organisations reputation.Over half also lack strong access to critical audience and stakeholder insights.In this setting,the Index seeks to benchmark

9、 performance in reputation management to provide a practical and useful assessment of where organisations are excelling and where adjustments are needed.The Index assesses performance based on nine areas of reputation management:Reputation Strategy,ESG&Sustainability Strategy,Crisis&Issues Managemen

10、t,Executive Profiling&Thought Leadership,Media Engagement,AI&Digital Environment,Employee Communications,Financial Communications,and Government&Regulatory Affairs.While over 80%of respondents rated all of these areas of reputation management as important,less than 50%self-rated their own organisati

11、ons as strong in these.This strategy to action gap is a consistent theme observed throughout the study findings.The data for this report was collated from a survey of over 2,700 CEOs,other C-suite Leaders,and Corporate Affairs Leaders working in their global headquarters of their organisations based

12、 across 27 markets in six continents.Based on their responses to 51 separate variables across the nine areas of reputation management studied,and using a 0-100 point scale,we have grouped respondents into four performance-based categories:Trailblazers(12%),Aspirants(54%),Followers(32%),and Beginners

13、(3%).Reputation Strategy and Crisis&Issues Management are the areas of the Index with the highest portion of Trailblazers,with ESG&Sustainability Strategy,Executive Profiling&Thought Leadership,and Media Engagement the lowest.Trailblazers outperform in every area of reputation management.Despite the

14、 number of challenges observed,these appear to be recognised,with more than seven out of 10 leaders saying their organisation plans to increase investment in each area of reputation management over the coming 12 months.The findings allow us to examine performance in each area of reputation managemen

15、t,and to create an overall global picture of reputation management practices and health.We hope the Index can help organisations assess their own capabilities,understand how their performance compares to global and sector peers,and ultimately use it to support decision making around where to invest

16、time and resources.4Profiles of our RespondentsFor our 2024 study,we were able to engage with a wide range of organisational leaders from across the world.This unique access allowed us to fully explore the needs,opportunities,and gaps they see in managing their firms reputations.Australia 119Netherl

17、ands 80Brazil 104Canada 105Philippines 55Mainland China 154Saudi Arabia 100France 127Germany 131South Africa 58Hong Kong 112South Korea 105Spain 83Switzerland 97Italy 111Taiwan 105Japan 102Thailand 51United Arab Emirates 103USA 202Vietnam 52New Zealand 56India 158Singapore 105Indonesia 51Malaysia 57

18、United Kingdom 126Respondent industry Number of respondentsBusiness&Professional Services 243Education 180Energy,Mining,Natural Resources,Utilities 152Financial Services 307Food&Agriculture 119Healthcare&Wellness 148Property,Real Estate&Construction 175Retail,Apparel&Consumer Goods 224IT,Technology&

19、Telecommunications 707Travel&Hospitality 49Transportation 115Industries&Manufacturing 290Organisation annual revenue(USD)33%35%23%10%$50 100m$101m$500m$501m$1b$1b+Number of employees22%37%22%19%100 249250 9991,000 1,4991,500+How big are their companies?What are their roles?What is their annual reven

20、ue?What are their industries?31%32%37%Owner/Proprietor/Founder/CEO Other C-Level RoleChief of/Head of/Director of Comms/Corporate Affairs(or Above)597%believe reputation is important for commercial success.56%feel reputation is becoming more difficult to manage,with 21%saying it is becoming easier.7

21、2%experienced negative business impacts due to reputational weak spots over the past year.90%are concerned about a range of emerging reputational risks:misinformation and disinformation,data privacy and cybersecurity,employee activism,stakeholder and customer activism,DE&I,media consolidation,and ES

22、G scrutiny and greenwashing claims.Fairly even levels of importance are placed across the reputation pillars studied:Reputation Management landscape90%rate all pillars of reputation as important,yet 50%rate their organisations as strong in these,with Corporate&Financial Performance an exception.85%b

23、elieve their headquarters geographic location positively influences their organisations reputation.67%of CEOs globally feel a high level of responsibility for their organisations reputation,yet only 50%of Corporate Affairs Leaders do.While 50%have strong access to stakeholder and audience insights,t

24、hose who do score significantly better in influencing and managing audience and stakeholders expectations.80%believe all of the nine areas of reputation management we studied are important,yet 50%rate their organisation as strong in these.70%plan to increase investment in each reputation management

25、area over the next year.50%feel they receive strong advice across all areas of reputation management.Corporate&Financial PerformanceProducts&ServicesEmployee ExperienceLeadership&GovernanceCyber&Data SecurityCitizenshipKey Findings6Key findingsGlobal Reputation Capital Index Globally,12%are in the t

26、op category of Trailblazers,with the rest categorised as Aspirants(54%),Followers(32%),Beginners(3%).12%Trailblazers54%Aspirants32%Followers3%Beginners The Americas have the highest portion of Trailblazers and the fewest beginners,with Europe having the lowest portion of Trailblazers and highest por

27、tion of Beginners.The top performing sectors globally are Travel&Hospitality,IT,Technology&Telecommunications,and Energy,and the lowest performers are in the Industrial&Manufacturing,Healthcare&Wellness,and Transportation.Reputation Strategy and Crisis&Issues Management are the areas of the Index wi

28、th the highest portion of Trailblazers,with ESG&Sustainability Strategy,Executive Profiling&Thought Leadership,and Media Engagement the lowest.Trailblazers outperform in every category of reputation management,including being 25 points below the global average in negative impacts owing to reputation

29、al weaknesses.Trailblazers(75 to 100 points)have a strong grasp of the function and rate their ability to execute on essential tasks highly.Aspirants(50 to 74 points)score highly but inconsistently,trailing Trailblazers in at least one area of the facet in question.Followers(25 to 49 points)have a m

30、ixed ability to execute in reputation management,performing some tasks well but others poorly.Beginners(0 to 24 points)lack the basic skills and conceptual knowledge for reputation management and rate their ability to execute as low.7Key findingsReputation Strategy50%have a corporate narrative that

31、is clear,differentiated,compelling,effective,accurate,or that is highly aligned with the organisations vision,mission,values or purpose.Just 41%believe key stakeholders and audiences have high awareness and understanding of their corporate narrative and key messages.ESG&Sustainability Strategy50%hav

32、e a sustainability or ESG strategy or targets,and only 13%have a dedicated internal team in this area.Only 29%and 12%respectively have a climate communications strategy and messaging.Crisis&Issues Management67%have a crisis&issues management plan,but only 44%are very confident of using it.Executive

33、Profiling&Thought Leadership95%say thought leadership activities have been effective in helping to build trust.88%believe their organisation has clear thought leadership topics and themes,but only 38%strongly agree that their leaders are recognised as an industry thought leader.Media Engagement69%be

34、lieve they are not engaging with media enough.While 84%say media training is effective,only 46%make it mandatory for all spokespeople.As a result,74%believe the quality of their spokespeople could be improved and 66%say they do not always represent their organisation accurately.66%believe journalist

35、s do not portray their organisations accurately,or treat them fairly at 63%.8Key findingsAI&Digital EnvironmentThe highest-ranking digital reputation activities for organisations are SEO optimisation(53%),social media advertising(45%),and content creation(42%).Only 38%believe they have a strong unde

36、rstanding of how generative AI tools are interacting with and influencing digital content.80%+are experiencing a range of digital reputation issues including low search-rankings,misinformation and disinformation,quality control of AI-generated content,and manipulated media and deepfakes.Employee Com

37、municationsOrganisations are using multiple different channels(11.6 on average)to engage employees,including digital,social,in-person and more.Only 40%say their Communications and Human Resources teams are highly aligned around employee engagement strategies.Only 41%say their employees have a strong

38、 understanding of how their role contributes to the corporate strategy.Financial CommunicationsOnly 47%believe their organisations value is well understood by investors,and 51%say they have been highly effective in communicating financial results.Just 39%are very satisfied with their performance in

39、capital raising.Government&Regulatory AffairsWhile 97%have attempted some form for stakeholder mapping,only 43%have a comprehensive approach.64%believe their policy engagement activity is insufficient.75%say a lack of influence and relationships with stakeholders has negatively impacted their busine

40、ss in the past 24 months.9To provide context for our Global Reputation Capital Index,our research scope also covered the landscape for reputation management more generally.The key findings in this area reveal that while having a strong reputation is universally recognised as important,the operating

41、environment is increasingly complex and fraught with perils,which are having a direct impact on organisations.Reputation recognised as a key driver of bottom-line valueIn an era of increasing demands for transparency,the importance of having a robust reputation has risen up the ranks of corporate ag

42、endas globally,with 98%of leaders saying it is very important or important to their organisations commercial success.Out of the three groups we interviewed,CEOs,other C-Suite Leaders,and Corporate Affairs Leaders,CEOs are the most likely to believe that reputation is very important at 74%,compared w

43、ith 67%for Corporate Affairs Leaders and 69%for other C-Suite Leaders.When comparing geographies and industries,significant differences emerge.Those in large emerging markets led by South Africa(95%),Saudi Arabia(90%),Indonesia(88%),Philippines(87%),India(85%),and Brazil(83%),are most likely to see

44、it as very important to commercial success.Those in typically more mature markets in Europe are less likely to indicate this,including Switzerland(51%),Germany(52%),France(56%),Italy(56%),and Spain(57%).South Korea was a low outlier,with only 45%indicating that reputation was very important to comme

45、rcial success.When looking at industries again,significant differences are seen between sectors.IT,Technology&Telecommunication(75%),Education(74%),and Business&Professional Services have the highest percentage of very important ratings,and the Transportation(55%),Healthcare&Wellness(59%),and Food&A

46、griculture(62%)sectors ranking lowest.Part One:Reputation landscape in 202410Part One:Reputation landscape in 202469%95%90%88%87%75%75%73%61%85%77%76%68%83%79%77%59%73%67%61%71%57%56%52%51%56%45%60%98%100%100%100%100%100%100%100%100%99%99%99%99%98%98%98%98%97%97%97%96%95%95%95%95%94%94%93%rating rep

47、utation as very important and important for commercial successGlobalSouth AfricaSaudi ArabiaIndonesiaPhilippinesUnited Arab EmiratesVietnamUnited KingdomSingaporeIndiaTaiwanUSAMainland ChinaBrazilNew ZealandMalaysiaHong KongCanadaAustraliaJapanThailandSpainItalyGermanySwitzerlandFranceSouth KoreaNet

48、herlandsImportantImportantVery importantVery important11Part One:Reputation landscape in 2024%rating reputation as very important and important for commercial success Very important Important Global69%98%Business&Professional Services73%99%Education74%98%Energy,Mining,Natural Resources,Utilities67%9

49、7%Financial Services71%98%Food&Agriculture62%97%Healthcare&Wellness59%97%Industries&Manufacturing70%98%IT,Technology&Telecommunications75%99%Property,Real Estate&Construction69%93%Retail,Apparel&Consumer Goods64%95%Transportation55%99%Travel&Hospitality61%100%12Part One:Reputation landscape in 2024A

50、 holistic approach to Reputation Management is neededRespondents were asked to allocate a percentage share for six pillars of reputation based on how each contribute to an organisations overall reputation.While Corporate&Financial Performance and Products&Services have the highest rating for their c

51、ontributions to reputation by a reasonable margin,the relatively even apportioning across the other pillars points to the need for a holistic approach to reputation management.Despite Cyber&Data Security ranking as the most important reputation pillar in our reputation research of consumers in 2022,

52、leaders rank it as having the lowest contribution to overall reputation suggesting a potential disconnect.Global average%of pillar contribution to overall reputationCorporate&Financial PerformanceProducts&ServicesEmployee ExperienceLeadership&GovernanceCyber&Data SecurityCitizenship22%21%15%15%14%13

53、%13Part One:Reputation landscape in 2024A sentiment to action gapMultiple areas impact reputation,but our results show leaders prioritising each area differently,and often failing to walk-the-talk when managing reputation.While more than nine out of 10 leaders globally rate all pillars of reputation

54、 as important to commercial success,less than half rate their organisations as strong in these areas,excluding Corporate and Financial Performance,which is still relatively low at 56%rating it as strong.Perhaps as a result of the areas leaders are prioritising,the biggest percentage point gaps betwe

55、en sentiment and strength are seen in the lowest rated pillars of Leadership&Governance,Employee Experience,and Citizenship.This exposes potential risk areas to reputation leaders with their eye off the ball.%globally rating reputation pillar as important vs strong Rate as important Rate as strong P

56、ercentage point gap Corporate and Financial Performance95%56%39%Leadership and Governance94%45%49%Cyber and Data Security95%49%46%Employee Experience93%43%50%Products and Services94%49%45%Citizenship91%42%49%14Part One:Reputation landscape in 2024Geography mattersWith geopolitical issues on the rise

57、 globally,nearly nine out of 10 believe that the location of their organisations headquarters now impacts its reputation.However,these impacts are overwhelmingly viewed as being positive at 88%.Again,large variations exist by market with those working for Singapore and New Zealand-based companies ra

58、ting the positive impact of the geographic location of their headquarters highest at 99%and 98%respectively.Those based in Japan and Mainland China rate this the lowest,at 76%and 75%which is still a significant majority.Does the geographic location of your headquarters have a positive impact on your

59、 reputation?Citizenship Cyber&Data Security Leadership&Governance Corporate&Financial Performance Products&Services Employee Experience Philippines(89%),UAE(85%),Mainland China(85%),Singapore(85%),Saudi Arabia(84%)Philippines(93%),UAE(92%),Indonesia(92%),South Africa(88%),Mainland China(86%)Indonesi

60、a(90%),UAE(89%),Philippines(89%),India(85%),Mainland China(85%)Philippines(95%),UAE(92%),Indonesia(90%),Saudi Arabia(90%),India(89%)Philippines(95%),UAE(91%),Vietnam(88%),India(87%),Singapore(87%)UAE(92%),Philippines(85%),India(84%),Thailand(82%),Indonesia(82%)South Korea(55%),Japan(65%),Australia(6

61、6%),Hong Kong(66%),Germany(67%)Japan(61%),South Korea(67%),Switzerland(71%),Germany(73%),UK(76%)Japan(56%),South Korea(61%),Germany(66%),Italy(69%),France(71%)Japan(63%),South Korea(68%),France(72%),Switzerland(72%),Germany(74%)Japan(55%),South Korea(66%),Netherlands(70%),Australia(71%),Germany(72%)

62、Japan(66%),Italy(67%),Hong Kong(68%),Australia(69%),Germany(69%)Top five marketsBottom five markets15Part One:Reputation landscape in 2024%geographic location of organisations headquarters has a positive impact on its reputation85%96%96%93%93%93%92%90%90%89%88%88%88%86%86%86%84%83%83%83%82%81%81%80%

63、79%76%74%71%GlobalUnited Arab EmiratesSaudi ArabiaSingaporeNew ZealandPhilippinesIndiaIndonesiaMainland ChinaMalaysiaVietnamThailandUSATaiwanItalySpainBrazilUnited KingdomCanadaSouth AfricaGermanySwitzerlandAustraliaFranceHong KongNetherlandsJapanSouth KoreaOverallOverall16Part One:Reputation landsc

64、ape in 2024CEOs emerge as Reputation championsCEOs lead the pack in feeling a high level of personal responsibility for their organisations reputation at 68%,with the same number believing that reputation performance should be strongly linked to executive remuneration.Again,CEOs based in large emerg

65、ing markets are more likely to feel high levels of responsibility than those in mature markets with Indonesia(94%)and Saudia Arabia(93%)the highest,and France(46%)and Germany(37%),the lowest.US CEOs,which are overrepresented in rankings of the worlds largest companies,come in above the global averag

66、e,with 75%feeling high responsibility.Global%how strongly do you believe reputation performance should be linked to executive performance and remuneration?56%68%50%52%40%29%46%44%1%2%3%3%OverallCEOs Other C-SuiteCorporate affairs leadersNot linkedSomewhatStronglyGlobal%by role for what level of resp

67、onsibility do you feel towards your organisations reputation?67%43%44%30%52%50%3%4%4%CEOs Other C-SuiteCorporate Affairs leadersLowModerateHigh17Part One:Reputation landscape in 2024%by market CEOs vs Corporate Affairs Leaders who feel a high responsibility for their organisations reputation74%77%57

68、%41%56%46%32%39%62%50%57%42%68%30%30%56%51%23%41%56%23%48%33%21%30%37%23%94%93%87%83%80%77%76%74%74%73%71%69%69%67%67%67%65%64%57%57%54%54%53%50%47%46%37%IndonesiaSaudi ArabiaIndiaVietnamBrazilSouth AfricaMalaysiaHong KongUSAUnited Arab EmiratesPhilippinesCanadaTaiwanJapanSpainThailandSwitzerlandUni

69、ted KingdomSouth KoreaAustraliaItalyNetherlandsMainland ChinaNew ZealandSingaporeFranceGermanyMeanwhile,by comparison,significantly fewer Corporate Affairs Leaders globally feel the same similarly high levels of personal responsibility of CEOS,at just 44%.Again,significant variances exist by market,

70、with those markets with more CEOs feeling high responsibility for reputation generally more likely to have Corporate Affairs Leaders who feel they have a high responsibility.With CEOs managing extremely tight diaries and a myriad of corporate targets,this points to a need for corporate affairs teams

71、 to be more empowered within organisations.CEOs%high responsibility Corporate Affairs leaders%high responsibility 18Part One:Reputation landscape in 2024%globally with strong access to insights by audience and stakeholder group46%44%42%38%36%35%34%32%EmployeesCustomersGovernment/RegulatorsInvestors/

72、ShareholdersCommunityOnline InfluencersMediaNGOsAudiences insights are crucialAny reputation strategy should be built around the key audiences or stakeholders you aim to engage what would you like them to think,feel,and ultimately do?An organisations ability to achieve its reputation goals depends o

73、n how well it understands them and how effectively it can engage and influence them and form aligned goals and expectations.For many businesses,customers are the most important stakeholder group influencing their business strategy,yet our study finds organisations are not wholeheartedly confident in

74、 their ability to understand and influence them.For example,only 44%of leaders rate their insights into customers as strong,with a further 46%rating them as moderate.Only 43%of business leaders report a strong ability to influence customers,with only 40%feeling strongly that their reputation is well

75、 aligned with customers expectations.The same trend is seen across other audience and stakeholder groups,with less than half having access to strong insights for any other stakeholder group,including Government&Regulators,Employees and Investors&Shareholders,with the lowest being NGOs and Media.Thes

76、e results reflect an acute need for organisations to understand the broad environment in which they operate,and also provides an indication of how audiences are being prioritised.Even among Corporate Affairs Leaders,only 35%report having strong media insights,leaving a majority of respondents in nee

77、d of support in this area.19Part One:Reputation landscape in 2024Government/RegulatorsCustomersEmployeesMediaOnline InfluencersInvestors/ShareholdersCommunityNGOsWeak access to insights and strong influenceNo access to insights and strong influence Moderate access to insights and strong influence%st

78、rong access to insights and strong influence72%62%59%52%54%57%60%52%23%30%34%26%31%30%32%24%12%20%23%16%17%17%17%11%13%11%24%10%12%12%10%8%Global%access to insights vs level of influenceProving the importance of audience and stakeholder insights,among our respondents,a wide gulf emerges between thos

79、e who rate their insights into individual audience groups as strong,and those who rate them as moderate,or weak,or lacking altogether and comparing this with their ability to influence them.This is consistent across all six audience categories,demonstrating that audience knowledge is a critical driv

80、er of influence.Similarly,the same strong correlation is seen between access to insights and being able to align an organisations reputation with its audiences expectations.20Part One:Reputation landscape in 2024Government/RegulatorsCustomersEmployeesMediaOnline InfluencersInvestors/ShareholdersComm

81、unityNGOsFeel strong ability to influence this audienceReputation strongly aligned with audience expectationsStrong resourcing to engage audiencesStrong access to audience insights42%44%46%34%35%38%36%32%44%44%46%35%35%37%38%34%42%43%44%33%35%38%41%39%44%40%42%35%36%38%38%33%Global%access to insight

82、s vs reputation expectations alignment21Benchmarking performance in Reputation ManagementThe Sandpiper Reputation Capital Index is based on the information shared by business leaders around nearly 50 variables across the nine areas of reputation management that we analysed:Reputation Strategy,ESG&Su

83、stainability Strategy,Crisis&Issues Management,Executive Profiling&Thought Leadership,Media Engagement,AI&Digital Environment,Employee Communications,Financial Communications,and Government&Regulatory Affairs.Based on the scoring for each area,respondent organisations are categorised into four group

84、s:Trailblazers(75 to 100 points)have a strong grasp of the function and rate their ability to execute on essential tasks highly.Aspirants(50 to 74 points)score highly but inconsistently,trailing Trailblazers in at least one area of the facet in question.Followers(25 to 49 points)have a mixed ability

85、 to execute in reputation management,performing some tasks well but others poorly.Beginners(0 to 24 points)lack the basic skills and conceptual knowledge for reputation management and rate their ability to execute as low.The data from our Global Reputation Capital Index provides a fascinating window

86、 into how organisations headquartered across 27 markets and six continents are performing in reputation management.Overall,when applying our methodology only a small subset of organisations(12%)perform consistently well across all of the nine areas of reputation management we assess and are categori

87、sed as Trailblazers.Much more commonly,respondents rate some areas highly,while others are still in development.This means most fall into the Aspirants(54%)or Followers(32%)categories.Only 3%of respondents score poorly in nearly all areas of reputation management and are therefore rated as Beginners

88、.The highest performing areas are those connected with strategy and risk management with the most Trailblazers in Crisis&Issues Management(47%),and Reputation Strategy(44%).However,in the same vein,performance in ESG&Sustainability Strategy has by far the fewest Trailblazers at 9%,followed by Execut

89、ive Profiling&Thought Leadership and Media Engagement,both at 15%suggesting that organisations are not sufficiently investing in public profiling efforts.Part Two:Global Reputation Capital Index22Part Two:Global Reputation Capital Index%in each performance category by categoryOverall3%32%12%54%Reput

90、ation Strategy2%14%44%40%ESG&Sustainability Strategy34%36%9%21%Crisis Management2%18%47%34%Executive Profiling&Thought Leadership18%49%15%28%Media Engagement4%42%15%40%AI&Digital Environment8%35%20%36%Employee Communications10%31%26%33%Financial Communications5%27%37%30%Government&Regulatory Affairs

91、7%35%20%38%Trailblazers Aspirants Followers Beginners23Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexRegional performance varies.The Americas and Middle East and Africa have the highest percentage of Trailblazers and fewest Beginners.The most highly rated area of reputation management is Reputation Strate

92、gy,where the Americas outpace the global average by more than 3 points.In addition,Financial Communications is a highlight for the Americas,outpacing the global average by nearly 4 points.Given the number of companies listing on exchanges based in New York,financial communications strategy will cont

93、inually be a focus,specifically for the US.The Middle East and Africa region also ranks the highest for Reputation Strategy,Financial Communications,Crisis&Issues Management,and Employee Communications.In each case,its scores exceed the global average by nearly 10 points.The Middle East and Africa s

94、core for Government&Regulatory Affairs is also the highest in the world,exceeding the global average by nearly 9 points,which may be a reflection of in-region requirements.%in each performance category by regionAmericas2%27%17%54%Asia Pacific2%28%13%56%Europe and United Kingdom4%47%5%44%Middle East&

95、Africa13%16%70%Trailblazers Aspirants Followers Beginners24Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexIn contrast,Europe and the United Kingdom has the widest distribution of scores,with 91%clustering in the Aspirants and Followers categories.ESG&Sustainability Strategy is rated the lowest,at nearly 9

96、points below the global average.It is likely that leaders and communicators did not rate their capabilities as strongly as those in other markets due to higher requirements in EU markets for reporting and governance around ESG.In addition,Executive Profiling&Thought Leadership trails other markets s

97、ignificantly at 40.31 out of 100,7 points lower than the global average.In contrast to the rise of celebrity CEOs in other markets,the EU appears to maintain a higher level of separation between executive personalities and the organisations they lead.For Asia Pacific,a high proportion of Aspirants i

98、s paired with low levels of Beginners.Asia Pacifics biggest overperformance is in ESG&Sustainability Strategy,where it exceeds the global average by nearly 3.5 points.Given the regions significant exposure to the realities of climate change,its organisations have had a steep learning curve to commun

99、icate effectively about their impact on the environment.ESG and sustainability are naturally top of mind for local populations,which is reflected in the prioritisation organisations now give to these issues.Other areas where the Asia Pacific region excels are Crisis&Issues Management(+2 points),AI&D

100、igital Environment(+1.5 points),and Executive Profiling&Thought Leadership(+1.5 points).The top three performing sectors according to our Index are Travel&Hospitality(16%Trailblazers),IT,Technology&Telecommunications(16%),and Energy,Mining,Natural Resources,Utilities(14%).In contrast,the industries

101、with the most Beginners include Industries&Manufacturing(6%),Healthcare&Wellness(5%),and Transportation(4%).25Part Two:Global Reputation Capital Index%in each performance category by industry Trailblazers Aspirants Followers BeginnersBusiness&Professional Services3%27%14%56%Education3%23%7%67%Energy

102、,Mining,Natural Resources,Utilities1%34%14%51%Financial Services1%33%11%54%Food&Agriculture3%39%8%51%Healthcare&Wellness5%55%3%38%Industries&Manufacturing6%29%12%53%IT,Technology&Telecommunications2%25%16%57%Property,Real Estate&Construction4%37%13%46%Retail,Apparel&Consumer Goods1%38%8%53%Transport

103、ation4%40%8%48%Travel&Hospitality41%16%43%26Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexReputation Strategy The importance of insights,planning,and measurementPerformance in the area of Reputation Strategy according to our Index is assessed based on having a reputation strategy with a clear owner in pla

104、ce,ensuring strong alignment of that strategy with the organisations objectives,and having effective measurement tools.Applying this framework,around four out of 10(44%)of respondents organisations globally qualify as Trailblazers,the second highest of any area,with 54%categorised as Aspirants or Fo

105、llowers,and only 2%as Beginners.Stronger performance here is likely linked to 90%of respondents believing in the importance of having a reputation management strategy,with 55%of CEOs seeing this as very important.Global%by category for Reputation Strategy44%Trailblazers40%Aspirants14%Followers2%Begi

106、nnersReputation strategy in place Clear owner of reputation strategy Alignment of brand positioning and narrative with vision statement,mission statement,company values,and company purpose Effectiveness of measurement of reputationAccess to audience insightsWeightingCriteria15%15%25%25%20%80%Reputat

107、ion Strategy has a clear strategy and owner90%Reputation Strategy is important43%Our organisation is strong in Reputation Strategy27Part Two:Global Reputation Capital Index%owning reputation strategy by marketGlobal%alignment of corporate brand,narrative,and messaging with key corporate communicatio

108、ns Overall,four in five(82%)leaders indicate that their organisation has a reputation management strategy in place.Almost all(95%)say their strategies have a clear owner,although ownership differs by organisation,but is most commonly the CEO(41%),or Communications Lead(37%),with Marketing Leads comi

109、ng in a distant third(14%).However,despite most having a reputation management strategy in place,many fall down in the alignment of these strategies with key business objectives.Less than half globally say that their corporate brand positioning and narrative and messaging is highly aligned with thei

110、r organisations vision,mission,values,or purpose.CEOHead of Communications/Corporate AffairsHead of Marketing/CMOIt is our General CounselShared responsibility no clear ownerNo clear ownerAmericasAPACEuropeGlobal41%37%14%3%3%2%53%27%11%4%3%2%41%39%12%2%4%3%30%41%20%5%3%2%54%30%9%2%4%1%49%Vision49%Va

111、lues43%Mission47%PurposeMiddle East&Africa28Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexAdditionally,similar numbers do not feel their corporate brand positioning or narrative messaging is clear,differentiated,compelling,effective or even highly accurate.Unsurprisingly as a result,only 41%believe their

112、key stakeholders and audiences have a high level of awareness and understanding of their organisations narrative and key messages,with 48%saying they have only a moderate understanding.Our Index-based analysis further showcases just how much a strong strategy can influence other aspects of reputatio

113、n.Trailblazers in reputation management strategy are between 11%and 19%more effective in all other aspects of reputation management.The largest difference is in relation to reputation measurement,where Trailblazers score a 21-point lead.Strategy and measurement are inextricably linked,as strategy re

114、quires measurement to inform what is working and what is not,as well as to highlight gaps and opportunities.Overall,leaders recognise the need to measure reputation,with 86%seeing it as very or moderately important.The larger their company,the more likely they are to indicate this.Most leaders repor

115、t they are planning to invest more time and resources in reputation measurement,with 77%anticipating some increase and 23%planning a large increase.Companies value a wide variety of tools to measure their reputation,with seven in ten leaders using customer reviews,media coverage and digital analytic

116、s tools,and finding them effective.Global%rating corporate brand positioning,narrative and messaging for possessing key attributes Corporate brand positioning Narrative and messagingClear51%48%Differentiated36%37%Compelling41%41%Effective44%42%Accurate48%43%29Part Two:Global Reputation Capital Index

117、76%74%73%72%72%69%69%69%67%Highly effectiveCustomer reviews and feedback analysisStakeholder reputation surveysStakeholder mappingDigital and/or social media analytics(incl.social listening)Employee engagement surveysBrand awareness and perception surveysMedia coverage analysisMedia monitoringFocus

118、groupsGlobal%rating measurement methodologies as effectiveThis is also true of direct perceptions research,including surveys and focus groups.There is strong confidence in brand awareness and perception surveys among leaders,with 69%of those using these tools and viewing them as effective.Only 5%say

119、 they are not effective.Trailblazers in Reputation Management Strategy also lead by 19 points in financial reporting and results and 19 points in ESG and sustainability performance and communications.30Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexReputation management strategyCEO profileExecutive/leaders

120、hip team profileMedia profile and relationshipsGovernment and regulator relationshipsNGO relationshipsCommunity engagementDigital footprint and profile(generative)AI integrationEmployee engagement/sentimentESG and sustainability performance and communicationsCrisis and issues communications prepared

121、nessFinancial reporting/resultsInvestor/shareholder relationsReputation measurementPoint increaseReputation Management strategy TrailblazersAll respondents48%42%44%35%39%33%38%38%39%39%39%39%46%42%43%73%57%61%47%56%47%54%53%53%55%58%54%65%58%64%+25+15+17+12+17+14+17+15+16+16+19+15+19+16+21Global%str

122、ong performance by reputation management area31Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexESG&Sustainability Strategy Doing well by doing goodESG&Sustainability Strategy is recognised as important by the vast majority the leaders surveyed at 83%.Despite this,many respondents organisations are lacking t

123、he basic fundamentals for success,with just 39%rating their organisations as strong in this area.Therefore unsurprisingly,applying our Index methodology,only 9%qualify as Trailblazers in this area with most being rated as Followers at 36%and Beginners at 34%the highest percentage of Beginners in any

124、 area.Global%by category for ESG&Sustainability Strategy9%Trailblazers21%Aspirants36%Followers34%Beginners53%ESG&Sustainability Strategy has a clear strategy and owner83%ESG&Sustainability Strategy are important39%Our organisation is strong in ESG&Sustainability StrategyClear strategy and owner in p

125、laceESG targets in placeRegular reporting on ESG and sustainability performanceRegular tracking in place for ESG and sustainability targetsESG&Sustainability Communications assets in placeClimate Communications plan and messaging in placeWeightingCriteria25%11.7%11.7%11.7%25%15%32Part Two:Global Rep

126、utation Capital IndexMultiple weak spots exist.Starting at the pointy end,less than half of respondent organisations have a sustainability and/or ESG strategy or targets;only 44%are regularly producing any form of sustainability and/or ESG reporting at least annually;and only 13%have a dedicated sus

127、tainability and/or ESG team or working group internally.Looking more specifically at sustainability and ESG communications,while half(50%)have spokespeople specifically trained in this area,only 43%have devised a specific sustainability narrative and messaging,and fewer have robust positioning mater

128、ials to support this.The perceived quality of their ESG and sustainability communications is also an issue.The majority do not feel these are highly clear(48%),accurate(43%)effective(41%),compelling(40%),or differentiated(32%).As a result,only 37%say their key stakeholders have a high level of aware

129、ness and understanding around their sustainability initiatives.Global%implemented49%Sustainability and/or ESG targets44%Regular sustainability and/or ESG reporting,at least annually47%Sustainability and/or ESG strategy13%Dedicated sustainability and/or ESG teamAs a subset of overall sustainability a

130、nd ESG communications preparedness,climate communications is faring extremely poorly,with only 29%having established a climate communications strategy and narrative at 12%.As we approach the mid-point of the decade of action most are also failing to ensure their sustainability and ESG communications

131、 are aligned with global agendas with only 45%of respondents organisations ensuring their sustainability strategies are strongly aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals(SDGs).Global%implemented key sustainability and/or ESG communicationsGlobal%implemented climate communication

132、sNarrative and messaging43%Dedicated climate communications strategy29%Robust position statements and Q&A39%Dedicated climate narrative and messaging12%Spokespeople specifically trained for ESG/sustainability communications50%33Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexCrisis Management Preparedness p

133、ays off For the purposes of this Index,performance in Crisis&Issues management is assessed based on having a clear crisis&issues communications strategy and plan with a clear owner,running regular training and simulations,and having confidence to activate plans.Based on this approach,nearly half of

134、respondent organisations are categorised as Trailblazers at 47%making this the strongest area of reputation management.This result is underpinned by findings that over two-thirds(67%)of respondents organisations globally have a crisis&issues communications plan in place,and 74%are conducting trainin

135、g and simulations to test their activation and response plans at least on a quarterly basis.Global%by category for Crisis Management47%Trailblazers34%Aspirants18%Followers2%BeginnersClear strategy and owner in place Crisis communications plan in place Frequent crisis and issues communications tests

136、and training Confidence in activation of crisis and issues communications plan WeightingCriteria25%25%25%25%44%Crisis Management has a clear strategy and owner84%Crisis Management is important39%Our organisation is strong in Crisis Management34Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexThe findings sho

137、w that greater preparedness is paying off in mitigating potential issues,with Trailblazers in the area of Crisis&Issues Management experiencing significantly fewer negative business impacts over the past 12 months than Aspirants,Followers,or Beginners.While nearly three quarters(72%)of all survey re

138、spondents experienced at least one negative reputational impact over the past 12 months,only 66%of Trailblazers in this area did.However,despite these overall positive results,some challenges remain with only 44%saying they are highly confident in using their crisis&issues communications plan.CEOs a

139、re the most prepared,with 53%highly confident,followed by Corporate Affairs Leaders(43%)and other C-Suite Leaders(38%).This points to the need for a disciplined approach to ongoing preparedness efforts that includes the broader management team.35Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexExecutive Prof

140、iling&Thought Leadership Consistent positioning and persistence yields results Executive Profiling&Thought Leadership reflects how effectively an organisation and its leadership communicates its viewpoints,engages with industry conversations,and maintains visibility across key channels.Over two thir

141、ds of respondents(67%)are Followers or Beginners in this critical pillar,with just 15%categorised as Trailblazers the second lowest alongside Media Engagement.Despite this being one of the lower performing areas of the Index,there is a clear appetite to do more.Global%by category for Executive Profi

142、ling&Thought Leadership15%Trailblazers28%Aspirants49%Followers18%BeginnersClear strategy and owner in placeClear thought leadership topics the CEO associates withClear thought leadership topics the industry associates withFrequency of thought leadership activitiesActivity across social media platfor

143、ms and other channelsWeightingCriteria25%12.5%12.5%25%25%53%Executive Profiling&Thought Leadership has a clear strategy and owner86%Executive Profiling&Thought Leadership is important44%Our organisation is strong in Executive Profiling&Thought Leadership36Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexLead

144、ers report that executive profiling and thought leadership investments have been effective in helping with a range of business challenges,particularly building trust and awareness with key audiences and stakeholders,fostering pride among employees,managing misinformation and disinformation,providing

145、 reassurance in the sales process and balancing industry narratives,and engaging existing and prospective customers.When looking specifically at common forms of executive profiling and thought leadership activities,this sentiment continues,with the overwhelming majority believing all of these can be

146、 effective particularly company reports and whitepapers.However,this enthusiasm is not always being reflected in frequency,with around half of respondents organisations only participating in these on average once or twice a year.In an increasingly digital communications environment with a voracious

147、appetite for content,the current frequency is increasingly insufficient as only 60%of organisations currently share executive and digital content on social platforms quarterly,at most.Global%rating executive profiling and thought leadership activities as effective in key areasGlobal%rating selected

148、thought leadership activities as effective95%91%87%86%86%89%87%87%89%Building brand or product trust with key audiences and stakeholdersBuilding brand or product awareness with key audiences and stakeholdersEngaging existing clientsEngaging prospective clientsEngaging and building trust with governm

149、ent/regulatorsBuilding pride with employeesProviding reassurance during the sales processHelping to balance important industry narrativesManaging misinformation/disinformationReports/whitepapers92%Editorial/byline articles in media89%Events/speaking opportunities87%Participation in working groups88%

150、Social media content89%37Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexHowever,despite lower levels of activity,our findings show that most are exercising campaign-based thinking in this area,with over two-thirds(68%)focused on executing at least three thought leadership-based campaigns per year,and 93%sa

151、ying they have dedicated online thought leadership portals.Further to this,88%and 85%respectively believe that their organisations and CEOs are clear on the thought leadership themes and topics they should be associated with.The most highly used social media channels globally for promoting executive

152、 profiling and thought leadership content as rated by our respondents organisations are LinkedIn at 92%,Facebook at 91%,and X at 90%.Global%average frequency of selected thought leadership activitiesAnnually or biannuallyQuarterlyMonthlyWeeklyDailyEditorial/byline articles in mediaEvents/speaking op

153、portunitiesParticipation in working groupsSocial media contentReports/whitepapers50%28%14%5%3%47%26%18%7%3%40%31%20%8%2%42%28%20%7%2%37%23%19%14%6%38Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexGlobal%number of thought leadership campaigns per yearGlobal%overall vs Trailblazers in recognition for industr

154、y thought leadershipThese results are underscored by a feeling that not enough time and resources are being invested in this area with 73%saying their organisations are not investing enough.At an individual level,85%and 75%respectively believe the CEO and their broader Executive teams should be spen

155、ding more time on this.As a result,only 38%and 36%strongly believe that their CEOs and organisations are well recognised as industry thought leaders.Trailblazers in this area are significantly more likely to have achieved this than others.None1-2 campaigns3+campaigns3%29%68%Overall Trailblazers in E

156、xecutive Profiling&Thought LeadershipMy organisations CEO is recognised as a thought leader in our industry38%60%My organisation as a corporate brand is recognised as a thought leader in our industry36%61%39Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexMedia Engagement Bridging the media engagement gapMed

157、ia Engagement assesses an organisations ability to manage a clear media strategy,and maintain strong media relationships and positioning.As with thought leadership,there is a wide gap between intentions and performance.83%of respondents say their organisations media profile and relationships are imp

158、ortant,but just 35%rate their performance as very strong in this area.According to our Index,82%are categorised in the middle two categories of Aspirants and Followers,with just 15%Trailblazers and 4%Beginners.Respondents recognise the need to do more.While just over two thirds(67%)say they have com

159、prehensively mapped media stakeholders,69%say their organisations are not engaging enough with the media.Global%by category for Media Engagement15%Trailblazers40%Aspirants42%Followers4%BeginnersClear strategy and owner in place Well maintained media map Media trained spokespeople Frequency of media

160、engagementPolicy on media trainingViews on poor media engagementWeightingCriteria25%10%10%15%18%22%37%Media Engagement has a clear strategy and owner83%Media Engagement is important35%Our organisation is strong in Media Engagement40Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexIn terms of media representa

161、tives,60%of respondents organisations have between 3-6 approved spokespeople in their corporate headquarters with variations by company size and industry.Looking at frequency of media engagement,Global CEOs emerge as the most prominent corporate spokespeople,followed by other C-suite executives,inte

162、rnal experts,and local market leaders.Across all roles most tend to engage on average on a quarterly or monthly basis with media,with typically less than a quarter engaging weekly or daily.Investments in this area and training are recognised as having clear benefits,with the vast majority(84%)of tho

163、se with access to media training viewing it as effective.However,less than half(46%)or those surveyed say media training is mandatory for all spokespeople in their organisation before they participate in media engagements a further 42%only make training mandatory for those participating in broadcast

164、 interviews.This is showing in results,with nearly three quarters(74%)saying the quality of their spokespeople could be improved(74%),and that local spokespeople are not receiving enough support(72%).Further to this,66%say their spokespeople do not always represent their organisations accurately.In

165、further evidence of the need to improve relationships here,66%believe that journalists do not portray their organisation or industry activities correctly,and 63%feel they are not treated fairly by media.Trailblazers in this area again outperform these averages significantly proving the importance of

166、 strong media engagement practices to effective control organisational narratives.Global%frequency of spokespeople by role engaging with media on averageGlobal%overall vs Trailblazers in media relations performance aspectsI dont believe my organisations activities are portrayed correctly in the medi

167、aI feel that journalists do not treat my organisation fairlyI feel that journalists do not understand the industry my organisation operates inAverageTrailblazers66%63%66%40%41%43%AnnuallyQuarterlyMonthlyWeeklyDailyInternal expertsLocal market leadership teamOther global C-SuiteGlobal CEO23%33%26%11%

168、4%15%30%28%16%6%13%27%30%16%7%12%28%28%19%7%41Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexAI&Digital Environment Rapid change drives a need for clear ownership,and more consistency in tacticsPerformance in the area of AI&Digital Environment is assessed based on having a clear digital communications stra

169、tegy in place,having to support engagement through digital tactics,understanding AI when integrating and prioritising digital information and content,and having an executive team with strong channel knowledge.Based on this approach,20%of respondents organisations are categorised as Trailblazers,with

170、 the majority(71%)as Aspirants or Followers and only 8%are Beginners.This echoes the fact that while most(79%)find AI&Digital Environment to be important,less than half have a clear owner and strategy(41%)and even fewer feel that they are strong in the area(39%).A lack of ownership plays a role in t

171、he strength of performance in this area.Global%by category for AI&Digital Environment21%Trailblazers36%Aspirants35%Followers8%BeginnersClear strategy and owner in place Ability of digital activities to support digital engagement Understanding of AI with integrating and prioritising digital informati

172、on and content Executive teams channel knowledge WeightingCriteria25%25%25%25%41%AI&Digital Environment has a clear strategy and owner79%AI&Digital Environment is important39%Our organisation is strong in AI&Digital Environment42Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexDigital activities to support e

173、ngagement varied widely.Activities such as search engine optimisation(SEO)are employed by over half(53%)of leaders,and regular social media monitoring and listening is in place for only 16%.Trailblazers again perform much better across a variety of digital reputation issues.Quality control of AI con

174、tent sees Trailblazers performing 13 points better than the average,while Trailblazers also perform 11 points better in data privacy and security.In contrast,executive teams knowledge of social channels and usage of these channels is high,with the majority(53%)claiming both knowledge and usage of ch

175、annels.Only 4%of leaders say their Executive teams lack both knowledge of channels and lack engagement.Leaders are planning to invest heavily in this area as it continues to evolve,though.Three quarters(75%)of leaders plan to invest in their digital footprint and profile over the next 12 months,whil

176、e 76%also plan to invest in generative AI capabilities.Global%managing digital reputation issues well vs AI&Digital Environment Index performanceLow awareness/search rankingsMisinformation and disinformationQuality control of AI-generated contentData privacy and securityManipulated media and deepfak

177、esIntellectual property and compliance issuesLoss of human touchTrailblazersAspirantsFollowersBeginnersOverall74%71%67%71%66%69%67%80%78%80%82%74%76%70%83%76%73%76%72%75%73%70%66%60%64%61%63%64%38%47%35%45%39%46%47%43Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexEmployee Communications Moving from directi

178、on to engagementEmployee Communications is seen as critical to overall reputational management performance,with 85%of business leaders rating it as an important factor.However,there is clear room for improvement.Only 39%of leaders believe their organisations are performing strongly in this area.Our

179、Index looks at whether a clear employee engagement strategy is in place with clear ownership,the deployment of employee communications channels,and how engaged employees are with an organisations strategy.Global%by category for Employee Communications26%Trailblazers33%Aspirants31%Followers10%Beginne

180、rsClear strategy and owner in place Effectiveness of internal channels to engage employees How well employees understand how their roles contribute to organisations strategy WeightingCriteria25%50%25%43%Employee Communications has a clear strategy and owner85%Employee Communications is important39%O

181、ur organisation is strong in Employee Communications44Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexBased on these aspects,the allocations are relatively evenly split over the top three categories with 26%qualifying as Trailblazers and 33%and 31%as Aspirants and Followers.The communications channels that

182、organisations are using to engage employees are wide ranging,with an average of 11.7 internal channels selected that they use.The channels rated as the most effective include intranets,advocacy and education-based sessions,employee Apps,focused meetings by specific leadership or divisional teams,and

183、 group sessions with the CEO or other Executive-level leaders.While our findings show organisations are typically using a lot of channels to communicate and perceive that they are using these relatively effectively,this may be misguided.Only 41%say that their organisations employees have a strong un

184、derstanding of how their role contributes to the corporate strategy.Part of this may be failing to engage with key internal stakeholders,with only 40%saying that their organisations Communications and Human Resources teams are highly aligned in employee engagement strategies.Organisations in the Tra

185、ilblazer category for Employee Engagement are significantly more likely to perform better in both of these areas.Global%effective by channelIntranet84%Advocacy and education sessions83%Employee apps80%Focused leadership or divisional meetings80%CEO/Executive group meetings79%Global%overall vs Trailb

186、lazers for employee communications performance indicators Overall Trailblazers in Employee CommunicationsEmployees have a strong understanding of how their role contributes to the organisational strategy41%82%Communications and Human Resources teams highly aligned in employee engagement strategies40

187、%69%45Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexFinancial Communications The need to show valueFor Financial Communications we assessed whether organisations have a clear strategy and owner,whether value is well understood by investors,effectiveness of results reporting,financial media engagement,and

188、performance in capital raising.Applying this framework,37%qualify as Trailblazers in Financial Communications,with 57%categorised as Aspirants or Followers,and 5%as Beginners.Overall,86%see this area is important for reputation management,but only 46%believe they are strong in it.Global%by category

189、for Financial Communications37%Trailblazers30%Aspirants27%Followers5%BeginnersClear strategy and owner in place Organisations value understanding by investors/shareholders Financial results communications effectiveness and reporting Key business and financial media understanding Performance in commu

190、nications around capital raising activities WeightingCriteria25%20%20%20%15%47%Financial Communications has a clear strategy and owner86%Financial Communications is important46%Our organisation is strong in Financial Communications46Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexIn reviewing why this is,on

191、ly 51%say they have been highly effective in communicating their financial results in the past 12 months,and less than half(47%)believe their organisations value is well understood by investors and shareholders.A similar number(43%),feel that financial media have a strong understanding of their orga

192、nisation.When looking at capital raising activities,it is evident that there are mixed feelings,with just 39%saying that they are very satisfied with their performance.Global%rating of performance satisfactionVery satisfiedSomewhat satisfiedNeutralSomewhat dissatisfiedVery dissatisfiedNot relevant39

193、%46%10%3%1%1%47Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexGovernment&Regulatory Affairs Relationships matterWhile Government Relations&Regulatory Affairs is seen as central to successful overall reputation management by 84%,only 39%of leaders feel their organisations are performing strongly in this are

194、a,and only slightly more(43%)say their organisation has a clear strategy and owner for this area.The assessment for Government&Regulatory looks at approaches to strategy,stakeholder mapping and engagement,and policy.Based on this,one in five are categorised as Trailblazers,with the majority falling

195、into the Aspirants(38%)and Followers(35%)categories.In stakeholder mapping,while 98%have attempted some form of stakeholder mapping only 43%say their organisation has approached this in a comprehensive way.Global%by category for Government&Regulatory Affairs20%Trailblazers38%Aspirants35%Followers7%B

196、eginnersClear strategy and owner in place Stakeholder mapping Engagement frequency Activity in influencing policy WeightingCriteria25%25%25%25%43%Government&Regulatory Affairs has a clear strategy and owner84%Government&Regulatory Affairs is important39%Our organisation is strong in Government&Regul

197、atory Affairs48Part Two:Global Reputation Capital IndexThe average frequency of engagement across different stakeholder groups tends to be quarterly,with slightly more frequent engagement with community leaders and groups and non-governmental organisations(NGOs).Further findings in this area suggest

198、 that current government and regulatory engagement efforts may not be optimised across the board,with nearly two thirds(65%)rating their organisation as being moderately active at best in their activities to influence policy outcomes,and only 36%strongly agreeing that their activity level in this ar

199、ea is sufficient.Once again,we see clear impacts with 75%stating that a lack of influence or relationships with key stakeholders negatively impacted their organisation in the past 24 months,and 71%saying this had generated an unnecessary crisis or issue over the same time period.Those in the Trailbl

200、azer category for Government&Regulatory Affairs were far less likely to experience these issues.Global%average frequency of engagement with stakeholdersAnnually or biannuallyQuarterlyMonthlyWeeklyDaily31%39%21%7%2%19%41%27%10%3%20%34%31%11%3%23%37%27%11%3%NGOsCommunity leaders/groupsGovernmentRegula

201、torsGlobal%overall vs Trailblazers in experiencing issues driven by government and regulator stakeholders in past 24 months Overall Trailblazers in Government&Regulatory AffairsLack of influence or relationships with key government and regulator stakeholders has negatively impacted your organisation

202、 in the past 24 months75%70%Lack of influence or relationships with key government and regulator stakeholders has generated an unnecessary issue or crisis for your organisation in the past 24 months71%66%49Part Three:How reputational risks and weaknesses are impacting organisationsReputational weakn

203、esses impact business performanceNearly three in four(72%)of the leaders surveyed say they have experienced at least one form of negative business impact owing to reputational weak spots over the past 12 months.These impacts are varied and have affected a wide range of stakeholders,including custome

204、rs,current and future employees,and government or regulatory stakeholders.The specific impacts experienced were around their organisations ability to do business with customers(61%),ability to attract and retain talent(54%),ability to recover from a crisis(54%),incurring financial losses(53%),and ne

205、gatively impacting government and community relationships(51%).A direct correlation is seen between performance and impact with those scoring highest in the Index overall and for Reputation Strategy.Only half(47%)of Trailblazers for Reputation Strategy faced negative business impacts from lack of re

206、putational strength over the same time period 25 points below the overall,global average.By comparison,Aspirants,Followers and Beginners in this same area were up to 10 points more likely to face negative consequences of negative reputation across categories.Most unprepared to tackle new threatsAs r

207、eputational risks increase and the environment for audience engagement becomes more fragmented,56%of global leaders believe that reputation is becoming more difficult to manage,with just 21%saying it is getting easier.Many of the new emerging threats stem from technology from AI to misinformation an

208、d disinformation,which will only increase as technology develops at a faster pace in the coming years.Several areas are connected to the core of organisational values,especially sustainability and DE&I.Despite acknowledging the potential impact of key reputation-related issues on their companies,mos

209、t leaders do not feel prepared to manage these.In fact,a significant gap exists between levels of concern and taking action to prepare.For nearly every emerging risk we asked leaders about,roughly two in three feel concerned but unprepared to manage it.The rise of misinformation and disinformation(6

210、7 pt gap),employee activism(67 pt gap),geopolitical tensions(66 pt gap),and greenwashing top the list,indicating a need for immediate attention toward these areas.50Part Three:How reputational risks and weaknesses are impacting organisationsGlobal%type of negative impacts experienced owing to lack o

211、f reputational strength over the past 12 monthsGlobal%highly concerned vs%highly prepared to manage reputational risksFaced at least one of the below negative impactsAbility to do business with some customers and marketsFinancial cost to business Ability to recruit and retain talentAbility to recove

212、r from a crisisRelationships with government and community stakeholdersTrailblazersAspirantsFollowersBeginnersOverall72%61%53%54%54%51%47%38%38%39%38%36%72%64%57%57%56%55%82%68%53%55%56%51%69%50%37%43%35%24%Impact of AI on CommunicationsRise of mis-and disinformation Stakeholder and customer activis

213、mEmployee activismIncreased ESG and sustainability scrutinyGreenwashing claimsPrioritisation of DE&INewsroom consolidationData privacy and cybersecurity issuesRising geopolitical tensionsDeltaHighly preparedVery concerned95%97%95%95%95%94%95%94%96%95%38%30%33%28%32%28%33%30%36%29%57pts67pts62pts67pt

214、s63pts66pts62pts64pts60pts66pts51Global%highly prepared for risks vs AI&Digital Environment Index performanceImpact of AI on CommunicationsRise of mis-and disinformation Data privacy and cybersecurity issuesTrailblazersAspirantsFollowersBeginnersAverage38%30%36%61%44%56%43%30%42%25%25%22%13%13%13%Gl

215、obal%highly prepared for risks vs Crisis&Issues Management Index performanceStakeholder and customer activismRising geopolitical tensionsTrailblazersAspirantsFollowersBeginnersAverage28%29%40%37%32%25%20%18%5%2%Part Three:How reputational risks and weaknesses are impacting organisationsBased on our

216、Index,the relationship between performance and preparedness becomes clearer.Analysing Trailblazers in AI&Digital Environment,Crisis&Issues Management,Media Engagement,Executive Profiling&Thought Leadership,ESG&Sustainability Strategy,Employee Communications,and Government&Regulatory Affairs shows ho

217、w Trailblazers separate themselves from the average leader in issue preparedness.For example,Trailblazers in AI&Digital Environment are at least 20 points more prepared than the average leader to deal with technology-related issues.Similarly,Trailblazers in ESG&Sustainability Strategy are at least 1

218、5 points more prepared than the average leader to deal with ESG and greenwashing related issues.Across the other areas of reputation management,Trailblazers are at least 10 points more prepared than their global peers on all issues analysed.The relationship between performance and preparedness based

219、 on our Index methodology is most profound when looking at leaders ranked as Trailblazers across all areas of reputation management.Overall Trailblazers are much more prepared than the average leader on data privacy and cybersecurity issues(35 point increase over average preparedness),impact of AI o

220、n communications(30 points)and increased ESG and sustainability scrutiny(30 points).52Part Three:How reputational risks and weaknesses are impacting organisationsGlobal%highly prepared for risks vs Media Engagement Index performanceStakeholder and customer activismNewsroom consolidationTrailblazersA

221、spirantsFollowersBeginnersAverage28%30%41%39%38%33%28%26%12%9%Global%highly prepared for risks vs ESG&Sustainability Strategy Index performanceESG and sustainability scrutinyGreenwashing claimsTrailblazersAspirantsFollowersBeginnersAverage32%28%51%43%42%36%33%26%22%21%Global%highly prepared for risk

222、s vs Employee Communications Index performanceEmployee activismPrioritisation of DE&ITrailblazersAspirantsFollowersBeginnersAverage28%33%40%55%35%40%29%36%20%20%Global%highly prepared for risks vs Executive Profiling&Thought Leadership Index performanceStakeholder and customer activismTrailblazersAs

223、pirantsFollowersBeginnersAverage28%51%40%25%22%Global%highly prepared for risks vs Government&Regulatory Affairs Index performanceRising geopolitical tensionsTrailblazersAspirantsFollowersBeginnersAverage29%44%31%22%8%53Part Three:How reputational risks and weaknesses are impacting organisationsGlob

224、al%highly prepared to manage reputational risks by overall categoryImpact of AI on CommunicationsRise of misinformation and disinformationStakeholder and customer activismEmployee activismIncreased ESG and sustainability scrutinyGreenwashing claimsPrioritisation of DE&INewsroom consolidationData pri

225、vacy and cybersecurity issuesRising geopolitical tensionsTrailblazersAspirantsFollowersBeginnersAverage38%30%33%28%32%28%33%30%36%29%68%54%55%52%62%53%62%54%71%57%47%32%39%32%37%31%38%34%42%32%15%20%18%15%17%15%17%16%15%14%4%4%1%3%4%3%4%1%0%4%54Part Three:How reputational risks and weaknesses are im

226、pacting organisationsCorporate Affairs leaders with high ownership achieve better outcomesAs covered earlier in this report,a key finding in this study is the tendency for CEOs to feel higher levels of responsibility for corporate reputation than other members of the C-Suite and also Corporate Affai

227、rs Leaders.As part of our analysis,a trend is observed that Corporate Affairs Leaders who feel they have a high level of responsibility for reputation management tend to perform better across all areas of reputation management.When looking across 15 different aspects associated with reputation manag

228、ement,high responsibility Corporate Affairs Leaders performed on average 7 percentage points better than the average,particularly around reputation management strategy and AI integration.When looking at the findings in relation to our Index,the same trends continues,with high responsibility Corporat

229、e Affairs Leaders significantly more likely to work for organisations categorized as Trailblazers at an overall level.These significant increases in nearly all categories show the importance of emboldening communications and public affairs professionals to own their organisations reputation-building

230、 efforts by giving them licence to lead on reputation management strategies.OverallReputation StrategyExecutive Profiling&Thought LeadershipMedia EngagementGovernment&Regulatory AffairsAI&Digital EnvironmentEmployee CommunicationsESG&Sustainability StrategyCrisis ManagementFinancial CommunicationsFo

231、llowersBeginnersAspirantsTrailblazers76%61%23%22%31%32%38%14%59%52%54%34%35%47%41%42%34%24%30%30%23%5%30%31%25%24%25%40%10%16%3%0%11%0%3%3%3%22%0%2%Global%organisations with Corporate Affairs leaders feeling high responsibility for reputation by category55Part Three:How reputational risks and weakne

232、sses are impacting organisationsReputation management strategyCEO profileExecutive/leadership team profileMedia profile and relationshipsGovernment and regulator relationshipsNGO relationshipsCommunity engagementDigital footprint and profile(generative)AI integrationEmployee engagement/sentimentESG

233、and sustainability performance and communicationsCrisis and issues communications preparednessFinancial reporting/resultsInvestor/shareholder relationsReputation measurementPoint increaseHigh responsibility Comms/Public Affairs leadersAll respondents48%42%44%35%39%33%38%38%39%39%39%39%46%42%43%58%48

234、%53%41%45%37%43%44%49%46%47%45%53%48%50%+10+6+9+6+6+4+5+6+10+7+8+6+7+6+7Global%strong performance by reputation management area56Aligned with reputation being viewed as a key driver of commercial success and with a growing risk landscape,investment in reputation manage is forecast to increase.Most l

235、eaders plan to make at least some level of investment in several reputation management functions over the next year,including reputation management strategy(which 80%plan to increase),reputation measurement(77%),and AI integration(76%).In the Americas,while reputation management strategy(81%)is the

236、most common area identified for investment,most leaders(80%)also plan to invest in ESG and sustainability performance and communications,CEO profiling,and the profiles of their broader executive leadership team.Asia Pacific leaders are unique in ranking employee engagement as a top focus for investm

237、ent(70%),alongside reputation management strategy(80%),and CEO profiling(77%).Just 39%of leaders rate employee engagement as an area of strength,showcasing the need for increased funding of this capability.Leaders in Europe are planning slightly lower levels of investment,with an average of two thir

238、ds planning to invest in each of the areas of reputation management.The most common areas for investment are reputation management strategy(74%),CEO profiling(73%),and financial reporting and results(70%),showcasing a strong focus for market leaders on enhancing executive-level participation.Leaders

239、 in the Middle East&Africa plan to invest in nearly all areas of reputation management,with nine in 10 planning at least a small increase across capabilities.Reputation management strategy(94%)and reputation measurement(93%)are the most likely areas for investment.Part Four:Investment is increasing5

240、7Part Four:Investment is increasingReputation management strategyCEO profileExecutive/leadership team profileMedia profile and relationshipsCommunity engagementDigital footprint and profile(generative)AI integrationEmployee engagement/sentimentESG and sustainability performance and communicationsCri

241、sis and issues communications preparednessFinancial reporting/resultsInvestor/shareholder relationsReputation measurementGlobal%plan to increase investments in reputation management over the next 12 monthsAmericasAPACEuropeMiddle East&AfricaGlobal80%77%75%76%74%75%76%75%75%75%76%75%77%81%80%80%77%74

242、%69%76%76%80%75%75%76%80%80%77%75%76%75%71%75%77%75%77%75%76%77%74%73%68%69%67%65%66%68%69%68%70%67%68%94%91%93%92%90%91%90%90%92%91%91%91%93%58Given the wide-ranging skills and expertise required for successful reputation management,most organisational leaders rely on a wide network of advisors for

243、 advice both internally within their organisations and externally.However,our study reveals significant issues and gaps in this area.In particular,leaders lack confidence in the advice they receive for NGO engagement.Only 29%consider their advisors strong in this area,compared with 17%who rate the a

244、dvice they have received as weak.The lack of solid advice around NGO engagement is consistent across markets,with leaders in all four regions rating this the lowest out of all areas tested.Similarly,leaders see an opportunity for improvement in the advice around engaging other stakeholder groups.Onl

245、y 34%of leaders rate the advice they have received around stakeholder engagement as strong,with only 35%indicating this for community engagement.Leaders are also finding gaps in advice around narrative and messaging and ESG and sustainability strategy.Less than one in three leaders(33%)consider the

246、advice they receive in these areas as strong.While there are many areas that leaders require stronger advice from counsellors,the highest number of leaders feel they receive strong advice is in relation to reputation management strategy,which is still low at 45%.Strong advice in reputation managemen

247、t strategy was consistent across markets,with leaders receiving the best advice from their advisors here in every region surveyed.Likewise,only one in ten(10%)globally consider the advice they receive on strategy weak.In the Americas,nearly half of leaders consider the advice they receive on investo

248、r and shareholder relations(49%)and financial communications(48%)to be strongest.Only 38%of Asia Pacific leaders also assess the advice on financial communications to be strong.Part Five:Reputation advice falling short of expectations59Part Five:Reputation advice falling short of expectationsLeaders

249、 based in Europe gave the lowest marks for external advisory support across all areas.Beyond reputation management strategy,investor/shareholder relations(32%)is the area they rated the highest.Middle East&Africa leaders are more confident in the advice that they receive.Digital reputation managemen

250、t(57%),employee engagement and internal communications(57%)and financial communications(56%)are among the areas where they are most satisfied with the advice being received.Based on these results,it is clear that advisors both inhouse and on the consultancy side need to adjust counsel to deliver bot

251、h overarching strategic guidance as well as direction on execution to their business stakeholders.While leaders feel that strategic advice is strong,applying that advice to stakeholder engagement,messaging,and sustainability can drive a greater impact on their business.60Part Five:Reputation advice

252、falling short of expectationsReputation management strategyNarrative and messagingMedia relationsGovernment and regulator relationsPublic policy and advocacyNGO engagementCommunity engagementStakeholder engagementDigital reputation managementSocial media managementEmployee engagement and internal co

253、mmunicationsESG and sustainability strategyESG and sustainability communicationsCrisis and issues communicationsFinancial communicationsInvestor/shareholder relationsGlobal and by region%receiving strong advice in each areaAmericasAPACEuropeMiddle East&AfricaGlobal45%33%37%34%36%29%35%34%37%34%36%32

254、%36%33%38%38%56%36%42%37%42%31%38%41%43%40%41%37%38%39%48%49%44%33%37%34%36%30%36%35%36%35%35%33%38%34%38%36%33%28%29%29%29%24%28%29%29%27%29%27%26%26%28%32%67%39%51%41%54%31%52%36%57%38%57%35%54%41%56%50%61Gather critical data to translate strategy to actionReputation is universally viewed as impor

255、tant,which is a great start,but bridging the strategy to action gap that we see throughout this report requires more.Insights and measurement are pinpointed as critical enablers to achieve this.Those with strong approaches in these areas performed significantly better in every area of reputation man

256、agement,including being able to engage and influence audiences.CEOs cant do it alone,corporate affairs teams must be empoweredSuccessful reputation management is a team effort.While typically led by the CEO,our findings show that other C-Suite team members and Corporate Affairs Leaders do not feel a

257、s high levels of ownership with reputational efforts and dont feel the same levels of responsibility.Further to this corporate affairs and HR teams are working in silos when it comes to employee communications.This lack of alignment can be another significant barrier to translating strategies into a

258、ctions,with organisations with Corporate Affairs Leaders feeling a high responsibility for reputation perform significantly better in all areas of the Index.Corporate affairs teams that help their CEOs to build broader executive and company support for reputation management efforts will be more succ

259、essful.Global alignment and localisation must be balancedA key weakness in the area of Reputation Strategy is lack of alignment across key communications and corporate positions.While alignment is important,with vast differences in opinions,approaches,and values seen across different markets,its imp

260、ortant to balance global and local needs.With rising geopolitical tensions around the world,these areas must also be navigated by organisations with great care to avoid unintended consequences.Build a culture of crisis preparednessIn a reputation management environment where risks are on the rise an

261、d evolving at a rapid pace,organisations must build a culture of preparedness around crisis.Trailblazers in Crisis&Issues Management whose organisations have high levels of preparedness are much less likely to have experienced negative business impacts owing to reputational weaknesses over the past

262、12 months.Conduct a critical assessment for blind spots and weaknessesOur analysis uncovers a number of areas where almost all organisations need to improve and/or may be unnecessarily exposing themselves to risk.Some areas identified include being vigilant around cyber and data security,advancing p

263、rogress in ESG and sustainability strategies and investing in a dedicated team,which correlated with higher success in that area.Investing in government®ulatory relationship management with proper stakeholder mapping,also correlated with being less likely to experience issues with this audience.C

264、onsistency and frequency are important for successAcross a number of areas,including Executive Profiling&Thought Leadership,Media Engagement,and Government&Regulatory Affairs,regular activity and engagement was identified as a key catalyst for greater success.The 38%of leaders who say their organisa

265、tion is a thought leader are more likely to have a regular drumbeat of thought leadership activities.In media relations,the 31%who feel their organisation is sufficiently engaging with media are more likely to think that journalists portray them accurately,and greater frequency of interactions is li

266、nked with greater ability to influence government and regulatory stakeholders.How you communicate your results builds valueFinancial results are critical moments to demonstrate corporate performance and ultimately value.The 51%who say they have been highly effective in communicating financial result

267、s,are also 14 points more likely to say their organisations value is well understood by investors and shareholders,and 20 points more likely to say they have been very satisfied with capital raising efforts.Recommendations62Sandpiper is an award-winning strategic communications and public affairs co

268、nsultancy based in Asia Pacific and operating globally.We use our shared experience to make sense of the challenges our clients face in times of change.We draw on rich,data-driven insights and research to inform our advice and deliver measurable value.We work as a single,global team,with one P&L.Thi

269、s allows us to serve our clients flexibly wherever they are in the world.Our team are trusted advisors to industry leaders and market disruptors.We combine strong regional market understanding with global perspectives.Our deep specialist knowledge in the technology,finance,health,professional servic

270、es,consumer brands and energy and environment sectors ensure we understand the challenges our clients face,can think creatively about their issues,and shape communications to achieve their business goals.In 2023 and 2024 Sandpiper was awarded Specialist Consultancy,Sandpiper Energy,Environment and E

271、SG Practice at the Public Relations&Communications Association(PRCA)APAC Awards 2024,Large Agency Certificate of Excellence by PRWeek Best Places to Work Asia Pacific 2023,Large Consultancy of the Year by the Public Relations&Communications Association(PRCA),Large Consultancy of the Year by PR Award

272、s Asia Pacific 2023,and Midsize Agency of the Year by PRovoke Media SABRE Awards Asia Pacific 2023.About Sandpiper63 2024 Sandpiper.All rights reserved.AUCKLAND22-28 Customs Street East,Auckland CBD,Auckland 1010,New Zealand+64 21 0844 0939BEIJINGSuite 2001,Full Tower,No.9 Middle East 3rd Ring Road,

273、Chaoyang District,Beijing,PRC+86 10 8591 0056DUBAIThe Prime Tower,Level 24,2401-75,Business Bay,Dubai,United Arab Emirates+971 4 547 7727HONG KONG SAR1701-2,17/F,Tai Tung Building,8 Fleming Road,Wanchai,Hong Kong+852 3114 6339MELBOURNELevel 2/1 Southbank Blvd,Southbank,Victoria 3006,Australia+61 2 9098 4321SHANGHAIS-07,East 2nd Floor,569 Xizang South Road,Huangpu District,Shanghai 200021,PRC+86 185 1614 7739SINGAPORE6 Shenton Way,#25-11,OUE Downtown 2,Singapore 068809+65 6592 2883SYDNEYGateway Tower,36/1 Macquarie Place,Sydney,NSW 2000,Australia+61 2 9098 4321