Post on 06-Jun-2018
Brand and Reputation in the BoardroomThe role of the CEO with regard to brand and reputation
Consulting Corporate Finance Management
Table of contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . 5
2. Brand and Reputation . . . . . . . . 7
3. Research design . . . . . . . . 8
4. Results and conclusions . . . . . . . 12
5. Implications and recommendations . . . . . . 17
About Boer & Croon . . . . . . . . 19
About the author . . . . . . . . 21
A selection of recommended literature . . . . . . 22
3
1. Introduction
Many a CEO is looking to find the right balance in his* own positioning. The modesty of Dutch
CEOs results in them not seeing themselves as the personification of the company. They do,
however, accept the role of figurehead, particularly during difficult times. This is one of the
conclusions of the research study ‘Brand and Reputation in the Boardroom’ carried out among
20 Dutch CEOs by Boer & Croon associate Koenraad van Hasselt, as part of his Masters degree.
In the past, Boer & Croon had already commissioned research on the view taken by Dutch top executives
on reputation management (‘Executives on Reputation’, Ron van der Jagt, 2005). In supporting this new study,
Boer & Croon hopes to get a better understanding of the CEO’s personal commitment to the corporate brand
and the reputation of his organisation. The research will provide an impetus for furthering professio-nalism
and strengthening Boer and Croon’s activities in the areas of reputation, branding and communication. The
purpose of this qualitative research was to gain a better understanding but due to the scope and purpose of
the study the findings cannot be considered as being representative of all Dutch CEOs.
During the interviews with the CEOs it became clear that they concur with the value of the corporate brand as
a binding factor between vision, culture and brand promise.
According to the CEOs, customer satisfaction and delivering on the brand promise have the biggest impact
on the corporate reputation, followed by stakeholder relationships and the reputation of the industry sector.
Therefore, it is not unusual that in addition to value creation, CEOs are held accountable for ‘soft’ performance
indicators such as customer and employee satisfaction, diversity and the performance of the Board of
Directors.
* For easier readability, masculine pronouns have been used.
5
The relationship between brand and reputation is a fascinating one. The world of communica-
tion accommodates brand thinkers and reputation thinkers.
Brand managers regard the corporate brand as the roots and ultimate purpose of the company. What matters
is to make the brand promise relevant for all stakeholders. Reputation managers are more likely to focus on
the ‘licence to operate’: without the support of the stakeholders the right of existence and the continuity of
the company will be at risk.
Consistently living up to the brand promise and a consistent way of expressing this promise have a positive
effect on perceptions among the stakeholders. This calls for leadership and a structured approach.
2. Brand and reputation
7
Interviews were carried out between May and September 2010. Twenty CEOs, from various
industry sectors, contributed to the study.
Figure 1: This study was made possible thanks to the cooperation of the above CEOs.
In addition to the interviews, a detailed literature study was carried out focused on the triangle brand -
reputation – leadership. The literature shows that the CEO plays a key role in the complex world of brand
and reputation. On the one hand, he represents the organisation’s heritage, culture and vision, but on the
other hand he is , first and foremost, the person stakeholders hold accountable for the performance of the
organisation.
A strong brand gives direction to a company and a good reputation creates added value for, among other,
shareholders, customers and the labour market.
3. Research design
Name
Niek HoekChairman BoM
Joop van OostenChairman BoM
Peter Molengraaf Chairman Board of Directors
Pieter JongstraManaging Partner
Gerrit ZalmChairman BoM
Willem van DuinChairman BoM
Feike SijbesmaChairman BoM
Ben NoteboomCEO
John Paul BroedersCEO
Sjoerd VollebregtChairman BoM
Company
Delta Lloyd
Koninklijke BAM Groep
Alliander
Ernst & Young The Netherlands & Belgium
ABN Amro bank
Eureko
DSM
Randstad Holding
Koninklijke Vopak
Stork
Name
Wout DekkerChairman BoM
Ad ScheepbouwerChairman BoM
Sander van der LaanManaging Director
Jan de JongManaging Director
Bert MeerstadtChairman Executive Board
Gerrit WitzelChairman BoM
Peter HartmanChairman BoM
Robert SwaakChairman BoM
Jos BaetenChairman Board of Directors
Gerard van de Aast Chairman BoM
Company
Nutreco Holding
KPN
Albert Heijn
NOS
Nederlandse Spoorwegen
Heijmans
KLM
PwC Netherlands
ASR Nederland
Koninklijke Volker Wessels
8
The hypothesis that underlies the research is that there is a correlation between corporate brand characteris-
tics and the personal involvement of the CEO with brand and reputation. In order to be able to properly
identify the studied brands, the Brand/Reputation grid by Riezebos (2005) was used. This grid classifies
corporate brands into one of four types, which have a focus on ‘product’, ‘process’, ‘market’ or ‘the organisation
itself’. This classification is developed by putting together the internal image (‘how the company sees itself’)
and the external image (‘how others see the company’).
Figure 2: Brand/Reputation Grid (Riezebos, 2005)
Externalimage
Self image
Market
Process Product
Strong
Strong Weak
Organisation
9
As an extension to the brand/reputation grid model, the role of the CEO with regard to brand and reputation
can be characterised as follows:
Introvert (product-driven): Focus on internal communication, brings together all internal parties that •
have an effect on the brand and reputation, allows all parties to contribute, an atmosphere of openness
and mutual trust.
Modest (process-driven): Focus on functional communication, based on trust, stability and control, •
not aimed at brand and reputation.
Extravert (market-driven): Focus on image, seeks publicity and thrives on it, comes across as being •
purposeful and self-assured. Very customer-oriented, challenges others.
Brand champion (organisation-driven): Continually moves the goal posts, is at the forefront of industry •
developments, anticipates the future and steers innovation and change. Actively disseminates this to
both internal and external audiences. Gives hope, outlook and manages to get his employees behind his
vision.
The interviews assessed whether the brand characteristics explained the CEO’s sense of commitment to brand
and reputation. In addition, four ‘general’ explanatory variables were evaluated: personal experience and back-
ground, industry sector, whether the company is listed or not, and brand architecture.
10
Figure 3: Research Model.
The consequences are focused on the commitment, in practice, of the CEO. Time allocation, organisational
context of brand and reputation, the priority on the management agenda and the CEO’s KPIs were addressed,
among other things.
Antecedents: possible explanatory
variables
Consequences, vision on 8 themes
Brand and Reputation commitmet
CEO
Extravert Champion
Modest Introvert
Hypothesis: four types of brand/reputation orientation
11
The main conclusion of the study is that the CEO’s leadership style is not always consistent with the
characteristics attributed to the corporate brand. The role the CEO sees himself in is one of bringing
about a shift in market focus and culture; this also includes a shift in brand characteristics.
A relatively large number of the interviewed CEO’s consider their own leadership style to be visionary while the
corporate culture is process or market driven.
Figure 4: Results business orientation and leadership style.
4. Results and conclusions
Company culture Company orientation
7
8
5 1
93 4
Competitive Enterpreneurial
Controlled Family business
Market Culture
Process Product
Critical success factor Leadership style
7 5 19
4
Winning Teamwork
Reliable Unique products
Competitor Visionary
Monitor Facilitator
7
5
1
# respondents
12
Figure 5: Corporate brand typology and CEO commitment to brand & reputation.
Figure 5 shows that there is not a one-to-one relationship between the corporate brand typology and the
CEO’s commitment.
One of the main explanations for the affinity a CEO has with brand and reputation appears to be the industry
sector in which the company operates. The interviewed CEOs in the construction and financial sectors were
clearly cautious in positioning themselves and their companies. They claim this is due to the recent loss of trust
these business sectors suffered.
Many a CEO appears to be preoccupied with finding the right balance between cautiousness and exuber-
ance concerning their own profile. The term Celebrity CEO, which never really became commonly used in the
Netherlands anyway, is now definitely no longer relevant. Successful CEOs are leaders who set out the course
behind the scenes with becoming modesty and ensure that the company moves in the right direction. All the
interviewed CEOs accepted the fact that they are the figurehead of the company. Frequently it is not a chosen
role but the CEO is simply seen and approached by the outside world as the one primarily responsible for the
company. The shown modesty is to the Dutch CEO’s credit: he does not see himself as the personification of
the company but merely as a passerby allowed to play a prominent role for the company for a specified time.
7
Product
1
3
# respondents
Process Market Organisation
Introvert
Modest
Extravert
Champion
2 1
2
1 2
13
Figure 6: CEO as figurehead.
None of the CEOs interviewed doubted the importance of the corporate brand. They definitely realise that
the brand is an important intangible asset (difference between market value and book value), but do not see
the point of actually measuring the financial value of the brand. The CEO does, however, see the relevance of
measurements in terms of brand visibility and brand preference.
The CEO’s role is that of steering the development of the corporate brand as this is directly linked (at least it
should be) to the vision, mission and core values, all matters which he regards as his responsibility.
In the first place, the CEOs see the corporate brand as a strategic issue, for example, when dealing with brand
hierarchy (whether to endorse or not) and the positioning of the brand during mergers and acquisitions.
Although the interviewees immediately associate the relevance of the corporate brand with customers and
consumers, they also indicate the importance of the brand as a catalyst within the organisation. Particularly
in international companies, the corporate brand sets a direction and provides consistency. A strong brand
induces coherence in the way employees perform and present themselves. Brand compliant behaviour, i.e.
living up to the core values and brand values of the company, is increasingly becoming one of the fixed
performance indicators for employees, often laid down in companies’ performance appraisal systems.
I am the �gurehead and set the tone as a role model
I take my responsibility, it comes with the job
I don’t feel like a �gurehead, others see it like that
Number of times mentioned (multiple answers allowed)
6
4
2
“ I am the �gurehead, but the company does not determine who I am, I am only allowed to do it for a certain time”
“When I become the personi�cation of this company, I have to leave, otherwise this is doomed to fail”
“I am the company, from head to toe, but the power comes from the collective”
“I am the incarnated enterprise, in particular in times of misfortune”
“I am only a hired gun, with an impact for a certain period”
“I am too old to change myself, it is easier to change the company…”
14
CEOs consider it a priority to explain their vision and objectives internally and to express the core values. They
use all means and tools to reach their employees and interact with them. The use of social media is still in its
infancy and only a few CEOs use this medium.
The Corporate Marketing or Corporate Communications Director, and sometimes a member of the Board
of Directors, is responsible for the day-to-day running of the brand. CEO´s consider the day-to-day brand
responsibility as being operational and believe the corporate brand can be ‘controlled’. This is in contrast to
reputation, which they believe simply just happens to a company and therefore deserves more attention.
Without exception, the interviewed CEOs stated that they and they alone are responsible for the reputation of
the company. They feel that it is something that they deal with on a daily basis. The interviewees cite customer
satisfaction and the company’s brand compliant behaviour as factors having the most important effect on the
reputation, followed by stakeholder relations and the reputation of the business sector.
In saying this, they are implicitly pointing at the relationship between corporate brand, or corporate brand
promise, and corporate reputation. The CEOs consider employees and customers to be the most important
stakeholders, followed by shareholders, the labour market and government authorities. This stakeholder
orientation is not consistent with the image created, particularly in the media, that in their role, CEOs are only
focused on shareholders or financial stakeholders in general.
Reputation was included as a potential risk in the risk management policies of the companies interviewed
but when asked what assessments and analyses this was based on, they could give no answer. The interview-
ees appeared to be unaware of the state of the art practices of reputation management. Only a few of those
interviewed head a multi-disciplinary reputation steering committee responsible for measuring, analysing and
monitoring reputation.
15
Although the CEOs are primarily held accountable for the financial performance of the company and value
creation, they are increasingly being given other, softer, targets. These range from customer and employee
satisfaction, the performance of the Board of Directors, the net promoter score and diversity, to helping in their
own succession planning. Only in a few cases are reputation and brand defined as performance indicators for
CEOs. It appears that the CEOs deem their own responsibilities and tasks in the areas of brand and reputation
to be more important than do the Supervisory Boards, who determine the performance targets for the CEOs.
Figure 7: The CEO’s KPIs.
Financial
Customer satisfaction
Employee satisfaction, engagement
Reputation
Role in the public cause
Integration process
Number of times mentioned (multiple answers allowed)
16
8
4
2
2
2
“My contribution to �nding a suitable successor for me is part of my bonus targets”
“For the �rst time my performance appraisal also contains a strategic and a behavioural component”
“I am made accountable, among other things, for diversity, in particular the number of women in management roles”
“I am made accountable for many things, the remuneration document spans some ten pages”
“My responsibility is now focused on the way the Board of Management is operating”
“Net promotor score is one of my personal targets, in addition to the company wide �nancial targets”
16
The results of this study once again emphasize the time-honoured truism that change is the only constant
for successful companies. Managing this process is one of the CEO’s main tasks.
CEOs acknowledge the importance of reputation and communication in successfully effectuating major
changes. It is, therefore, in their best interest to familiarize themselves with the latest developments and
methods in the areas of corporate branding and reputation management.
Communications Directors should put themselves more in the place of their CEOs, interpret their assignment
and understand their leadership styles. Communications professionals will have to speak the language of
the Boardroom: objective, based on facts and substantiated with figures. The Communications function must
make a measurable contribution to the implementation of major changes and, thereby, the organisation’s
objectives as a whole. Only then will brand and reputation earn the place they deserve on the Board’s agenda.
5. Implications and recommendations
17
About Boer & Croon
Boer & Croon stands for high-quality service in consulting, corporate finance and management. This unique
combination enables us to come to grips with our customers’ strategic challenges and to find real solutions for
them. From inspiration to implementation.
We are unmatched in our ability to combine brainpower and decisiveness. An excellent mix enabling us
to quickly break new ground towards improved, sustainable results. The group comprises approximately
450 experienced consultants, managers and support staff.
Boer & Croon has many years of experience with assignments at the crossroads of strategy, organisation and
communication. We consult and support top management of the corporate as well as the not for profit sector
on change management issues where positioning, external perceptions, social responsibility and internal buy
in are key.
Nowadays, excellent communication is crucial for the (top of ) organisations, especially when sensitive issues
are at stake, such as an impending crisis, an organisational change, relationships in a complex stakeholder
arena, the introduction of a new strategy and mergers & acquisitions.
We help clients from the perspective of four areas of specialization:
Identity, mission and vision, positioning, brand strategy and reputation•
Issues management, crisis communication, stakeholders, media and public affairs•
Getting buy in and bringing the organisation into motion through change communication en strategic •
communication
Organisation and professionalization of the communication function and interim solutions •
19
About the author
Koenraad van Hasselt MBM is originally a linguist but also studied Public Relations and Mass Communications
at the University of Utrecht and Brand Management at the European Institute for Brand Management (EURIB).
He held several executive Communications positions at international companies, including Akzo Nobel (in
the Netherlands and Germany), Canon Europe, Philips and KPN. At Philips Consumer Electronics he was
Vice-President, with global responsibility for Corporate Communications and at KPN he was the Director of
Corporate Communications.
Koenraad van Hasselt runs a consultancy (www.reputationmatters.nl) for Corporate Branding and Reputation
management. He is currently Principal at RiiЯ (Risk2 Reputation) (www.risk2reputation.com) in London. RiiЯ
measures, analyses and monitors reputational risk for large international organisations as an integrated part of
their risk management system.
Koenraad has performed various interim assignments for Boer & Croon, of which he has been an associate
since 2007.
21
A selection of recommended literature.
Cameron, K.S. and Quinn, R.E. (2006), Diagnosing and Changing Organizational Culture, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, US. •
Dowling, G. (2006), Reputation Risk: It’s the Board’s Ultimate Responsibility, Journal of Business Strategy, Vol. 27 No.2, pp. 59-68.•
Gaines-Ross, L. (2003), CEO Capital, A guide to building CEO reputation and company success, John Wiley & Sons Inc., Hoboken, •
New Yersey, USA.
Hansen, M.T., Ibarra, H. and Peyer, U. (2010), The Best-Performing CEO’s in the World, Harvard Business Review, January 2010. •
Hatch, M.J., Schultz, M. (2008) , Taking Brand Initiative (how companies can align strategy, culture, and identity through corporate •
branding) , Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.
Ind, N. (2003), Inside out: how employees build value, Journal of Brand Management, Vol. 10, No 6., pp.393-402. •
Jagt, A.R.J. van der (2004) , Corporate reputatiemanagement (Bouwen aan vertrouwen in het transparantietijdperk), Kluwer, Deventer.•
Jagt, A.R.J. van der (2005), Executives on Reputation, Het topmanagement van het Nederlandse bedrijfsleven over corporate •
communication en reputatiemanagement, Boer & Croon Strategy and Management Group, Amsterdam.
Kotter, J.P. (1996), Leading Change, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, USA.•
Khurana, R. (2002), The Curse of the Superstar CEO, Harvard Business Review, September 2002.•
Morhart, F., Herzog, W. and Tomczak, T. (2009), Brand-specific leadership: Turning Employees into Brand Champions, Journal of •
Marketing, Vol. 73 (September 2009), pp. 122-142.
Olins, W., How Brands are Taking over the Corporation (2000). In: The Expressive Organization, linking Identity, Reputation and the •
Corporate Brand (Schultz, M, Hatch M.J. and Holten Larsen, M., ed.), Chapter 4, pp. 51-65, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Riel, C.B.M. van, and Fombrun, C. J. (2007), Essentials of Corporate Communication, Implementing practices for effective reputation •
management, Routledge, Abingon, UK and New York, USA.
Ries, A., and Ries, L. (2009), War in the Boardroom, Why Left-Brain Management and Right-Brain Marketing Don’t See Eye-to-Eye – •
and What to Do About It, HarperCollins, New York, USA.
Riezebos, R. en Van der Grinten, J. (2008), Positioneren, stappenplan voor een scherpe positionering, Boom, Amsterdam.•
Urde, M. (2003), Core value-based corporate brand building, European Journal of Marketing, Vol. 37, No. 7/8, pp. 1017-1040.•
22
aanpassingen:
p. 3: Inhoudopgave > InhoudSamenvatting eerst of inhoud eerst? Samenvatting = inleiding?p. 6: Titel opgesplitst in titel en intro-tekstp 9. introtekst aanpassen (RJ)p. 10: hoofdstuk 4 onderverdeeld in 4.1, 4.2 etc... titels boven 4.1 ed nu zelf bedacht, anders?p. 12: ‘Op de volgende pagina’s’ > ‘hieronder’?
Boer & Croon
Postbus 75784
1070 AT Amsterdam
Amstelveenseweg 760
1081 JK Amsterdam
Tel.: +31 (0)20 301 40 00
Fax.: +31 (0)20 301 40 09
info@boercroon.nl
www.boercroon.nl
Boer & Croon stands for high-quality service in consulting, corporate
finance and management. This unique combination enables us to come
to grips with our customers’ strategic challenges and to find real solutions
for them.
From inspiration to implementation.
We are unmatched in our ability to combine brainpower and decisiveness.
An excellent mix enabling us to quickly break new ground towards
improved, sustainable results. The group comprises approximately 450
experienced consultants, managers and support staff.