Well, well, well...sometimes validation comes from the strangest places. Maybe I've just been watching the PR flack's "Director's Cut" of the classic flick, Miracle on 34th Street, where in a fit of charity and bonhomie Macy's starts sending customers to Gimbels, but I was gratified to read that Fleishman-Hilliard just recently stumbled upon an insight that GolinHarris discovered, documented and has been tracking for four years now, since 2003:
When it comes to business earning its stripes as a good corporate citizen, Americans believe that the litmus test and job #1 is how a business values and treats its employees!
Preposterous you say? Well, if you don't take my word for it, then take Fleishman-Hilliard’s and the National Consumers' League, as reported by the Grey Lady herself in a business story slugged, “Corporate Conscience Survey Says Workers Should Come First,” (NYT, 31 May 2006).
Here's the wood: "Far more American consumers consider the way companies treat their employees a good indicator of their social conscience than their philanthropy.”
Isn’t that interesting.
GolinHarris' annual "Doing Well by Doing Good" corporate citizenship survey discovered way back in 2003 that "how a business values and treats its employees" is one of the top two drivers of corporate citizenship, right up there with "ethical, honest, transparent and accountable executives and business practices," so sayeth nearly two-thirds of Americans.
More importantly, "how a business values and treats its employees" is no random blip on the corporate citizenship radar screen, a reputational UFO of little consequence to the traffic controllers of corporate social responsibility, charitable giving, strategic philanthropy, cause marketing, community relations, issues management and SarOx compliance.
Quite the contrary: The trend is significant, stable and sobering.
The chart below is a trend analysis from all four GolinHarris "Doing Well by Doing Good" corporate citizenship surveys...including a sneak peak at our just completed and - ssshh - not yet released 2006 study.
"Values and Treats Employees Well and Fairly"
2006 (5,000 Americans)
Importance: 69% - Rank: 1 of 12 corporate citizenship drivers
Excellent/Good Brand Performance (150 brand average): 48% - Gap: -21%
2005 (3,500 Americans)
Importance: 66% - Rank: 1 of 12 corporate citizenship drivers
Excellent/Good Brand Performance (108 brand average): 51% - Gap: -15%
2004 (1,000 Americans)
Importance: 64% - Rank: 2 of 12 corporate citizenship drivers
Excellent/Good Brand Performance (75 brand average): 52% - Gap: -12%
2003 (500 Americans)
Importance: 61% - Rank: 2 of 12 corporate citizenship drivers
Excellent/Good Brand Performance (30 brand average): 54% - Gap: -07%
Gee, think there’s a pattern here?
Not only is "values and treats employees well and fairly" consistently at the top of heap in importance, but Americans perceive business performance as anemic. . .and weakening year to year!
And if I were a betting boy, I'd double-down on "values and treats employees well and fairly" continuing its upward trajectory as more and more businesses begin to rethink, rework and retreat from the "Social Contract" that - arguably - has been the engine of American economic prosperity since World War II.
I know it sounds counter intuitive to place "values and treats employees well and fairly" to high in the Maslovian corporate citizenship hierarchy of needs because we’re conditioned to think in artificial boxes and silos of “charitable giving,” “strategic philanthropy,” “community relations,” “issue management” “EHS/sustainability,” “corporate social responsibility” and “cause marketing” -- not the holistic and integrated character of the brand’s reputation, value proposition, and stakeholder relationships that GolinHarris advocates.
That's why in this year's corporate citizenship survey we decided to push the issue front and center. We asked all 5,000 Americans if they agreed or disagreed with the following statement, allowing them to position themselves on a 10 point scale of "Very Strongly Agree" to "Very Strongly Disagree."
"A company's relationship with its employees is fundamental to a company's corporate citizenship.
I think how a business values and supports its workers (e.g., wages, working conditions, job security, retirement and health benefits, etc.) is a MORE IMPORTANT MEASURE of corporate citizenship than a company's charitable contributions, support for causes and issues and other forms of social responsibility and giving back to the community."
Agree 73%
Strongly Agree 42%
More Agree than Disagree 30%
Mixed 22%
Disagree 05%
More Disagree than Agree 03%
More Agree than Disagree 02%
So, as we think about the Next 50 Years of Public Relations, let's not accept the old "RCA Victor" dog look that 9 out of 10 of our clients give us when they eyeball "treats employees well and fairly" high priority topic for discussion developing in corporate citizenship strategies.
(Perhaps some of you are old farts like me and can remember the venerable RCA Victor logo of the dog tilting its head in befuddlement upon hearing his master's voice bellowing from the victrola's horn).
But then, I'm just the numbers guy, pledged to confuse and confound through obfuscation and obtuseness through the fine art of lies, damn lies and statistics.
What say ye PR practitioners, professionals and pundits?
Did Fleishman-Hilliard award GolinHarris a supreme compliment and prove that old saw, "imitation is the greatest form of flattery" in concluding "far more American consumers consider the way companies treat their employees a good indicator of their social conscience than their philanthropy," or do we both have our statistical heads stuck way up in that place where the sun don't shine?