I spent yesterday morning with the directors of fifteen major non-governmental organizations. My topic was trust, in this case trust in civil society. I told them that the origins of our study, now in its 16th year, stem from the confrontation between NGOs and police during the World Trade Organization meeting in Seattle in 1999. We found that NGOs were actually the most trusted institution, well ahead of business, government and media.
Today, I told the NGO leaders that they face significant challenges in the years ahead. It is true that the sector continues to be the most trusted, though the gap with business is closing. The essential change is that major NGOs are now considered big institutions and are expected to achieve tangible results for society. I describe the NGO movement as the Fifth Estate in global governance, along with media, the church, the government and the people.
I pointed out three disturbing statistics from the 2016 Edelman Trust Barometer.
First, credibility in NGO representatives as spokespeople is sinking. The NGO spokesperson now ranks below CEOs in trust, ahead of government regulators. The trust in a person like yourself, a technical expert or an academic is 15 points higher than for the NGO representative.
Second, the NGO movement is not as trusted as business to keep pace with changing times. For the first time in any of our surveys, there is a chink in the image of the NGO, specifically related to innovation.
Third, the Trust Index of the mass population in NGOs is substantially lower than among elites. The gap in the U.S., Germany, Mexico, France, Australia and Sweden exceed 15 points, while in key developing markets such as India and China it is more than 10 points.
I was asked to make an assessment of the deteriorating position. I asserted that the political wing of the NGO movement, the advocacy or campaigning arm, is getting much more attention than the operational unit, leading to the perception of more political action than effectiveness. I asked whether the marketing of the NGOs was focused excessively on direct mail soliciting donations and advertising in magazines, while the mass population had migrated to search and social channels. I also asserted that NGOs might be too closely linked to their governments, their prime source of funding, whose trust scores have plummeted in the past five years.
A fascinating debate ensued among the executives. The case was made for more transparency on funding sources, use of resources and results of work. There could be a change in focus, away from the elites towards the mass audience, to enlist them through social media, to mobilize their own employees. The NGO brand needs to be global but the footprint must be local in order to assure connectivity to the community. There was even a question on the most appropriate title for the head of the organization; why be called CEO if that makes an NGO seem more like a big corporation?
The NGO movement is now at a different point than when it constituted a band of dogged and poorly financed activists who stormed the Brent Spar rig in the North Sea to protest deep water drilling. They are part of the fabric of global governance charged with finding solutions to the pressing problems of environment, refugees, education and treatment of women. They are indeed big businesses with brands to maintain. They need to be seen as facilitating innovation in the interest of all. I would focus on being a partner with both business and government in finding tangible and innovative solutions.
Richard Edelman is president and CEO.
