Agh! You had me up until "C:/Perl/site/lib/..."

Please re-post this last entry. You're definitely on to something, Richard.

I, for one, find tremendous energy from the international business meetings I attend and help direct. Other points of view help me spot my own blind spots and to find ways to overcome the natural biases of clients, partners and journalists no matter which country they call home.

Please tell us more!

Best,

Mike Bawden
Brand Central Station

In the previous posting, several people commented that transparency is necessary for trust to develop and increase. However, I belive that before transparency there needs to be respect.

Respect is what allows one to communicate with transparency and then increase trust.

As you have shown with the Edelman Trust Barometer, those with professional credentials such as doctors, lawyers and financial analysts are far ahead on the trust scale. In my opinion, respect is frequently tied to those who have earned the credentials. Hence, why we as a public trust those professionals.

CEO's earn their positions too and should be respected for their hard work. Yet, with the recent scandals you've mentioned in previous posts, it is the few individuals who have lost the respect of the public for the entire group.

I believe that when CEOs utilize conferences such as the World Economic Forum to network with NGOs, credential professionals and the "average person" it is a step in gaining respect.

Only then, after respect is established with all groups, can CEOs, countries or the average person communicate with complete transparency and trust.

On the other hand, we don't live in a perfect world. I don't believe complete respect, transparency or trust will occur, but it doesn't mean we can't try.

Best regards,

Cathy Schieberl
Average Person

With regard to the rise of public trust in NGOs in the US in the latest Trust Barometer, it seems to me that there will be a natural tendency for people to trust NGOs over businesses. Or maybe it's not "natural," and just reveals my own, personal bias. Here's my take:

Philanthropic gestures, corporate social responsibility and triple-bottom-lines notwithstanding, a business's primary focus is to make money. This will mostly be perceived as self-interest, and it should be. Successful businesses grow, and make more money than they made before. The corporate scandals of the past few years have been corporate scandals, not non-profit scandals, because the corporate leaders involved have benefited themselves by redirecting profit -- the lifeblood of business.

NGO's do not focus on making money. They exist as a counterweight to the forward push of business, to redress the social, environmental or health problems that are often side effects of business (and/or government). By nature, a measure of the success of an NGO is minimal self-interest. A scandal scenario for an NGO, in fact, might consist of a situation in which one of them actually made money. If they are ultimately successful in their stated goals, they really should become smaller, or cease to exist.

The natural disconnection between NGOs and financial self-interest, and the natural involvement of business with the same would make me (for one) tend to trust an NGO to "do the right thing" before I'd trust a company to do so.

This assumes that "doing the right thing" implies an ethical consideration, not simply making a better product or service: while I might trust them to fill a niche, I would not count Coca-Cola's making of a new softdrink as "doing the right thing."

Somehow, I feel like I'm stating the obvious. If not, I'd love to hear an opposite opinion.

Jim,

I do believe that companies will do the right thing most of the time
Because it is in their business interest to do so
Note the repercussions today of Exxon Valdez now almost 20 years ago
More than ever the brand and corporate image are inextricably linked

Complications occur when we try to apply the corporate, profit-driven, self-interest model to the production and distribution of what are known as public goods and services and apply the civil society non-profit model to the production and distribution of other goods and services.

However, both types of organisations, governments themselves and all individuals have a common responsibility to respect and not hurt each other and to care for their physical, social and cultural environments for succeeding generations. Acknowledgement of this would provide a reasonable basis for regulation by democratic governments on behalf of us all. Being fallible, we all need some rules but having separate rules for individuals and each type of organisation just leads to obfuscation and avoidance.

Repercussions for Exxon? It has grown to be the largest company in the WORLD. Seems like it has bounced back just fine. Many scandal-ridden companies do: Odwalla, Pepsi, Ford, Tylenol, etc.

Jim,

You may be right about Exxon Mobil's growth rate despite its hard line position on environnental issues. But I think they continue to move toward a more communicative position. Note their funding of a research grant at Stanford University to study global warming
and commitment to pursue other research in this area. Now they want to meet with certain NGOs at least...a start in my view.

Jim,

here is my hope....perhaps delusional but nonetheless. I believe that business now recognizes that it must do the right thing the first time. Not only because it is right but because it is smart..for employees, for customers, for regulators. The competitive advantage to be gained from more environmentally sound solution is serious. You can save money...you can benefit the community at large.
All the while motivating your key constituency the employees of the firm.

Cathy,

Sorry it took me so long to come back to you The World Economic Forum has become a much more open place Now NGOs are inside negotiating with CEOs inside of outside throwing rocks And the Forum makes much more of the content available to the public As you say, transparency is key to trust...so is lack of control on content

I allways find a necessary information in your blog. Thank you.

Robert,

Thanks for writing. And keep reading.

Richard