Category Archives: Credible communication

Check out The Language of Trust blog

I haven’t stopped blogging. But for the moment I am concentrating most of my attention on my new book The Language of Trust.  You can find my latest blog posts listed to the right and on www.languageoftrust.com.  Hope to see you there!

Anatomy of an Apology: Akio Toyoda

In an age of mistrust, even the smallest slipup can destroy a well-cultivated corporate image.  So it’s no wonder that Toyota is scrambling to control the fallout from their latest recalls.  The acceleration problems that have led to a recall of more than two million cars aren’t simply a quality-control issue – they strike at the heart of the company’s value proposition: reliable cars that keep your family safe.

Much has already been written about Toyota’s response to this corporate crisis, and especially their failure to act more quickly.  I want to focus on a specific event, Akio Toyoda’s February 9 Op-Ed in the Washington Post. The point is not to assess Toyota’s overall approach to this crisis or to predict its effectiveness. Continue reading

Is trust really back for business?

“How much do you trust business to do what is right?”

That is the question posed in the Edelman 2010 Trust Barometer. And the good news – if you can call it that – is that 54% of Americans believe that business will do the right thing, representing an 18% jump from last year.  

But business should hardly celebrate. First, there is always the risk of mistaking a majority for a mandate. This number is barely half the population at best and means that the other half don’t trust business to do what is right. And while the numbers are not broken out, my guess is that only a very small percentage of the population feels strongly about their belief in business.

More importantly, being acknowledged as a company that will “do what is right” is not really a ringing endorsement. I might believe that a company will “do what is right,” on the big things – fraud, serious product safety issues, etc. – while also doing everything that it can to put its profits and shareholders ahead of its customers. In other words, I might trust the company’s big actions but remain skeptical of its everyday interactions with me as a customer.

In fact, that is what I see everyday. Even where companies are not perceived as inherently evil, the overwhelming majority of Americans view them with a skeptical eye. This trust, even if it is increasing, is incredibly fragile.

The Year of the Apology: The Worst and Best of 2009

Who did the best? Who did the Worst? A Report Card

The list of apologies in 2009 is almost too long to recount. But who did it best – and worst – and why? We tested 15 of the most public apologies of the year to see what makes for a good apology and a bad apology and what we can learn from our A-list of apologists.

First, the perp walk:

The athletes:

1. A-Rod for trying to be a superhuman,

2. Michael Vick for being inhumane,

3. Serena Williams for dressing down a line judge, and

4. Tiger Woods for carousing with anyone in a dress.

The politicians: Continue reading

The Language of Trust: Selling Ideas in a World of Skeptics

I am happy to announce that my new book, The Language of Trust: Selling Ideas in a World of Skeptics, is scheduled to be published in May 2010 by Prentice Hall Press.

Below is a little preview.  The book is available at Amazon for pre-order in case you want a headstart.

The Language of Trust: Selling Ideas in a World of Skeptics

Trust is dead.  Now what?

Living through the horror of 9/11 era, the 2008 financial collapse, and a lifetime of accumulated consumer experiences, Americans are more skeptical now than at any other time in our history. They think financial services companies will take their money. Pharmaceutical companies put profits over patients.  Politicians are all liars. And corporations will do anything for a dollar.

At the same time, the public has access to more information and more viewpoints.  Major corporations and mommy bloggers find themselves on equal ground in the fight for attention and credibility.  And for every fact and statistic that supports one side of an argument, a quick Google search can reveal an equally compelling alternative view of the world. Continue reading

Inside Zappo’s: A great case study on internal comms

You have to love Tony Hsieh’s letter to employees following the Zappo’s deal with Amazon. His company has gotten a lot of credit for its customer service, but this is an example of how that service happens. While I don’t know how Zappo’s employees reacted to the letter, my guess is that this is exactly what they hoped to hear. There are few senior executives who could pull off a letter like this because they simply don’t have the credibility inside their organizations that he likely does. But there are a couple of good lessons for all CEOs in talking to their teams. Continue reading

Bulldog Reporter Interview: Words that Resonate in Recession and Recovery

Check out my interview with Frank Zeccola 
The economic climate hasn’t just affected bank accounts and business prospects. One leading communications strategist says it has actually changed how we’retalking—and this means huge opportunities for PR professionals who can tap into the right kind of messaging to lead their brands and clients out of recession and into recovery.  READ THE ARTICLE

It’s the symbols, stupid.

This was originally published on April 29, 2009 on: cnbc1

Multimillion-dollar compensation packages.  Private jets.  Hormones in milk.   Plastic water bottles.  Chemicals in baby products.   High credit card rates.  Retention bonuses.  

42-19549584

What do these things have in common?  They come from different industries but each represents a common set of challenges that corporations now face.   Each is a symbol
– a shorthand representation
of a much larger ideological perspective.  Each tells a story without having to say a word.  

For better or worse, symbols now dominate the debate: 

Congressmen try to embarrass executives by asking them why they took private jets to their hearing on Capitol Hill rather than trying to grapple with the real issues at hand as a means toward a positive end.    Continue reading

Combating The “OutrAIGe”

This was originally published on March 19, 2009 on the CNBC Guest Blog

The reasons to envy Edward Liddy, AIG Chairman and CEO[AIG  1.51    0.13  (+9.42%)   ], are few and far between these days.

It’s bad enough he has to defend $165 million in bonuses to senior AIG staff when the company just received more than $170 billion in federal taxpayer dollars. And in his defense, he did say he found the current bonus arrangements to be both “distasteful” and “difficult to recommend” given the current economic climate. But the fact that he did so with such cold, dispassionate language only adds salty insult to an already bloody injury.

But this isn’t meant to be another attack on AIG or the bonuses themselves, however “distasteful” they might be. Rather, there are some communication lessons to be learned from AIG’s fetid response that cut across every business or industry, both in good times and in bad.

The fallacy of fatal facts. Aside from the obviously painful position of being at the helm when that kind of money is going out in executive bonuses, Liddy makes one of the biggest (and most common) communication blunders possible: clinging to fatal facts. Continue reading

Obama’s Backlash Backlash

It didn’t take long for Obama’s anti-Wall Street rhetoric to start to come back to haunt him.  Already the New York Times is reporting that anger at the financial services industry is threatening to put a wrench in Obama’s agenda.  

I never understood why the President decided to switch from “Yes, We Can” to “Look at what they did.”   It was so off-brand for Obama.  And given Bush’s horrendous approval ratings and the nonstop news coverage of the evil done by Wall Street,  Obama would have been better off focusing on the future and not on the past.   Why further drive people against Wall Street?  Was that really necessary to get the stimulus passed?   Always seemed like gratuitous populism to me.  And it seemed potentially very dangerous to amp up the anti-business hatred.   Continue reading