dWhen it comes to aligning business actions to CSR priorities, communicators often say they lack the resources or the authority to “force” business partners into action. Members tell us things like “We’re agents of change, but we’re not doers. Execution is down to the business.” Or “We view our role as catalysts, to help the business see the bigger picture, the hidden business opportunities.” While for some organizations this may still be more aspiration than reality, one great example of becoming a catalyst for CSR in the organization is Unilever.

Now, Unilever is a well-documented case of creating shared value (most famously through Hindustan Unilever’s project Shakti), but recently the company has taken a further step of actually branding its commitment to sustainable business through its Sustainable Living Plan. The Plan, which was launched in November 2010, sets out a blueprint for how the company will achieve its sustainability objectives. By putting it on paper, Unilever is making a public statement of what it stands for as a business and what it wants to achieve, and holding itself accountable for it. There are three cool things to take away from the Sustainable Living Plan in thinking about how to get business partners more involved in executing on your priorities:

Read More »

This post was written by Amy Gallo for our Finance and Strategy Practice.

In CEB View’s last Talent Matters post we discussed how difficult it is to work for a bad boss. But what if, instead of working for one, you are one?

Of course it’s not easy being the boss. Research from CEB’s CLC Human Resources program shows that the three areas that most managers – even great ones – struggle with are evaluating employee performance, providing effective feedback, and turning around underperformance. These are hard things to do and because the way you do them directly affects your team, any missteps are likely to create friction.

Fortunately, the recession seems to have improved many employee-manager relationships but boss-bashing is still a favorite pastime (as proved by last week’s traffic on the first “bad boss” piece). So, how do you know if your employees are just letting off steam or if you are truly difficult to work with? Unfortunately, many bad bosses are the last to know how awful they are to work under. This may be because you aren’t getting the feedback you need, you’re disconnected from your employees or you just aren’t watching out for the signs.

Here are five indications that you may be a worse boss than you thought: Read More »

AXA build CSR objectives from the bottom up

Here at CEC, we often hear that business partners don’t fully buy into CSR programs. It seems that CSR teams spend a lot of time understanding stakeholder expectations, and making proposals to the business about what they should be doing, often in CSR committees, or similar environments. Understandably, CSR teams are frustrated when the business fails to seize on their ideas and actually implement them.

The smart companies are making it much easier for the business to make these objectives a reality – first by getting buy-in so they want to do it, and also by making it easy for them to do so. Last week, we saw a great approach from Ford, who partner with the business to get bottom up buy-in to initiatives before going to senior leaders, and launching a new CSR initiative. What’s really smart about their approach is that it ensures that new practices are compatible with existing processes, that the managers are bought in from the offset, and that the new item won’t be rejected.

Recently, we were also really impressed to hear of a simple yet highly effective approach from insurance giants AXA. Now, although the American automotive manufacturer and the French insurer are very different entities, there is one major common denominator between their approaches; instead of using a prescriptive, top down approach, as many companies do, both companies develop new CSR initiatives in conjunction with the business units that will implement them. Read More »

By Rebecca Canan

This is the second in a two-part series about corporate translation services.  This post offers insight into how communicators are assessing translation vendors to ensure a good fit with company needs. The first post outlined the primary options for translation services (e.g., in-house, free lancer, vendor, etc).

If you’re like other CEC members, you opened up a phone book (or more likely, did a quick Google search) to identify a company that could translate your organization’s communications.   However, due to global expansion in new markets, you may be facing increased (and quicker) demands for translated company content.  How can you ensure that you’re partnering with the best vendor for your needs?  One of your peers recently asked a question in a CEC discussion forum, requesting advice on translation services.  Aside from assessing a vendor’s language capabilities and costs, here are other factors your peers recommend considering: Read More »

First of all, a very happy new year to you all!  It’s that time when you make yourself all sorts of promises and resolutions.  You look forward to a fresh start and lay out all the things you will do differently this year compared to last.  Any chance your list includes a resolution to invest more in the corporate brand?

The pharmaceutical industry is experiencing a time of unprecedented challenge.  Patent expiries, regulatory issues, and increased pressures from healthcare providers have combined to create an environment where the sector is associated with lower growth and higher risk.  Clearly focusing on reputation should be everything for you right now? Or should it?

In an industry subject to a lot of scrutiny, we hear the term ‘Corporate reputation’ used a lot.  It is often used alongside ‘corporate brand,’ perhaps even in the same sentence to mean the same thing.  The CEC’s quantitative research from ‘Building Stakeholder Preference through the Corporate Brand’,  however, confirms that reputation and brand are two means to two very different ends.  The end goal for reputation is stakeholder acceptance (i.e., “would I consider doing business with you?”), and the end goal for corporate brand management is stakeholder preference (i.e., “would I as a health care professional choose to prescribe your drug in preference to your competitor’s?”) Read More »

By Kirsten Robinson

“Who wants to be working on things that are low-value added? Nobody.” – Marie Uhrich, SVP Communications at Thrivent Financial

With this thought in mind, Communications leaders should be asking themselves—Is our team working on tasks that are valuable resources to the business? Are we using our time efficiently? And how can our team demonstrate the value we are adding to our company?

Process improvement relies on information taken from workflow data, but the effectiveness and value of the Communications team isn’t measured by metrics like other company functions—making it more difficult to uncover inefficiencies, as well as show partners value being brought to the business.

Thrivent Financial’s communications team realized the importance of workflow data, but also saw some obstacles—such as collecting data from a staff resistant to time and activity tracking; organizing disparate sets of data; and understanding what type of analysis is most appropriate in a given situation. Read More »

Business is in a state of permanent crisis. In its most frightening definition, a crisis is “a stage in a sequence of events at which the trend of all future events, especially for better or for worse, is determined; a turning point.” How many of these turning points have you and your company experienced in the last two years? How many more do you foresee in the coming years?

The pace of change and level of uncertainty in the external environment is putting pressure on companies to build a new competency within their organization—adaptive leadership. In a 2009 HBR article, Leadership in a (Permanent) Crisis, the authors argue that leaders need to solve for the underlying causes of major crises while simultaneously making the changes that will enable their organizations to thrive in unpredictable environments.

Adaptive leaders, according to article, do three things well. Read More »