Zimpapers Logo

 

Lenox Lizwi Mhlanga

I FIND myself in this space because there are fundamental issues that we seem to be swept under the carpet of expediency. The elections are upon us and as expected, it is highly contested territory. People take no prisoners when the contest is for political office.

The level of scrutiny on the politicians themselves and the institutions related to the elections reaches fever pitch. So, it should go without saying that individuals who are on the firing line, so to speak, should be aware of the opportunities and pitfalls that may come their way.

The corporate reputation of an organisation provides the most credible assurance to consumers that the products or services they use are desirable and safe. And yet a reputation that has been built over years can be destroyed in one fell swoop in a crisis.

Reputation is the enduring perception held of an organisation by an individual, group or network that forms a collective system of beliefs and opinions that influence people’s actions with regards an organisation or an individual, says Professor John M T Balmer, a scholar in corporate marketing.

Corporate reputation is, arguably, the costliest asset entrusted by the shareholders and board to the CEO and the management team. It is thus worth protecting.

According to reputation expert Charles Fombrum, building a good reputation relies on reliability, responsibility, credibility and trustworthiness that contribute to creating a good culture.

From an operational perspective, the CEO as head is the face of the organisation. If he or she is found guilty of any misdemeanour, or has their character put to question, it goes without saying that this is bound to negatively affect its image and reputation. This depends on how visible they are.

Martha Stewart was the identity, heart and soul of her organisation. When she was convicted of insider trading in 2008, the share index of Martha Stewart Inc. took a severe knock.

That was until the organisation forced a Caesarian separation that effectively distanced the battered image of the embattled CEO from that of her company.

When a crisis strikes, it is the level of preparedness that makes all the difference. Experts suggest that strategy should address reputation weaknesses through evolution not revolution.

We saw how the crisis known as “Salarygate” in Zimbabwe negatively affected organisations whose CEOs were named and shamed in corporate scandals that had to do with what the media exposed as outrageous salaries paid to them.

The CEOs of state enterprises such as the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation, Premier Service Medical Aid Society and a host of other organisations were among those implicated.

They were suspended to make way for investigations, leading to a secondary crisis. The third crisis was the paralysis of the boards in the absence of the suspended CEOs in acting to try and cushion their organisations from the negative effects of the scandals.

The apparent indecision by the boards and management and their propensity to lie low and wait for the next government ministerial statement on what to do next made things worse.

In the absence of an approved crisis management strategy, the worst that any organisation is tempted to do in such a situation is to maintain a vow of silence. This is enforced as a gag order issued under executive duress and usually going against the wise counsel of public relations experts.

Organisations under siege may think that this is the safest thing to do. It’s based on the assumption that silence will keep them below the media radar. This is in the hope that this would buy them time and hopefully all the undue attention will eventually go away.

Unfortunately, it’s the opposite that usually prevails as stories stocked by unofficial sources rage in the media and the organisation’s name continues to be dragged in the mud, popping up in the headlines for all the wrong reasons.

There is the urgent need for the affected organisation to act promptly, decisively and truthfully to salvage its image and reputation. No matter what the crisis is, whether political or non-political, the organisation must tell its side of the story.

Leaders should employ all the resources at their disposal to tackle crises or manage issues that can shatter their reputations for a long time to come. The nature of the new digital news order with its 24-hour news cycle demand that CEOs and their organisations shift from being reactive to proactive.

The conventional wisdom on how state entities operate is that they are under the oversight of government, it being the sole shareholder.

However, the same government oversight has been seen to have been eroded over time allowing the elements that led to salarygates of this world to manifest.

Organisations are all accountable to all their stakeholders. And these stakeholders hold certain perceptions about the organisation based on actions, words and behaviour. If you hold a sensitive position, be rest assured that what you do in private will come under the microscope.

The organisations’ leadership may not be sensitive enough to the perceptions that are out there. It might also seem too much to demand that management grow their organisations into enterprises whose values represent those sought by their stakeholders. These are expectations that are common in the civilised world.

Organisations and their leaders need to communicate messages founded on truth and fact.Messages that must be measured by their ability to change or enhance perceptions held by stakeholders towards it and their brand.

Perception is reality to stakeholders until they are convinced to believe otherwise.

The public’s perception of the whole organisation, along with that of other stakeholders, is affected by the blunders or the impropriety of the person in charge.

The entire image of the organisation rests with him or her and the way they represent it to stakeholders through the media and other platforms.

Conversely, the way the media portrays the head honcho in charge has a positive or negative impact on their organisation’s reputation. In an ideal situation, the leader and his organisation should be well equipped and trained to tackle any crisis — particularly one that is generated outside of it, particularly on social media.

Let those who have ears hear.