reputation results of the largest companies in the ... · introduction 4 the reptrak™ method 6...

Reputation Resultsof the Largest Companiesin The Netherlands

2010

Introduction 4

The RepTrak™ Method 6

The Global RepTrak™ Pulse Study 2010 8

Reputation Results of the Largest Companies in The Netherlands 9

Global Industry Reputations 14

Reputation Intelligence: The Changing Face of Corporate Reputation 15

About Reputation Institute The Netherlands 18

Reputation Institute around the World 20

14th International Conference May 19th – 21st 2010, Rio de Janeiro 21

Content

REPUTATION RESULTS | 3

Reputation Resultsof the Largest Companiesin The Netherlands

2010

4 | REPUTATION RESULTS

Cees B.M. van RielVice Chairman and Co-Founderof the Reputation Institute

This year we celebrate a very special occasion:

2010 is the 10th consecutive year that we have

measured the reputations of Dutch companies.

In 1999, the Reputation Institute started measuring the reputations of companies with an

instrument called RQ, the Reputation Quotient, to develop detailed ratings and analyses of

some of the most visible companies in the world. Initially used in the USA, the RQ was soon

adopted in other countries. In fall 2001, we invited representative samples of consumers in

The Netherlands, Italy and Denmark to rate the reputations of the most visible companies

in their countries.

Keeping up with latest research and trends, there have been some changes in the decade

of reputation research that followed. Extensive qualitative and quantitative research

with consumers in USA, Europe, Latin America, Russia, Australia, South Africa and China

indicated that ‘Corporate Reputation’ can be represented by a standardized measure based

on four questions asked of consumers about their trust, admiration, feeling and esteem for

the company: The RepTrak™ Pulse was born. The RepTrak™ Pulse became the beating heart

of the RepTrak™-method, which replaced the RQ-model in 2006.

During the last years, reputation measurement has truly taken a global lift-off: In 2010,

the reputations of the largest companies have been measured in a whopping 35 countries

worldwide, surveying consumers about their perceptions of more than 1,800 companies.

This has enabled us to create a unique database of reputation scores of the largest

companies in the world.

Introduction


Having a database of ten years of Dutch reputation scores allows us to distinguish some

very interesting trends and shifts:

• There appears to be a link between the economic cycle and average reputation scores:

when consumer confidence is negative, reputation scores are declining; when consumer

confidence is positive, reputation scores generally show improvements.

• Reputations need to be carefully built. Philips’ reputation is top of the bill these last

years, but in 2001 Philips only obtained 14th place in our reputation ranking; it was even

outperformed by Sony. During recent years, Philips managed to transform the company

into a leading brand in the area of health and well-being which has had a tremendous

positive impact on its reputation.

• Nevertheless, strong reputations should not be taken for granted. Even strong

reputations require continuous maintenance. Ahold was the winner of the first RQ

ranking in 2001. We all know what happened to Ahold after that. Yet, Ahold’s

reputation has made a remarkable recovery in the last years.

We are very pleased to present to you the newest reputation results of the largest

Dutch companies in 2010 and the highlights of ten years of Dutch reputation results.

I am looking forward to welcoming you to the Annual Event of the Reputation Institute

in the Amstel Hotel on April 28th, 2010.


The RepTrak™ Method

The Reputation Institute created the RepTrak™

method, to provide companies with a

standardized framework for enabling the

identification of factors that drive reputations

and for benchmarking their corporate

reputations internationally.

RepTrak™ is the world’s first standardized

and integrated tool for tracking corporate

reputations globally across stakeholder groups.

The RepTrak™ Model is a tool that tracks

23 key performance indicators grouped around

7 reputation dimensions that research has

proven to be effective in getting stakeholders

to support the company.

The beating heart of the RepTrak™ Model is

the Pulse. The RepTrak™ Pulse measures the

health of a company’s overall reputation with

consumers. The RepTrak™ Pulse score is based

on four statements: the esteem, good feeling,

trust, and admiration that consumers feel

towards a company.

Establishing a good reputation is not a goal in

itself; the ultimate goal is getting stakeholders

to support the company. Supportive behaviors

can be shown in various areas, such as the

willingness to purchase products from a

company or to invest in company stock.

Pulse

esteem

feel

ing adm

ire

trust

PurchaseProducts & Services

Innovation

Workplace

Governance

Citizenship

Leadership

Performance

Recommend

Crisis proof

Verbal support

Invest

Work


Internationally standardized andcomparable reputation scores

In some countries, people are universally

more positive in their responses than in other

countries. The distribution of scores in that

country may also be more ‘spread out’ than in

another because people have more information

and are able to make more subtle differences

between companies.

To overcome these sources of systematic bias,

Reputation Institute’s policy is to adjust all

RepTrak™ scores by standardizing them against

the aggregate distribution of all scores obtained

from the RI’s Annual Global RepTrak™ Pulse.

Standardization has the effect of lowering

scores in countries that tend to overrate

companies, and has the effect of raising

scores for companies in countries that tend

to rate companies more negatively. Due to this

procedure, all RepTrak™ reputation scores are

comparable across industries, countries, and

over time.

The global distributionof reputations

The global mean is 64.2 and the largest

concentration of companies have a RepTrak™

Pulse between 60.0 and 70.0. Based on the

global distribution of scores, Reputation

Institute proposes the following benchmarks

for benchmarking standardized corporate

reputation results internationally:

Maintain (>70)

Improve (60-69)

Immediate action (<60)

50

40

30

20

10

020 40 60 80 100

# of

Com

pani

es

Global RepTrak Pulse

Measuring the reputations ofthe world’s largest companies

The RepTrak™ Pulse 2010 is the annual study of

the reputations of the world’s largest companies.

The study was developed by the Reputation

Institute to provide executives with a high-level

overview of their company’s reputation with

consumers. Online interviews with consumers

were conducted in January and February 2010.

More than 260,000 ratings were used to create

reliable measures of the ‘corporate reputation’

of more than 1,800 companies.

In 2010 the Global RepTrak™ Pulse studyis conducted in 35 countries:

Europe:

Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland,

France, Germany, Greece, Hungary,

Ireland, Italy, The Netherlands,

Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia,

Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey,

United Kingdom

Asia:

China, India, Japan, Singapore,

South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand

North America:

Canada, Mexico, United States

Latin America:

Brazil, Bolivia, Chile

Africa:

South Africa

Oceania:

Australia

Companies rated

The Global RepTrak™ 2010 measures the

reputations of the largest corporations in

each country based on their ‘total revenues’.

Rated companies had to have significant

consumer presence and be sufficiently familiar

to the general public. All companies are

measured in their home country only.

Survey methodology

The Global RepTrak™ 2010 was conducted

online in all countries. The RepTrak™ Pulse

is calculated by sampling an average of

150 local respondents a month, who are

familiar with the company. The Global RepTrak™

2010 questionnaire is a 10 minute long survey

that invites respondents to describe their

perceptions of companies. The Reputation

Institute uses online surveys since they are

more diverse than traditional samples in many

domains (e.g. gender, geographic location and

socioeconomic status).


The Global RepTrak™ Pulse Study

2010


Companies rated

The Global RepTrak™ Pulse 2010 measures

the reputations of the 30 largest corporations

in The Netherlands based on their ‘total revenues’.

Rated companies had to have significant

consumer presence and be sufficiently familiar

to the general public in The Netherlands.

These conditions have as a consequence that

a small number of corporations were not included

in the list (e.g. UVIT); the general public in

The Netherlands is not familiar enough with

the companies to evaluate them in a valid way.

Profile of respondentsin The Netherlands

More than 15,000 respondents were surveyed

during January and February of 2010 to come

to the reputation ranking in The Netherlands.

Respondents had to be familiar with the

company they were rating and were allowed

to rate up to four companies. The surveys

were conducted online. The data is weighted

to obtain representative samples for

The Netherlands based on age and gender.

Reputation Results of the Largest

Companies in The Netherlands

45 - 64

age

35 - 44

25 - 34

18 - 24

0 1000 2000 3000 # of respondents

Female Male

0%

10%

20%

Low

23.1%

30%

40%

50%

Level of educationMiddle

44.2%

High

32.8%

77.776.3

73.6 73.472.9

71.871.570.770.770.0

67.166.968.766.365.865.665.365.3

63.4 63.362.862.662.462.061.360.960.8

59.854.4

48.8

1. Philips Electronics2. Rabobank Groep

3. Air France-KLM4. Friesland Campina

5. Heineken6. Unilever

7. AkzoNobel8. TNT

9. Ahold10. CZ

11. Randstad12. DSM

13. Reed Elsevier14. VolkerWessels

15. BAM Groep16. KPN

17. Nutreco18. ING Groep

19. Shell20. Delta Lloyd Groep

21. Eneco22. Eureko/Achmea

23. Essent24. Aegon

25. USG People26. Nuon

27. ABN Amro28. SNS Reaal

29. Nederlandse Spoorwegen30. Fortis

Reputation results of the largestcompanies in The Netherlands

This year’s reputation leader in The Netherlands

is Philips with a RepTrak™ Pulse of 77.7.

Rabobank Groep takes the second place with a

Pulse score of 76.3, followed by Air France-KLM

(73.6).

Reputation scores above 70 are hard to

achieve as we have seen over the years.

This year, one third of the largest

Dutch companies manage to accomplish this

top achievement.


“Een gezonde reputatie is een gekoesterd bezit in een tijd waarin het aanzien vanbedrijven meer dan ooit ter discussie staat. Bij Philips hebben we de afgelopen jarenmet zijn allen hard gewerkt aan een ware metamorfose rond de thema's 'markt' en'gezondheid en welzijn'. Dat in deze periode onze reputatie zich goed heeft gehoudenis voor ons een belangrijke graadmeter. Het zegt ons dat klanten en andere belang -hebbenden temidden van de verandering vertrouwen blijven stellen in een ondernemingwaar je met recht trots op kunt zijn. We zijn ons er echter terdege van bewust datreputatie te voet komt en te paard gaat. Het feit dat we nu opnieuw deze ReputatieAward uitgereikt krijgen beschouwen wij dan ook niet als een verworvenheid, maarals een aansporing om met beraad en discipline voort te gaan met een strategie eneen bedrijfsvoering die Philips ook in de toekomst uitzicht geeft op een evenwichtigereputatie en duurzaam vertrouwen.”

Gerard Kleisterlee

Voorzitter Raad van Bestuur, Koninkijke Philips Electronics N.V.


Shifts in the reputation ranking

Philips has managed to score a hattrick:

Philips was also number one in 2008 and 2009.

Rabobank is again the number 2, which is a

remarkable performance compared to the

reputations of other banks all over the world.

The numbers 3 and 4 (FrieslandCampina and Air

France-KLM) have switched positions this year.

Top 5 Reputation Improvements

Fortis +5.8

ING Groep +4.6

BAM Groep +3.4

AkzoNobel +3.1

ABN Amro +2.1

Top 5 Reputation Declines

Nederlandse Spoorwegen -6.1

Shell -2.8

TNT -2.3

Nuon -2.2

Randstad -2.0

Fortis shows the largest improvement in its

reputation (+5.8 points). However, due to the

downfall of the company’s reputation earlier,

Fortis still lingers at the bottom of the ranking.

ING Groep and BAM Groep also belong to the

Top 5 Reputation Improvers. As a result, both

BAM Groep and ING Groep climb nine places in

the ranking this year: BAM Groep from the 24th

to the 15th position, ING Groep from the 27th

to the 18th. Striking newcomer in the top 10 is

AkzoNobel, which climbs from the 12th to the

7th position, due to its reputation improvement

of 3.1 points.

Climbers in the ranking inevitably entail

decreases of others. Nuon has made the largest

drop in the ranking. As a result of its reputation

decline (-2.2 points) it loses four places, as it

goes down from the 22nd to the 26th position.

The reputation of the Nederlandse Spoorwegen

seems to suffer a great deal from the snowy

conditions in The Netherlands lately, yet

Nederlandse Spoorwegen is only set back one

place in the ranking; it’s reputation is still well

above Fortis’ reputation.

Corporate leaders onreputation dimensions in 2010

A reputation is built on seven pillars from which

a company can create a strategic platform for

communicating with its stakeholders.

Reputation Institute measured not only

perceptions of companies on the four Pulse

attributes, but also asked respondents to rate

the companies on the seven key dimensions.


Products & Services Innovation Workplace

1 FrieslandCampina 1 Philips 1 Heineken

2 Heineken 2 Unilever 2 AkzoNobel

3 Philips 3 Heineken 3 Philips

4 Unilever 4 Ahold 4 CZ

5 AkzoNobel 5 AkzoNobel 5 FrieslandCampina

Governance Citizenship Leadership

1 Heineken 1 Rabobank Groep 1 Heineken

2 Philips 2 Philips 2 Philips

3 FrieslandCampina 3 FrieslandCampina 3 AkzoNobel

4 CZ 4 AkzoNobel 4 Rabobank Groep

5 Rabobank Groep 5 Ahold 5 Ahold

Performance

1 Heineken

2 Ahold

3 Shell

4 Rabobank Groep

5 Unilever


This year’s leader on reputation, Philips, is

present in the top 5 of six of these dimensions

(only in Performance it does not hold a top 5

position). This clearly underlines the robustness

of Philips’ reputation platform.

Compared to last year, the reputation foundations

of the Rabobank Groep seem to have been

hollowed out slightly: last year the Rabobank

Groep was present in six of the top fives, this

year in four. Nonetheless, the Rabobank Groep

still has a strong number 1 position on

Citizenship.

Heineken is currently present in the top 5 of

six reputation dimensions and is even ranked

1st in four of those dimensions (Workplace,

Governance, Leadership and Performance).

AkzoNobel’s reputation improvement is also

visible with the reputation dimensions.

AkzoNobel holds a top 5-position in five

reputation dimensions. Noteworthy is Ahold,

which really has come a long way since 2001

and is now back in the top 5 of four reputation

dimensions.

Wij zijn zeer verheugd met het feit dat Rabobank – net als vorig jaar – deop een na hoogste reputatiescore van het Nederlandse bedrijfsleven weette noteren. Wij zien het als blijk van waardering voor onze manier vanopereren als coöperatieve financiële dienstverlener. Dit geldt te meer methet oog op de teruggang in reputatie van de financiële sector wereldwijd,vooral als gevolg van de kredietcrisis. Al meer dan 100 jaar stelt deRabobank het gemeenschappelijk belang van mensen en gemeenschappenvoorop. De resultaten van de meting die jaarlijks door het ReputationInstitute wordt gehouden bevestigen nogmaals dat de respectvolle,integere, professionele en duurzame manier van werken van de Rabobankdoor het algemeen publiek hoog wordt gewaardeerd. Uiteraard is dezebevestiging voor ons zeer motiverend.

Gerlinde Silvis, member of the Executive Board, Rabobank Nederland

Global Industry Reputations

Industry results provide an indication of the

context within which companies operate. Eight

industries show an average score above 70:

Consumer Products, Food Manufacturing, Retail-

Food, Industrial Products, Computer, Electrical &

Electronics, Retail-General and Beverage. In

contrast, Financial-Diversified and Tobacco

companies have a weak industry reputation,

showing an average industry score below 60.

Most of the global industry reputations have

improved this year. The largest improvements

have been made by the Food Manufacturing

industry, Insurance companies and Services

providers. On the other hand, the reputations

of Tobacco companies show the largest decline

compared to 2009.

Our top 30 Dutch companies fare very well in

comparison to the ‘average’ players within their

global industry: the majority of the Dutch

companies have a higher reputation than their

average counterpart in their global industry.

Most noteworthy in this respect is of course

the Rabobank, that is in the top of the Dutch

ranking, while Financial institutions are

generally among the least-reputed

organizations. But also CZ performs well in this

respect, by scoring a 70.0, which is 8.2 points

above the global Financial-Insurance average.


51.2

75.575.4

72.372.271.971.2

70.770.3

67.567.5

67.367.3

66.166.065.965.3

65.063.6

62.762.461.861.160.9

58.1

Consumer ProductsFood Manufacturing

Retail - FoodIndustrial Products

ComputerElectrical & Electronics

Retail - GeneralBeverage

AutomotivePharmaceuticals

ConglomerateAirlines & Aerospace

Raw MaterialsServices

Transport & LogisticsChemicals

EnergyUtilities

Construction/EngineeringInformation & MediaFinancial - Insurance

Financial - BankTelecommunications

Financial - DiversifiedTobacco

1.60.6

3.7

2.91.0

1.5

3.6

0.40.2

0.22.3

2.1-2.2

-0.6

-1.4

-0.5

-1.0-4.2

1.1

2.5 0.0

3.24.4

1.1

0.1

2010-2009


A decade of reputation evolution

It wasn’t that long ago that the concept of reputation

was a purely academic exercise, centering around four

basic questions:

1 How is reputation defined?

2 Does reputation matter?

3 Can reputation be measured?

4 Is reputation valuable?

One catalyst for bringing the academic debate about

reputation into mainstream dialogue globally in the

mid-1990s was the fierce competition among business

schools to move up in the annual rankings of Business

Week, U.S. News & World Report and the Financial

Times. By 2000, the dialogue centered around the

twin concepts of ‘if’ and ‘how’ reputation can be

measured. The burning questions were measuring

intangibles, reputation creation, understanding

perceptions and linking perceptions to behaviors.

At the same time, Reputation Institute’s annual

studies on the world’s most visible companies gave

new prominence to the emerging discipline of

reputation management.

To understand what drives reputation around the

world and identify the companies who have been able

to build strong relations with key stakeholders,

Reputation Institute embarked on the most ambitious

global research project on reputation in 2006. Each

year, the annual Global Reputation Pulse Study

measures perceptions of over 50,000 consumers in

over 25 countries to find out what the ties are that

bind more than 1,000 of the world’s largest companies

to the stakeholders they serve.

In the four year history of the Global Reputation Pulse,

Italian food group Barilla won in 2006, followed by

Danish toy manufacturer Lego (2007), Japanese

automaker Toyota (2008) and Italian confectionary

giant Ferrero (2009). What is the common

denominator to these winners? They all compete

globally and locally with strong reputation platforms

that align corporate value across corporate vision,

stakeholder perceptions, supportive behaviors and

employee beliefs. They all invest in winning

multistakeholder reputation platforms in order to

reduce the perceptual or behavioral gaps between

these elements through properly configured

messaging, engagement and aligning strategies.

Through unlocking the power of reputation these

companies see accelerated value creation.

Reputation Intelligence:

The Changing Face of Corporate Reputation1

1 Excerpt taken from “Reputation Intelligence 2009”, published by Reputation Institute’s Knowledge Center.

Current state of reputation

The world’s most reputable companies don’t

wait for a crisis to test their reputation; rather,

they proactively work to inoculate and manage

their reputation risks, leading to an

unquestionably strong link between reputation

and support. In 2009, those companies in

Reputation Institute’s Global Reputation

Pulse rankings that improved reputation by

5 points saw an increase in support by 6.75%

on average, which manifests itself in positive

word-of-mouth recommendations to others.

This material level of support creates a

competitive advantage for the “best of the best”

and raises the bar for those companies playing

catch-up with skeptical stakeholders.

Today, there are changing global shifts around

which reputation drivers are most relevant to

stakeholders as the economic landscape moves

from bull markets to recessions. The increasing

importance of governance (#2 overall in 2009

Global Reputation Pulse) speaks to the virtue

of companies going beyond compliance when it

comes to ethical leadership and transparency.

In fact, governance is the #1 reputation driver

in four countries: Canada, India, Thailand and

Turkey. Over the last three years, there has also

been a shift towards the Workplace, Leadership

& Financial Performance dimensions at the

global level. All of this suggests that managing

reputation is never static or formulaic, and the

importance of managing a corporate reputation

platform across all seven dimensions is now

more mission-critical than ever.

In addition, recent years have seen the

emergence of strong reputation leaders in

emerging markets: an unprecedented fourteen

companies from Brazil, Russia, India & China

(BRIC) took the 2009 Global Top 50 rankings

by storm. Large companies in emerging

markets have been able to foster more

emotional, “hometown connections” with

consumers in their home markets. Corporate

managers should look to local companies in

key markets in Africa, Asia and Latin America

for best practices on how to build stronger

relationships with their burgeoning middle-class

customers.

Another unmistakable trend from emerging

markets is the rise of companies hailing from

traditionally reputation-challenged global

sectors who delight stakeholders in their home

markets nonetheless. Clearly, Petrobras (#4 in

2009, Brazil), China Faw (#22, China) and State

Bank of India (#29, India) were not dragged

down by the dreary global outlook for the

energy, automotive and banking sectors from

a reputation standpoint.



What does the future holdfor reputation?

The future orientation of reputation

management centers around how to create

strong reputations, with four related questions:

1 What are the actions that stakeholders

expect and want from companies?

2 How can we partner with external

stakeholders to co-create a better future?

3 How do we align employees in the creation

of stakeholder support?

4 How do we manage the risks and leverage

the opportunities more systematically?

What does the future holdfor reputation?

The next decade of reputation management

promises to be even more exciting and dynamic

than the first ten years were, and it’s up to all

of us to ensure that both the art and science of

reputation are preserved and enhanced during

the present economic challenges and the

emergence of a post-crisis world.

“AkzoNobel has been through a period of great transformation, which culmi -nated in our rebranding in 2008. So I was very pleased to learn that over thelast 12 months the company has made big strides with respect to its reputation.As the world’s largest coatings company, it’s something we pay careful atten -tion to. Because our reputation matters. It affects our products, reflects onour employees and, of course, can influence our share price. But how do welook after it? Well, we have to ensure that people understand us as a company.So we put a lot of effort into the quality of our communications. We applyworld class standards to everything we do, and that includes talking to theoutside world. We speak openly to the media, we have fully embraced thebenefits of online technology and social media and we care about the relation -ships we have with our customers. We realize that engaging audiences inconversations about what we do is crucial to how we are perceived. Thank -fully, we seem to be doing a good job. But we know we can do even better.”

Hans Wijers, CEO AkzoNobel


About Reputation Institute

The Netherlands

Reputation Institute The Netherlands is

located in Rotterdam. Reputation Institute

The Netherlands brings together a diverse

group of academics and corporate practitioners

from institutions around the country. Reputa -

tion Institute The Netherlands cooperates with

the Corporate Communication Centre, which is

a joint initiative of the Rotterdam School of

Management, Erasmus University and the

business community. The Corporate Communica -

tion Centre conducts academic and applied

research, consults to blue-chip companies, and

educates the next generation of communication

leaders.

Cees B.M. van Riel is Vice-Chairman and

co-founder of Reputation Institute and RI

Director for The Netherlands. Dr. van Riel

is also a Professor at Erasmus University

Rotterdam and head of the Corporate

Communication Centre.

Corporate Members &RƒN Members

Door wonen gedreven


Corporate Communication Centre

Dr. Majorie DijkstraSenior research consultantE-mail: [email protected]

Marijke Baumann ConsultantE-mail: [email protected]

Ahong GuConsultantE-mail: [email protected]

Patricia Heijndijk Research consultantE-mail: [email protected]

Amidé StevensConsultantE-mail: [email protected]

Reputation Institute Products

RepTrak™ - A tool which measures reputation

across stakeholders, countries and industries.

The RepTrak™ model tracks 23 key performance

indicators (attributes) grouped around 7 core

dimensions.

Media RepTrak™ - A tool that assesses the impact

of media coverage on a company’s reputation;

whether and how media coverage is contribu -

ting to building up or breaking down reputation.

RepTrak™ Risk - A tool that helps organizations

evaluate intangible risks in real time. A tool

to prioritize and mitigate risks as well as

a standardized approach to risk reporting.

CountryRepSM - A tool that measures the

emotional appeal of countries.

The Strategic Alignment Monitor - A tool for

measuring employee alignment and analyzing

the relative effectiveness of internal communi -

cations to ensure that everyone in the organi -

zation does their part to realize the strategy.

Corporate Brand Value Assessor® - A tool to assess

the strengths of a corporate brand name as

endorser for new plus existing product/BU names.

Corporate Story Development - Building a

corporate story that functions as a communi -

cation platform for internal and external

messages, based on archival data, workshops

and, if necessary, an internal survey.

Organizational Identity Assessor - A tool to

assess the core organizational characteristics by

comparing the projected identity with the desired

and perceived identity.


Reputation Institute

Around the World

RI Offices:

Brazil – Chile – China – Denmark – Netherlands

South Africa – Spain – United States

RI Associates:

Australia – Bolivia – Canada – Colombia – France

Germany – Greece – India – Ireland – Italy – Japan

Norway – Portugal – Russia – Sweden – Switzerland

Turkey – Ukraine – United Arab Emirates

United Kingdom

Ana Luisa de Castro Almeida —Managing Director RI Brazil: InBrazil’s emerging economy it isimportant for our large companies

to be able to benchmark their activities andresulting reputation to those of top-tiercompanies globally. The Global RepTrak™Pulse gives them exactly that possibility.

William Pullen — ManagingDirector RI Chile: As one of themembers of the global ReputationInstitute network we are proud to

help organizations further improve their reputationin Latin America.

Matthew Pan — Managing DirectorRI China: Two of the five biggest‘gainers’ in terms of reputation inthe Global RepTrak™ Pulse study

of last year were Chinese, showing the increasedimportance of Chinese companies in the globalmarket.

Fernando Prado — ManagingDirector RI Spain: Last year’s‘winner’ in Spain, Mercadona, seestheir top-tier reputation score as a

confirmation of the public’s appreciation of theirfocus on quality and service.

Henrik Stroier — Managing DirectorRI Denmark: We have been respon -sible for the tracking of companyreputations for the Nordic countries

for many years now, as a proud part of the globalReputation Institute network. Over the years, manyNordic companies haven proven to be amongstthe top performers on reputation worldwide.

Dominik Heil — Managing DirectorRI South Africa: As Africanrepresentatives of the ReputationInstitute network we help African

companies manage their reputation. The GlobalRepTrak™ Pulse gives them the means to puttheir own reputations into perspective, andinspires them to increase their performancein order to reach tier-1 positions as well.

Anthony Johndrow — ManagingDirector RI US: Our list of the200 companies with top-rankingreputations - published each year in

Forbes - is held in high regard by US corporations,since it is based on the Global RepTrak™ Pulsestudy, which reviews over 1,800 companies in35 countries this year.


14th

International Conference on Corporate

Reputation, Brand, Identity and Competitiveness

“The Sustainability

Imperative:

A Strategic Role for

Reputation Management”

May 19th to 21st 2010, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Corporate Reputation, Brand, Identity and Competitiveness


Plenary Session Wednesday 14:30-16:00 hoursThe triple bottom line of Sustainability – the experience of Brazilian companiesin sustainable management of financial, social and environmental issuesJosé Sérgio Gabrielli - President of Petrobras

Zeca Rudge - Executive Vice-President of Itaú Unibanco

Marcos Bicudo - President of Philips Brasil

Moderator: Prof. Dr. Ana Luisa Almeida - Managing Director of Reputation Institute Brazil

Plenary Session Wednesday 18:00-19:30 hoursA Second Wave of Corporate Responsibility: from a Top Down strategy to a Bottom-up Co-creation with StakeholdersProf. Dr. C. B. Bhattacharya - Professor at European School of Management and Technology, Germany

Moderator: Prof. Dr. Cees van Riel - Vice-chairman of Reputation Institute

Plenary Session Thursday 9:00-10:00 hoursCreating Value with Sustainability: “Relentlessly committed to wind” – securing sustainable energy though windMr. Morten Albaek - Senior Vice-President at Vestas

Moderator: Kasper Nielsen - Managing Partner at Reputation Institute

Plenary Session Thursday 13:30-14:30 hoursSustainability through the Social Media Lens: Comparing the US and BRIC ExperienceJon Low - Co-founder of Predictiv LLC

Courtney Barnes - Co-Author of Digital Strategies for Powerful Corporate Communications

Plenary Sessions


Plenary Session Thursday 16:30-17:30 hoursCreating internal and external support for SustainabilityPeter van Minderhout - Former Director of Corporate Communication & Sustainability of TNT

Internal and External Strategic AlignmentProf. Dr. Cees van Riel - Vice-Chairman of Reputation Institute

Plenary Session Friday 11:00-12:30 hoursWhat companies that manage their reputation have learned and what are their next challengesProf. Dr. Charles Fombrun - Chairman of Reputation Institute

Eduardo Eisler - Director of Marketing at Tetra Pak Brasil

Moderator: Prof. Dr. Dominik Heil - Managing director of Reputation Institute South Africa

Plenary Session Friday 12:30-13:30 hoursCross Cultural Competence in Global Corporate Reputation. Culture: Key Factor of Success to effectively build and sustain Good Corporate Reputation across National Borders and at HomeSalvador Apud - Senior Partner of ITIM International for the Americas

PLEASE VISIT OUR WEBSITE:

www.Reputationinstitute.com

FOR MORE INFORMATION AND TO REGISTER

10

24

1. B

&T

Ont

wer

p en

adv

ies

reputation results of the largest companies in the ... · introduction 4 the reptrak™ method 6...

Documents