Over the past few months, we've discussed why companies should open a Washington office, why CEOs are getting more engaged in public policy and why most D.C. lobbyists haven't faced substantial budget cuts.

Now comes a study from McKinsey & Company that examines global business attitudes about government and assesses companies' effectiveness in dealing with policy-makers. This survey of 1,167 executives (representing a full range of industries, regions and functions) shows that government is more likely to affect a business' economic value than any other group except customers.

If you're looking for proof that companies expect public affairs to play an even larger and more influential role in the years ahead, this is it.

Nearly two-thirds said they believe government's role in their industry will increase in the next three to five years. In addition, respondents rated government more likely to affect their economic value than investors, employees or suppliers.

Where will this impact be felt? For obvious reasons, companies across the globe said passing laws and enforcing regulations was government's most influential role. But it's interesting to note that 47% said passing laws would have a negative impact and 38% said new laws would have a positive effect. Government's efforts to enforce rules was split 44% to 41%, positive versus negative.

Different attitudes about government showed up when McKinsey compared different regions of the world. In China, India and the Middle East/Africa, more than half agreed new laws would have a positive effect. In the United States, only 28% said new laws and policies would be positive.

For the U.S. and countries in the Asia-Pacific region (other than China and India), government's role as a purchaser of products and services was the activity most likely to have a positive impact. Other regions of the world considered government's role in providing infrastructure and services to be the most valuable.

What's the net impact on corporate bottom lines? Respondents were divided as to whether government actions will increase or decrease operating incomes. But 34% said the impact, whether it's positive or negative, will be at least 10% during the next three to five years.

Given these data, one would assume that most companies would have a dynamic strategy for engaging government at all levels. Well, don't assume.

In the U.S., where we think public affairs is most sophisticated, fewer than 40% said their company was "extremely" or "very effective" at many policy-related functions, including:

• Gathering intelligence about government actions that could affect the company;

• Understanding social, political and economic objectives of government actions;

• Sharing information about government actions among business units; and

• Quantifying the potential effect of government's actions on economic value.

Fewer than 30% of companies in U.S. markets gave themselves high marks for using their CEO as company spokesperson on critical policy issues or working to build strong, trust-based relationships with key government stakeholders.

As a matter of fact, companies primarily active in the U.S. and the European Union gave themselves the lowest overall scores for effectiveness. In contrast, companies whose primary market is China gave themselves the highest scores.

So what's the problem? Clearly, regional expectations for government vary considerably. Developing nations are trying to build roads and bridges, expand utility service and take other steps to support economic expansion. Most are not focusing on "fine-tuning" their economies through new laws and regulations that may improve quality of life but dampen growth. It's no wonder that U.S. and European countries are more concerned about the negative effects of government on business.

In addition, many executives expressed frustration with government for blaming business for societal problems, for not understanding the economics of an industry and for making it too difficult to determine the best way to engage productively with government officials. (I'm guessing these frustrations were particularly acute in developed nations, but the survey didn't break out the results by region.)

Since the vast majority of U.S. companies have never quantified the impact of government actions on their operating income, it's also likely the McKinsey survey results will be surprising news to top executives who focus exclusively on operations, finance and sales.  This may be the impetus they need to support a more robust public affairs program.

Perhaps you should send them a copy. (Valentine's Day is just around the corner.)

Comments? Email me at http://pac.org/contact/blog.