By Doug Pinkham
Public Affairs Council President

Nearly three in four Americans think the level of ethics and honesty in politics has gone down over the past decade. And more than half feel the same way about ethics and honesty in business.

So what are you supposed to do if your job is to deal with politicians on behalf of business?

That’s the challenge facing corporate public affairs professionals as they try to manage public policy issues when levels of trust are at record lows. A new study on American attitudes about business shows the public is surprisingly supportive of major companies but has deep concerns about executive pay, corporate power and political influence.

The Public Affairs Pulse — a nonpartisan survey of 1,753 American adults commissioned by the Public Affairs Council and conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International — ranks CEOs’ honesty and ethics just behind those of public officials in Washington and just ahead of those of state/local government officials. All three categories receive extremely low scores. The highest scores for ethics are given to small business owners.

The good news is that six in 10 Americans have a favorable view of major companies. And nearly three-quarters say companies are doing a good job of providing useful products and services. Much of this support comes from younger citizens — Gen X and Gen Y — who hold more positive views about Corporate America than do their parents.

Yet three-quarters of the public (77 percent) endorse the opinion that there is too much power in the hands of a few large companies. And three-quarters think companies do a poor job of reining in executive pay.

It’s no surprise that lobbying and lobbyists have a negative reputation in the public’s eyes. In the survey, 55 percent say they think more unfavorably of a company that hires lobbyists to represent the firm. It is a surprise, however, that most people are supportive of specific lobbying activities. When presented with five reasons for lobbying, a majority say each action is acceptable. They include advocacy to:

• Protect jobs at the company;
• Open new markets for the company;
• Create a level playing field with competitors;
• Reduce business costs; and
• Secure government funding or grants.

What the public is more concerned about is corporate efforts to get directly involved in election campaigns. Sixty-three percent say they would have a less favorable opinion of a company that pays for ads to support a specific candidate. In addition, 59 percent say they would have a less favorable opinion of a company that starts a political action committee. Forty-one percent would object to companies paying for ads to promote a specific public policy issue.

In this tough environment, corporate public affairs executives would be wise to assume that employees, customers and other stakeholders are as skeptical as the general public. Leading companies are nonpartisan, state their commitment to ethical behavior, emphasize the strategic importance of public policy engagement and are transparent about their reasons for getting involved in politics. That’s a formula for earning trust.

By Doug Pinkham
Public Affairs Council President

If you think members of Congress are the only ones with ultra-low approval ratings, think again. While most Americans have a favorable opinion of major companies, they don’t much like the executives who run them. In fact, only 6 percent believe CEOs have high ethical standards, according to a new study on American attitudes about business. Forty-eight percent believe top executives have low standards for honesty.

The Public Affairs Pulse — a nonpartisan survey of 1,753 American adults commissioned by the Public Affairs Council and conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International — ranks CEOs’ honesty and ethics just behind those of public officials in Washington and just ahead of those of state and local government officials. All three categories receive extremely low scores. The highest scores for ethics are given to small business owners.

To make matters worse, when asked whose interests most major companies put first, the largest percentage of respondents (43 percent) answer “their top executives.”

These data present major challenges for corporate communications professionals who support their CEO’s role as the major emissary or spokesman with employees, local communities, investors and the news media. After all, if the public already assumes CEOs can’t be trusted, are they likely to have faith in a top executive announcing a corporate restructuring, a merger, a change in pricing policy or the construction of a power plant?

While CEOs still must publicly represent companies, communications professionals may want to consider new strategies when faced with controversial announcements. One of these strategies may be to make greater use of rank-and-file employees in personalizing messages associated with corporate decisions. This can be done through advertising, media outreach and ally development campaigns. According to the Public Affairs Pulse, 28 percent of Americans think non-management employees of major companies have high ethical standards, and only 12 percent think they have low standards.

If a corporate decision (for example, to open a new pipeline) provides benefits for local small businesses, owners of those firms ought to play a prominent role in building public support as well. That’s because 47 percent of Americans give them high marks for honesty and ethics, and only 7 percent give them low marks.

When it comes to confronting a corporate crisis, however, no one can take the place of a CEO. Major companies need to make their top executives available to answer questions about what happened and what they intend to do about it. Fifty-nine percent of respondents to the Public Affairs Pulse survey say this approach would do “a lot” to make them feel the company is doing the right thing. An additional 31 percent say it would still help “a little.”

While this is a tactic many communicators advocate, they are frequently overruled by company lawyers concerned that public interviews or apologies will place the firm in legal jeopardy.

And speaking of apologies, 81 percent of Americans say a public apology from a top executive would be a positive step when a company is facing a crisis of its own making.

By Doug Pinkham
Public Affairs Council President

The public wants major companies to be full, active partners in tackling the big problems that have traditionally been the province of government, says a new study on American attitudes about business.

The Public Affairs Pulse, a survey of 1,753 American adults, was commissioned by the Public Affairs Council and conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates International. Both are nonpartisan and nonpolitical organizations.

For obvious reasons, nine in 10 want big companies involved in improving the economy and creating jobs. But there is also majority support for business involvement in:

• Providing community services such as food banks, free clinics and job training for the poor (80 percent);
• Providing relief for disasters like floods, tornadoes and earthquakes (76 percent);
• Improving health care (73 percent);
• Improving education (72 percent); and
• Improving roads, bridges and mass transit (56 percent).

What’s more, in four of these five cases, most Americans express strong support for business involvement.

Yet, despite the dollars and volunteer hours many companies currently invest in corporate citizenship endeavors, 57 percent of respondents say major companies are generally not doing a good job of “contributing to their communities.” Only 35 percent say firms are doing well on that front. In addition, 56 percent think major companies are not doing a good job of protecting the environment.

While it appears that companies may not be receiving recognition for community involvement programs, corporate contributions to charities and local community groups do have a positive impact on a company’s public image, says the report. Fully four in five (81 percent) say they view major businesses more favorably if they make large contributions to such organizations.

Negative views about top business leaders seem to color attitudes toward CEOs joining with government leaders to help solve the nation’s problems. Only 46 percent support such direct involvement. A bare majority (51 percent) take the view that it is better to keep business and government separate and not involve business leaders.

Based on these data, it’s clear that major companies need to do more to communicate their efforts to support local communities, make the public aware of corporate citizenship programs and demonstrate their commitment to sustainable business practices.

It’s also clear that corporations need to figure out how to set realistic expectations for their role as corporate citizens. A company can support good schools, healthy diets, safe neighborhoods, clean water, financial literacy and other goals that Americans strive to achieve. It can also be a partner with government agencies and others to provide disaster relief. But few corporations would want to be primarily responsible for the condition of the nation’s roads, bridges and mass transit systems. Though some state and local governments may lack the funds to support essential services, it’s difficult to expect the private sector to play a primary role.