Reputation and Intangibles – Connecting the dots
February 15, 2011 by Mary Adams · Leave a Comment
My last few posts have been about reputation. There are some out there that would ask what the big deal is. What’s different now? Companies have always had employees and customers. Why do they have more influence now?” Why do I need to think about reputation more than before? There are actually several forces driving this change.
The first driver is the shift in the control of the means of production. In the industrial era, a company’s profits were driven by what it owned. Workers had to come to the employer to get access to the means of production. It gave companies a greater level of control over its workers. With the rise of the knowledge economy, however, the knowledge held by employees and, indeed, external stakeholders have become an important part of a corporation’s “means of production.” The knowledge factory relies on the unique contribution of human and relationship capital elements. This shift in the balance of power means that companies have to pay more attention to the interests and priorities of their stakeholders as “partners” in the success of the knowledge factory.
The second driver of the increased focus on reputation is the acceleration of communications. If you didn’t understand this before, you certainly do now given the events of wikileaks, Tunisia, and Egypt. Blogs, Twitter, Facebook and other social networks are just the latest developments in a society that had already developed 24-hour news. It is easier than ever before for anyone to get a message out. Sometimes all it takes is a blog post or a YouTube video by one disgruntled customer to go viral and threaten your reputation in an instant.
The third driver is an increased interest in sustainability and corporate social responsibility. Sustainability is an umbrella term for a number of related trends including corporate social responsibility and triple bottom line. CFO magazine defines sustainability as “the practice of publicizing a company’s environmental and social risks, responsibilities and opportunities…it can be thought of as an environmental-impact statement for the entire corporation, with ‘environment’ defined not only in terms of natural resources and climatological effects but also the economic and social impacts of labor practices, charitable endeavors and governance structures.”
The fourth and final driver is the lack of transparency of intangibles. There is a shocking lack of information available to internal and external stakeholders about the knowledge side of business. So when news does get out about a problem or a failure, then the reaction is swift and often very negative. If your stakeholders don’t understand how your business works and don’t receive periodic information beyond just the financials, then bad news is a warning to get out. The less your stakeholders understand about your business and the less you share about non-financial aspects of it, the more vulnerable you are to severe reactions to bad financial news.
You need to consider all four drivers as you think about managing your reputation. But we ask you to pay special attention to the last driver—intangibles reporting. You have a lot of control over your reputation—if you are getting the kind and quality of information to your stakeholders. And very few companies have developed good reporting on intangibles. That means that the 80% of corporate value that is driven by intangibles is invisible. Stakeholders can only guess at it unless you give them the information they need. This is really the goal of Intangible Capital. Helping you see, leverage and communicate about your intangibles. Because it will help you perform better AND because it will help you get the reputation you deserve.
Adapted from Intangible Capital: Putting Knowledge to Work in the 21st Century Organization by Mary Adams and Michael Oleksak.
Redeploying Agricultural Intellectual Capital
May 27, 2009 by Mary Adams · Leave a Comment
The challenges facing the food industry provide an important chapter in the story about the end of the industrial era.
In past posts, I have talked about how the large industrial model has lead to dangerous monocultures in bananas and unsustainable concentration of salad green production in the Salinas Valley. There is a growing realization that we need to think about sustainability in agriculture. This is a significant challenge–but also an enormous opportunity. Read more
Is Sysco an Example for Sustainability?
May 22, 2009 by Mary Adams · Leave a Comment
One of my favorite magazines for recreational reading is Saveur. It is a food magazine that features everyday food around the world. It’s like being invited into a private home on a trip around the world. No pretension, just real people and real food. And there is an incredible variety of real people around the world so it gets pretty interesting.
But I don’t read it for business information. So I was surprised to see a recent column (although I probably shouldn’t have been) on Sysco entitled Greener Giant. It asked the question, “Can an emblem of industrialized food also stand for sustainability?
Most of us think of Sysco as the giant distribution company that delivers mass quantities of food to institutional kitchens. And that’s what they do. But it was very interesting to see how they see sustainability relating to their business. Read more



