The Evolving Corporate Communication Function
Paul Argenti, Maril MacDonald, and Sean O’Neill
As the role of the chief communication officer (CCO) evolves, it is important to understand her unique strategic contribution to the operation of the enterprise. Over the last few decades, a profound shift has occurred in how leaders view the communication function within organizations, from a tactical and superficial focus to a more strategic and elevated perspective. As a result, it has evolved to enjoy more responsibility, importance, and impact than ever before.
Multilateral demands from a range of constituencies, declining confidence in business, and the impacts of globalization are all propelling strategic communication to the center of modern enterprise management, and enterprises are reacting by revising budgets and internal structure to support the function. This chapter explores the evolving CCO role, the growing mandate and responsibilities of the function, the increased focus on integration and collaboration, and the effect of an increasingly globalized, interconnected business landscape.
The Emergence of Corporate Communication
Early in the 20th century, as big business became more of a force in society, increased demands for transparency from a variety of internal and external constituencies and changes in laws and regulations ushered in the emergence of a new corporate function: public relations. Whether they wanted to or not, enterprises had to respond to constituencies at an unprecedented rate and volume. Managers realized that they would need to dedicate resources to manage the near constant flow of information.
The first senior corporate public relations executive who was more than just a publicity man was Arthur W. Page, who served as vice president, public relations, for AT&T from 1927 to 1946. Page was already a well-respected national business magazine editor and columnist when he was hired by AT&T. Page Society founder Ed Block explained in 1993,
When he was offered the job, [Page] told the chief executive that he would take it only if it was a policy making position. Corporate policy. Not “communications” policy. He understood clearly from the outset that good public relations is a product of wise and timely policy.
Page also understood that good public relations was essential to the survival of business. “All business in a democratic society begins with public permission and exists by public approval,” he said. He also believed that good public relations flowed from the authentic reality of the company’s actions. “Public relations is 90 percent doing and 10 percent talking about it,” Page famously said (Arthur W. Page Society n.d.).
Another early pioneer was Paul Garrett, who joined General Motors in a similar position in 1936. Like Page, Garrett believed public relations was integral to company policy and argued that it was the responsibility of everyone in the organization (Henige 1995).
From its founding in 1983, the Page Society aspired to this kind of elevated, policy-making role for its members, who primarily are CCOs and public relations agency CEOs. As the role of corporate public relations evolved, some professionals like Larry Foster at Johnson & Johnson, and advisers, like Harold Burson, founder of Burson Marsteller, did have full access to CEOs and were involved in enterprise policy decisions. Foster, for example, was a chief adviser to J&J Chairman Jim Burke during the Tylenol crisis in 1982, which is widely seen as a model of corporate crisis management (New York Times October 30, 2013).
In many other enterprises, though, corporate communication became a decentralized function, with employee communication often located in human resources, investor relations in finance, customer relations in marketing, and media relations in public relations, which often did not report to the CEO (Argenti 2016, pp. vi–vii). Thus, the importance of the Page Society’s mission: “To strengthen the enterprise leadership role of the chief communications officer”—a phrase that suggests that the leadership role of many CCOs is not as strong as it could be (Arthur W. Page Society n.d.).
In The Authentic Enterprise (Arthur W. Page Society 2007), the Page Society observed that for many years, the enterprise communication function simply served as a liaison of the enterprise and was responsible for developing and maintaining media relationships, corporate journalism, internal events, and speechwriting. The goal was information, and the measurement of value was activity-based (volume of press coverage, readership of company publications).
The financial scandals of WorldCom and Enron in the early 2000s drove changes in public expectations of business to be more authentic, responsive, and responsible (Argenti 2016). This trend was not isolated to the United States. Massive accounting scandals at the Netherlands’ Royal Ahold and at Italian dairy-foods firm Parmalat—sometimes referred to as “Europe’s Enron”—dominated headlines in the same period. These scandals alarmed the public about the lack of transparency in business and the concept of reputation evolved from a communication-led theory to a strategy-based enterprise necessity.
The Authentic Enterprise (Arthur W. Page Society 2007) reported that by 2007 the role of corporate communication had evolved to be a strategic planner of enterprise positioning, focused on driving coverage, influencing external criteria, changing culture, and influencing strategy and policy—a role more like that assumed by Page and Garrett in earlier times. The goal was to influence brand perceptions and enterprise reputation, and the measurement of value was attitude-based (assessing corporate reputation and employee commitment). The CEOs who were surveyed as a part of that report saw the role of corporate communication evolving from reactive to proactive to interactive:
• Reactive communications exhibit the traditional role of playing defense—protecting the company’s reputation and responding effectively to crises and other unexpected developments.
• Proactive communications involve the more advanced skills required to play offense—seeking new opportunities to enhance the company’s reputation.
• Interactive communications represent the future of the profession—the emerging imperative to build values-based relations and two-way collaboration with diverse constituencies. (p. 40)
The Growing Mandate
CEOs now regard the communications function as highly strategic, particularly in light of heightened demands for transparency and corporate purpose (Arthur W. Page Society May, 2017).
Across the board, the CEOs regarded reactive approaches as inadequate, the report stated. “Even the proactive approaches that have strengthened during the past couple of decades, while valuable, are no longer sufficient. … CEOs acknowledge that these new forms of interactive communications are in an early, largely aspirational stage today. But they expect their chief communications officer to take on this new responsibility.” (p. 17)
In the ensuing decade, the evolving business environment and stakeholder expectations, described in Chapter 1, have accelerated demands on the CCO and the enterprise communication function. Most important, the CCO role is transitioning from functional expert to business leader. CCOs must, therefore, be able to deliver effective strategic communication and, at the same time, contribute to high-level corporate decision making. A 2015 Korn Ferry Institute survey of Fortune 500 companies examining the evolving role of the CCO found that “nearly all respondents (more than 91 percent) identified ‘providing leadership on reputation, values, and culture’ across the enterprise” as receiving more attention and effort today (Korn Ferry 2015, p. 14).
As the enterprise’s shepherd of authenticity and reputation, CCOs increasingly are focused on how a company’s actions and behaviors affect the perceptions of its key constituencies, just as Page and Garrett were in an earlier era. The Page Society introduced a report in 2012 outlining the “Page Model of Enterprise Communication,” which holds that the first responsibility of the CCO is to help create a strong corporate character. Explored in more detail in Chapter 4, corporate character is the source of the enterprise’s unique, differentiating identity, consisting of purpose, mission, values, culture, business model, and strategy. The idea is that, to be trusted by stakeholders, an enterprise must define and activate a corporate character that is worthy of trust (Arthur W. Page Society 2012a).
Developing a “One-Company culture” (Argenti March 2016, p.15) is a strategic imperative focusing on corporate character (Chapter 4 will examine this in detail). The results of implementing such a culture are a clearer corporate vision and a guiding principle for executing strategy through communication. The Institute for Public Relations recently concluded from a comprehensive study, “By aiding employees in drawing a line-of-sight between their individual jobs and the marketplace, against the backdrop of the company’s strategy, businesses can achieve Organizational Clarity and, ultimately, organizational success” (Institute for Public Relations 2016, p. 6).
Having a strategy and communicating it so that everyone can act on it is a critical first step. The strategy must be clear and understandable, it must be true, and most important of all it must be consistent (Argenti and van Riel n.d.). A One-Company culture involves deep employee engagement, an entrepreneurial spirit across all enterprise levels, and authentic relationships between managers and employees to align them around a strategic road map to harness maximum individual and collective brainpower and keep the enterprise nimble and responsive to the world evolving around it. The growth of large enterprises over the last century has led to incredible progress and opportunity. That growth, however, has also created organizational complexity. The idea of thousands of people operating as one is next to impossible without a concerted effort by a senior management team focused on strategy, execution through communication, and culture.
The enterprise needs to find ways to translate its vision into a handful of words capturing the imagination of employees all over the world. Orit Gadiesh, chairman of consulting firm Bain & Company, wrote an article for Harvard Business Review in 2001 (with James L. Gilbert) entitled “Transforming Corner-Office Strategy into Frontline Action” that focused on how to distill “their strategy into a phrase and have it used to drive consistent strategic action throughout their organizations” (p. 74). Earlier, she used Dell’s “Be direct” and GE’s “Be number one or number two in every industry in which we compete or get out” as some of the best examples of this vision distillation (Gadiesh and Gilbert 2001).
Today, we might look at Walmart’s “Save Money, Live Better” as perhaps the best example of enterprise strategy distilled into a few words. The dual focus on value through low prices and values through sustainability and responsible business behavior has transformed the largest corporation in the world (by revenue) in terms of its relationships with suppliers and its willingness to focus on major societal issues within and outside the corporation (Argenti 2016).
Even the most authentic and illuminating codes of conduct and values, however, do not automatically result in supportive behavior throughout an entire employee base. Most critical is management’s maintenance of a strong two-way dialogue about the company’s direction and strategy with employees, including a concrete action plan for how people at all enterprise levels can support it through their individual roles. Once employees become part of the dialogue, and understand their personal connection with corporate strategy and values, they are more likely to believe their best interest is to further the best interests of the organization as well. That critical connection when employee self-interest and corporate self-interest fuse is the cornerstone of a One-Company culture (Argenti and Van Riel 2016).
In addition to culture and values, corporate character includes a sense of purpose with a focus on creating value, not just for customers and shareholders, but for all stakeholders and society in general. There is a growing emphasis on corporate responsibility,1 which continues to grow in importance as companies are expected to do more than just give back to the community. Companies must ensure they have a clear set of operating principles and definitions of responsible behavior. A clear example is provided by Starbucks, a company that thrives in striking a balance between marketplace performance and social impact. Corey duBrowa, former Starbucks senior vice president of global communications, explains, “Collaborating with marketing and category leadership ensures that the Star-bucks brand and approach presents an integrated view of the company as one capable of leading marketplace performance while executing its business through the lens of humanity” (Arthur W. Page Society 2016, p. 27). The CCO is often looked to for guidance in building these principles, a process that requires input and buy-in across the entire enterprise.
Modern businesses are battling to build and maintain strong identities and global reputations, and today’s CCO serves as a “conscience counselor” to ensure the honesty and authenticity of an enterprise’s rhetoric, values, and the responsibility of its behavior with the interests of all constituencies in mind (Arthur W. Page Society 2016).
The second role of the CCO in the Page Model is to build stakeholder advocacy, explored in more detail in Chapter 5. This overarching responsibility requires CCOs to build relationships across a greater number of constituents, internally and externally, to ensure symmetrical engagement and dialogue—not just one-way communication from the enterprise (Grunig 1987; Korn Ferry Institute 2012). As the shepherd of enterprise positioning, reputation, and authenticity, the modern CCO is responsible for creating and influencing an ecosystem of stakeholders and advocates; stewarding the company’s values, brand, and reputation; shaping the culture and behaviors; creating the new, blended physical/virtual work environment; and empowering employees as communicators (Arthur W. Page Society 2016). As a result, today’s most forward-thinking CEOs are looking for CCOs to take a more strategic and interactive role within senior leadership.
In an increasingly transparent world, an enterprise can no longer be different things to different constituencies; it must be one thing across its entire ecosystem. CCOs must assert leadership in building and managing multistakeholder relationships. Additionally, the communication function serves to build support among multiple constituencies and civil society (Arthur W. Page Society 2007). In other words, the CCO ensures responsiveness to all stakeholders—internal and external, financial and customers, employees and management.
These new roles for the CCO and the corporate communication function require new skills and capabilities, a topic that will be examined more closely in Chapter 9. As a result, CCOs are frequently functioning as an attractor, builder, and distributor of talent. The CCO’s ability,
To cultivate and disseminate talent strategically, in ways that fully leverage the collective capabilities of the communications [sic] function, address core business needs and further organizational goals, is an emerging expectation of the CCO that has become even more critical given the dynamic environment in which we now operate. (Arthur W. Page Society 2016, p. 16)
As the scope of responsibilities continues to grow, there is an increasing mandate for communication executives to serve as high-level, strategic advisers to CEOs and senior leadership teams. In a report based on interviews with CEOs in 2013, the Page Society reported that more CCOs report directly to their CEO than they did in 2007, and more are on their company’s executive committee, where most major strategic decisions are made, especially at many larger companies.
Today’s enterprises require a CCO who is an informed, vocal, compelling, and trusted counselor to the firm’s leadership. The communication function is relied upon to identify, interpret, and act upon changes in the external environment; stay ahead of events by monitoring traditional and social media; engage with regulators, policy makers, intergovernmental organizations (IGOs), and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs); and build trusting and lasting relationships with constituencies. This requires business acumen and “a deep understanding of the company and the industry as a crucial source of credibility inside the C-Suite,” according to the CEOs interviewed by Page (Arthur W. Page Society 2016, p. 13). Gary Sheffer, former vice president of strategic communications at General Electric, explains that “the diversity of issues that today’s CCOs are expected to help lead is greater than ever. This requires CCOs to have a broader lens and more depth on the issues that can affect the success of the company” (Arthur W. Page Society 2016, p. 21). As Mike Fernandez, former corporate vice president for corporate affairs at Cargill, put it: “We talk about engaging and positively shaping the environment in which the company operates. That has moved the function from being not just a group of communicators, but of business strategists and problem solvers” (Arthur W. Page Society 2016, p. 24).
The Increased Focus on Integration and Collaboration
When it comes to structuring communication activities within the enterprise, challenges still persist. One challenge is how to maintain consistency in enterprise corporate communication while maintaining a level of flexibility across business units. While centralizing communication under one senior officer at global, national, or regional headquarters provides the easiest way for enterprises to achieve that consistency, that amount of control can adversely affect the creativity and productivity of the enterprise. The effective balance often depends on enterprise size, the geographic dispersion of its offices, and the diversity of its products and services. For an enterprise like General Electric, for example, there is simply no way that such a large and diversified enterprise could remain completely centralized in all of its communication activities. The same might not be said about a smaller and functionally focused enterprise, such as Chipotle. Further, because the new roles of the corporate communication function are to build corporate character and stakeholder advocacy, and because effectively doing that requires the commitment of the entire enterprise, there is a growing imperative for the CCO to work collaboratively across the enterprise. This will be explored in detail in Chapter 7.
The core objective of the modern communication function is to build reputation, which is a prerequisite for business success. This cannot be achieved without taking an outside-in approach, thinking and acting holistically. Today’s constituencies are both interconnected and interdependent, and the benefits of having integrated teams and programming are impossible to ignore. Integration is increasingly important as enterprises become more international and as more business is conducted remotely. With this level of dispersion, it is vital that employees be on the same page regarding company goals, mission, vision, values, and priorities. CCOs are embracing and driving cross-functional collaboration and partnerships, both within the enterprise and across the C-Suite. They are working more closely with other C-Suite functions, especially the chief human resources officer, chief marketing officer, and chief information officer. According to the Page Jam (an online discussion that garnered the opinions of Page members), CCOs say their collaboration with C-Suite colleagues is up 32 percent from five years ago (Arthur W. Page Society 2016). Engagement increased most with the Chief Information Officer (CIO) (a 42 percent increase from five years ago). This illustrated how CCOs are increasingly leveraging digital and mobile platforms to engage key stakeholders (Arthur W. Page Society 2016). Whether collaborating with the Chief Human Resources Officer (CHRO) on employee engagement and corporate character, with the CIO on developing a more robust data analytics capability, or with the CMO on aligning brand and customer engagement with that of other stakeholders, greater integration and collaboration support more strategically successful communications efforts across the firm. This collaboration should be supported through innovative approaches to re-engineer the concept of teams and facilitate greater cross-functional integration and collaboration (Arthur W. Page Society 2016).
At the firms that best understand the value and importance of the CCO function, CCOs enjoy direct reporting relationships to the CEO. GE’s iconic former CEO Jack Welch explained in the 2016 Page Society report, “The CEO and the CCO have a unique relationship; total trust, very intimate, in it together, buy-in on the mission…their relationship is closer to the CCO than any other person on the staff, and as a result they know more about what’s going on.” Communication executives act as reputation stewards in a highly interconnected landscape, leading integrated initiatives across teams, and building platforms and processes to effectively engage with the world (Arthur W. Page Society 2016). Everyone across the organization, from the top down, participates in shaping and preserving that reputation. The CCO is ideally situated to work across the C-Suite to ensure that corporate character is reflected across functions, that values are being practiced, and so on. Maintaining the trust of the public—the social license to operate—depends on making sure that the entire organization is aligned around character, culture, values, purpose, and so forth.
Integration of communication activities across the business remains a pressing challenge. The 2015 Brands2Life/PR Week Annual Communication Directors survey found that 73 of the 100 communication directors surveyed put integration at the top of their to-do list. Most CCOs believe that whatever formal structure is applied within an enterprise, the future will require more ad hoc, fluid approaches requiring coordination, collaboration, and strategic integration skills. Whatever structural approach an organization chooses, research from the Page Society suggests that:
• The CCO must have a direct working relationship with the CEO and C-Suite colleagues;
• All C-Suite members must collaborate on both activating corporate character and engaging constituencies around it; and
• The CCO should have responsibility for systematically managing enterprise stakeholder engagement through social media and other means. (Arthur W. Page Society 2016, p. 6)
Integration and collaboration are not only internal prerequisites. The communication function must be able to integrate strategic communication across multiple external stakeholder constituencies to achieve a single end. CCOs are supplementing in-house capabilities with external expertise in areas like behavioral economics, data analytics, and content creation while forging new partnerships with NGOs that allow them to better navigate rapidly changing social and environmental challenges (Arthur W. Page Society 2016).
The Road Ahead
The pace of this change is only going to increase, and with it the role of CCO will continue to broaden and diversify. The modern communication function is responsible for understanding the wide range of stakeholder constituencies and navigating an increasingly complex environment. Success will come through the development of increasingly sophisticated Digital Engagement Systems that map stakeholders, engender understanding of them (usually through data), and systematize the process of engaging with them, not merely as segments but as individuals. In form, these systems would resemble the digital commerce systems through which companies are leveraging data about online behavior to discern individual stakeholder wants and needs and cater to them more effectively (Arthur W. Page Society March 2016, p. 32).
Building these new systems, described in more detail in Chapter 8, will require entirely new skills and capabilities. As the evolution of the role of the CCO continues, there will remain a need for a strong CCO who intimately understands the inner workings of the enterprise and the forces affecting it, the diverse stakeholder constituencies affected by it and how to build relationships with them, and the dynamics of earning and maintaining the public’s trust (Arthur W. Page Society 2016). Additionally, according to the 2016 Global Communication Report (Holmes 2016), corporate communication executives around the world believe that, over the next five years, both they and their public relations agency partners will be expected to deliver more strategy, content, channels, creativity, and measurement.
As the world continues to globalize, the CCO will increasingly be required to interpret and plan for the impact that macro/socioeconomic and geopolitical events will have on the enterprise. This means that CCOs must have a global perspective and strategic mindset to effectively communicate across cultures and understand the complexities of managing communication for global enterprises. CCOs must possess the ability to strategize multicultural communication within and across enterprises and integrate innovative global communication strategies. Additionally, CCOs are increasingly required to manage global teams of communicators to ensure consistent, integrated, and effective messaging across oceans.
The requirements for success continue to increase. There is growing emphasis on international experience, cross-cultural management, and language skills. In an increasingly globalized world, fueled by the ubiquity of the Internet and 24-hour news cycle, corporate reputation can be destroyed in seconds. As modern business continues to learn about the immense value of using communication to execute strategy most effectively, the CCO role will become even more critical to the success of the enterprise in the 21st century (Arthur W. Page Society 2016).
Case: Defining and Supporting Enterprise Strategy Through Stakeholder Partnership
A Company Transformed and Challenged
Established in 1864 by Gerard Adriaan Heineken in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, HEINEKEN is the world’s most international brewer and the leading developer and marketer of premium beer and cider brands. Led by the Heineken® brand, the Group has a powerful portfolio of more than 250 international, regional, local, and specialty beers and ciders. The company employs nearly 85,000 people and operates 160 breweries in 70 countries.
Over the last 15 years, the company has transformed its geographic footprint from being a predominantly European and mature market business to a business that now derives two-thirds of its volumes and profits from emerging markets in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Today, HEINEKEN is the number one brewer in Europe and the number three brewer by volume in the world.
In 2014, HEINEKEN launched its “Greenprint” strategy, mapping out what it saw as the keys to future growth. For the first time, sustainability in the form of its “Brewing a Better World” (BaBW) approach was included as one of the company’s six strategic global pillars. The six key BaBW focus areas were agreed upon with the company’s stakeholders and covered the key material impacts across the business operations: water, CO2 reduction, responsible consumption, sustainable sourcing, health and safety, and communities.
Challenge and Opportunity in Equal Measure
In the confluence of the new strategy, the company’s transformed global footprint and macro issues, the corporate relations (CR) function led by Chief Corporate Relations Officer (CCRO) Sean O’Neill saw challenges. If the new strategic pillars were not executed with a clear understanding of external context and stakeholder concerns they could fail to deliver growth and damage hard-won reputation. Given the integration of sustainability within the strategy, it would be challenging, particularly in developing markets, to ensure the delivery of inclusive growth that would benefit all stakeholders and communities.
The CR function within HEINEKEN spans public and government affairs, public policy, sustainable development external communication, employee communication, and brand/consumer PR. Programming across key stakeholders is integrated across these disciplines to ensure a consistency of message, delivery, and approach and also to increase influence and impact. At global, regional, and in most of the operating companies, the most senior functional leader is a member of the executive management team and has the remit and responsibility to act as a business leader and functional expert.
Input, Integration, and Alignment
Externally, the function led conversations with key stakeholders centered on materiality, desired outcomes, and quantifying the trends. Internally, a series of facilitated discussions at local, regional, and global levels engaged cross-functional team members essential to building the new approach.
A number of key areas for potential partnerships were identified including human rights in emerging markets, the water/food/energy nexus particularly in water- and food-scarce areas, diversity and inclusion, biodiversity and animal rights and welfare. Following presentations at both the company’s Corporate Affairs Committee and global Executive Team the outline strategy was confirmed.
“Proof of Concept”—The First Partnership Forcing Positive Change
It was proposed that the first partnership would address the challenge of the water/food/energy nexus. By 2030, the world is expected to require 40 percent more water and 50 percent more energy. Population growth, changing lifestyles, and climate change will place increasing pressure on the environment, particularly on water, energy, and food. As a brewer, HEINEKEN touches all three of these areas. While it was felt that the company had made good progress on the individual elements of local sourcing, water footprint, and energy/CO2 reduction plans, a strong partnership in Africa would allow the company to build a more inclusive and integrated approach.
The company reviewed several possible partnership options before approaching UNIDO, the United Nations Industrial Development Organization, a specialized agency of the UN with primary responsibility for promoting industrial development in developing countries and in countries with economies in transition. It had significant experience of working with private sector companies and governments to address exactly the issues on which HEINEKEN was seeking to partner.
Discussions and negotiations with UNIDO were led by Michael Dickstein, global director sustainable development, and Patrick Villemin, regional CR director Africa Middle East. Both understood the importance of getting the first partnership right and ensured that objectives and expectations were clear. In March 2015, the formal partnership agreement with UNIDO was signed at their Vienna Headquarters.
The ongoing partnership focuses mainly on water stewardship initiatives in “water-scarce” areas. The initiatives developed by the partnership directly support HEINEKEN in its commitment to reduce water consumption to 3.3 hectoliters (1 hl = 100 liters) of water per hectoliter of beer brewed in its breweries in Algeria, Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Mexico, Nigeria, and Tunisia. Two multistakeholder workshops have been held in Ethiopia and Nigeria on the future of local watersheds.
The partnership is also focused on efforts to improve the livelihoods of local communities, as well as reducing fossil-fuel dependency at Heineken’s developing country breweries and supplying excess clean energy back to local communities. The company continues to establish new partnerships that are resulting in senior-level conversations that build understanding of the noncommercial issues and risks that the company faces across its operating footprint. As a result, the company will be better prepared and positive impact will be more widely felt across stakeholders when appropriate change is made.
Key Learnings
1. CCOs must address strategic challenges from an enterprisewide perspective. It is critical to anticipate conflicts between enterprise strategy and societal trends/norms.
2. A clear, strategic, agreed-upon role for communication/corporate affairs is critical. This gives the function the mandate to influence, challenge, and advise on strategy and decision making.
3. Know what you are getting into. Partnerships require commitment. The recommendations for change—if sufficiently powerful—will require financial investment and behavioral change.
Summary
In an interconnected world, the ability of enterprises to build and protect brand and reputation requires development of a strong corporate character and authentic stakeholder engagement. Increasingly, enterprises are turning to the CCO for leadership. The CCO needs a seat at the C-Suite table when strategic decisions are being made, because corporate communication is part of a fully aligned strategy. Few other executives have the broad and deep understanding across stakeholder constituencies that is required to make the complex and mission-critical decisions facing today’s enterprises. Smart CEOs and managers will learn that prioritizing communication will allow them to build an integrated culture and a reputation with constituents, and to execute strategy more effectively; those who ignore this imperative do so at their peril.
1 Initially defined as corporate social responsibility (CSR), the phrase has been redefined as corporate responsibility (CR) to note that responsibility is more than merely social in nature and often to remove the company from being identified.