The Organizational Leader, the Face of the Organization
In a modern organization, a leader is more than a decision-maker. The leader is one of the clearest signals through which stakeholders understand and evaluate the organization. In this article, Sam Cordier examines the relationship between executive reputation, the corporate brand and the role of professional communications in protecting trust.
People do not judge organizations by their products, services and financial performance alone. Sam Cordier explains how executive reputation can strengthen corporate credibility, or place years of trust-building at risk.
Over the past two decades, we have continually worked in corporate communications to present both the external and internal face of an organization in a clear and understandable way—to external audiences as well as to the organization’s own employees.
This effort has been the result of the continuous, daily, and moment-by-moment collaboration of our colleagues across the different departments of Payam Gardan Tehran; colleagues who have worked to smooth the path of industry within society. For many organizations, this path can appear particularly difficult amid unstable economic and social conditions.
Among the services we have provided to organizations is the protection and development of the reputation of their leaders and prominent organizational figures, as well as creating greater clarity around that reputation.
Reputation is what sells your organization. As an industrial or manufacturing organization, what you sell is the reputation that has emerged from the quality of your products. You continually work to protect, maintain, and strengthen it.
But this raises a professional question: What effect does the reputation of senior executives have on the image and brand of an organization? Should organizations consider the reputation of their executives and leaders to be part of their corporate brand?
People do not judge organizations solely through their products, services, financial performance, or advertising campaigns. Alongside these factors, people recognize and evaluate an organization through the individuals who lead it.
Maintaining this value and standing under the critical gaze of the public and the people within an organization may be one of the most difficult managerial responsibilities an organization faces. It is a responsibility that requires not only knowledge, awareness, and professional conduct, but also the support of a consulting organization and an experienced external partner.
Allow me to introduce the academic concept of “reputation” more fully within the field of management.
An article titled The Face of the Firm: The Influence of CEOs on Corporate Reputation was published in the Academy of Management Journal. Its authors examined precisely how chief executives and senior organizational leaders can influence the credibility and reputation of their organizations.
Although the central idea of the article is simple, it is also compelling. To make the subject more tangible, we need only look at football.
Sometimes, the name of a head coach alone can change our perception of a team. When Guardiola’s name is associated with a team, we instinctively expect discipline, a system, possession of the ball, and intelligent football. When Mourinho’s name is mentioned, we expect psychological pressure, organized defence, and performances in major matches.
For many years, Ferguson was not merely the manager of Manchester United; he was part of the authority and credibility of the club itself.
In reality, we do not see only the players, results, or league table. We judge the team through the personality, background, style, and reputation of its head coach.
Almost the same thing happens in business. A CEO, founder, business owner, or senior executive can become a cognitive shortcut through which people understand an organization.
In the article mentioned above, the researchers examined whether a CEO could influence corporate reputation independently of the company’s financial performance.
Their first finding was that CEOs with positive reputations and favourable media coverage helped strengthen the image of their companies. By contrast, CEOs who received negative media coverage damaged their companies’ credibility.
Simply being visible is therefore not enough, and reputation is not merely the result of being famous. A CEO may appear frequently in the media, but when that visibility is not accompanied by a positive perception of the executive’s competence, judgment, and quality of leadership, it will not necessarily benefit the company.
Under certain circumstances, excessive visibility, an inappropriate statement, or an impulsive and poorly considered action can destroy years of organizational reputation-building overnight.
However, even these smaller mistakes, when managed with the support of a specialist communications unit, can have a considerably more limited negative effect on the reputation of both the executive and the organization.
Throughout our work with companies and organizations, we develop long-term plans for them. During times of crisis, we stand beside them, support them, and help present them in a way that is consistent and aligned with their organizational brand.
During my years of working with major regional and international companies, one of my most significant experiences occurred when I was given responsibility for establishing the corporate communications department of a large industrial group.
The initial proposal was for this department to operate under marketing. However, I insisted that communications should report directly to the owners and the board of directors. I also believed that communications needed to be present during important decisions before a crisis occurred—not afterward.
The result became visible almost immediately. Several crises were contained before they developed into news stories, and the reputation of the group and its brands was preserved.
This experience demonstrated to me that an organization’s credibility is truly protected when communications is present in the same room in which decisions are made, rather than in the room where those decisions must later be explained. This is the same principle on which our work at PGt is based.
Why is this important?
Companies are complex structures made up of many different factors. We are generally unable to understand and evaluate directly all of a company’s capabilities, the quality of its decision-making, its organizational culture, or its genuine future.
We therefore look for signs that make the company easier for us to understand. One of the most important of these signs is the organization’s leader.
An organization must consequently protect its reputation with great care and, with the assistance of professional advisers, work not only to preserve it but also to strengthen it.
This development is one of the many ways in which companies specializing in corporate public relations stand beside an executive, protecting both the organizational brand and the leadership brand.
