Ranking Corporate Reputations
Tech Companies Score High in Yearly Survey
As Google Makes Its Debut in Third Place;
Autos, Airlines, Pharmaceuticals Lose Ground
It takes most companies decades to build a great reputation. Google Inc. did it in seven years.
The creator of the premier Internet search engine made a striking debut this year in the annual Reputation Quotient ranking, placing third among 60 of the most prominent companies in the world. Google, which took root in a Stanford University dorm room and was founded in 1998, ranked behind No. 1 Johnson & Johnson and No. 2 Coca-Cola Co., American icons that are both more than a century old.
Technology companies generally made an impressive showing in the annual ranking of the best and worst corporate reputations. The technology business enjoys the strongest reputation of any industry, receiving positive ratings from 71% of the nearly 20,000 Americans who took part in the survey. Respondents said most of the technology companies provide innovative, reasonably priced products that enhance their daily lives -- a claim that few other companies in the survey can make.
? See the Reputation Quotient rankings for 60 companies, and additional results from the Corporate Reputation Survey.
? See the survey methodology
? Word-of-Mouth Buzz Pays Off for Companies
Some survey respondents called Google "indispensable" and "priceless." Michelle V.L. Miko, a Web developer in Moss Landing, Calif., said she "can't even recall how many years I've been using Google. It instantly became my search engine of choice because of its simplicity, accuracy and the clean way the site is organized. I rely solely on Google for the many things I have to research like obscure music lyrics and medical terminology."
Google's lofty share price also boosted its reputation, with respondents naming it as one of the stocks they would most like to buy and would most recommend to other people. "It's one company I would have been interested in investing in," said Ms. Miko, "had I had the chance to get in on the ground floor."
Other technology companies in the top 10: Sony Corp., Microsoft Corp. and Intel Corp. In addition, International Business Machines Corp. and Apple Computer Inc., buoyed by its popular iPod music players, both climbed higher in this year's ranking, landing at No. 19 and No. 27, respectively.
The technology industry is the exception. In the reputation survey, Harris Interactive Inc., a Rochester, N.Y., research firm, found that most industries, particularly automotive, airlines, pharmaceuticals and energy, lost ground in the ratings. Only the tobacco industry ranked lower than energy and pharmaceuticals.
The overall reputation of American corporations, already weak, slipped further this year. Despite corporate-governance reforms and a growing commitment to ethics and social responsibility, companies haven't redeemed themselves with the public. This year, 71% of respondents rated American businesses' reputation as "not good" or "terrible," compared with 68% in 2004.
"Corporate America continues to demonstrate a tremendous amount of greed, dishonesty, incompetence and a general lack of humanity that I believe is contributing to dissolving values and the work ethic in America," said Tamara Maimon, a university administrator in Novato, Calif. "Many young people that I come into contact with don't believe they have to work hard to make a lot of money; they believe they just have to make the right connection or BS or bully their way to the top."
Although many companies provided help after this year's natural disasters, especially Hurricane Katrina, many respondents didn't give them much credit. In fact, many respondents called on companies to be more benevolent -- and make their good deeds more visible to the public. For example, Procter & Gamble Co., which dropped to No. 13 this year from No. 4 in 2004, was called to task for not demonstrating enough social responsibility.
"If P&G is doing something significant, they should make it known, and it should be something that makes a difference in my family's life or my community," said Teresa DeVilbiss, an accounting representative in Roseville, Calif.
But publicizing social activism is a delicate issue for companies. Many are reluctant to tout their good deeds in advertising and news releases because they don't want to appear self-serving. P&G, however, includes information about its philanthropic response to recent natural disasters on its corporate Web site. "Our social-responsibility operating principle has always been to focus our efforts on the results of our contributions and volunteerism and employee leadership," a P&G spokeswoman said. "Getting recognition for it is secondary."
The Reputation Quotient study, developed jointly by Harris and the Reputation Institute in New York, was conducted in two parts. Between March and June, 6,977 respondents were asked to name the two companies with the best reputations and the two with the worst. The 60 companies named most often were then rated by 19,564 people in a separate survey between Aug. 30 and Sept. 26.
Respondents evaluated companies they were familiar with on 20 attributes that measure emotional appeal, financial performance, quality of products and services, social responsibility, vision and leadership, and workplace environment. The 60 companies in the final ranking vary slightly from year to year, depending on which are most top-of-mind with the general public.
One company has shown particular consistency. Johnson & Johnson has had a lock on first place since the survey began in 1999, successfully dodging the bullets fired at other pharmaceutical companies. It scored well for the quality of its products and for emotional appeal because of people's warm feelings about its baby-products business. It also received the highest scores for being ethical and trustworthy. J&J "is as American as Mom and apple pie," one respondent commented.
Although J&J derives more revenue from pharmaceuticals and medical devices than from baby products, Cynthia Posey, a program manager at the University of Texas at Austin, still thinks of baby powder when she hears the company name, "not drugs or the company's birth-control products." J&J, she said, "does a really good job at image control and should just keep quiet about pharmaceuticals."
People weren't as kind to the other pharmaceutical marketers in the ranking. Merck & Co., denounced by some respondents as greedy and dishonest, placed 45th. Eunice Black, a paralegal in St. Paul, Minn., said she doesn't "believe for a minute that the company didn't know all along about the risks of Vioxx. They're just like the tobacco companies that hid the risks of smoking for so long." Merck, which stopped selling Vioxx last year, contends that it withdrew the painkiller promptly when a clinical study showed increased risk of heart attacks or strokes after 18 months of treatment.
The company last appeared in the Reputation Quotient ranking in 2003 when it placed 32nd. In response to the survey, a Merck spokesman said, "Our decision to voluntarily withdraw Vioxx was a reflection of our commitment to putting patient safety first. Merck acted responsibly and appropriately as it developed and marketed Vioxx, and we extensively studied Vioxx and shared our scientific data with the public at every stage."
The three oil companies in the survey -- Exxon Mobil Corp., Chevron Corp., and Royal Dutch Shell PLC -- received low ratings and a scolding from the public for the "heartless" spike in prices at the pump and their gusher of profits. "The whole gasoline-price fiasco was a doozy," said Joe Fortunato, an art director in Cleveland. "They have had me over a barrel because where I live, there isn't adequate public transportation and I have to drive."
A spokesman for Exxon Mobil, the world's largest public energy company, said many consumers don't realize that gas prices are influenced by changes in the price of crude oil, supply and demand, government regulations, taxes and transportation costs. More than 90% of the retailers that operate stations selling Exxon- or Mobil-branded gas independently set their own prices, the spokesman added.
Wal-Mart Stores Inc.'s recent image-building advertising and PR blitz yielded no improvement in its ranking. The retailer placed 29th, compared with 28th last year. It scored well for financial performance, placing third in that portion of the survey. Wal-Mart declined to comment.
Rival Costco Wholesale Corp. ranked 18th, with some respondents saying they admire the warehouse-club operator more than Wal-Mart. "Costco treats its employees well," a respondent said.
Home Depot Inc., which ranked No. 12, benefited from the fact that customers appreciate its quality service. The home-improvement retailer, along with package-delivery companies FedEx Corp. and UPS, were cited most often for excellent customer service. Meanwhile, MCI Inc., Comcast Corp., Bank of America Corp., McDonald's Corp., and UAL Corp.'s United Airlines, received some of the worst scores for service.
Big mergers proved damaging when the negative reputation of one company rubbed off on the other. In fact, Sears Holdings Corp., which includes Kmart, ranked 41st, and Hewlett-Packard Co., which includes Compaq, ranked No. 31, experiencing two of the largest reputation declines this year.
The bottom of the ranking remains largely those involved in scandals: Enron Corp., MCI (formerly WorldCom and now being acquired by Verizon Communications Inc.), Adelphia Communications Corp. (now being acquired by Time Warner Inc.'s Time Warner Cable and Comcast), and Tyco International Ltd.
Respondents weren't appeased by the fact that some of those companies' former executives have been convicted and sentenced to prison. "Bernie Ebbers (former WorldCom CEO) and Dennis Kozlowski (ex-Tyco CEO) are a start," said Ms. Black, the Minnesota paralegal. "But there are still so many who haven't been brought to justice."
美国企业声誉大排名
大多数公司要花费几十年的时间才能树立起卓越的声誉。而Google Inc.只用了七年。
这家主要互联网搜索引擎的创造者在今年的年度名商(Reputation Quotient)排名中闪亮登场，位居全球最著名的60家公司当中的第三位。植根于斯坦福大学一间宿舍、成立于1998年的Google排名仅在强生公司(Johnson & Johnson)和可口可乐公司(Coca-Cola Co.)之后，而这两家公司可都是有著百余年历史的美国标志性企业。
通常来说，科技公司在最佳和最差公司声誉排名中的表现都令人印象深刻。科技行业是所有行业当中声誉最高的行业，接受调查的近20,000名美国人当中有71%的人给出了正面的评价。受访者表示，大多数科技公司提供了使他们日常生活质量得到提高、定价合理的创新产品－－调查中的其他公司很少能够获得这样的评价。
一些受访者称Google是“不可或缺的”和“无价的”。Google高高在上的股价也提高了它的声誉，受访者称Google是他们最想买进和最希望推荐给其他人的股票之一。
排名位居前10位的其他科技企业包括：索尼公司（Sony Corp., 又名：新力公司）、微软(Microsoft Corp.)和英特尔(Intel Corp.)。此外，国际商业机器公司(International Business Machines Corp.)和苹果电脑公司(Apple Computer Inc.)今年的排名均有所上升，分别位居第19位和第27位。其中苹果电脑的排名受到了其备受欢迎的iPod音乐数字播放器的有力推动。
科技行业的这种状况是绝无仅有的。在此次名商调查中，纽约研究公司Harris Interactive Inc.发现，大多数行业，尤其是汽车、航空、制药和能源行业的排名均有所下降。只有烟草行业的声誉比能源和制药行业还要低。
美国公司的总体声誉本来就不是很好，而今年又进一步下滑。尽管企业进行了公司治理改革，并更多地承诺会遵守道德规范和履行社会责任，但这并没有挽回它们在公众眼中的形象。今年，有71%的受访者将美国企业的声誉评定为“不佳”或“糟糕”，而在2004年这个比例为68%。
“美国企业界仍在展现著贪婪、欺骗、无能的本性，普遍缺乏人性的关爱，我认为它们正在瓦解美国的价值观和工作道德观，”加利福尼亚州的大学行政管理人员麦蒙(Tamara Maimon)这样说，“我所接触到的许多年轻人认为要赚大钱不必努力工作；他们认为只要拥有合适的关系网或者恃强凌弱就能爬到公司上层。”
尽管美国公司在今年的自然灾害、尤其是飓风卡特里娜(Hurricane Katrina)之后提供了帮助，但许多受访者并没有给予很高的评价。实际上，许多受访者呼吁企业参与更多慈善事业－－并使它们的善举为公众所知。比如说，宝洁公司（Procter & Gamble Co.又名：宝硷公司）的排名从2004年的第四位降到了今年的第13位，即因为被指没有表现出足够的社会责任感。
但公布社会行动对于企业来说是一个敏感的问题。许多公司不愿在广告和新闻稿中吹嘘它们的善举，因为他们不想被人看作是在谋取私利。不过，宝洁把它在近来自然灾难中提供的人道主义援助公布在了公司网站上。
名商调查由Harris和纽约的Reputation Institute联合举办。受访者根据20项标准对他们熟悉的公司进行评价。这20项标准衡量企业在感情上的吸引力、财务、产品和服务质量、社会责任感、远见和领导以及工作环境等各个方面的表现。
进入最终排名的60家公司每年的位置都会有一些变化，但有一家公司例外。自这项调查于1999年开始以来，强生一直锁定在榜首的位置，成功地躲开了其他制药公司遭受的抨击。它在产品质量和感情上的吸引力这两项的得分很高，这要归功于人们对强生婴儿产品业务的温暖感受。它在道德规范和诚信度方面的得分也是最高的。一位受访者评论道，“强生就是一家典型的美国公司。”
对于其他制药公司，人们就没这么客气了。默克公司(Merck & Co.)排在第45位，一些受访者谴责它贪婪无度、有意蒙蔽大众。 明尼苏达州的一位律师助手布莱克(Eunice Black)称，她“压根儿就不相信默克一直都不了解万络(Vioxx)的风险。它们跟长期以来试图掩盖吸烟风险的烟草公司如出一辙。”
默克上一次出现在名商排名中是在2003年，当时它位列第32位。针对调查结果，默克的一位发言人称，“我们主动召回万络是我们将患者安全置于首要位置的反映。默克在开发和销售万络方面的行动是负责的和适当的，我们全面地研究了万络，并在每个阶段公布了我们的科学数据。”
调查中三家石油公司－－埃克森美孚(Exxon Mobil Corp.)、雪佛龙公司(Chevron Corp.)和荷兰皇家壳牌有限公司(Royal Dutch Shell Plc)获得的评价较低，公众斥责它们“无情”涨价、追逐利润。
作为全球最大的能源上市公司，埃克森美孚的发言人称，许多消费者并不了解汽油价格受到原油价格、供求状况、政府法规、税收和运输成本的影响。另外，在运营出售埃克森牌或美孚牌汽油的零售商当中，有90%以上都是独立定价的。
沃尔玛连锁公司(Wal-Mart Stores Inc.)最近的形象广告和公关攻势无助于其排名的提高。这家零售商的声誉排在第29位，而去年为第28位。它在财务表现方面的得分较高。沃尔玛拒绝就此置评。
Home Depot Inc.排在第12位，主要得益于顾客对其优质服务的赞誉。这家家居装饰零售商，以及包裹递送企业联邦快递集团(FedEx Corp.)和联合包裹运送服务公司(UPS)在客户服务卓越方面获得的褒奖最多。与此同时，MCI Inc.、康卡斯特(Comcast Corp.)、美国银行(Bank of America Corp.)、麦当劳(McDonald's Corp.)和UAL Corp.旗下的联合航空( United Airlines)在服务质量方面的得分都较差。
大型并购之后，一家声誉不好的公司对另一方声誉的影响是具有破坏性的。实际上，收购Kmart的西尔斯(Sears Holdings Corp.)排在第41位，而收购康柏电脑(Compaq)的惠普公司(Hewlett-Packard Co.)排在第31位。这两家公司今年的排名下降幅度最大。
排名最低的那些公司基本上都曾卷入过丑闻：安然公司(Enron Corp.)、MCI（前身是WorldCom，现为Verizon Communications Inc.所收购）、Adelphia Communications Corp.（现为时代华纳公司(Time Warner Inc.)旗下的Time Warner Cable和康卡斯特(Comcast)所收购）、以及泰科(Tyco International Ltd.)。
