Editorial
Editorial
Cees van Riel on The Alignment Factor
‘Reputation
is a means,
Alignment
an end’
You could call him the king of reputation management. Cees van
Riel was the first to introduce a valid way of measuring company
reputations. And that demonstrated just how important reputation
can be. His new book The Alignment Factor, subtitled “Leveraging
the power of total stakeholder support”, takes this a significant
step further. In an interview with this professor of corporate
communication, he reveals how to build long-term relationships
with all your stakeholders, the position of the communication
professional and alignment-in-practice, among other things. ‘At
Philips the alignment process began with the Board.’
‘Alignment means forging
long-term relationships
with all internal and
external stakeholders’
Text Paul Groothengel
Photography Frank Groeliken
Cees van Riel has become something of an icon
in the world of corporate communication and
reputation management. Entire tribes of
communication students are familiar with the
professor of Corporate Communication (at
Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus
University) from his standard work, Identiteit
en Imago (Identity and Image). In another of
his books, Fame and Fortune, he collaborates
with Charles Fombrun to demonstrate how
companies can measure their reputation. The
partners also establish that a good reputation
enables corporations to attract customers,
1 | January 2012
of our country’s largest enterprises, with
Philips leading the pack in recent years. With
his RepTrak model, Van Riel has shown he can
divide the reputation of an organisation into
seven dimensions, the so-called qualitative (the
company as employer, CSR) and quantitative
building blocks (results, innovation) which
determine a reputation. All in all then, it’s
hardly surprising that he was granted the
prestigious 2011 Pathfinder Award early in
November, ‘the highest academic honour
bestowed by the Institute for Public Relations
(IPR)’. The jury’s opinion of Van Riel: ‘… a
research pioneer in corporate reputation and
strategic alignment.’
investors and top talents more easily. Each year
communication managers look forward to the
results of Van Riel’s reputation research, which
he conducts with ‘RepTrak’, a yardstick for
reputation that he developed back in 1997. As
one of the co-founders of the Reputation
Institute in New York, he has since studied the
reputations of the world’s 1,500 most
prominent companies. That makes his
research the largest reputation study in the
world, with results published annually in
Forbes. The same research is conducted each
year in the Netherlands, examining the top 40
Building long-term relationships
Alignment is the foundation of his new book
The Alignment Factor, appearing this spring in
five languages simultaneously – including
English, Dutch and Spanish. It is a sizeable
book that mentions the term reputation
surprisingly rarely. Has Van Riel suddenly had
a change of heart? No, he believes he has
simply moved on to the next stage: ‘Alignment
is building long-term relationships with all
internal and external stakeholders, those you
depend on as an organisation. Where reputation
is a means, alignment is an end.’ You might
www.managementboek.nl
Cees van Riel: `Companies are
increasingly aware that they don’t
operate in isolation, but are entirely
dependent on what happens in their
immediate surroundings.'
say: where a pop star’s success depends partly
on their X-factor, company success depends to
a significant extent on their alignment factor.
True to character, Van Riel has expressed this
alignment factor as a figure and it follows that
his book concerns itself with determining the
‘Strategic Alignment Factor'. Before we
examine that alignment factor further, and its
consequences for both communication and top
management, we first ask Van Riel how the
(corporate) communication profession is
holding up. Are communication managers
finally taken seriously internally? Or do their
colleagues still view them as Chief of Press
Releases & Staff Magazine? Van Riel:
‘Companies are becoming increasingly aware
that they do not operate in isolation, but are
entirely dependent on what happens in their
immediate surroundings. Outsiders track
companies with an increasingly critical attitude,
especially given the growing number of
economic and social issues at stake. These arise
in essence from the increasing shortage of
economic means, such as natural resources. That
shortage has prompted fierce debates on how
to distribute these scarce resources. These days
managers are also terrified of the media, the
power consumers have through social media,
the risk of being held personally responsible for
mismanagement. People now know that
reputation does count and that corporate
communication is an essential instrument for
building that reputation.’
Cees van Riel:
‘You need to make
management see the major
benefits of criticism.’
www.managementboek.nl
‘Corporate silence was
the norm and journalists
were considered riff-raff ’
Between a rock and a hard place
With obvious enjoyment, he recalls the time
when managers could still get away with
‘No comment’. Van Riel considers Operation
Centurion, the reorganisation initiated by Jan
Timmer when he became Philips CEO
in 1990, a significant turning point: ‘Until
then, it was fine for companies like Philips to
refuse bluntly to respond to outside questions.
I remember images of Philips executives at one
of their factories, whizzing by in chauffeured
cars and entirely ignoring the journalists
gathered at the factory gate. Corporate silence
was the norm, and journalists were considered
riff-raff. But with the announcement of
Centurion, silence was never an option for
Timmer.’ Corporate communication became
more important from then on. Or rather, it
was taken seriously. Initially, communication
managers were engaged predominantly in
PR, notes Van Riel: ‘Enticing journalists with
fun press trips, hoping to spark positive
newspaper articles, and lobbying Members of
Parliament. There was nothing intrinsically
wrong with that; the mantra of the time was
“Be good and tell it.”’
Slowly but surely – nudged by image-damaging
scandals, such as Shell’s Brent Spar affair and
Ahold’s accountancy fraud – the realisation
dawned that reputation constitutes a great good;
not only for customers and shareholders, but also
for employees (top talent is a scarce commodity),
NGOs, suppliers and more. When Van Riel
introduced his RepTrak in 1997 – for which he
wanted to work closely with companies to reveal
the correct data – he initially encountered his fair
share of scepticism: ‘Scientists believed I depended too heavily on practice, while companies
wondered whether measuring reputation was all
that important, on top of which they believed I
remained too much of a scientist. I was caught
between a rock and a hard place.’
Managing criticism
Now the position of the communication
department within organisations has changed
January 2012 | 2
Editorial
Editorial
for instance on a change process, there is no
way back. You need to walk on eggshells:
employees don’t welcome change, which also
produces less commitment towards their
employer. So you need to have a wide range of
skills for internal communication. If truth be
told, many communication professionals
haven’t developed those skills, because they
have too little practical experience in this field.’
Cees van Riel:
‘If you grow 10 per cent
in alignment, people
will put six per cent
more effort into your
organisation,
which effectively leads
to a two per cent
increase in turnover!’
‘Start dialogue with
all those who
criticise you most’
entirely, notes Van Riel. ‘Communication staff
are focusing increasingly on building
alignment, the degree to which you are able to
build long-term relationships with both your
internal and external stakeholders. This has
two consequences. First, communication
professionals need to really deliver; they must
initiate dialogue with all those who criticise you
most or demand something from you. That’s
much more complicated than it might seem,
but a good communication professional knows
exactly how to direct this process. The second
consequence is that you must ensure that both
parties actually listen to one other’s arguments,
sparking true dialogue.’ But what, if your own
board, entirely convinced of its own strategy,
is not so keen on doing so? ‘You need to
make management see the great benefit of
criticism. Criticism keeps you on your toes.
If criticism is communicated, you at least have
the opportunity to respond to it.’ In short:
the communication officer must manage
any criticism among all types of stakeholders,
must channel that criticism and must then
ensure that the organisation does something
constructive with it.
Listening to your surroundings
With ‘criticism’ Van Riel means something
beyond complaints about annoyingly long
waiting times for the call centre or unclear
3 | January 2012
policy conditions. It also involves listening
to what goes on in your community and
responding accordingly. When asked for an
example, he mentions Johnson & Johnson, the
large American medical and consumer goods
enterprise. ‘There was a huge nursing shortage
in the US. It was considered a poorly-paid
position, with no apparent status. Neither were
the hospitals collaborating to resolve the issue,
for instance through a national recruitment
campaign or by setting up a common database
for registering available nurses. So Johnson
& Johnson spent more than a year investing
considerable sums in a national campaign
portraying nurses as heroes: they are, after all,
‘Alignment is about
earning respect’
the human factor between the focused clinical
specialist and the unfortunate patient. Johnson
& Johnson also ensured that a database was set
up for job openings nationwide. The result:
within one and a half years the nursing
shortage was entirely resolved. That campaign
was conjured up by Johnson & Johnson’s
Communication Manager, continues Van Riel.
‘Naturally his idea initially met fierce internal
resistance: it would cost them millions and
what would they gain? He made it clear that the
company would be investing significantly in its
own reputation: in a better relationship with its
various external stakeholders. And as a supplier
to hospitals, Johnson & Johnson also had a
direct interest in ensuring sufficient capacity.’
Internal communication often neglected
Van Riel predicts that communication
professionals will be assessed increasingly on
KPIs, as are their colleagues in finance,
marketing and logistics. Could he offer an
example of such indicators? ‘Think of KPIs like
reputation and the degree of alignment, which
makes stakeholders consider it to their mutual
advantage to enter into dialogue with your
organisation. This does not explicitly mean that
you earn points for being right. On the
contrary: alignment is not about winning or
losing a discussion, but about earning respect,
which results in a pleasant negotiating
position.’ This brings us back to his new book
divided into building Internal and External
Alignment respectively. Is it a coincidence that
he begins by discussing Alignment with one’s
own staff and that this is also the longest
chapter, or does this perhaps illustrate (superfluously) the vital importance of motivated
employees? ‘Hmm, I hadn't realised that this
chapter is lengthier than the others, but
I suppose it is a good indicator of the great
value I attribute to building long-term
relationships with your own employees. Many
companies often neglect the internal aspect of
alignment.’ How does he explain this? ‘Until
very recently, the communication department
consisted largely of people with a background
in journalism or advertising. They were trained
solely to communicate with external target
groups, so that was what they continued to
focus on in their new work environment.
Internal communication is also far scarier than
external communication. If your message
doesn’t reach your external audience, you could
always say: those numbskulls just didn’t get it.
If you communicate within your company,
www.managementboek.nl
Alignment begins with the Board
We continue discussing the companies he has
dealt with for years, companies (Philips, Delta
Lloyd, FedEx) that contributed to fine-tuning
his measurement tools. ‘I sometimes felt like a
cross between an intern and a researcher.
I started with the first version of my Strategic
Alignment Monitor at Philips seven years ago.
It was around the time that Kleisterlee
introduced the concept of Sense and Simplicity.
To the outside world this was perhaps just a
slogan, but the concept was intended for
Philips’ internal world. The idea of making
products simple and useful did not
immediately meet with much enthusiasm
from the engineers.’ But Sense and Simplicity
was not just about products such as the WakeUp Light; it also referred to internal processes.
For instance, the introduction of key account
management was to ensure that the silos at
Philips would finally start working together,
while Finance was assigned the task of creating
equal reporting structures worldwide. ‘It’s not
possible for Communication to take on sole
responsibility for managing such a process.
The alignment process began with the Board.
Sense and Simplicity has prompted an
attitude change at Philips, a transformation
that Kleisterlee has been able to achieve in
a very impressive way.’
to be changing? Mechanics were told their role
would change. They weren’t simply going to
clean boilers, but were to advise clients on new
technology. This appealed to the technicians
who were very eager for additional training so
as to be able to substantiate the claims for their
customers. By addressing all the stakeholders in
a personal manner, Eneco has been able to live
up to its sustainable image. The result: new
recruits are not just clerk-type characters, but
are smart youngsters who feel very comfortable
with that sustainability claim.’
sation then also hope for improvement in its
results? ‘Such a positive correlation, yes, there
are figures to substantiate that connection,’
Van Riel beams. ‘If you grow 10 per cent
in alignment terms, people will put six per cent
more effort into your organisation, which
effectively leads to a two per cent increase
in turnover! But let’s stay realistic here; that 10
per cent is never achieved. Nevertheless, even
if you achieve just one per cent, you’ll still
achieve a substantial increase in turnover.’ #
Alignment and increased turnover
Finally then, just what is new about this book?
Van Riel doesn’t have to think long for the
answer: ‘It has an international scope, with
examples demonstrating what’s happening
in this field across the world. The focus is also
no longer on reputation as a means, but on
building towards the objective of alignment.
Finally, it offers a practical approach, with
pointers on how to build an alignment road
map.’
So the alignment factor should yield improved
long-term relationships, but might an organi-
Cees B.M. Van Riel (born in 1951) is a professor of
Corporate Communication at Rotterdam School of
Management, Erasmus University (RSM). He has
published work on corporate identity, reputation
and branding and is the author of the books
Identiteit en Imago, Principles of Corporate
Communications and Fame & Fortune.
He is editor-in-chief of Corporate Reputation
Review. Together with co-founder Charles Fombrun
he manages the Reputation Institute in New York,
which operates worldwide. He is also the founding
director of the Executive Master of Science in
Corporate Communication Programme at RSM.
Reputation as a core value
In working with Delta Lloyd Van Riel also
discovered the impact a top executive can have.
‘Long before the recession in 2008, board
chairman Niek Hoek was already advocating
the importance of making reputation a core
Delta Lloyd value. He did this after extensive
consultation with his communication staff and
external advisors. He was the first insurer to
present reputation as an objective and to attach
consequences to it internally: if a member of
staff did something inappropriate, he would
immediately be sent packing. And those
extortionate insurance policies? Delta Lloyd was
the first to respond with a settlement proposal.’
Eneco offers another good example of what
an alignment strategy can achieve, says Van Riel:
‘They claimed to be a sustainable energy
company. Well, many others make this claim,
but Eneco are true to their word. They had to
communicate their message to both their
external and internal audiences. One of the
external messages was that people could now
generate energy from their own homes and
return that energy to the network, saving them
money. Internal responses were reserved: what
did they mean by sustainable? What was going
www.managementboek.nl
January 2012 | 4