2012
Edelman Trust Barometer Executive Summary
2012 Trust Barometer: Business Can Earn the License to Lead
In 2008-2009, in the wake of a recession that saw large, global companies such as Lehman Brothers
and AIG collapse, trust in business imploded. Government stepped in with bailouts and new regulations.
But in 2011, government became paralyzed by the politics of extremism and endless haggling – and the
public lost confidence.
The 2012 Edelman
Trust Barometer
sees an unprecedented nine-point
global decline in
trust in government.
In twelve countries,
it trails business, media, and nongovernmental organizations as the
least trusted institution. This has
pushed more countries into the distruster category (figure 1). Political
brinksmanship on the debt ceiling
in the United States, dysfunction
on bailouts in the European Union,
corruption in Brazil and India, and a
natural disaster in Japan drove the
downward trend.
Business leaders should not be
cheered by government’s ineptitude, especially as trust in the two
institutions tends to move in sync.
There is still a yawning trust gap for
business, as evidenced by one half
of the informed public respondents
(49%) saying government does
not regulate business enough. Yet
what most stakeholders want from
government – consumer protection (31%) and regulation ensuring
responsible corporate behavior
(25%) – are actions business can
take on its own.
It makes good business sense for
business to broaden its definition
of leadership. It cannot be seen
as acting solely in self interest, but
rather must execute on both the
fundamentals of profit and societal
good. To earn the license to lead,
business must do the following:
* The Wall Street Journal, January 13, 2012
1
BUSINESS:
CAN EARN LICENSE TO LEAD
2008-2009
Low trust in
business and CEOs
Business has
flexibility and speed
Business leaders
more trusted than
government leaders
business has advantage
in 24 out of 25 markets
THE DYNAMIC OF
TRUST BETWEEN
BUSINESS &
GOVERNMENT
Call for
increased
regulation
protection from
irresponsible
behavior sought
2011
Dwindling trust
in government
Government
responds
policy paralysis
͚͚ Exercise principles-based leadership instead of rules-based strategy.
Business should not go to the edge of what is legally permissible but rather
stay focused on what is beneficial both to shareholders and society.
͚͚ Recognize that the operational factors responsible for current trust in
business won’t build future trust. Our research shows that current trust levels are built on consistent financial returns, top management, and innovative
products. However, engagement-oriented behaviors that are more societal
in nature, such as treating employees well, putting customers ahead of profits, and transparency, are vital to building future trust (see pages 9 and 10).
͚͚ Practice radical transparency. Speak first to employees – whose credibility rose
dramatically (page 7) – enabling them to drive the continuing conversation with
their peers. Establish operational and societal goals and report on them regularly.
͚͚ Shape the public discourse on issues like fracking and charging fees for
financial services. Explain the advantages for customers. Business must
exhibit its role as job creators, managers of responsible supply chains, and
community partners that help build infrastructure.
Business is a force for good. Yes, there are risks in bold decision-making, in
telling hard truths, and in structuring business goals that serve investors and
society. But the bigger risk for business is in waiting for government to act;
some business leaders are clearly aware of that fact. In the Wall Street Journal,
Paul Polman, CEO of Unilever (disclosure: Edelman client) recently said: “Our
version of capitalism has reached its sell-by date. Never has the opportunity
for business to help shape a more equitable future been so great.”*
Government Suffers Steepest Trust Decline in Barometer History
The majority of countries surveyed do not trust their government to do what is right
Throughout the world, people blamed
their governments – more than any
other institution – for the financial and
political crises they endured in 2011. In
seventeen of the 25 countries surveyed,
government is now trusted by less than
half to do what is right (figure 1). In Europe, trust in government dropped by
more than ten points in France, Spain,
and Italy. In Latin America, Brazil experienced a 53-point plunge. In Asia, South
Korea and China suffered declines of
17 and 13 points, respectively. In Japan,
trust in government dropped by 26
points driven by the catastrophic earthquake that struck the country in early
spring. (For more on Japan and the
domino effect of the government’s poor
response to the disaster, see page 5.)
Trust in government did hold steady
in a number of countries. Germany, though well below the midpoint,
stayed firm at 33 percent, while India
cleared the midway mark (53 percent)
for the first time. In the United States,
trust remained stable despite all the
political discourse. Singapore registered the third-highest government
trust level at 73 percent. Trust saw a
significant increase in Ireland, where
elections brought in a new government.
Government’s inability to effectively
manage the political and financial crises of 2011 also had a severe impact
on the credibility of government officials. Not surprisingly, their decline
mirrored the historic drop in trust in
the institution of government. In nearly every country surveyed, the general
population says it trusts government
leaders less to tell the truth than it
does business leaders (figure 4, page
3). Their credibility has taken such a
beating that they are now the least
trusted spokespeople in the world.
(For more on the steep decline in
credibility levels of government officials see page 7.)
Figure 1: Biggest decline in trust in government in Barometer history
How much do you trust government to do what is right?
-Trust +Trust
Trust Steady
GLOBAL
-Trust
88%
88%
78%
77%
85%
75%
73%
75%
64%
62%
50%
43%
40%
35%
33% 33%
43%
38%
62%
54%
52%
50%
47%
44%
43%
62%
61%
56%
53% 52%
52%
42%
39%
42%
35%
26%
28%
51%
49%
45%
49%
43%
40%
33%
31%
36%
32%
31%
25%
20%
20%
N/A
2011
2012
2011
N/A
2012
COUNTRIES
GLOBAL
Responses 6-9 only on 1-9 scale; 9 highest; Informed Publics ages 25-64
Figure 2: Distrust is growing: more countries are now distrusters
2011
2012
GLOBAL
55
GLOBAL
51
Brazil
UAE
Indonesia
China
Netherlands
Mexico
Singapore
Argentina
India
Italy
Canada
South Korea
Sweden
Japan
Australia
Spain
France
Poland
Germany
U.S.
U.K.
Russia
Ireland
80
78
74
73
73
69
67
62
56
56
55
53
52
51
51
51
50
49
44
42
40
40
39
China
UAE
Singapore
India
Indonesia
Mexico
Netherlands
Canada
Italy
Argentina
Australia
Brazil
Sweden
U.S.
South Korea
Poland
U.K.
Ireland
France
Germany
Spain
Japan
Russia
76
68
67
65
63
63
61
58
56
54
53
51
49
49
44
44
41
41
40
39
37
34
32
TRUSTERS
NEUTRAL
DISTRUSTERS
Responses 6-9 only on 1-9 scale; 9 highest; Informed Publics ages 25-64
Composite score is an average of a country’s trust in business, government, NGOs and media
2 0 1 2 | T r u s t Bar o m et er
2
Business Still Has Its Own Hurdles to Clear, Especially in
Developed Markets
Despite better standing than government, people want more regulation of business
Driven by steep drops in countries
in the heart of the eurozone economic crisis, trust in business fell
three points globally to 53 percent.
Spain, France, and Germany, down
by 21, 20, and 18 points respectively (figure 3), weren’t the only mature
economies moving squarely into the
distruster category. South Korea recorded a 15-point drop in trust in
business (for more on South Korea,
see page 6).
Figure 3: Several mature economies see double-digit drops in business trust
How much do you trust business to do what is right?
-Trust +Trust
Trust Steady
GLOBAL
-Trust
81%
77%
80%
78%
71%
70%
61%
57%
54%
56%
56%
53%
50%
50%
69%
67%66%
64%
62%
46%
44%
67%
65%
63%
53%
46%
43%
41%41%
53%
52%
47%
44%
48%
46%
47%
38%
31%
In the majority of countries, trust in
business held steady, with several
countries in Asia staying well above
50 percent – Indonesia (78 percent),
Singapore (66 percent) and India (69
percent). The U.S., however, was
among the countries where trust did
not go above the 50-percent mark.
65%
63%
57%
54%
52%
50%
46%
81%
78%
74%
34%
32%
28%
N/A
2011
2012
2011
N/A
2012
COUNTRIES
GLOBAL
Responses 6-9 only on 1-9 scale; 9 highest; Informed Publics ages 25-64
China was the lone country to see a
significant boost in trust in business,
rising from 61 percent to 71 percent.
The uptick could be attributed to the
profitability of state-owned enterprises and the growth of the country’s auto industry, which is now the
largest in the world.
Figure 4: Government leaders less trusted than business leaders to tell the truth
Do you trust leaders to tell you the truth?
73%
69%
69%
66% 66%
Despite the fact that in all but one of
the countries surveyed (Singapore),
government leaders are less trusted
than their business counterparts to
tell the truth (figure 4), nearly half of
global respondents still want more
government regulation of business.
The regulations they are calling for
however, are changes business can
step up and implement on its own.
Business has the means to act with
speed and dexterity to right its own
ship, while maintaining the ability to
be a force for good and an engine
for profit.
3
% who do not trust them to tell the truth
65%
60%
51%
50%
46%
44%
53%
50%
48%
51%
50%
47%
42%
40%
36%
38%
34%
46% 46%
36%
46%
43%
43%
41%
40%
36%
34%
27%
34%
30%
28%
26%
23%
24%
21%
13%
Government Leaders
“Do not trust them at all”; General Population
17% 17%
15%
14%
14%
10%
11%
10%
5%
Business Leaders
29%
24%
9%
NGOs Remain Most Trusted Institution Globally, Despite Decline
Media, the only institution to post an increase, benefits from diversification of options
For the fifth year in a row, NGOs are
the most trusted institution in the
world, and in 16 of the 25 countries
surveyed, more trusted than business.
Trust in NGOs has reached a record
high of 79 percent in China among
35 to 64-year-olds (figure 6). This signals a number of changes taking place
within the country, including the evolution of its market. The growth in NGO
trust, a by-product of becoming the
world’s second-largest economy, also
indicates that China’s people and media outlets are breaking long-standing
traditions and now relying more heavily on non-traditional sources for information. Since 2009, trust in NGOs
has surged in India to 68 percent
among 35 to 64-year-olds (figure 6).
Figure 5: Trust in three of four institutions declines; only media rises
How much do you trust the following institutions to do what is right?
61%
50%
As the media landscape continues
to dimensionalize and deliver a wider
range of options, it is becoming more
trusted and valued (for more on the
evolution of the media landscape
see page 8). The media also did a
strong job this past year of covering
the financial turmoil throughout the
European Union as well as numerous
corporate crises, including Bank of
America trying to impose a debit card
fee, the Netflix/Qwikster snafu, and
the India telecoms scandal. Media is
also skillfully using social networks to
help extend the life of its stories and
keep its brands relevant.
56%
53%
47%
NGOs
BUSINESS
49%
52%
52%
46%
43%
38%
GOVERNMENT
MEDIA
But some countries are not as trusting
of NGOs. In markets that dealt with crises and scandals, such as Brazil (down
31 points), Japan (21 points), and Russia (14 points), NGOs suffered severe
drop-offs in trust (not depicted here).
The institution of media rose above
50 percent in trust for the first time
and is the only institution the Barometer studies that saw an increase
(figure 5). Media experienced significant regional upticks in India (20
points), the U.S. (18 points), the
UK (15 points), and Italy (12 points).
58%
2011 Informed Public
2012 General Public
2012 Informed Public
Responses 6-9 only on 1-9 scale; 9 highest; Informed Publics 25-64 and General Population
Figure 6: NGOs surge in China and India
How much do you trust NGOs to do what is right?
79%
80%
75%
70%
68%
65%
60%
54%
55%
52%
50% 48%
48%
45%
40%
35% 36%
31%
30%
2001
2002
2003
U.S.
2004
2005
2006
UK/France/Germany
2007
2008
2009
China
2010
2011
2012
India
Responses 6-9 only on 1-9 scale; 9 highest; Informed Publics ages 35-64
2 0 1 2 | T r u s t Bar o m et er
4
Japan and the Fragility of Trust
Earthquake and subsequent nuclear disaster expose weakness of country’s “command-and-control”
method of communications and how easily trust can be lost
There is little mystery behind the precipitous drop in trust in Japan, historically a country with steady trust levels.
The 8.9 off-shore earthquake that hit
the country in March 2011 set off a
chain of events, including a nuclear
meltdown at the Fukushima power
plant, that all but destroyed people’s
trust in government, officials, and five
major industries. Facing one of its largest environmental and political crises
ever, Japan failed to deliver the leadership and protection its people needed.
Trust in three of the four institutions we
survey suffered double-digit decreases
for the first time ever (figure 7a). As the
nuclear crisis worsened, the government’s absence of leadership, and the
local utility’s poor transparency revealed
massive shortcomings in the country’s
command-and-control approach to
communications. The Olympus Corporation scandal also raised concerns
about corporate governance in Japan.
Five of 11 major industry sectors saw
dramatic drops (figure 7b). Not surprisingly, energy suffered the worst blow
with a 46-point plunge. In Japan, trust
in the media industry tumbled by 21
points, while banks and financial services fell by 20 and 17 points, respectively. Not depicted here is a 17-point
decline in trust in the telecommunications sector, which fell to 58 percent.
Trust in credible spokespeople
dropped across the board (figure 7c).
For government officials it nearly vanished, dropping from 63 percent to
8 percent. Unlike most other mature
markets in which CEO credibility fell
but that of regular employees rose,
both took a pounding in Japan, dropping by 43 points each. Information
sources are less trusted too, in particular TV, which dropped by 26 points
(figure 7d). Not pictured here, but also
recording declines is trust in socialnetworking and micro-blogging sites.
Both enjoyed significant increases in
the overall study (figure 13, page 8).
5
Figure 7: The fragility of trust: Focus on Japan
a)  Trust in institutions
Business
53%
Media
48%
47%
NGOs
-12
51%
36%
Government
-21
-26
51%
30%
2011
25%
2012
b)  Trust in industries
Energy
75%
29%
-46
Media
54%
33%
-21
Financial Services
55%
-17
38%
Banks
71%
-20
51%
2011
2012
c)  Credible spokespeople
-38
-23
70%
65%
-43
67%
-55
-43
63%
59%
-30
48%
-17
42%
-26
40%
39%
32%
24%
22%
18%
16%
14%
8%
Technical
Expert
Academic
or Expert
CEO
A Person
Like Yourself
NGO
Represent.
2011
Regular
Employee
Financial
Analyst
Government
Official
2012
d)  Trust in information sources
-16
Business
53%
47%
Newspapers
-26
Media
48%
-13
-12
36%
51%
-13
-21
30%
TV
Radio
2011
Informed Publics ages 25-64
NGOs
2012
Government
51%
-26
25%
Magazines
Banks and Financial Services Remain Least Trusted;
Technology on Top for Sixth Year
The financial industry suffers as Europe’s sovereign debt crisis continues
While Japan shows how easy it is to
lose trust, the financial sector exemplifies how hard it is to gain it. As the financial situations around the globe remain
bleak, banks and financial services stay
the two least trusted industry sectors
for the second year in a row (figure 8).
On the opposite end of the trust spectrum, technology, for the sixth consecutive year, is the most trusted. The
steady introduction of more powerful
tablets and smart phones has helped
keep the tech sector in good standing in both developed markets such as
the U.S. and the UK and in developing ones like China and India (figure 9).
The financial meltdown throughout the
eurozone has had a particularly negative impact on trust in countries like
Germany, France and Spain (figure 9).
The persisting negative economic climate is going to make the recovery of
trust in that region even more difficult
in 2012. A severe loss of confidence in
the financial services industry also occurred in South Korea where trust fell
25 points. South Korea was the setting
for a remarkable slide in trust across
every industry sector except automotive and technology. A few of the biggest decreases happened in telecommunications (down 32 points), financial
services (25 points), banks (24 points),
and media (16 points). Despite the fact
that South Korea was less affected by
the global economic downturn, there
is still a high level of uncertainty its
people are facing. This, along with
the intensified polarization of wealth,
diminishing disposable income and
a hike in consumer prices, could
be driving this drastic drop in trust.
In Germany, the energy sector felt
the effect of Japan’s nuclear disaster, recording a 24-point drop
in trust, equal only in size to the hit
the auto industry took in that country. Energy also saw a steep decline in France and South Korea.
Figure 8: Technology remains on top; finance sector still at bottom
How much do you trust the following industries to do what is right?
2012
2011
Technology
80%
Technology
79%
Telecommunications
67%
Automotive
66%
Automotive
67%
Food and beverage
64%
Food and beverage
64%
Consumer packaged goods
62%
Pharmaceuticals
61%
Telecommunications
60%
Energy
60%
Brewing and spirits
59%
Consumer packaged goods
57%
Pharmaceuticals
56%
Brewing and spirits
57%
Energy
53%
Media
52%
Media
51%
Banks
50%
Banks
47%
Financial services
48%
Financial services
45%
Responses 6-9 only on 1-9 scale; 9 highest; Informed Publics ages 25-64 in 20 countries
Figure 9: Distrust in finance and energy spreads; tech remains stable and strong
How much do you trust the following industries to do what is right?
Financial Services
100%
Energy
Technology
90%
91%
+10
80%
75%
70%
64%
60%
52%
50%
32%
83%
-46
-25
67%
-20
74%
-15
73%
71%
73%
59%
-32
45%
40%
30%
98%
93% 92%
-26
48%
-24
47%
39%
-18
29%
24%
20%
20%
19%
14%
10%
0%
Germany France
2011
Spain
S. Korea
2012
Japan
Germany France S. Korea
2011
UK
2012
US
2011
India
China
2012
Responses 6-9 only on 1-9 scale; 9=highest; Informed publics ages 25 to 64
2 0 1 2 | T r u s t Bar o m et er
6
Government Officials Now Least Credible Spokespeople;
CEOs See Record Drop
Dispersion of authority evidenced in rise in credibility of “person like me” and regular employee
As trust in government experienced
its biggest decline in Barometer history, so too did the credibility of its
officials. Only 29 percent of those
surveyed view them as credible. Government officials, whose 14-point
drop is their largest in Barometer
history, are now the least credible
spokespeople in the world (figure 10).
In a separate look at how much the
general population trusts government
and business leaders to tell them the
truth, government leaders resoundingly emerge as the less likely party to
be transparent, with 46 and 27 percent, respectively, saying “I do not
trust them at all” (figure 4, page 3).
Business leaders were not immune
to the increasing skepticism. The
drop in the credibility of CEOs in mature markets such as the U.S., UK/
France/Germany, and South Korea
fell more than – or as dramatically
as – it did when the recession hit in
2008-2009 (figure 11). Overall, CEO
credibility dropped 12 points to 38
percent, its biggest drop in Barometer history (figure 10).
As government officials and CEOs
become less a source of trusted
information, people are once again
turning to their peers. “A person like
me” has re-emerged as one of the
three most credible spokespeople,
with its biggest increase in credibility since 2004 (figure 10). Seeing a
similar rise in credibility are regular
employees, who saw their number
jump by 16 points. Smart businesses
will take advantage of this dispersion
of authority. They will talk to their employees first, and empower them to
drive the conversation among their
peers about the company and its role
in society.
7
Figure 10: Credibility of CEOs and government officials plummets; peers and
regular employees see dramatic rise
If you heard information about a company from one of these people, how
credible would that information be?
2012
2011
Academic
or expert
70%
Technical expert
in the company
64%
Financial or
industry analyst
53%
NGO representative
47%
68%
Technical expert
in the company
66%
A person
like yourself
65%
Regular employee
50%
NGO representative
50%
50%
CEO
Academic
or expert
A person
like yourself
43%
Financial or
industry analyst
Gov’t official
or regulator
43%
CEO
Regular employee
Gov’t official
or regulator
34%
Greatest
increase
since 2004
+ 22
+ 16
46%
38%
29%
- 12
- 14
Biggest declines
in Barometer history
“Extremely credible” and “very credible”; Informed Publics ages 25-64 in 20 countries
Figure 11: CEO credibility returns to low of 2009
If you heard information about a company from a CEO, how credible would
that information be?
100%
90%
83%
80%
70%
60%
60%
59%
60%
46%
44%
37%
37%
30%
56%
53%
50%
40%
68%
66%
41%
34%
22%
20%
49% 51%
44%
32%
23%
46%
45%
35%
33%
34%
26%
23%
18%
63%
17%
28%
27%
22%
21%
26%
17%
10%
0%
2007
U.S.
2008
UK/France/Germany
2009
2010
China
India
“Extremely credible” and “very credible”; Informed Publics ages 35-64
2011
2012
S. Korea
Japan
Social Media Surges as Skepticism Rises
New media sees biggest rise in trust, jumping by 75 percent
This year’s Barometer once again
looks at the number of times people need to hear something to believe it. Against the backdrop of increased skepticism, 63 percent say
between three and five times (figure
12), which represents a four-point uptick over last year. In Japan, which
now sits second from the bottom of
the Trust Index, the number is 82 percent (see page 2 for the Trust Index).
While traditional media sources are still
the most trusted, the diversification of
trusted media sources continues. In
fact, social media, which consists of
social networking sites, content-sharing sites, blogs, and microblogging
sites, saw the biggest percentage increase (75 percent) in trust among media sources (figure 13). Online multiple
sources, made up of search engines
and news/RSS feeds also saw a jump
of 18 percent.
In the U.S., trust in all media sources rose, with major jumps in the perceived trustworthiness of television,
radio, and newspapers as sources of
information about a company (by 23,
13, and 11 points, respectively). In the
U.K., those same sources increased
by 25, 17, and 17 points, respectively.
By contrast, in France and Germany,
trust in television news and newspapers fell by ten or more points.
Figure 12: Skepticism requires repetition
13%
TEN OR MORE TIMES (10+)
China saw double-digit decreases in
television as a trusted source, plunging
from 74 to 43 percent. Newspapers in
that country didn’t fare well either (down
by 20 points to 34 percent). But trust in
social media jumped: micro-blogging
sites and social-networking sites went
from virtual distrust at just one percent
each to being greatly trusted by a quarter (25 percent) and 21 percent, respectively – a likely reflection of the rapid
growth in social media usage within China. At the end of 2010, Weibo (the Twitter equivalent) had 60 million users. By
the end of 2011, 310 million users were
on Weibo, which broke major news stories, including the corruption of the Red
Cross and a high-speed train crash.
5% ONCE (1)
14% TWICE (2)
6%
SIX TO NINE TIMES (6-9)
How many times in general do you
need to hear something about a
specific company to believe that
information is likely to be true?
35% THREE TIMES (3)
28%
FOUR OR FIVE TIMES (4-5)
Informed Publics ages 25-64 in 25 countries
63% THREE TO FIVE TIMES
Figure 13: People now trusting multiple media sources
How much do you trust each of the following places as a source of information about a company?
+10%
32%
29%
+18%
26%
+75%
22%
14%
+23%
13%
16%
8%
TRADITIONAL
ONLINE MULTIPLE SOURCES
2011
SOCIAL MEDIA
CORPORATE
2012
“Trust a Great Deal”; Informed Publics ages 25-64 in 20 countries
2 0 1 2 | T r u s t Bar o m et er
8
Neither Business nor Government Is Meeting Expectations
Wide gap seen between what is considered important for business and government to do and how they
are actually performing
In this year’s Trust Barometer, we
asked the general population a
two-part series of questions to understand the gap between what is
important to them and how well business and government are delivering
against that. For business, we looked
at 16 attributes that build trust and
at eight for government. Both institutions show performance gaps,
but the gulf is wider for government,
which appears to be falling short
on policy and execution. It records
double-digit gaps in environmental
protection, sound fiscal management,
and frequent and honest communication (38, 46, and 49 percentage
points, respectively) (figure 14).
cietal in nature. Sixty-four percent
say that treating employees well is
important to building their trust in a
company, but only 27 percent say
that business is doing a good job
of that. Both business and government are cited, by a wide margin,
for not adequately listening to their
primary stakeholders – for business, there is a gap of 31 percentage points in this critical behavior;
for government it is even greater at
50 percentage points.
Business, on the other hand, is
doing a slightly better job at closing the gap on operational factors
like bringing innovative products to
the market, and ranking on global
best-of lists. The areas in which it
has largely fallen short are more so-
Figure 14: Business and government not meeting expectations
How important are each of the following actions to building trust?
How are companies/government performing on each of the following attributes?
Business
Government
LISTENS TO CUSTOMERS
36%
-31
HIGH QUALITY
PRODUCTS OR SERVICES
48%
TREATS EMPLOYEES WELL
27%
CUSTOMERS
AHEAD OF PROFITS
-36
28%
ETHICAL PRACTICES
-34
32%
TRANSPARENT PRACTICES
-29
27%
COMMUNICATES
FREQUENTLY AND HONESTLY
-33
26%
PROTECTS THE ENVIRONMENT
-31
29%
ADDRESSES SOCIETY'S NEEDS
-26
30%
POSITIVE IMPACT ON
LOCAL COMMUNITIES
-20
26%
-23
INNOVATOR
29%
23%
38%
31% -7
RANKS WELL
19%
Business Importance
66%
TRANSPARENT PRACTICES
-50
16%
62%
61%
EFFECTIVE FINANCIAL
STEWARDSHIP
65%
-46
19%
60%
65%
COMMUNICATES FREQUENTLY
57%
-49
16%
55%
50%
56%
PROTECTS THE ENVIRONMENT
-38
18%
49%
Closing
the gap on
expectations
36%
-17
Company Performance
Responses 8-9 only on 1-9 scale, 9 highest; General Population in 25 countries
9
-50
17%
67%
62%
41%
-12
39%
-16
67%
LISTENS TO CITIZENS
64%
46%
41% -5
REGARDED AND
ADMIRED LEADERSHIP
PARTNERS WITH
THIRD PARTIES
-37
26%
RESPONSIBLE ACTIONS
DELIVERS
FINANCIAL RETURNS
-19
67%
PROVIDES EMPLOYMENT
TRAINING
POSITIVE IMPACT ON
LOCAL COMMUNITIES
PARTNERS WITH
THIRD PARTIES
54%
-36
18%
52%
-36
16%
41%
14%
Government Importance
-27
Government Performance
New Dynamics in Play to Build Trust in Business
To increase trust levels, a combination of operational and societal factors is required; if done right,
business has an opening to move from license to operate to license to lead
The 2012 Trust Barometer’s deep
dive into the 16 attributes of trust
finds that the factors responsible for
shaping current business trust levels
(47 percent) are largely tied to business competence – and that those
that will build future trust are more
societally focused (figure 15). Listening to customer needs, treating
employees well, placing customers
ahead of profits, and having ethical
business practices are all consid-
ered more important than delivering
consistent financial returns – and indicate that the path forward entails
continuing to do the basics well while
also adopting shared values.
cial system. We could go a long way
to regaining that trust by making the
system more transparent, by clearing
some of the obscurity that causes
people to believe the system is a
game rigged against their own interests.” * Mr. Pandit was writing about
the financial industry, but the same
analysis applies to business overall.
As part of the Capitalism in Crisis series in the Financial Times, Vikram
Pandit, CEO of Citigroup (disclosure:
Edelman client) wrote that the loss
“of trust arose not from a failure of
capitalism but from specific failures
by certain participants in the finan-
* Financial Times Wednesday, January 11, 2012, p. 9
— http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/90bb724a-3afc11e1-b7ba-00144feabdc0.html
Figure 15: Earning the license to lead requires operational and societal attributes
CURRENT TRUST
BUILDING FUTURE TRUST
47% TRUST BUSINESS
1 Listens to customer needs and feedback
1 Delivers consistent financial returns
2 Innovator of new products
3 Highly regarded, top leadership
SOCIETAL ATTRIBUTES
MORE IMPORTANT TO
BUILDING FUTURE
TRUST
3 Ranks on a global list
5 Partners with third parties
CURRENT TRUST
DRIVEN BY OPERATIONAL
ATTRIBUTES
1 High quality products or services
3 Treats employees well
4 Places customers ahead of profits
4 Takes actions to address issue or crisis
6 Has ethical business practices
7 Has transparent and open business
8 Communicates frequently and honestly
9 Works to protect/ improve environment
10 Addresses society's needs
11 Positively impacts the local community
12 Innovator of new products
13 Highly regarded, top leadership
14 Delivers consistent financial returns
FROM LICENSE TO OPERATE TO LICENSE TO LEAD
SOCIETAL
OPERATIONAL
15 Ranks on a global list
16 Partners with third parties
Regression Analysis; Responses 8-9 only on 1-9 scale; 9 highest; General Population in 25 countries
2 0 1 2 | T r u s t Bar o m et er
10
About the Edelman About Edelman
Edelman is the world’s largest indeTrust Barometer
pendent public relations firm, with
The 2012 Edelman Trust Barometer
is the firm’s 12th annual trust and
credibility survey. The survey was produced by research firm StrategyOne
and consisted of 20-minute online
interviews conducted from October
10 - November 30, 2011. The 2012
Edelman Trust Barometer online survey sampled 25,000 general population respondents with an oversample
of 5,600 informed publics in two age
groups (25-34 and 35-64) across 25
countries. All informed publics met
the following criteria: college-educated; household income in the top
quartile for their age in their country;
read or watch business ⁄ news media
at least several times a week; follow
public policy issues in the news at
least several times a week. For more
information, visit http: ⁄ ⁄ www.edelman.com ⁄ trust or call 212.729.2166.
#edeltrust2012
wholly owned offices in 60 cities and
4,000 employees worldwide. Edelman was named Advertising Age’s
top-ranked PR firm of the decade
and one of its “2010 A-List Agencies” and “2010 Best Places to Work;”
PRWeek’s“2011 Large PR Agency of
the Year” and “2011 Large UK Consultancy of the Year;” EuropeanExcellence Awards’ “2010 Agency of the
Year;” Holmes Report’s “Agency of
the Decade” and“2009 Asia Pacific
Consultancy of the Year;” and among
Glassdoor’s top five “2011 Best Places to Work.” Edelman owns specialty firms Blue (advertising), StrategyOne (research), Ruth (integrated
marketing), DJE Science (medical
education ⁄ publishing and science
communications), MATTER (sports,
sponsorship, and entertainment), and
Edelman Consulting. Visit http: ⁄ ⁄ www.
edelman.com for more information
On the cover, from top left: protest in front of Bank of America – Jessica Rinaldi ⁄ Reuters; U.S. President Barack
Obama meets with House Speaker John Boehner about U.S. debt ceiling – Yuri Gripas ⁄ Reuters; graffiti rendering of logo for Tepco, the Tokyo Electric Power Company, widely criticized for its handling of the disaster at
Fukushima – Thierry Ehrmann; “Next stop: Greece” ad on a Washington, D.C. bus shelter, admonishing U.S. to
not spend beyond its means – Public Notice Media; protester holds up “We Are the 99%” sign – Jon Silver ⁄ Edelman; Former Olympus Corp CEO Michael Woodford, who unveiled a major accounting scandal at the company,
speaks with reporters – Toru Hanai ⁄ Reuters; French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel address a news conference following talks at the Chancellery in Berlin – Fabrizio Bensch ⁄ Reuters.