“Who’s responsible for your company’s reputation?”

This is the question posed in the title of a Harvard Business Review article published April 28 and written by Ron Ashkenas, author of The Boundaryless Organization. His answer, which draws on the current case against Goldman Sachs, and the ongoing trials and tribulations of Toyota’s quality control progams, among others, posits that reputation management “may need to be part of everyone’s responsibility.”

When any stakeholder—customer, employee, investor, etc.—chooses to buy from, work with or invest in any organization, their decision is based at least in part on the organization’s reputation. Based on the historical performance and customer care of an organization like Disney (another of Ashkenas’s examples), we expect a certain experience: For customers, that’s fabulous, family-friendly entertainment; for employees, its an amazing, innovative work environment; for investors, it’s a healthy, reliable return on their investment in the form of regular dividends.

Organizations that don’t hold to their own standards of responsibility inevitably erode their own reputations: Toyota’s current experience, for example, implies a betrayal of their legendary quality control practices. They’re fortunate to have such a strong reputation, forged through decades of strict adherence to their core values; they’ll likely weather the current storm. However, their customers won’t be fooled again. Repeated errors and quality gaffes will erode Toyota’s reputation, sales, and market share.

Reputation management—and brand management—require the care and attention of leaders, managers, and everyone else in an organization. A strong brand requires a remarkable degree of personal responsibility. How successful and consistent is your brand at enhancing its reputation?

This expectation of an experience is precisely our definition of the word brand.

Organizations can choose to embed responsibility for this expectation in their operations and standards, or they can choose to let it follow the whim of circumstance. In Disney’s case, leadership and management “make every employee feel responsible for the entertainment products and services they provide.” Johnson & Johnson, legendary for their adherence to their ‘credo,’ emphasizes every employee’s “responsibility to put the well-being of the people they serve first.” These are two of the most reputable firms in the world. And they’re also two of the most valuable brands in the world.

The Downtown Vancouver Business Improvement Association hosted one of the most admired leaders in the modern business world at Vancouver’s Pan Pacific Hotel yesterday. Howard Schultz is Chairman, President and CEO of Starbucks, one of the most successful brands in recent memory, and one of the strongest business success stories of the 20th century.

In a brief but illuminating address, Schultz talked about his roots “growing up on the wrong side of the tracks” in the projects of Brooklyn. He also talked about the heartbreak of seeing his father’s despair after he was injured on the job, and could no long support his family.

Amazing, isn’t it, how great leaders seem to endure adversity before achieving the loftiest of goals?

And lofty, indeed, were Schultz’s goals: He spoke of a time when Starbucks had only 12 stores, but a vision of a world-renowned brand. Today, more than 30 years into the Starbucks story, the company operates more than 17,000 locations in more than 150 countries. And they employ over 180,000 people.

Most memorable from among Schultz’s comments, though, were his discussion of the challenges he and his leadership team have faced during the past year: Starbucks is renowned for treating its employees better than most retail brands can manage. Their extended medical plan is exceptional for a company in their industry—especially in light of its annual $300M cost. The economic downturn of 2009 presented an opportunity to reduce this expenditure, but Schultz would have noting of it:

“To cut back on our commitments to our people would be to tear the very soul out of our company.”

Read the rest of this entry »