Corporate reporting | by Helen Dunne on 30/10/2010 16:05:49 in Issue 51 | share me: del.icio.us | digg | reddit | Tweet
A presentation of the unintentional wit and wisdom of the FTSE 100 companies' annual reports as they grapple with the thorny subject of values

Helen Dunne is the editor of CorpComms Magazine, follow her tweets here @CorpCommsMag

Peter Cruddas, the multimillionaire boss and founder of financial trading business CMC Markets, works in an industry well known for its opaque language, so perhaps he can be forgiven for the following statement in his annual report. We've created a set of values...that will unite us as a business, set the standards and empower us to build an exceptional investment brand. We call it 3D thinking from CMC Markets. Dream, Dare, Deliver.
But when it comes to the country's biggest companies who are increasingly eager to prove their virtue alongside their profitability, it might be expected that their stated values would be both rather more sensible and meaningful.
But, as London-based communications agency Radley Yeldar finds in a recent report The value of values, many FTSE 100 companies have fallen into the trap of corporate gobbledegook. Among the 75 FTSE 100 companies who state values, there is one that cites 'boundarylessness' (sic) - a word that does not exist in any dictionary, while others opt for 'heart', 'pioneering' and 'thinking holistically' among the attributes that they perceive make them stand out from the crowd.
One FTSE 100 company has 'integrity of communication' while another boasts 'we act wisely', which must come as a relief to its investors, who must similarly be glad to see 'deliver our promises', 'doing it right' and 'relentlessly focusing on delivering results' from some of its competitors.
As the report makes clear, however, it is not about the specific descriptive nouns chosen by a business but rather about how their actions in the real world either support or contradict these values. Less clear is how companies with 'technology' and 'great shopkeeping' as their values can demonstrate these.
And still they keep on coming. Drinks giant SABMiller may have sampled its own products when it came up with the line 'our reputation is indivisible', platinum miner Lonmin appears to have borrowed from the term 'zero tolerance' with its value 'zero harm' while Tesco's boast that 'No one tries harder for customer services' prompts the old joke Well, why don't you employ no one? And British Airways is 'safe and secure' which must come as a relief to passengers.
Occasionally, some of these oddities work when put together, such as broadcast company BSkyB's values 'Tuned-in, irrepressible, inviting, fun' or brewing group Whitbread's 'Genuine, confident, committed'.
A clear statement of values can help to build trust in a company, engage brand loyalty, create a sense of belonging amongst employees and consumers, and articulate why the firm's collective efforts matter. The report claims that FTSE 100 companies use values in one of three ways - as a way of influencing behaviour, a way of sign posting what they believe is important (more 'what we value' than 'our values') or as a set of beliefs, which are too vague and impractical to work as behavioural values (such as diversity or honesty).
But perhaps these attempts to be different should be welcomed, as ten values get over-used. Almost one quarter of FTSE 100 companies claim ownership of three of the top ten values, while 97 per cent of those with stated values claim one and 80 per cent claim two.
Like medieval knights, today's modern companies seem to value 'virtue' and 'honour' above all, while 'integrity', 'trust', 'honesty' and 'responsibility' make a combined total of 43 appearances on FTSE 100 literature. These companies have a conscience and want stakeholders to know.
(Ironically, energy giant Enron, which collapsed in 2001 and was frequently cited as one of America's top ten most admired corporations, had RICE corporate values: respect, integrity, communication and excellence.) Almost 40 per cent of financial companies within the FTSE 100 (nine) cite integrity as a value, while three quarters of healthcare companies equally value integrity and respect.
Teamwork is the second highest rated value, used by some companies to portray a united front and most often by those organisations that have grown through acquisition.
Respect is also popular, but, as the report questions, how does this manifest itself? Indeed, financial services companies cite respect as a value as often as performance, which may raise some eyebrows in the media. Centrica goes even further; it cites 'respect for human rights' as a value, which is probably a legal requirement.
As companies that are meant to work in the interests of their shareholders, it is rather strange to see 'performance' as a popular value. After all, which company would aspire to perform badly? Few companies provide any further guidance on this value, although National Grid 'take ownership for driving performance' - which perhaps sanctions investors asking for the return of executive bonuses in underperforming years?
Source: Radley Yeldar
share me: del.icio.us | digg | reddit | Tweet