Subscribe
About Us
Virtual Vantage PointsSM is the home blog of APCO Worldwide. Contributors include APCO's consultants around the world.
Read More »Follow us on Twitter @apcoworldwide
Contributors
Shared Purpose
Visit Shared Purpose, our new sub-blog on what's next for business and society.
History & Categories
Click to unfold.Recent Posts
- Reading Between the Lines: CR Messages in the Super Bowl Ads
- Unsolicited Campaign Advice to Candidate Romney
- What Do Employees Really Want?
- The Think Tank That Does
- Newt, the Center of Attention, in His World
- Improving Cities in India
- From Davos: The Problems, Difficulties and Woes of Europe
- Patiently Watching India’s Rise
- The World’s “Big Economic Headache”
- The State of the Union I’d Like to Hear
Categories
- Health Policy (80)
- Corporate Responsibility (65)
- Uncategorized (51)
- Global Development (28)
- Health Care (28)
- European Politics (27)
- Global Health (26)
- U.S. Politics (72)
- U.S. Elections (54)
- Reputation (21)
Archives by Month
- February 2012 (3)
- January 2012 (28)
- December 2011 (2)
- November 2011 (12)
- October 2011 (11)
- September 2011 (7)
- August 2011 (7)
- July 2011 (13)
- June 2011 (5)
- May 2011 (10)

Notes from the Other Side of the One-Way Mirror: The Evolving Definition of Transparency
I’m just getting out of focus groups with opinion leaders. I’ve probably moderated close to 500 focus groups over the past 15 years – mostly around expectations for corporate conduct and responsibility – and there is absolutely no doubt in my mind as to what the most striking change has been in the public’s view of companies. Ready for it?
The definition of transparency.
Fifteen years ago, transparency meant disclosure. As long as you didn’t hide the information, and made it available for some resourceful person to find, you met the public’s expectation for transparency.
Today, transparency means, “Come find me and tell me.”
It’s no longer sufficient to put information in your annual report or deep within your Web site. People only believe you to be transparent if they know it because you told them.
In these focus groups today, I was gauging awareness of some fairly obscure corporate responsibility initiatives of a Fortune 100 company. (In the spirit of full disclosure, before I did my homework, I had never heard of the initiatives before.)
Several focus group respondents became visibly agitated that no one in the group was aware of the initiatives I was testing. With accusations of conspiracies that would make Oliver Stone blush, the group came to the consensus that the company in question was deliberately hiding something far more damaging than its corporate responsibility report.
Now I know the Trust Barometer by one of our competitors tells me that people don’t trust companies the way they used to. But I’ve seen people willing to excuse far more egregious behavior by companies than not doing a good enough job communicating their corporate responsibility initiatives. What I believe has really changed is the bar that has been set for transparency.
The reasons for these exponentially-expanding expectations would require far more space than I have here on VVP. Clearly the corporate governance scandals of 2001-2002 made a lasting impression. And we can place a great deal of blame (credit?) on the rise of new media, social networks, and how communication itself has changed.
I invite others to weigh-in. Tell me your thoughts about transparency in the comments section.
Categories Corporate Responsibility, Reputation and tagged corporate responsibility, public opinion, transparency
. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.