A PERSON can live with four necessities. But to make him or her a better person, motivation is necessary and that can be driven by self-esteem.
When this is applied to the corporate world, a company's self-esteem can derive from its image - partly achieved by the perception of the public. All companies have their sights on profits, but once they get enough, they also dream of a good image. In a world where "sustainability" rules, good image is believed to be a shield against negative criticism.
And what would be a better way to know what others think about a company than to have a survey?
I was recently invited to join a survey in which the respondents were entirely members of the press. The survey company was hired by one of the top energy companies in Thailand. Let me call it Company A here.
Company A, in fact, has been successful to some extent. Its profits are in the top-10 ranking. Socially, its name has been frequently mentioned for donations. Environmentally, it is involved in many projects to help Thailand achieve its target in cutting carbon emissions.
The company is known all over Thailand even though it has been in existence for less than 50 years.
During the survey, what surprised me was the list of questions I was asked. I was asked if Company A was among the top 5 companies in terms of image. As I said, it was.
I was asked if Company A's image is better than Siam Cement Group, Siam Commercial Bank or Land & Houses. As we know, these are all No 1 players in their respective industries. What comparison did Company A, in the energy industry, want to establish?
I was asked to give scores on social and environmental projects that companies should embark on. I had to provide a score of 1 to 5 on how intensively companies need to be involved in sports sponsorship, promote public participation in their operations, ensure fair play in their industries, or strengthen communities near their plants.
Have you seen something peculiar? All questions were about fair play, but for the sport sponsorship. It surprised me because if money is to be set aside to make a better society, why did the survey not contain "art" sponsorship as well? If we want to encourage tomorrow's adults to think differently, we need events to promote different thinking. Sport sponsorship could help, but then given the long list of sports, it sounds unfair to focus sponsorship on popular sports such as tennis or football. What about the Paralympics?
Sport sponsorship was given Score 2. But when I was asked to assign score 1-5 for the company's achievement, it was given 4. In this regard, Company A exceeds my expectation.
Sadly, overall, it performs below my expectation. Company A is yet to struggle more to avoid distorting market mechanisms (even when ordered by regulators) and to be more creative in helping society and the environment. For example, to date, its reforestation scheme has become common as so many companies are involved in a similar move.
I just hope that my views won't affect Company A's pride. Like anything, there is always a chance for improvement, both for individuals and companies, both to themselves and in the eyes of others.