CAMPAIGNS: JUDGE AND JURY; The fat cat got the cream but failed to win public support

GEC has alienated both the general public and the City by giving its managing director a potential pounds 10 million wage packet, says Fiona Driscoll, chief executive of Ogilvy Adams and Rinehart

GEC has alienated both the general public and the City by giving its

managing director a potential pounds 10 million wage packet, says Fiona

Driscoll, chief executive of Ogilvy Adams and Rinehart



I don’t envy GEC’s PR team, having to make the best of last week’s

announcement that GEC’s new managing director, George Simpson of Lucas,

has been given a remuneration package potentially worth pounds 10

million over the next five years.



Not surprisingly, the headlines screamed about ‘the fattest cat of all’.

The PR team did manage to get critical key messages including one about

Simpson being the right man for the job and how dependent his package

will be on performance. But overall the impression is not of a PR

triumph.



So, has this done real harm to GEC’s reputation and could it have been

handled better? What, if anything, could PR have done to mitigate the

position?



It appears that GEC have learnt little from the row sparked by the

salary award to Cedric Brown of British Gas - the ‘original’ fat cat.



GEC has damaged its corporate reputation not only by making a salary

award that is open to criticism as socially unacceptable, but also by

appearing to flout corporate governance principles and Greenbury rules.



In the case of British Gas, the circle of critics focused on small

shareholders, unions and employees, the general public and the Labour

Party. This time, the City institutions are weighing in - the ABI,

institutional investors and analysts and even the Financial Times. This

is perhaps less emotive, but potentially more powerful group. Now that

the announcement is over, GEC has to be prepared to continue to defend

its position. It may have lost the first battle, but the real fight will

come if it continues to be pressured to further justify or change its

position.



Companies should not be dissuaded from doing what they believe to be

right out of fear of media reaction. GEC was no doubt made fully aware

of the likely fallout from its actions, but itsstrategy seems to be to

ride it out and ignore criticism.



It is not the role of our industry to make company policy for our

clients, but it is our responsibility to advise them of the likely

effect of their actions on their corporate reputation. And then it is

our job, to the best of our ability, to communicate facts and

explanations - not obfuscation and puffery - to the media. But

sometimes, even we can’t fix it.



Personally, I doubt that the PR result for GEC could have been any

better under the circumstances. One of the best things about our

business is the opportunity to be involved in the hot issues of the day.

But we all have to be realistic about what we can achieve for our

clients and to manage their expectations carefully. Otherwise reality

has a nasty habit of biting back.



Have you registered with us yet?

Register now to enjoy more articles and free email bulletins

Register
Already registered?
Sign in