Practical advice on how to narrow your reputation gap
Even if the use of AI is inevitable and desirable, it’s critical that firms have the correct practices in place to build trust with their stakeholders and manage reputation risks.
To ensure these practices are well understood, firms must align communications with purpose. Otherwise, they’ll find that there is a difference between the benefits that AI is providing and public perception of how they’re using it – this is known as the reputation gap.
For example, take corporate communications that promote concern for the welfare of a company’s workforce. However, the business’s practices are shown to be doing otherwise. This divergence of what the company does from what it says will cause serious damage to its reputation.
Every organisation has a reputation gap but some are wider, and therefore riskier, than others.
AI presents a challenge for long-established companies with legacy systems that need to become more agile in their reputation management. But younger companies that have grown quickly and haven’t had the time or the resources to develop and implement a communications strategy should also take heed. Consider the case of the traditional banks versus the fintech firms – both can benefit from AI but both need to know how to communicate its pros and cons.
Companies implementing AI need to have some form of governance group set up, which can oversee the multi-factor issues relating to implementing the technology. These can include internal and external reputational risk issues, and how to mitigate these through communications.
Even if the use of AI is inevitable and desirable, it’s critical for companies to share their reasons behind making the change, and to offer reassurances that they’re approaching it in a sensitive manner. To do this, they have got to align communications with purpose.
Given the evolving nature of AI as well as public opinions of it, it’s important to note that any consequences don’t just involve the business. If one business gets it wrong, that can affect sentiment surrounding an entire technology – and even the industry as a whole.
This is why it’s crucial that businesses implementing AI:
Business leaders spearheading AI change programmes will need to ensure that they’ve reduced their reputation gap in order to minimise the chances of damaging their brand.
Rather than merely explaining to target audiences what has been decided, they need to be at the table during the decision-making process, advising on how certain decisions may cause negative reactions. This way, steps to mitigate reputational risk will be worked into the strategic plan for implementing AI, rather than as an afterthought.
External communications and reputation management must also be aligned with internal communications. As they interact with clients, suppliers and regulators, employees will influence the reputation of the organisation. They can also be used by communications departments as a source of intelligence – to identify the operational issues or potential issues that could open up the reputation gap and cause reputational risk.
Ironically, one of the best means to explain this technological revolution could be face to face contact, in some circumstances. For example, an announcement on the intranet will work for some staff but not necessarily those who work on the factory floor or in warehouses – that is, the very people who might be most profoundly affected. Regular ‘huddles’ with direct line managers might be more appropriate. Segmentation and targeting is essential, to ensure that employees are briefed in ways that are most efficient depending on the type and level of roles that they do.
Communications need to be more targeted, customer relations more nuanced, and social media sentiment analysis more precise and granular. They need to scan the horizons for threats, and monitor conventional news and social media, as well as the actions and comments of regulators and policymakers.