Pharma RepTrak The World s Most Reputable Pharmaceu<cal Companies. May 2016

Transcription

1 Pharma RepTrak 2016 The World s Most Reputable Pharmaceu<cal Companies May 2016

2 About Reputa<on Ins<tute The World s Leading Research and Advisory Firm for Reputa<on Founded in 1997 by Dr. Charles Fombrun and Dr. Cees van Riel, we help organiza<ons answer the ques<ons: What is my reputa<on and how does it compare? How can I improve it? Who is doing it well? RepTrak Framework We measure the reputa<ons of thousands of the world s most pres<gious companies annually using our RepTrak framework the world s largest and highest quality norma<ve reputa<on database. Con<nuous Reputa<on Measurement & Guidance We provide con<nuous reputa<on measurement, benchmarking and consul<ng services to hundreds of the best- known companies globally to help them protect their reputa<ons, analyze risks and drive compe<<ve advantage. Kasper Ulf Nielsen Execu<ve Partner knielsen@reputa<onins<tute.com Reputa<on Management Best Prac<ces Through our Reputa<on Leaders Network, we bring execu<ves from 100+ global member companies together to advance the prac<ce of reputa<on management collec<vely and for their organiza<ons. 2

3 Agenda About Reputa<on Ins<tute The 2016 Global Pharma RepTrak Building a Strong Reputa<on Across Countries and Dimensions Drivers of Reputa<on and Support Driving Business Success Through Reputa<on 3

4 Welcome to the Pharma RepTrak 2016 The Pharma RepTrak is a study that Reputa<on Ins<tute conducts annually to measure the reputa<on of pharmaceu<cal companies with a global footprint in product distribu<on and high familiarity with general public in 15 countries In 2016, the Pharma RepTrak measures 14 companies with over 23,000 ra<ngs collected in Q1, 2016 Respondents are qualified at 2 <ers: Familiarity: Respondent must be somewhat or very familiar with companies RepTrak Pulse: 75% comple<on of pulse ra<ng to be included The results tell us: Which pharmaceu<cal companies are best regarded by the general public What drives trust and support with general public How the top companies are living up to public expecta<ons Study components: RepTrak Pulse Dimensions of Reputa8on and Drivers of Reputa8on Suppor8ve behaviors such as willingness to trust or buy Brand expressiveness Data by demographic cuts AUSTRALIA BRAZIL CANADA CHINA FRANCE GERMANY INDIA ITALY JAPAN MEXICO RUSSIA SOUTH KOREA SPAIN THE UNITED KINGDOM THE UNITED STATES RepTrak is a registered trademark of Reputa<on Ins<tute. Copyright 2016 Reputa<on Ins<tute. All rights reserved. 4

5 Why Measure Reputa<on? The success of your company depends on gepng people to support you. Reputa8on is an emo8onal bond that ensures Customers buy your products The general public recommend your company Policy makers and regulators give you a license to operate The financial community invest in you The media report favorably on your point of view Employees deliver on your strategy RepTrak is a registered trademark of Reputa<on Ins<tute. Copyright 2016 Reputa<on Ins<tute. All rights reserved. 5

6 The RepTrak Model Summary The RepTrak System measures a company s ability to deliver on stakeholder expecta<ons on the 7 key ra8onal dimensions of reputa8on A company that delivers on expecta<ons in the 7 domains will earn support from its stakeholders PRODUCTS & SERVICES INNOVATION WORKPLACE GOVERNANCE CITIZENSHIP LEADERSHIP PERFORMANCE PURCHASE RECOMMEND CRISIS PROOF VERBAL SUPPORT INVEST WORK REPUTATION DIMENSIONS REPUTATION (RepTrak Pulse) SUPPORTIVE BEHAVIORS RepTrak is a registered trademark of Reputa<on Ins<tute. Copyright 2016 Reputa<on Ins<tute. All rights reserved. 6

7 Reputa<on Ins<tute Pharma RepTrak Pharma RepTrak 7

8 Who is the General Public? Gender Age Income Somewhat or very familiar with the pharma companies 48% 52% 35% 26% 13% 26% 70% 3% 29% Male Female Low Middle High Balanced female- male ra<o 61% are 35 or older 70% with high educa<on AUSTRALIA BRAZIL CANADA CHINA FRANCE GERMANY INDIA ITALY JAPAN MEXICO RUSSIA SOUTH KOREA SPAIN THE UNITED KINGDOM THE UNITED STATES RepTrak is a registered trademark of Reputa<on Ins<tute. Copyright 2016 Reputa<on Ins<tute. All rights reserved. 8

9 Global Reputa<on Summary The overall reputa<on of Pharma companies is average but improving However, the reputa<on is s<ll very polarized - 37% perceive the industry as having an excellent reputa<on, and 35% perceive it as weak or poor With the younger genera<on (18-24 years old) the reputa<on is much lower leaving a risk for the industry With the high income group the reputa<on is much higher and at a strong level (71.4) The percep<on of pharma companies are improving on all 7 dimensions and for the first <me its strong for Product/Services and Financial Performance However, 44%- 55% are s<ll uncertain about what the individual companies are doing on the 7 dimensions exposing the industry to a large reputa<on risk. Compared to other industries Pharma is s<ll lagging behind in terms of both familiarity and reputa<on 9

10 Global Reputa<on Summary The key drivers of reputa<on are for Product/Services, Governance, and Ci<zenship they make up 46% of reputa<on The drivers are consistent across emerging and developed markets and have been consistent over the past 3 years However, there is a gap between performance and importance the industry has its weakest scores for Governance and Ci<zenship This is a key focus area for the companies who wants to improve reputa<on Bayer has the best reputa<on among pharma companies with a strong score Bayer is the only company to break the 70 mark indica<ng a strong reputa<on 4 other companies follow with high average scores: Abbov Laboratories, Novo Nordisk, Roche, and Merck who all have a reputa<on score between Across the 7 dimensions of reputa<on Bayer and Novo Nordisk stands out The two companies win the 7 dimensions Bayer is number one for Product/Services, Financial Performance, Leadership, and Workplace Novo Nordisk wins the dimensions of Innova<on, Governance, and Ci<zenship 10

11 Pharma Reputa<on Development : Pharma Reputa<on Improves in Source: 2016 Pharma RepTrak N = 23,243 ra<ngs from general public across 15 countries Globally RepTrak Pulse scores that differ by more than +/- 0.3 are significantly different at the 95% confidence level Norma8ve Scale Excellent/ Top Tier 80+ Strong/ Robust Avg./ Moderate Weak/ Vulnerable Poor/ Lowest Tier <40 11

12 Global Pharma s Mixed Reputa<on: 37% perceive the industry as having an excellent reputa<on, and 35% perceive it as weak or poor Distribu<on among respondents 13% 22% 14% 14% 37% RepTrak Mean Score Norma8ve Scale Source: 2016 Pharma RepTrak N = 23,243 ra<ngs from general public across 15 countries Excellent/ Top Tier 80+ Strong/ Robust Avg./ Moderate Weak/ Vulnerable Poor/ Lowest Tier <40 12

13 Pharma Enjoys Best Reputa<on in the UK and US, and Poorest in South Korea CANADA 64.3 MEXICO 68.4 U.S BRAZIL 70.9 U.K FRANCE 64.7 SPAIN 65.0 GERMANY 70.1 ITALY 64.8 INDIA 67.3 RUSSIA 71.0 CHINA 66.3 S. KOREA 59.8 JAPAN 63.7 Pharma reputa<on increased 3 points in the UK,4 points in Germany and 5 points in Brazil, moving from an average to a strong reputa<on India = 5 point increase China = 6 point increase Global Pharma RepTrak Score AUSTRALIA All RepTrak Pulse scores that differ by more than +/- 1.0 are significantly different at the 95% confidence level Norma8ve Scale Excellent/ Top Tier 80+ Strong/ Robust Avg./ Moderate Weak/ Vulnerable Poor/ Lowest Tier <40 13

14 Reputa<on Dashboard for Pharma across segments AGE INCOME LOW MIDDLE HIGH GENDER EDUCATION MALE FEMALE MIDDLE HIGH Norma8ve Scale Excellent/ Top Tier 80+ Strong/ Robust Avg./ Moderate Weak/ Vulnerable Poor/ Lowest Tier <40 14

15 Pharma Reputa<on Development : Pharma Reputa<on Improves in ,6 68,9 70, , High Income GLOBAL PHARMA 60 62,7 62,7 62,7 63, Yr. 55 Norma8ve Scale Globally RepTrak Pulse scores that differ by more than +/- 0.3 are significantly different at the 95% confidence level Excellent/ Top Tier 80+ Strong/ Robust Avg./ Moderate Weak/ Vulnerable Poor/ Lowest Tier <40 15

16 Pharma has a high average to strong percep<on across the 7 dimensions. Across the 7 dimensions Pharma Companies has the strongest percep<on for Product/Services, Financial Performance, and Innova<on. The weakest percep<ons are for Ci<zenship and Governance where the scores are only average Norma8ve Scale Globally RepTrak Pulse scores that differ by more than +/- 0.3 and dimension scores that differ by more than +/- 0.5 are significantly different at the 95% confidence level Excellent/ Top Tier 80+ Strong/ Robust Avg./ Moderate Weak/ Vulnerable Poor/ Lowest Tier <40 16

17 The Reputa<on of Pharmaceu<cal companies is improving 2014 Global Pharma 2015 Global Pharma n=20,175 n=20,789 Norma8ve Scale Excellent/ Top Tier Strong/ Robust Avg./ Moderate Weak/ Vulnerable Poor/ Lowest Tier <40 n=

18 Pharma is facing a large Risk or Opportunity: 44%- 55% are Uncertain About What Pharma Companies do Across the 7 dimensions FENCE SITTERS = % of public who is neutral or not sure about the company s performance on that dimension PRODUCTS & SERVICES 4% 51% 43% 3% 44% INNOVATION 4% 48% 44% 4% 48% WORKPLACE 4% 41% 41% 14% 55% GOVERNANCE 5% 42% 44% 9% 53% CITIZENSHIP 5% 40% 44% 11% 55% LEADERSHIP 4% 43% 43% 10% 53% PERFORMANCE 2% 49% 37% 12% 49% DISAGREE STRONGLY AGREE NEUTRAL NOT SURE 18

19 However, as an industry Pharma Companies remains lower compared to the Top % 90% Familiarity % 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 50,0 55,0 60,0 65,0 70,0 75,0 80,0 Global RepTrak Pulse Score Global RepTrak Pharma Companies Compared to the best 100 companies in the RepTrak the Pharma companies are falling behind both when it comes to familiarity but also reputa<on 19

20 Reputa<on Ins<tute Pharma RepTrak 2016 The Best Reputa8on in Pharma 20

21 Best Reputa<on in Pharma 3 Tiers of Reputa<on - from Strong to Average Bayer Only Pharma Company with a Strong Reputa<on, and Leader 5 th Year in a Row Tier 1 Tier 2 Company 2016 RepTrak Pulse Bayer 70.6 Abboh Laboratories 68.7 Novo Nordisk 68.5 Roche 68.4 Tier 3 Merck 68.3 Sanofi 67.8 Allergan 67.5 AstraZeneca 67.1 Eli Lilly 67.1 AbbVie 67.0 GlaxoSmithKline 66.9 Novar8s 66.7 Bristol- Myers Squibb 66.0 Pfizer 65.9 All RepTrak Pulse scores that differ by more than +/- 0.9 are significantly different at the 95% confidence level Average Norma8ve Scale Excellent/ Top Tier Strong/ Robust Avg./ Moderate Weak/ Vulnerable Poor/ Lowest Tier <40 21

22 Pharma RepTrak 2016 vs Rank Company Company 1 Bayer Bayer 2 Abboh Laboratories Roche 3 Novo Nordisk Abboh Laboratories 4 Roche Eli Lilly 5 Merck GlaxoSmithKline 6 Sanofi Bristol- Myers Squibb 7 Allergan Novo Nordisk 8 AstraZeneca AstraZeneca 9 Eli Lilly Pfizer 10 AbbVie Sanofi 11 GlaxoSmithKline Merck 12 Novar8s Novar8s 13 Bristol- Myers Squibb 14 Pfizer Allergan and AbbVie are new- comers to the study The industry is experiencing a posi<ve li{ in 2016 Roche, Eli Lilly and Bristol- Myers Squibb s scores did not increase significantly, but s<ll did increase posi<vely Merck has the highest improvement of 4.2 points All RepTrak Pulse scores that differ by more than +/- 0.9 are significantly different at the 95% confidence level Sta<s<cally significant score difference between 2015 and

23 Reputa<on across Age Groups Company 2016 RepTrak Pulse Bayer Abboh Laboratories Novo Nordisk Roche Merck Sanofi Allergan AstraZeneca Eli Lilly AbbVie GlaxoSmithKline Novar8s Bristol- Myers Squibb Pfizer All RepTrak Pulse scores that differ by more than +/- 0.9 are significantly different at the 95% confidence level 23

24 2 Companies Win the 7 Dimensions Bayer and Novo Nordisk Novo Nordisk leads in Innova<on, Governance and Ci<zenship Bayer leads in Products & Services, Workplace, Leadership and Performance All dimension scores that differ by more than +/- 1.8 are significantly different at the 95% confidence level 24

25 Reputa<on Ins<tute Pharma RepTrak 2016 Drivers of Reputa8on 25

26 Products/Services, Governance and Ci<zenship are once again the key drivers of Reputa<on for Global Pharma 2016 Global Pharma RepTrak Drivers Product/Services: Offers high quality products and services it offers excellent products and reliable services 12.9% 15.8% Innova8on: Is an innova<ve company - - it makes or sells innova<ve products or innovates in the way it does business 12.9% 15.1% 15.5% 13.8% 13.9% Workplace: Is an appealing place to work - - it treats its employees well Governance: Is a responsibly- run company - - it behaves ethically and is open & transparent in its business dealings Ci8zenship: Is a good corporate ci<zen - - it supports good causes & protects the environment Leadership: Is a company with strong leadership - - it has visible leaders & is managed effec<vely Performance: Is a high- performance company - - it delivers good financial results Factor Adjusted Regression N = 21,000 Adj- R² =

27 Reputa<on Drivers have been consistent across last 3 years 2016 Global Pharma RepTrak Drivers 2015 Pharma Drivers 2014 Pharma Drivers 12.9% 12.9% 15.8% 13.8% 15.1% 13.9% 15.5% Factor Adjusted Regression N = 21,000 Adj- R² =

28 Reputa<on Issue Pharma is weakest on top 2 drivers: Governance and Ci<zenship 2016 Global Pharma RepTrak Drivers 2016 Global Pharma RepTrak Scores Factor Adjusted Regression N = 21,000 Adj- R² = n=

29 Pharma Companies Have the Opportunity to Stand out by Focusing on CSR P&S IN. W. G. C. L. P. Δ score between 1 st and last ranked company in dimension Majority of the pharma companies have average scores across the 7 dimensions with a few excep8ons. (ex. Sanofi Products & Services score is 70.1) The biggest delta for pharma companies scores appears in the CSR dimensions governance and ci8zenship Consequently, these are dimensions in which the industry as a whole has the lowest scores in and any company who can stand out there would see a compe88ve advantage Globally RepTrak Pulse scores that differ by more than +/- 0.3 and dimension scores that differ by more than +/- 0.5 are significantly different at the 95% confidence level Global Company RepTrak Pulse scores that differ by more than +/- 0.9 and dimension scores that differ by more than +/- 1.8 are significantly different at the 95% confidence level 29

30 Percep<ons for Governance Key focus area for Pharma companies Governance: 'Company' is a responsible company - - it behaves ethically and is open and transparent in its business dealings Company Governance Novo Nordisk 69.2 Bayer 68.3 Merck 67.9 AbbVie 67.2 Allergan 67.2 Abboh Laboratories 67.0 Sanofi 66.7 AstraZeneca 66.3 Roche 66.3 Bristol- Myers Squibb 66.2 Eli Lilly 66.0 Novar8s 65.2 GlaxoSmithKline 64.5 Pfizer % 44% 46% 7% 4% 41% 43% 13% 4% 45% 43% 8% 5% 47% 46% 2% 4% 45% 43% 8% 4% 45% 42% 8% 5% 43% 44% 8% 6% 43% 43% 8% 4% 44% 39% 13% 7% 45% 37% 12% 4% 46% 40% 9% DISAGREE NEUTRAL STRONGLY AGREE NOT SURE 5% 44% 42% 8% All dimension scores that differ by more than +/- 1.8 are significantly different at the 95% confidence level 30

31 Percep<ons for Ci<zenship Key focus area for Pharma companies Ci8zenship: 'Company' is a good corporate ci<zen - - it supports good causes and protects the environment Company Ci8zenship Novo Nordisk 67.8 AbbVie 67.6 Merck 67.5 Abboh Laboratories 66.5 Allergan 66.5 Bayer 66.2 Sanofi 66.0 Eli Lilly 65.8 AstraZeneca 65.4 Roche 64.3 Bristol- Myers Squibb 64.1 GlaxoSmithKline 63.7 Novar8s 63.2 DISAGREE All dimension scores that differ by more than +/- 1.8 are significantly different at the 95% confidence level 6% 42% 42% 10% 5% 45% 47% 3% 4% 44% 43% 9% 5% 44% 41% 10% 4% 45% 41% 10% 5% 40% 38% 17% 6% 42% 42% 10% 5% 44% 41% 10% 5% 43% 42% 10% 6% 43% 35% 16% 6% 46% 37% 11% 7% 43% 36% 14% 6% 45% 36% 13% 7% 43% 34% 15% NEUTRAL STRONGLY AGREE NOT SURE 31

32 Reputa<on Ins<tute Pharma RepTrak 2016 Reputa8on: The Driver of Support 32

33 Reputa<on Drives Support - Only Companies in the Strong RepTrak Pulse Range Achieve Support Above 50% 9% 17% 36% 55% 84% 9% 14% 31% 51% 83% 9% 14% 33% 51% 83% 8% 14% 28% 48% 79% 9% 16% 33% 51% 80% 11% 18% 35% 54% 78% 9% 14% 29% 46% 74% Source: 2016 Global Pharma RepTrak N = 23,243 ra<ngs from general public across 15 countries 33

34 Globally the Impact of Reputa<on on Support Has Increased A 5 point Increase in Reputa8on Results in a 8.5% Increase in Recommenda8on 34

35 Reputa<on Ins<tute Pharma RepTrak 2016 Corporate Brand and Communica8on 35

36 Global Pharma Brand Expressiveness MEETS NEEDS OF CUSTOMERS CONSISTENT EXPERIENCE DELIVERS ON PROMISE APPEARS GENUINE STANDS OUT FROM THE CROWD SUFFICIENT INFORMATION WELCOMES OPEN DISCUSSION WITH OUTSIDE COMMUNICATES OFTEN 69,7 68,4 67,6 67,1 66,7 64,9 64,5 63, Global Pharma Demographic differences regarding pharma s brand expressiveness AGE: Respondents between in the age group years perceive pharma s brand expressiveness as higher than respondents in the age groups and GENDER: No difference between males and females MARKETS: Respondents from emerging markets perceive pharma s brand expressiveness as higher than those from developed markets All scores that differ by more than +/- 0.5 are significantly different at the 95% confidence level 36

37 Compared to the Global Top 10 Companies, Pharma Falls Behind in Communica<on MEETS NEEDS OF CUSTOMERS CONSISTENT EXPERIENCE 69,7 68,4 77,5 77,2 DELIVERS ON PROMISE APPEARS GENUINE STANDS OUT FROM THE CROWD SUFFICIENT INFORMATION 75,1 67,6 74,6 67,1 77,7 66,7 71,9 64,9 Individually, all Pharma companies are perceived as similar when it comes to brand communica<on None of the pharma companies are standing out from their industry WELCOMES OPEN DISCUSSION WITH OUTSIDE COMMUNICATES OFTEN 64,5 63,8 71,3 71, Global RT Top Global Pharma All scores that differ by more than +/- 0.5 are significantly different at the 95% confidence level 37

38 Expressive companies that welcome open discussion have bever reputa<ons Communicates oren Welcomes open discussion Excellent % 68% Strong % 40% Average % 23% Weak % 12% Poor % 7% 38

39 The Impact of Corporate Brand Personality on Pharma Companies Honest, sincere, trustworthy, socially responsible Reliable, secure, hardworking Concerned, reassuring, suppor<ve, agreeable Friendly, pleasant, open, straigh~orward Technical, corporate Ambi<ous, achievement oriented, leading Imagina<ve, up- to- date, exci<ng, innova<ve Pres<gious, exclusive, refined Casual, simple, easy- going Charming, stylish, elegant Extrovert, daring Cool, trendy, young Masculine, tough, rugged Inward- looking, authoritarian, controlling Arrogant, aggressive, selfish - 2,3% 0,7% 3,2% 6,6% 6,6% 5,9% 5,9% 8,1% 7,9% 7,1% 8,9% 8,3% 8,2% 10,2% 10,1% Being perceived as honest, sincere, socially responsible, reliable and concerned have the highest posi<ve impact on reputa<on for pharma companies The only nega<ve impact on reputa<on is being perceived as arrogant, aggressive and selfish - 4% - 2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% GREEN avributes reflect personality avributes that have the highest posi<ve impact on reputa<on RED avributes reflect personality avributes that nega<vely impact reputa<on 39

40 Pharma Companies: Who is seen as Honest, Sincere, Trustworthy, Socially Responsible AbbVie 5% 46% 47% 3% Novo Nordisk 3% 47% 46% 5% Merck 5% 46% 44% 5% Sanofi 5% 46% 43% 6% Allergan 4% 48% 42% 6% AstraZeneca 7% 46% 42% 6% Bayer 6% 45% 41% 8% Abbov Laboratories 5% 48% 41% 7% Eli Lilly 6% 48% 40% 5% Bristol- Myers Squibb 5% 50% 40% 6% Individually, all Pharma companies are perceived as similar when it comes to the brand strength avributes Abbvie, Novo Nordisk and Merck as seen as most trustworthy and honest GlaxoSmithKline 7% 48% 38% 7% Novar<s 7% 48% 38% 7% Roche 5% 48% 38% 9% Pfizer 8% 48% 37% 8% DISAGREE NEURAL STRONGLY AGREE NOT SURE 40

41 Pharma Companies: Who is seen as Arrogant, Aggressive, and Selfish? AbbVie 24% 42% 31% 3% Allergan 31% 37% 26% 6% Sanofi 31% 39% 25% 6% Merck 30% 39% 25% 6% Novo Nordisk 33% 37% 24% 6% AstraZeneca 33% 39% 23% 6% Bristol- Myers Squibb 31% 40% 22% 7% Eli Lilly 31% 41% 22% 6% Abbov Laboratories 33% 39% 21% 8% Novar<s 32% 39% 19% 9% Roche 35% 37% 18% 10% GlaxoSmithKline 34% 40% 17% 9% Individually, all Pharma companies are perceived as similar when it comes to the brand strength avributes More than a fi{h of respondents strongly agree that Merck, Sanofi, Allergan and AbbVie are arrogant, aggressive and selfish Pfizer 34% 40% 17% 9% Bayer 39% 35% 17% 10% DISAGREE NEURAL STRONGLY AGREE NOT SURE 41

42 Your personality mavers when it comes to reputa<on Reliable, Secure, Hardworking Ambi8ous, Achievement Oriented, Leading Technical, Corporate Honest, Sincere, Trustworthy, Socially Responsible Inward looking, Authoritarian, Controlling Excellent % 72% 72% 73% 43% Strong % 48% 47% 44% 26% Average % 32% 32% 26% 18% Weak % 17% 18% 13% 10% Poor % 16% 15% 8% 13% 42

43 Pharma Companies Will Benefit from Telling Their Company Story - Enterprise Drives 60% of Willingness to Support 60% 40% > ENTERPRISE PRODUCT SUPPORTIVE BEHAVIORS RECOMMEND COMPANY SAY SOMETHING POSITIVE GIVE THE BENEFIT OF DOUBT TRUST TO DO THE RIGHT THING BUY PRODUCTS INVEST WORK FOR COMPANY WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBOURHOOD RECOMMEND PRODUCTS RECOMMEND AS AN INVESTMENT 43

44 For Pharma Who You Are Carries More Importance Than What You Sell RECOMMEND PRODUCTS 56.3% 43.7% SAY SOMETHING POSITIVE 59.1% 40.9% GIVE THE BENEFIT OF DOUBT 63.6% 36.4% WORK FOR COMPANY 62.4% 37.6% 44

45 Reputa<on Ins<tute Driving Business Success Through Reputa8on Management 45

46 Reputa<on Ins<tute Helps Measure and Manage Your Reputa<on What You Do Reputa<on Behavior Business Results Products Investments Customer Service Employment What You Say Branding Public Rela<ons Marke<ng Sponsorship What Others Say Media Key Opinion Leaders Topic Experts Friends/Family 46

47 Get Your Company s Data Ask us to be among the first to know your company's 2016 score and ranking. See how likely your stakeholders are to buy from you, work with you, and invest in your company. Understand how you can improve your scores and grow your stakeholder support. Ask us at info@reputa<onins<tute.com 47