Our poll with @FortuneMagazine shows Americans' sentiments on the big five CEOs in tech, and @amazon's @JeffBezos ranks highest in skilled leadership. #techleadership
Check out our Societal ROI, a new diagnostic tool for assessing a company's investment for social good. #csr #socialimpactinvestment
In our study on companies' return on investments for social good, we uncovered the top issues that Americans want businesses to address. The top ones include data privacy and healthcare access #csr #socialimpactinvestment #corporateleadership
Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos is the most skilled leader among top tech CEOs, according to a new poll.
Eighty-three percent of respondents said they had confidence in his abilities to grow his company and innovate, beating Apple CEO Tim Cook (77%), MicrosoftCEO Satya Nadella (76%), Google CEO Sundar Pichai (76%), and Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg (71%), according to a survey conducted on Fortune’s behalf by The Harris Poll.
Bezos has earned his top position by transforming Amazon from a tiny online bookseller into an e-commerce Goliath. At the same time, he pushed the company beyond its roots into streaming video, information technology, Kindle tablets, and, more recently, Echo smart speakers while also expanding into physical retail, most notably by acquiring grocery chain Whole Foods.
“Amazon is sort of it’s own thing right now,” Harris Poll CEO John Gerzema said. “It’s like what Apple was 10 years ago.”
But the current landscape is complicated for tech CEOs. Once seen largely as helping make life easier for their users, many of them are now under suspicion amid problems like privacy missteps and the growing sentiment that people spend too much time staring at screens.
In an effort to gauge public sentiment about major tech CEOs, Fortune enlisted Harris Poll to conduct an online survey on its behalf in mid-October of over 2,000 U.S. adults. The group represents the population at large.
Read more at Fortune Magazine.
For the book, Schawbel conducted a global research study in partnership with Virgin Pulse of over 2,000 managers and employees from 10 different countries. Interviews were also conducted with 100 leaders from top companies including Facebook, Google, HBO, Starbucks, General Mills, GE, Nike, American Express, Four Seasons, Walmart, Best Buy, Unilever, TIME, LinkedIn, and The U.S. Air Force.
One of the most interesting finds from the study was the impact of remote work. While people who work from home enjoy the flexibility of their work schedule, having full control of their day and not being confined to a desk or office, Schawbel’s research with Virgin found that employees who work remotely are less likely to want a long-term career at their companies. Only 5% of remote workers always or very often see themselves working at their company for their entire career compared to 28% who never work remote.
“Working remote has an impact on loyalty and team and organizational commitment,” Schawbel told The Harris Poll.
Another aspect of our excessive dependence on technology in the workplace was seen among managers. “Too many leaders use technology as a crutch instead of a bridge to really facilitating relationships and connections among teammates,” Schawbel said.
“The devices in those companies are intentionally making us addictive because that’s the business model and as a result a leader will much rather text someone instead of actually calling them or meeting them face to face even if they are a foot away and that’s a big problem,” he added. “In the study we found that the biggest technology in the way of human contact is email.” The research showed that employees increasingly depend on technology tools to communicate with their teammates, including email (45%), text messaging (15%) and instant messaging (12%). Of those who cited email, over 40% said they feel lonely always or very often, are not engaged and have a high need for social connection.
A recent study in the Harvard Business Review by two social psychologists stresses the importance of communicating in person because we’re less persuasive than we think over email. According to the research, a face-to-face request is 34 times more successful than an email. Schawbel expounded on the data: “It’s really about understanding. You can go back and forth with emails and people might take what you’re saying the wrong way and that creates frustration and argument and it delays the message, delays productivity.”
Companies are beginning to notice the negative consequences of a less-human and excessively tech-reliant workplace and some are taking action. “Apple is investing billions of dollars in creating a new headquarters that 12,000 employees can work in and they’re investing so much in their office space because they know that real innovation and creativity comes from the conversations that are happening in the hallways,” Schawbel said.
One of Schawbel’s recommendations for combatting growing isolation in the workplace is organizing more social events such as company retreats, and at these gatherings employees should put their devices away and focus on bonding with co-workers in real life.
“We have to use technology as a bridge to human connection instead of a barrier,” he said. “Leaders need to give people space to connect because that’s how they are going to be able to bring their best self into the workplace and be as productive as possible.”
According to Schawbel, “Back to Human” ultimately serves as a reminder to be conscious of how we’re using technology, when and where we’re using it and being more thoughtful around it. “Humanity matters in the age of technology,” he said.
In addition to the research, Schawbel’s book features a proprietary academic assessment called "The Work Connectivity Index," which measures the strength of team relationships, and it offers exercises, examples, activities and advice for individuals and teams to improve their leaderships skills and increase personal productivity in order to be more collaborative and fulfilled at work.
You can see other key findings from the study here.
The high cost of cancer treatment is on the minds of a lot of Americans. The National Cancer Opinion Survey conducted by The Harris Poll on behalf of the American Society of Clinical Oncology finds that 57% of respondents say they would be more concerned about paying for cancer treatment, compared to 54% who are more concerned about dying, or cancer-related pain and suffering.
“So this is a big financial burden. It’s a big emotional burden on families,” says Dr. Richard Schilsky, chief medical officer for the Society.
The survey found that among caregivers responsible for paying for cancer care for a family member, 74% say they’re concerned about affording it. Dr. Schilsky says many of them are taking drastic steps to pay for cancer treatments. “61% of the caregivers in the survey this year said they’ve started to work extra hours, postponed retirement, by taking extra jobs, or dipping into their 401K plans, simply to be sure that their family member with cancer has the financial resources to be able to receive the care that they need,” he says.
He suggests these care givers speak about their financial situation with their physicians, who may have some way for them to deal with the high cost of treatments by “modifying the treatment plan in some that still can produce a good outcome; limiting the number of tests that are performed; changing some of the supportive care regimens around,” he says.
Another concern raised in the survey comes from rural residents, and the access they have to cancer treatments. The survey found that 40% of rural Americans who have or have had cancer say there are not enough doctors in their communities who specialize in cancer treatment as opposed 22% for urban and suburban residents. They also say they typically spend an average of 50-minutes traveling one way to see their cancer physician, compared to non-rural residents, where the average is 30-minutes.
Read more at WFMD-AM.
The Societal ROI index ranks companies based on three dimensions: Ethical Leadership, Civic Minds, and Visible Values. It is a broad lens that uniquely captures public perceptions of leadership, citizenship and real-world engagement, bringing a holistic assessment to the marketplace. Each dimension has two attributes which are used to create scores and rankings.
“The point of Societal ROI as an index is that it’s not just about whether a company takes a stance or is a good neighbor, we’re dimensionalizing it to represent the broad view the public is taking of corporate behavior today,” said Wendy Salomon, The Harris Poll’s Managing Director of Corporate Reputation. Salomon recently previewed the index and its findings alongside Amy Terpeluk, Finn Partners' senior partner in the CSR & Social Impact practice, at the 3BL Forum on Brands Taking Stands. “[The public] cares about the ethics of the C-suite and the values they represent; they see companies engaging in complex issues, and so increasingly they have higher expectations. Companies need to understand this and get on board.”
Targeting these complex problems is especially crucial at a time when Americans don’t think companies are doing enough to solve social issues. To inform the creation of the Societal ROI Index, The Harris Poll investigated Americans’ views on companies tackling social issues. A national survey found that 65% of Americans believe data privacy is the number one issue for companies to address, followed by healthcare access (61%), supporting veterans (59%), education (56%) and job creation (56%), but far fewer Americans think companies should be working to make a difference on social issues like LGBTQ rights (30%). Meanwhile only 24% of Americans think companies are making a very positive impact on job creation, the highest number out of all 15 issues listed; the lowest was immigration, just 12% say companies are making a significant impact addressing this issue.
While the numbers appear discouraging, Salomon sees a silver lining. “This is an opportunity for companies who have been quietly and consistently supporting these issues from the get-go. We’re at an inflection point, and it’s never been more important to share information about the good companies do.”
There are clear examples of companies working to make a positive difference in the issues the country faces. The public, however, is apparently unaware of the good work being done. “It’s interesting that the public gives businesses so little credit when many companies are doing so much to be a part of the solution in many of these areas,” Salomon explained.
Through the Societal ROI Index’s comprehensive lens, companies can better understand the strong impact of public perceptions on business outcomes. They can identify points of equity and risk relative to social good in order to help them more strategically invest in their community participation and related efforts.
Having a high Societal ROI score implies that a company is perceived as having a positive and tangible role in society. The higher the score, the more likely the public is to behave in ways the company hopes such as becoming informal brand ambassadors and welcoming expansion into their communities. On the other hand, companies with low Societal ROI scores are seen as having a negative or negligible impact on society, which consequently affects their business.
“In the case of Wegmans who scored the highest, we can delve deeper into the return on their latest social initiative, which involved them joining forces with local law enforcement to combat the rising opioid epidemic with coordinated activities across 82 stores in six states,” said Salomon. “It is possible to look more closely at how they performed on Ethical Stewards, Civic Minds and Visible Values. Societal ROI is proving to be a great diagnostic tool to help companies focus and understand their efforts,” she added.
For this inaugural 2018 Societal ROI Index, Wegmans received the highest score (85/100) and was ranked first. While only select companies were calculated as part of the current index, any company can request its Societal ROI score through The Harris Poll or Finn Partners. Custom research can be efficiently conducted and placed in a broader context in order to contextualize sentiment.
See the full Societal ROI Report here
Nearly 40 percent of Americans incorrectly believe that alternative medicine can cure cancer, a new study out Tuesday finds.
The survey finds that 38 percent of people who care for cancer patients believe in alternative therapies, and 22 percent of cancer patients or former cancer patients believe in such remedies.
That’s despite overwhelming evidence that such treatments not only do not work, but can shorten the lives of cancer patients.
The American Society of Clinical Oncology commissioned The Harris Poll to survey more than 4,800 people, including 1,000 cancer patients or cancer survivors. They found 39 percent of them believe alternative therapies alone -- such as enzyme and oxygen therapy, diet, vitamins, and minerals -- can cure cancer.
They’re wrong, the evidence shows.
“There’s no question that evidence-based cancer therapy is necessary to effectively treat the disease,” said ASCO Chief Medical Officer Dr. Richard Schilsky.
“The vast majority of alternative therapies either haven’t been rigorously studied or haven’t been found to benefit patients. When patients are making critical decisions about which cancer treatments to undergo, it is always best to follow the evidence from well-designed research studies.”
Younger people were more likely to believe in “natural” or alternative therapies, the survey found. It showed that 47 percent of people aged 18-37 and 44 percent of people 38-53 believed in alternative medicine, compared to 21 percent of people 72 and older.
Read more at NBC News.