The calls for sponsors to pull out from Willing Willie continues to intensify. Fortunately, they have not fallen on deaf ears. Jollibee Foods Corporation has paved the way for other advertisers to follow.
Free Lunch
With the international media taking notice, and the social media being used by various interest groups to call attention, the issue has gone beyond local borders. Companies looking to build a brand identity, both locally and globally, should be wary of the possible negative repercussions such a scandal may have on their on their corporate identity. They should also take note of the possible boost taking the high road would have on branding their image.
Companies pay millions each year for add placements, a few seconds for a commercial means paying tens of thousands of pesos. They advertise for a number of reasons, among them is to keep a healthy positive image. In a competitive market, nothing travels faster than rumors and bad news. The Jan Jan incident is exactly that. And news has traveled fast, it has traveled far and wide.
As the public fervor over the incident is still fresh, companies looking to build a good image can take advantage of the situation. A holding off of ad placements would certainly not go unnoticed by the various sectoral and interest groups keenly monitoring developments, it will even be championed.
The action taken by the Jollibee Foods Company has provided them an open window for reinforcing their wholesome and family-centric image. Their immediate withdrawal gives the appearance of them having no second thoughts as to the side they are on in issues concerning the rights of a child and morality. As the incident has been seen as a blatant abuse and exploitation of Jan Jan, JFC’s quick reaction has portrayed them as upholders of the rights of children and decency, an image that surely wouldn’t hurt any company.
Withdrawing support for Willing Willie not only shows concern for the company’s image and reputation, but what’s more, this will be conveyed for free. The issue being a hot item at the moment ensures media mileage, not to mention a vote of approval from various sectors in society. Why pay millions for an ad placement when you can promote and reinforce your brand image for free?
Give the People What They Want
The public outcry over the Jan Jan incident is at fever pitch as various sectors of society have voiced their contempt for what they saw as an obvious case of child exploitation and abuse. The incident has generated quite a buzz, not only with the local media outfits, but even with the international press. Social media has also played a significant role in calling attention to the issue. Calls to boycott the products of corporate sponsors of the show were made. Government agencies, primarily the DSWD, have also expressed concern.
In light of this, it is apparent that distancing one’s company from the show is the smart thing to do right now. Reputations that take years, even decades, to build can be destroyed with one bad call. Being on the wrong side, or just being implicated in a scandal of this scale suffices to ruin a company’s reputation of being licit and legit in its affairs. Managing such risks is at the core of corporate strategies. JFC’s reaction is consistent with managing the risk of gaining unwarranted negative attention from the public and quite possibly, the government.
JFC’s handling of the issue sends a clear message to the public: that they are committed to being responsive to the concerns of their consumers and that they are faithful to family values. Creating attachment necessitates responsiveness. If a company is to build a lasting relationship with its consumers, trust is a must. Trust in this case means that a brand is seen as consistently following through on promised claims and working in a way that is in the best interests of the consumer. Jollibee has always packaged itself as wholesome and thus appealing to the younger demographics and their parents. It can not afford to be seen as sponsoring a show which popular opinion sees as exploitative and abusia child. No company can.
JFC’s responsiveness over time and concern for the best interest of their consumer is what has endeared Jollibee to its target market, and has made it a household name. They were able to develop attachment and trust, and consequently build a relationship with their consumers. Thus, by giving the people what they want, the company has again reinforced their image as a trustworthy and responsive company.
A Company with a Conscience?
The Son of Man, Magritte 1964
The European Commission defines Corporate Social Responsibility as “[a] concept whereby companies integrate social and environmental concerns in their business operations and in their interaction with their stakeholders on a voluntary basis.” In a nutshell it is the principle that aside from maximizing profits, businesses should also take responsibility and create a positive impact on society. And although it can involve incurring short-term costs that do not provide an immediate financial benefit to the company, in the end it is meant to: promote positive social and environmental change.
A company’s CSR policy serves as a self regulating mechanism ensuring its compliance with the spirit of the law, business ethics and international norms. The idea being that companies should voluntarily and consciously take responsibility for its actions and activities, and not to settle with mere legality. Although critics say that it is an attempt to pre-empt the role of governments as a watchdog, still, being perceived as always doing right was never a bad thing, was it?
This is the basic level of CSR, and at this level it can be inferred that JFC holding off its ad placements in Willing Willie is aimed at respecting the spirit of the law by choosing not to sponsor a show seen as having infringed upon the rights of a child. If you’re still sitting on the fence on the issue, I suggest browsing through LaGalana’s insightful article “The Tale of Willing Willie and his Unwilling Performer: Why ‘Sorry’ just won’t cut it.” JFC has always been among the respected companies in the country, looked up to for sound and ethical business practices. And their handling of the popular outcry over the Jan Jan incident only serves to strengthen this reputation.
Maximizing Profit
However, confining JFC’s action to a substantial compliance with the laws and international norms is a bit too simplistic. Compliance with the laws of the land is incumbent upon all entities within a state. Companies are accorded no exception. Surely, no company wants the government on its back. But since the ultimate end of companies is to maximize profits, it would be beneficial to look at how JFC’s actions can be converted to profit.
By minimizing input in advertising and yet managing to portray the desired company image through various media -T.V., print, web, radio-, JFC has certainly made a sound business decision. Saving money while managing to convey to the public a positive image is surely a profitable proposition for any company. It also serves to differentiate them from other companies. In a competitive market where every other company is trying to get ahead by putting their image out in the open through advertisements, a company managing to distinguish themselves through distinctive ethical values is essential in getting customer loyalty. There is no doubt that the withdrawal of sponsorship for Willing Willie, at the earliest time possible will also benefit other companies this way.
Money is also saved by managing the risk to companies in being seen as supporting a show responsible of exploitation and child abuse. As such the perception of a company becomes negative, steps will eventually be taken to spin it or to explain the company’s actions or inaction. This equates to money spent on more ad placements and more sponsorships just to manage the damage, with more to be spent on repairing the company’s image. On the other end of the spectrum, companies could simply hold off ad placements for Willing Willie, get points for the company’s image, not to mention save money by avoiding a potential fallout.
Performing a Public Service
But perhaps the most relevant aspect of a withdrawal of support for Willing Willie is that the company will be performing an important public service. It would communicate non-tolerance of illicit behavior in television, and serve as a reminder that such behavior does not go unpunished. Performing this public service serves as a customer value proposition which translates to a competitive advantage for a company. Furthermore, this will send a message to local networks that they should minimize the production of shows that contribute to the ignorance of the populous.
Corporate success and social welfare are deeply intertwined.
Successful businesses require:
- healthy, competent workforce
- sustainable resources,
- a well managed and fully functioning government upholding the rule of law
- financiers and consumers (people with money)
Society needs profitable and competitive businesses to create:
- income
- wealth
- tax revenue
A well informed and educated population would greatly benefit businesses, but companies have a role to play in the process of getting the population there. What’s more is that it surely doesn’t hurt that in performing this role the company also manages to keep costs down, create a shared value with their customers, differentiate their company from their competitors, and maximize profitability.
Source: www.antipinoy.com
On Willing Willie 's episode tonight, April 8, host Willie Revillame made a big announcement concerning himself and his show.Willie announced first during the early part of the show that Willing Willie won't go live or will have a pre-taped episode tomorrow, April 9.
Posts
