2016 Edelman Trust Barometer India
•Transferir como PPTX, PDF•
0 gostou•952 visualizações
2016 Edelman Trust Barometer India
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Mais procurados (20)
Destaque
Destaque (11)
Semelhante a 2016 Edelman Trust Barometer India
Semelhante a 2016 Edelman Trust Barometer India (20)
Mais de Edelman APACMEA
Mais de Edelman APACMEA (15)
Último
Último (20)
2016 Edelman Trust Barometer India
- 2. Informed Public ‣ 8 years in 20+ markets ‣ Represents 15% of total global population ‣ 500 respondents in U.S. and China; 200 in all other countries ‣ 10th year in India (since 2007) Must meet 4 criteria: ‣ Ages 25-64 ‣ College educated ‣ In top 25% of household income per age group in each country ‣ Report significant media consumption and engagement in business news General Online Population ‣ 5 years in 25+ markets ‣ Ages 18+ ‣ 1,150 respondents per country Methodology 28-country global data margin of error: General Population +/-0.6% (N=32,200), Informed Public +/- 1.2% (N=6,200), Mass Population +/- 0.6% (26,000). Country- specific data margin of error: General Population +/- 2.9 ( N=1,150), Informed Public +/- 6.9% (N = min 200, varies by country), China and U.S. +/- 4.4% (N=500), Mass Population +/- 3.0 to 3.6 (N =min 740, varies by country), half sample Global General Online Population +/- 0.8 (N=16,100). ‣ 16 years of data ‣ 33,000+ respondents total ‣ All fieldwork was conducted between October and November 2015 Online Survey in 28 Countries Mass Population ‣ All population not including Informed Public ‣ Represents 85% of total global population 2
- 3. Trust in Retrospect 3 Rise of Authority Figures 2011 Fall of Government 2012 Crisis of Leadership 2013 Business to Lead the Debate for Change 2014 Trust is Essential to Innovation 2015 Growing Inequality of Trust 2016
- 4. 1 State of Trust
- 5. 51 48 45 41 55 53 47 42 63 57 51 48 67 63 57 51 Globally, Trust is Rising Source: 2016 Edelman Trust Barometer Q11-14. Below is a list of institutions. For each one, please indicate how much you trust that institution to do what is right using a nine-point scale, where one means that you “do not trust them at all” and nine means that you “trust them a great deal.” (Top 4 Box, Trust) Informed Public and General Population, 27-country global total. 5 Percent trust in the four institutions of government, business, media and NGOs, 2015 vs. 2016 NGOs Business Media Government +4 +6 +6 +3 Informed Public General Population 2015 2016 +4 +5 +2 +1
- 6. 55 Global 60 Global 82 China 78 India 74 UAE 72 Mexico 72 Singapore 70 Indonesia 64 U.S. 63 Australia 63 Canada 62 Netherlands 61 Colombia 84 UAE 79 India 78 Indonesia 75 China 65 Singapore 64 Netherlands 49 Ireland 47 Turkey 46 Sweden 42 Poland 42 Russia 41 Japan 48 Italy 48 S. Africa 47 Hong Kong 47 S. Korea 46 U.K. 45 Argentina 45 Poland 45 Russia 45 Spain 45 Sweden 40 Turkey 37 Ireland 37 Japan 58 Brazil 58 Italy 58 Malaysia 57 U.K. 55 France 54 S. Africa 53 Argentina 53 Spain 52 Hong Kong 51 Germany 50 S. Korea 59 Brazil 59 Mexico 56 Malaysia 53 Canada 52 Australia 52 France 52 U.S. 50 Germany Trust Index: Informed Public Drives Rebound Average trust in institutions, Informed Public, 2015 vs. 2016 2015 2016 Informed Public trust up 5 points Trusters from 22% in 2015 to 39% in 2016 Distrusters from 48% in 2015 to 21% in 2016 Trusters Neutrals Distrusters 6 The Trust Index is an average of a country’s trust in the institutions of government, business, media and NGOs. 27-country global total.
- 7. 49 Ireland 47 Turkey 46 Sweden 42 Poland 42 Russia 41 Japan 49 Australia 49 Italy 49 U.S. 47 Hong Kong 46 Spain 45 S. Africa 42 Germany 42 S. Korea 42 U.K. 41 France 41 Ireland 41 Turkey 39 Russia 38 Japan 37 Sweden 35 Poland 73 China 66 UAE 65 India 64 Singapore 62 Indonesia 60 Mexico 82 China 78 India 74 UAE 72 Mexico 72 Singapore 70 Indonesia 64 U.S. 63 Australia 63 Canada 62 Netherlands 61 Colombia 56 Canada 55 Colombia 52 Netherlands 51 Argentina 51 Malaysia 50 Brazil58 Brazil 58 Italy 58 Malaysia 57 U.K. 55 France 54 S. Africa 53 Argentina 53 Spain 52 Hong Kong 51 Germany 50 S. Korea Trust Index: General Population Lags Average trust in institutions, Informed Public vs. General Population, 2016 Nearly 6 in 10 countries are distrusters among the General Population The Trust Index is an average of a country’s trust in the institutions of government, business, media and NGOs. 28-country global total. Informed Public General Population 60 Global 50 Global 7 Trusters Neutrals Distrusters
- 8. 49 Australia 49 Italy 49 U.S. 47 Hong Kong 46 Spain 45 S. Africa 42 Germany 42 S. Korea 42 U.K. 41 France 41 Ireland 41 Turkey 39 Russia 38 Japan 37 Sweden 35 Poland 73 China 66 UAE 65 India 64 Singapore 62 Indonesia 60 Mexico 57 Mexico 55 Canada 55 Colombia 52 Netherlands 50 Argentina 50 Malaysia 48 Brazil 47 Australia 47 Italy 46 Hong Kong 45 U.S. 44 S. Africa 44 Spain 42 Germany 40 S. Korea 40 U.K. 39 France 39 Ireland 39 Russia 39 Turkey 38 Japan 36 Sweden 34 Poland 71 China 65 UAE 62 India 62 Indonesia 62 Singapore 56 Canada 55 Colombia 52 Netherlands 51 Argentina 51 Malaysia 50 Brazil Trust Index: Mass Population Left Behind Average trust in institutions, Informed Public vs. General Population vs. Mass Population For the mass population, 17 of 28 countries are distrusters The Trust Index is an average of a country’s trust in the institutions of government, business, media and NGOs. 28-country global total. General Population Mass Population 50 Global 48 Global 49 Ireland 47 Turkey 46 Sweden 42 Poland 42 Russia 41 Japan 82 China 78 India 74 UAE 72 Mexico 72 Singapore 70 Indonesia 64 U.S. 63 Australia 63 Canada 62 Netherlands 61 Colombia 58 Brazil 58 Italy 58 Malaysia 57 U.K. 55 France 54 S. Africa 53 Argentina 53 Spain 52 Hong Kong 51 Germany 50 S. Korea Informed Public 60 Global For the mass population, the global index falls into distruster territory 8 Trusters Neutrals Distrusters
- 9. 49 Australia 49 Italy 49 U.S. 47 Hong Kong 46 Spain 45 S. Africa 42 Germany 42 S. Korea 42 U.K. 41 France 41 Ireland 41 Turkey 39 Russia 38 Japan 37 Sweden 35 Poland 73 China 66 UAE 65 India 64 Singapore 62 Indonesia 60 Mexico 57 Mexico 55 Canada 55 Colombia 52 Netherlands 50 Argentina 50 Malaysia 48 Brazil 47 Australia 47 Italy 46 Hong Kong 45 U.S. 44 S. Africa 44 Spain 42 Germany 40 S. Korea 40 U.K. 39 France 39 Ireland 39 Russia 39 Turkey 38 Japan 36 Sweden 34 Poland 71 China 65 UAE 62 India 62 Indonesia 62 Singapore 56 Canada 55 Colombia 52 Netherlands 51 Argentina 51 Malaysia 50 Brazil Trust Index: India is a Net Truster Average trust in institutions, Informed Public vs. General Population vs. Mass Population For the mass population, 17 of 28 countries are distrusters The Trust Index is an average of a country’s trust in the institutions of government, business, media and NGOs. 28-country global total. General Population Mass Population 50 Global 48 Global 49 Ireland 47 Turkey 46 Sweden 42 Poland 42 Russia 41 Japan 82 China 78 India 74 UAE 72 Mexico 72 Singapore 70 Indonesia 64 U.S. 63 Australia 63 Canada 62 Netherlands 61 Colombia 58 Brazil 58 Italy 58 Malaysia 57 U.K. 55 France 54 S. Africa 53 Argentina 53 Spain 52 Hong Kong 51 Germany 50 S. Korea Informed Public 60 Global For the mass population, the global index falls into distruster territory 9 Trusters Neutrals Distrusters
- 11. 53 58 56 56 60 44 47 46 46 48 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 A Significant Divide Source: 2016 Edelman Trust Barometer Q11-14. Below is a list of institutions. For each one, please indicate how much you trust that institution to do what is right using a nine-point scale, where one means that you “do not trust them at all” and nine means that you “trust them a great deal.” (Top 4 Box, Trust) Informed Public and Mass Population, 25-country global total. GDP 5 = U.S., China, Japan, Germany, U.K. 11 Percent trust in the four institutions of government, business, media and NGOs, 2012 to 2016 Informed Public Mass Population 12pt Gap 9pt Gap in trust inequality-- which jumps to a 5-point increase among the GDP5 3-point increase
- 12. Trust Index 2012 – 2016, percentage point change in the size of the trust gap between Informed Public and Mass Population An Accelerating Disparity Source: 2016 Edelman Trust Barometer Q11-14. Below is a list of institutions. For each one, please indicate how much you trust that institution to do what is right using a nine-point scale where one means that you “do not trust them at all” and nine means that you “trust them a great deal.“ (Top 4 Box, Trust) Informed Public and Mass Population, 25-country global total, 2012 vs 2016. GDP 5 = U.S., China, Japan, Germany, U.K. 12 Increased Gap Decreased Gap Gap has increased in 16 of 25 countries Global25 GDP5 France U.K. U.S. Spain Mexico Singapore S.Korea Malaysia India China Brazil Germany Australia Ireland Russia Poland Canada Japan Indonesia Italy Argentina UAE HongKong Netherlands 2012 Gap 9 7 4 7 11 1 8 6 6 4 13 8 7 6 14 8 2 7 8 3 10 13 6 13 10 14 15 2016 Gap 12 12 16 17 19 9 15 10 10 8 16 11 10 9 16 10 3 8 8 3 8 11 3 9 6 10 10 Sweden 3 5 12 10 8 8 7 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 -2 -2 -3 -4 -4 -4 -5
- 13. A Global Phenomenon Source: 2016 Edelman Trust Barometer. The Trust Index is an average of a country’s trust in the institutions of government, business, media and NGOs, 28-country global total. 13 Trust Index, Informed Public vs. Mass Population, 15 countries with double-digit trust gaps in 2016 Country Informed Public Mass Population Gap U.S. 64 45 19 U.K. 57 40 17 France 55 39 16 India 78 62 16 Australia 63 47 16 Mexico 72 57 15 Italy 58 47 11 China 82 71 11 Brazil 58 48 10 Ireland 49 39 10 Netherlands 62 52 10 Sweden 46 36 10 S. Africa 54 44 10 S. Korea 50 40 10 Singapore 72 62 10
- 14. 50% 18 of 28 countries have a double-digit trust gap between high-income and low-income respondents Trust Index: A Link to Income Inequality Source: 2016 Edelman Trust Barometer Q13. Below is a list of institutions. For each one, please indicate how much you trust that institution to do what is right using a nine-point scale, where one means that you “do not trust them at all” and nine means that you “trust them a great deal.” (Top 4 Box, Trust) General Population, 28-country global total, lower vs. upper quartile income in each country. [“CEOs are fairly paid relative to the rest of the workforce”] GDP 5 = U.S., China, Japan, Germany, U.K. 14 Average trust in institutions, respondents in top quartile of income vs. respondents in bottom quartile of income in each country, ranked by the size of the gap between them 60 57 71 64 78 78 68 49 52 62 67 49 45 46 50 53 40 74 79 46 65 68 59 38 44 80 55 62 58 71 46 42 40 35 52 56 48 30 33 45 50 32 31 32 37 40 27 62 69 36 56 59 51 30 37 73 48 55 52 66 Global GDP5 U.S. France Brazil India Netherlands Russia U.K. Italy Singapore Japan HongKong Turkey Sweden Spain Poland Colombia Mexico Ireland SouthAfrica UAE Argentina SouthKorea Germany Indonesia Australia Malaysia Canada China 19192022262931 Low-income respondents High-income respondents
- 15. Mass Population The Inversion of Influence 15 Authority & Influence Influence Authority Source: 2016 Edelman Trust Barometer Q11-14. Below is a list of institutions. For each one, please indicate how much you trust that institution to do what is right using a nine-point scale, where one means that you “do not trust them at all” and nine means that you “trust them a great deal.” (Top 4 Box, Trust) Informed Public and Mass Population, 28-country global total. 85% of population 48 Trust Index 15% of population 60 Trust Index Informed Public
- 16. 16 Footer State of Trust in India 3
- 17. 65 68 70 68 64 69 63 65 74 84 76 82 77 87 73 77 In India, Business Leads the Way Source: 2016 Edelman Trust Barometer Q11-14. Below is a list of institutions. For each one, please indicate how much you trust that institution to do what is right using a nine-point scale, where one means that you “do not trust them at all” and nine means that you “trust them a great deal.” (Top 4 Box, Trust) Informed Public and General Population, India. 17 Percent trust in the four institutions of government, business, media and NGOs, 2015 vs. 2016 Informed Public General Population +3 +3 -3 -5 Business MediaNGOs Government 2015 2016 -1 +1 -7 -3
- 18. 67 69 75 74 77 55 63 64 65 64 53 57 53 82 77 43 55 51 68 65 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 69 81 79 84 87 61 68 63 68 69 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Source: 2016 Edelman Trust Barometer Q11-14. Below is a list of institutions. For each one, please indicate how much you trust that institution to do what is right using a nine-point scale, where one means that you “do not trust them at all” and nine means that you “trust them a great deal.” (Top 4 Box, Trust) Informed Public and General Population, India. 18 Percent trust in the four institutions of government, business, media and NGOs, 2012 vs. 2016 70 79 71 76 73 60 70 64 70 63 NGOs Government Media Business Five-Year Trend Sees Gains for Government and Business Informed Public General Population
- 19. 1919 Trust in Business 69 81 79 84 87 61 68 63 68 69 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Informed Public General Population
- 20. Sector Trends: All Sectors Rebound Source: 2016 Edelman Trust Barometer Q45-429. Please indicate how much you trust businesses in each of the following industries to do what is right. Again, please use the same 9-point scale where one means that you “do not trust them at all” and nine means that you “trust them a great deal”. (Top 4 Box, Trust) General Population, India. *From 2012-2014, Pharma included as subsector(Q61f-65f). **From 2012-2015, Pharma included as an industry sector (Q43-60). 2012-2014 data recalibrated as a sector. Trust in each industry sector, 2012 - 2016 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Industry 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 5 yr. Trend Technology 83% 87% 91% 89% 88% 5 Automotive 74% 82% 87% 84% 82% 8 Telecommunications 73% 83% 85% 84% 81% 8 Energy 68% 80% 81% 80% 79% 11 Consumer Packaged Goods 64% 77% 78% 79% 76% 12 Food & Beverage 62% 76% 79% 78% 75% 23 Financial Service 59% 71% 70% 77% 74% 15 Pharmaceutical 61% 73% 75% 75% 72% 11 General Population 20
- 21. 79 77 72 75 69 67 66 62 58 80 79 78 76 73 68 66 56 52 CEOs Trusted More than Peers Source: 2016 Edelman. Trust Barometer Q130-587. Below is a list of people. In general, when forming an opinion of a company, if you heard information about a company from each person, how credible would the information be—extremely credible, very credible, somewhat credible, or not credible at all? (Top 2 Box, Very/Extremely Credible) General Population, India, question asked of half the sample. Percent who rate each spokesperson as extremely/very credible 2015 2016 +6 Technical Expert Academic Expert A person like yourself Financial Industry Analyst CEO NGO representative Board of Directors Government official/regul ator CEO credibility increased the most Employee General Population 19
- 22. Purpose Impacts Trust Percent who cite each as a reason for why their trust in business has increased or decreased Source: 2016 Edelman Trust Barometer Q328-329. For which of the following reasons, if any, has your trust in each institution listed below increased over the past year? Q330-331. For which of the following reasons, if any, has your trust in each institution listed below decreased over the past year? General Population, India. Reasons Trust in Business Has Increased Reasons Trust in Business Has Decreased Produces economic growth Contributes to the greater good Helps me and my family live a fulfilling life/Has good leadership Provides few/no public services Lacks economic growth Fails to contribute to the greater good 66% 54% 51% 37% 36% 36% 22 General Population
- 23. Company NOT engaged in societal issues Company engaged in societal issues Employee Advocacy Increases with Societal Issue Engagement Source: 2016 Edelman Trust Barometer Q527-529. Does your company and your company’s CEO get involved in addressing broader societal issues beyond the core business, through programs or relationships with other companies? Thinking about your current company, please indicate how much you agree with each of the following statements using a 9-point scale where one means that you “strongly disagree” and nine means that you “strongly agree”. (Top 4 Box, Agree) General Population, India, question asked of half the sample. 23 Percent who agree with each statement, comparing those who work at companies/for CEOs involved in addressing broader societal issues vs. those who do not 68 71 79 76 69 74 83 Recommend company as an employer Stay working for the company Committed to achieving our strategy Confidence in the future of the company Motivated to perform Recommend products and services to others Do the best possible job for the customer Impact of Company Engagement 12 18 24 16 13 17 20 95 93 93 92 92 88 88 General Population
- 24. 24 Trust in GovernmentGovernment has an opportunity to take charge of the net trust in government to implement reforms and new ideas 53 57 53 82 77 43 55 51 68 65 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Informed Public General Population
- 25. 50% 55 46 19 21 28 48 41 45 42 47 44 57 46 50 46 63 52 49 58 55 55 51 69 62 64 73 73 79 81 87 47 37 15 20 24 31 31 33 33 34 34 36 36 37 39 45 46 47 49 49 49 57 64 64 65 69 70 74 81 83 Global GDP5 Japan France Germany U.K. Australia Italy S.Korea Netherlands Sweden Poland HongKong Canada Russia U.S. Singapore Turkey Ireland S.Africa Spain Malaysia Mexico Argentina Brazil China UAE Indonesia Colombia India In 19 of 28 countries, less than half of Mass Population think they will be better off in five years India Remains a Highly Optimistic Nation Source: 2016 Edelman Trust Barometer Q445. Thinking about the economic prospects for yourself and your family, how do you think you and your family will be doing in five years' time? (Top 2 Box, ‘Much better off than today,’ and ‘Somewhat better off than today.’) Informed Public and Mass Population, 28-country global total. GDP 5 = U.S., China, Japan, Germany, U.K. 25 Percent of the Informed Public vs. Mass Population who believe they and their families will be better off in five years’ time Informed Public Mass Population 17 10 12 13 10 21 10 13 18
- 26. Trust in NGOsSuffers after a tough year, trend shows diverging trust 67 69 75 74 77 55 63 64 65 64 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Informed Public General Population
- 27. 27 Trust in MediaA changing media landscape 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 70 79 71 76 73 60 70 64 70 63 Informed Public General Population
- 28. Search Engines* Traditional Media Online-only Media** Social media Owned media 72 79 81 79 73 60 64 68 68 73 65 70 70 76 69 53 59 60 63 64 72 83 82 85 81 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Transformed Media Landscape Source: 2016 Edelman Trust Barometer Q178-182. When looking for general news and information, how much would you trust each type of source for general news and information? Please use a nine-point scale where one means that you “do not trust it at all” and nine means that you “trust it a great deal.” (Top 4 Box, Trust) General Population and Millennials, India, question asked of half the sample. Trust in each source for general news and information *From 2012-2015, we included Online Search Engines as a media type. In 2016, we changed to Search Engines. **From 2012-2015, we included Hybrid as a media type. In 2016, we changed this over to Online-Only. General Population 26
- 29. 83 81 78 71 75 70 73 63 58 44 83 80 78 75 75 74 65 61 53 46 My friends and family An academic expert Companies I use Employees of a company A well-known online personality A company CEO A journalist Elected officials Celebrities Companies [brands] I don’t use Friends, Family and Business Most Trusted Content Creators Source: 2016 Edelman Trust Barometer Q598-609. Thinking about the information you consume, how much do you trust the information from each of the following authors or content creators? General Population, India, question asked of half the sample. 29 Percent who trust information created by each author on social networking sites, content sharing sites and online-only information sources, 2015 vs. 2016 2015 2016 DistrustersTrusters General Population
- 30. The State of Trust in India 30 • Business is in a position of strength • Trust in Government still strong, presents a big opportunity • Fluctuating trust in Media with a downward trend • Diverging trust trends for NGOs
- 31. 4 How do we work with Inverse Influence?
- 32. Influence The Inversion of Influence 32 Influence & Authority Authority Old Model ‣ Elites have access to more/better information ‣ Elites’ interests interconnected with those of mass ‣ Becoming an “elite” open to all New Reality ‣ Peer-to-peer influence more powerful than top- down ‣ Increasing distrust among mass population ‣ Mass movements based on dissatisfaction and urgency The Divide ‣ Democratization of information and more information ‣ High-profile revelations of greed and misbehavior ‣ Income inequality
- 33. Actions Values Employee Advocacy Engagement Embracing the New Reality of Influence to Address Trust Inequality ‣ Create societal impact in addition to profits through purposeful action ‣ Express your values through honest, ethical engagement in which you share your story ‣ Ignite your most powerful advocate, your employees ‣ Engage cross channel to meet stakeholders, where they are, about what most interests/concerns them Influence TRUST 33 Leadership TRUST
Notas do Editor
- This is our largest study ever. In total, we surveyed more than 33,000 respondents around the world We conducted the survey in 28 countries this year We survey 1,000 general online population respondents per market who are representative of the online population in each market As in previous years, we oversample for Informed Publics, which must meet 4 criteria: age, college-educated or higher, top income earners, and they over-index on media consumption Mass population is all the population not including the informed public. This represents 85% of the global population, 82% in India. New this year: For the first time we analyzed the differences between the Informed Public, which make up 15% of the total sample, and the remaining 85% of the general population, which we call Mass Population in the report.
- Again, this is our 16th look at trust in institutions, and there have been some interesting trends over the years. The relative trust levels in the individual institutions has risen and fallen. Since 2011 we’ve seen a shift in trust trends between institutions: 2011 was the rise of authority figures 2012 the fall of government 2013 a crisis of leadership 2014 saw business as leaders for the debate for change Last year we saw that trust is essential to innovation This year we’ll look at the growing inequality of trust; what this means and how we can combat it as leaders and communicators. More on that in a moment.
- So what do this year’s results tell us about the state of trust in 2016?
- While globally, trust increased across the four institutions to a hit an all-time high in 2016… More information: [NGOs are most trusted across the world, though less so in developing markets. Business trust is continues to rise. Media was sliding, but has risen in the last couple of years. Government continues to be the least trusted institution in the world. It has risen slightly, but it is still most distrusted. ]
- Even in a year where we have had profound change and many high-profile scandals (FIFA’s leadership ousted, leadership of Brazil’s biggest bank arrested, Germany’s Deutsche Bank issues) -- even with these, the number of distrusting countries fell substantially among Informed Publics vs. last year and previous years. Overall, Informed Public trust is up 5 points, and the number of truster countries has increased from just a handful to nearly 40% of the total. ===== Country Insights: China: Trust still up +7 despite Q3 2015 market crash Communist Party in October 2015 outlines a new development approach, with a focus on innovation and reassured the public that market fundamentals and reforms are on track = gov’t proactive in shaping public’s perceptions through formalized agendas Growing start-ups with tremendous VC support Local MNCs doing well with Alibaba, Tencent, Huawei and Lenovo Government has enabled shared economy infrastructure and business People have mixed feelings on hidden government intervention to protect shareholders/investors translating into public economic “rescue” No major corruption scandals due to gov’t efforts Psychological disposition of people Booming internet + technology enhancing consumer experience- elevating consumption Expectation for media to “do the right thing” UAE: Drop is economic driven: prospect of long-term depressed oil prices and unknown economic consequences NOT a drop in trust in government ; still remains the among the most trusting environments Reflects the broader macroeconomic story in the region Uncertainly over the regional conflicts (KSA, Iran) has affected public confidence on geo political stability Italy: Among distrusters last year, now in neutral zone Driven by economic recovery, though slow, forecasting higher growth rate in 2016 Exports driving economic growth Benefiting from success of Expo 2015 in Milan Reforming attitudes driven by PM Matteo Renzi, who initiated a constitutional reform resulting in a referendum and Jobs Act that changed labor market’s legislative infrastructure- well received in business segments Unemployment down to 11.5% vs. 13% in 2015 Higher trust in media driven by expose, Mafia Capitale, which uncovered the corruption scandal in Rome Australia: surprise to Australians- with new power regime: The Turnbull Effect New PM brought a fast economic rebound- but now public wants more tangible results New administration is cited as the core reason behind the sustainability of booming real estate sector Banks and business sector are confident despite commodities crash, turmoil in China (AUS’ major trading partner) Experiencing strong economic position,: Effects felt more with informed public: higher property values Employment levels within skilled/tertiary educated workers remained high with big demand for professional work force All driving a more positive outlook and linked with higher personal wealth levels and higher pension funds UK: turning to conservative economic policies and no opposition to new Conservative party Strong economic performance geographically insulated from immigration crisis/China crash/terrorism Not seen any larger scandals Business has a positive role to play in social and economic development: has become a channel for positive government initiatives
- But among the General Population, things look very different. Compare the chart on the right to that on the left: instead of just a handful of distrusters for Informed Public, 60% of the General Population are distrusters, even where economies are good. For example, look at the difference in the U.S. 64% of Informed Public say they’re trusting; while only 49% Gen Pop thinks that. Also notice that all the trusting countries for general population are in Asia. It’s as if you’re looking through the world through two different sets of glasses.
- The difference is even more profound when you look at the Mass Population—that segment of the General Population that does not include the Informed Public. The global Index for the mass population falls into distruster territory as 17 of 28 – more than half– of countries are distrusters These distrusters include nearly all European countries, the US, and other significant economies from around the world. While the Informed Public is becoming more trusting, the mass population is being left behind.
- Globally, we’re looking at a situation where, when you separate the informed public from the data, the mass population shows up as net distrusters. 17 of 28 countries surveyed showed this trend. India bucks this trend on one level – we remain a nation of trusters at informed public, general population and mass population levels.
- This inequality of trust is a phenomenon that we have seen since we started tracking the general population in 2012. But it is happening in a more profound way now. There is a significant divide.
- You can start to see the gap back in 2012, when we had a 9-point gap between the informed and the mass population. Today, that gap has increased to where it is a 12-point gap, a 3-point increase. And it is even more severe in the largest economies: if you look at the 5 largest economies – the GDP 5, the gap has increased by 5 points.
- And this disparity is growing in the majority of countries. If we look at the change in the size of the gap between informed and mass, you can see that it has increased in 16 of the 25 countries for which we have 5 years of data. France and the UK have seen double-digit increase in the size of the gaps, with trust inequality growing from 4 points to 16 points in France, and from 7 to 17 points difference in the UK. The largest gap today is in the US, where the gap has grown by 8 points, from 11 to 19 in 2016.
- And this is a global phenomenon. More than half of our countries today have a double-digit trust gap. As you can see from the map, this is not a developed vs developing country issue. Not an east vs. west issue. It’s truly a global phenomenon. Its an everywhere problem, that exists across a mix of economies.
- The widening gulf is directly linked to income inequality. This slide looks at the top 25% of income earners vs. the bottom 25% of earners, and ranks them by the size of the gap between them. A double-digit trust gap between high-income and low-income respondents is present in two-thirds of the countries, with the U.S. (31 points), France (29 points) and Brazil (26 points) exhibiting the largest disparities On January 14, 2016, the Washington think tank, Brookings Institute, came out with yet another analysis of US Census data that show further impacts of the income gap increase. Paychecks are rising for the top 20% … and plummeting for those at the bottom. Many of the poorest households still earn just a fraction of what they made before the Great Recession began in late 2007. On the same day, the housing nonprofit Enterprise Community Partners released findings that 26.4 of US renters devoted at least half their income to rent and utilities, a share that has steadily increased during the past decade. These trends are having a real impact on trust, creating a real disparity in the top vs the bottom earners.
- Gone are the days if the traditional “pyramid of influence,” in which both authority and influence were concentrated in the hands of a small number of opinion shapers. This model was predicated on the belief that the informed publics have access to superior information, their interests were interconnected with those of the broader public and that becoming ‘an elite’ was open to all of those who work hard. But today, due primarily to the democratization of information, we have seen the pyramid turned upside down. Influence now rests among the broad population, who talk to each other on social media or use search to access information, and no longer need to rely on the more “informed” population for ideas. Influence is no longer automatically granted to those in authority. And, as we have seen, the Mass Population’s view of the world—at a trust level of just 48—is vastly different from that of the 15% who have a trust level of 60, creating real challenge for those in authority who want to earn the ability to have broad influence.
- In India it’s a different story. India is a net truster nation across all three population splits (informed public 78 points, general population 65 points and mass population 62 points), which bucks the global trend. But, when we look at the individual institutions, there’s a notable decline in trust. Among the informed public, Business and NGOs see a marginal 3 point increase in trust Media and Government both see a decrease of 3 and 5 points respectively Among the general population (mass pop and informed public), trust is on the decline The only institution that sees an increase in trust is Business (+1 point) whereas NGOs (-1 point), the Media (-7 points) and Government (-3 points) all see a decrease in trust levels
- The five-year trends in each institution tell us the wider story of where trust lies in India. Whereas the trust in NGOs and the Media fluctuates slightly, we see it remain within a 10 point band. Trust in Business is firmly a positive trend – it has gained a full 18 points among the Informed Public since 2012. The General Population gain is not as marked, but at 8 points is still a firmly positive trend. The break-out story is in Trust in Government – we see the biggest gains among the informed public where it gains 24 points. The general population follows this trend, gaining 22 points since 2012. So we see that expectations for Government and Business are high, despite the slight decline in trust we see in government this year.
- Not only do we have an increase in overall trust in business over five years, we also see an increasing trust trend across industry sectors. Technology remains the most trusted sector – the e-commerce boom can be seen to have impacted this figure. Food and beverage’s slip could be looked at through the lens of the Maggi noodles scandal, though it’s notable that this slip is only by 3 points All other sectors saw marginal declines in trust in this year’s data, but the increasing trend of trust over five years is strong, and in the double digits for the majority of sectors
- Business figures, as well as business institutions, are also trusted but the General Population. CEOs are seen as leaders who can not only make an impact in business, but also in society if they speak up and act. They saw the biggest rise in this year’s data, a sign of strong leadership at the helm of Indian enterprise. Their voices are more credible even than peers and government officials, which we’ll explore later. Notable here is the credibility of technical or academic experts, who retain the lead this year.
- a. Actions: In April 2014 we saw the implementation of the 2% clause in Section 135 of the Companies Act 2013. A year after it was implemented, in April 2015, it’s still unclear whether this made a difference. Some business leaders have been vocal about the 2%, capped at 5% spend on net profits, and how this doesn’t go far enough. But until people see the impact on the street no one will believe that this can make a difference. We need to step up our sustainability efforts to show that action through robust strategy, translated into significant engagement and action. Our CEOs need to talk about these efforts, we need to be more vocal about them to deliver the message that we’re leading.
- Employee advocacy: Do not underestimate employees. They are the most trusted sources of information to speak about how they are treated (41 points) and they are also seen as credible sources when it comes to talking about financial earnings and operational performance (30 points) after CEOs (47 points). They can give the population the real picture. Employees need to be engaged in the company narrative, values and vision so they communicate this to the population. The research shows that those companies that have CEOs actively engaged in societal issues have a more engaged employee base. This reads a positive story for employee retention and advocacy for the company; those companies with CEOs engaged in social issues had employees that were more likely to stay working for the company (17 points more likely compared to companies where the CEO was not involved) and they were more likely to recommend the company as an employer (20 points more likely).
- In 2015’s Trust Barometer, trust in government hit an all-time high in India with an enormous 82% of the informed public respondents expressing confidence in government. The 2014 elections brought 100 million new voters to the polls for the promise of better days, and that optimism is still very much alive. According to the survey, respondents from India, come out as the most optimistic people in the world – both the informed public (87 points) and the mass population (83 points) believe that they and their families will be better off in five years – a clear mandate of trust in the government. The Modi optimism is still alive People are net trusters that in five years’ time they’ll be better off. These parties need to deliver locally to retain that trust.
- The general population is rallying against that – the changing media landscape is putting citizen journalism first, a sign perhaps that the general population feels distance from the media of the elite. Search engines retain their lead in the 2016 data and their five-year leading trend, with only a marginal decline in trust by 4 points. Traditional media continues its decline – but this must be noted against the registered 5.8% growth in print media in India, one of the only countries in the world where the print medium is growing. Nevertheless, the printed word is now back at levels of trust we saw in 2012, it’s no longer the authority The decrease in trust in social media is surprising when compared to the data that shows social as one of the top three most-used media. This might be due to the increased trend for paid-posts on social media that are difficult to filter – we’re not choosing what we see of them. Online only media has perhaps filled that gap – it has registered a 5 point increase in trust in the past year. Similarly owned media is on the five-year up. People are increasingly consuming owned content from business and organisations and are choosing to do so –perhaps the key in the equation and what sets it apart from the decrease in trust in social media.
- We saw that the general population has more trust in online-only and owned media, and here we see that they place greatest faith in information that comes from friends and family on online platforms. They trust the content that they consume from the companies that they use – perhaps on the owned media channels that they’re increasingly trusting. Journalists see a drop of 8 points in trust – correlating to the drop in trust in traditional media. In short – the masses rule.
- Business is in a position of strength Business is the real gainer. Trust in Business is at a global high, but we’ll look at what this means in India for they way businesses, their leaders and communicators need to work. Trust in Government still strong, with a big opportunity The mandate Modi won in 2014 was reflected in the phenomenal leap that we saw in trust levels in government in last year’s data. This year we see just a marginal decline, but this isn’t a downward trend. We’ll look at how the populations are reacting to the first year and a half of Modi’s Government and what lessons we can draw from the mandate of trust they still have. Fluctuating trust in Media, with a downward trend Media has had a turbulent five years, and we’re on a downward trend. We’ll look closer at the landscape and why this could be. Diverging trust trends for NGOs The informed public and general population have a different view of NGOs – the sheer volume of NGOs in India means we don’t have a clear idea of what they stand for. India has 3,100,000 NGOs – double the number of schools, 250 times number of government hospitals, equivalent to one NGO for every 400 people The Informed Public might have more trust as they engage with the idea of NGOs on the global level – thinking international organisations – which inspire faith in work and reputation The General Population might have a more local view – with 400 NGOs per person there’s no defined standard, and therefore a wide range in what constitutes an NGO – or indeed a confusion over what that might mean
- What does it mean to be a leader when we have a division of trust, where influence no longer flows directly from authority? Old ways of leadership won’t work. This is a new era of business, with a moral imperative for business to lead. So how can you lead in a divided world?
- Engagement with community: Engage cross-channel to meet stakeholders, to discuss openly with them where they are and about what most interest or concerns them. They want business to come to them. They will use social and online media to talk about you and form opinions about you, based on content from peers. This year’s Trust Barometer introduces a new model of influence, one that is designed to build trust and, through that trust, to bridge the divide between those with influence and those with authority. Through these four trust-building elements—how you behave, your values, your level of employee advocacy, your model of engagement—those with authority have the opportunity to lead—and to earn the influence of the broader set of stakeholders.