I’ll post some further info on the SWOT over the next few days.

Gallup-Healthways has recently issued details of their Well-being Index – a survey of over 100,000 Americans which shows that employees who are unhappy at work take, on average, an extra 15 days sick leave a year. Yes, that’s right, an extra 15 days a year.

The survey assesses well-being at work by asking employees about

i) job satisfaction,
ii) whether their boss is authoritative or collaborative,
iii) whether there is openness and trust in the workplace and
iv) whether their individual strengths are recognised.

Just over a fifth of full-time employees apparently reported working in a negative environment. Even if only a half of those surveyed are full-time, this still equates to an enormous amount of lost productivity.

Clearly this has significant cost implications for business and for the economy in general; so any organisation, profit-making or otherwise, which doesn’t take employee well-being seriously should probably think again.

‘Why, of course!’, you reply, slightly indignant that we’ve even asked the question. And no doubt at work or down the pub or gym, you are. But what about with your neighbours? Do you know the other people who live in your street? And would you leave them a set of keys to your house?

These were questions asked by recent BBC research into neighbourliness. In response:

• 36% of us wouldn’t trust anyone on our street with a set of keys.
• surprisingly, in the younger age group (25-34 year olds), this is a whopping 48%!
• 22% of us believe our neighbourhoods have become less friendly in the last five years.

A lot of this has been attributed to the loss of local institutions (like schools, small shops, and Post Office closures), and the fact that people work further and further away from home. There are fewer and fewer reasons for people who live near each other to get together.

It’s interesting (and concerning) that British people are far less trusting than other Europeans – when measured by the World Values Survey, which asked ‘Generally speaking, would you say that most people can be trusted or that you need to be very careful in dealing with people?’. Britain is one of the few countries (along with the US) in which the levels of trust have been falling.

In 1981, 42.5% of British people said “yes most people can be trusted”. By 1998 this had fallen to 30.4% The levels of trust in other European countries has actually been rising over this same period of time – take Denmark for example, where the number who said “yes” rose from 45.9% to 64.1% between 1981 and 1999. Apparently Britain is the only European country in which levels of trust have been falling. Hmmmmm, makes you think doesn’t it?

But back to the more immediate question of you and your neighbours…if you think your neighbourhood is unfriendly, you can bet that they feel the same way. So, be bold! Invite a few round for a cup of coffee, or a drink one evening. And now that summer is on its way, you could even bring out the BBQ. Go on, take the first step – you’ll be pleasantly surprised how human your neighbours turn out to be.

This month’s posting for Positive Psychology News Daily focuses the importance of space in the development of well-being in children, and what this means for the rest of us.

What initially struck me about the CWM was the sheer energy in the room, even before the main debate got underway. About a quarter of the delegates were new to the network, the atmosphere warm and welcoming, in sharp contrast to the rather solemn surroundings.

The panel, made up of

• Aliza Blachman O’Keeffe (Executive Coach with Eden McCallum)
• Jane Atkinson (PR and image consultant, former spokesperson for the late Diana, Princess of Wales),
• Stuart Higgins (ex-editor of the Sun and now MD of Stuart Higgins Communications), and
• Neville Hobson (VP New Marketing for Crayon and blogger-extraordinaire),

contrasted traditional and new media contexts in a lively and engaging way, drawing on their personal experience and including many anecdotes to illustrate their points of view.

And what also intrigued me was the contrast between the way ‘old’ and new media works, with the latter having an unforeseen level of impact on every aspect of PR and personal branding, as well as on society more generally.

* In traditional media (newspapers and mainstream TV) it may take several months or even years to carefully craft the ‘right’ public image. With new media (basically anything delivered using the internet), this might be achieved within days or even hours.

Business people might dismiss this as only relevant to the world of celebrity, but the point is that personal and corporate reputations can be improved or tarnished in just the same amount of time.

In addition, your (or your company’s) public image can even be created or affected without your agreement or knowledge. We were advised by Neville Hobson to google our own names when we got home – whilst we may not be able to change what is out there in the public arena, at least we can be aware of it. Forewarned is forearmed.

It seems that the rewards for getting it right can be enormous, but the risks are equally large.

* The way new media works dictates that authenticity is crucial. When you’re in the public eye (voluntarily or not), if you’re not authentic you’ll be found out and exposed, and probably sooner rather than later. So why is authenticity so important?

* Well, authenticity is linked to trust, and new technology has contributed to a huge change in the nature of trust in society. According to Neville Hobson, we are more likely to trust ‘a person like me’ than our politicians or the media. It seems that we are now prepared to trust people we’ve never met and probably never will, simply because we got talking to them in an internet chat-room, or liked what they had to say on a blog. Therefore, if you want to create a professional image which is trusted and respected, be authentic.

There were several questions to the panel along the lines of “given what we’ve heard about the dangers, should I try to establish a personal brand at all?” Stuart Higgins quoted an example of a very high profile woman whose reputation has been enhanced by the fact that she has resolutely kept quiet at public engagements. It works both ways. The key is to know what you’re going into and to adhere to the simple rules.

And what of the business world? Well, the Edelman Annual Trust Barometer states that

Trust has important bottom-line consequences. In most markets, more than 80% [of respondents] say they would refuse to buy goods or services from a company they do not trust, and more than 70% will criticize them to people they know, with one-third sharing their opinions and experiences of a distrusted company on the Web.

So companies are not immune from the issues surrounding authenticity and trust.

According to Edelman, “To build trust, companies need to localize communications, be transparent, and engage multiple stakeholders continuously as advocates across a broad array of communications channels’

For another perspective on this CWN event, see writer Yang-May Ooi’s blog.

Other reports and surveys about the nature of trust :

Reuters survey

Public trust and confidence in charities – Nov 05

Public Affairs News – Democratisation of Trust

IEEE Communications Society – Survey of Trust in Internet Applications – 2000

Trust Us – Survey of Corporate Sustainability Reporting