More than a year after the economy crashed, C-suite reputations on and off Wall Street remain predictably bad. In 2008, public confidence was tested to such an extent that even the most committed corporate good citizenship and subsequent efforts to redress societal grievances are now greeted with unrelenting skepticism.
But there are exceptions – and thereby hangs quite a tale. That even in today’s world certain reputations somehow survive undiminished suggests, not just that these particular business leaders acted shrewdly while the rest of the world crumbled, but that something in their very DNA assures long-term immunity and an abiding, almost mystical, connection to an otherwise disillusioned populace.
Atop that list is, of course, Warren Buffett. His leadership “style” has been much discussed as have the equally durable reputations of contemporaries such as Bill Gates and past exemplars like Sam Walton. One common explanation for this enduring prestige is that they create jobs. In so doing, they garner the persistent gratitude of people who, for whatever reason, cannot understand that, say, Goldman Sachs does so too.
Yet some of those same people may likely know next to nothing about Berkshire Hathaway or the actual work that Buffett does. They have no more concrete reason to associate him with job-creation than Lloyd Blankfein. No, there are stronger forces at play and, perhaps, a few cautionary lessons for officers and directors amid the continuing decline in corporate credibility.
Main Street isn’t Wall Street. Buffett is from Nebraska, Walton Arkansas, and Gates indelibly West Coast. No matter how savvy these men are with respect to the financial markets, they are not perceived to occupy the same private and secretive New York world where the Wall Street mainstays reside.
Work is its own reward. The Buffett and Walton (if not the Gates) mythologies eschew the trappings of success. Buffett drives an old car and lives in a house he bought decades ago. Walton drove a pick-up truck at the height of his success while his office in Bentonville was small and unadorned. Such Spartan habits do more than simply establish a “we’re just plain folks” basis for a relationship with the public. They also minimize the burden of envy that people feel toward jetsetters. Absent envy, what’s left is admiration.
But it goes further than that by underscoring the value of work for its own sake, i.e., the Protestant Ethic. If these men are not working in order to live opulently, they must have less selfish motives. Austerity further inspires confidence because it shows that success has not changed them; they still share our values and are just as trustworthy as when they first opened modest little businesses.
They help others succeed. There’s a common perception that success on Wall Street requires mastering an arcane financial language unique to the financial services industry. It is a language with which many people cannot imagine themselves likewise conversant. Instead, the public reveres those from whom it can learn. No matter how bad the economy, Buffett and Walton earn allegiance because they sincerely explain their success in terms anyone can understand. One post on youngentrpreneur.com says it all: “I love Warren Buffet! Not because he’s extremely wealthy but he creates his choice of words in a simple fashion.”
They foresee the future. Bill Gates does not live humbly or proffer simple wisdom. Unlike Buffett, some abhor him for his ruthlessness. Unlike Walton–still admired despite Wal-Mart controversies since his death–Gates’ reputation is tied to Microsoft’s.
But Gates shares one quality, at least with Buffett, which bedazzles and continues to generate loyal admiration. He seems to know what’s coming next before anyone else does. The word “visionary” is typically used to characterize his command of the technological future but, on the larger stage, people listen just as intently to his pronouncements on other industries or the economy in general. (His 1996 best-seller was called The Road Ahead.)
Especially during crises, the gift of prophecy is at a premium as crises by definition raise alarming questions about the future. Gates earned his prophet’s stripes by spearheading American technology at a time when it seemed the Japanese owned the future. For those who lived through it, such leadership is remembered and can still cover a multitude of purported sins.
Don’t tread on me. The public will stay loyal longer to fighting spirits who are also underdogs. Buffett and Walton remain underdogs because of their humble beginnings; the brand, reinforced by austere lifestyles, bespeaks courage. In this regard, the Microsoft antitrust case ultimately worked very much in Gates’ favor. First, he took on IBM. Then he went toe to toe with the U.S. government. People warmed to his cause who didn’t know what that cause actually was.
No one virtue or ingredient can possibly enable a business leader to maintain heroic stature in an environment like today. The key is in the combination. With heartland roots reinforced by conspicuous modesty, they are purveyors of life’s lessons, scrappy combatants against formidable odds, and sympathetic guides who know what problems loom on the horizon for all of us.
Such leaders survive the Great Flood and barely get wet.
Richard S. Levick, Esq., is the president and chief executive officer of Levick Strategic Communications www.levick.com, a crisis communications firm. He is the co-author of Stop the Presses: The Crisis & Litigation PR Desk Reference and writes for www.bulletproofblog.com. Reach him at rlevick@levick.com.