Not all reputational risks are equal
THE ISSUE
From responsible sourcing to ingredient safety to environmental transparency, the road to reputational strength is paved with potential pitfalls. Some are common but mild; others rare but severe. Knowing the difference determines where a CCO should focus attention.
THE QUESTION
We asked global respondents how far they agree with a series of statements about FMCG companies. For most statements, disagreement signals a reputational concern. For example, disagreeing that large consumer goods companies can be trusted "to act in the best interests of consumers" suggests trust is a live issue. For two statements, it's agreement that signals the concern instead.
For each issue, we split respondents into two groups: those whose answer signals a concern (the "risk answer") and those whose answer doesn't. We then compare the average Trust & Like Score each group gives the sector.
The net score is the gap between these two groups. A large negative gap means that people who see an issue as a risk rate FMCG companies much lower, which we call a trust penalty. A small gap means the issue makes little difference to how people rate the sector either way.
Ranking issues by the size of the gap shows which concerns are most closely linked to weaker reputations, rather than just which ones people say they care about.
THE TRUST PENALTY
Responsible Sourcing and Ingredient Safety, both within a company's control, carry the heaviest trust penalties.
Stakeholders who doubt that FMCG companies source their ingredients and materials responsibly give the sector an average Trust & Like Score of 53, compared with 78 among those who don't.
CONCERN WITHOUT BLAME
Two issues work differently. The statements for Environmental Transparency and Supply Chain Risk measure how much people care about an issue, not how they judge companies' handling of it.
Here, the people who share the concern rate FMCG companies higher, not lower.
Stakeholders who care about environmental transparency, or worry about global instability, don't hold the sector responsible.
HOW OFTEN, HOW COSTLY?
Figure 14 combines the two measures: how often each issue is raised as a concern, and how large a trust penalty it carries. Together, they show which risks are both common and costly.
THREE RISK PROFILES
Each of the eight issues where disagreement signals concern carries a penalty of at least 19 points.
- Frequent and damaging: Independent Accountability and Sector Trust are raised often and carry heavy penalties.
- Frequent, slightly less damaging: Frequent, slightly less damaging: Price & Value Fairness is the most common concern, closely followed by Geopolitical Sensitivity, with somewhat smaller penalties.
- Less frequent, most damaging: Responsible Sourcing, Ingredient Safety, and Meets Changing Dietary Needs are raised less often, but do the most harm when they are.
REALITY CHECK
Key Opinion Leaders — journalists, influencers, NGOs, etc. — are more risk-sensitive than the average stakeholder, in every risk category. Their views matter because they shape how everyone else sees the sector.
Conclusions
This year has tested FMCG's reputation, yet the sector remains more trusted than most in the majority of markets we track, and its strongest companies recovered quickly. The lessons below are about where that resilience comes from, and where it could run out.
01
The stakeholder map is fragmented
Reputation in FMCG depends partly on the market and audience. Integrity and Governance matter more in the US, Brazil rewards brand over product, and ESG scores lag in Europe. Key opinion leaders raise every risk more often than the average stakeholder. A single global strategy, applied uniformly, is likely to underperform.
02
Trust runs mainly from product to company
Offering is the strongest driver of Trust & Like Scores globally and in most markets. Broadly, the more of a company's brands people recognize as its own, the more they tend to trust it. And when a crisis hits a single brand, the damage doesn't tend to travel up to the parent.
03
The biggest risks are the ones you control
Responsible Sourcing and Ingredient Safety carry the heaviest trust penalties of any issue, whereas Price & Value Fairness is the concern raised most often, closely followed by Independent Accountability and Geopolitical Sensitivity. Most of these are within a company's control, making them the risks it should be best placed to manage.
Smarter decisions start with stakeholder intelligence.