Visible Leadership Is Back, But Visibility Alone Isn't Enough

Belief that company leaders are "strong and appealing" rose by 1.1 points in 2025, according to RepTrak data. Stakeholders are paying closer attention to leadership than they have in years, and they are forming sharper judgments about what they see. Visibility alone does not strengthen reputation. Alignment with stakeholder expectations does.

The data backs this up across the board. Some 48% of global stakeholders say the CEO is the most appropriate voice to communicate company vision, well ahead of any other C-suite leader or spokesperson. When asked what matters most in corporate communications, the priorities are clear: 45% value listening and responding to feedback, 44% want openness and transparency about actions, and 39% prioritize clear, jargon-free language.

Leadership visibility is not a soft narrative theme. It is a measurable driver of reputation. Stakeholders want leaders to show up. But how they show up matters more than how often.

Visibility Is Neutral. Credibility Is Not.

Consider Jamie Dimon, Satya Nadella, and Elon Musk. All three are among the most visible CEOs in the world. Dimon is a fixture in financial media and on Capitol Hill. Nadella has become the face of AI transformation at Microsoft. Musk may be the most visible CEO alive, and his personal brand was instrumental in building Tesla into one of the most valuable companies in the world. Yet their visibility produces very different reputational outcomes today. Tesla's reputation has declined 18 points over five years, and vehicle sales fell 9% in 2025, a reminder that the same visibility that once accelerated growth can become a liability when it no longer aligns with stakeholder expectations around Leadership credibility, stability, and responsible Conduct.

The point is not that visibility is good or bad. What determines its impact is whether it aligns with what stakeholders currently value: listening, transparency, clarity. These are not signals of volume. They are signals of accountability. Dimon's visibility works because it consistently reinforces stability, discipline, and institutional confidence. When visibility becomes unpredictable or disconnected from those signals, it can amplify volatility rather than reduce it.

Most leadership visibility plans won't look like any of these, however. Not every CEO wants to be so visible and, in many cases, not every CEO needs to be so visible. Which raises the question: What type of visibility is needed? And when?

Three Models of Strategic Leadership Visibility

As a communications leader, the answer depends on the context you're operating in. Organizational risk profile, reputation maturity, and current events will all dictate how you build a plan to increase leadership visibility when it's needed. And recent history shows us a few.

• Stabilize. CEO transitions and organizational change naturally increase volatility in stakeholder perception. In these moments, leadership visibility should signal continuity, not reinvention. Costco's 2023-2024 CEO succession is instructive: a planned transition to an internal candidate with over 40 years at the company, a deliberate overlap period, and messaging that reinforced the company's core identity around pricing, membership, and employee focus. Costco didn't increase noise. It increased clarity. This approach reinforces Leadership consistency and stabilizes Conduct perception during transition periods.

• Humanize. Not every organization needs a high-profile CEO to lead its reputation story. In 2020, the AA in the UK elevated frontline ambassadors rather than amplifying executive visibility. Through its "Patrol of the Year" recognition program, media-trained roadside patrols, and authentic employee storytelling, the AA strengthened perceptions of conduct, workplace culture, and trustworthiness, all without executive overexposure. In service-driven industries, operational leadership can outperform CEO-centered narratives. This model strengthens Conduct and Workplace drivers without increasing executive overexposure.

• Transform. For organizations undergoing strategic repositioning, CEO activation can act as a multiplier across multiple reputation drivers. In 2023, JELD-WEN used RepTrak analysis to identify Leadership and Conduct as high-impact drivers in its low-visibility B2B category. It then activated its CEO around ESG commitments, governance messaging, and themes of innovation and employee well-being. Perceptions improved across leadership quality, ethics, fair business practices, and environmental responsibility. Visibility accelerated trust because it was tied to measurable accountability.

Making Leadership Visibility Measurable

This is where strategy needs to become practice. Leadership visibility should not be evaluated by impressions or media mentions alone. It should be evaluated by what actually moves: the Leadership driver, Conduct factors, and business outcomes like willingness to recommend, benefit of the doubt, and trust to do the right thing.

RepTrak Compass gives communications leaders the tools to do exactly that. With Compass, teams can track Leadership driver shifts quarterly and connect them to specific executive actions. They can identify whether CEO activation is lifting Conduct perception or creating noise without reputational return. They can compare how influencers and the informed general public respond differently to executive visibility. And they can monitor volatility beneath stable averages, catching early warning signals before they surface publicly.

In short, Compass turns leadership visibility from an assumption into a measurable strategy.

Why This Matters Now

Trust ecosystems are diverging across channels. Influencers are forming opinions earlier and with greater conviction. And stakeholders are defining effective corporate communications less by polish and more by behavior.

Leadership visibility in this environment must be sequenced across channels intentionally, must demonstrate accountability rather than just assert it, and must be measurable. This is no longer about executive profile building. It is about reputation management.

The question communications leaders should be asking is no longer "Should our CEO be more visible?" It is: "Which leadership visibility model fits our risk profile, and how are we measuring its impact?"