Only 5% of Americans call corporate statements completely credible

A new survey from Resonant Advisory Group finds corporate credibility in the U.S. is weak and worsening, with just 5% of adults saying company statements are completely credible. The findings suggest businesses may face growing skepticism around AI, crisis messaging and leadership communication at a time when transparency could matter more than polish.

Why it matters: - Corporate statements now face broad skepticism, which can weaken crisis response, layoffs messaging and everyday brand communication. - The survey suggests credibility gaps are widest on issues businesses are using to explain difficult decisions, including artificial intelligence and profitability. - The findings matter most for companies that need public confidence from customers, employees and investors at the same time.

What happened: - Resonant Advisory Group released a report titled “The Credibility Deficit: Why Business Starts Behind, and How It Earns Its Way Back One Interaction at a Time.” - The report is based on a national survey of 1,000 U.S. adults conducted by DHM Research in partnership with Verasight. - Only 5% of Americans said corporate statements are completely credible. - 63% said crisis communications have become less credible in the past year. - Across nine industries tested, none reached 10% of respondents calling their statements completely credible. - AI emerged as the least credible topic in corporate communication.

The details: - Nearly half of respondents, 48%, said AI used in business operations is not credible. - AI adoption tied with “responsibility to shareholders to be profitable” as the least credible explanation for a hard business decision, at 27% each. - Inflation and rising costs remained the most accepted layoff explanation, with 45% calling it credible. - On leadership style, respondents preferred practical leadership over visionary leadership 74% to 26%. - An employee- and stability-focused leader beat a tech-forward leader 85% to 15%, the widest margin in the survey. - The only exception in the seven leadership matchups: a visible, socially present CEO beat a low-visibility CEO 57% to 43%. - The report groups credibility into four channels: company conduct, industry standing, societal engagement and community investment. - 79% said a company gains credibility by disclosing bad news before others expose it. - 57% said one company’s poorly explained crisis hurts how they view the entire industry.

Between the lines: - The report draws a distinction between trust and credibility, treating trust as a slower, longer-term asset and credibility as something won or lost in day-to-day interactions. - The data suggest AI is becoming a credibility liability just as companies use it to justify layoffs and other unpopular moves. - Credibility erosion appears strongest among higher-income and more news-engaged respondents, who may be harder for businesses to win back. - The report argues the problem is chronic, not a one-time crisis, which means companies may need to rethink how they communicate before the next controversy hits. - Erik Moser, president of Resonant Advisory Group, said companies have stretched credibility to its limits and need to focus on fundamentals such as daily interactions, simpler language and accountability.

What's next: - Companies are likely to face more pressure to explain layoffs, pricing, AI adoption and other hard decisions with clearer, more transparent language. - The report suggests businesses that choose openness over polish may have the most room to rebuild credibility over time. - Resonant Advisory Group concluded that there is little left to lose by being more honest and a lot to gain.

The bottom line: - Corporate credibility is already low, and the survey suggests the fastest way back is not better spin — it is more transparency.