Blog post
June 24, 2019

The growing momentum for environmental and social responsibility

Across Australia and New Zealand, companies are talking more than ever about their contribution to greater good – for people and the planet

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has moved considerably from ‘a nice to have’ to a ‘must have’. Where it was once a voluntary decision of individuals within a company now, we see greater emphasis on mandatory schemes at regional, national and even transnational levels. For those unfamiliar, CSR also includes social and environmental impact and requires companies to consider the interests of all stakeholders when going about day to day operation including investors, suppliers, consumers, employees and the community.

In the current climate, this presents an interesting question for companies who are going to have to strike the right balance across areas like shareholders priorities, the provision of jobs or saving the planet.

​There is no doubt that modern companies have realised the importance of operating and thinking in an ethical and sustainable way. Social impact has evolved from a PR play to an important part of a companies’ strategy. This trend is often in part to also attract top talent as new professionals’ value and even seek out companies where positive social and environmental initiatives are prioritised and social responsibility is part of the company’s ongoing strategy or culture.

​In Australia and New Zealand, CSR programs have become central for many companies. In the early 2000s, one of New Zealand’s largest banks announced its policy to move to triple bottom line reporting, which broadens a business’ reporting focus to include social and environmental impact as well as just the financial. Since then, it has pursued a large range of CSR activities including community contributions (company branded helicopters), as well as environmental initiatives. Recently, green growth lending targets have been set as well as the introduction of electric and hybrid cars – a partnership with Sir Peter Blake Trust which encourages environmental awareness and leadership development. And most recently, this bank has become a living wage employer.

​Seeking to be an industry leader in environmental sustainability, Australia’s largest airline recognises that the cost of inaction outweighs the cost of action. Determined to embed environmental performance and sustainability principles within all management systems, policy and practices, by 2020 they are striving to save 20 per cent on electricity and water consumption, reduce waste by 30 per cent, improve fuel efficiency by 1.5 per cent each year and cut net emissions by 50 per cent come 2050. Having initiatives in the air and on the ground allows them to better achieve their goals of helping protect our environment for present and future generations.

​It has become evident New Zealanders increasingly care about climate change and their concern for the environment with the introduction of the new Climate Change Response Amendment Bill. Colmar Brunton’s Better Futures research (2019) shows us that 55 per cent of New Zealanders express high level of concern around the impact of climate change on New Zealand. This figure has increased a notable 31 per cent from 2010 and as it is argued New Zealand is a progressive country, there is a strong consensus emerging they could play as a global leader with this issue. The Bill means New Zealand will need to dramatically reduce their emissions, particularly from transport, energy and agriculture, and offset the ret through new forestry. If a country like New Zealand can’t do it, who can?

Interestingly, in the latest edition of Isentia’s Leadership Index released in March 2019, New Zealand leaders discussed CSR in 12% of the media coverage analysed, behind financial results at 57%. Potentially a good precursor to what might now be another impressive topical lead for New Zealand. 

​In another study conducted by Business Insider Australia, 77 per cent of consumers said they would choose to pay more to purchase from companies demonstrating community responsibility. This shift is a result of consumers expecting less of institutions and governments in particular. In an era of fake news and celebrity style politics, consumers are looking more to companies to do the right thing by society and are prepared to pay for the peace of mind.

​External-facing reputation isn’t the only thing that needs to be worried about. Engaging in positive social and environmental initiatives can have a big impact on companies, both internally and externally – some of these include:

Increase in company revenue

Boost in employee productivity

Reduced staff turnover

Protected brand value

Improved Research and Development

Controlled risk management

Nowadays, instead of using traditional accounting practices, it is encouraged for companies to look at its success from financial, environmental and social perspectives. Triple Bottom Line (TBL), also sometimes called people, planet and profit measures a company’s success by examining growth from an economic, social and ecological perspective.

Profit – the traditional measure of corporate profit, the ‘bottom line’

People – a measure in some shape or form of how socially responsible an organization has been throughout its operations.

Planet – a measure of how environmentally responsible it has been.

Using this method will continue the success for current and subsequent generations and help leaders build more sustainable and socially responsible companies.

3 ways to leverage CSR

Choose your social and environmental initiatives based on the fit with your company’s strategy and develop long-term relationships with social causes. Use employee volunteer programs, product donations and advocacy support, however, be modest in promoting CSR to gain customer goodwill and third-party promotion as this can detract from the CSR initiative. The key here is it has to be authentic or be perceived as authentic by you key audiences.

Here’s what we know: CEOs, CMO’s and Chief Communications Officers who support corporate social responsibility lead their companies to greater success in comparison to those who do not. Society is demanding companies, both public and private, serve a social purpose. To prosper over time, every company must not only deliver financial performance, but also show it makes a positive contribution to society. With this, reputation, talent and incentives are the 3 key areas we feel need to be nurtured when undertaking a CSR initiative.

1.       Reputation

The benefits of corporate social responsibility are not limited to dollars and cents. Such policies confer other benefits as well, such as a better company reputation. Some companies enhance their reputation through philanthropic actions, supporting charitable causes, arts organisations, education programs and other initiatives in the communities where they conduct business. However, socially responsible policies related to health, safety and the environment also improve companies’ public images which also assists with protecting companies’ brands and intellectual property. A lack of such policies can result in negative media attention, harming a company’s reputation.

Companies operate in a market of opinion. How companies are judged by customers, suppliers and the broader community will have an impact on profitability and success. Corporate social responsibility offers a means by which companies can manage and influence the attitudes and perceptions of their stakeholders, building trust and enabling benefits of positive relationships to deliver business advantage.

2.       Talent

A meaningful and well-executed CSR strategy can help attract and retain top talent in an increasingly competitive human capital market, especially in industries with a large number of customer-facing employees.

With exponentially more choices, candidates judge potential employers on more than just the standard set of benefits. Millennials in particular look to be part of something ‘bigger.’ They want to be inspired, to feel good about their employment choice and to join an organization that fits with their values. This often means seeking potential employers that support causes they are passionate about, or more broadly, that share their views on the importance of giving back. Working at a company where employees view their CSR efforts as positive, has a significant and favourable impact on how they rate their pride in the organisation, their overall satisfaction, their willingness to recommend it as a place to work and their intention to stay.

3.       Incentive

How far do the effects of CSR reach? Can it impact the way customers perceive a company and their products? Companies can incentivise their customers with CSR initiatives to enable a stronger and more passionate and loyal customer base.

​Knowing a company has behaved ethically can cause customers to perceive a company’s product as performing better, known as the “benevolent halo.” Moreover, consumers must believe the company’s motives to be authentically benevolent, rather than merely self-beneficial for the company, and the halo effect is strongest for consumers who believe companies have a desire to act charitably. 

In case there is no CSR strategy currently implemented in your workplace, you can start with some small changes that can have a larger impact on the wider environment.  Start with recycling old tech products, such as old computer parts, old mobile phones, cords and cables and all manner of e-waste that is no longer needed. Recycling paper and printer cartridges are also easy and effective ways to implement positive change around the workplace and is a step in the right direction to making a positive difference.

​​Thankfully, whatever the outcome it looks like the future may be a bit greener.

Share

Similar articles

object(WP_Post)#8034 (24) { ["ID"]=> int(1379) ["post_author"]=> string(2) "36" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2019-05-15 04:06:01" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2019-05-15 04:06:01" ["post_content"]=> string(3062) "

15th May 2019 

UN Women National Committee Australia and Isentia Media Intelligence Announce Partnership

UN Women National Committee (NC) Australia is pleased to announce their partnership with media intelligence company Isentia in a joint effort to accelerate gender equality. 

Isentia, in support of the world’s women and girls, are proud to be able to provide valuable media intelligence and reporting to strengthen UN Women NC Australia’s fundraising activities and events throughout the year, including their inaugural International Women’s Day events across Australia.

UN Women NC Australia are pleased to stand alongside a company that aligns with UN Women’s commitment to gender inclusion and equality. Isentia is committed to diversity and inclusion through their policy and practices across the group. Chief Human Resources Officer for Isentia Kelly Young notes, “We believe diversity is our strength. Working together as one team is a core value to who we are and how we deliver to our clients. We continually strive to be a workplace that embraces and values diversity, taking opportunities to share and celebrate our uniqueness.”

Like UN Women’s efforts to promote gender equality, nurturing diversity and inclusion is at the heart of Isentia’s work. “We see the benefits of diversity and inclusion from its contribution in achieving our strategic objectives and enhances our reputation,” continues Ms Young. “It enables us to make more informed and innovative decisions, drawing on the wide range of ideas, experiences, approaches and perspectives that our people from diverse backgrounds, with differing skill sets, bring to their roles. A diverse workplace gives us a better representation of our stakeholders and markets.”

UN Women NC Australia Executive Director Janelle Weissman said of the partnership,

“We are delighted to have Isentia’s support on the path to achieving parity. Gender equality can only be achieved by working together. It is fantastic to have the incredible support of organisations like Isentia, standing with us to empower the world’s women and girls.”


-ENDS-

UN WOMEN NC AUSTRALIA MEDIA CONTACT:
Leisa Quinn (02) 6185 0010, leisa.quinn@unwomen.org.au
UN Women is dedicated to gender equality and the empowerment of women. A global champion for women and girls, UN Women was established to accelerate progress on meeting their rights worldwide.

UN Women National Committee Australia is the fundraising and advocacy arm of the United Nations agency for gender equality, here in Australia.

" ["post_title"]=> string(61) "UN Women National Committee Australia and Isentia Partnership" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(89) "UN Women National Committee Australia and Isentia Media Intelligence Announce Partnership" ["post_status"]=> string(7) "publish" ["comment_status"]=> string(6) "closed" ["ping_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(61) "un-women-national-committee-australia-and-isentia-partnership" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2019-07-17 00:26:57" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2019-07-17 00:26:57" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(36) "https://isentia.wpengine.com/?p=1379" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" }
Media Release
UN Women National Committee Australia and Isentia Partnership

UN Women National Committee Australia and Isentia Media Intelligence Announce Partnership

object(WP_Post)#7805 (24) { ["ID"]=> int(50341) ["post_author"]=> string(2) "75" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2026-10-08 11:53:50" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2026-10-08 11:53:50" ["post_content"]=> string(26341) "

A weekly tracker tracing the stories, figures and policies driving media and social coverage in the 2026 New Zealand General Election across Online News, TV, Radio, Newspaper, Magazine, X, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Threads and Forums. This edition covers conversations and coverage from 1st – 8th October, highlighting what’s shaping the election conversation.

1. Election Conversation

21,637
total mentions this week
4,360 media17,277 social

2. Media Issue of the Week

National Proposes Drug Testing and Benefit Cuts for Jobseekers

National29 media items

National announced a five-point welfare policy: random drug testing for JobSeeker recipients (with sanctions for repeat failures), reduced payments for long-term beneficiaries, and a doubled stand-down period for repeatedly leaving jobs without good reason. Labour and the Greens called it "punching down" and "cruel"; ACT proposed going even further; Luxon defended it as "fairness" for taxpayers.

The single largest media cluster this week (183 of 600 sampled items) was generic "campaigning intensifies as election day nears" coverage. This welfare policy, while smaller by volume (29 items), is a genuine flashpoint: a specific, controversial announcement that sharply divided every major party and will likely keep generating reaction into next week.

3. What's happening across media and social?

4,360 media items · 17,277 social items · share of each channel's own conversation, so the two bars are directly comparable

MediaSocial
Issues
Cost of Living
Media
15.8%
Social
24.5%
Economy & Jobs
Media
19.4%
Social
13.4%
Housing
Media
10.5%
Social
7.7%
Health
Media
8.5%
Social
9.3%
Infrastructure & Transport
Media
9.8%
Social
7.1%
Education
Media
8.2%
Social
8%
Parties
National
Media
25.5%
Social
31.3%
Labour
Media
18.9%
Social
25.9%
NZ First
Media
18.3%
Social
17.2%
Greens
Media
10.3%
Social
20.8%
ACT
Media
11%
Social
3.9%

The Greens get more than twice the relative attention on social media as in the news. On social, the Greens are 20.8% of party conversation; in the news, they're 10.3%.

Health is a top-four issue on social but not in the news this week - Infrastructure takes its place in media's top four instead. Social conversation is tilting toward the health system while media coverage stays on economy, cost of living and infrastructure announcements.

4. Party Share of Conversation

1. National33.7%
2. Labour26.7%
3. NZ First20.7%
4. Greens18.9%

Share of conversation measures attention and mentions only - it is not polling and should not be read as an indication of electoral success.

5. Top candidates this week

1. Christopher Luxon2,301
2. Chris Hipkins2,058
3. Winston Peters1,446
4. David Seymour757
5. Chloe Swarbrick609

Luxon and Hipkins remain close at the top as the campaign enters its final stretch. Peters follows, still driven by coalition speculation. Seymour moves up to fourth on the back of ACT's economic-reform push (including floating a higher superannuation age), overtaking Swarbrick, whose fifth-place mentions continue to track the Greens' polling strength.

6. Election Issues

Top 4 themes this week

Cost of Living3,584
Economy & Jobs3,359
Housing1,846
Infrastructure & Transport1,709

How are policies landing for each party?

Each major party's most prominent specific policy, and how social conversation reacted to it

NegativeNeutralPositive
National
Infrastructure investment · 53 items
Neg 42.3%Neu 36.5%Pos 21.2%
Labour
Capital gains tax (incl. farms) · 70 items
Neg 85.5%Neu 14.5%Pos 0%
Greens
Wealth tax · 67 items
Neg 17.9%Neu 65.7%Pos 16.4%
ACT
KiwiSaver tax removal · 23 items
Neg 4.3%Neu 4.3%Pos 91.3%

Volume and sentiment above are based on social media data only.

7. Issues to Watch

  • National's welfare drug-testing policy is a fresh, sharply divisive flashpoint - the "punching down" framing from Labour and the Greens, and ACT signalling it wants to go further still, both point to more reaction next week.
  • Labour's capital gains tax remains the week's clearest negative outlier (85.5% negative on social). National's own infrastructure pledge is also net-negative this week (42.3% vs 21.2% positive), despite infrastructure announcements usually landing on safer ground than tax policy. ACT's KiwiSaver policy, by contrast, remains clearly positive (91.3%).
  • On social, discussion of the Greens is mostly about polling results and tactical voting rather than their own policy: 14% of their social conversation is coalition/tactical-voting framing (which bloc to "party vote" for), versus just 2% specifically about their wealth tax policy - their polling surge is driving attention more than their platform is.

If you want to find out more about how Isentia can help you understand the NZ media landscape, please reach out to us here.

" ["post_title"]=> string(71) "NZ Election 2026: Welfare, Greens and the policies driving conversation" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(152) "What’s shaping New Zealand’s 2026 election conversation? Explore the key policies, parties and issues driving media and social discussion this week." ["post_status"]=> string(7) "publish" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(69) "nz-election-2026-welfare-greens-and-the-policies-driving-conversation" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2026-10-08 12:06:35" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2026-10-08 12:06:35" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(32) "https://www.isentia.com/?p=50341" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" }
Blog
NZ Election 2026: Welfare, Greens and the policies driving conversation

What’s shaping New Zealand’s 2026 election conversation? Explore the key policies, parties and issues driving media and social discussion this week.

object(WP_Post)#12124 (24) { ["ID"]=> int(50056) ["post_author"]=> string(2) "75" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2026-09-21 02:41:53" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2026-09-21 02:41:53" ["post_content"]=> string(21525) "

A customer evaluating a brand, a journalist researching a CEO, and a policymaker looking up a public agency are all doing the same thing — discovering organisations through AI. The difference is that they may each receive a different description, supporting evidence, and overall impression.

This shift represents a major change in modern communications.

Large language models (LLMs) now interpret information for audiences, rather than just helping them find it. Instead of listing search results, they retrieve content, select authoritative sources, and generate a single synthesised answer that many users accept without reviewing the original articles.

For PR, communications, and marketing professionals, this presents a new reputation challenge. Your organisation now has multiple AI-generated reputations, each shaped by the model your stakeholders use. Understanding these differences is becoming as important as understanding media coverage – in fact, the two are often closely linked.

There isn't one AI version of your organisation

A common misconception is that ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and Perplexity all access the same information. In reality, they  don’t. 

At a high level, all leading LLMs are built on similar foundations. They're trained on vast collections of books, websites, news articles, public documents and licensed datasets that help them understand language and generate human-like responses. Increasingly, they're also capable of retrieving live web information, allowing answers to incorporate recent events rather than relying solely on historical training data.

However, their similarities end there.

Each LLM uses a unique combination of training data, retrieval architecture, and ranking logic. As a result, each model answers three key questions differently before generating a response:

  • What information should I retrieve?
  • Which sources should I trust most?
  • What deserves emphasis in the final answer?

These decisions fundamentally shape how organisations are represented. To explain this better, we summarise how different AI models consult different publications and finally cite them in AI answers:

LLMs are not impartial, but come with their own weights and balances. In a sense, it reflects dynamics we already see at play across PR & Comms. 

If four experienced journalists had to write a profile of the same CEO after attending the same press conference and have access to the same reports, one may write about leadership, another  financial performance, another governance and another might frame the story around innovation. None are necessarily wrong—they're simply viewing the event through a lens of individual expertise, and therefore, making different editorial decisions.

LLMs behave in similar ways. As a result, organisations are now represented by multiple AI-generated narratives, rather than a single authoritative digital narrative.

The same prompt can produce four different narratives

These differences are most apparent when users ask AI questions that require judgment rather than simple factual recall.

Consider a prompt like: "Which are the leading banks in Southeast Asia?" Across ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and Perplexity, you will likely see many of the same names — DBS, UOB, OCBC, and Maybank. This overlap occurs because all four models recognise these institutions as major regional banks.

However, the models differ in their explanations of why these banks are considered leaders.

ChatGPT may highlight DBS's digital banking leadership and customer experience. Claude is potentially more likely to discuss governance, regional strategy, and long-term institutional strength. Gemini may emphasise recent awards and publicly available web information, while Perplexity often presents answers as research comparisons supported by multiple citations. These changes are not necessarily so big as to be immediately noticeable, but over time the results accumulate. 

An organisation may not meaningfully change between two users asking two different LLMs , but the reputation narrative shifts accordingly. This distinction matters because stakeholders rarely ask AI for isolated facts. They ask questions like:

  • Should I work with this company?
  • Which university is most innovative?
  • Has this government agency delivered on its commitments?
  • Who are the market leaders in this sector?

AI responds by interpreting credibility, authority, and context, rather than simply retrieving documents.

For communications teams, this means your organisation is increasingly evaluated through comparative prompts, where competitors, industry peers, and institutional benchmarks appear alongside your organisation by default.

Every LLM has its own citation fingerprint

When ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, or Perplexity answer a question, they first retrieve documents from distinct information ecosystems. A recent study analysed 17.2 million AI citations across ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude and Perplexity and found that each model retrieves from substantially different source ecosystems rather than a shared pool of webpages. Two LLMs can answer the same question accurately while relying on entirely different publications.

Instead of viewing these as technical differences, it is more useful to consider them as citation behaviours. Each model consistently references different types of publications when explaining organisations. 

  • ChatGPT – Building consensus from multiple sources

ChatGPT functions more like an executive briefing writer than a traditional search engine.

Rather than listing multiple links, ChatGPT typically combines information from several credible publications into a coherent narrative. If mainstream media, company information, and industry commentary consistently describe an organisation as a market leader, ChatGPT is likely to reinforce that positioning, regardless of the original source.

For a prompt like "Tell me about Singapore Airlines”, a typical ChatGPT response integrates its history, customer experience, awards it has won over time, its financial performance, etc., into a cohesive description. Individual articles become almost invisible, as the model prioritises a coherent narrative in its answer over transparently showcasing all citations. 

For brands, this means consistency across publications is very valuable. ChatGPT values credible signals that repeat across multiple publications over one off news moments.

  • Gemini – Reading the living web

Gemini approaches organisations differently, as its retrieval is closely linked to Google's broader information ecosystem.

When we ask  "What has Enterprise Singapore done to support AI businesses?", Gemini is more likely to include recent programme announcements, official government webpages, and newer online reporting. Its responses often feel more current because they draw from a web ecosystem designed to reflect continuously updated information.

For government agencies, this has practical implications. Official announcements and well-structured public information become machine-readable assets that help AI explain policy more accurately. These become important information touchpoints into how audiences understand government through AI.

  • Claude — explains the ‘why’, in addition to the ‘what’

Claude's defining feature is its emphasis on context.

Other models often prioritise concise answers but Claude frequently elaborates on why an organisation is respected. Questions about leadership, governance, ethics, and institutional reputation tend to produce more detailed explanations rather than brief summaries.

For a prompt like "Why is DBS considered one of Asia's leading banks?", Claude is more likely to discuss how the bank has regionally expanded, its digital transformation, what’s unique about its leadership etc. Its responses resemble analyst reports more than search summaries, as it favours high-authority editorial and institutional content.

For executive communications, this makes Claude particularly influential. Leadership narratives and corporate values often receive more contextual treatment than with other models.

  • Perplexity — makes your media strategy visible

Perplexity changes the experience by treating citations as a central feature rather than a supporting detail.

A question comparing two sustainability leaders, for example, typically returns numerous linked sources from business media and research publications. Users can immediately review the origin of each claim.

For PR teams, this creates greater transparency. Publication quality becomes visible within the user experience and is not hidden behind an AI summary. This means media strategy influences the evidence presented alongside the perception of the organisation. 

How commercial brands and government agencies are represented differently

Although LLMs behave similarly across sectors, the questions users ask differ fundamentally.

  • For brands, AI compares before customers get the chance 

Consumers rarely ask AI what a brand does. They definitely do ask which brand is better.

Questions like:

1. Which airline has the best customer experience?
2. Is Salesforce better than HubSpot?
3. Which bank is most innovative?
4. Who are the leaders in cloud computing?

These questions are inherently comparative.

As a result, your organisation is often introduced alongside competitors before stakeholders visit your website.

During a recent Isentia webinar on Measuring your brand’s visibility in AI answers, we analysed airlines across multiple LLMs with Lumina AI View. Using identical prompts, different models highlighted different airlines and emphasised varying strengths, such as premium service, operational performance, innovation, and customer experience. Competitive positioning shifted depending on the model, even though the underlying organisations remained unchanged.

For commercial communicators, competitor association is becoming as important as share of voice. AI evaluates brands in context, not in isolation.

  • AI becomes the interpreter of policy for government agencies

Public sector organisations encounter a different reputational challenge. Audiences increasingly ask questions that begin with how, why and can I trust:

1. What support does this agency provide?
2. Has this ministry achieved its policy goals?
3. What AI initiatives has this department introduced?
4. Has this programme faced criticism?

LLMs then synthesise official publications and institutional information into a single accessible explanation. This changes the role of public communications. The objective is not to ensure AI models have sufficient credible, authoritative context to explain complex policy accurately.

As AI becomes the primary interpreter of government information, communications teams are responsible for managing both visibility and understanding.

Measuring AI reputation with Lumina AI View

Reputation has been shaped across three familiar environments: media, search and social. AI introduces a fourth environment.

LLMs condense dozens of publications into a single response, reducing the traditional discovery process between a question and an opinion.

During the recent webinar, Prashant Saxena, VP of Revenue and Insights says, “We used to Google it. Now we're ChatGPT-ing it.”

This behavioural shift is significant. Reuters Institute research found that only a small proportion of AI chatbot users regularly click through to original articles. 

Practically, every piece of earned coverage now has two audiences:

  • The people reading it.
  • The AI models learning from it.

Both shape reputation.

This is the challenge Lumina AI View was designed to solve.

Instead of measuring whether an organisation appears in ChatGPT, AI View measures how different LLMs represent the organisation. Using consistent question sets across ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Perplexity, Grok, and Google AI Overviews, it compares narratives, citations, and competitive positioning through a unified reputation methodology.

The framework is built around four familiar dimensions: Direction, Performance, Integrity, and Innovation. Rather than tracking keywords alone, AI View identifies which reputation pillars dominate AI responses, which publications influence those narratives, and how representation differs across models. It also gives the organisation an AI score based on all the above factors.

The tool also shows organisations which publications are covered by different AI models. If the organisation’s AI score on the tool is high for ChatGPT, but struggles with or is a lower score on Gemini or Perplexity, the tool allows you to see where you’re underperforming. If there are publications that are covering the wrong information, or the important ones just don’t show up, then that’s an indication to why the AI score is low on that platform. 

What this means for PR and communications professionals

The communications profession has always adapted to new discovery channels, from newspapers to search engines, and from social media to digital news.

AI is different because it does not simply help audiences find information, but it increasingly determines how organisations are introduced.

For communications leaders, this changes media strategy in three key ways. 

  • First, publication quality becomes more important than quantity, as different LLMs repeatedly reference authoritative sources when constructing narratives around your organisation.
  • Second, visibility for the organisation’s spokespeople now extends beyond interviews and articles. The expertise attributed to leaders increasingly shapes how AI explains an organisation's direction and credibility. 
  • Finally, competitor positioning is now continuous rather than campaign-based, as AI naturally compares organisations whenever users ask for recommendations or leadership insights.

Organisations that succeed in this new environment are those that have leadership, performance, integrity, and innovation represented consistently across every major AI model, regardless of where audiences and stakeholders begin their search.


Want to see which sources are shaping how AI describes your organisation? Get in touch about Lumina AI View.

" ["post_title"]=> string(50) "How do different LLMs represent your organisation?" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(136) "Uncover how different LLMs treat your brand, explore key model capabilities, and learn how PR teams can measure and shape AI visibility." ["post_status"]=> string(7) "publish" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(49) "how-do-different-llms-represent-your-organisation" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2026-09-21 02:42:00" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2026-09-21 02:42:00" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(32) "https://www.isentia.com/?p=50056" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" }
Blog
How do different LLMs represent your organisation?

Uncover how different LLMs treat your brand, explore key model capabilities, and learn how PR teams can measure and shape AI visibility.

Ready to get started?

Get in touch or request a demo.