Media coverage of CEOs has become an important proxy for corporate reputation. Leaders are no longer just operators of their businesses; they are increasingly seen as brands themselves. PublicRelay’s 2025 edition of our CEO Index illustrates how executives are perceived in the media and, more importantly, how their presence affects their companies’ reputations. 

The Index combines both perception and impact into a composite score. Perception reflects how the CEO is covered in the media (tone, reach, and visibility) while impact measures how that same coverage translates into reputation outcomes for the company. A consistent theme in the data is the widening gap between perception and impact. Many CEOs are highly visible and even well-liked, but their companies do not see a corresponding reputational benefit. 

Visibility’s Double-Edged Sword 

In the period leading up to Trump’s second term, CEO Perception and Impact Scores experienced a  spike, as many high-profile executives sought visibility by engaging with Trump and his administration. At the time, this media-friendly approach—being seen at Mar-a-Lago or in high-profile meetings—was widely viewed as doing what was necessary for their companies, sometimes drawing even positive press coverage despite political differences. However, this honeymoon period proved short-lived. As Trump’s policies on tariffs began to impact businesses and tech leaders became embroiled in public controversies, such as Elon Musk’s erratic influence on Tesla’s narrative, the mood quickly shifted and  scores dropped again. While visibility initially boosted CEO standing in the media, it soon backfired as those same meetings and donations led to sustained negative coverage. In other words, just “being visible” and courting influence is not a reliable long-term strategy. 

This is where executive communications plays a critical role. For a CEO’s presence to have a positive effect on a corporate brand, it has to be carefully connected to the company’s enduring strategic narrative—otherwise, fleeting publicity can do more harm than good. 

Archetypes That Reward Substance 

The Index identifies nine CEO archetypes depending on certain combinations of Perception and Impact. These archetypes range from the well-aligned “Brand Ambassador” to the reputationally risky “Villain.” Two of the less flashy archetypes are particularly noteworthy: 

  • The Reluctant Hero: A leader who rarely seeks the spotlight but, when covered, emphasizes the company’s achievements and values. Their modest, authentic approach builds credibility and often improves the company’s reputation more than constant visibility would. 
  • The Steady Operator: A leader who communicates consistently and factually, without spectacle. This archetype may not drive headlines, but they project competence and stability, which are essential qualities when markets are volatile. 

Both types represent CEOs who may not dominate media narratives but nonetheless contribute meaningfully to their company’s reputation by either positively impacting it, or at the very least, by not causing controversy. 

Case Studies of Quiet Effectiveness 

Recent case studies illustrate how understated leadership can deliver strong impact: 

  • Verizon’s Hans Vestberg has steadily climbed the rankings by embodying the Reluctant Hero archetype. Rather than chasing headlines, he has highlighted Verizon’s AI-powered service improvements and cybersecurity investments. Coverage of these efforts portrays the company as competent and forward-looking, reinforcing stability in a sector where trust in technology is critical. While Vestberg’s average Perception Score has seen a slight decrease since 2022, his Impact Score has jumped. 
  • In the finance sector, several CEOs have successfully shifted archetypes by dialing back personal visibility and focusing on results. Goldman Sachs’ David Solomon, once criticized for his DJ side-gig and off-beat return-to-office comments, retreated from that persona and returned to a more traditional leadership profile. Solomon’s quieter public profile signaled a retreat from Villain territory toward a more stable archetype. 

These examples demonstrate that quiet effectiveness is not about avoiding the media altogether, but about ensuring that media coverage consistently reinforces the company’s narrative rather than overshadowing it. 

Why Quiet Can Be Effective 

Some CEOs score higher on impact than perception. They are not household names like Elon Musk or Mark Zuckerberg, nor do they command constant media attention. Instead, they focus their communication on company performance, innovation, and stakeholder value. Their impact scores suggest that measured visibility, tied directly to the brand’s story, can be just as valuable as charisma or controversy. 

This matters at a time when CEOs are under intense pressure to serve as steadying figures. The public looks to them for signals of stability in the face of economic and geopolitical challenges. For executive communications teams, the task is to align messaging with that need, ensuring that even modest media appearances reinforce the company’s strengths and resilience. 

Implications for Executive Communicators 

The data suggests that visibility alone is no longer a reliable strategy. Executive communications teams should consider: 

  • Building strategies for high-impact, low-frequency engagements, especially when the CEO naturally fits the Reluctant Hero or Steady Operator mold. 

Conclusion 

Not every CEO will become a larger-than-life media figure, and that can often be for the best. The 2025 CEO Archetypes Index shows that quiet effectiveness can be just as valuable, if not more so, for companies seeking stability and trust. Executive communicators who recognize and support this kind of leadership can help ensure that a CEO’s media presence, however modest, delivers meaningful impact for the brand. 

Download the full 2025 CEO Archetypes Report to explore all nine archetypes and learn how they shape both perception and impact. 

Author: Kay Kavanagh, Director of Research