1.
Investor relations 2.0 – An international benchmark study Kristin Koehler, M.A. University of Leipzig | Institute of Communication and Media Studies | August 20111 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

2.
Content Outline of the study Research design Empirical insights Best practices Summary of findings2 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

3.
Outline of the study _ Online content analysis of top 30 listed businesses in the United States (Dow Jones Industrial Average), Germany (DAX), UK (FTSE), France (CAC) and Japan (Nikkei) _ In addition, comparison of the IR 2.0 engagement of German companies listed in DAX, MDAX, TecDAX and SDAX _ Longitudinal design for German and U.S. indices: first IR 2.0 study conducted in 2009 (see DIRK research edition, vol. 17, Köhler, K. (2010): Investor relations and social media) _ Organized by the University of Leipzig, Kristin Koehler, M.A. _ Thanks to Melanie Gerasch and Isabel Reinhardt for their support3 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

4.
Outline of the study Aims and focus _ Monitoring the status quo in the field of investor relations 2.0 in an international context _ Identifying trends and developments for German and U.S. businesses _ Identifying best practices _ Comparing use of social media for IR purposes in different countries and cultural settings4 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

5.
Research design _ Online content analysis of 280 listed companies in GER, USA, GB, FRA, JPN: Investor relations websites and presence with IR topics on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and SlideShare _ Analysis included platforms and tools, predominant functions, topics, ratio between obligatory information and published news via social media, possibility for feedback and dialogue with stakeholders _ Ranking in regard to investor relations 2.0 engagement index _ Period of analysis: December 2010 – May 2011 _ Independent variables: industrial sector, sales market, index membership _ Methods of empirical research, descriptive and analytical analysis (using SPSS for statistical analysis) See Koehler (2011) for further readings.5 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

6.
Overview obligatory and optional online investor relations Source: Own display in reference to Köhler, 2010; 6 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de Weber, 2009

7.
Empirical insights7 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

8.
Investor relations 2.0 engagement index Engagement index IR 2.0 engagement index (IIR2.0) comprises internal and external IR 2.0 engagement. Internal = Social media on the IR website; External = external social networks or platforms, here: Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, or SlideShare. Index values for the overall score ranged from 0 to 1,280 with low engagement on a level of 0 !" IIR2.0 !#$$%"&()*&"+,-,&+."/+"-"010"/2"#$$"!"IIR2.0 !3$$"-+("4),4"+,-,&+."/+"-"010" of IIR2.053$$68 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

9.
U.S. and German companies outperform RANKING IR­2.0­ENGAGEMENT Companies Ranking IR 2.0 / internal (in Ranking IR 2.0 / external (in Ranking IR 2.0 / overall (in comparison to 2009) comparison to 2009) comparison to 2009) 1 Cisco Systems Inc. (4) DJIA Alcoa Inc. (1) DJIA Cisco Systems Inc. (5) DJIA 2 General Electric Co. (1) DJIA BASF SE (30) DAX General Electric Co. (1) DJIA 3 SAP AG (2) DAX Deutsche Bank AG (10) DAX SAP AG (2) DAX 4 Hewlett­Packard Co. (3) DJIA BMW AG (13) DAX Hewlett­Packard Co. (7) DJIA 5 AT&T Inc. (66) DJIA Chevron Corp. (15) DJIA AT&T Inc. (22) DJIA 6 Intel Corp. (6) DJIA SAP AG (4) DAX Intel Corp. (10) DJIA 7 Alcoa Inc. (25) DJIA Alcatel­Lucent SA (­) CAC Alcoa Inc. (3) DJIA 8 BAYER AG (12) DAX Cisco Systems Inc. (6) DJIA BAYER AG (23) DAX 9 Daimler AG (10) DAX Lafarge SA (­) CAC Daimler AG (12) DAX 10 Boeing Co. (43) DJIA Daimler AG (9) DAX BASF SE (27) DAX N = 150. Comparison could only be conducted for German DAX listed and U.S. DJIA listed companies. Changes in: DAX: sorted out: Salzgitter AG, new: HeidelbergCement AG; DJIA: no changes. For the 2009 research results cf. Köhler, 2010 (N = 190; indices analysed: DAX, DJIA, MDAX, SDAX, TecDAX).Score IR 2.0 / internal = ((no. of dialogical tools *3) + (no. of tools * 2) + (no. of social media publications on IR website * functions (1‐4) * degree of implementation (0‐3)) + (no. of social media publications with feedback or comment function on IR website * 3) + (no. of social media publications on IR website / no. of IR releases traditionally published)). Score IR 2.0 / external = ((no. IR channels * 3) + (no. of channels with IR topics * 2) + (no. of social media publications on external platforms) + (no. of social media publications on external platforms / no. of IR releases traditionally published)). Score IR 2.0 / overall = ((Score IR 2.0 / internal) + (Score IR 2.0 / external)).9 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

10.
U.S. blue chips even more engaged than German DAX; social networks remain underrepresented Mean values scores10 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

11.
95 per cent use social media on their IR website; webcast and RSS feed on top position Overview applications on IR website RSS feed 30 Other 25 Podcast 20 15 IR app 10 Webcast 5 0 Share button Video cast Wiki Weblog Chat DJIA DAX FTSE CAC NIKKEI N = 142. Number of companies using the mentionend applications on IR website. Other: e.g. social media survey, live stream without filing, instant messaging reminder, skype, virtual shareholder magazines. Share button includes Facebook “like” button and tweet button.11 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

12.
Companies increasingly link to external platforms from their IR website No. of companies with links to external platforms 0 1 Link to other 2 2 3 0 0 3 Link to SlideShare 1 0 Link to FlickR 1 2 2 3 3 4 0 Link to YouTube 0 4 Link to SlideShare 0 10 3 2 7 7 0 Link to Twitter 4 6 Link to YouTube 4 17 4 10 2 4 Link to Facebook 0 4 5 12 Link to Twitter 7 7 17 0 5 10 15 20 0 5 DAX 2009 DAX 2011 DJIA 2009 DJIA 2011 Link to Facebook 2 4 12 0 5 10 15 20 NIKKEI CAC FTSE DAX DJIA N = 142 (no. of companies with social media on IR website). Number of companies with links to external social media platforms from their IR website. Other: e.g. LinkedIn, Scibd, Dailymotion, FourSquare.12 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

13.
Majority is still sceptical and does not experiment with more than 5 different tools Overview no. of different tools on IR website DJIA 30 25 20 15 NIKKEI 10 DAX 5 0 CAC FTSE 1­5 different tools 6­10 different tools More than 10 different tools N = 142 (no. of companies with social media on IR website). Number of companies using different tools on IR website.13 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

14.
American blue chips are most engaged; Japanese companies lack behind Comparison no. of publications via social media 300 249 250 213 199 200 157 150 140 133 126 108 105 95 100 67 54 50 34 36 29 33 22 23 21 20 25 17 17 18 15 76 10 10 7 3 0 00000 01000 01100 1 2 4 0 RSS feed Podcast Webcast Video cast Weblog Chat Wiki Share IR app Other button DJIA DAX FTSE CAC NIKKEI N = 142 (no. of companies with social media on IR website). Number of publications via social media (e.g. videos, audio recordings, audio­ visual presentations) on IR website.14 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

15.
DJIA: Increased social media usage in comparison to 2009; especially blogs gain importance DJIA 2009 to 2011 / Social media on IR website 300 281 249 250 221 213 199 200 150 140 126 100 85 50 2529 2529 2826 1814 1317 10 9 14 9 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 RSS feed Podcast Webcast Video cast Weblog Chat Wiki Share button IR app DJIA (no. of companies 2009) DJIA (no. of companies 2011) DJIA (no. of publications 2009) DJIA (no. of publications 2011) N = 30 (no. of DJIA listed companies using different tools on IR website).15 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

16.
DAX: Podcast lost ground; no significant improvements in IR 2.0 practice DAX 2009 to 2011 / Social media on IR website 180 157 160 138 140 133 123 120 108 109 100 80 60 40 33 26 27 21 22 21 22 20 15 13 13 12 15 15 6 6 2 3 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 RSS feed Podcast Webcast Video cast Weblog Chat Wiki Share button IR app DAX (no. of companies 2009) DAX (no. of companies 2011) DAX (no. of publications 2009) DAX (no. of publications 2011) N = 29 (no. of DAX listed companies using different tools on IR website).16 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

17.
On a low level, dialogical approaches are on the rise Overview no. of dialogical tools on IR DJIA / DAX 2009 to 2011 website 0 3 1 8 Tools with feedback or Tools with feedback or 2 comment function comment function 8 3 14 14 2 4 28 47 Publications with Publications with feedback or comment 28 feedback or comment function function 47 61 240 240 0 100 200 300 0 200 400 NIKKEI CAC FTSE DAX DJIA DAX 2009 DAX 2011 DJIA 2009 DJIA 2011 N = 142 (no. of companies with social media on IR website). Number of tools and publications via social media on IR website.17 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

18.
Most blue chips communicate on at least one of the social networks with IR participation Overview external engagement DJIA / DAX 2009 to 2011 Company’s presence 26 15 Company’s presence on at least 1 of 24 on at least 1 of the 29 22 external platform (all the external platform (all topics) 28 28 29 topics) 28 0 Specific IR 0 Specific IR channel/account on at 0 channel/account on at 1 0 least 1 of the external least 1 of the external platforms 2 2 1 platforms 2 6 IR engagement on at 20 IR engagement on at least 1 of the 14 22 18 least 1 of the external external platforms 17 16 22 platforms 17 2 2 8 IR engagement on 2 11 IR engagement on 2 platforms 13 11 platforms 6 11 11 1 3 3 IR engagement on 3 7 IR engagement on 3 platforms 6 7 platforms 1 7 7 0 0 0 IR engagement on all 4 3 IR engagement on all 4 platforms 0 2 platforms 0 3 2 0 10 20 30 40 0 20 40 NIKKEI CAC FTSE DAX DJIA DJIA 2009 DJIA 2011 DAX 2009 DAX 2011 N = 118. Number of companies within the sample on external platforms (here: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, or SlideShare); all topics.18 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

19.
Twitter and YouTube as top channels for the publication of IR relevant topics regarding no. of companies Overview IR presence in social networks 20 18 18 16 16 14 14 14 13 13 12 11 10 8 8 7 7 6 5 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DJIA DAX FTSE CAC NIKKEI IR presence on SlideShare IR SlideShare channel IR presence on YouTube IR YouTube channel IR presence on Twitter IR Twitter channel IR presence on Facebook IR Facebook channel N = 77. Number of companies on external platforms with IR topics (here: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, or SlideShare).19 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

20.
However, specific IR channels remain at a low level Comparison DJIA & DAX / IR presence in social networks 20 18 18 16 14 14 14 12 12 11 10 9 9 8 7 7 6 5 4 4 4 3 2 2 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IR presence on IR SlideShare IR presence on IR YouTube IR presence on IR Twitter IR presence on IR Facebook SlideShare channel YouTube channel Twitter channel Facebook channel DJIA 2011 DJIA 2009 DAX 2011 DAX 2009 N = 39. Number of DJIA and DAX companies on external platforms with IR topics (here: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, or SlideShare).20 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

21.
Most intense use of Twitter and Facebook regarding no. of publications Overview no. of publications on external platforms 0 14 20 Posts and comments 128 Posts and comments on Facebook 21 128 on Facebook 55 121 121 69 148 440 Tweets and re­tweets on Twitter 195 326 Tweets and re­tweets 326 375 on Twitter 447 1 375 17 Videos on YouTube 24 70 38 84 70 Videos on YouTube 0 35 0 Presentations on SlideShare 2 84 7 18 2 70 Presentations on 7 185 SlideShare Publications on external platforms 242 0 531 18 598 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0 100 200 300 400 500 NIKKEI CAC FTSE DAX DJIA DAX 2009 DAX 2011 DJIA 2009 DJIA 2011 N = 77 (No. of companies on external platforms with IR topics). Number of publications on external platforms (here: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, or SlideShare).21 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

22.
Social media are used for information and interpretion; networking remains marginally considered Basic functions of social media (no. of companies) 2 9 28 111 Basic functions of social media on the IR website: networking 4 17 107 22 Basic functions of social media on the IR website: interpretation 1 11 45 93 Basic functions of social media on the IR website: structuring 7 33 95 15 Basic functions of social media on the IR website: information 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 fully applicable (100 per cent) largely applicable (50­75 per cent) partly applicable (25­50 per cent) not applicable (0 per cent) Basic functions of social software, see Zerfaß & Sandhu, 2008: information (e.g., RSS feeds), structuring (e.g., social bookmarks, wikis), interpretation (e.g., podcasts, video casts, and blogs) and networking (e.g., social communities). Category in content analysis: Degree to which each function is fulfilled: 3 = fully applicable (to 100 per cent appropriate), 2 = largely applicable (to 50­75 per cent appropriate), 1 = partly applicable (to 25­50 per cent appropriate), 0 = not applicable (to 0 per cent appropriate). N = 142 (category analyzed for companies using social media on the IR website). 22 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

23.
Differences between indices: FTSE and CAC use social media for interpretation, Nikkei only for information, DJIA and DAX are most balanced on a low level Country­specific characteristics of investor relations 2.0 Social media function N Average SD F p Information DAX 30 1.30 0,651 3.806 0.006 DJIA 30 1.47 0.681 FTSE 30 1.10 0.607 CAC 30 0.87 0.507 NIKKEI 30 1.33 0.802 Structuring DAX 30 0.67 0.661 3.266 0.013 DJIA 30 0.63 0.718 FTSE 30 0.47 0.776 CAC 30 0.43 0.568 NIKKEI 30 0.13 0.434 Interpretation DAX 30 1.07 0.450 10.758 < 0.001 DJIA 30 1.33 0.711 FTSE 30 1.23 0.504 CAC 30 0.97 0.414 NIKKEI 30 0.50 0.572 Networking DAX 30 0.50 0.861 16.616 < 0.001 DJIA 30 1.00 0.743 FTSE 30 0.10 0.305 CAC 30 0.10 0.305 NIKKEI 30 0.03 0.183 Basic functions of social software, see Zerfaß & Sandhu, 2008: information (e.g., RSS feeds), structuring (e.g., social bookmarks, wikis), interpretation (e.g., podcasts, video casts, and blogs) and networking (e.g., social communities). Category in content analysis: Degree to which each function is fulfilled: 3 = fully applicable (to 100 per cent appropriate), 2 = largely applicable (to 50­75 per cent appropriate), 1 = partly applicable (to 25­50 per cent appropriate), 0 = not applicable (to 0 per cent appropriate). N = 150 (category analysed for companies using social media on the IR website). Average = mean score; SD = standard deviation; F = F­ratio for one­way ANOVA F­test statistic. Results significant for p < 0.05. Rounded figures. Significant differences between groups (here: indices) according to social media functions found. Post hoc tests revealed further insights, see Koehler (2011).23 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

24.
Financials, CSR and non­standard issues as most common topics Topics24 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

25.
Software, technology and telecommunications outperform, but no significant correlation between industrial sector and IR engagement could be found Mean values industrial sector One­way ANOVA tests found no significant differences between the groups (p > 0.05).25 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

26.
Surprisingly, B2B more engaged in social media when it comes to financial communications Mean values sales market One­way ANOVA tests found no significant differences between the groups (p > 0.05).26 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

27.
Within German companies, DAX outperforms but smaller indices significantly gain ground Social media usage on IR website 45 41 40 35 35 30 29 29 25 25 20 20 16 15 15 10 5 0 DAX MDAX TecDAX SDAX Social media on IR website 2011 Social media on IR website 2009 N = 115 (2011) / 95 (2009). Number of companies with internal IR 2.0 engagement, German indices only.27 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

28.
Findings for German indices correspond with data for international usage: screencasts on top Overview applications on IR Overview applications on IR website 2011 website 2009 RSS feed RSS feed 30 30 Feedback tools Podcast Feedback tools Podcast 25 25 20 20 Other Webcast Other 15 Webcast 15 10 10 5 5 IR app 0 Video cast IR app 0 Video cast External link Weblog External link Weblog Share button Chat Share button Chat Wiki Wiki DAX MDAX TecDAX SDAX DAX MDAX TecDAX SDAX N = 115 (2011) ) / 95 (2009). Number of companies with internal IR 2.0 engagement, German indices only. Other: e.g. social media survey, live stream without filing, instant messaging reminder, skype, virtual shareholder magazines. External link: Link to external social media platforms (e.g. FourSquare, LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter).28 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

29.
German IROs gradually pay attention to external platforms, also among small and mid caps Overview IR presence in social networks 16 14 14 14 12 12 11 10 9 8 8 7 7 7 6 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 22 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 11 1111 1 1 1 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 00 0 0 00 0 0 0 DAX 2011 DAX 2009 MDAX 2011 MDAX 2009 TecDAX 2011 TecDAX 2009 SDAX 2011 SDAX 2009 IR presence on SlideShare IR SlideShare channel IR presence on YouTube IR YouTube channel IR presence on Twitter IR Twitter channel IR presence on Facebook IR Facebook channel N = 51 (2011) / 27 (2009). Number of companies with IR 2.0 engagement on external platforms (here: YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, SlideShare); German indices only.29 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

30.
However, specific IR channels are not yet perceived valuable for financial communications at large; improvements within small and mid caps Overview no. of publications on external platforms 18 17 16 16 15 14 12 11 10 10 9 8 7 7 6 6 4 4 4 4 4 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DAX 2011 DAX 2009 MDAX 2011 MDAX 2009 TecDAX 2011 TecDAX 2009 SDAX 2011 SDAX 2009 IR engagement on all 4 platforms IR engagement on at least 3 platforms IR engagement on at least 2 platforms IR engagement on at least 1 of the external platforms Specific IR channel/account on at least 1 of the external platforms N = 51 (2011) / 27 (2009). Number of companies with IR 2.0 engagement on external platforms (here: YouTube, Twitter, Facebook, SlideShare); German indices only. Specific IR channels: YouTube: Gesco AG (SDAX); Twitter: Deutsche EuroShop AG, HHLAG (both MDAX), Qiagen, QSC AG (both TecDAX), Balda AG (SDAX); Facebook: Deutsche EuroShop AG, HHLAG (both MDAX), C.A.T. oil AG (SDAX); SlideShare: Balda AG (SDAX).30 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

31.
Best practices IR 2.031 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

32.
BASF (DAX) as IR 2.0 pioneer 32 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

33.
Allianz (DAX) offers investor relations app33 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

34.
Online shareholder meeting by Walmart (DJIA)34 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

35.
elringklinger (MDAX) introduced live chat with CEO35 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

36.
Surprisingly, Deutsche Bank (DAX) canceled present live chat with retail investors in 201136 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

37.
Bayer (DAX) interested in shareholders‘ social media demands37 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

38.
Deutsche EuroShop (MDAX) launched IR blog38 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

39.
Alcatel­Lucent (CAC) with no specific IR blog but corporate one deals with IR topics39 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

40.
IBM (DJIA) offers RSS feeds for specific IR occasions40 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

41.
Deutsche Beteiligungs AG (SDAX) includes feedback function in webcast presentation41 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

42.
Munich RE (DAX) with specific shareholders‘ portal42 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

43.
Mitsubishi (Nikkei) with investors‘ newsroom43 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

44.
SABMiller (FTSE) with special IR website on takeover44 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

45.
Deutsche Boerse (DAX) and Nyse Euronext provide similar online services45 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

46.
Even though highly sensitive, social media seem applicable to accompany M&A transactions / AT&T (DJIA) with videos, blog posts, webcasts46 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

47.
SAP (DAX) investor relations Twitter channel47 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

48.
Deutsche Euroshop (MDAX) proves that broad social media engagement does not necessarily demands high personal ressources48 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

49.
Summary of findings _ Social media gained importance within investor relations departments _ Internationally, U.S. blue chips are on the forefront _ However, German companies outperform in comparison to French, Japanese or British ones _ Social media networks and other external platforms are still underrepresented in online IR _ Most companies employ different social media tools on their IR website and support their online financial communications in regard to interactive features, multimedia, but not shareholder dialogue or networking _ Best practices prove adaptability of social media within investor relations _ Further research is dedicated to focus on users‘ demands: Are social media really appropriate for investor relations purposes? Which would be the right channels? Which would be the appropriate type of communication? _ Country­specific differences within the recent study are critical for further analysis (cultural differences as well as characteristics of the occupational field, online usage patterns, etc.)49 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

50.
References _ Köhler, K. (2011). Investor relations 2.0 – Status quo of online financial communications. Paper presented at EUPRERA annual conference, Leeds, UK, September 2011. _ Köhler, K. (2010). Investor Relations und Social Media. Benchmarkstudie zur Praxis der Finanzkommunikation im Web 2.0 bei börsennotierten Unternehmen in Deutschland [Investor relations and social media]. DIRK Forschungsreihe, Vol. 17. Mu!nchen: Going Public Media AG. _ Weber, C. (2009). Online­Finanzkommunikation [Online financial communications]. In K. R. Kirchhoff & M. Piwinger (Eds.) Praxishandbuch Investor Relations. Das Standardwerk der Finanzkommunikation [Handbook investor relations], (2nd rev. Ed.) (pp. 393­414). Wiesbaden: Gabler. _ Zerfaß, A. & Sandhu, S. (2008). Interaktive Kommunikation, Social Web und Open Innovation. Herausforderungen und Wirkungen im Unternehmenskontext [Interactive communication, social web and open innovation. Challenges and effects for organizations]. In A. Zerfaß, M. Welker & J. Schmidt (Eds.) Kommunikation, Partizipation und Wirkungen im Social Web. Band 2: Strategien und Anwendungen: Perspektiven für Wirtschaft, Politik, Publizistik [Communication, participation and effects of the social web. Volume 2: Perspectives for business, politics and the media] (pp. 283­310). Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag.50 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

51.
Appendix: Index composition _ Each index represents the top listed companies in the respective country/at the respective stock exchange. _ From each index, the top 30 constituent companies according to weight within size indices were chosen to enable a comparative design: The German DAX and the U.S. DJIA both consist of 30 values. The Japanese Nikkei comprises 225, the French CAC 40 and the UK based FTSE 100 the 100 most highly capitalized listed companies. DJIA and NIKKEI are price­ weighted stock market indeces; DAX, CAC and FTSE are market­value­ weighted indeces. _ Index composition according to January 6, 2011. _ DJIA: 3M Co., Alcoa Inc., American Express Co., AT&T Inc., Bank of America Corp., Boeing Co., Caterpillar Inc., Chevron Corp., Cisco Systems Inc., Coca­Cola Co., E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Exxon Mobil Corp., General Electric Co., Hewlett­Packard Co., Home Depot Inc., Intel Corp., International Business Machines Corp., Johnson & Johnson, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Kraft Foods Inc., McDonalds Corp., Merck & Co. Inc., Microsoft Corp., Pfizer Inc., Procter & Gamble Co., Travelers Cos. Inc., United Technologies Corp., Verizon Communications Inc., Wal­Mart Stores Inc., Walt Disney Co. 51 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

52.
Appendix: Index composition cont‘d _ DAX: adidas AG, Allianz SE, BASF SE, Bayer AG, Beiersdorf AG, BMW AG, Commerzbank AG, Daimler AG, Deutsche Bank AG, Deutsche Börse AG, Deutsche Lufthansa AG, Deutsche Post AG, Deutsche Telekom AG, E.ON AG, Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA, Fresenius SE, HeidelbergCement AG, Henkel AG & Co. KGaA, Infineon Technologies AG, K+S AG, Linde AG, MAN SE, Merck KGaA, Metro AG, Münchener Rück AG, RWE AG, SAP AG, Siemens AG, ThyssenKrupp AG, Volkswagen AG _ FTSE: Anglo American plc, AstraZeneca plc, Aviva plc, BAE Systems plc, Barclays plc, BG Group plc, BHP Billiton plc, BP plc, British American Tobacco plc, BT Group plc, Centrica plc, Diageo plc, GlaxoSmithKline plc, HSBC Holdings plc, Imperial Tobacco Group plc, Lloyds Banking Group plc, National Grid plc, Prudential plc, Reckitt Benckiser Group plc, Rio Tinto Group plc, Rolls­Royce Holdings plc, Royal Dutch Shell plc, SABMiller plc , Scottish and Southern Energy plc, Standard Chartered plc, Tesco plc, Tullow Oil plc, Unilever plc, Vodafone Group plc, Xstrata plc52 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

53.
Appendix: Index composition cont‘d _ CAC: Air Liquide SA, Alcatel­Lucent SA, Alstom SA, Arcelormittal SA, AXA SA, BNP Paribas SA, Carrefour SA, Credit Agricole SA, Danone SA, EADS, Essilor Intl. SA, France Telecom SA, GDF Suez SA, LOréal SA, Lafarge SA, LVMH SA, Michelin SCA, Pernod Ricard SA, PPR SA, Renault SA, Saint Gobain SA, Sanofi­Aventis SA, Schneider Electric SA, Societe Generale SA, Total SA, Unibail­Rodamco SA, Vallourec SA, Veolia Environ. SA, Vinci SA, Vivendi SA _ Nikkei: Canon Inc., Denso Corp., East Japan Railway Co., Fanuc Corp., Hitachi Ltd., Honda Motor Co. Ltd., Inpex Corp., Japan Tobacco Inc., KDDI Corp., Komatsu Ltd., Kyocera Corp., Mitsubishi Corp., Mitsubishi Electric Corp., Mitsubishi Estate Co. Ltd., Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group Inc., Mitsui & Co. Ltd., Mizuho Financial Group Inc., Nippon Steel Corp., Nissan Motor Co. Ltd., NTT Corp., Panasonic Corp., Seven & I Holdings Co. Ltd., Shin­Etsu Chemical Co. Ltd., Softbank Corp., Sony Corp., Sumitomo Corp., Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Tokyo Marine Holdings Inc., Toshiba Corp., Toyota Motor Corp. (Weighting of Nikkei 225 indexs components according to market capitalisation)53 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

54.
Appendix: Index composition cont‘d _ German indixes TecDAX, MDAX and SDAX are market­value­weighted indeces. _ Index composition according to January 6, 2011. _ All companies within each German index were part of analysis. _ MDAX: Aareal Bank AG, Aurubis AG, Axel Springer AG, BayWa AG, Bilfinger Berger SE, Brenntag AG, Celesio AG, Continental AG, Demag Cranes AG, Deutsche EuroShop AG, Deutsche Wohnen AG, Douglas Holding AG, ElringKlinger AG, EADS, Fielmann AG, Fraport AG, Fuchs Petrolub AG, GAGFAH S.A., GEA Group Aktiengesellschaft, Gerresheimer AG, Gildemeister AG, Hamburger Hafen und Logistik AG, Hannover Rückversicherung AG, Heidelberger Druckmaschinen AG, Hochtief AG, Hugo Boss AG, IVG Immobilien AG, Kabel Deutschland Holding AG, Klöckner & Co. SE, Krones AG, LANXESS AG, Leoni AG, MTU Aero Engines Holding AG, Praktiker Bau­ und Heimwerkermärkte Holding AG, ProSiebenSat.1 Media AG, Puma AG, Rational AG, Rheinmetall AG, RHÖN­KLINIKUM AG, Salzgitter AG, SGL Carbon SE, Sky Deutschland AG, STADA Arzneimittel AG, Südzucker AG, Symrise AG, Tognum AG, TUI AG, Vossloh AG, Wacker Chemie AG, WINCOR NIXDORF Aktiengesellschaft54 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

55.
Appendix: Index composition cont‘d _ TecDAX: ADVA Optical Networking, Aixtron AG, BB Biotech AG, Bechtle AG, Carl Zeiss Meditec AG, centrotherm photovoltaics AG, Conergy AG, Dialog Semiconductor plc, Drägerwerk AG & Co. KGaA, Drillisch AG, EVOTEC AG, Freenet AG, Jenoptik AG, Kontron AG, Manz Automation AG, MorphoSys AG, Nordex AG, Pfeiffer Vacuum Technology AG, Phoenix Solar AG, Q­Cells SE, Qiagen, QSC AG, Roth & Rau AG, Singulus Technologies, SMA Solar Technology AG, Software AG, SolarWorld AG, STRATEC Biomedical Systems AG, United Internet AG, Wirecard AG _ SDAX: Air Berlin PLC, alstria office REIT AG, Amadeus Fire AG, Balda AG, Bauer AG, Bertrandt AG, Biotest AG, C.A.T. oil AG, CENTROTEC Sustainable AG, CeWe Color Holding AG, Colonia Real Estate AG, comdirect bank AG, Constantin Medien AG, CTS Eventim AG, Delticom AG, Deutsche Beteiligungs AG, DEUTZ AG, DIC Asset AG, Dürr AG, elexis AG, Gerry Weber International AG, Gesco AG, GfK SE, Grammer AG, GRENKELEASING AG, H&R WASAG AG, Hawesko Holding AG, Highlight Communications AG, Homag Group AG, Hornbach Holding AG, Indus Holding AG, Jungheinrich AG, Koenig & Bauer AG, KUKA AG, KWS SAAT AG, Medion AG, MLP AG, MVV Energie AG, PATRIZIA Immobilien AG, Pfleiderer AG, SAF Holland S.A., Sixt AG, SKW Stahl­Metallurgie Holding AG, Ströer Out­of­home Media AG, TAG Immobilien AG, TAKKT AG, Tipp24 SE, TOM TAILOR Holding AG, VTG AG, Wacker Neuson SE55 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

56.
Copyright and reproduction of results _ The material presented in this document represents empirical insights and interpretation by the author. It is intellectual property subject to international copyright. Publication date: August 2011. _ You are welcome to quote from the content of this survey and reproduce any graphics, subject to the condition that the source including the internet address is clearly quoted and depicted on every chart. _ Suggested citation for this document (APA style) Koehler, K. (2011): Investor relations 2.0. An international benchmark study (Chart Version). Leipzig: University of Leipzig (available at: http://www.slideshare.net/communicationmanagement) 56 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de

57.
Contact Kristin Koehler, M.A. University of Leipzig, Germany Research Assistant Institute of Communication and Media Studies Department Communication Management and Public Relations (Prof. Dr. Ansgar Zerfass) kristin.koehler@uni­leipzig.de www.communciationmanagement.de57 / Kristin Koehler | University of Leipzig | www.communicationmanagement.de