Chief executives are consumers too. But do they share the general public's perception of companies or is their perspective coloured by their position? This year's survey for the first time compares business leaders' views of "consumer value" with those of the public. It also examines whether chief executives see eye-to-eye with fund managers on a more traditional measure of success - creating shareholder value.

At first sight, there appears to be remarkable agreement on which companies create most value for consumers. Microsoft, General Electric, Sony, Toyota, Wal-Mart and McDonald's all feature in the top 10 lists chosen by both CEOs and the public.

But look closer and there are some interesting omissions. Dell and Amazon.com are not mentioned by the general public even though both have built their reputations on dealing directly with customers. Dell is fourth and Amazon ninth on the list chosen by chief executives.

On the other hand, the public rates highly two automobile companies - General Motors and Volkswagen - that do not appear among the CEOs' choices. The public sees them as large, reliable companies that produce vehicles offering value for money and that give good customer service. Personal experience is often the deciding factor. "I have always used them. They are always ready to help and their service is very good. Smaller repairs are done immediately," is one typical response.

Unlike most of the chief executives, the public takes a very subjective view of consumer value. Personal experience of the product or personal ties to the company are one of the two main reasons they give for their nominations. The other is quality and reliability.

The public also appears more willing than chief executives to take on trust that large, high-profile companies inevitably offer consumer value. One picked General Electric, for example, "because it is the most important in the world", and another "because I've heard the name so often". Underlining the importance of personal experience, one says: "I just happened to glance at our refrigerator."

The CEOs put by far their greatest emphasis when judging consumer value on quality, reliability and respectability. They also give more weight than the public to value for money and innovation. High-quality products, innovation and reliability are mentioned frequently in relation to GE, for example. "They create great brands that people stick with," says one CEO.

The public's view of another long-established giant, International Business Machines, seems at odds with that of the CEOs. IBM comes fifth in the public's league table, but only 15th with chief executives. Among the public's reasons for choosing the company are "old-style sentimental favourite" and "I can't imagine living without IBM". Good customer service is a common theme.

By contrast, Coca-Cola, another ubiquitous brand, is placed sixth by chief executives but only 16th by the public.

Business leaders do not automatically equate consumer value with respect: 12 companies, including General Motors, AIG and 3M, feature among the 30 most respected companies but are not rated as best for consumer value.

As one might expect, there is considerably more agreement between business leaders and fund managers on the matter of shareholder value. General Electric and Microsoft come first and second in both the chief executives' and the fund managers' lists of top 20 performers. Twelve companies are common to both.

Six of the 20 most respected companies do not make it onto the chief executives' shareholder value list: AIG, Ford, Hewlett-Packard, DaimlerChrysler, Nestle and Southwest Airlines. Nor do they feature among fund managers' choices.

Despite these overlaps, there are some differences in emphasis between CEOs and fund managers. The chief executives give high ratings to Sony, GM and Toyota, but these do not appear in the fund managers' league table. Fund managers like L'Oreal and HSBC far more than the CEOs. They also choose Merrill Lynch, which does not figure on the CEOs' list.

Both groups give as their top reason for nominating a company its success, profitability and high return on investment. But the chief executives give even greater weight to this definition of shareholder value than the fund managers.

A strong second reason for the fund managers is whether a company is "leading edge", visionary and strong on research and development. Market dominance or leadership is also an important factor for them. The chief executives emphasise quality, reliability, consistency, strong management and transparency slightly more than the fund managers do.

How do these different shades of opinion manifest themselves in relation to individual companies? It seems that Sony, which features only in the chief executives' choices, was chosen particularly for being respectable and communicating well with shareholders. "It is extremely highly motivated in presenting business information and building a system for corporate governance," comments one chief executive. But Sony is also praised for being innovative and entrepreneurial, qualities that are apparently prized even more by fund managers than by CEOs.

When it comes to L'Oreal and HSBC, neither of which appears in the chief executives' top 20, it is hard to differentiate the comments of fund managers from those of chief executives when speaking about other companies. L'Oreal, fifth choice for fund managers, is regarded as "very stable and constant over the years, with high yields" and has "a good, sustainable business model". HSBC, joint 8th with Berkshire Hathaway on the fund managers' list, is "very stable", has "consistent profitability" and "sensible strategies".