If you don’t know who you are and what you stand for, you’ll never fool the public into believing you are who you want them to think you are.
The roadside is littered with the shredded reputations of well-meaning corporations whose best efforts to engage on social issues have ended badly. Perhaps that’s because their PR teams forgot the average person can smell bulls**t a mile away.
An interesting perspective on how we got here can be found in the USC Center for Public Relations report, “The Balancing Act,” which offers a look at corporate activism in an age when a growing percentage of consumers, employees and investors believe companies have a responsibility to help solve society’s most pressing problems.
“Over the past decade, the terminology for social engagement that falls outside of normal business activity has evolved from philanthropy and corporate social responsibility to PURPOSE – a belief that companies who embed a deeper mission in their business that reflects their shareholders’ values earn brand loyalty, public recognition, and a higher valuation. PR professionals became the primary advocates for this powerful narrative, infusing purpose into their internal messaging and external programs.”
Ironically, the public relations profession now finds itself in retreat mode.
According to the surveys, while nearly half (49%) of corporate leaders expect companies to take MORE of a public stance on controversial issues during the next four years, only three in ten PR professionals expect them to do so.
And when asked “what is good advice for the CEO who is considering addressing an issue during the upcoming presidential election,” 40 percent of PR pros said the CEO should stay silent, 29 percent said s/he should avoid taking a stand, and 39 percent said the CEO should see what other companies do before speaking out.
Advocacy has evolved into caution. Reading the headlines, it’s easy to understand why.
- Who’s the genius who thought it was a good idea for Company X to speak up on the evils of global warming when everything they sell is made from petrochemicals?
- Why did Company Y hire a particular influencer and then throw its marketing team under the bus when outraged customers staged a boycott?
- And what was Company Z thinking when its effort to recruit women chefs led off with a post about women “belonging in the kitchen?”
What do companies need to do in order to stop doing stupid stuff?
NYU Professor Alison Taylor offers tremendous insights in her new book Higher Ground: How Business Can Do the Right Thing in a Turbulent World. Drawing on her 30 years’ experience in corporate ethics, Taylor argues the old command-and-control strategies no longer work in a world where the public’s demands for corporate activism and universal access to and dissemination of internal corporate communication is rampant.
(You can read an encapsulation of her points in the Harvard Business Review:
Corporate Advocacy in a Time of Public Outrage.)
Taylor calls for companies to align risk management, compliance, human resources, and executive and board leaders in a thorough examination of the reasons why a particular company exists (beyond making money), evaluate the material and existential risks inherent in its operations and engage with employees, customers, vendors and even adversaries to identify issues that are not only core to the business’ purpose but also resonate with stakeholders—AND where the company can make a real and positive impact.
Taylor’s book should be required reading for any corporate communications or public relations professional (and the C suite, for that matter). Here are some Cliff’s Notes on the questions corporations should ask before engaging on issues:
- Is the issue central to your business’ values, code of conduct, or other existing public commitments?
- Is the issue an environmental or social priority, according to a rigorous materiality assessment?
- Does the issue pertain to commitments you have made to your workforce, such as diversity and inclusion or human rights commitments?
- Has your company done all it can to ensure it isn’t making the problem worse through its actions or business model?
- Does your company have relevant capacity and expertise to contribute to solutions for the issue?
- Is this a new issue that has a proximate relationship to the company’s goals or operations?
- Is there a clear way your business can make a positive contribution in collaboration with others?
- Will acting on the issue support a positive operating environment for business in general? Would it support democratic participation, fair competition, equality of opportunity, and basic human rights?
- Can the company make a statement that’s consistent with its values, prior actions, political spending, and environmental and social priorities?
If you answer “no” to any of these questions, it’s probably best to stay off the road.
Corporate reputations are not about what you SAY, they’re about what you DO. And what you DO is a function of who you ARE.
If you haven’t thoroughly examined your company’s purpose to ensure you’re truly living your mission, vision and values, you are setting yourself up to take a knee-jerk action or issue a statement that rings hollow with those most important to the health and prosperity of your business.
For my colleagues in PR: this means US. You owe it to your employer/client to ask these difficult questions and ensure the organization is engaging in reflective thought before chasing clicks and likes.
Or run the risk of wearing the tread marks on your back.
Revival 