The increasing incidence of for-profit corporations publicly expressing views on social, cultural and political issues is creating new reputational risks. This viewpoint aims to examine this problem and propose a range of practices for companies to adopt for minimizing this risk.
This paper examines a variety of recent cases of companies expressing public viewpoints to extract learnings about the range of potential stances to adopt to minimize reputation risk.
This analysis determined that there were four different paths for companies to take – radical behavior change, vocal activism, quiet engagement or strict neutrality – each with its own risks and benefits.
This paper offers practical advice to corporations about how and when they should adopt public stances on social, cultural and political issues in a way that minimizes reputation risk.
As corporations become smarter about their public stances, activists and advocates seeking their support will need to make more compelling arguments to gain their endorsement.
While individual corporate controversies about public positions have been written, the author is unaware of any previous comprehensive risk analysis of the reputation risks of public positions by corporations on social, cultural and political issues or recommendations on how to handle the risks.
