Pick a side, any side, but be forever condemned if it’s not my side…
It seems that everything these days must be an argument, and not just an argument, but one that points to existential values that we must either vehemently support or forever condemn. For organisations and brands of all kinds these hard-sided arguments have become a problem.
It’s not even clear who started it – the ‘populist’ hard right or the ‘woke’ hard left (there is a hard-sided argument just in that). One thing for sure, however, is that with Trump’s return to power, polarisation of opinion is set to become more extreme.
This will build on an increasing challenge for both businesses and public sector organisations. On the one hand, customers, employees and stakeholders expect and even demand that they take positions on issues that matter to them. On the other, those same customers, employees and stakeholders will be eternally mortified if the position is not exactly the same as their own.
Navigating this seemingly impossible landscape is the responsibility of leadership. Some step up as champions, Elon Musk-style, for one side or another. Others hope to remain in the shadows. Most still believe in going beyond pure commercial or operational focus as part of their leadership, yet cling nervously to purpose and values, fearing recrimination.
For leaders, the key question is whether this matters at all. Recent share price boosts for Musk’s businesses suggest not, but he is on the winning side for now. How long will this last? Can his electric car company, Tesla sustain growth or, with time, will many potential customers turn away in rejection of his political views?
At River Effra, we wanted to understand where the public sit on these issues. We asked research agency, Message House BPI to help us answer some fundamental questions: Is it OK to withdraw from the debate and ‘just’ go back to being a company? Must organisations take positions on everything, inevitably upsetting some audiences by picking a side? What if your employees expect one thing but your customers another?
The answers give hope but, as with most things, it is helpful to have data to support a point of view.
What did we learn? Perhaps unsurprisingly, the environment and sustainability have become a hygiene factor for consumers. Here, they expect a clear position from all, but particularly those sectors (energy and autos) that have most work to do.
Yet, the public are not generic in their judgements. They don’t expect organisations to be overtly political or too actively geopolitical. In fact, too much comment on these topics will have an impact, not just on ‘favourability,’ towards an organisation but also on ‘brand consideration’ i.e. whether they will buy its products or services.
However, that doesn’t mean you can put all this back in the box: when events happen and issues matter, stakeholders expect organisations to show understanding and empathy proactively, even if they don’t want them to support a particular point of view.
Interestingly, in an era when calling for an instant response has become the norm, those surveyed in all age groups did not expect a corporate position immediately upon an issue emerging. They preferred to wait for a well thought through perspective.
In fact, in all, the research suggests a nuanced view; organisations should take a position that doesn’t bend to the loudest voices, nor shy away from the difficult. To sum up the responses in one word it would be ‘considered.’
In our hard-sided world where those demanding of us get the most traction, reaching positions that achieve this more balanced approach is difficult. Yet being more considered does not ask the impossible, either.
To find out more about the detail behind our findings, please get in touch.
Thank you for reading. For more insights please visit our blogs directory and insights page.