Resolved: Do Companies/Brands Need to Speak Out and Take A Stand on Social/Political Issues to Be Successful?

In a debate, there are Pros and Cons.

To help you prepare your considered and essential arguments (that I urge you to share), I have prepared some source materials for you to help shape your arguments.

As I debated this very proposition in my own mind, taking first one side and then the other, I was struck by the need to go deep on the source material findings and connect the dots between disparate sources and cases—not to mention my own experience and writing.

Let’s begin…

• According to WPP's BAV data, it’s generally easier to be trusted than to be associated with social responsibility. The follow-up is that only a small percentage of trust is related to social responsibility. The implications of this finding are far-reaching and cut deeply.

• The Edelman Trust Barometer takes it a step further and reports that business is ahead of government by 54 pts in the perception of competence but only 30 pts on ethics. Still damning for the government, but follow my nuance trail here.

• Stagwell’s latest Harvard/Harris Poll places Elon Musk high in the favorability rankings of US voters with a higher net positive than either Trump or Biden. Hold on to that thought.

• Almost every study ranks climate change and economic inequality as the two most important social issues people care to take a stand on.

Here are a few more thoughts for your consideration:

• To be true to the topic, you must take yourself out of the equation. There is nothing less credible than a survey of one.

• Back to Stagwell and this time the Axios Harris Poll...100 reputation rankings….Patagonia (to some, no surprise) ranks first, and Chick-fil-A ranks a not-so-distant 5th, which is 5 levels above Apple (to others, no surprise. To the “others” of the “others,” if you get my drift,...no doubt shocking).

Allow me to unpack some of the above.

Consider the case of Patagonia and Gillette. Patagonia has always been true to its core—business-driven purpose and social responsibility. It’s their DNA. The ethos of Patagonia powers everything from their employee culture to their product development to their donations to nonprofits and, of course, is communicated by their marketing. It’s all in a direct…dot connected…"money where their mouth is" line.????

Gillette, no doubt, reacting at the time to Blackrock CEO Larry Fink’s annual letter (see my prior IMAGINEs) of “The World Needs Your Leadership,” saw an opportunity to follow Patagonia, who protested then President Trump's Executive Order eliminating public parkland and Levi’s and Dick’s taking a public stance on gun safety (not control) dropped a campaign called “We Believe: The Best Men Can Be.” Study it for yourself. The best that can be said is that it gave Gillette a multi-billion dollar write-down and joined Pepsi’s unfortunate attempt at showing Kendall Jenner stopping a riot with a can of Pepsi.

I’d add that it's actually a sign of our times (see my IMAGINEs) and inability to learn from history that Bud Light fell into the same trap.

The lesson is simple and to the point.

• Bud Light's failure has nothing to do with the issue at hand but everything to do with bad marketing and bandwagon jumping that has zero credibility...as it’s completely disconnected from the Brand (vs. the other examples)...and is transparent to all as a marketing ploy—another campaign to win an award with.??
• Every study reports that consumers overwhelmingly say that they choose to buy products from companies with a purpose beyond making a profit.“I look to buy brands that make a positive social impact.”“I look for brands that stand out for having a social conscience.”

I will point out here, as I have previously, that this wonderful sentiment breaks down when price and convenience take precedence. You only have to look at the long list of questionably socially equipped companies that are hugely successful to prove the point.

All of which leads me to a recent Harris Poll and a quote from CEO John Gerzema...as I see it, the “money shot." Full disclosure: I work for Stagwell Global—the parent company.

The bottom line, they report, is that CONSUMERS ARE CYNCIAL…companies are seen as inauthentic.

• 68% believe when companies speak out today on social issues, it's a marketing ploy rather than an authentic opinion.

• 59% say there is generally more risk to a CEO speaking out on social issues than reward.

• 78% say companies are getting into more controversy as they try to appease both the left and the right.

What does all of the above mean? Speaking out requires a track record and relevance:

• 84% of companies need to have a track record of acting on their values to be taken seriously.

• 77% of companies would have a better reputation if they only spoke out on social issues directly related to their business.

• 77% would respect a company more if they were clear in its values, even if they disagreed.

Gerzema summed it all up for me by sharing:

“Overall companies should understand the polarization and cynicism and tread lightly, only speaking out on things close to their business. Better yet, far more impactful to be seen doing rather than saying…companies are valued more for being true to their word and convictions even if they are disagreed with…I refer you back to Patagonia and Chick-fil-A.”

?Success?

• Be real...as in whatever it is you lean into—it's in your DNA.

• Ditch the bullshit marketing “authenticity,” or be ready for the write-down.

• Be consistent.

?And it’s consistency I will emphasize as it’s roiling the corporate world right now. If you spoke out for one cause back when… You better have a good reason not to speak for another today…and visa versa. It’s not just your consumers at stake here; it’s your shareholders and, most importantly, your employees.

Bruce Springsteen said it well:

?“Getting an audience is hard. Sustaining an audience is hard. It demands a consistency of thought, of purpose, and of action over a long period of time.”

?Be consistent in this. Now, ON TO THE DEBATE…RESOLVED.

What’s your view?