Being Tough Is Easier with a Parachute: Is It Always Good for Companies to Take a Stand?

Helena Uhl

Last month, fellow blogger Kimberly Ho introduced you to the idea that in the age of social media, political conflict is everywhere and companies should embrace this conflict rather than avoid it.

Social media is rife with political conflict/Pixabay

Using research by Ciszek and Logan, she argues that instead of creating a dialogue based on consensus, companies should employ agonistic PR strategies. These strategies place companies in situations where they can publicly fight for social change.

To do this, companies need to take a clear stance on socio-political issues, engaging in what researchers would call Corporate Political Advocacy (CPA).

To be or not to be [political]

This is a bold statement in an age where companies who make a false move can upset up to 3.5 billion social media users in a matter of hours.

The fact of the matter is that although some companies got punished for not taking a stand and others were successful with the political stand they took, there are also companies who crashed and burned when they got political.

What can go wrong?

Pepsi’s ad, featuring Kendall Jenner, is perhaps the most infamous example. In an attempt to promote unity, PepsiCo released a video showing scenes from a generic protest with no real cause.

PepsiCo's Controversial ad/Youtube (Yash Yadav)

Its inauthenticity and callous appropriation of protest scenes from the Black Lives Matter movement angered its stakeholders and Pepsi’s brand perception fell to its lowest level in 10 years.

Audi didn’t fare much better when they tried to take a stance on gender equality. Their video of a father being upset by the challenges his daughter will face in a man’s world had an unintended effect. 

Audi's Superbowl ad/Youtube (Kiss my Ads)

People started to discuss the lack of female board members at the company, questioning Audi’s commitment to their political statement.

So is it better to do nothing at all?

This is the point where you may ask yourself: how can I as a PR professional advise my company to take on a political cause when it can lead to such controversy? Although it is definitely a risk, there are things to consider before giving up on CPA.

Ihlen and Levenshus point out that risk is an essential part of any dialogue. They argue that in order to engage in proper dialogue, companies need to interact with stakeholders on their own terms and question their own perspectives, ideas, meanings. This means giving up control and accepting risk, which can be very hard for most companies and PR professionals.

Social media calls to boycott Walmart/Twitter (Coopmike48)

Also as Kimberly previously explained not taking a stance can be just as controversial. After a shooting in a Walmart in El Paso, its customers launched the hashtag #BoycottWalmart when the company didn’t immediately take a stance on gun control.

Last but not least Ihlen and Verhoeven found that within the PR profession the idea of having responsibility for others and society is gaining in importance.

At this point, you may feel that you’re caught between a rock and a hard place, but the good news is Wettstein and Baur have done some research into when CPA is most successful.

Three tips to practice CPA without becoming a pariah

1. Keep your company’s values in mind

Make sure that whatever political stance you take matches the core values of your company. This may require sitting down with upper management and figuring out what they are, but trust me it’s worth it.

2. Commitment is key

No one will take your CPA seriously if you only pick issues based on what is currently trending on social media. Whether you like it or not, there needs to be evidence of a longer-term strategy that is linked to the support of this specific cause.

3. Actions speak louder than words

Empty words won’t get you anywhere. Any political stance that you take will need to be backed up by concrete actions. A company’s culture, character and actions should align with what was said. The lack of women on Audi’s board was evidence of this, the culture at Audi didn’t match their political stance.

We accept ad/Youtube (Airbnb)

Patagonia, Airbnb and others have proven that these steps work. But there is also hope for those that get it wrong.

Hydock, Paharia and Weber argue that although customers often claim they will be socially responsible, this is rarely reflected in their actions. So even if customers don’t agree with a company’s political stance and say they will boycott their products, they might still find a way to justify buying them.

But to be safe never jump into CPA, without your parachute of consistency, plausibility, and authenticity.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

About the author: Helena Uhl is a Communication Science student at the University of Amsterdam. She previously studied journalism in London and is currently working on her thesis about the political effects of fictional media. Lately, she has developed an interest in Corporate Social Responsibility and all that comes with it.