Should CEOs get involved in hot social issues?
Whichever side of the fence they sit, there are risks involved for high profile CEOs when they take a stance on a big public issue, warns issues specialist Tony Jaques
Is it helpful for high profile CEOs to personally align themselves with controversial issues which have no direct link to their business?
It’s a question which has just been thrown back into the public arena by an Australian Federal Cabinet Minister launching a shock attack on business leaders who came out in support of same-sex marriage.
In a letter to the Prime Minister two weeks ago, 34 business and community leaders argued that marriage equality is good for busineds, employees, customers and the country.
They claimed to be writing in their personal capacity, but the likes of Qantas CEO Alan Joyce still copped a spray from Immigration Minister Peter Dutton, who said companies should “stick to their knitting.”
Joyce: Copped a spray from Dutton
No, this is rampant narcissism. Now that these CEOs have infiltrated and exploited every possible avenue that their grotesque narcissism could permeate within and around their organisations, they seek new avenues to conquer.
They have a powerful tools at their disposal – shareholder funded advertising and PR budgets to boost their personal self esteem and ego, along with the thrust of identity politics which, propelled by mainstream media is metastasising before our eyes. The result is this awful moral posturing and virtue signalling. It is a truly repulsive spectacle, and these narcissists should be condemned for it.
AGREE ENTIRELY
I abhor small but vocal online groups that force brands to take sides.
Michael, what’s wrong with signalling to the market that you want to align yourself or your brand to certain causes? Funny how VB shouting their partnership with Legacy from the rooftops is never described as “virtue signalling” by… well, the type of people who use the term “virtue signalling”.
Corporations, and their various leaders are as much a part of the community as any individual, politician, church, union, individual etc etc and they should, if they wish comment on social issues.
Otherwise governments high-jack topics, and Minister Dutton’s response was OTT. The more we are all involved in the conversation the better.
Wrong, Michael.
People have a right to their beliefs and should not feel pressured to conform with the loudest, most hysterical sectors of the community.
These are not official corporate positions – just the personal views of their CEOs, who are (mis)using the power conferred by the profile of the logos they hide behind.
Sorry, Michael (my mistake) – It’s RODNEY that’s wrong …
Everyone can express their subjective feelings or opinion on this particular society changing Same- Sex marriage issue.So it is unacceptable for any decent and responsible Corporate company to jump onto the wagon so early when there are bad and worrying consequences slowly emerging from local and oversea in legalization of Same-sex marriage.There must be a open ,objective debate on this issue.Silent majority must allow to know the truth. We must stand for responsible free speech!
If CEOs want to get involved in social or political issues, that’s fine – but they should do so as INDIVIDUALS, rather than hiding behind their company logos.
It’s likely that most of them are just ‘look at me’ corporate narcissists jumping on the latest viral bandwagon and trying to show everyone how ‘in touch’ and ‘socially aware’ they are.
Disgraceful, self-indulgent – and a total misuse of their corporate positions in trying to bully others to conform to their world view.