Provokeglobal: Companies Need To Talk Differently About Woke Initiatives

(MENAFN- PRovoke) Coming toward the end of a year that has seen conservatives direct their wrath in the direction of“woke” corporations, it came as no surprise that the attacks on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) initiatives and diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs were a major part of the discussion at PRovokeGlobal, our annual Summit that took place in Washington, DC, last week.

More surprised, perhaps, was the vigorous defense of ESG and DEI initiatives presented by a series of senior communicators from a wide range of companies, all of whom continued to view sustainability as a business imperative-albeit one that needs to be presented differently to a polarized public.

The most strident criticism of companies that take positions on political and social issues came from former South Carolina governor and UN ambassador Nikki Haley, now vice chair of Edelman Global Advisors, who told attendees that when it comes to consumers,“You don't want to offend any of them. You don't want to go and risk any revenues with any of them. So the best thing is to talk about your products... don't talk about any labels or anything else.”

Meanwhile, Michael Maslansky (pictured), CEO of language strategy firm Maslansky + Partners, discussed the problematic language of DEI and ESG (““People focused on DEI have come up with a language only they understand. Use language everybody understands, and people will feel more included”) but insisted that whatever the outcome of the election companies would need to maintain their commitment to environmental responsibility.

And while ESG has taken on a negative connotation, Maslansky said,
the term“responsibility” resonates quite broadly. Data suggests that progressives think the term responsibility is progressive, conservatives think it's conservative, and moderates think it's moderate:“There's much less moral connotation with the words 'responsible' and 'responsibility,' than with many other terms.”

Maslansky's criticism aligned with a subtext of several other sessions, was that American companies had erred by presenting their investment in ESG and DEI as motivated by conscience rather than pragmatism: the former suggested that companies were taking sides in a political controversy; the latter emphasizes the business necessity of increasing the talent pool and planning for a sustainable future.

This was the key takeaway from a session featuring Daniela Foster , senior vice president and global head of public affairs, market access, and sustainability for Bayer's consumer health division, who acknowledged the political intensity around ESG but said:““If you really look at and what ESG has been used for, it's really a reporting mechanism. Environmental, social, governance. It's reporting some of the good fundamentals that as a company you should have.”

The political controversy notwithstanding,“Sustainability is the future of business, period. If you want to be a company that's gonna be around for the next 20, 40, 60 years, you have to be thinking about how to use the resources that are most material to your business, to your industry in a more sustainable way.”

To justify their commitment, she said, companies need to emphasize the material impact of their sustainability initiatives.“I can sit through today and tell you, for example, that our sustainability goals around consumer health also contribute 12% of our annual revenue,” she told the audience.

On the same panel Piper Overstreet White, senior vice president of government and community relations for the NFL's Las Vegas Raiders,
discussed the community outreach and involvement work the organization has undertaken to gain acceptance after relocating from California to Nevada. Discussing the Raiders' Social Impact report, she said:
“It really helps bridge the gap between a team that was at one point viewed as a transfer from California to really be part of the fabric of the community.”

In other words, behaving responsibly-whether by considering the environmental and social impacts of company decisions of investing in local communities-can still provide significant benefits. But such actions need to be described in language that makes them relevant and palatable to all stakeholders.

MENAFN06112024000219011063ID1108857194