The Conference Board’s survey of 300 US public and private companies and nonprofit organizations about their response to the recent US Supreme Court decisions on women’s reproductive rights (Dobbs case) and gun regulation (Bruen case) revealed fresh insights on whether, how, and why organizations take or decide not to take a public stance on controversial social issues.
- Of 13 enumerated social issues (as well as “Other” and “Unsure / not applicable” answer choices), only racial equality has prompted more than half of respondent organizations to take a public stance since the start of 2020. In contrast, for example, 21% of respondents, and 12% or respondents, indicated their organization had taken a public stance on women’s reproductive rights and gun safety, respectively.
- Just 10% of respondent organizations made a public statement (8%) or plan to make a public statement (2%) in response to the Dobbs decision, compared to more than half that addressed the decision internally (38%) or plan to do so (13%). Internal responses most commonly consist of (re)communicating existing healthcare benefits to employees and offering or planning to offer travel expense benefits to employees to obtain an abortion outside their state of residence. Nearly one-third of respondent organizations did not respond, and have no plans to respond, either publicly or internally.
- Only 4% of respondent organizations made or plan to make a public statement in response to the Bruen decision, and just 9% addressed the decision internally (6%) or plan to do so (3%). Nearly three-quarters (73%) of respondent organizations did not respond, and have no plans to respond, either publicly or internally.
- Following these Supreme Court decisions, a minority of respondent organizations have received pressure to respond to women’s reproductive rights and/or gun safety issues. For those that have, pressure is overwhelming being exerted by individual employees and employee resource groups as opposed to other types of stakeholders such as senior management, consumers, external advocacy groups, etc.
- Senior management and/or the CEO, often in consultation with Legal, HR, and Communications, are typically making the decisions about whether the organization should weigh in on these two issues, whereas less than one-quarter of organizations consulted with—or plan to consult with—their boards. The Conference Board suggests the executive team proactively seek the input of various stakeholders in the decision-making process and that, as respects board involvement, at a minimum, boards be informed in advance.
The #1 deciding factor organizations consider or considered in deciding whether and how to respond is the issue’s relation to the company’s core values.
See “Speak Up or Keep Quiet? In-House Lawyers Wrestle With Responses to Tough Social Issues” (Corporate Counsel) and our prior reports: “Mission/Values Alignment #1 Driver for CEO “Activism”; “CEO/Corporate Activism Governance: Society Members Speak!”; and “Whether & How to Engage on Political & Social Issues”; and additional resources here.
This post first appeared in the weekly Society Alert!