In 2025, any organization that is concerned about its public image and positioning cannot help but feel a dizzying sense of being whipsawed. We are living through times of radical swings in public positioning.
In a sharply divisive environment, public-facing organizations often confront difficult decisions about whether to speak out and take a stand on a public issue. Here are five key questions to consider:
- How directly does the issue relate to our mission – is it mission-critical or optional?
- Do our internal or external audiences expect the organization to take a stand? Has the organization previously spoken out?
- How will either taking or not taking a position affect our employees and their morale?
- What consequences do we likely face if we take a stand – or stay silent?
- Are there larger political or social ramifications that we must consider?
Organizations may be tempted to follow the prevailing zeitgeist of the moment, but as history reminds us, the pendulum keeps swinging. Weighing all possibilities is essential before taking action.
Positioning Options
Organizations seek to protect their reputations as being steadfast and trustworthy as they advance their core business and missions both before and when fraught issues arise. There are three options for doing this:
Maintain consistent neutrality
Some organizations simply avoid statements or public stances on issues other than those that tie directly to the organization’s mission.
- Pros: Keeps organizations focused on their mission and avoids perceptions of stepping outside its expertise. It also avoids the risk of alienating people and the risk of having to backtrack and be inconsistent.
- Cons: Can make organizations appear tone-deaf to issues that matter greatly to their staff, members, clients or constituents.
Remaining silent even when an issue aligns closely with an organization’s mission can be a practical strategy to protect organizations’ bottom lines and reputations. But it also leaves a void that others may fill. For example, when the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine refrained from publicly opposing administration attacks on the nation’s scientific enterprise, many members independently banded together to issue a public letter proclaiming their collective position.
Take positions reflecting institutional values but avoid controversy
Some organizations create ongoing community outreach or charitable partnerships that demonstrate their values while they remain politically and socially neutral on national issues.
- Pros: Demonstrates consistent caring and commitment to the greater good without alienating people.
- Cons: May not satisfy various important constituencies who expect to hear more on issues that matter to them.
Respond to mission-relevant issues of the moment
Some organizations embrace the risk of standing up for issues that their members, clients, constituents and employees care deeply about.
- Pros: Earns trust and respect by demonstrating steadfast commitment to their constituents’ concerns.
- Cons: Invites pushback from critics who may retaliate; could alienate crucial stakeholders who may not share the same beliefs about emerging issues.
For some companies, taking a bold position has proved unsustainably costly, as Budweiser found after hiring a transgender influencer to promote its product. However, others such as Penzey’s Spices have capitalized on backlash to inspire broader brand awareness and deepen customer loyalty.
Taking a Stand
When organizations decide to take a stand during radically shifting periods, they need to exercise both agility and adaptability. Here are three factors to consider:
Frame the messaging
If an organization is going to speak out, it’s helpful for its leaders to first make sure they fully understand the potential for blowback.
- Consider the logic and arguments of opponents. This will help develop talking points to counteract criticism.
- Try to frame a position that speaks to a range of audiences. This may require multiple sets of talking points and materials with phrasing and graphics tailored to various groups.
- Prepare spokespeople to stay narrowly focused on the topic.
Determine the means and the messenger
- A formal position statement may be necessary to address a mission-critical issue.
- An even more proactive approach would be an open letter or commentary placement in a relevant outlet.
- Engage internal audiences first to ensure awareness and buy-in.
- Have top leaders convey mission-critical positions, thereby adding a human voice to the issue.
Monitor and adjust accordingly
Carefully tracking the reactions of various audiences will help organizations determine whether they need to clarify their public positioning and create additional materials to better explain their rationale.
Positioning is sometimes an imperative in meeting an organization’s mission — and thorough preparation is crucial to making sure that your words and actions truly manifest your organizational values.
