ReportUniversity of Notre Dame – Deloitte Center for Ethical Leadership

When and How to Respond to Controversial Topics in the Workplace

This guidance helps leaders decide when to engage—or refrain—from responding to controversial social and political issues at work. It offers a framework for assessing relevance, risk, and responsibility, emphasizing the importance of consistency, listening, and clarity to avoid internal polarization while maintaining trust and organizational cohesion. 

Notes on Related Topics

Employee Polarization or Activism (A) – Addresses internal division arising from controversial issues. 
Reputational Risks (A) – External and internal reactions can damage credibility

More Resources

Sort by type
201 – 220 of 371 results showing
VideoCorporate Political Responsibility Taskforce
Video Details
VideoCorporate Political Responsibility Taskforce
Video Details
VideoCorporate Political Responsibility Taskforce
Video Details
VideoCorporate Political Responsibility Taskforce
Video Details
VideoCorporate Political Responsibility Taskforce
Video Details
VideoCorporate Political Responsibility Taskforce
Video Details
VideoCorporate Political Responsibility Taskforce
Video Details
VideoCorporate Political Responsibility Taskforce
Video Details
VideoCorporate Political Responsibility Taskforce
Video Details
WebsiteCivic Alliance

Civic Alliance assembled a robust playbook for companies to more representatively support a strong democracy. The playbook includes concepts to support one’s business case, questions to ask oneself in building an action plan, and concrete steps to better engage employees, consumers, and other stakeholders.

View Details
ReportPolicyLink

This report argues that the private sector has an indispensable and influential role in achieving a future free of racial and economic inequality in the US. Outlines guidelines to help business leaders and stakeholders articulate the need for corporate priorities on equity.

View Details
VideoCorporate Political Responsibility Taskforce
Video Details
ArticleHarvard Business Review

Strine and Lund argue that political spending hurts shareholder interests because it increases risks, is not transparent, and correlates with lower financial performance. They make the case that companies should either end all spending, obtain shareholder consent, or limit expenditures to PACs (which are strictly voluntary and have mandated disclosure).

View Details
VideoCorporate Political Responsibility Taskforce
Video Details
VideoCorporate Political Responsibility Taskforce
Video Details
VideoCorporate Political Responsibility Taskforce
Video Details
VideoCorporate Political Responsibility Taskforce
Video Details
VideoCorporate Political Responsibility Taskforce
Video Details
VideoCorporate Political Responsibility Taskforce
Video Details
VideoCorporate Political Responsibility Taskforce
Video Details
Share.

Do you have a resource to recommend for The CPR Hub? Please reach out and we will review it for future updates!

Receive Updates from The CPR Hub

Learn about new tools, insights and events to help you consider how CPR can help your company, clients or members.

Stay in the loop.