Showcase

A Gallup-Bentley University survey shows that only 38% of U.S. adults believe businesses should take public stances on current events, a decline from 48% the previous year, reflecting a broader trend toward preferring corporate neutrality in political matters. 

As investors increasingly focus on systemic risks, few risks are as consequential as the weakening of democratic institutions and the rule of law -- or today’s once-in-a-generation operational and strategic challenges from AI, an increasingly chaotic political environment, and more.  Yet, as an investor, it can be difficult to translate these systemic risks into concrete actions. Focusing on public affairs governance – how companies make decisions about whether and when to engage in the public sphere, can be one helpful lens.

This new tool from Third Side Strategies helps investors to ask sharper questions—of companies and of themselves. It introduces the concept of CPR Governance (a set of best practices for whether and when to engage in the public sphere) which helps investors in two ways: (i) prompting companies to think more concretely about their public affairs practices and strengthen any areas of weakness highlighted by the questions, and (ii) providing investors the information needed to more effectively manage this systemic risk across their portfolio.

This survey reveals that while Americans expect businesses to take a stand on important social issues, they want them to steer clear of political involvement. Respondents call on companies to focus on finding shared values and solutions, rather than engaging in partisan debates. 

This report addresses the impact of increased political polarization and decreased trust in government, which has resulted in policy differences that affect long-term business planning. To take initiative, companies should rethink their approach to PAC giving and lobbying to support bipartisanship, systemic change, and a positive social impact. 

This note acknowledges the increased pressure on business to engage in politics and counsels corporate restraint.

This report reveals that since 2010, U.S. corporations and trade associations have contributed over $1 billion—more than 40% of total funds—to six influential "527" political organizations, significantly impacting state-level elections and policies, often in ways that conflict with their publicly stated values and pose reputational risks. 

This report explores the financial impacts of growing political instability in the U.S., emphasizing how shifts in policy and governance affect corporate decision-making, risk assessment, and long-term value. It outlines the importance of aligning business strategies with evolving political landscapes to protect financial interests. 

This paper warns that companies risk backlash when engaging in political debates beyond their core business. It argues for an explicit commitment to “non-posturing” —which requires focusing on transparency, stakeholder alignment, and voluntary initiatives instead of symbolic activism or reactive statements. 

This report details the increasing complexity of reputational risks in today’s business environment, highlighting how political, societal, and environmental issues are challenging corporate reputations. It emphasizes the need for boards to adopt adaptive governance strategies and stay ahead of public and regulatory pressures to avoid brand damage. 

Summarizes five key threats based on The Conference Board’s C-Suite Outlook 2025 report, including international rivalries, global political instability, trade disruption, rising nationalism and political polarization in the workplace. Recommends assessing risk and governance, leveraging innovation and digital transformation, and strengthening cybersecurity. 

A robust overview of current legal landscape for corporate political activity. It highlights the reputational and other risks companies need to manage, and the need for oversight and transparency to govern political spending.

This research paper provides data that shows the costs to companies of deciding not to speak up on certain issues and the negative stakeholder response to such decisions. The researchers theorize whether and when consumers will negatively respond to corporate silence on a social issue based on the visibility of silence. 

This article examines how current economic and political upheavals reflect an ongoing misalignment between business and economies and acceptable societal outcomes. Encourages re-examination of long-held assumptions. 

This article discusses how businesses can thrive by achieving a net positive impact on people and the planet, and avoiding achieving returns by creating problems for people and planet. Calls on businesses to recognize that investing in healthy systems -- economic, civic and natural -- is the key to his positive impact. 

Drawing on insights from over 500 directors, NACD highlights five governance dilemmas boards must navigate in 2025—including balancing innovation with risk, long-term strategy with short-term pressures, and engagement vs neutrality on social issues. It also addresses the debate over prioritizing subject-matter expertise versus leadership experience in director recruitment. 

This guide provides a good overview of how the current environment developed for companies and some tips that business leaders can use to navigate through the conflicting pressures.

This article presents a framework leaders can use to better focus their sustainability strategies. It consists of four lenses: the business value lens (What affects our bottom line?), the stakeholder influence lens (What are people trying to tell us?), the science and technology lens (What does the data tell us about our impact and future?), and the purpose lens (What do we stand for?). The framework is intended to help leaders balance external pressures with internal priorities and objective data with stakeholder perceptions. 

This article summarizes the rationale for corporate political responsibility and explains the four Erb Principles, which are an actionable, non-partisan template that companies can use to decide whether and how to engage in political influence.  

Addresses the increasing role that political turbulence is having on corporations’ ability to accomplish strategic objectives and tips for navigating external political uncertainty.  

This article introduces the concept of “net positive advocacy,” which involves working with partners to advocate for policy that supports systemic solutions and net positive outcomes for all competitors. This requires courage and a shift in mindset, but actually helps de-risk both sustainable business strategies AND political interactions for companies. Their Readiness Test tool provides a useful conversation starter about the change in mindset required. 

This article advocates for and examines the role of managers in weighing corporate political responsibility with traditional shareholder primacy when lobbying. Builds a strong case and suggests that companies consider whether the public is informed or has the necessary expertise.

Based on the fact that the assumption that business and politics can and even should be kept separate is no longer realistic, the authors outline steps that effective leaders should take to ensure strategic decisions in the space, which include: (1) develop robust principles to guide strategic choices; (2) address ethical issues early; (3) consistently communicate and implement their choices; (4) engage with and beyond the industry to shape the context; and (5) learn from mistakes to make better choices in the future.

Outlines a structured framework for CEOs to disclose 3–5 year strategic plans—financial and non-financial—to long-term investors, helping align sustainability, purpose, and market-facing strategy while demonstrating material impact on stock performance and investor confidence.

In a major refresh of its Vision 2050, the World Business Council for Sustainable Development argues that the decade ahead is critical if we are to achieve “9+ billion people living well within planetary boundaries.” They highlight the need to shift political and economic incentives that push companies into short-term behaviors that undermine societal or environmental systems, and propose a new CPR-driven mindset where firms align all policy influence activities to purpose statements and sustainability goals, partner to generate new policy ideas and help ensure relevant stakeholders are at the table.

Investors showed clear market interest in long-term plans—particularly those with specific, forward-looking disclosures on strategy, trends, and financials—while vague or missing information on governance and ESG weakened impact, highlighting the need for more accountable, investor-relevant corporate communication to counter short-term market focus.

Dominic Barton, Mark Wiseman, Laurence Fink, Richard Edelman, Henry M. Paulson Jr., Lynn Forester de Rothschild, Nicholas Carr, Nitin Nohria, Paul Polman, Whitney MacMillan, Greg Page, Chanda Kochhar, Kathleen McLaughlin, Doug McMillon, Adrian Orr, John D. Rogers, Lim Chow Kiat, Euan Munro, Charles Tilley, Lei Zhang, Michael Sabia, James P. Gorman, David Walker, Angel Gurría, Ronald P. O’Hanley, Donald Kaberuka, Julie Hembrock Daum, Edward Speed, Angelien Kemna

This report compiles insights from CEOs, investors, and regulators emphasizing how quarterly earnings pressure and misaligned incentives restrict long-term strategic thinking, and it proposes governance reforms to realign business purpose with sustainable, multi-stakeholder value creation.

This paper reflects on Friedman’s famous claim that American business should solely be driven to increase profits. Oxford Professor Karthik Ramanna homes in on the qualifying clause of Friedman’s argument—that markets need non-market institutions to safeguard the conditions for competition—and that if corporations have influence in shaping the market, then it is not free. The report argues that corporate influence on the political landscape has tilted in their favor, often at the expense of the public sphere.

This report examines current legal frameworks for institutional investors in 11 countries, including the EU, UK, US, Canada, Japan, and Australia and how they link financial returns with sustainability. It finds that in many cases, investors are legally required to consider sustainability if it aligns with financial goals. The report also recommends policy changes to clarify fiduciary duties and make it easier for investors to prioritize sustainability by fostering clearer guidelines and collaboration 

Researchers describe the “double legitimacy” problem. American workers need to invest portions of their income into mutual funds to have economic security, thus becoming Worker Investors. Corporations are unconstrained and can dip into these funds to support their political spending. This paper outlines the Big 4’s political power in resolving the double legitimacy problem, and how their refusal is supporting policies that go against the Worker Investor.

PRI sets out to create the case for investors to encourage responsible corporate political engagement. PRI shares precedent-setting principles followed by detailing the risks faced from irresponsible political engagement practices (e.g. the revolving door), which burden companies, investors, and society alike.

The authors argue that withholding corporate political spending from investors increases reputational and legal risks. They contend that transparency allows investors to make informed decisions, aligning their investments with their values and minimizing potential risks. 

This report highlights the strong investor demand for transparency in political spending, with lobbying transparency proposals receiving 31% median support in 2024, highlighting pressure for corporate accountability post-Citizens United. 

Surveys of a national sample of investors revealed that 87% believe companies should adopt a code of conduct for political spending. Additionally, 91% support measures to ensure that political contributions are lawful and consistent with the company’s public policies and objectives.  

This article argues that Modern Portfolio Theory falls short in today’s interconnected and complex risk landscape, calling for “system-level investing” that integrates social, environmental, and economic factors to boost long-term resilience and sustainability.

Suggests that a company’s political activities may have more impact on social and environmental sustainability than operations, and argues that corporate political responsibility requires transparency, accountability, and responsibility.

An overview of the need for CPR and how the Erb Institute’s Corporate Political Responsibility Taskforce supports companies in aligning their approaches to political influence with their commitments to purpose, values, sustainability and stakeholders, while contributing to rebuilding trust in US civic institutions. 

This article outlines a new approach to corporate political engagement that builds on human rights frameworks to help combat corporate short-termism and enable companies to align their political engagement with longer-term priorities. The article outlines specific action steps that companies can use to align their political engagement with longer-term environmental, institutional stability, and human rights considerations.

This report outlines how corporate greenwashing tactics have become more sophisticated, shifting from exaggerated claims to subtler misrepresentations and legal obfuscation. It highlights emerging regulatory gaps, critiques industry self-regulation, and calls for more robust public accountability frameworks to ensure environmental claims align with actual business practices. 
 

This framework is developed through a multi-stakeholder process and designed to gauge company progress against the UN Sustainable Development Goals. It provides succinct definitions for various core social indicators (CSIs), as well as a rubric to gauge company performance regarding these indicators. CSI 18 is their standard for responsible lobbying and political engagement, drawing from the Transparency International principles.

This report reviews how 17 jurisdictions regulate corporate political engagement, highlighting gaps in transparency, oversight, and accountability. It calls for stronger governance and investor involvement to prevent undue influence.

This report demonstrates that countries investing in stable, healthy systems and norms—such as resilient institutions, inclusive economies, and social trust—are more likely to flourish, while those that don’t face increased risk of future violent conflict.

Developed with Erb Institute’s Corporate Political Responsibility Taskforce, in consultation with academics and over 40 stakeholder groups from across the political spectrum, the Erb Principles for CPR offer a thought process for non-partisan, defensible decisions in turbulent times.  The principles of legitimacy, accountability, responsibility, and transparency provide actionable and non-partisan approach to weighing when, how and why to engage in political affairs, to manage risk and advance long-term value creation for business and society. 

This CPR Decision Tool and Executive Conversation Guide is part of a suite of tools and resources that make it easier for companies to take a principled and responsible approach to a specific public affairs decision. Specifically, it is meant to help them apply the Erb Principles for CPR to weigh whether and how to engage in a specific political scenario.

Provides a five-principle framework for responsible lobbying. Helpful for companies trying to orient themselves on their value/stance development in their corporate political activities as actions in the space come under increased scrutiny. 

This article emphasizes the importance of board oversight in managing corporate political engagement and CEO activism, stressing the need for clear policies to mitigate risks and align political actions with overall business strategy. It highlights growing shareholder expectations for accountability and the potential reputational and financial impacts of CEO public statements. 

This toolkit helps companies adopt practical transformational governance steps aligned with SDG 16 principles of peace, justice, and strong institutions. It includes a self-assessment tool to identify governance gaps, offers actionable recommendations, and focuses on board leadership, responsible lobbying, and sustainable investment strategies, enabling companies to improve transparency, reduce risks, and drive long-term societal impact. 

Provides investors with a structured approach to responsible investment, considering investment beliefs, stewardship, fiduciary duty, governance roles, and public disclosure.

The Good Lobby Tracker assesses the major corporate political responsibility initiatives, from sustainability frameworks to ESG ratings, to enhance their transparency, accountability and action-ability. It is designed to help business practitioners, investors, civil society advocates, regulators and other stakeholders select the best methods and standards when assessing the corporate political footprint of companies. 

The CPA-Zicklin Framework provides suggested key practices that companies can adopt to help manage the risks associated with election-related political spending.

The CPA-Zicklin Framework for Corporate Political Spending was developed to help companies manage the risks associated with election-related spending. The Framework provides twelve provisions that companies can implement to help better engage in and manage election-related spending.  

In partnership with Chronos Sustainability, this article reflects a survey about (i) how investors identify and assess political engagement activities; (ii) how investors integrate political engagement into their stewardship activities; and (iii) challenges to engaging on responsible political engagement with investees.

This framework sets new B Corp certification requirements for responsible lobbying and public policy engagement, including public disclosure of lobbying activities and country-by-country tax reporting. It also mandates that companies engage in at least two collective actions that support social and environmental goals, enhancing transparency and accountability in government affairs as part of fulfilling a beneficial purpose. 

This paper examines how the intersection of corporate governance and political engagement is reshaping business strategies and societal impact. It explores how factors like ESG investing, corporate activism, and political changes are pushing businesses into social issues, complicating the roles of shareholders vs. stakeholders, and blurring the lines between private and public power. The author offers new models for businesses and policymakers to navigate these evolving dynamics. 

This article summarizes the rationale for corporate political responsibility and explains the four Erb Principles, which are an actionable, non-partisan template that companies can use to decide whether and how to engage in political influence.  

The article maps out a non-partisan, principled conception of good corporate citizenship drawing on shared assumptions of the right and the left about the place of corporations in our society and the realities of corporate governance. That conception concentrates on how corporations’ own conduct affects the best interests of their stockholders, workers, communities of operation, consumers, taxpayers, and the environment. 

This article explores the need for companies to think about political responsibility, not just social responsibility.

Amid rising political backlash, most companies are recalibrating—not abandoning—their ESG and DEI agendas. This piece highlights a shift toward quieter, stakeholder-focused strategies rooted in authenticity, measurable impact, and alignment with business goals. It notes how terms like “ESG” are being replaced with less politicized language, and how scenario planning and coalition-building are helping leaders navigate polarized environments without losing credibility.

As a company’s engagement in social and political issues becomes increasingly fraught, this article lays out decision-making principles companies can use to determine whether and when to engage in social and political issues.

In this article the authors highlight how the Erb Principles for Corporate Political Responsibility identify common ground between the debate about shareholder value versus stakeholder considerations, and offer a roadmap for more responsible participation by businesses in our political system. 

Considers three critical questions companies must ask themselves when deciding to speak out or take a stance on an issue. Assessment is oriented around alignment, potential influence, and constituency agreement.

Lays out core principles—transparency, integrity, accountability, and effectiveness—with practical examples to help professionals and organizations engage in ethical and responsible lobbying. 

Outlines a framework to help companies determine how to engage with social issues and an appropriate level of engagement—ranging from supporter to champion—describing the key to an effective engagement plan that integrates functional silos, all bolstered by compelling case studies.

This report from the New America Foundation’s political reform program advocates for a voluntary public database that tracks the political positions and papers of advocacy groups, making it easier to track who is advocating for what when it comes to critical policy debates, demystifying the lobbying process. 

This playbook sets out practical guidance for companies on how to optimise their indirect “policy footprint”. It covers how to assess and improve associations' alignment and impact, by clarifying their strategic policy priorities, evaluating where to invest in important trade association relationships, and engaging those associations constructively and effectively. 

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).

Provides a framework for boards to manage the reputational, legal, and financial risks of political spending, including misalignment with public commitments, shareholder backlash, and regulatory scrutiny. Emphasizes the need for transparency and alignment with a company’s stated objectives and strategic goals. 

This post summarizes the Center for Political Accountability’s Guide to Corporate Political Spending, which provides best practices for implementing the CPA-Zicklin Model Code. The Model Code identifies a company’s broader societal and democracy obligations and responsibilities that should govern its political spending decisions. This new Guide spells out what concrete steps and actions management should follow as it makes spending decisions and evaluates the accompanying risks. 

This toolkit helps B Corps and values-driven companies turn their mission into action through clear steps for engaging in policy advocacy—offering templates, case studies, and guidance on building coalitions, crafting messages, and showing up credibly in the public arena.

The Civic Alliance is a nonpartisan coalition of more than 1,300 businesses united by a commitment to a thriving democracy, which they believe depends upon active participation in safe, accessible, and trusted elections.

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.

Outlines steps for companies to implement non-partisan time-off policies for voting, covering legal compliance, leadership support, clear policy creation, and promoting civic engagement through flexible schedules.

This guide provides concrete ways that companies can integrate civic activities into its talent management and other processes.

Explores the history, emotion, and power of effective argumentation to promote more constructive debates and mutual learning in America. Shares key principles, including removing the focus on winning, prioritizing relationships and engaged listening, considering context, embracing vulnerability, and creating space for transformation. 

This playbook offers HR professionals guidance on managing political discussions at work, providing strategies to ensure civil dialogue, resolve conflicts, and maintain a respectful, productive environment. It includes practical tips and real-world examples for handling political topics in diverse workplaces. 

The authors believe it is imperative to stay in the conversation about changes to the business environment because of this new administration, but we need to move on from “Making the Problem Too Big”, “Ignoring Popular Sentiment”, “Failing to Find Common Ground”, “Not Telling Your Story”,  and “Talking About All the Good You’re Doing in the World.”

This report engages more deeply with global stakeholder expectations for lobbying disclosure, detailing calls for transparency not only on spending but also on lobbying positions, trade association memberships, and alignment with sustainability goals. It argues that voluntary disclosures remain inconsistent and insufficient, and recommends standardized reporting frameworks to strengthen trust, accountability, and policy coherence. 

This report recognizes that the stakeholder environment has shifted for many companies to encompass a broader range of stakeholders, and provides thoughts on how companies can take a truly long-term view of stakeholder interests.

Summary of voluntary standard on reporting public policy management approach, including political contribution disclosures as is certified by the Global Reporting Initiative.

 A core set of 21 metrics created by the WEF, in partnership with a handful of multinational companies, to best align with the political, social and environmental considerations necessary for implementing stakeholder capitalism. 

This article draws on the Erb Principles for Corporate Political Responsibility to guide companies in navgating social outrage—urging them to ground advocacy in core values, engage employees early to build legitimacy, and embed ethical deliberation into everyday operations rather than issuing reactive or superficial statements.

This HBR collection offers practical guidance on how companies can engage with social and political issues at work, from CEO activism to employee dialogue, and includes a piece by Ed Dolan that highlights the Erb Principles as a framework for responsible corporate political engagement.

Presents a framework for when companies should present forceful or tempered political positions based on their publicly stated values and materiality.

Named one of the best businesss books of 2024 by the Financial Times, this book outlines how businesses can more effectively navigate a new ethical landscape.

This piece explores how companies can maintain ethical business practices as geopolitical tensions and authoritarianism erode global consensus on anti-corruption and rule of law. The authors argue that compliance systems alone are insufficient and call for stronger values-driven leadership, cross-border ethical alignment, and proactive stakeholder engagement to navigate growing political and moral complexity. 

A far-reaching account of how intractable conflicts can be transformed, and the mindset that enables breakthroughs. Outlines specific approaches from conflict resolutin and peace-building, including how to leverage a "third side."

With his background as a former business executive leading companies such as e-Scholastic, the Proactiv Company and Guthy-Renker, Seth Radwell provides both historical context for the political division in the U.S., and a detailed plan on steps we can take to depolarize society. 

This article is a summary of a conversation hosted by Democratic Innovations at Yale's ISPS.  Led by ISPS Director Alan Gerber and ISPS faculty fellows and political science professors Hélène Landemore and Adam Meirowitz, Democratic Innovations serves as a laboratory to identify and test new ideas for improving the quality of democratic representation and governance. It recaps insihgts from the conversation hosted by Landemore and Theophile Penigaud de Mourgues, a postdoctoral associate with Democratic Innovations, and Jonathan Moskovic, advisor in democratic innovation for the president of the French-speaking Brussels Parliament.

Explores how citizens' assemblies—randomly selected groups with active facilitation deliberating on policy—could improve U.S. democratic decision-making, improve trust and reduce polarization. Shares a successful initiative in Oregon to address youth homelessness.

This executive presentation supports business leaders:

1. Understand the current threats to U.S. democratic institutions and their implications for business.
2. Analyze how political instability and the erosion of democratic values can directly affect your business environment.
3. Learn actionable steps that business leaders can implement to mitigate political risks and support the stability of U.S. democracy.

This report demonstrates that countries investing in stable, healthy systems and norms—such as resilient institutions, inclusive economies, and social trust—are more likely to flourish, while those that don’t face increased risk of future violent conflict.

This paper provides a deep and detailed examination of how economies and businesses fare under leaders who purport to be both pro-business and populist. With the increase in the number of populist leaders throughout the world, this question has become increasingly pressing. 

Using the exodus of companies from Russia due to the war against Ukraine, Bennett argues that, with influential economic power worldwide, multinational companies should consider a new geopolitical corporate responsibility to help support international rules-based order when it is under stress or faces challenges. He explains that this order defines the international community in which nations should respect individual sovereignty and obey the law. 

This article outlines how businesses can manage modern political risks, which now stem from a broader range of sources, including social media, local officials, and cybercriminals. It emphasizes four core competencies—understanding, analyzing, mitigating risks, and responding to crises—and provides practical questions and case studies to help companies strengthen their ability to handle political disruptions.

This paper reviews how globalization, technology, and financialization have served to decouple business prosperity from social prosperity.  The paper also explores how there can be a "recoupling" of business and social prosperity and move from shareholder maximization to a broader view of stakeholder interests.

This report argues free enterprise supports both individual prosperity and societal well-being, advocating for competitive markets over government intervention to ensure long-term economic growth.

This article argues that corporate governance need to take account of a company's political responsibility and that the Erb Principles provide a helpful framework for doing so. 

Highlights key factors required to refocus capitalism on long-term inclusive growth, including specific practices and policies that businesses should support. (See pg 5-13)

While this report more broadly assesses America’s competitiveness, Chapter 3: The Role of Business in Politics Today and Tomorrow, identifies the role of business in political gridlock, and suggests potential solutions. (See pg 28-36)

Deep analysis of how to incorporate CPR into financial institutions, with a benchmarking proposal to drive successful market signaling initiatives. (See pg 3-20)

In a major refresh of its Vision 2050, the World Business Council for Sustainable Development argues that the decade ahead is critical if we are to achieve “9+ billion people living well within planetary boundaries.” They highlight the need to shift political and economic incentives that push companies into short-term behaviors that undermine societal or environmental systems, and propose a new CPR-driven mindset where firms align all policy influence activities to purpose statements and sustainability goals, partner to generate new policy ideas and help ensure relevant stakeholders are at the table.

This article outlines how crony capitalism distorts the market, violates the principles of free markets, and risks value creation for all, as reflected in the Heritage Foundation's Index of Economic Freedom.

This chapter introduces a “market failures” approach to business ethics, arguing that while profit is a core obligation, businesses also have a duty to avoid exploiting legal or structural gaps in the market in order to preserve trust, fair competition, and long-term legitimacy.

This guide outlines nine clear pathways—like net-zero emissions, circular economy, and inclusive societies—across key sectors including energy, mobility, food, and manufacturing, providing businesses a strategic roadmap to embed sustainability in governance and operations for a thriving 2050 within planetary limits.

The book opens by establishing the minimum expectation that businesses support the right rules of the game—those rewarding long-term value creation rather than destruction—and shows how companies can live their values through cross-sector collaboration, eco-efficiency, and strategies advancing prosperity, planet, and people, supported by real-world cases.

This guide offers companies a research-backed climate communication strategy that emphasizes materiality over morality—framing climate action as a business necessity, not just ethical responsibility. Drawing on extensive surveys and focus groups from the US and abroad, it outlines how to connect with skeptical audiences by stressing the concrete, economic benefits of climate initiatives. 

As companies face increased pressure to advocate publicly for robust climate policies, this WRI report outlines three internal and four external barriers, including org charts and quarterly reports as well as trade associations and political winds, that present the biggest hurdles to implementation, and suggests ways to overcome them.

Recognizing that the right policies enable companies to meet climate targets, this Framework introduces a structure that companies can use to ensure their advocacy efforts align with their climate priorities. 

Bain's thoughts on how CEO's can best navigate the current environment to achieve sustainability goals. 

Conducting corporate climate policy engagement positively and appropriately is critical to creating the conditions that will enable a company to achieve its net zero transition.  This briefing, produced by the Climate Governance Initiative in collaboration with the global think tank InfluenceMap, highlights the key issues that board directors should be aware of.  

This framework guides companies to align lobbying with climate goals, focusing on transparent reporting, board oversight, and annual reviews to support efforts to limit global temperature rise to 1.5°C.

Offers concrete recommendations on how companies can establish systems that address climate change as a systemic risk and integrate this understanding into their direct and indirect x on climate policies.

This action plan outlines 10 clear steps for how insurers can lead on climate, setting it apart by emphasizing science-based targets, underwriting reform, and equitable resilience. It combines strategic, operational, and policy actions to help insurers align with net-zero goals while supporting vulnerable communities and driving systemic change.

Recognizing that climate-related risks are complicated, this brief disaggregates climate risks into three categories (planetary, economic, and financial) to then map those risks to which stakeholders are best positioned to address them. The article explains the importance of this disaggregation to facilitate intended outcomes and avoid unintended consequence. 

This framework assists companies in reporting both direct and indirect climate policy engagements aligning advocacy with science-based targets and the Paris Agreement. It provides a structured format for reporting to stakeholders—like investors, NGOs, and regulators—clarifying the company’s role in influencing climate policy and improving accountability. 

This 60-page report elaborates on the “how” of engaging in meaningful climate policy engagement. Illustrative examples spanning the globe are grounded by five core elements of responsible policy engagement and three key actions to put said elements into practice. 

Urges corporate leaders to stay the course on climate action, integrating sustainability into core governance and fiduciary duties. Strine offers a critique of anti-ESG backlash as inconsistent with capitalism and argues that long-term climate leadership protects workers, investors, and the economy.

This framework is a comprehensive guide for institutions to justly transition to net-zero emissions, including four core pillars and 20 building blocks that provide practical examples for implementation, with alignment to just transition assessment methodologies.

Ex ante regulation modeled on the FDA enhances public safety by rigorously assessing AI systems before deployment to prevent harm, while providing industry with clear, consistent standards that build consumer trust, reduce costly post-release failures, and foster sustainable innovation.

This policy brief outlines the challenges of AI implementation and dissemination through various sectors of society, and provides policy recommendations for how to protect privacy, safety and ethics as AI adoption grows.

Summarizes five key threats based on The Conference Board’s C-Suite Outlook 2025 report, including international rivalries, global political instability, trade disruption, rising nationalism and political polarization in the workplace. Recommends assessing risk and governance, leveraging innovation and digital transformation, and strengthening cybersecurity. 

Drawing on insights from over 500 directors, NACD highlights five governance dilemmas boards must navigate in 2025—including balancing innovation with risk, long-term strategy with short-term pressures, and engagement vs neutrality on social issues. It also addresses the debate over prioritizing subject-matter expertise versus leadership experience in director recruitment. 

The EU’s new AI Act—the world’s first legal framework for artificial intelligence requires companies to treat AI as a real risk, with rules around labeling AI content, ensuring human oversight, protecting data, and monitoring system performance. With steep penalties for noncompliance and similar U.S. guidance emerging, the piece urges boards and leaders to bring AI under the umbrella of existing risk, ethics, and governance frameworks—treating it not as a tech issue, but as a core part of responsible corporate strategy.

The White House AI portal lays out a a multi-pronged national strategy to boost U.S. leadership in AI by investing in research, encouraging adoption across industries, and preparing the workforce for AI-driven changes. It highlights a commitment to developing AI responsibly by setting ethical guidelines, ensuring transparency and privacy, and fostering cooperation across government agencies to address risks and build public trust.

This publication frames AI safety as a critical global public good, highlighting challenges in balancing innovation with robust safety measures, ensuring international cooperation, and promoting equity so AI benefits align with sustainable development goals. It calls for clear accountability alongside shared responsibility through collaborative governance to manage AI risks worldwide

This deep-dive paper is a collaboration between Earth4All, the Predistribution Initiative (PDI), Beyond Bretton Woods (BBW), and Africa Investor (Ai) and focuses on the role that capital markets investors can play in building a more regenerative and inclusive economy that supports the long-term wellbeing of people and nature. Building on the 2022 report to The Club of Rome, Earth for All: A Survival Guide for Humanity, this paper provides concrete proposals for how institutional investors can support systemic change.

A guide to how responsive politics, productive markets, and supportive communities are key to rebuilding American capitalism.

The authors of this report argue that regulatory capture, specifically in finance, health care and housing sectors, has created extensive roadblocks to achieving inclusive prosperity and advocate for a more dynamic high road economy built around equitable access to high quality services. (See pg 1-11)

Contrasts common-good capitalism with the modern shareholder-dominated economy. Advocates for restoring balance by prioritizing worker benefits and economic fairness. Analyzes how large corporations have become beholden to shareholder and bank demands, reducing innovation and limiting financial opportunity for other stakeholders. 

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.

This report goes beyond diversity and inclusion to outline how a business's actions, products and services, have influence within the company, within the community, and more broadly in society. The report provides concrete recommendations for companies.

This playbook offers HR professionals guidance on managing political discussions at work, providing strategies to ensure civil dialogue, resolve conflicts, and maintain a respectful, productive environment. It includes practical tips and real-world examples for handling political topics in diverse workplaces. 

BSR’s report (71 pages in full, 9-page summary linked here) focuses on creating a new social contract in business, focused on ample collaboration between public and private entities, so that we can face future challenges at scale. This review highlights the opportunity areas specifically for businesses.

Widely accepted multi-sector framework outlining expectations for companies to evaluate and disclose their commitment to human rights, identify salient issues, identifying processes for responding to claims, conducting due diligence and identifying strategies to prevent, mitigate or remediate adverse impacts on individuals and communities. Supports corporate political responsibility by outlining political rights as human rights, and providing established processes to draw on. 

This tracker provides an overview of federal and state investigations into corporate ESG practices, highlighting lawsuits over misleading ESG claims by firms like BlackRock, government probes requesting information from asset managers and climate organizations, and legislative efforts aimed at limiting ESG considerations in investing. It offers essential insight into the shifting legal and reputational risks companies face in ESG governance.

This piece argues that capitalism’s existing rules often deepen inequality and systemic risks, but by changing those rules to focus on upfront redistribution of wealth, power, and opportunity—a “predistribution” approach—inequality can be meaningfully reduced. It urges institutional investors to lead reforms that reshape capitalism for a fairer, more resilient economy instead of reacting only after crises occur.

Seeks to advance the rule of law by engaging responsible business to support the building and strengthening of legal frameworks and accountable institutions – serving as a complement to, not substitute for, government action. 

The Framework on transformational governance provides guidelines to help companies deepen business values and strategies, policies and operations and internal and external relationships. The Framework applies to corporate functions from government relations and public affairs to legal and compliance and focuses due diligence processes applied to investment risks and opportunities and environmental and social considerations. The Framework helps to better align governments, civil society and businesses towards a common agenda of leaving no one behind. 

Founder of the Institute for Political Innovation and a Harvard Professor teamed up to identify the most powerful levers for transformation in American politics. Most notably, an increasing call from corporate leaders to reconsider frameworks that allow businesses to be entrenched in politics.

Summarizes the results of a two-year bipartisan commission studying citizen concerns and how to revitalize democratic participation. Calls for a “fourth founding” of the United States, outlining six imperatives: achieve equal representation, empower voters, ensure political responsiveness, expand civil society, build civic information systems, and nurture a culture of commitment to democracy. 

Henderson combines the public sentiment of distrust in corporate influence with evidence suggesting that free politics support free markets. She provides a strong case for businesses to fundamentally change their role from partisan players to supporters of the democratic process.

A comprehensive evaluation of corporations that gave significant amounts of money to politicians in key swing states that supported or introduced legislation aimed at voter suppression.

Informative look at what dark money is, how it came to be, and the influence it has on shaping our society. Provides both a report and a first-of-its-kind database shining a light on transactions happening in the dark.

Joe Zammit‑Lucia argues that in today’s world, politics and business are deeply connected, and companies need strong “political antennae”—a keen understanding of societal values, regulations, and consumer expectations—to succeed. Drawing on global case studies, he shows how pressures from stakeholders, investors, and regulators require firms to embed political awareness into their purpose, strategy, and daily operations to build trust and resilience.

Patricia McLagan is an author, consultant, and business owner with fifty years’ experience supporting large scale change processes in business and governments globally. From 1983 through 2004, Pat consulted with major South African businesses, government entities, universities, and parastatals, and chaired the Desmond Tutu Peace Foundation after returning to the US. This article draws on her personal experience with South African businesses and government entities from 1983 into the 2010s, focusing on what some white South African business leaders did in a time of polarization and potential civil war. 

This report argues that to meet the demands of democracy, government must be reorganized to effectively carry out the goals set by the people’s representatives, and offers a four-part agenda to rebuild state capacity through hiring reform, procedural streamlining, digital modernization, and stronger feedback systems.

With his background as a former business executive leading companies such as e-Scholastic, the Proactiv Company and Guthy-Renker, Seth Radwell provides both historical context for the political division in the U.S., and a detailed plan on steps we can take to depolarize society. 

This report reveals a decline in trust, and how majorities now hold grievances against governments, business and the rich. Historically strong trust in “my employer” is complicated when employees hold grievances.  Argues that business should respond in concert with other actors, investing in local communities, quality information, and job skills.    

This report highlights the growing bridge-building movement in the United States and provides concrete examples of organizations doing this work in different settings, including policymaking, workplaces, faith communities, education, and volunteering.  

Presents a framework for when companies should present forceful or tempered political positions based on their publicly stated values and materiality.

This article urges companies to actively reduce the polarization that can impact their businesses, by carefully considering their public stances, promoting inclusivity, and fostering collaboration across differing viewpoints within their organizations and communities.

This report provides an expansive history that ties the corporate condition to various policy eras, and makes a case for private sector investment in public policy (and not just one-off, charitable CSR initiatives).

Advances the argument that American CEOs, seemingly more powerful today than ever, have abrogated the key leadership role they once played in addressing national challenges, with grave consequences for American society. 

Explores how citizens' assemblies—randomly selected groups with active facilitation deliberating on policy—could improve U.S. democratic decision-making, improve trust and reduce polarization. Shares a successful initiative in Oregon to address youth homelessness.

A guide to selected video clips (and some transcripts) from the Erb Institute’s Corporate Political Responsibility Taskforce (CPRT) Expert Dialogues hosted from March 2021 to April 24, featuring conversations with a diverse range of advocates, experts and executives from across the political spectrum, to explore what it means for companies to use their political influences responsibly. A very useful resource for educators, practitioners and associations to spark conversation and action. All clips are coded with keywords for easy selection by topic.

Twelve short cases to help business educators spark discussion around management dilemmas related to corporate political responsibility. Each caselet includes a few public articles, possible discussion question and links to relevant Principles for Corporate Political Responsibility. Supports the more in-depth report, Bringing CPR into the Business Classroom, by Gabriel Correa Acosta, also available in this Showcase.

Written as a CPR Independent Study project at the Stephen M. Ross School of Business at the University of Michigan, this report outlines ways to bring CPR concepts into five areas of the business school curriculum, including: Business Law and Ethics Courses, Business Economics and Policy Courses; Finance Courses; Business Strategy Courses; and Business and Society, Social Responsibility and Sustainability Courses. Drawing on the Erb CPR Principles the report outlines detailed suggestions for "caselets" and videos that are most relevant for each topic area, as well as sample discussion questions. 

While this report more broadly assesses America’s competitiveness, Chapter 3: The Role of Business in Politics Today and Tomorrow, identifies the role of business in political gridlock, and suggests potential solutions. (See pg 28-36)

This report focuses on 527 organizations as a major vehicle for corporate treasury spending in support of candidates, parties and issues. It shows how the complexity of the transactions distance companies from their political spending, and the contradictions this invites -- in theory and in practice.

Researchers describe the “double legitimacy” problem. American workers need to invest portions of their income into mutual funds to have economic security, thus becoming Worker Investors. Corporations are unconstrained and can dip into these funds to support their political spending. This paper outlines the Big 4’s political power in resolving the double legitimacy problem, and how their refusal is supporting policies that go against the Worker Investor.

This paper reflects on Friedman’s famous claim that American business should solely be driven to increase profits. Oxford Professor Karthik Ramanna homes in on the qualifying clause of Friedman’s argument—that markets need non-market institutions to safeguard the conditions for competition—and that if corporations have influence in shaping the market, then it is not free. The report argues that corporate influence on the political landscape has tilted in their favor, often at the expense of the public sphere.

Surveys of a national sample of investors revealed that 87% believe companies should adopt a code of conduct for political spending. Additionally, 91% support measures to ensure that political contributions are lawful and consistent with the company’s public policies and objectives.  

The Recommendation on Transparency and Integrity in Lobbying and Influence provides concrete guidance for governments in ensuring lobbying and influence activities support effective public decision-making while limiting the risks of undue influence, and it provides a framework to support businesses and other influence actors in conducting their lobbying and influence activities in a responsible manner.