Intergenerational Policy Analyst Emilie Dye takes to the street to find out what Australians think about corporate social and political activism.
Corporations are spending billions on Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) measures, a significant proportion of which can be categorised as merely virtue-signalling. Yet, most Australians are looking the other direction. This was the results of the recent survey commissioned by the Centre for Independent Studies.
The results suggested that far from being a mass movement, driven from the ground up, these activism initiatives are considered peripheral — if not largely ignored — by most shareholders and employees.
Less than 15% of employees and shareholders closely follow the activism of their employer or the companies where they hold shares.
Furthermore, over 60% of employees and 41% of shareholders report that corporate support for political parties and causes never aligns with their personal convictions.
Among consumers, 60% say the corporate political advocacy rarely or never aligns with their views.
In fact, 6% of employees say they have left a job because of their employer’s activism. This is not an insignificant loss of talent.
Younger generations place increasing weight on the need for business to intervene in contentious public debates. However, even among Gen Z nearly two-thirds (64%) said business should focus on providing good service to customers and high returns to shareholders and stay out of public debate.
The data suggest that while corporate activism may appeal to a small, vocal minority, it risks alienating a broader base of stakeholders — including consumers.
The findings highlight a critical misalignment between corporate activism and stakeholder values. This report should give strength to managers who feel bullied into taking a public position on contentious social issues, and make those who have been convinced to do so take pause.