Can and should companies be activists?

It was one of the questions that was reflected on during the third edition of Public Affairs Forum, the meeting of Public Affairs managers in Spain organized by NITID Corporate Affairs (formerly MAS Consulting) in collaboration with Apple Tree and Dircom. Held on November 14, it was articulated around the concept “Social activism on the public agenda: lessons and opportunities for the corporate world.”

Specifically regarding this question, Jaime de Jaraíz, CEO of LG Iberia; Fátima Araluce, Sustainability Manager of Urbaser;and Jesús Revuelta, Founder & Creative Director of the agency Revolt; moderated by Jaime Lobera, Managing Partner of Strategy and Brand Development at Apple Tree.

In this conversation, as in others during the meeting, it was pointed out that the “activism” concept encounters friction in its application to the corporate environment, mainly due to the connotations it carries. However, it does include the ambition and will to cause social and environmental changes that build a better and fairer society for all.

In this regard, the speakers pointed out that, beyond the term, companies have to be active, because they are agents of the economy and society, and as such, they must be part of the change. They have to be from action and from their position in the market, their activity and their community.

Active companies

They also pointed out that all companies can and should be active, always from the legitimacy of your business, and never with the intention of working on the image or obtaining a certain perception. Some companies find their purpose in a more obvious way, due to the very nature of their activity; while others must do an introspection exercise in their mission and values.

Among the first is Urbaseras Fátima Araluce pointed out. “We are dedicated to the circular economy and it is not something accessory. It’s our business. It’s what we do”, he commented in one of his interventions. “Our responsibility is to make circularity a reality in everything we do. Always from our capacity, from what we know, and the tools and people we have”.

You enter the seconds it is located LG, which in its mottos “Life is good” and “Innovation for a better life” found the guiding principles of, among other things, its Smart Green program, with which it is promoting reforestation, the repopulation of bees or the growth of posidonia. “We realized that LG’s ethical code and philosophy included seeking to do the right thing, contributing to society and improving people’s lives. And all of this happens through sustainability.”explained Jaime de Jaraíz. “We have created a movement that we want other companies and entities to join. We look for big exponential changes by getting the individual involved in the solution”.

And this one, the one from the responsibility -or degree thereof- in generating positive impact was a point of reflection. “It is evident that citizens must be involved, and it is very important to do environmental and social literacy work, but shared responsibility has very different weights”said Jesús Revuelta. “The one that has brought us the most to the point where we are now and the one that has the most capacity to change things is the company. Everyone should do an exercise of looking at themselves and studying the direct impact of their activity.“.

In this regard, Urbaser explained that it works to raise awareness among the population regarding recycling, and is also focusing on reducing both its impact and that of its entire value chain. LG, for its part, in addition to Smart Green, recycles household appliances, even those from other brands, and innovates in the creation of products, such as a washing machine, that reduce pollution with microplastics.

Action vs. Communication

Another talking point was the ever-present debate between action and communication. In a context of high sensitivity and polarization, there is the fear in many companies to communicate their actions and that consumers label companies as opportunistic or seeking their own benefits. On the other hand, not communicating can incur the brand irrelevance, misinformation or audience confusion.

In the conversation it was also noted that the debate between action and communication Sometimes it is budgetary, that is, many companies are forced to choose between allocating their resources to implementing measures or programs with a positive impact or communicating them.
In addition, they were also warned about excessive communication and the counterproductive effect that this can have, as well as its tone.

“We are spreading the Smart Green program by word of mouth, we meet directly with companies and entities to get them to join and take action”explained the CEO of LG Iberia. “What is communicated must be measured very well so that there are no misinterpretations. My priority is for the company to do well so I can do the right thing and have the opportunity to help.”.

Faced with this approach, the Creative Director of Revuelta advocated communication as generator of a movement that creates greater impact. “It usually happens that the companies that act the most are the ones that show the least, and by not communicating the contagion effect is broken. After the three Ps – people, planet, profit – communication should be the fourth impact”, he explained. “Not communicating generates confusion and irrelevance, and there are no greater risks for a company than those”.