Another exercise that can go a long way toward avoiding the risks of hitting a political landmine is to spend more time establishing, in writing, the core values of the company. Since it’s often difficult to anticipate when the company will be forced to take a position on a political issue, it can be hard to formulate that position given the lightening speed of social media, as Uber found out the hard way. Having well-established core values, however, can provide some much needed guidance when the need comes to stake out a political position.
Don’t forget about where a majority of employees stand on certain issues. Employees, especially customer-facing employees, can play a big role in establishing the perceived values of the company. It can be very uncomfortable when employees with one set of political views need to interact with customers who may predominantly hold opposing political views. In some cases it can be a good practice to remind employees to check their personal political views at the door to avoid such conflicts.
Keys to Managing Partisan Political Risks
- Keep up with the discussion on social media
- React quickly to mentions of the company in political discussions, including making the decision to not react
- Maintain firm policies on who is authorized to speak for the company and on what platforms
- Cement a set of well-conceived company core values and make them public
- Take stands on political issues when they fit with the company’s image, brand, and values
Partisan political risks can materialize in the most unlikely places. During the 2016 presidential campaign, for example, Donald Trump Jr. weighed in on the debate over allowing Syrian refugees to enter the United States by comparing them to a bowl of skittles with one poisoned skittle. His logic was that you wouldn’t eat any of the skittles knowing just one was poisoned, so why would you let even some refugees into the United States, knowing that one could be a terrorist.
Mars, which owns the skittles brand, reacted quickly with what many praised as a very effective response. In a tweet, it stated: “Skittles are candy. Refugees are people. We don’t feel it’s an appropriate analogy. We respectfully refrain from further commentary as anything we say could be misinterpreted as marketing.” With the statement, the company was able to remain above the political fray, while attempting to remain neutral or refusing to comment could have damaged its reputation.
In an article on the topic in the Harvard Business Review, Korschun and co-author N. Craig Smith emphasize the need for transparency, consistency, materiality, and leadership when taking on political issues or when dragged into a partisan political battle. “A knee-jerk reaction for many companies is to shun the political spotlight, sometimes by shifting attention to trade groups or by waiting for peers to make the first move,” they write. “However, companies that are transparent, consistent, and can make a business case for political positions are sometimes better off standing out in the crowd. Political stands can become a point of real differentiation for a company.”
While partisan politics may not be a front-and-center issue for internal auditors, incidents from political skirmishes are becoming more frequent and potentially more damaging for companies that bungle their response to them. Getting them on the risk radar now and thinking through how the company will respond when such risks materialize could go a long way toward limiting the damage or even turning the event into an opportunity to differentiate the company.
Says Korschun: “Internal audits of the corporate values and culture are going to be a critical ingredient in preparing companies for the inevitability that politics will come up.” 
Joseph McCafferty is editor & publisher of Internal Audit 360°
Did you enjoy this article? Consider making a donation to support independent business journalism at Internal Audit 360°. Click Here!