Pictured: Veronica Magan, SHRM Director of Content Strategy & Editor in Chief
The Civility Call
The Civility Call provides a vital forum for senior HR and communications leaders to share best practices on managing workplace tensions during polarized times. Convened in partnership with SHRM and the Page Society, these monthly discussions provide expert insights and best practices from participants’ organizations. Each month, executives engage in candid dialogue after expert-led discussions on pressing topics like navigating political discourse, customer relationships across divides, and supporting employee wellbeing. This open sharing of strategies and experiences is critical, as businesses face escalating civility risks that can disrupt operations and damage reputations.
In a rare reversal of roles, on June 2nd three veteran journalists turned the tables to share what they’re hearing from the marketplace about how corporate America is navigating today’s polarized environment. The latest Dialogue Project Civility Call, a monthly series produced in collaboration with SHRM and the Page Society, offered unprecedented intelligence from those who cover business daily about which messages are breaking through – and which are falling flat.
The conversation revealed a disconnect between what companies think they’re communicating and what stakeholders are actually receiving. As the Dialogue Project’s founder, Bob Feldman, noted in opening the session, “It’s not what you say, it’s what people hear.” The insights that followed painted a picture of an industry grappling with unprecedented complexity while stakeholder expectations continue evolving rapidly.
The volatility creates winners and losers
David Smith, The Guardian’s Washington Bureau Chief, has witnessed the “shock and awe” approach of the new administration’s first months, particularly around DEI policies. His frontline reporting reveals a corporate landscape split between those who submitted immediately and others who found strength in standing their ground.
“Initially, you saw a lot of capitulation,” Smith observed. “But now four months in, you’re also seeing pushback. Some law firms immediately buckled, others stood their ground—and we’re now seeing a response from their clients, really rewarding those companies who stood their ground.”
The DEI policy changes have created a natural experiment in corporate courage. Smith noted examples of companies like Costco standing firm on diversity policies, which resulted in activists organizing “buycotts” to actively reward the company for maintaining its stance. Meanwhile, companies that quickly reversed course found themselves satisfying no stakeholders.
The best crisis communications work goes unnoticed
Steve Barrett from PR Week offered a counterintuitive insight about measuring communications success: “The best crisis work is stuff that you never find out about, which makes it very difficult when we’re doing our PR Week awards, because you can’t honor the best crisis work because by definition it’s not known about.”
Barrett’s analysis suggests that in today’s volatile environment, victory might simply be staying below the radar. “Have you achieved victory by not even being mentioned in a call like this?” he wondered, highlighting how strategic silence has become a legitimate communications strategy.
He pointed to McDonald’s as an example of a company that successfully navigated multiple challenges—from an E. coli outbreak to politically charged endorsements during the election—without sustaining lasting damage. “They managed to sort of rise above it and come out unscathed if not even ahead,” Barrett noted.
In contrast, Barrett cited Target and Anheuser-Busch as examples where communications failures turned what “could have been one day stories” into ongoing brand challenges. The difference often came down to response speed and consistency under pressure.
Pictured: Steve Barrett, Editor-in-chief, PRWeek US
Political divisions drive workplace incivility
Veronica Magan, SHRM’s editor-in-chief, shared sobering data about the workplace impact of societal polarization. Her organization’s Q2 Civility Index found that 53% of US workers either experienced or witnessed active incivility in the workplace, often fueled by political viewpoint differences.
“43% of workers said political issues were the bigger contributor” to workplace incivility, Magan reported. The financial impact is staggering: employees lose about 37 minutes of productivity per incident, adding up to approximately $2 billion in daily losses across industries.
The data reveals how external political tensions directly impact business performance. Workers experiencing incivility are more likely to seek new jobs, creating retention challenges in an already tight labor market. As Magan noted, “We still have more open roles than workers in the US.”
The solution, according to SHRM’s research, involves training leaders on difficult conversations, active listening, and conflict resolution. “Two-thirds of workers feel like their managers could have done more to prevent incivility,” Magan explained, highlighting a critical leadership development opportunity.
Stakeholder capitalism faces reality test
The discussion touched on the evolution of corporate purpose since the 2019 Business Roundtable statement. Steve Barrett offered a nuanced assessment: while 178 major companies signed noble statements about stakeholder capitalism, the practical implementation has been mixed.
“Looking back, it possibly didn’t achieve what it needed to,” Barrett reflected. “Some people do think it went too far. Personally, I think it’s just good business—doing right by your employees, doing right by the communities you work in, doing right by your customers as well as your shareholders.”
Barrett noted that stakeholder capitalism “has been a bit embarrassing really” when comparing companies’ 2019 statements to their current positions. However, he maintained that the underlying principle remains sound business practice because stakeholders are more likely to work with and buy from companies they view positively.
The communication imperative: authenticity over perfection
The journalists’ collective intelligence pointed to a clear conclusion: successful corporate communication in today’s environment requires authenticity over perfection, consistency over convenience, and courage over capitulation.
Companies succeeding in this environment share common traits: they maintain open internal dialogue, link decisions to clear business rationales, respond quickly during crises, and demonstrate consistency between stated values and actions under pressure.
The reverse interview format revealed that stakeholders—whether employees, customers, or investors—are evaluating companies not just on what they say, but how they act when tested. In an era where every corporate stance risks alienating someone, the companies building sustainable trust are those brave enough to stand for something while honest enough to engage authentically with the consequences.
As the discussion concluded, the message was clear: the old playbook of careful corporate speak and reactive crisis management is insufficient for today’s challenges. Success belongs to organizations willing to engage in genuine dialogue, make principled decisions, and communicate with the transparency that modern stakeholders demand.