In the week since our country named Donald Trump the 45th president, I've been reading more and articles such as the one here from the Washington Post.

Its coverage concerns the attempts made by CEOs of companies large and small to accomplish two goals:

1.) Quell the fears of the employee base that voted for Clinton and reassure everyone of the company's commitment to inclusiveness and diversity.

2.) Get everyone back to focusing on communicating, cooperating and producing whatever product or service they were making before November 8th.

You'd be surprised how many well-meaning attempts have not only run awry; they've caused an old-fashioned donnybrook.

As you'll read in the Post article, more than 19,000 social messages have been posted in the past few days that have contained the words #BoycottPepsi.

That groundswell is in response to PepsiCo CEO's Indra Nooyi's comments about her company's POV. Please read her precise remarks and see what you think.

Pepsi is far from alone. CEOs who issued similar comments from companies as diverse and different as New Balance, Grubhub and Lebenthal have had to "clarify" initial comments aimed at tamping employee anger and fear and, instead, either apologize or clarify their words to Trump supporters across the country.

We, ourselves, have had a lengthy discussion as to how best handle the subjects of inclusiveness and diversity in the workplace, trying to strike a delicate balance between saying what's right AND what will be acceptable to Republican and Democratic staff.

In this political climate, is the price for speaking out on these social issues too high? Worth the risk? What's the role of the enterprise in standing up and speaking out?