PageViews Monthly: Issue 15

By J.T. Conway, Content Marketing Manager

• Internal Alignment
• A Framework for Speaking Out
• Plus, additional insights from members

Page members have raised concerns to each other and Page staff that approaches to speaking about issues are changing, particularly since stakeholder groups are flexing more direct influence on organizations. Yet, the need to lead with values – specifically corporate character that includes organizational mission, purpose, values and culture – in deciding when and what to say remains consistent. 

It’s the main reason we recently hosted a Page Conversation on the topic, with Paul Argenti, a professor of Corporate Communications at Dartmouth, and Becky Edwards and Bill Margaritis, two seasoned communications executives. And it’s also the focus of this newsletter.

Internal Alignment, First and Foremost

Both Becky and Bill emphasized the critical importance of achieving strong internal alignment before an organization decides to speak out on a societal or political issue. Becky shared how she would work to get the general counsel, HR leadership, and regional business heads all on the same page about the organization's analysis, position, and planned response. 

Bill advised developing a clear decision-making framework and socializing it proactively, so the entire organization understands the criteria for when and how the company will engage on an issue. They both highlighted that achieving this internal buy-in and ownership of the response is essential, rather than having the communications team simply propose a stance.

A Framework for When to Speak Out

Paul offered a framework grounded in decades of research on corporate activism. When considering whether to engage publicly, CCOs should ask:

If all three align, the risk of staying silent may outweigh the risk of speaking out. If not, the better choice may be internal engagement or preparing quietly for what comes next. You can check out his framework in more detail on the Page Turner Blog.

Listening to the Room

Audience comments revealed a shared sense of tension and concern. Some observed that more than ever, companies are choosing not to speak out, even on issues directly impacting the business. Whether due to stakeholder fatigue, political backlash, or internal misalignment, many are recalibrating what “corporate voice” really means in 2025. One member acknowledged that fear of US presidential-level pushback now looms larger than ever before.

That fear has created a shift – from bold statements to quiet consistency, and from sweeping declarations to localized action. If organizations are taking stances, they are seeking to do so through industry associations and advocacy groups, like how the U.S. Chamber of Commerce provided resources and spoke out against tariffs.  Several CCOs acknowledged, however, that trade and professional associations represent such varied members that associations may take too long to build member consensus to effectively communicate on complex, divisive issues.

Some CCOs recommended using AI (such as Decipher Index by Burson + Limbik; Glean; and MS Copilot) to test messages and to analyze the impact of actions and statements of peers and competitors on similar issues. Others advised caution to avoid overreliance on AI.

While this moment calls for courage, it also calls for wisdom, and for CCOs to play a critical role in navigating the nuances of risk, purpose and long-term trust.