1
00:00:00,000 --> 00:00:07,820
Welcome back to Communication Breakdown, a new podcast from the Observatory on Corporate

2
00:00:07,820 --> 00:00:12,400
Reputation. Thanks for joining us. I'm Steve Dowling in Silicon Valley.

3
00:00:12,400 --> 00:00:16,320
And I'm Craig Carroll in New York City. Each week Steve and I take a look at strategies

4
00:00:16,320 --> 00:00:21,360
companies are using to shape headlines and sometimes save their skins.

5
00:00:21,360 --> 00:00:28,200
It's the post game show for PR pros. This week, staring down an anti-diversity bully.

6
00:00:28,200 --> 00:00:32,720
It's been well over a month since our last episode on the broad-based retreat from corporate

7
00:00:32,720 --> 00:00:37,600
diversity initiatives. That was in the wake of targets capitulation to internet provocateur

8
00:00:37,600 --> 00:00:43,280
Robby Starbuck. And the same week Costco shareholders voted overwhelmingly to support

9
00:00:43,280 --> 00:00:48,800
diversity efforts. Since then, it's been a tale of two retailers who took very different

10
00:00:48,800 --> 00:00:54,040
paths and some customers seem to be voting with their feet. The trade publication retail

11
00:00:54,040 --> 00:01:00,640
brew and other industry watchers reported shift in traffic and in market share from target

12
00:01:00,640 --> 00:01:07,160
to Costco. While correlation may not be causation, Target's foot traffic fell for six consecutive

13
00:01:07,160 --> 00:01:12,720
weeks following their DEI reversal. While visits to Costco were up in February.

14
00:01:12,720 --> 00:01:17,960
Elsewhere on the diversity front AT&T became the latest Fortune 50 company to buckle under

15
00:01:17,960 --> 00:01:24,080
pressure from Robby Starbuck, dialing back diversity training and notably cutting off funding

16
00:01:24,080 --> 00:01:30,160
to pride events and even a suicide hotline at RAN in partnership with the Trevor Project.

17
00:01:30,160 --> 00:01:34,800
And like most other Starbuck targets, they let him break the news and of course take a victory

18
00:01:34,800 --> 00:01:35,800
lap.

19
00:01:35,800 --> 00:01:40,960
"I have a great announcement. They are no longer going to have a Chief Diversity Officer

20
00:01:40,960 --> 00:01:46,600
at AT&T. In addition to that good news, I have even better news. There are no more DEI

21
00:01:46,600 --> 00:01:51,360
trainings from this day forward at AT&T across the entire company. And one more exclusive

22
00:01:51,360 --> 00:01:55,320
for you guys that I'm very happy to bring you, there will no longer be pronoun pins. That

23
00:01:55,320 --> 00:01:59,280
is right. They are cancelling their pronoun pins. That is no longer going to be something

24
00:01:59,280 --> 00:02:02,440
that employees have in their style guide."

25
00:02:02,440 --> 00:02:05,760
A really stuck it to them on those pronoun pins.

26
00:02:05,760 --> 00:02:11,280
Robert Starbuck Newsom, then swung through New York for audiences with Bloomberg and Wall

27
00:02:11,280 --> 00:02:16,000
Street Journal. One of the key takeaways, a new threat to companies who simply renamed

28
00:02:16,000 --> 00:02:22,000
diversity programs to belonging or some other word that just doesn't begin with the E or

29
00:02:22,000 --> 00:02:23,000
I.

30
00:02:23,000 --> 00:02:27,440
Starbuck told Bloomberg these companies are still in this crosshairs. Steve, we've been seeing

31
00:02:27,440 --> 00:02:32,640
the same strategy play out at AT&T in some 20 other companies since last summer. A piece

32
00:02:32,640 --> 00:02:38,880
Robbie with easy gives like pronoun pins and maybe some other changes already in the works.

33
00:02:38,880 --> 00:02:44,720
Let him take credit to his followers into a short cycle press and watch as he moves onto

34
00:02:44,720 --> 00:02:50,040
his next target. But have we learned anything from his recent press or that may give us better

35
00:02:50,040 --> 00:02:53,640
insights into how we can guide companies moving forward?

36
00:02:53,640 --> 00:02:58,840
Yeah, we're learning more definitely about what companies are dealing with here. And Robbie

37
00:02:58,840 --> 00:03:05,000
Starbuck is pretty transparent in his methods. He's showing us his cards. I watched his interviews

38
00:03:05,000 --> 00:03:10,280
with the Wall Street Journal and on Wall Street Week, which is produced by Bloomberg.

39
00:03:10,280 --> 00:03:15,080
And at first I was really frustrated that they gave him a platform because a lot of what

40
00:03:15,080 --> 00:03:20,200
he says is really vague, hand wavy and in a lot of cases just unsupported by the facts.

41
00:03:20,200 --> 00:03:26,880
But then as I watched, I was really glad they had him on because he just laid out this entire

42
00:03:26,880 --> 00:03:32,200
playbook and we can learn a lot. And his credit, Alan Murray at the Wall Street Journal challenged

43
00:03:32,200 --> 00:03:38,000
Starbuck in front of an audience of CFOs and it did not go well for Robbie Starbuck.

44
00:03:38,000 --> 00:03:44,800
My takeaways were his position hinges on a few assumptions that he presents as facts.

45
00:03:44,800 --> 00:03:48,880
First is that all diversity programs are just virtue signaling, just their just PR in

46
00:03:48,880 --> 00:03:53,840
Robbie Starbuck's world. There's no business case for diversity. Yeah.

47
00:03:53,840 --> 00:03:59,040
Also, he told Bloomberg that more than half the country finds DEI to testable. Well, that's

48
00:03:59,040 --> 00:04:04,720
just not supported by the data we've seen. And then importantly, I think, and telling

49
00:04:04,720 --> 00:04:10,160
him, he claims that DEI is somehow inclusive of everyone but Christians. And he says his

50
00:04:10,160 --> 00:04:15,000
researchers could not find one employee resource group for Christians at all the largest corporations

51
00:04:15,000 --> 00:04:21,120
in America. Well, that's not true or they just didn't look very hard. So everything seems

52
00:04:21,120 --> 00:04:26,800
to come down to this overly simplistic framing of zero sum left versus right where anything

53
00:04:26,800 --> 00:04:33,000
other than pure capitalism is socialism and communism. So if I were Robbie Starbuck's

54
00:04:33,000 --> 00:04:37,960
PR manager, I would not be thrilled with the media tour he did last week in New York because

55
00:04:37,960 --> 00:04:42,560
on the plus side, he got in front of a lot of smart, influential people and got a platform

56
00:04:42,560 --> 00:04:47,040
to share his ideas. But on the downside, he got a platform to share his ideas and showed

57
00:04:47,040 --> 00:04:52,240
pretty clearly that they don't hold up to scrutiny at all. So Robbie Starbuck is enjoying

58
00:04:52,240 --> 00:04:56,800
his 15 minutes of fame, but Robbie Starbuck, I think is also out over his skis, at least

59
00:04:56,800 --> 00:04:59,560
when he has to face any scrutiny at all.

60
00:04:59,560 --> 00:05:04,040
I thought it was very interesting the way he, I want to call it a heads a little bit, right?

61
00:05:04,040 --> 00:05:09,560
So he referred to, you know, the road of hell is paid with good intentions. So he's trying

62
00:05:09,560 --> 00:05:16,120
to play a little bit into DEI being a good intention. He also talked a little bit about

63
00:05:16,120 --> 00:05:22,520
DEI strategy and how it looks differently in practice. And then of course, it gave, you

64
00:05:22,520 --> 00:05:28,320
know, the real strategy behind his argument. But you know, Robbie Starbuck wants to make

65
00:05:28,320 --> 00:05:32,400
DEI sound like it's a failed experiment. Something has started with good intentions, but one

66
00:05:32,400 --> 00:05:37,960
off the rails. But here's the problem. Intent isn't what matters, outcomes or what matter.

67
00:05:37,960 --> 00:05:42,760
And the company that actually measure outcomes know that diversity isn't a PR stunt. It's

68
00:05:42,760 --> 00:05:47,560
a competitive advantage. And you know, so if the road of hell is paid with good intentions,

69
00:05:47,560 --> 00:05:51,720
the road to relevance is paved with fear driven retreats.

70
00:05:51,720 --> 00:05:56,880
Fair point. I was struck in that interview the way. And this is, you know, he's not the

71
00:05:56,880 --> 00:06:03,760
only one who does this, but just dropping statement as though it were fact. And I thought that

72
00:06:03,760 --> 00:06:08,280
Alan did a really good job challenging him in the places where where he really needed

73
00:06:08,280 --> 00:06:15,000
to the the craziest one for me was this idea that the executive class as he calls it CFOs

74
00:06:15,000 --> 00:06:21,760
and CEOs have veered left and that they vote Democrat more often than Republican clearly

75
00:06:21,760 --> 00:06:25,920
was working off his talking point and not aware of the audience here. Yeah, it was just

76
00:06:25,920 --> 00:06:31,080
that it just is another one of these sort of outlandish things that comes back to everything

77
00:06:31,080 --> 00:06:36,240
as you find with as we see him making these pronouncements on Twitter. We don't see anybody

78
00:06:36,240 --> 00:06:41,760
pushing back on him. And when you have, you know, an actual journalist pushing back on him,

79
00:06:41,760 --> 00:06:46,040
he can't really cite facts to defend anything. Yeah, I'll look out just go and say it. He

80
00:06:46,040 --> 00:06:52,000
calls CFOs a bunch of liberals, right? Yeah, that somehow that top leadership in the four

81
00:06:52,000 --> 00:06:58,600
to five hundred companies have veered left over the past 20 years. I just that just doesn't

82
00:06:58,600 --> 00:07:03,480
resonate with the day to day experience in the conversations that I'm having given so

83
00:07:03,480 --> 00:07:09,800
many companies are on board with with Trump's business direction there aside from the tariffs,

84
00:07:09,800 --> 00:07:14,640
right? That the tariffs are pretty bad. But for the most part, I think they were anticipating

85
00:07:14,640 --> 00:07:21,040
a favorable business environment moving into into Trump's second term here. Yeah, he

86
00:07:21,040 --> 00:07:26,400
doesn't have a lot of facts, a lot of actual facts. And there's a lot of this we're investigating

87
00:07:26,400 --> 00:07:30,520
or we're not we're going to reveal something or we were going to reveal something, but the

88
00:07:30,520 --> 00:07:35,000
company made changes. So it's kind of a shell game with him, but it's and it's unfortunate

89
00:07:35,000 --> 00:07:41,640
to see companies, you know, giving into this over generalization and then conflating of issues

90
00:07:41,640 --> 00:07:47,640
and then that leads to fear mongering and intimidation. And I think when dealing with

91
00:07:47,640 --> 00:07:54,680
a Robbie Starbucks, the tactics are really important, really important for me. This was a very interesting

92
00:07:54,680 --> 00:08:00,600
moment to hear Starbucks talk to an audience of chief financial officers. It, you know, I,

93
00:08:00,600 --> 00:08:05,720
I mean, I don't know how much attention and how much opportunity that we should be giving

94
00:08:05,720 --> 00:08:11,480
in because it does further legitimize this cause. But I think on the other hand, as communicators,

95
00:08:11,480 --> 00:08:16,000
we have to be aware of what's out there in the environment. And you're not going to

96
00:08:16,000 --> 00:08:21,760
be able to respond unless you are aware of what his, what his positions are and what his

97
00:08:21,760 --> 00:08:26,080
arguments are. So, you know, it might be outlandish. He might not have any data, but I think

98
00:08:26,080 --> 00:08:31,480
all of us still need to be aware of what his point of view is. Yeah. And his followers

99
00:08:31,480 --> 00:08:35,960
may not care, but the problem is that companies who are capitulating to him and then letting

100
00:08:35,960 --> 00:08:43,120
him tell the story for them, they are essentially broadening his platform and giving him a

101
00:08:43,120 --> 00:08:48,720
greater audience, I think. I mean, you can look at this approach that AT&T and other companies

102
00:08:48,720 --> 00:08:52,440
took and that most of the companies who deal with them have been taking. And it's hard to

103
00:08:52,440 --> 00:08:57,840
argue that things have generally gone as well as can be expected for them. The, the cycles

104
00:08:57,840 --> 00:09:02,080
are short and then he moves on to the next company. Targets and outlier, I think, but they're,

105
00:09:02,080 --> 00:09:05,840
they're still dealing with it. I suspect McDonald's feels it could have gone better for them.

106
00:09:05,840 --> 00:09:11,240
But by and large companies, they take a modest PR hit and then they move on. That's one

107
00:09:11,240 --> 00:09:16,800
way to define success in this situation, but I don't think it feels very good. It's convenient

108
00:09:16,800 --> 00:09:22,440
and it's pragmatic, but it's not a win. Yeah. Well, you know, part of it is that embarrassment

109
00:09:22,440 --> 00:09:27,520
is just a bait, right? Part of his power is what comes from what happens next. You know,

110
00:09:27,520 --> 00:09:33,520
viral post turns into shareholder backlash or government scrutiny or internal panic.

111
00:09:33,520 --> 00:09:36,880
The companies that survive aren't the ones that, you know, who react fascists are the

112
00:09:36,880 --> 00:09:41,720
ones that refuse to play this game. So I'd say, Starbac doesn't need the truth. He just

113
00:09:41,720 --> 00:09:48,640
needs traction, a single post or an opportunity for airplay turns into, you know, a headline.

114
00:09:48,640 --> 00:09:53,920
And then a headline turns into some segment on cable news and then suddenly routine HR policies,

115
00:09:53,920 --> 00:09:59,520
national controversy. So the more companies, he panics, the bigger the firestorm gets.

116
00:09:59,520 --> 00:10:06,200
Yeah. And companies, I think, are in these situations giving him traction. Like in, in

117
00:10:06,200 --> 00:10:11,320
isolation, company by company, they're giving him what he wants or some version of what he

118
00:10:11,320 --> 00:10:16,160
wants. They're letting him tell the story and then they're moving on for individual companies.

119
00:10:16,160 --> 00:10:21,400
That's your definition of success. That's fine. But in the broader context, he's getting more

120
00:10:21,400 --> 00:10:28,320
traction and he's now, now he's getting access to, you know, Bloomberg's editorial team and

121
00:10:28,320 --> 00:10:33,320
not that they're necessarily buying it. But I think they are, to your earlier point, they

122
00:10:33,320 --> 00:10:40,680
are giving him this legitimacy and he's also got real momentum. So if we go back to the

123
00:10:40,680 --> 00:10:46,400
more commonly taken approach, it's based on the assumption that the issue will actually

124
00:10:46,400 --> 00:10:51,880
go away. And maybe it does. But, you know, Costco stood up to the shareholder proposal and

125
00:10:51,880 --> 00:10:56,640
was lauded for that. Next thing, you know, there's CEO got a letter from these 19 state attorneys

126
00:10:56,640 --> 00:11:02,040
general, all of them Republican saying maybe their policies are illegal. And Robbie Starbac

127
00:11:02,040 --> 00:11:06,720
is already talking about revisiting some of the companies in his trophy case because he

128
00:11:06,720 --> 00:11:12,280
just realized they still support diversity. So if Robbie Starbac has to come back at you,

129
00:11:12,280 --> 00:11:16,680
well, you may be your extra woke or something worse. And I don't know what the penalty is

130
00:11:16,680 --> 00:11:20,840
going to be then. So it's working for these companies in the short term because he moves

131
00:11:20,840 --> 00:11:25,700
on. But I feel like in the long term, if they're not taking a stand, if they're not making

132
00:11:25,700 --> 00:11:31,000
a contribution, really, to an effort to define this, I don't want to call it a debate,

133
00:11:31,000 --> 00:11:36,640
and to define this issue, I worry that he just gets more and more momentum and it's going

134
00:11:36,640 --> 00:11:39,920
to come back on these companies and probably many others.

135
00:11:39,920 --> 00:11:45,640
Here's the real problem. If Robbie Starbac does come back, you know, you're not just a company

136
00:11:45,640 --> 00:11:51,040
with the E.I. policies anymore. You're a company that lied about them now the attack escalates.

137
00:11:51,040 --> 00:11:55,280
Right? The company's playing defense right now need to realize that this is not a one-time

138
00:11:55,280 --> 00:11:59,160
game. You know, the goal posts are going to move. The definitions are going to change

139
00:11:59,160 --> 00:12:03,480
in the fight, doesn't it? Just because you changed words or you said that you have changed

140
00:12:03,480 --> 00:12:08,160
your policies. And what point does getting out of the line of fire become an illusion? If

141
00:12:08,160 --> 00:12:13,160
you're on a list once, you're really never off it. And so I think the question is not just

142
00:12:13,160 --> 00:12:17,280
how do we survive this round, but it's how do we prevent the next one?

143
00:12:17,280 --> 00:12:23,360
I agree. And we are seeing companies who have to deal with this over a long period of

144
00:12:23,360 --> 00:12:28,680
time, even after making moves to appease them. I think one thing that went largely unnoticed

145
00:12:28,680 --> 00:12:33,800
was at the end of last month, end of February, deer and company, you know, the John Deere

146
00:12:33,800 --> 00:12:39,000
equipment maker. They were one of the first to make changes last year or last summer under

147
00:12:39,000 --> 00:12:44,600
pressure from Robbie Starbac. But in February, their shareholders rejected a shareholder

148
00:12:44,600 --> 00:12:48,800
proposal from the National Legal and Policy Center. Those are the same folks who brought

149
00:12:48,800 --> 00:12:54,440
the shareholder proposal at Costco. And just like Costco, deer shareholders crushed them

150
00:12:54,440 --> 00:13:02,040
like 98.7% voted no, right? So two things. First, Robbie Starbac, you know, they gave into

151
00:13:02,040 --> 00:13:08,720
him, but they still faced more pressure from the right. And I found it interesting. You

152
00:13:08,720 --> 00:13:14,320
read the deer proxy, which mentions diversity, by the way, over 30 times. They're pretty clear.

153
00:13:14,320 --> 00:13:18,000
And it's a good proxy, I think, from a comms perspective, I would encourage people to read

154
00:13:18,000 --> 00:13:24,320
it. They talk about diversity 31 times. They use the word never just once. And that's

155
00:13:24,320 --> 00:13:28,960
an align I came across and it reads the existence of diversity quotas and pronoun identification

156
00:13:28,960 --> 00:13:34,600
have never been and are not company policy. That's the Robbie Starbac hangover nine, ten

157
00:13:34,600 --> 00:13:39,640
months later. Those are claims that he was making about John Deere in his video on Twitter.

158
00:13:39,640 --> 00:13:44,520
And I think they're still trying to shake it. But he put out his video first and they've

159
00:13:44,520 --> 00:13:49,640
been playing catch up, even though they apparently gave him what he wanted on diversity.

160
00:13:49,640 --> 00:13:54,440
But they really gave him was what he's ultimately after, which is credit for punishing, you

161
00:13:54,440 --> 00:13:58,160
know, a hundred billion dollar company for being to woke and they're still dealing with

162
00:13:58,160 --> 00:14:02,560
it. Yeah. Based on everything that you've seen and you're, you know, you've certainly been

163
00:14:02,560 --> 00:14:07,560
in the driving seat before, how would you respond here? What, like, what are some ways that

164
00:14:07,560 --> 00:14:13,920
you would recommend that that company's respond here? Yeah. I think it's again about tactics

165
00:14:13,920 --> 00:14:19,080
and you need to gain a tactical advantage over this guy because that's where he is exercising

166
00:14:19,080 --> 00:14:26,240
this intimidation and fear mongering. So the first thing I would do is control his access.

167
00:14:26,240 --> 00:14:33,080
Yeah. Keep him at arm's length, keep the engagement really selective and proportional to I think

168
00:14:33,080 --> 00:14:37,720
he's out there talking about meetings with CEOs. I find it hard to believe that anybody

169
00:14:37,720 --> 00:14:41,920
would put this guy in front of their CEO or that he could hold his own in a meeting like

170
00:14:41,920 --> 00:14:47,080
that after what we saw. So people are already probably already doing this, but I would be

171
00:14:47,080 --> 00:14:52,320
limiting his access to any executive. Make the guy file a shareholder proposal or whatever.

172
00:14:52,320 --> 00:14:57,120
Make him do the work, make him write it down. I've never seen Robbie Starbuck write an op-ed

173
00:14:57,120 --> 00:15:02,440
or anything longer than a social media post. Maybe I've missed it, but bottom line force

174
00:15:02,440 --> 00:15:08,320
him into your process, not the other way around. And when whoever is dealing with him, you've

175
00:15:08,320 --> 00:15:13,960
got to be in information collecting mode. If he's got a list, he's not shy about these things.

176
00:15:13,960 --> 00:15:18,840
He wants to get something out of you. So let him tell you what he wants to change. I would

177
00:15:18,840 --> 00:15:24,760
not offer him a single thing beyond that. That's that's step one. Yeah. Yeah. I would say I

178
00:15:24,760 --> 00:15:28,920
mean, I don't know how many I don't think any companies have done that, but it's very clear

179
00:15:28,920 --> 00:15:34,760
that that needs to be rule number one. Don't grant anyone on one time with this CEO or executive

180
00:15:34,760 --> 00:15:39,360
meetings. I would almost say, you know, I'm not sure how much you'd want to engage with

181
00:15:39,360 --> 00:15:45,400
him on social media if he reaches out to you on LinkedIn. No, zero. You follow your process,

182
00:15:45,400 --> 00:15:49,320
right? He's got a follow structure process there. So I like the fact that you're laying that

183
00:15:49,320 --> 00:15:53,760
out very clearly. Yeah. It has to be the same as anyone else, right? They need to be directed

184
00:15:53,760 --> 00:16:00,400
to legal or investor relations, but not to executives. Yeah. So once you know what he wants

185
00:16:00,400 --> 00:16:07,920
or what's you understand, like what is on his list, I think the next thing is to overwhelm

186
00:16:07,920 --> 00:16:13,880
him with your response, except ideally it's not a response because you front run him and he

187
00:16:13,880 --> 00:16:20,640
says he's going to expose you on Tuesday. I go out on Monday or Sunday night and burn him.

188
00:16:20,640 --> 00:16:25,080
Like no heads up. You write a blog post or choose your platform, whatever. I would not do it

189
00:16:25,080 --> 00:16:29,600
on Twitter or any other social media platform. Maybe LinkedIn. I don't know, but it's you

190
00:16:29,600 --> 00:16:35,640
get your message out and be very clear and use your language. But you maybe even explain

191
00:16:35,640 --> 00:16:39,280
how this guy operates, like which programs he finds objectionable. What are you complained

192
00:16:39,280 --> 00:16:46,400
about? And then you explain it, demystify it, use plain English, make it ordinary, right?

193
00:16:46,400 --> 00:16:51,520
Own it and defend it where it deserves to be defended. And yet maybe you're going to

194
00:16:51,520 --> 00:16:55,840
make changes or maybe there are changes that were already in the works as we've heard more

195
00:16:55,840 --> 00:17:00,720
than once from companies in this saga. He's going to embarrass you because some of your

196
00:17:00,720 --> 00:17:06,160
employees were pronoun pins. You get out ahead of that because it will all sound as petty

197
00:17:06,160 --> 00:17:12,880
as it is if you frame it the right way. Yeah. Speaking of frame, my thought is we should

198
00:17:12,880 --> 00:17:18,160
actually back up and look at a different frame. I think part of it is that we know how much

199
00:17:18,160 --> 00:17:22,280
time, energy and attention that he's already taken from companies and a lot of companies

200
00:17:22,280 --> 00:17:28,520
are talking about their various responses here. But it set it up in a way that we are engaging

201
00:17:28,520 --> 00:17:33,240
with him when really we need to be about our business. And this is one of the things that

202
00:17:33,240 --> 00:17:38,160
we do in the process of carrying out our business. We listen to our stakeholders, we listen

203
00:17:38,160 --> 00:17:42,760
to voices that are out there. But as we've just said, right, we should lay out a process

204
00:17:42,760 --> 00:17:46,840
of, okay, here's how if you want to engage us. If you have a question, if you want to discuss

205
00:17:46,840 --> 00:17:52,760
something with us, here's our process laid out. Here's the channels there. But about

206
00:17:52,760 --> 00:17:59,200
responding the day before the night before, I'm not sure if I'm there yet. I think simply

207
00:17:59,200 --> 00:18:05,000
being focused on where your businesses and what your priorities are, the more important

208
00:18:05,000 --> 00:18:10,120
part is making sure that you have your story laid out and that he's not controlling it. And

209
00:18:10,120 --> 00:18:15,800
so my turn is if everything is about getting out the day before, we're still responding

210
00:18:15,800 --> 00:18:20,840
too much to him instead of giving him too much control or too much agency. Yeah, but I

211
00:18:20,840 --> 00:18:27,920
really do think the tactics are important here because you as the comms lead as the executive

212
00:18:27,920 --> 00:18:35,280
team, whatever you need to remember that you are the experts on your business. And so you

213
00:18:35,280 --> 00:18:41,440
are empowered to define this, this issue. And I think, you know, some of the things that

214
00:18:41,440 --> 00:18:50,640
he's, he's considering wins, it would seem a lot less impactful if a company were announcing

215
00:18:50,640 --> 00:18:57,440
them and framing them. And you know, it could be as simple as, you know, we came at this with

216
00:18:57,440 --> 00:19:02,440
his words, good intentions and nobody's perfect. So we're dialing a couple of things back, but

217
00:19:02,440 --> 00:19:07,320
we still believe in diversity for all the right reasons. Our hearts are in the right place.

218
00:19:07,320 --> 00:19:12,200
We're not discriminating against anybody. You need to separate fact from fiction and then

219
00:19:12,200 --> 00:19:18,280
draw a bright line. Robbie Starbuck is asking us to do things that would weaken our business.

220
00:19:18,280 --> 00:19:22,760
Our employees know this in that process of him asking us to do things that are weakening

221
00:19:22,760 --> 00:19:27,360
our business. That based on you already having a list. I mean, if you've already explained

222
00:19:27,360 --> 00:19:32,520
him what the process is and he's written it, is this your day before response? Is that

223
00:19:32,520 --> 00:19:37,320
already hinging on the fact that you've asked him to write things down? Whether he's written

224
00:19:37,320 --> 00:19:41,360
things down or not, he's, I don't think he is writing things down. If we're looking at

225
00:19:41,360 --> 00:19:45,400
the way he has, he's, he's been dealing with these companies. He's apparently getting

226
00:19:45,400 --> 00:19:51,640
phone calls at some level because he's getting the memo and he's, he's taking the victory

227
00:19:51,640 --> 00:19:55,920
lap on things that he asked for. At least that's what he's saying. This comes back to this

228
00:19:55,920 --> 00:20:01,520
point of like, they're letting an outsider tell the story and position these changes that

229
00:20:01,520 --> 00:20:06,760
they're making with the companies can be doing that and it will go much better for them.

230
00:20:06,760 --> 00:20:10,000
These are the things that we are changing. These are the things that we are not changing

231
00:20:10,000 --> 00:20:15,720
and here's why. I mean, one of the ways that he gets away with naming and shaming companies

232
00:20:15,720 --> 00:20:19,480
in their policies is he's the only one with the information. He's the one who gets the

233
00:20:19,480 --> 00:20:24,600
memo. So this is why I focus on the tactics on this. It seems so much more mysterious,

234
00:20:24,600 --> 00:20:30,200
more scandalous because he's supposedly, you know, gotten inside to fight the wokeness

235
00:20:30,200 --> 00:20:35,360
or whatever. If you could say the same thing about the changes as a company, it can seem

236
00:20:35,360 --> 00:20:39,120
really boring. It's like, it's like, you know, when you build up the courage to complain

237
00:20:39,120 --> 00:20:43,000
about something and then once you do, you realize it seems kind of silly now that I'm saying

238
00:20:43,000 --> 00:20:49,160
out loud, right? It's kind of it's kind of the approach. So, you know, I think that's key

239
00:20:49,160 --> 00:20:54,960
is that it's got to be not reactive. It's got a sound like this is so boring. It's a routine.

240
00:20:54,960 --> 00:21:00,960
It's a it's a non issue, but we're just going to get it all out there. There's one other

241
00:21:00,960 --> 00:21:06,880
aspect going back to his talk with Alan Murray and the CFOs that he played into and he

242
00:21:06,880 --> 00:21:11,200
was referring to something he said it was off the record, but it's interesting that he

243
00:21:11,200 --> 00:21:15,280
mentioned Jamie Dimon's name. So I don't know if he's referring to Chase or some other

244
00:21:15,280 --> 00:21:21,480
CEOs there, but he said that when he engaged CEOs and of course I don't think he's engaging

245
00:21:21,480 --> 00:21:26,520
him directly, okay? But somehow one of the points that he was making was that CEOs seemed

246
00:21:26,520 --> 00:21:32,160
to be unaware of the DEI practices that were going on inside of their companies. And

247
00:21:32,160 --> 00:21:39,960
for me, true or not, that I think is one of the flags here that any senior leadership

248
00:21:39,960 --> 00:21:45,120
team, you want to keep them away from an argument like that in the stage of misinformation

249
00:21:45,120 --> 00:21:52,560
and disinformation. That's where he so's division and confusion because no senior leadership

250
00:21:52,560 --> 00:21:57,880
team and certainly no chief comms officer wants to have the word out that their senior

251
00:21:57,880 --> 00:22:02,440
leadership team is unaware or that you are unaware and you've not brought those issues

252
00:22:02,440 --> 00:22:06,960
to your senior leadership team. Yeah, I think there's two things going on there. First is

253
00:22:06,960 --> 00:22:13,600
he actually the one who is exposing these sort of fringe efforts to a shocked CEO, I doubt

254
00:22:13,600 --> 00:22:21,060
it. But are there programs that have gone a little too far afield? Are there was a

255
00:22:21,060 --> 00:22:24,920
camera with Jamie Dimon's quote, but it was something like the silly stuff or things

256
00:22:24,920 --> 00:22:29,760
that maybe were again well intentioned, but didn't work out the way we expected. Like

257
00:22:29,760 --> 00:22:34,280
I think that a company positioning the same thing that Robbie Starbuck is he's going

258
00:22:34,280 --> 00:22:38,760
to make it sensational. A company can say, yeah, nobody's perfect. So we're dialing

259
00:22:38,760 --> 00:22:43,440
a couple of things back, but it doesn't have to be, it doesn't have to be a capitulation

260
00:22:43,440 --> 00:22:47,600
or concession. It doesn't have to be a name and shame situation. But would you acknowledge

261
00:22:47,600 --> 00:22:52,760
when any of his claims have any substance at all? I mean, if you want to concede that

262
00:22:52,760 --> 00:22:57,560
something wasn't the silver bullet that you had hoped it would be, I think that you conceding

263
00:22:57,560 --> 00:23:04,120
that is is going to take a, you know, is going to take an arrow out of his quiver, you know,

264
00:23:04,120 --> 00:23:09,200
you put out a memo, memos are boring. Like it, it, it, it, it sets the tone and Robbie Starbuck's

265
00:23:09,200 --> 00:23:13,920
only real weapon is embarrassment, the threat of embarrassment. And to embarrass you, he

266
00:23:13,920 --> 00:23:18,440
has to make things sound sinister. But if you get out ahead of him, you get first mover

267
00:23:18,440 --> 00:23:23,520
advantage, you frame the issues. And this is one of those situations where you can use

268
00:23:23,520 --> 00:23:29,280
transparency as a weapon. And for those things that were on the fringe, that whether your CEO

269
00:23:29,280 --> 00:23:34,400
did or didn't know, like you had an initiative that was maybe over the top or didn't produce

270
00:23:34,400 --> 00:23:39,920
results, just own it. And then, you know, it's like PS, maybe the pronoun pins weren't super

271
00:23:39,920 --> 00:23:43,720
popular. Anyway, just take the weapon out of his hand, I say.

272
00:23:43,720 --> 00:23:47,600
That's certainly important. You got to take the weapon out of his hand. You got to disarm

273
00:23:47,600 --> 00:23:53,240
him. The concern for me is finding some way that we can make the entire engagement look very

274
00:23:53,240 --> 00:23:58,920
boring, very routine and not tit for tat where he's accusing us of something and then we're

275
00:23:58,920 --> 00:24:05,280
responding with, okay, we either agree with you or you're wrong and not turning into a,

276
00:24:05,280 --> 00:24:10,640
you know, to a conversation where he's controlling the narrative part of regaining control.

277
00:24:10,640 --> 00:24:15,880
Here's staying in the position of business as usual. This is how we engage our stakeholders.

278
00:24:15,880 --> 00:24:17,960
This is how we engage our voices.

279
00:24:17,960 --> 00:24:23,480
No, I agree with you there. And I think that's why in this scenario anyway, which is just,

280
00:24:23,480 --> 00:24:27,640
as soon as I get extrapolating the pattern that he's established with other companies, if

281
00:24:27,640 --> 00:24:31,560
you've engaged with him, you've decided to get ahead of it, you're making a definitive

282
00:24:31,560 --> 00:24:36,000
statement about this. I think you need to make sure that that statement in whatever form

283
00:24:36,000 --> 00:24:42,640
it comes, the statement has got to be comprehensive. It's got to be transparent and then it's got

284
00:24:42,640 --> 00:24:48,760
to be over. Shut the door. Conversation over. We're going back to work, serving our customers

285
00:24:48,760 --> 00:24:54,800
which we do and we understand how to do better than, you know, these critics. And if anybody

286
00:24:54,800 --> 00:24:59,360
has questions, we just answered them. Like you have something that is, I feel like Costco

287
00:24:59,360 --> 00:25:04,960
did that, you know, with an economy of words and their strategy worked. They made a statement

288
00:25:04,960 --> 00:25:10,040
and they said nothing more and the shareholder proposal went down to defeats.

289
00:25:10,040 --> 00:25:14,400
As communication leaders, you know, our job isn't just to manage the external narrative.

290
00:25:14,400 --> 00:25:19,480
It's to make sure that our executives are not blindsided. So your CEO, your CFO should

291
00:25:19,480 --> 00:25:24,240
never be in a position where they're saying, holy poo, like, I like, I didn't know this

292
00:25:24,240 --> 00:25:28,880
was happening. If they're learning about DEI policies or missteps or even just confusion

293
00:25:28,880 --> 00:25:33,600
from Robbie Starbuck before they're hearing it from your own team, to me, that's a failure

294
00:25:33,600 --> 00:25:37,760
of internal communication. You don't want your leadership reacting to a controversy they

295
00:25:37,760 --> 00:25:43,200
didn't see coming. And to me, that's when companies make rush decisions that get defensive

296
00:25:43,200 --> 00:25:48,520
or worse, they seed control of the narrative entirely. So, you know, you say, get ahead of

297
00:25:48,520 --> 00:25:54,000
it. That's sort of important. Getting ahead of it is also auditing your programs, identifying

298
00:25:54,000 --> 00:25:59,600
what your block, what your weak spots are, making sure that your senior leadership team

299
00:25:59,600 --> 00:26:03,880
knows what's happening at all levels so that they're never caught saying, wait, what? We

300
00:26:03,880 --> 00:26:07,720
did what? So finding out from an activist instead of you, you've already lost your

301
00:26:07,720 --> 00:26:09,560
block control of the story anyway.

302
00:26:09,560 --> 00:26:15,600
For sure. And I've got to believe that we're now, what, nine months into this saga, I've

303
00:26:15,600 --> 00:26:21,640
got to believe that there are, you know, leaders, probably at every company with a diversity

304
00:26:21,640 --> 00:26:25,880
program that are looking at this going like, well, this company got, you know, raked over

305
00:26:25,880 --> 00:26:31,520
the coals for supposedly, you know, making employees sign, all I pledges or whatever, or

306
00:26:31,520 --> 00:26:35,680
you know, things that sound, you know, you know, a little over the top, or do we have

307
00:26:35,680 --> 00:26:39,520
pro, do we have pronoun pins? Is how's that going over? I got to believe that people have

308
00:26:39,520 --> 00:26:43,920
a good handle on things that are working and are not working because, you know, there's

309
00:26:43,920 --> 00:26:48,680
a lot of, how much you can pass up, right? I mean, you know, part of this strategy supposed

310
00:26:48,680 --> 00:26:53,320
to be big picture, you're not caught up on all the, the details here.

311
00:26:53,320 --> 00:26:58,600
But we keep hearing from companies after they make these changes. And I mean, these are

312
00:26:58,600 --> 00:27:02,440
things that sort of get out there publicly. Well, this change was already in the works

313
00:27:02,440 --> 00:27:08,800
or we've already been looking at this stuff. So I again, saying that proactively is so much

314
00:27:08,800 --> 00:27:15,080
better than then sort of using it as an explanation after the fact, well, no, I know it sounds bad

315
00:27:15,080 --> 00:27:19,520
that we, you know, changed all of our diverse or eliminated diversity training or whatever,

316
00:27:19,520 --> 00:27:24,760
but we were already going to do that. Like if you were to get out there proactively and

317
00:27:24,760 --> 00:27:30,160
explain it, I don't think we're telling people anything really radically new. I think it's

318
00:27:30,160 --> 00:27:35,040
just, it's hard right now to look at this pattern and go, ah, number one, I don't want to be

319
00:27:35,040 --> 00:27:40,280
next on the Robbie Starbucks list. And there's this, here's this tried and true thing where

320
00:27:40,280 --> 00:27:45,160
we just, you know, let him do his thing and then it really doesn't resonate too far beyond

321
00:27:45,160 --> 00:27:51,120
his audience. But that's again, as we said earlier, like that's so far, but, you know, this

322
00:27:51,120 --> 00:27:55,280
is, this is, you know, the appeasement and bullies and we see how these things play out.

323
00:27:55,280 --> 00:27:59,400
I suspect they're going to be back for more. And in some cases where, you know, we may

324
00:27:59,400 --> 00:28:04,040
already be seeing that. I would think it of a hybrid approach, right? So when you first

325
00:28:04,040 --> 00:28:09,000
hear from Robbie Starbucks, part of it is, you've got to find out, okay, what, what is the

326
00:28:09,000 --> 00:28:14,920
after here? What, you know, if he's teasing a vague expose, they can go first internally

327
00:28:14,920 --> 00:28:19,920
and get his answers on paper, right? And once this argument is out there, then you can

328
00:28:19,920 --> 00:28:25,160
respond strategically, not, not emotionally. Certainly you got to act fast when the narrative

329
00:28:25,160 --> 00:28:31,200
is gaining momentum, but there's also a question of, okay, well, if he's saying he's getting

330
00:28:31,200 --> 00:28:37,440
his sources internally, right? Maybe somebody else has already got a piece of the story here.

331
00:28:37,440 --> 00:28:41,800
I don't know. How do you handle that? I mean, how do you, are you worried about like cutting

332
00:28:41,800 --> 00:28:46,760
off leaks or things? Well, I think that's, I think one of the issues here is we got to think

333
00:28:46,760 --> 00:28:52,280
about, okay, he's, he's whether true or not, he has, well, I'm going to say it has to

334
00:28:52,280 --> 00:28:57,200
be true, right? He's set up various channels on his own website for employees of companies

335
00:28:57,200 --> 00:29:04,760
to expose practices of their, of their companies or to question practices there. Yeah. And again,

336
00:29:04,760 --> 00:29:10,440
the, the value in that for him, the newsworthiness, the sensational part of that is when he's the

337
00:29:10,440 --> 00:29:16,080
one who's telling the story first and therefore it feels like he's exposed something is, you

338
00:29:16,080 --> 00:29:20,600
know, do you have something benign that someone doesn't know about that doesn't necessarily

339
00:29:20,600 --> 00:29:27,600
mean it's newsworthy. So it is, there's a lot of this is in the setup. I think yes to your question,

340
00:29:27,600 --> 00:29:33,640
leaks are frustrating, disgruntled employees. Of course, nobody wants disgruntled employees.

341
00:29:33,640 --> 00:29:40,600
You want to keep them happy. So I think when you see complaints going out to external voices,

342
00:29:40,600 --> 00:29:47,040
I got to believe that there was some effort at some level for people to resolve that internally.

343
00:29:47,040 --> 00:29:52,400
Maybe not, maybe in this, in and if you, if you believe probably Starbucks people are so silently

344
00:29:52,400 --> 00:29:57,760
feel or they're feeling silenced because of these diversity pressures. And again, this is

345
00:29:57,760 --> 00:30:03,440
an issue that we, you know, have been dealing with now at one level or another for five years,

346
00:30:03,440 --> 00:30:09,640
internally and externally in big companies. So I've got to believe that companies can get

347
00:30:09,640 --> 00:30:15,600
a handle on what's working and what's not. And, you know, there should be forums inside

348
00:30:15,600 --> 00:30:22,400
of companies for people to express things that they're concerned about, how you are, if you

349
00:30:22,400 --> 00:30:26,560
are dealing with them, you know, satisfactorily or not, I think that's kind of on you. And there

350
00:30:26,560 --> 00:30:29,240
are going to be some things that, you know, you're not going to be able to make everybody

351
00:30:29,240 --> 00:30:34,720
happy all of the time. But I think that gets, that gets back to this sort of umbrella, you

352
00:30:34,720 --> 00:30:41,920
know, argument here, which is, do we try to appease a narrow audience and sort of tell

353
00:30:41,920 --> 00:30:48,080
them one thing in one way while sort of either directly or with a wink, letting everybody

354
00:30:48,080 --> 00:30:52,480
else know, like, we're not really changing anything. That's a really difficult position to

355
00:30:52,480 --> 00:30:56,320
be a problem. Yeah. Yeah. So, yeah, out with it, I say.

356
00:30:56,320 --> 00:31:02,200
For me, I think out of all this, it's really important that we pack way up here. I mean,

357
00:31:02,200 --> 00:31:07,640
everything over the past six months is, it's still, no matter how much we say, you've

358
00:31:07,640 --> 00:31:13,800
got to find a way to take control of the narrative. I got to say, I haven't seen enough examples

359
00:31:13,800 --> 00:31:18,960
of what that looks like in practice. And I think part of it is that we're so focused

360
00:31:18,960 --> 00:31:26,100
on beating Robbie Starbucks as opposed to just doing our business, if you will.

361
00:31:26,100 --> 00:31:31,640
Well, I think that, yeah, I understand what you're saying, but the problem with this gets

362
00:31:31,640 --> 00:31:37,320
back to my point about tactics being important here because he's not coming at this issue

363
00:31:37,320 --> 00:31:45,280
constructively. His, I think, a lot of his expectations are unreasonable, certainly at the

364
00:31:45,280 --> 00:31:50,480
most basic level in that they are, they run counter to, I must say, it's universal, but

365
00:31:50,480 --> 00:31:58,120
the very broadly accepted fact that diversity has been, it has business benefits. And so he's

366
00:31:58,120 --> 00:32:05,880
not engaging at a level where you're going to win on, on reason, right? If you want to

367
00:32:05,880 --> 00:32:10,960
get out of this pattern of just sort of like taking your beating and then moving on to the

368
00:32:10,960 --> 00:32:16,400
next person, again, it just doesn't feel good to me. And reputationally, my gut says it's

369
00:32:16,400 --> 00:32:22,480
not a positive over the long term. I think that you have to understand how to deal with

370
00:32:22,480 --> 00:32:26,960
someone who comes out, you like that. And for me, it comes down to tactics.

371
00:32:26,960 --> 00:32:32,080
Yeah, no, that's great. Part of what I'm thinking here is what's a strategy or lens that we

372
00:32:32,080 --> 00:32:38,200
can look at that's going to help us and help companies that are facing is moving forward.

373
00:32:38,200 --> 00:32:43,220
And I'm wondering if giving them that much attention by being the focus of the discussion

374
00:32:43,220 --> 00:32:49,280
is already setting him up to win. So here's a way I'm thinking about it is that beating

375
00:32:49,280 --> 00:32:54,680
him is maybe not the right frame, no matter what it's always going to keep companies

376
00:32:54,680 --> 00:33:00,940
in a reactive state, not proactive. It's going to turn the issue into a battle and not

377
00:33:00,940 --> 00:33:06,180
a business decision or a series of business decisions. Your habits and routines and what

378
00:33:06,180 --> 00:33:12,700
you're all about. And I think it's going to create more unintended consequences. So part

379
00:33:12,700 --> 00:33:18,620
of that is certainly no matter what, we've got to be owning the story and shaping our own

380
00:33:18,620 --> 00:33:23,380
narrative. And part of that is staying true to your purpose, staying true to what it is

381
00:33:23,380 --> 00:33:27,780
that you're trying to accomplish, meeting the needs of your stakeholders. It means building

382
00:33:27,780 --> 00:33:33,820
a resilient internal culture. If employees understand why a company has certain policies,

383
00:33:33,820 --> 00:33:40,420
they're less likely to feel blindsided and to leak internal information to external critics.

384
00:33:40,420 --> 00:33:46,740
So internal line is a much better defense than a PR strategy is I think.

385
00:33:46,740 --> 00:33:51,540
Yeah, it doesn't feel good to say we're going to beat somebody. But I think it's how do

386
00:33:51,540 --> 00:33:57,740
you define success for yourself and how is he defining success for himself? And I think

387
00:33:57,740 --> 00:34:03,460
you look at it and you got to go, I don't care how he defines success because how we define

388
00:34:03,460 --> 00:34:08,100
success is being to your point, being true to our purpose, being true to our values as

389
00:34:08,100 --> 00:34:15,540
a company, operating with integrity and not creating more work for ourselves by allowing

390
00:34:15,540 --> 00:34:21,580
two contradictory storylines to exist out there that at some point, like I think dear,

391
00:34:21,580 --> 00:34:26,020
somewhere down the line, we feel like we have to continue to put effort into reconciling

392
00:34:26,020 --> 00:34:31,260
these two messages that people maybe continue to hear. So I think it comes down to some

393
00:34:31,260 --> 00:34:37,300
pretty basic concepts and the one that stands out the most for me is tell your own story.

394
00:34:37,300 --> 00:34:40,860
You have a right to tell your own story. You tell your own story when you release a new

395
00:34:40,860 --> 00:34:46,980
product, you tell your own story when you name it. In every other instance, I think the

396
00:34:46,980 --> 00:34:53,500
PR instinct is to say we are going to be the ones who tell the story. And this is one

397
00:34:53,500 --> 00:34:57,220
where we are breaking our own rules and we have to ask ourselves why?

398
00:34:57,220 --> 00:35:01,620
So you know, there is a saying that we judge others by their actions but ourselves by our

399
00:35:01,620 --> 00:35:07,160
intentions. That is human nature. And in corporate DEI, that is exactly where companies are

400
00:35:07,160 --> 00:35:11,380
finding themselves getting in trouble. Then once diversity initiatives are the best of

401
00:35:11,380 --> 00:35:17,260
intentions, but you know, employees, customers and critics don't always experience the intent,

402
00:35:17,260 --> 00:35:22,620
they experience the impact. So if your leadership team assumes we meant well is enough, well,

403
00:35:22,620 --> 00:35:27,140
they are missing the point. You know, you don't get credit for what you hope would happen.

404
00:35:27,140 --> 00:35:30,380
You are accountable for what actually happens. And if you are not paying attention to that

405
00:35:30,380 --> 00:35:35,460
reality, somebody else, whether it is an employee and activist or politician is going to

406
00:35:35,460 --> 00:35:40,980
point it out for you. And that point is when you are reacting instead of leading. So I would

407
00:35:40,980 --> 00:35:46,380
say here is the challenge. We got to stop judging our programs by intent and start measuring

408
00:35:46,380 --> 00:35:51,540
them by outcomes. Companies put DEI programs in place for the best intentions, but that is

409
00:35:51,540 --> 00:35:56,700
how it determines success. What matters is how those programs actually function in the real

410
00:35:56,700 --> 00:36:02,580
world. And sometimes there is an inverted consequences. You know, a policy that is designed

411
00:36:02,580 --> 00:36:07,020
to promote inclusion might unintentionally create resentment. A training program meant

412
00:36:07,020 --> 00:36:12,420
to foster understanding might, alienate employees instead. And if you don't know how these programs

413
00:36:12,420 --> 00:36:16,140
are actually playing out on the ground, then you are leaving yourself vulnerable, not just

414
00:36:16,140 --> 00:36:20,540
the critics like Robbie Starbuck, but to internal discontent and external scrutiny.

415
00:36:20,540 --> 00:36:27,060
Yeah. And I think what a storyteller, what a communications professional can do for a company

416
00:36:27,060 --> 00:36:33,540
is link the outcomes with those intentions. And you do that when the outcomes are as you

417
00:36:33,540 --> 00:36:38,940
intended and you do that when the outcomes are not as you intended and you take responsibility

418
00:36:38,940 --> 00:36:45,140
for those things. But you can't do any of that if you are not telling your own story.

419
00:36:45,140 --> 00:36:49,980
Craig, a great conversation this week. Really appreciate all the thought and we wish the

420
00:36:49,980 --> 00:36:55,860
best of luck for whoever is next on Robbie Starbuck's hit list. We will be watching. That's our

421
00:36:55,860 --> 00:37:00,980
show for this week. We want to thank Shawn P Neal and the people forward network for making

422
00:37:00,980 --> 00:37:05,060
our podcast possible. If you like to tell us what you think, we would love to hear from

423
00:37:05,060 --> 00:37:12,340
you. Our email address is podcast@ocrnetwork.com. Communication breakdown is a production of

424
00:37:12,340 --> 00:37:15,980
the observatory on corporate reputation. I'm Steve Dowling.

425
00:37:15,980 --> 00:37:22,980
And I'm Craig Carroll. Thanks for listening. We'll be back next week.

426
00:37:22,980 --> 00:37:32,980
#corporatereputation #diversity #RobbieStarbuck #Target #Costco #corporatecommunication #DEI #publicrelations #corporatestrategy

427
00:37:32,980 --> 00:37:42,980


428
00:37:42,980 --> 00:37:52,980