Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
WWW.GSB.STANFORD.EDU/CGRI
TA B LE O F CO NTE NT S
Executive Summary and Key Findings............................ 1
Methodology....................................................................... 4
Review of Findings.............................................................. 5
Demographic Information.............................................. 13
Acknowledgments............................................................ 14
Contact Information....................................................... 15
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND KEY FINDINGS
THE PUBLIC TAKES A SURPRISINGLY MIXED VIEW OF CEO ACTIVISM.
WHILE SOME INDIVIDUALS REACT POSITIVELY TO CEOs TAKING A POSITION ON SOCIAL,
ENVIRONMENTAL, OR POLITICAL ISSUES, THEY ARE LARGELY COUNTERBALANCED BY OTHERS
WITH A STRONG NEGATIVE REACTION.
PEOPLE ARE MORE LIKELY TO THINK OF PRODUCTS THEY HAVE STOPPED USING THAN
PRODUCTS THEY HAVE STARTED USING BECAUSE OF CEO ACTIVISM.
“We find that the public is highly divided about CEOs who “Hot-button issues are hot for a reason,” adds Brian Tayan,
take vocal positions on social, environmental, or political researcher at Stanford Graduate School of Business.
issues,” says Professor David F. Larcker, Stanford Graduate “Interestingly, people are much more likely to think of
School of Business. “While some applaud CEOs who speak products they have stopped using than products they have
up, others strongly disapprove. The divergence in opinions started using because of a position the CEO took on a public
is striking. CEOs who take public positions on specific issues issue. When consumers don’t like what they hear, they react
might build loyalty with their employees or customers, but the best way they know how to: by closing their wallets.”
these same positions can inadvertently alienate important
In summer and fall 2018, the Rock Center for Corporate
segments of those populations. The cost of CEO activism
Governance at Stanford University conducted a nationwide
might be higher than many CEOs, companies, or boards
survey of 3,544 individuals—representative by gender, race,
realize.”
age, household income, and state residence—to understand
how the American public views CEOs who take public
positions on environmental, social, and political issues.
Opinions vary more significantly depending on the age of The public reaction is somewhat more mixed about issues
the respondent. A large majority of Millennials (71 percent) of diversity and equality. Fifty-four percent of Americans
and two-thirds of Generation X (63 percent) support CEO support CEO activism about racial issues, while 29 percent
activism. Baby Boomers, by contrast, are more likely to do not; 43 percent support activism about LGBTQ rights,
disapprove of CEO activism, with only 46 percent approving while 32 percent do not; and only 40 percent support
and 54 percent disapproving.1 activism about gender issues, while 37 percent do not.3 The
public viewpoint on whether CEOs should speak out on these
All respondents are more in favor of CEOs taking public issues varies considerably by age and political affiliation,
positions on social, environmental, or political issues if with Democrats and Millennials more likely to favor CEO
those issues directly impact their business or employees. activism, Republicans and Baby Boomers more likely to
Seventy-two percent of the public support CEO activism oppose it, and Independents and Generation X respondents
under these circumstances, with Millennials (76 percent), closely divided.
Gen X (71 percent), and Baby Boomers (60 percent) holding
favorable opinions.
2 Net-favorable opinions are calculated as the percent of respondents who select “thank you for
speaking up” minus the percent of respondents who select “keep your mouth shut.” Respondents
who select “no opinion” are excluded.
1 Millennials are defined as respondents age 38 or younger. Generation X are respondents age 39
to 53. Baby Boomers are respondents age 54 or older. 3 LGBTQ means lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer/questioning
AMERICANS ARE MOST LIKELY TO RECALL PROMINENT Respondents claim that disagreement with the CEO over
CEOs SPEAKING UP ABOUT ISSUES THEY AGREE — AND
an environmental, social, or political issue caused them to
DISAGREE — WITH.
decrease their spending on that company’s products by 50
Americans are aware of prominent CEOs who take public
positions on social, environmental, and political issues. percent, on average (from $124 per month to $62 per month).
The CEOs and former CEOs of Microsoft, Tesla, Starbucks, A full 69 percent claim that they stopped using the product
Apple, Facebook, Target, and Chick-fil-A are recognized on or service entirely.
an unprompted basis for their stances on racial equality,
income inequality, privacy, women’s rights, religious rights, By contrast, respondents claim that agreement with the CEO
and environmental issues. over an environmental, social, or political issue caused them
to increase their spending by 91 percent, on average (from
Of note, many of the same CEOs are cited as examples of CEO $80 per month to $152 per month). Only 21 percent claim
activism that the public agrees with as well as examples of that they started using the product or service for the first
CEO activism that they disagree with. For example, the CEO time as a result of the CEO’s stance.
of Chick-fil-A is cited favorably for his support of religious
rights and negatively for his views of the LGBTQ community. “While it is difficult to generalize from self-reported purchase
Similarly, the former CEO of Starbucks is cited both favorably data, Americans clearly express an awareness of the positions
and unfavorably for his stances on racial issues. that CEOs take and are willing to change their buying habits
when they agree or disagree,” says Tayan. “Companies and
“The fact that the same names pop up both positively and their boards need to understand the demographics of their
negatively underscores the polarizing nature of these issues,” employee and customer base and do the calculus to figure
observes Professor Larcker. “Prominent CEOs who use their out whether their CEOs are doing more harm or good when
positions to advocate for issues that they personally believe they speak out on controversial issues.”
in can have a bifurcated impact on the public. CEO activism
really is a double-edged sword.”
n Yes n No
Full Sample
65%
35%
28% 29%
Democrat Millennials
57% 63%
43% 37%
Republican Gen X
65% 46%
35% 54%
25%
5. Very Strongly Average
34%
4.
34% 3.8
3.
4%
2.
3%
n Yes n No
Full Sample
72%
28%
22% 24%
Democrat Millennials
67% 71%
33% 29%
Republican Gen X
71% 60%
29% 40%
31%
5. Very Strongly Average
35%
4.
28%
3.9
3.
4%
2.
2%
Thank You for Speaking Up – By Political Affiliation Thank You for Speaking Up – By Age
(Sorted by Democrat favorability) (Sorted by Millennials favorability)
* Responses vary significantly when respondents are segmented by race. White respondents reply 49% “thank you for speaking up.” Nonwhite respondents reply
66% “thank you for speaking up.”
** LGBTQ means lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or queer/questioning
*** Reponses vary only modestly when respondents are segmented by gender. Female respondents reply 42% “thank you for speaking up.” Male respondents reply
37% “thank you for speaking up.”
* Calculated as the percent of respondents who select “thank you for speaking up” minus the percent of respondents who select “keep your mouth shut.” Excludes
respondents who select “no opinion.”
7. Can you give an example of a CEO speaking out about a social, environmental, or political issue that you
disagree with?
(Most frequently cited, on an unprompted basis in descending order*)
n Yes n No
Full Sample
72%
28%
18% 24%
Democrat Millennials
64% 69%
36% 31%
Republican Gen X
69% 60%
31% 40%
n Yes n No
Full Sample
62%
38%
31% 38%
Democrat Millennials
58% 60%
42% 40%
Republican Gen X
61% 63%
39% 37%
10. Can you think of a product or service that you use LESS or have stopped using because of a position that the CEO took
on a social, environmental, or political issue?
Percent Responding
35%
After
50% 69%
* Respondents were given the option to report spending on a daily, weekly,
or monthly basis. Responses were calculated on a monthly equivalent basis.
Note that these numbers are self-reported and might not reflect actual
changes in purchasing behavior.
Percent Responding
20%
After
* Respondents were given the option to report spending on a daily, weekly,
91% 21%
or monthly basis. Responses were calculated on a monthly equivalent basis.
Note that these numbers are self-reported and might not reflect actual
changes in purchasing behavior.
Political Affiliation
Average Median
33%
Democrat
27%
38 34 Republican
28%
Independent
1%
Other
11%
None
Region
(As defined by the U.S. Census Bureau)
Household Income
18%
Northeast
39% 17%
South Less than $20,000
23% 14%
Midwest $20,000 but less than $30,000
21% 12%
West $30,000 but less than $40,000
8%
$40,000 but less than $50,000
9%
$50,000 but less than $60,000
8%
$60,000 but less than $75,000
15%
$75,000 but less than $100,000
8%
$100,000 but less than $125,000
4%
$125,000 but less than $150,000
5%
$150,000 or more
DAVID F. LARCKER
David F. Larcker is the James Irvin Miller Professor of Accounting at Stanford
Graduate School of Business; director of the Corporate Governance Research
Initiative; and senior faculty of the Arthur and Toni Rembe Rock Center for
Corporate Governance. His research focuses on executive compensation
and corporate governance. Professor Larcker presently serves on the Board
of Trustees for Wells Fargo Advantage Funds. He is coauthor of the books
A Real Look at Real World Corporate Governance and Corporate Governance
Matters.
Email: dlarcker@stanford.edu
Twitter: @stanfordcorpgov
Full Bio: http://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/faculty/david-f-larcker
BRIAN TAYAN
Brian Tayan is a member of the Corporate Governance Research Initiative
at Stanford Graduate School of Business. He has written broadly on the
subject of corporate governance, including boards of directors, succession
planning, compensation, financial accounting, and shareholder relations.
He is coauthor with David Larcker of the books A Real Look at Real World
Corporate Governance and Corporate Governance Matters.
Email: btayan@stanford.edu
Full Bio: http://www.gsb.stanford.edu/contact/brian-tayan
Acknowledgments
THE AUTHORS WOULD LIKE TO THANK MICHELLE E. GUTMAN OF
THE CORPORATE GOVERNANCE RESEARCH INITIATIVE AT STANFORD
GRADUATE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS FOR HER RESEARCH ASSISTANCE
ON THIS STUDY.
Copyright ©2018 Stanford Graduate School of Business and the Rock Center for Corporate Governance