This webinar presented a non-partisan analysis of how companies handled being publicly singled out during the first Trump administration and potential best practices in the years to come, providing guidance for both US and multinational entities that will face key issues in the incoming administration including tariffs, taxes, and immigration.
Background Materials
The different approaches to crisis response demonstrated during the last Trump administration, and the background materials mentioned, are:
- Stick to the facts.
- In 2020, Trump called for a boycott after it came out Goodyear wouldn’t let employees wear Trump gear or “Blue Lives Matter” shirts. The company said it had a policy of asking workers to not wear candidate gear and that a deck slide against police gear and for “Black Lives Matter” didn’t come from HQ: “Goodyear has always wholeheartedly supported both equality and law enforcement and will continue to do so. These are not mutually exclusive.”
- Address the issue but not the President.
- In 2017, after Trump attacked NFL players’ knee-taking protests, nearly every team released a statement, but many didn’t mention Trump. Carolina Panthers owner Jerry Richardson said: “We are proud of the men we have on this football team. Our players have been active and impactful participants in making our community stronger.” The League emphasized its support for players’ right to express their views while also promoting unity and respect. Owners framed their responses as a support for free expression rather than a political statement.
- Communicate that this is a business decision.
- Trump attacked Nordstrom in 2017 when it dropped Ivanka’s clothing line; it responded that it was based on performance: “Over the past year, and particularly in the last half of 2016, sales of the brand have steadily declined to the point where it didn’t make good business sense for us to continue with the line for now.”
- In 2018, Trump criticized General Motors and threatened to pull subsidies after GM said it would close five plants. GM defended its record and said the closings would strengthen its ability to thrive (it also said — sticking to facts — many workers would get jobs in other plants): “Yesterday’s announcements support our ability to invest for future growth and position the company for long-term success and maintain and grow American jobs.”
- Defend your company or industry.
- In 2017, again regarding Trump’s criticism of NFL players’ knee-taking protests; Roger Goodell said, “Divisive comments like these demonstrate an unfortunate lack of respect for the NFL.” The NFL initiated efforts to work with players on community outreach programs to address social justice concerns, demonstrating a commitment to actionable change beyond symbolic gestures. The league largely avoided escalating the situation further, aiming to present a united front and de-escalate tensions.
- Highlight your company’s contribution to the economy and job creation.
- Regarding General Motors’ 2018 factory closings, the company said: “GM is committed to maintaining a strong manufacturing presence in the U.S., as evidenced by our more than $22 billion investments in U.S. operations since 2009.”
- Reinforce core values.
- Coca-Cola‘s statement in response to the 2017 Muslim travel ban serves as a strong example of corporate messaging that aligns with core values. By explicitly condemning the travel ban, the company reinforced its commitment to diversity, fairness, and inclusion. Such statements not only define the company’s stance on social and political issues but also strengthen its brand identity among stakeholders who share these values. Coca-Cola’s approach demonstrates how clear and value-driven messaging can effectively communicate a company’s principles while addressing controversial topics.
- Balance criticism with praise.
- On the Muslim travel ban, Mark Zuckerberg wrote both “Like many of you, I’m concerned about the impact of the recent executive orders signed by President Trump” and “I was glad to hear President Trump say he’s going to ‘work something out’ for Dreamers — immigrants who were brought to this country at a young age by their parents.”
- Embrace the attack and use it as marketing.
- In December 2016, President-elect Trump lashed out at Vanity Fair for a scathing review of the Trump Grill in Trump Tower (NYC). The Condé Nast magazine responded by echoing Trump’s own tweet: “Vanity Fair: way up, big success, alive! Subscribe today!” it wrote. It also ran an ad calling itself the “magazine Trump doesn’t want you to read” and said subscriptions were up 100 percent after his tweet.
- Accommodate him.
- In January 2017, before Trump was in office, he attacked Ford for its plan to build a $1.6 billion plant in Mexico. The company then announced it had scrapped the plan and would instead expand a factory in Michigan to make hybrid pickup trucks and electric SUVs. CEO Mark Fields said during a conference call that its decision was based on tax cuts and regulatory proposals supported by Trump. But the company statement didn’t mention Trump or his criticism.
- Ignore him.
- Some companies successfully chose to ignore President Trump’s attacks, demonstrating that remaining silent can sometimes be an effective strategy. When Trump attacked Amazon in 2018, saying it was pulling a “scam” on USPS, the company and Jeff Bezos stayed largely silent; the admin’s task force found that Amazon was profitable for the USPS and wasn’t costing it “massive amounts of money,” as Trump alleged in tweets.
