Is sharing your personal political views in public worth the risk? If your stances are aligned with those of your customers, employees, or followers, taking a side is likely pretty harmless — and of course, if you feel strongly enough, moral considerations may outweigh strategic ones. But many leaders hesitate to take sides on controversial issues out of fear that speaking out might alienate people who disagree with them. Whether you’re a CEO considering releasing a public statement on abortion rights, a supervisor managing a team with divergent opinions on gun control, or just an individual chatting with coworkers about the news, conventional wisdom suggests that staying neutral is often the safe option. But is it?
When Staying Neutral Backfires
Research shows that “staying out of it” might make you seem more suspicious and untrustworthy than outright disagreement.
August 24, 2022
HBR Staff/artpartner-images/DNY59/Getty Images
Summary.
Many leaders are reluctant to voice an opinion on controversial political topics. Whether you’re a C-suite executive releasing a public statement on a hot-button news event, a supervisor managing a diverse team, or even just an individual contributor chatting with your coworkers, many of us assume that refusing to pick a side is the safest option. The authors’ recent research, however, suggests that this approach can seriously backfire. Through a series of studies with more than 4,000 people, the authors found that staying neutral can make you come across as more suspicious and untrustworthy than simply sharing your opinion, even if your audience disagrees with that opinion. As such, the authors suggest that if someone asks for your opinion, you should certainly be considerate, thoughtful, and respectful in your response — but you shouldn’t be afraid to take a side.