Do not have a backbone?

Suddenly the business community is full of converts. Oil companies that reduce their investments in renewable energy. Banks that step out of climate alliances. Large companies such as McDonald’s, Google and Accenture that adjust or abolish their diversity policy. Companies that delete the words diversity, equality and inclusion from their annual reports. As solemnly as they showed themselves green and diversity conscious in recent years, they now leave those promises now.

That ‘anti-woke’ movement started in the US before the Trump election. But Trump changes a lot More American companies their ambitions. It is now also affecting companies in Europe. The American embassy in The Hague has asked its Dutch suppliers to declare that « their diversity policy is in line with the » anti-diversity decree « of Trump, » reports Het Financieele Dagblad. Ambassades in other countries sent the same letter.

In recent months the question often arose in me: do companies that do not have a backbone? Or were ‘more climate -friendly operating’ and ‘more inclusive personnel policy’ always little more than nice talks?

Not all greenwashers

It is not that simple, say three experts I spoke. Professor Mijntje Lückerath specializes in good business board. She wrote the book Moral dilemmas in the boardroom. Professor Harry Garretsen is researching leadership with Janka Stoker. Vino Timmerman was a lawyer-general at the Supreme Court, specialized in corporate law.

All three think that there is an actual change at companies that can also not be stopped by Trump. The group of companies that want to become more climate -friendly grows, just like the group that wants a more diverse workforce. Out of conviction and from business interest. Companies are eager for staff and there is money to make money from the cover to a more climate -friendly economy.

Garretsen: « Companies will not all turn out to be Rainbowwashers and Greenwashers. The group that does mean it has grown. » In bonuses for top managers, climate and social goals more often play a role, according to research from KPMG. « Then something really changes. »

Timmerman: « It is very unwise to go against social trends for companies. Perhaps companies are taking a step back now, but I cannot imagine that the emancipation movement of women, people of color and people with a different sexual orientation does not continue. For some companies it is very attractive to make a lot of money from the fossil economy, but in the long term they graves their grave.” ””

However, many companies will comment less on their ambitions. Some American companies actually spend less money on promoting diversity, shows research from the Financial Times. Other companies merely change the words in their annual report. Instead of ‘striving for diversity’, they want to be a place where everyone is flourishing.

Timmerman: « I think it is wise not to make too much noise. I notice that supermarket group Ahold adds more vegetarian products to the range without much publicity. That evokes less resistance than pronounced green CEOs such as former Unilever CEO Paul Polman. He had to deal with the Shareholders. »

Sausje of the right words goes off

The letter from the American embassy goes way too far, the three think. Timmerman: « The US is now going to interfere with the internal state of affairs at companies in other countries. That is not possible. » Companies that do business in the US and Europe are stuck. Between European requirements to become more climate -friendly and to name more women in the top and American policy that opposes this. Lückerath: « The American model has always been more focused on shareholders. But we are moving in the same direction. Now the direction is opposed. Not moving in the US can companies yield costs or legal claims. »

According to Lückerath, it is too easy to say about decisions of companies: where was the moral compass? « The moral compass does not exist. If you have to choose between your diversity policy in word somewhat weaken and a large government contract, that is more than a choice between principles and money. If many jobs are in danger of being in danger, that is also a moral dilemma. »

In recent years, companies could only claim one thing

There are already shifts on display From dozens of billions of euros by American and European pension funds that do not or do not want to invest with an eye for climate change. Garretsen: « In recent years, companies have been able to claim one thing: of course we are sustainable and diverse. Now the sauce is scraped off the right words. And it is clear whether companies have backbone. Make no sense: companies that drop their values ​​are not attractive for many customers and potential employees. »

In his inaugural lecture in 2020, Timmerman outlined how in the Netherlands the era of ‘the political enterprise‘Had arrived in which companies receive social tasks such as promoting diversity and sustainability. But what if those social tasks suddenly change strongly after elections, such as in the US? Then do we get the wind vane company? Timmerman: « In this world it is extremely difficult to pursue balanced policy. Look at weapons. Pension funds wanted to invest less in this in recent years, and more. »

I suspect that many companies are pronounced less. And we are more difficult to assess whether companies continue to become more diverse and greener. Or that that was always a superficial layer of lacquer.

To share

Mail the editors