- Index hide
The firm’s decision is part of a phenomenon studied by Yale University, on how companies acted in the face of the Russian armed conflict.
Geopolitical conflicts have led to brands like Ben and Jerry’s to make business decisions.
Weber Shandwick also conducted an analysis, where he found out what the opinion was about CEO activism.
The Ministry of Industry and Commerce of Russia announced that Lancome, Armani, Saint Laurent, Redken and Kerastese, trademarks owned by The realwill return to that country, in the midst of the armed conflict in Ukraine where he intervened.
The news supposes the reshipment of merchandise of these brands to the country that has been the object of a series of criticisms due to the geopolitical conflict that it is leading with Ukraine and that has been compared to situations such as the one experienced by Palestine with the armed intervention of Israel.
This agency information RIA Novosti confirms what has been reported since August, about the sale of the products of The real to the distributors of this brand in Russia, due to the obvious, the shortage of these products in that nation.
A projection of Yale University estimated that, in the midst of this conflict, 320 companies completely stopped their operations in Russia or completely left the country; 499 companies temporarily restricted most or almost all operations, keeping return options open; 172 companies reduced some commercial operations, but continued with others; 160 delayed their investments in the country; and 236 refused to stop operations.
Like this phenomenon that has been registered in Russia, brands like Ben and Jerry’s they have made geopolitical decisions like the one it announced in 2021, when it stopped selling its products in the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel.
The decision was argued at the time by the brand as an action in the face of “incompatible with our values to sell ice cream in the occupied Palestinian territories”, the company committed to social justice causes such as Black Lives Matter or LGTBIQ+ rights”.
The questioning of brands to geopolitical phenomena, opposing it to their values, has become a measure increasingly followed by companies, due to the importance of values and the activism that is taken into account by these brands and their managers.
It is important to see that in the cases of Russia or Israel, not all brands are willing to take a stand and implement actions that help to face the circumstances, on the contrary, many brands become allies of these questioned countries, because they give value to their sales needs, arguing the lack of products on store shelves.
Given these phenomena, it is interesting to see that there are very important tendencies of activism, we saw this when a study on activism CEOwhere Weber Shandwick found that 70 percent of respondents said they should talk about skills and talent management; 67 percent said they should talk about a living wage; 62 percent that they should address health issues, while activism CEO it was to refrain from touching on issues such as LGBT+, 44 percent, gun control, 47 percent, and refugees, 44 percent.
The geopolitical impact on business decisions is a phenomenon that was put to the test in the conflict in Russia and Ukraine, revealing the actions of social empathy, beyond business, in which many brands assumed active roles before the population of that country.