The exposure of Nubank in June as a supporter of the video producer Brasil Paralelo, identified as a diffuser of revisionism and denialism (such as the attempt to discredit Maria da Penha, responsible for the law to protect women against aggressors) and who was demonetized by the Superior Electoral Court (TSE) for spreading fake news, caused a tsunami of negative comments on social networks and the flight of clients that were not discreet & many made a point of trumpeting the reason for the closure of the account, retro-feeding and keeping the crisis on the rise.
One of the critical points was the disclosure of an event of the producer by the co-founder of the bank, Cristina Junqueira, in her Instagram account 0 the executive, still, ended up leaving the board of directors of the site Ranking of Politicians, which has Brazil Parallel among its maintainers. The issue is that a personal speech or opinion has the strength of institutional communication, thanks to the propagatory power of social media BCG april it addresses the issue and shows the value of discretion in a polarized world, in which leaders and executives have become more careful to take positions on the values advocated by the company so as not to be surprised by initiatives that are antagonistic to the positions assumed ¡ ̄ how to support pronouncements for or against more sensitive issues.
Studies by the consultancy pointed out that an image emerges not of companies that depart from their values, but of “companies that recalibrate when and how to make their voices heard in an era of political polarization and viral echo chambers in social networks”. “Companies are also adopting a more sophisticated approach to the communications generated, spending less time publicizing their commitments and more to building their own business case (..) ”, the article points out. Also “ are documenting their actions and explaining their positions directly to employees, customers and other important stakeholders (..), learning to avoid terms that have become politically charged, subject to misinterpretation or that irritate key segments of their customers (..) and building stricter mechanisms to address thorny issues and mitigate public relations risks”.
In Nubank, the crisis has caused company's response saying not to support the Brazil Parallel channel, analyzing the action as “damage control”, which would not need to occur if there was more care in the demonstrations of its leaders. It also contaminated the internal environment, with no positive comments from employees circulating on corporate social networks, reinforcing the external crisis intercept Portal, internal messages from the bank's management pointed to the need to review communication policies of the top leadership, but came out in defense of Junqueira.
In addition to minimizing the post, an internal statement reinforced the plurality of ideas and positioned itself against “censura” and “intolerance” against the brand's association with the producer's cultural activism, as well as against alleged violence against those who “promote different points of view.It also highlighted how one of the sources for feeding the problem “internal leaks about their communications. “Any who resorts to leaks (.....) should look for another workplace.
The case highlights some issues. One, that the culture of leadership seems somewhat contradictory with image and innovative discourse of the startup that opened the doors to the digital revolution of the Brazilian financial system.To what extent disruption and conservatism come (or not) in contradiction? Another, as communicated by the bank to employees admits, the lack of preparation and better defined policy on public discourses.One more, a certain innocence in assuming that internal discussions that do not involve strategic secrets, such as product planning or algorithm development, are restricted to the company environment.
Of course, this is not the first time that executive stumbles happen in the corporate world. By word of mouth some cases have become anecdotes, such as the thank you of the then president of Corinthians to Brahmas that Antarctica sent toast or the press conference of Souza Cruz when one of the spokesmen let a pack of Marlboro (cigarette brand of competitor Phillip Morris). Less funny are cases such as the dismissal of a Locaweb executive who insulted a football team in a personal profile of social network.
From a reputational point of view, in which the positive points are stimulated by integrated communication policies covering all stakeholders (stakeholders) and all their points of contact, the example indicates a possible greater attention of the bank with, say, communication with the financial and capital markets, than with the appropriate social profile for its executives which, today, weighs as much with end consumers as sponsorships and millionaire activations in various events, a segment where the brand usually has a presence.
The definition of clear rules and a more nuanced view of what to say or not in networks, in order to favor the company, also marks many points in the question of reputation. A well-built reputational strategy, taking into account the balance between the image that a company and its leaders have of itself, and as can be seen by others, certainly contributes to avoid (or mitigate) the crisis more efficiently.
