Nubank's exposure in June as a supporter of the video production company Brasil Paralelo, identified as a disseminator of revisionism and denialism (such as the attempt to discredit Maria da Penha, responsible for the law protecting women against aggressors) and which was even demonetized by the Superior Electoral Court (TSE) for spreading fake news, provoked a tsunami of negative comments on social media and the not-so-discreet exodus of customers – many made a point of publicizing the reason for closing their accounts, fueling and keeping the crisis on the rise.
One of the critical points was the promotion of an event by the producer by co-founder of the bank, Cristina Junqueira, on her Instagram account – the executive also ended up leaving the board of the Politicians Ranking website, which has Brasil Paralelo among its supporters. The issue is that a speech or personal opinion has the force of an institutional communication, thanks to the propagating power of social media. Article ofApril BCGaddresses the topic and shows the value of discretion in a polarized world, in which managers and executives have become more careful to take positions related to the values advocated by the company so as not to be surprised by initiatives that are antagonistic to the positions taken – such as supporting statements for or against more sensitive issues.
Consulting studies have indicated that what emerges is not an image of companies distancing themselves 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 on social media." Companies are also adopting a more sophisticated approach with generated communications, spending less time promoting their commitments and more on building theirbusiness case(...) ", points out the article. They are also "documenting their actions and explaining their positions directly to employees, clients, and other key stakeholders (...), learning to avoid terms that have become politically charged, subject to misinterpretation, or that irritate key segments of their clients (...) and building more rigorous mechanisms to address thorny issues and mitigate public relations risks."
At Nubank, the crisis causedcompany responsesaying they do not support the Brasil Paralelo channel, analyzing the action as "damage control," which would not be necessary if there had been more care in the statements of their leaders. It also contaminated the internal environment, with negative comments from employees circulating on corporate social networks, reinforcing the external crisis. According to theportal Intercept, internal messages from the bank's management pointed out the need to review senior leadership communication policies, but came out in defense of Junqueira.
In addition to minimizing the post, an internal communication reinforced the plurality of ideas and positioned itself against "censorship" and "intolerance" from those who opposed the company's association with the producer's cultural activism, as well as against alleged violence towards those who "promote different points of view." It also highlighted internal leaks as one of the sources fueling the problem regarding its communications. "Anyone who resorts to leaks (...) should look for another place to work."
The case highlights some issues. Uma, whose leadership culture seems somewhat contradictory to the innovative image and discourse of the startup that opened the doors to the Brazilian financial system's digital revolution. To what extent do disruption and conservatism conflict (or not)? Another, as bank notices to employees admit, is the lack of preparation and a more well-defined policy regarding public speeches. One more thing, a certain innocence in assuming that internal discussions that do not involve strategic secrets, such as product planning or algorithm development, are confined to the company's environment.
Of course, it's not the first time that executive missteps happen in the corporate world. By word of mouth, some cases became anecdotes, such as the then president of Corinthians thanking Brahmas that Antarctica sent as a gift or the press conference of Souza Cruz when one of the spokespersons let a pack of Marlboro (a cigarette brand from competitor Phillip Morris) show. Less funny are cases like the dismissal of an executive from Locaweb who insulted a football team on a personal social media profile.
From a reputational point of view, where positive points are stimulated by integrated communication policies covering all stakeholders and all their points of contact, the example indicates a possible greater attention from the bank to, let's say, communication with the financial and capital markets, than to the social profile suited to its executives – which, today, carries as much weight with end consumers as sponsorships and million-dollar activations in various events, a segment where the brand usually has a presence.
The definition of clear rules and a more refined vision of what to say or not on social media, in order to favor the company, also scores many points in terms of reputation. A well-crafted reputational strategy, taking into account the balance between the image a company and its leaders have of themselves and how they can be perceived by others, certainly helps to prevent (or mitigate) a crisis more effectively.
