Regardless of personal opinions, there’s no disputing that divisive public figure Elon Musk knows how to steer the course of the conversation. But what lessons, if any, can leaders learn from studying his outspoken narratives and how can trust be rebuilt in the current unstable political climate?
Right now, Elon Musk would likely come close to topping a list of the world’s most controversial public figures. Yet eight years ago, when German-born, Switzerland-based academic Dr Dorothee Winkler, decided to write her doctoral thesis on non-market strategies in an ideologically polarised world, and chose him as one of her case study subjects, he wasn’t anywhere near as notorious. “It was clear that we were entering a period of very strong polarisation and the initial idea was to think about how firms could deal with this new environment,” she recalls. “I thought the automotive sector and Tesla would be interesting, especially as Elon Musk was already also looking at space exploration, and a CEO activist, publicly speaking out on social, environmental, and political issues – a phenomenon at the time. It turns out he was a good choice as quite a lot happened.”
This is something of an understatement. Dorothee and her University of Zurich co-authors evaluated data from 2013 to 2022, covering Barack Obama’s second presidency, Donald Trump’s first and most of Joe Biden’s time in office. During this time, Elon made a complete 360-degree turn in his opinions using two communication strategies. “Initially, he was very one-sided and clearly aligned with the democratic standpoint. This he communicated in an unequivocal, non-robust way, by portraying himself as an entrepreneur saving the world from climate change through producing electric vehicles,” explains Dorothee, who specialises in the intersection of business with the political and societal sphere.
“Until 2016, liberal media such as The New York Times loved Elon, portraying him as a climate saver and global entrepreneur. His business also received subsidies from the government. Right-wing and conservative outlets like Fox News and The Wall Street Journal thought he was stealing taxpayers’ money from hard-working middle-class American people for expensive cars only bought by the rich,” she says, referring to observations taken from her ongoing work. As soon as Donald Trump came into power, everything changed. “Musk needed a strategy to appease him,” confirms Dorothee, also pointing out that as a company, Tesla – much like countless corporations around the world – was dependent on pleasing both sides of the political spectrum. “While customers were initially in liberal voting states such as California, to roll out elsewhere, he needed to be liked by Republicans too. We also looked into the company’s funding base and this was associated with both sides.”
His response, she explains, was to shift to robust activism. “We can see the pattern: he began to act like a chameleon, offering communicative treats for both parties.” She cites tweets about domestic job creation which aligned with the populist agenda and the notion of making America great again (liked by Republicans) and on the importance of environmentalism (liked by Democrats) which helped him gain approval all round. During this period, Elon also appealed to shared values and wasn’t aggressively critical of either side.
That is, until 2020 when he made a full right-wing swing back to non-robust activism. “He went in a conservative direction, becoming polarising and provocative. It wasn’t enough that he was clearly on the side of Trump but he began derogating the Democrats, tweeting that Biden was a dumb puppet in human form and that all social media channels were a propaganda machine for the Democrats. This was one of his reasons for taking over Twitter.”
For all the potentially damaging outcomes of such behaviour, Dorothee believes that there are some lessons that leaders can learn from his unorthodox strategies, to help navigate an ideologically polarised world without alienating stakeholders. “One route is to follow his previous risk mitigating, robust communication strategy by looking for what unites in a diplomatic way,” she says. “In challenging environments lies a unique opportunity for managers. By understanding and leveraging cross-cutting virtues, or shared values that transcend political divides, they can help an organisation not just survive but thrive.” For this to work though, messaging must be contextualised. She gives examples of appealing to the notion of the American dream in the US, for instance, compared to Italy, where family values and cultural heritage are integral to the majority.
The advantage of this depolarising approach, says Dorothee, is that businesses can remain flexible and enhance brand resilience. “In the first presidency many companies stood up and criticised Trump but now most of them ‘kneel down’ towards his political agenda to have an easier life. Instead, tailoring communications to different audiences while maintaining an overarching theme could help keep everyone on side.” Avoiding reputational risks aligned to political positioning then, ensures long-term legitimacy and market positioning. “The world will continue to be volatile and polarised but it is ultimately up to leaders whether they fuel division or foster depolarization. What’s important for investors is to analyse ideological positioning and CEO communicative behaviour of a target or portfolio company to see where they stand. This needs to be built into risk assessment strategies.”
Looking inwards, Dorothee suggests that corporate leaders focus on their own area of influence and practical ways they can create positive social cohesion. She concludes: “what some firms are doing is engaging and fostering constructive dialogue by bringing people from different ideological maps together in stakeholder dialogue rounds. This can contribute to rebuilding some of those bridges our society so desperately needs.”
Dr Dorothee Winkler
post doctoral researcher at the University of Zurich