The world around us is shifting rapidly and divides old and new are widening—in economies, societies, and organizations. Debates about when and how business leaders should respond to societal conflict affecting the communities they serve are taking place daily. The recent events in Minnesota that led to the deaths of two members of the community heightened many people’s focus on the topic.

In these situations, people on either side of the issues often call on companies to “take a stand.”

“Taking a stand” can be interpreted as choosing sides—and whatever issue a company and community are facing, the legal, reputational, and operational risks of choosing a side often prompt leaders to hesitate to act at all. It is true that each company will face moments that call for its leaders to take a side. But the most effective stand for leaders to take is enabling constructive engagement within the organization and among those with differing views. And that does not require advocacy for a specific position; in fact, taking sides often reduces the chances of constructive engagement. 

Our research and work with leaders around the world suggest there is a far greater upside in creating the conditions in which people can bridge divides, and a far greater risk than many think in simply remaining silent, which can be construed as taking the side of the status quo. Nearly two-thirds of CEOs and directors across all major global markets report that the ability to lead constructively across boundaries is foundational to success—more important than operational skills and strategic ability—and a key driver of innovation and financial performance.¹ The implication is clear: leadership teams should be adept at harnessing conflict, and that is never more important than in moments of heightened tension.

Why now?

As 2026 unfolds, the question is not whether leaders across the globe will face division, but how they will respond to it. These are defining moments, and many leaders don’t know where to start; in our third annual global CEO & Board Confidence Monitor, 79% of CEOs and board members who cited social polarization as a key issue reported limited confidence in their organizations’ ability to manage it. Leaders who set the conditions for and practice constructive engagement, even across the most difficult fault lines, build trust and create the conditions for progress.

Actions you can take

• Agree on a framework. Decide which issues your organization will engage with based on your values and what is most material to your performance.
• Scenario plan. Something will happen that affects your people and operations, but today’s volatility makes it hard to predict exactly what or when. Practice ahead of time so you’re ready to engage when you need to.
• Set expectations for engagement in your everyday work. Find ways to talk about your organizational values and why engagement on topics that affect them matters to your organizational future. Role model constructive engagement, and reward others for participating.
• When something happens, work back from the future to stress test your approach. As with any other strategic initiative, think about where you want to be as an organization five years from now. Make sure what you do operationally and what you say as a leadership team today won’t limit your options for getting there—as long as whatever you do or don’t do aligns with your organization’s values.

Our firm’s view on these subjects, which we call Leading across boundaries, is explored in “Leading across boundaries: Why CEOs and board members see this as a strategic asset,” a global study of over 500 directors and CEOs.

To dive further into how we approach this topic, visit Leading across boundaries: Our view.

Reference

¹ Jeremy Hanson and Jonathan McBride, “Leading across boundaries: Why CEOs and board members see this capability as a strategic asset,” Heidrick & Struggles, October 7, 2025, heidrick.com.