不难发现，最近吉列推出的广告不是典型的剃须刀广告。广告里没有类似刀片滑过肥皂泡或者清水，然后露出一张刚剃完胡须面孔的镜头，实际上是一些反对霸凌和性骚扰滋事者的男性，广告画面明确传递了信息：抵制“有毒的大男子主义”。

与其说是宣传片，看起来更像是面向社会的请愿，而且比起十年前，现在更为常见。去年秋天，耐克请美国职业橄榄球四分卫转型的社会活动人士柯林·卡普尼克拍广告，还是去年，体育用品零售商迪克体育用品决定限制旗下门店出售枪支，不少企业面临存在政治分歧问题时更愿意选边站队。而且相关姿态可能不仅是依据原则采取行动，也可以提振销售业绩，帮助一些品牌从无数同类产品中脱颖而出，吸引持有相同观点的客户，不过此举也意味着抛弃意见不一致的顾客。

至于股东会不会高兴，目前尚不清楚。从短期来看，犀利的言论往往会吓跑一些不够坚定的投资者。在采取上述行动后，迪克体育用品、耐克和吉列母公司宝洁的股票都迅速下挫。但耐克随后公布了增长强劲的财报，三只股票又集体反弹，截至2月中，三家公司表现都优于标普500股指（宝洁的股价还创造了历史新高）。当然了，三家公司的样本规模太小，但也传递了一个信号：适当情况下，勇于发声可以提升销售和客户忠诚度，而且不会打压股价。

You don’t have to watch Gillette’s recent commercial for long to realize it’s no typical shaving ad. There are no shots of blades gliding through lather or water splashing on a freshly trimmed face. Instead, the ad shows men standing up to bullies and sexual harassers, all part of a message about resisting “toxic masculinity.”

It’s more social plea than sales pitch—and it’s the kind of gesture that’s far more common now than it was a decade ago. Whether it’s Nike’s ads last fall supporting quarterback turned activist Colin Kaepernick, or Dick’s Sporting Goods’ decision last year to restrict its own gun sales, companies are more willing to take sides on politically divisive issues. And such stances can be more than acts of principle: They can boost sales, luring customers who share the same views—albeit while alienating those who don’t—and helping brands stand out in crowded product categories.

Whether shareholders can cheer the returns is less clear-cut. Edgy statements often chase skittish investors away in the short term: The stocks of Dick’s, Nike, and Gillette parent Procter & Gamble fell sharply immediately after they made the moves described above. But Nike subsequently reported blockbuster growth, and all three stocks rebounded to outperform the S&P 500 through mid-February. (P&G hit an all-time high.) That’s a small sample size, to be sure, but it sends a message: Under the right conditions, speaking up can boost sales and customer loyalty, without weighing down share prices.

评估表明立场的公司股价走势

以下三家公司对分歧明显的政治和社会问题表明了态度，都因此上了头条。以下是对各家核心业务的介绍。

耐克

去年9月，耐克请柯林·卡普尼克拍摄了经典广告语“Just Do It”三十周年的广告。一些客户看过卡普尼克过去在美国职业橄榄球大联盟（NFL）打比赛时的抗议，认为他不爱国，随后将矛头指向耐克。但就在卡普尼克拍广告当季，耐克的营业收入飙涨10%，旗下电子商务网站的销售业绩占总销量的15%。资产管理公司Bernstein的分析师杰米·莫里曼指出，由于网络购物者增加，提升了耐克的利润。

星巴克

这些年来，因为在同性恋婚姻、种族关系等方面不断发声，咖啡连锁巨头星巴克的股价大起大落。尽管如此，过去五年里星巴克股价仍然累计上涨94%，远远超过标普500。星巴克在中国以及美国郊区拓展业务应该会推动销售业绩保持增长。但有一点有待观察：卸任的董事长霍华德·舒尔茨要竞选美国总统，对星巴克的财务冲击不知会怎样。

迪克体育用品

去年美国佛罗里达州帕克兰市发生校园枪击案后，迪克体育用品决定不再出售步枪，并且将客户的最低购枪年龄上调到21岁。一些枪械制造商随后停止与迪克体育用品合作。由于狩猎设备销售疲软，迪克体育用品的股价大跌。另外运动服装也销售不振，因为很多与之合作的公司也开始在网上销售。但如果迪克体育用品能加强其电商领域，按照目前较低的估值还是可能为投资者带来回报。

Assessing The Chances Of Those Who Take Stances

These three companies have made headlines for their messaging on divisive political and social issues. Here’s how their core businesses are faring.

NIKE

Last September, when Nike featured Colin Kaepernick in ads marking the 30th anniversary of its “Just Do It” campaign, customers who had viewed Kaepernick’s pre-NFL-game protests as anti-patriotic decried the company. But revenue jumped 10% in that quarter. Nike’s e-commerce site now accounts for 15% of sales, and Jamie Merriman, a Bernstein analyst, notes that its profit margins improve as the number of online buyers grows.

STARBUCKS

The coffee giant’s stock has seesawed for years in response to the company’s outspokenness on same-sex marriage, racial relations, and much more. Still, shares are up 94% over the past five years, far outpacing the S&P 500. Expansion in China and in U.S. suburbs should sustain Starbucks’ sales growth. Yet to be determined: the financial impact of retired chairman Howard Schultz’s presidential ambitions.

DICK’S SPORTING GOODS

After the Parkland shootings, Dick’s stopped selling assault rifles and increased its minimum age for gun purchases to 21. Some gunmakers severed ties, and Dick’s stock slumped, owing in part to weak hunting-equipment sales. Dick’s has struggled as well in athletic apparel, where many brands it offers also sell direct online. But if it can boost its own e-commerce, Dick’s could reward investors who buy in at today’s low valuations.

消费者态度的变化也是企业如此行事的原因之一。爱德曼公关最近一项调查显示，约半数消费者选择是否购买某品牌商品时，都会先看看商家对有争议的问题态度如何。中佛罗里达大学的公共关系学教授梅丽莎·多德指出，现在人们普遍认为，政府缺乏解决对消费者最重要问题的能力，希望企业能填补上空缺。

哪些企业会因为公开发声获益？没有固定的规律，不过已经出现了一些模式。如果某家公司建立了热心社会公益的声誉，或者采取明显与品牌理念一致的立场，销售业绩和股价就更有可能因表态而上升。假如某公司言论不符合大众心目中的既有印象，股东就不太可能受益。同理，如果企业并未主动亮出态度，只是回应新形势，也能获利。比如，在去年佛罗里达州帕克兰校园枪击案发生后，美国达美航空公司取消了给予全美步枪协会会员的折扣，赢得了某些人士称道。但该公司称这只是一次性举动，并且向公众保证，不会对机票销售和股价产生重大影响。

吉列传递“有毒的大男子主义”信息的广告才播放大概一个月，现在断言对宝洁公司股价的长远影响为时尚早。在宝洁2018财年的营业收入之中，吉列之类剃须品牌产品只贡献了10%。但是，宝洁旗下有一些主要瞄准女性买家的消费类大品牌，其中也包括吉列Venus系列女士剃刀，还有Always女性护理产品，之前的广告就一直声称宝洁支持男女平等。德雷塞尔大学教授丹尼尔·科尔逊认为，吉列的最新广告可能被视为宝洁在强化立场，女性顾客的积极回应可能也惠及宝洁的其他品牌。

科尔逊预计，若果真的形成良性影响，公众看待宝洁在社会问题方面的立场时会“更加高标准严要求”，未来宝洁一旦改变立场，可能遭受舆论反弹打击。换言之，一旦公司涉足政治就不能轻易改路线，否则管理层和股东可能代价巨大。（财富中文网）

本文另一版本发表于2019年3月出版的《财富》杂志，文章标题为《企业涉足政治的利与弊》。

译者：Pessy

审校：夏林

Evolving consumer attitudes help explain the pattern. According to a recent poll by public relations firm Edelman, roughly 50% of consumers have chosen to buy a brand (or not) because of the business’s position on a controversial issue. Melissa Dodd, a public relations professor at the University of Central Florida, says there’s a widespread perception that government lacks the ability to address the issues most important to consumers—so consumers are looking to businesses to fill that role.

Which companies benefit from speaking out? No two situations are alike, but some patterns are emerging. If a company has a reputation for social engagement or takes a stand that’s clearly in line with its brand’s philosophy, sales and shares are more likely to get a lift. If a company makes a statement that doesn’t match the way people already feel about it, shareholders are less likely to benefit. Likewise, if a stance is more reactive than proactive: Delta Air Lines won praise from some corners when it ended a discount for National Rifle Association members after a school shooting in Parkland, Fla., last year. But the airline framed it as a one-time move, and the ensuing publicity didn’t have a big impact on either ticket sales or the share price.

Roughly a month after Gillette’s toxic-masculinity message went live, it’s too early to discern its long-term impact on P&G’s stock. Shaving products such as Gillette’s accounted for only 10% of P&G revenue in fiscal 2018. But the company owns big consumer brands that are targeted predominantly at female buyers, including Venus razors and Always feminine-care products, and has previously run ads conveying its commitment to gender equity. The Gillette ad could be seen as doubling down on that stance—and a positive reaction among women could spill over to benefit other brands, according to Daniel Korschun, a Drexel University professor.

If that happens, Korschun says, P&G will likely henceforth be “held to a higher standard” on social issues, risking a backlash if it changes course. Once a company gets political, in other words, backtracking can be costly—for management and shareholders alike.

A version of this article appears in the March 2019 issue of Fortune with the headline “The Pros And Cons of Politics.”