The Case for Quiet Corporate Activism – MIT Sloan Management Review

Report on Corporate Strategies for Advancing Sustainable Development Goals in a Volatile Political Climate

Executive Summary

This report analyzes the emerging corporate strategy of “quiet activism” as a method for sustaining commitments to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) amidst a challenging political and social environment. Faced with significant backlash against public-facing Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives, corporations are adopting discreet, behind-the-scenes approaches. This strategy allows for continued progress on key SDGs, such as SDG 13 (Climate Action), SDG 5 (Gender Equality), and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), while mitigating political, legal, and reputational risks. The report outlines the context driving this shift and presents core strategies for effective implementation.

The Shifting Environment for Corporate SDG Commitments

A notable shift has occurred in the corporate landscape, moving from encouragement of public advocacy for the SDGs to a climate of risk and hostility. This change is characterized by several key factors:

• Political and Regulatory Pressure: Government actions in the United States and rising sentiment in Europe have created a contentious environment for corporate sustainability efforts. This includes lawsuits and regulatory threats targeting companies for their commitments to climate action and social equity.
• Global Backlash: The 2025 Sustainability at a Crossroads survey indicates that backlash is a global phenomenon, with 71% of European sustainability experts reporting opposition to corporate sustainability efforts, a rate second only to the U.S.
• Corporate Response: In response to these pressures, many organizations are retreating from public declarations related to the SDGs to avoid becoming targets of political campaigns, activist shareholders, and legal challenges. This affects corporate work on a range of goals, from environmental protection to social justice.

The Emergence of Quiet Activism for SDG Attainment

Quiet corporate activism is a strategic response to the current landscape, enabling companies to continue their work on the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development without attracting undue negative attention. This approach prioritizes substantive action over public pronouncements. The core objective is to maintain momentum on critical SDG targets while navigating external pressures. It is a pragmatic pivot designed to protect and advance long-term sustainability and social justice agendas.

Core Strategies for Implementing Quiet Activism for the SDGs

To effectively pursue SDG-aligned objectives in the current climate, leaders can adopt a framework of quiet activism built on five strategic pillars:

1. Strategic Prioritization: Companies should selectively focus on SDG targets that are most material to their core business operations and where they can achieve the most significant impact, thereby choosing engagements that are defensible and integral to their mission.
2. Reframing Communications: The focus of corporate communication should shift from broad, public pledges to internal messaging and targeted stakeholder reporting. This involves demonstrating progress on SDGs through operational metrics and performance data rather than high-profile campaigns.
3. Internal Coalition Building: Securing strong, unified support within the organization is critical. This ensures that commitments to goals like SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth) and SDG 5 (Gender Equality) are understood and championed internally, creating resilience against external criticism.
4. External Alliance Development: Corporations should build alliances with sympathetic, like-minded partners, such as industry peers and non-governmental organizations. These collaborations can advance shared SDG targets collectively and discreetly, distributing risk and amplifying impact.
5. Operational Integration: The most profound strategy is to embed SDG principles directly into core business functions, supply chains, and governance structures. By making sustainability and equity integral to how the business operates, progress becomes institutionalized and less dependent on public validation, directly contributing to frameworks like SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

Analysis of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article discusses corporate engagement with social and environmental issues, which connects to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The following SDGs are relevant:

• SDG 5: Gender Equality & SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities: The article repeatedly mentions “Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives.” These corporate programs are designed to address inequalities and promote inclusion, which are central to SDG 5 (specifically regarding gender) and SDG 10 (covering broader inequalities based on race, origin, etc.). The text refers to pressure on companies to “drop DEI” initiatives, highlighting the direct relevance of these goals.
• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth: DEI initiatives also directly relate to creating inclusive and fair workplaces, which is a core component of decent work. Promoting diversity and inclusion is fundamental to ensuring productive employment for all.
• SDG 13: Climate Action: The article explicitly names “climate” as a key area where business leaders were pressured to speak up. It mentions “climate initiatives” and the backlash against them, directly linking the corporate activism discussed to the goals of climate action.
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions: The article describes a landscape of “political hostility,” “lawsuits, political campaigns, and regulatory threats” targeting corporate sustainability efforts. This relates to the institutional environment required to advance sustainable development, highlighting challenges to creating accountable and transparent institutions that support, rather than hinder, progress on social and environmental goals.
• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals: One of the key strategies proposed for “quiet corporate activism” is “building support both internally and with sympathetic external partners.” This directly reflects the collaborative approach advocated for in SDG 17, which emphasizes the need for partnerships between different stakeholders (including the private sector) to achieve the SDGs.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the themes discussed, the following specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. Target 10.2: “By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, colour, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status.”
   • Explanation: The article’s focus on “DEI initiatives” and “inclusion” directly aligns with this target. The corporate efforts discussed are aimed at promoting the inclusion of diverse groups within the economic sphere.
2. Target 8.5: “By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all women and men… and equal pay for work of equal value.”
   • Explanation: The “DEI” initiatives mentioned in the article are fundamental to achieving non-discriminatory and inclusive employment practices, which is a cornerstone of this target.
3. Target 13.3: “Improve education, awareness-raising and human and institutional capacity on climate change mitigation, adaptation, impact reduction and early warning.”
   • Explanation: The article refers to corporate “climate initiatives” and public statements on climate. These actions by companies contribute to raising awareness and building institutional capacity within the private sector to address climate change.
4. Target 17.17: “Encourage and promote effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships, building on the experience and resourcing strategies of partnerships.”
   • Explanation: The article’s proposed strategy of building support with “sympathetic external partners” is a direct example of the private sector engaging in partnerships to advance a purpose-driven agenda, as called for by this target.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

The article implies several qualitative and quantitative indicators, although it focuses more on strategy than on specific metrics:

• Indicator for Targets 8.5 & 10.2: The existence, continuation, and scope of corporate “DEI initiatives.” The article implies that a key measure of commitment is whether companies “drop DEI and climate initiatives” in the face of pressure. Therefore, the number of companies maintaining or expanding such programs serves as an indicator of progress.
• Indicator for Target 13.3: The number and nature of corporate “climate initiatives.” Similar to DEI, the commitment of companies to maintain their climate-related programs despite backlash is an implied indicator of their contribution to this target.
• Indicator for SDG 16 (contextual): The article provides a direct quantitative indicator of the challenging institutional environment. The “2025 Sustainability at a Crossroads survey” finding that “71% of European sustainability experts now report strong backlash against corporate sustainability efforts” is a clear metric measuring the external pressure and hostility that can impede progress on the SDGs.
• Indicator for Target 17.17: The formation of coalitions and partnerships. The strategy to “build support… with sympathetic external partners” implies that the number and effectiveness of these partnerships could be used as an indicator to measure the implementation of this collaborative approach.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: sloanreview.mit.edu