28Apr2026
Podcast: Is This the End of the Neutral CEO?
by: Nordic Business Forum
Staying neutral used to be the safe choice for leaders. Today, silence can be considered a statement too. In this podcast episode, host Heli Hänninen is joined by Annika Arras, CEO of Milton New Nordics, and Thomas Kolster, marketing advisor and author, to explore what corporate activism means in a polarized world.
If you prefer reading, under the player is a thorough summary of the podcast discussion:
For decades, many CEOs could stay safely in the middle. They could focus on business performance, avoid sensitive topics, and leave societal issues to politicians. But over the last few years, that space has gotten a lot smaller.
Today, leaders are expected to have a point of view. Employees, customers, and stakeholders increasingly look to companies not only for products and services, but also for direction, trust, and values. At the same time, taking a stand can divide people, damage trust, and even hurt business performance.
So, how can leaders take responsibility without turning every issue into a public performance?
In a Nordic Business Forum podcast discussion, Annika Arras and Thomas Kolster explore this tension from two different but connected perspectives. Annika brings deep experience in political communication, societal change, and leadership.
Thomas brings a strong background in brand strategy, sustainability, and marketing activism.
Together, they make one thing clear: the neutral CEO is under pressure, but careless activism can be just as dangerous as silence.
Corporate Activism Starts With Values
Annika describes her own understanding of corporate activism as a journey. Years ago, she was taught the classic Milton Friedman view: businesses exist to make money, and societal issues belong to politicians. But in another class, she heard the opposite: companies increasingly need to take a stand on societal issues.
Today, she believes leaders can no longer fully separate business from society.
“But today I think you really can’t choose not to be involved because the world has become so complex that you have to be involved,” Annika says.
Still, involvement doesn’t mean commenting on everything. For Annika, the starting point is personal clarity. Before leaders define corporate principles or public positions, they need to understand themselves.
“It’s very difficult to live in conflict with your own personal values,” she says.
This is a key point. Corporate activism cannot only be a communication strategy. If a leader’s public statements are not connected to real values, real decisions, and real behavior, trust disappears quickly.
It’s Not About You
Thomas warns that corporate activism can easily become self-serving. In some cases, companies take public positions not because they are deeply connected to their business, but because it looks good. He calls this “the hero trap.”
Instead of trying to appear morally superior, Thomas advises leaders to stay close to the real needs of their customers and the role their company plays in people’s lives.
“What I always advise CEOs to do and companies to do is, yes, you have your principles, you have your values, but so do your customers.”
This is where many companies get into trouble. They take a strong stand on an issue, but the connection to their business, customers, or employees is weak. The result can feel forced, irrelevant, or even hypocritical.
Thomas points out that brands like Ben & Jerry’s, Patagonia, and The Body Shop helped shape the early image of corporate activism. But he also argues that activism becomes much harder when companies operate inside traditional financial structures, with shareholders, growth targets, and quarterly pressure.
As he puts it, “money does still win this game.” That doesn’t mean values don’t matter. It means leaders need to understand the reality they are working inside.
Not Every Issue Is Yours to Own
One of the hardest questions for leaders is where to draw the line. Which issues should a company speak about? Which ones should it stay away from?
Annika argues that leaders need to understand how close an issue is to their key stakeholders. Some topics are distant, while others are existential.
For example, for companies in countries close to Russia, the war in Ukraine is not an abstract geopolitical issue. It affects employees, customers, security, and identity. In those situations, neutrality may not be possible.
“If it is very, very close and it becomes existential, then you can’t remain neutral,” Annika says.
Thomas agrees that some issues are forced on companies. But he also warns leaders to be careful about taking positions that divide people unnecessarily. Companies are often microcosms of society. They include people with different views, backgrounds, and experiences.
For him, the most sustainable path is often inclusion. “The most sustainable thing to do is to be inclusive, not exclusive,” Thomas says.
This doesn’t mean avoiding values. It means avoiding the kind of activism that turns disagreement into rejection.
Walk the Talk, or Lose Trust
Both Annika and Thomas return to one central principle: actions matter more than statements.
Annika puts it simply: “Clarity means that the things you say, you have to do.”
This is where many leaders fail. They communicate values externally, but their internal culture, business model, or leadership behavior tells a different story. When that happens, stakeholders notice.
Trust is not lost because a company has a point of view. Trust is lost when the point of view is not lived. This is why corporate activism must be connected to business strategy, not only marketing. It should influence decisions about customers, partners, hiring, culture, products, and long-term direction.
As Annika explains through her own leadership, her company’s purpose is to empower changemakers. That purpose shapes which clients they choose to work with and which conversations they are willing to have internally.
Stay Curious, or Fall Behind
Corporate activism is not a one-time decision. Society changes. Customer expectations change. Employee values change. A position that felt bold ten years ago may feel outdated today.
Thomas uses The Body Shop as an example. The company was once a pioneer in ethical beauty, but other brands later caught up and moved faster. His point is that values alone are not enough. Companies must keep innovating around them.
“The business is failing. They’re not keeping up with what they should be keeping up with,” Thomas says.
Annika makes a similar point from the perspective of generations. Every day, new people become adults, employees, customers, and voters. They bring different expectations with them. So, if CEOs don’t stay curious about society, they risk becoming irrelevant.
“If you’re just being a CEO in your lonely tower; that’s a big problem,” Annika says.
Curiosity means listening beyond the boardroom. It means understanding what people are worried about, what gives them hope, and what they expect companies to help solve.
The Leadership Question: What Kind of Money?
There is a commercial reality to all of this. Businesses need to perform. CEOs are expected to deliver results. Activism that ignores financial pressure is not realistic. But Annika challenges leaders to go one layer deeper.
“What kind of money is the question and who is it that you as an individual want to be?”
That question captures the deeper leadership challenge. The issue is not whether companies should make money. They must. The issue is what leaders are willing to do for it, what they are willing to ignore, and what kind of legacy they want to leave behind.
Thomas adds another useful reminder: CEOs are temporary stewards. They borrow leadership and eventually pass it on. That perspective changes the question from “How do I win this quarter?” to “What kind of company am I handing over?”
Corporate Activism Needs a Culture, Not a Campaign
A strong public stand means little if the culture cannot support it.
Annika emphasizes the importance of open conversations inside companies. If there is tension in society, there will often be tension inside the workplace too. Avoiding those conversations may create short-term peace, but it doesn’t build trust.
Workplaces can be important spaces for dialogue, especially when people no longer trust politics or media in the same way. But that only works if leaders create psychological safety.
Annika shares the promise she gives her own team: if they take a risk and fail, she will protect them first. Then they will learn together.
This matters because activism, innovation, and leadership all involve risk. If people are punished for every mistake, they stop learning. And if they stop learning, the company stops growing.
The Real Playbook for Leaders
There is no universal framework for corporate activism, but the discussion offered a few clear principles for CEOs and leaders:
- Start with your real values, not what looks good externally
- Stay close to your customers, employees, and the needs your business actually serves
- Avoid tokenism and one-off statements that are not connected to action
- Build a culture where people can discuss difficult issues openly and will do so respectfully
- Stay curious about society, because expectations will keep changing
- Understand the financial reality, but don’t let short-term money define your entire legacy
The strongest leaders are not the loudest. They are the ones who know when to speak, why they are speaking, and how their actions will support their words.
The End of Neutrality Doesn’t Mean the End of Respect
Perhaps the most important point in the discussion is that taking a stand should not mean losing respect for those who disagree. Near the end of the conversation, Thomas recalls seeing a simple poster in Copenhagen. It said: “It’s okay to disagree.” That just might be one of the most useful reminders for leaders (or anyone for that matter) today.
In a polarized world, CEOs don’t need to turn every company into a battlefield. But they do need to understand that silence, values, money, culture, and trust are now deeply connected.
The challenge is not to become more political for the sake of it. The challenge is to lead with enough clarity, courage, and humility that people know what you stand for, even when they don’t agree with every decision.
As Annika puts it: “Remain true to your own values.”
