Employee expression and reputational risk    

At a time when employee voices are increasingly amplified through social media and, more recently, by artificial intelligence, organisations face growing reputational challenges when responding to sensitive or controversial content shared by employees online. This issue was the central theme at Penningtons’ HR Leaders Forum, where DRD’s Kate Miller and Paul Mander and Adele Ashton of Penningtons discussed practical approaches to managing change, employee conduct and reputational risk. As a starting point, a sharp rise in employee activism on social platforms was observed, covering political, geopolitical and broader cultural issues. Whether expressed on public platforms such as X or professional networks such as LinkedIn, personal opinions can quickly be perceived as reflecting an employer’s position, particularly when an individual’s workplace or role is clearly referenced.

Setting clear boundaries and expectations   

A key message was the importance of clarity and alignment. Organisations must clearly distinguish between employees expressing views in a personal capacity and speaking as representatives of their employer. This distinction should be underpinned by robust codes of conduct and social media policies, supported by regular training. Such frameworks should prohibit harassment, hate speech, the disclosure of confidential information and content that implies organisational endorsement, while continuing to recognise employees’ rights to personal expression. Clearly defined behavioural expectations, communicated from the point of recruitment, help establish acceptable conduct both online and offline and reduce potential reputational risk.

Discretion and proportional response 

Avoiding online reputational scandals requires discretion and measured decision-making. Not every social media incident constitutes a communications crisis. Before responding, organisations should assess the potential impact by considering who is posting, what is being said, the context in which it appears and who the audience is. Effective monitoring tools can assist in evaluating reach, credibility and any potential association risk. Close alignment between legal, HR and communications teams is essential in determining whether an issue warrants external comment or intervention. Reacting too quickly can amplify a concern that may otherwise have attracted limited attention. In many cases, particularly where external attention is limited and no policy breach has occurred, restraint or silence can be the most effective approach.

This principle also applies to employee departures. Over-justifying the reasons for a departure or resignation in sensitive circumstances can invite further speculation or misinterpretation. Factual co-ordinated and forward-looking communication is preferable, ideally with language agreed and signed off by all parties.

Handling harassment and sensitive allegations

The Forum also addressed workplace misconduct such as harassment, where reputational stakes are particularly high. In these situations, the emphasis was on the importance of structured internal investigations and disciplined communication. From an external communications perspective, organisations should focus on process rather than outcomes, making clear that concerns are taken seriously, investigated thoroughly and handled in accordance with established procedures, while avoiding speculation or premature conclusions. When conducted rigorously and confidentially, internal investigations play a critical role in demonstrating accountability and containing reputational risk. Clear protocols, a restricted information flow and a pre-agreed approach to potential leaks are essential to prevent escalation and ensure that the investigation itself does not become a source of further reputational damage. While having cost and time implications, there are some occasions where an external investigation is warranted and advisable, particularly if the individual under investigation is very senior, so as to demonstrate an independent process. In such cases, agreeing a clear scope and process is key.

Conclusion: preparation as the foundation of crisis management  

A consistent principle emerging from the Forum was that effective crisis management is rooted in preparation. Clear policies, strong internal alignment between legal, HR and communications teams, and well-established investigative frameworks enable organisations to respond proportionately and credibly when issues arise. In an environment where employee conduct can rapidly become a reputational issue, the most effective responses are often those considered well before a crisis emerges.