Navigating Internal Activism with Credibility and Control

When Employees Challenge the Board

In recent years, workplace activism has emerged as a defining feature of the corporate environment. Employees are no longer confined to operational roles and private channels when raising concerns. They are increasingly willing to speak publicly, mobilise colleagues, and push boards to address issues ranging from diversity and climate policy to executive pay, supply chain ethics and political affiliations.

For boards, this shift represents both a challenge and an opportunity. A challenge, because internal activism can disrupt operations, expose reputational vulnerabilities and test leadership authority. An opportunity, because employee perspectives can provide early warning of cultural misalignment, ethical blind spots and emerging risks.

This article examines why employee activism is growing, what it means for board governance, and how Non-Executive Directors (NEDs) can listen and lead without losing control.

The Rise of Employee Activism

Employee activism has existed for decades, but digital communication, shifting workforce expectations and a more politically engaged society have amplified its visibility and impact.

Several drivers underpin this trend:

• Generational shifts in values and career expectations
• Greater transparency through social media and workplace review platforms
• Heightened societal focus on corporate responsibility and ethics
• Access to organising tools that make coordination easy and low-cost
• Low tolerance for perceived hypocrisy between stated values and real-world actions

Today’s employees are more likely to see their role as extending beyond their job description. They expect the organisation’s behaviour to reflect its purpose and are willing to challenge perceived inconsistencies, even if that means going against leadership decisions.

Why This Matters for Boards

Boards are the ultimate stewards of corporate culture and reputation. While management handles operational HR matters, NEDs have a responsibility to ensure that culture is monitored and that serious concerns receive appropriate oversight.

When employees feel compelled to bypass management and address the board directly, it signals a gap in trust, communication or both. Even if the concerns raised are specific and operational, the very act of escalation to board level can influence perceptions of leadership effectiveness.

For boards, mishandling these moments can lead to reputational harm, talent attrition, and in some cases, legal or regulatory scrutiny. Conversely, a well-handled response can demonstrate integrity, strengthen culture, and reinforce stakeholder trust.

Types of Employee Challenges Boards Encounter

Not all employee activism looks the same. Boards should recognise the spectrum of challenges, from informal feedback to public protests.

1. Private Escalation

Employees may write directly to the chair, senior independent director, or committee chairs. This often occurs when they believe internal grievance channels are ineffective or biased.

2. Organised Internal Campaigns

Petitions, open letters, or internal forums that gather collective support for a specific change. These may remain private but can escalate if not addressed.

3. Public Advocacy

Employees taking their concerns to external audiences, including the media, regulators or social platforms. This often follows perceived inaction internally.

4. External Alignment

Collaboration with NGOs, unions, or advocacy groups to increase pressure on the company. This can significantly heighten reputational stakes.

Recognising the Root Causes

Boards should avoid treating activism purely as a problem to be contained. The real value lies in understanding why employees feel the need to challenge leadership.

Common triggers include:

• Mismatch between stated corporate values and actual practices
• Perceived lack of transparency in decision-making
• Concerns over ethical or environmental standards
• Inadequate response to allegations of misconduct
• Pay, benefits, or working conditions that appear unfair or inconsistent with market norms

Identifying and addressing these root causes often requires more than a communications strategy. It demands cultural awareness and structural change.

How Boards Can Respond Effectively

Listen Without Prejudice

Initial reactions matter. Boards should avoid defensive language or assumptions about employee motives. Acknowledging that concerns have been heard is the first step in de-escalating tensions.

Ensure the Right Governance Channels Exist

If employees feel they have no credible internal route to raise concerns, they will go outside. Boards should regularly review whistleblowing policies, ethics hotlines, and engagement mechanisms to ensure they are trusted and effective.

Separate Oversight from Management

While operational handling belongs to management, boards must ensure there is independent verification that concerns are addressed appropriately and without retaliation.

Protect Against Reputational Risk

If an issue becomes public, boards should work with management to ensure responses are consistent, factual and aligned with the company’s stated values. Over-promising or dismissing concerns can both damage credibility.

Link Back to Purpose

Purpose should guide decision-making and public positioning. When employees challenge the board, aligning responses to purpose provides a consistent and defensible framework.

Questions NEDs Should Be Asking

• Do we have a clear picture of the organisation’s cultural health?
• Are there early warning signs in engagement surveys, exit interviews or grievance data?
• How quickly do concerns raised through official channels receive a substantive response?
• Are we confident that whistleblowing protections are robust and well-communicated?
• Has the board discussed scenarios involving public employee activism?

Case Study: Digital Protest in a Global Tech Firm

A multinational technology company faced an internal revolt when employees objected to a government contract they believed was incompatible with the firm’s stated ethical principles. Thousands signed an open letter, some resigned in protest, and the story gained international media attention.

The board had been aware of the contract but had not anticipated its cultural impact. The incident prompted the creation of an ethics advisory panel, expanded employee consultation processes, and more proactive risk assessment on sensitive projects.

Lesson: Decisions that pass legal and financial tests may still fail the cultural test. Boards should evaluate not just compliance, but perception.

Maintaining Authority Without Alienating Staff

One fear among boards is that conceding to activist employees sets a precedent that undermines management authority. In reality, the issue is not about concession, but about engagement.

A credible process for listening, explaining decisions, and showing where employee feedback has been considered can strengthen, rather than weaken, authority. Even when the board decides not to change course, employees are more likely to respect the outcome if the rationale is transparent.

Proactive Steps Boards Can Take

• Cultural Audits: Commission regular, independent assessments of corporate culture.
• Scenario Exercises: Include internal activism in crisis simulation drills.
• Board Education: Provide NEDs with training on employee relations, labour law, and digital activism trends.
• Dialogue Platforms: Create forums where employee representatives can brief the board periodically.

From Confrontation to Constructive Dialogue

Internal activism is unlikely to fade. As workforces become more values-driven and digitally connected, boards should expect to encounter direct challenges from employees on ethical, strategic and cultural issues.

The organisations that thrive will not be those that suppress dissent, but those that channel it into constructive dialogue. Boards, and NEDs in particular, have an essential role in setting the tone for how activism is received and resolved. By listening carefully, responding thoughtfully, and aligning actions with purpose, boards can turn moments of challenge into opportunities for cultural resilience.

Key Takeaways for NEDs, Board Advisors & Chairs

• Employee activism is a growing governance issue that can impact reputation, culture and strategic delivery.
• The board’s role is not to manage day-to-day employee relations, but to ensure governance structures support trust and transparency.
• Clear purpose, consistent values, and open communication are the strongest safeguards against damaging escalation.
• Internal activism can be an early warning system for deeper cultural risks. Boards should treat it as an insight opportunity, not just a threat.