ABSTRACT
American sociologist C. Wright Mills warned not to ‘allow public issues as they are officially formulated, or troubles as they are privately felt, to determine the problems that you take up for study’ (Wright Mills, 1959:226). A first prerequisite for effectively addressing societal issues is to analyse them as objectively as possible. But, in practice, issues are habitually approached and regarded as important on the basis of the (perceived) self-interest of firms. The strategies of issues managers thus tend to be relatively reactive, short-term and occasion oriented. This orientation is often reinforced by the relatively weak internal bargaining position of the Public Affairs/Corporate Communications department. A second prerequisite for effective Societal Interface Management is that societal issues themselves are tackled (see Chapter 8), not least because the most important issues have become governance issues (Chapter 9). The formulation and implementation of new societal goals takes place in ‘bargaining arenas’ (cf. Chapter 6). Previously, government played the role of facilitator in many of these arenas. Growing regulatory and institutional gaps, however, have made governance itself a subject of negotiation. The issues not only define the stakes, but also the bargaining arena: firms, govern-ments and other stakeholders regularly convene in changing network constellations to discuss the ‘hottest issues’, often also in surprising locations. Can or should firms thus be considered part of the (societal) problem or part of the solution? Should food firms be expected to take responsibility for solving world hunger? Should car manufacturers contribute to slowing down global warming? Should toy manufacturers help to address child labour? In short: who is to be(come) the ‘issue owner’?
