Startups are undeniably the driving force behind the American economy’s growth and dynamism. They’ve fueled job creation, fostered innovation, attracted international capital, imbued a culture of entrepreneurship that promises continued economic resilience and adaptability in the future, and introduced products and services into our lives we can’t imagine living without.
Startups chart a distinct course from established businesses. They rightly allocate resources primarily to product development and people, which is crucial for attracting investor interest. The next priority is often safeguarding their legal interests, including business structure, intellectual property, and regulatory compliance. Both are intuitive and essential first steps for a company planning to upend or transform an industry. However, there is a critical blind spot for many startups that can pose a significant risk to their future success – especially if their sights are set on industry or regulatory disruption – not properly understanding, investing in, and deploying strategic communications and public affairs work.
In the dynamic startup ecosystem, founders and investors often navigate a maze of decisions and personnel. One key factor that must be considered when running through the risk management protocols is the proper investment in strategic communications. This can come in many forms, and while it might not immediately contribute to the profit column, if not done properly, it can set a business on the wrong path with employees, regulators, customers, and numerous other stakeholders.
I understand how rich it sounds for a communications and public affairs professional to advocate for a fulsome investment in his discipline. However, businesses routinely call our firm after being sued by a government agency, called before a Congressional hearing, or attacked by an adversarial interest group. Unfortunately, when you have reached that point, it is much more expensive to dig yourself out of that reputational hole than to develop an early foundation upon which you can build.
While investment in strategic communications is traditionally seen as a later-stage endeavor for these businesses, there is a solid argument to be made that investments in these disciplines provide better returns when done earlier in the business trajectory for a few reasons:
When you create a business, there are massive barriers to entry mostly driven by market forces. Still, companies must contend with the larger hurdles that your better-financed and organized competition will build to shut you out. This is particularly true when you are looking to disrupt an industry or innovate in an already heavily regulated space – the government would like to have their say as well – either driven by their interests or your competitors’ interests.
Facebook (now Meta) is a prime example. Following the 2016 election, Mark Zuckerberg faced numerous days of Congressional grilling in both chambers over Russia’s alleged manipulation of the platform to spread disinformation during the 2016 presidential campaign and concerns over user privacy breaches and fake news. These hearings were essentially an apology tour while he was hit by members from both sides of the aisle armed with talking points and information from certain “interested parties.”
While the turmoil that hit Facebook following the 2016 election might have been inevitable, having not made the proper investment in government relations and strategic communications, Facebook opened themselves up to attacks by those in Washington that have been heavily lobbied and tactfully communicated to by their advertisement competitors – large telecommunications giants.
Facebook learned its lesson in 2017 when it was reported that Facebook had significantly increased its lobbying expenditures to $11.5 million, nearly double what it had spent two years prior.
Every business does its best to create a risk management playbook and has a line in its balance sheet for it. The playbook typically includes financial planning and compliance, but communications are too frequently absent. I understand why this is; a company’s reputation is less tangible as a piece of software or a medical treatment.
I can show you sentiment charts and give you all the case studies that I can fit into a slide deck, and you still might not be ready to make the necessary investment to limit your future risk. One thing I can tell you is the billing rates of the consortium of consultants rack up fast once you get a Congressional inquiry or are on the receiving end of a government agency investigation. Without the proper reputational baseline and communications infrastructure, you might find yourself on the wrong end of the trending pages – even if you were the one who founded a social media website.